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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Which is more arrogant / stupid, Sony 2006-7 or MS 2013-14?

 

Which?

Microsoft 2013-2014 326 66.13%
 
Sony 2006-2007 166 33.67%
 
Total:492

I'd agree with most comments in this thread. Arrogance goes to SONY. Stupid goes to MS.



4 ≈ One

Around the Network

Already 34% for Sony on forums largely dominated by Sony enthusiasts... It says a lot :)



Machiavellian said:
soulfly666 said:

Sony was more arrogant in 06, but what MS tried to do this current gen was much more stupid. The pre-180 plans that they wanted to force on gamers were unethical. They would have totally and completely tanked if they had gone forward with it. I seriously think they would maybe be hitting 1/3 their current sales had they not 180'd. And that is a maybe.

I am actually interest to understand what was unethical about MS pre-release plans.  Are you taking about the DRM part.  If so could you explain what was unethical about it.


It is really just my speculation as they never actually went forward with the plans due to the 180.  IMO, there were several things on the table that did not scream ethically sound.  The policies for always online and to check in once every 24 hours were basically making the console largely unuseable in countries / areas with terrible and unreliable internet connectivity which is relatively common and something people take for granted, yet they were certainly planning on selling it there anyway. (South America, Eastern Europe, Southern Asia etc.)  I also felt the want to limit how previously bought games could be accessed was bad.  MS was basically saying that all armed servicepersons would not be able to game on their XBox1 at sea, or deployed to remote locations with no or limited internet, which is hugely popular with 360 and those folks, and let's face it if you live that stressed a life you deserve to play the new consoles just like everyone else.  Serious questions about privacy also went unanswered regarding always on Kinect despite ongoing NSA headlines.

Also there was the whole paying youtube creators to promote X1 but making them unable to disclose they were being paid or say anything bad about the console which many claim violates FTC rules.

None of these things are illegal but I find them leaning towards unethical.  All that being said I did buy an X1 after getting a PS4 myself anyways, as I don't hold grudges towards companies or people who make the right decisions going forward.  While some may seem like not that big of a deal, it's important to look at them from the mindset of an uninformed average consumer.



Machiavellian said:
SvennoJ said:
Machiavellian said:
soulfly666 said:

Sony was more arrogant in 06, but what MS tried to do this current gen was much more stupid. The pre-180 plans that they wanted to force on gamers were unethical. They would have totally and completely tanked if they had gone forward with it. I seriously think they would maybe be hitting 1/3 their current sales had they not 180'd. And that is a maybe.

I am actually interest to understand what was unethical about MS pre-release plans.  Are you taking about the DRM part.  If so could you explain what was unethical about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine
MS tried to eliminate the right of first sale by turning physical copies into install discs that automatically get tied to an account.
Then they promised you could still sell your physical game discs, yet only through select approved retailers.

MS did not try to eliminate first sales rights because they were the only company that would allow you to sell, trade, gift and loan your digital copy of a game.  Currently right now, No digital retailer allows you to do any of those things with a digital game.  I do not see people calling any of the digital retails as being unetical.  The approved retailer part was there because things would need to be authenticated over MS network to make it happen which means installing such capability with the retail market.

The whole 24 hour checkin was put in place because of MS trying to allow all of the things I mentioned at retail.  You would not need a 24 hour check in for digital distribution.  You do need something in place where a consumer will purchase the digital game from lets say GameStop.  Install the game on their X1, then take the same game back to the shop for trade in or sell while still able to play the game.

MS big problem with their original goal was their message and not having everything already setup for launch.  I believe this is where Sony caught MS with their pants down when they announce the PS4.  MS did not have all of the agreements and software ready.  All of this stuff did not come out until well after their reveal and it was clouded by to many half assed reports from different blogs.  MS never had a consistant place to get info nor did they release that info in a structured way to make sure everyone understood their plan.  I am not saying that they would not have had to reverse those plans as I believe they would, its just that they did not communicate it right and the net rage was to strong to overcome anyway.

They wanted to turn physical discs, into digital copies. Yes digital has always been on the wrong side of first sale doctrine.
But now they wanted to eliminate the freedom to lend, sell, give away your physical copies at your own disgression.

The whole, ok we'll allow you to sell / share digital copies came after the initial shit storm. Btw why can't you do that now? What's holding that back exactly? The 24h check in was only required to prevent content from physical discs to be used in multiple places at the same time. Through an online service you can still de-activate your digital copy and then transfer it to another account to be activated there. That only requires you to be online at the time of transfer, nothing difficult about it, online auction houses in MMO's have been doing it for years.
That would be the carrot approach to promoting digital over physical, instead MS choose the stick approach.



The thing is MS changed their policies a month after they messed up. Sony took a couple years.

Poll results are a reflection of recent memories, while blocking out the past......too traumatic to remember I guess lol



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Around the Network

They both were pretty terrible, but I have to choose Sony on this one.



I chose Sony, because that was arrogance from 2006, so it's worth more now. That's how inflation works, right?



Sony in 2014 imo. After all of Microsoft's fuck ups they're not really trying to capitalize on it, they're assuming that everyone is going to go to Playstation because they've got the better hardware, while Microsoft is securing exclusives that people want to play. I couldn't care less about Titanfall, but there's no doubt that people want to play it. Sunset Overdrive looks lke it'll be a great game. They bought the Gears of War franchise which Sony could have done with the talks they've been having with Epic, and could have stolen the entire fanbase of that series and made them Sony supporters.

Instead, all that Sony has really been pushing has been indie, indie, indie, indie. No offense to those of you out there like Joe the Bro who are indie developers, but indie games don't move consoles. People aren't going to say. "Wow, an indie game! I've got to get a PS4!." No, they say. "Holy sh**! Next gen Call of Duty!."

Sony has had over six months to capitalize on Microsoft's fuck ups but they haven't. Who's more arrogant AND stupid? Sony.



If you consider that the PS3 went on to outsell the 360 globally and taking into consideration it's year later release, I'd probably have to go with Microsoft. I honestly can't see any way in which they can cope with Sony in this generation.



Atleast the hardware in the PS3 was worth the price and Sony were not ripping us off. It was also the cheapest blu-ray player for a long time.... the technology which MS tried to screw but are now using it themselves.

the xbone on the other hand is a complete rip off, the camera is not worth as much as they claim and even after removing it from the bundle, MS insist the xbone alone should cost as much as a PS4. what a joke.

In terms of anti-consumer policies, the xbone beats any other product in history and will be keeping the crown for a long time to come.