By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - MS preys on Consumer Ignorance with Xbox 360/One

I was looking for that quote, thanks :)



Around the Network
papamudd said:

 


...



Don't talk about the RROD again.This was the worst experience that I have with a console in my life.4 call to support in a row! Worst quality in a popular company ever heard. For me one console with RROD was enough and that was the end from Xbox to me. Other gamers taunt about buying a console every year but that was too rich for my blood and, duh?What's the deal? I'm not a piggy bank for being squeezed all time until got dry. So wait for a year for those stupid Xbones begin to get broken and here goes the same ol' bs again.Even if they didn't obligate consumer to expend 100 bucks more on the hatred kinect deal, if they weren't treatening the ppl with the DRM before launch and if it weren't not as powerful as the PS4 ,I surely wouln't get an MS product again.



sales2099 said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
gergroy said:
 

so... that doesn't seem to really affect consumers though.  that is more of a developer issue.  sure, you can say it will delay the game, but like you said, that is a developer choice.  It certainly doesn't take any choices away from the consumer.

Now, is the parity clause crap for indie developers?  definitely!!  I just don't see it as a big consumer issue like you are making it out to be.  

It does because not all indies have the resources to develop multiple versions of a game simultaneously.

Its why some indies are on xbox and not on other systems yet, and why some indies launched on PS and have claimed they dont want to work with xbox. Either way gamers on both sides have lost out. Without the policy the indie games would have made it to both systems.

There is no reason why the policy should exist. The way I see it is MS are just throwing a tantrum because they got beaten at their own timed exclusivity game which they started.

Also this is exactly the point of my original post. You have no reason to defend the policy, it is of no use or no benefit to anyone, yet you still defend it.

This in regards to MS demanding timed exclusivity and/or release parity with PSN? Because I can tell you first hand that it benefits the XBox gamer. We don't have to wait while someone else gets to play or we enjoy a 1st class experience with getting it first. If there was any place that MS truly cared for their gamers, it was the indie scene with 360.

xbox would have got the games without the policy anyway, it might have been a month or two after another platform but it still would have got them.

On the other hand, it also lost some indie support because of the same policy.

Just because it benefits the xbox gamer in the short term it doesnt mean it benefits you in the long term.



Yes it was. The Xbox 360 was the most expensive console for two reasons:

Need to buy battery replacements for the controllers

and

Xbox Live's $60/year.

 

Add all the years you paid for Xbox Live up to now + the batteries + the Xbox 360 price you paid for. This equals how much?



Around the Network

I know. It's really sad how consumers do not research and weigh the pros and cons with products. I don't want the Xbox One but it doesn't mean I don't know what it has to offer. It has the new Kinect which I care not for at all and the following exclusive games:

Ryse

Forza 5

Dead Rising 3

Crimson Dragon

Killer Instinct

Peggle 2

Kinect Sports Rivals 

 

Titanfall is not exclusive as it is available for PC and soon on 360 as well. See, I am educated about even the product I don't want. I could further elaborate why I prefer the PS4/PS3 instead of the xbox but I think I already made my point. Many that did not buy the PS3 are extremely ignorant of the many awesome games they missed out. 



You still don't get it. If the Xbox was $400 or $300 or even $200 it didn't matter. In a few years you paid between the console and Xbox Live way more than what it cost to buy a PS3. Whether it was worth it or not is up to you but it was undeniably more expensive no matter how you looked at it.



This your reaction should have been the normal reaction that any consumer should have had. Instead they inexplicably forgave Microsoft in a day. I never understood it. I never went through that and I hope I never will.



Actually I disagree also that it does not benefit Xbox owners either. Sony is getting tons of permanent exclusives while Microsoft secures temporary or timed exclusives. So you guys miss out on the possibility that Microsoft would focus instead on securing permanent exclusives, but they don't care. That is why Sony always gives its consumers the greatest value.



Breathe man breathe!

Either use one post to address multiple users or wait until other users have posted to reply back. What you're doing right now (multiple unaddressed replies in a row) can get you in trouble here.