LudicrousSpeed said:
DonFerrari said:
Seems like you fail to notice differences.
When MS created the practice on CoD for the month exclusivity, that was something new that they proposed. When right now people say that if Sony don't accept the proposition of Activision they would go to MS and MS would accept you know that is true. So that is what differentiate the criticism and you know it.
Also on the charging for online, MS again created it and sure customers were wrong to accept it. When MS done and got more money with neglible backlash why wouldn't Sony and after Nintendo do the same? So again it is very easy to see why people blame MS for creating much more than they blame who followed.
|
You’re only proving my point when it comes to the double standard. When MS and Activision got together for exclusive deals, it was because “Microsoft created it”. When Sony and Activision make a deal that is worse for gamers, it’s Activision. MS could have been in the exact same situation you’re guessing that Sony was in, but in Sony’s case you’re willing to absolve them of blame, but MS “created” the issue. It’s just like when MS paid for Tomb Raider to be a timed exclusive. Tons and tons of bitching and criticizing MS, yet people ignored that Sony literally moneyhatted the same franchise earlier. Double standard.
So reply, didn't MS created and/or made it common to have month exclusive DLC? The Tomb Raider case got more backlash than other cases because first MS tried to phrase it as if forever exclusive and then had to correct it and because the majority of the fanbase were in the system that would being left out of the game. But you really do try to twist to defend MS even though you swear you don't do console war.
Same with online play. Nintendo and SEGA had paid online services on SNES/Genesis and the DC also eventually required money for online play. Sure, MS was the first to really make it successful, but if they’re going to receive criticism for online play requiring a fee, anyone who follows suit deserves the same criticism. But Sony not only saw zero criticism in some places but strangely it somehow became Microsoft’s fault that Sony was charging. Bizarre.
It was already proven in another thread that SEGA charged for ISP not for the MP, so different stuff again. Wasn't even aware Nintendo had paid online on SNES.
Sony received a lot of criticism in here, pretend as much as you want it didn't, from both Sony fanbase and Nintendo. The fact that between the criticism was acceptance because it became mainstream due to MS is a very easy to see difference that again you prefer to ignore and call it double standard.
Anyways im not about to join in the bickering about which huge corporation is nickel pinching more 👍 Rumors have it the game has seen massive pre-order cancels and IW devs on twitter have already been apologizing like crazy so it seems they know they’re fucking over all gamers here. Nothing else needs to be said really.
If the game lose plenty of pre-orders and do bad on the release I'll be one of the happy people, first because I don't like the game and second because it may prevent Activision and others of trying the same shit again. If this had happened when exclusive DLC started and paid online started then we wouldn't have reached this situation today.
|