forevercloud3000 said:

*snip*

1. I work at retail, and I see quite a few people running into roadblocks because MS's barebones system skus left them wanting for one thing or another. Not everyone needs wifi.....but a good enough sum of gamers do because of their gaming setup.I'm near a few colleges and they ALL pretty much need one.  According to MS's own online agenda, constant internet connection should have been a priority. That attachment costs an additional $100. There goes that money they supposedly saved on getting 360 right there.This is worsened by the fact that both PS3 AND the Wii came with Wifi........standard. When I included HDMI, I was speaking of the fact that some early 360 models did not have an HDMI port. MS knew HD was where it was going yet they knew that cheaper price model would be more appealing and they could get the consumer to buy a new console for a very basic feature the "other" console had already. I understand giving consumers more choice but many of those things became necessity, I would like to say 80%(not a hard figure) of everyone that picks up XBO is also picking up that 25 buck play&charge kit. I hear people give lame excuses as to why MS does this. Batteries........do not last longer than rechargeable. And Recharging is as simple as plugging it in for an hour, and u can continue playing while it does this. PS3 and PS4 do this by default. By the time your rechargeable battery wears down, you can easily buy a new controller and still have saved money on batteries(which are $4-5 a pack). I will return to this "options" argument later....

What store franchise did you work in?  Those WiFi Adapters were selling like hotcakes, huh?  I guess the 2005 Xbox 360 should have come packed with features that launched with features they didn't know the competition would have.  Greedy Microsoft.  Should have given us Wii Remotes, too.

 2.The reason we saw so few games utilizing the benefits of Bluray was because most devs are multiplatform and they always had to be wary of 360's DVDs. Rage developer outed that some content was cut from game because developers are charged a fine for every disc over 1 they make their game(unless waved by MS for special cases). He later had to retract this but its out in the ether now. If Bluray isn't needed........why do both WiiU and XBO have it now? PS3 did trojan it in but it was a good idea culminating, and now it is standard. We could of had larger gamers earlier if not for 360 once again shooting for bare minimum. No normal game has an install over that 12gb, MMOs are a special case as their install is constantly expanding and they are usually massive games. In fairness, Sony was basically copying MS's approach of barebones in order to compete with HDD'less 360 skus. I don't condone that either, yet it is a presedent MS set and made it hard for Sony to not follow suit if they didn't want to get left behind. This is why PS3 had to shake off so many features, so they could compete with the allusion that 360 was cheaper but gave same capability.

Bluray didn't benefit Sony in any way shape or form.  Even Sony's amazing exclusives didn't benefit from the size.  It's not really beneficial now.  The Wii U's "Blu Ray" variation means longer load times. It stutter running 7th gen games like Arkham City.  Xbox One/PS4 games come on Blu Rays...but you have to install them to the HDD and they run off of the hard drive.  Blu Ray holds a lot of data but accessing the data is slow.

3.This is the impression I get from 360 owners, not from me. They feel dissappointed at the annualization of Forza, Halo, Gears and wanted NEW games.

I'm a 360 owner.  Which 360 owners gave you this impression?  From my experience, it was always PS3 owners (I'm a PS3 owner, too) telling me that we didn't have any games.  I even used to get messages from random Youtubers and I STILL get messages on my 360 and PS3 from Playstation fans more than happy to attack the Xbox 360.  Real people (aka: non forum dwellers) don't care if Call of Duty or GTA isn't exclusive.  They want to play the game and they're just happy they have the hardware that can play it.  The same reason I own the Wii U, PS4, and Xbox One.  When a good game comes out, I just want the means to play it.

4. This is a presedent established by MS yet again, that Sony unfortunately had to bend to or else be left behind. Still not a good one.

Thou art gotta be shitting me!  This kind of stuff happened even during the 16-bit era!!

5. I can't see how anyone could trust a company that willingly and knowingly put out a defective product, only to be able to best their competition. How can this not scream foul to you?

Hey, the reason I personally bought an Xbox 360 (aside from the fact that I couldn't find a PS3) was because the PS1 was super defective and the PS2 was even worse.  I can't find any exact figures online but at the time--before the internet was as big as it was--magazines wrote articles, fans wrote angry letters, etc.  There is the reason the PS2 was the subject of a class action lawsuit.  I said "I had to buy two PS1's and 3 PS2's.  I'm not buying more than one PS3 for $600!"  And then the RRoD came along and was worse than  anything Sony did.  The original Xbox and Gamecube were built like tanks.  The PS2 was fragile and prone to the "Disc Read Error".  Google it.  How can Microsoft's error seem foul to you (and it does scream foul to me.  I didn't defend it.) and Sony's problem not?  Before the PS1 I NEVER had a console break on me.  At this point, EVERY Sony console has broken on me at least once.  The Xbox 360 has broken on me twice (but was repaired).

The Xbox One comes with one notable thing that PS4 does not directly compare.....Kinect. Both come with Mics and by popular opinion, the PS4 one is better. You just were talking about giving consumers choice a minute ago but now its ok to force people to buy their scammish camera? In comparison, you can get a PS4 Camera for 60-70 bucks, so quite a bit less. PS4 also has a few voice activated commands you can pull off WITHOUT even owning a camera, they just don't advertise it. There is also about only one motion based game out at this moment (Just Dance) so what is the point of the thing?

I don't have a PS4 Camera but I'm pretty sure it's at least $40-$30 less capable than Kinect.  Just a hunch I have.

You honestly think this: 

is better than this:

I have used both (I even use the PS4 headset to play Call of Duty on the Wii U!) and I'm not just regurgitating what somebody else has posted on the internet.  Have you used both?  

I'm a PS4/Xbox One owner.  I don't even know how to get the PS4 voice commands to work.  No idea what they even are.  There were some in Tomb Raider but when I tried them, nothing happend.  Can you tell me how to utilize them? Are you even listening to me?  My opinions come from owning/playing BOTH.  From my experiences, not something I read online.

I don't know about "Just Dance" but I had a great time playing the Wake Racing portion of Kinect Sports Rivals on Xbox One.  It's okay if you don't like it.  Some of us do.

MS was/is not trying to give added benefit with Kinect. The only reason they wanted it in every home is so it can survail you for advertisement purposes. Google makes billions off of your search data, MS stood to make the same off of your clothing habits, the things you say, in general what you do in your home. This is MS's kinect based future. Many do not vibe with this idea.

Should I wear my tin foil hat?

Now all you need to do is add what you paid for the Xbox 360 system + multiply by 60 for every year you paid for Xbox Live. Add this to the console and tell me by how much you surpassed 600 dollars.

They are hypocrites. The way they play is pretty damn dirty and a very bad example to set for the industry in how to deal with your competition. They tell developers to give them parity for games and then strip parity away from others because they are afraid it will make their console seem equal. That is called fear.