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

Forums - Gaming - Seeing this image, do you think Sony and Microsoft kept their promises?

 

Do you think Sony and Microsoft kept their promises?

Yes, they kept their promises. 25 26.32%
 
Yes, they overdelivered. 6 6.32%
 
Yes, but they took too long. 23 24.21%
 
No, they underdelivered. 41 43.16%
 
Total:95
Ganoncrotch said:
greenmedic88 said:

You're not thinking of the game in terms of competitive tournament play. 

Unfortunately, the release of SFV has essentially closed the book on tournament play for SVIV in terms of official sponsored events. 

This is also the reason why SFV in its current state is bare bones compared to a game that has had about 8 years of updates over numerous editions, not that any of that should matter to a casual or non tournament player

@Bold - I'd be confident in EVO having Ultra Street Fighter 4 at it for many many many years to come though, considering the games popularity accross all the platforms it is available on and over all the versions released, SFV not charting in EU on the PSN top 10 sales on it's first week could mean that ends up being a far smaller community playing it in a couple of years, Capcom aren't going to be trying to push SF4 out of the public eye like was seen with Nintendo and Smash Melee considering that USF4 launched less than 2 years ago on PC and last gen consoles with the PS4 "definitive" edition coming just 10 months ago.

@underlined - Did you maybe get the line backwards? the features missing from SFV far more so effect the casual player, being that all SFV currently has is online versus and local versus that means that if someone is just trying to get into Street Fighter using this game they're going to get destroyed online and be quickly turned off the game, when it comes to SF as it launched in 2009 before any other editions/patches of the game the same beginner players had options such as a story (albeit made up of just intro/7 fights/rival match/Seth/Ending) challenge modes to beat, timed challenges, survival modes as well as the most basic opinions like VS cpu option for the versus mode, those sort of game modes allow a new player something to do to get used to the controls of the game without just being double perfected online by people who are just happy to bottom feed fight money and rank from those guys stumbling onto the online modes.

 

In terms of just the game being for tournament play only, and I'm guessing you are only referring to officially sponsered stuff here? There really is no money to be had in a game which is only created for the elite tournament goers, it's such a small player base to sell into cutting out millions of those who bought the various versions of SF4, I doubt many of the 1.2m who bought the 3DS version of SF4 for example use it for tournament play.

Ultimately, it boils down to the preferences of competitive players.

Capcom can push as hard as they want to make SFV the defacto standard in tournament play, but as long as there's demand for tournament competition play for SFIV, there will still be tournaments as sure as there will be a base of people competing online. I'd be surprised to see Capcom holding officially sponsored SFIV tournaments unless player support for SFV turns out to be a bust. 

To clarify, SFV does not in any way shape or form come off to me as being a game that is conducive to casual play. Much of this simply has to do with the evolution of SF as a game and its player base, but also in the way that Capcom has chosen to release the game as a regularly full retail priced game without some basic features like arcade mode. 

SFIV represents a better choice for casual players, partly because it can be picked up for a song and mostly because it has everything in place with 8 years on the market. 



Around the Network

I'm most curious about the "no jerks" xbla promise. Did they actually pull that off in any capacity?



ArnoldRimmer said:
elektranine said:
The Xbox side is missing where they promised to make games less expensive and where the Xbox one will increase in power by 700% due to the power of the cloud.

That's the first thing I have to think of when it comes to "have they kept their promises": The ridiculous "power of the cloud" meme, where Microsoft actually convinced some naive fans to believe that it doesn't matter that Xbox 1 ist just half as powerful as PS4, because some mysterious god called "da cloud" would soon show up, and by magic transform all their inferior Xbox hardware into vastly superior and more powerful machines.

Oh and that's not all. There's so many more more promises MS made that will never happen. They seemingly said anything that they thought would sell more xboxes. And the entire gaming media and a certain group gamers want to ignore it.

  • every xbox is a dev kit
  • our games will have no performance issues
  • secret sauce (nobody but us truely understands how much more powerful xbox is)
  •  esram hype that never panned out
  • family share play
  • xbox live 300,000 dedicated servers
  • etc
Instead people want to focus on what little sony didn't deliver on
Mike_L said:
ArnoldRimmer said:

That's the first thing I have to think of when it comes to "have they kept their promises": The ridiculous "power of the cloud" meme, where Microsoft actually convinced some naive fans to believe that it doesn't matter that Xbox 1 ist just half as powerful as PS4, because some mysterious god called "da cloud" would soon show up, and by magic transform all their inferior Xbox hardware into vastly superior and more powerful machines.

Agree. XB1 is a great console and for that reason Microsoft should've just been upfront about its resolution and framerate. Just lay down all your cards in the first place instead of being secretive and making a big deal about it. In that way it would get far less attention as well.

See the thing is that when the gaming media and certain people say they don't care about power or graphics or resolution or framerate they are probably not being entirely thruthful IMO. MS's and others reactions during the launch certainly tell a different story. This stuff mattered last gen and the gen before that and the gen before that. That is why MS and their media team try to hide it. You can find game reviews last gen from major players like IGN/Gamspot/etc where they absolutely destroy the PS3 version of a game for having ~5-10% less resolution and 5% lower average frame rate but now this gen things are seemingly different and the western gaming media can't spot 40% differences in resolution.