I'll agree the forum is highly intelligent & for the most part it's civilized. That's more to do with the mods than anything, but there was a time when the forum was more middle than the leaning to left or right we have now. It's more off now than I remember. There are a few out there that agree with me, although I doubt they will publicly say.
I guess you are right, to be biased is simply to be human. And it's only logical that someone who chose console X would have a vested interest in that console doing well, if not better than the rest (because better, potentially means more support).
I guess I have been tackling the argument from a different point. Yes, most are biased, but IMO that shouldn't necessarely be an issue, as long as the discussion is civilized and constructive. I guess I am biased too, although I do try my best to think
outside the box and detach myself emotionally, so that I'm as neutral as an outsider in my arguments.
I think some of us do that well - even those that only have one console. I might be from the other side of the pond (relative to you), so I usually stay out of the Xbox games topics (if only to peak inside with a bit of curiosity), but find more enjoyment out of analyzing hardware specs or engaging in market related discussions. And I feel that in those discussions, it doesn't really matter what you own - because it is what it is and the conversation there can be held on a strictly analytical level.
As long as posters don't post in denial or refuse anothers opinion because of their bias and have thoughtout logical arguments, all the more fun for all of us - and this is the reason why I registered here back in 2002. First as a lurker, then eventually becoming a regular poster. I guess what my point boils down to - don't judge the poster, judge his post. Although he might be biased, it doesn't necessarely have to reflect on his post or the points he made.
And there will never be parity, here or elsewhere. This forum might have a majority of PS owners, but I don't think that has be something that is necessarely a negative.
Do you think that the one's that changed platforms would have made the same decision if not for the bias in this forum? Were they making decisions inside a vacuum? I don't think so. If it weren't for the leaks & the continually harping by those interested in the tech side about how inferior the Xbox One's graphics were, I'm not so sure the polls would have been so lopsided. Granted the DRM aspects didn't help matters either, but that's been reversed yet there was hardly in change in opinions. I wonder why that's the case? The tech that kept getting crapped on for months & months? Most likely. Kinect? Maybe a little. Most of you are hard core gamers, naturally a lot of you are biased against it. Price? A little, but it goes back to the tech & how you have ingrained this idea that it's inferior to the PS4.
To be really honest, I wouldn't know. I can only judge it from my own angle, as a PlayStation owner. This is a technical forum at heart, so yes, hardware analysis topics is a large area of interest for many. But to be really honest - even if the PS4 ended up being the inferior console hardware spec wise, it wouldn't sway me away from it. We've effectively had to endure inferior multiplatform games for the last 8 years (longer if you include the PS2/Xbox generation as well) and to be honest, I've never looked at my games thinking how much better they looked or how much smoother they run on the X360. Why? Because my most enjoyment from games doesn't come from the visual fidelity, but from the gameplay. CoD is still a lot more fun to play than other shooters that look better at the expense of framerate.
So that point leaves me pretty cold. Not everyone thinks like that, if we are to believe some posts. Perhaps it's a mentality that comes from people who play on the PC regularly (where they can effectively influence how good their game looks and runs by buying better hardware) and also happen to own a Xbox console. I simply don't know.
What wouldn't leave me cold, is if Sony would pull a Nintendo Wii stunt and go all out for the casual gaming market - substantially weaker hardware, focused on Move games (perhaps even ridded themselve of the traditional controller) and on features that go beyond gaming. This would mean that effectively the games that I enjoyed 3 entire generations would evaporate. Sony might be successfull, just as Wii was, but they would lose me as a customer. It would force me to move on to a different console that caters to my interest (I bet a lot of GameCube owners who weren't happy with Wii ended up buying a PS3 or X360), meaning I would need to adjust to a new and different eco-system, different controller etc.
Now of course, the Xbox One isn't exactly that. But it's going in that direction - and I think that's where the results from this poll come from. Not necessarely because of the hardware specs, but because the entire package seems to focus on a larger market that goes beyond the core-market. Certain trade-offs were made and not everyone agrees with them. If the roles were reversed, I'd be highly critical too (just as I've been very critical of KZ3 multiplayer changes over KZ2). Now of course, the situation might not be that bleak. They might be very successfull with the business approach they've chosen - but that doesn't necessarely mean that their loyal fanbase is standing as strongly behind them as before. And this is where this poll is fascinating IMO.
Even if we have predominently PS owners on this forum, it shouldn't sway the results too much, because like me, they've voted that they will not change their console of choice. What we do see however is the people that are unhappy with the direction their console of choice is taking - and taking these results, it gives us a better understanding on what pros and cons the general business approach has (although the poll doesn't show which casuals who don't own a current console might buy a Xbox One for exactly those features that isn't the primary interest of gamers).
Of course, you are right that the more vocal users (or press/media) influences others around them - but that can go both ways too. In the end, it boils down to the business approach the company chose and how well the market accepts it.
If bias has any place - then I would think that posters in favour of their console doing well are perhaps rather optimistic (seeing the immense potential, even if to some degree through rose-tinted glasses) and the posters from the other side perhaps rather pessimistic and overly critical. I think both angles have their place as long as posted in a constructive way and in the end, the truth likely is bound to being somewhere in the middle...
PS: Nice post btw and sorry for my lengthy reply...
I wouldn't like to put myself in the shoes of a PS3 fan back then tbh.
