Johnny Awesome
Veteran
You might want to change your sig a little then. 
Xenon Project
- Thread starter bbot
- Start date
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Paul said:
Point?
Point?
I have no idea why you or anyone else would "plan to buy" an X-Box2, PS3, or Next Nintendo for playing games...when we have no idea how any one of them will function competitively in that department.
I have an X-Box currently. I may or may not buy a next-gen console...I certainly have no plans to buy a particular brand when we know next to nothing about any of them...how silly!
And quite frankly, all this MS stuff is as irrelevant.
And if MS makes a better product (defined as "the poroduct that more people want") in the living room, then good for MS.
So what?
No, I don't.
I might even prefer it. I certainly prefer that the X-Box handles DVD playback in addition to being "games only." I might appreciate DVR recording if it's done right.
Whether or not I ultimately object to it in the end, all depends on the final product. This of course includes gaming.
Paul said:
I did, but I just don't agree with them or see them as having any basis in reality.
Anyway, Joe, Dave and others have done a pretty good job of debating your points, so I won't rehash their responses. However, I will ask you a simple question. Let's say Microsoft never produced the Xbox and that left just Sony and Nintendo, then how do you think things would have turned out for the console business?
Tommy McClain
I don't own or plan to own a sony console so anyone bringing up what Sony is doing and comparing it to MS means nothing to me.
We are discussing MS.. it's not irrelevant.
You obviously don't care that they are obviously being hypocrites, I do end of story.
It's called brand recognition, why do you think all those people bought a ps2. It's because these people enjoyed psone and expect ps2 to be as good or better.
Xbox was good, I had no reason to believe Xbox2 would be better.
But this is my last reply in this post though, I have made my points whether anyone agree's with them or not.
AzBat said:
for one, consoles would not be as cheap as they are now
anyway, i guess it would have been the same but with the vast majority of current xbox games on PS2 instead. of course technicalities aside...
I just feel I should mention here that if Bill Gates bought me a house, I would indeed be a much bigger supporter of Microsoft than I am now.
In fact, you should all write Bill and tell him this.
hell yeah!!! if bill gates bought ME a house, i would even have his picture on my wall. naked.
no hold on.... now that i think about it.... no thats disgusting
no hold on.... now that i think about it.... no thats disgusting
Joe DeFuria
Legend
Paul said:
The fact that you are (did?) plan to buy an X-Box 2, and don't plan to buy a PS3....knowing nothing about their game play capabilities, is exactly your problem.
Bringing up "what MS did or is doing" without having a product to talk meaningfully about (X-Box2) means nothing to me.
We are discussing MS and Sony.[/b]
I obviously don't recall Microsoft ever saying that their "game box only" philosophy would extend beyond X-Box1. There's nothing hypocritical about it.
That's a DUMB reason to buy a console or any product. To be clear, I'm not saying people don't do it (of course they do)...but those who do are, well, dumb.
So, you've just, literally, defined yourself as a x-box fan-boy. Nothing wrong with that, I suppose, but as you know, fan-boys don't rely on logic or reasoning. They rely on some emotional attachment to their hardware. This leads to irrational argumentation...as we have witnessed.
Again, I just find that a pretty dumb approach to take.
And you still don't.
cybamerc said:
I think Sony's market share numbers show its more than capable of taking control. They do have control over PS2 title distribution and they have their own content. Sony also controls a lot of non-gaming media companies like music and movies. Microsoft doesn't have near as much of their hand in the media content side. Media formats is only a part of what you need to get control of the living room.
cybamerc said:
There's no need to add the quality issue to the debate. We're talking about competition here and how it keeps the big guys in check. I seriously doubt Microsoft can overtake Sony. Personally I think they there will be good competition in the next-gen and it's possible that Microsoft might increase its market share, but in the end it's Sony dominance to lose, not Microsoft. With that said, if there is no competition(Sony or Microsoft wins), then yes, the consumer will lose, but I highly doubt one party will come out as victor.
cybamerc said:
The consoles are not always about hardware technology. You could have the most impressive hardware out there, but no software to drive it and still lose. The technology that Microsoft has is their software technology(OS, software development and games). BTW, Sony was a new comer to the console industry too and they had to buy some technology as well.
cybamerc said:
If Sony had no competition, they would be free to charge whatever they wanted. So if I wanted a game console I would have to pay their price or not get one at all. By having competition Sony are held in check and I'm able to shop around for a product that meets my budget and the games and features I want. Again, whether or not Microsoft is a quality option is beyond this debate. However, I will say that the free market will eventually show if they're quality is good enough for this market. So far Microsoft is not doing too bad despite your belief they're just "also-rans".
So like I said before: choice is good, no choice is bad. Simple logic.
Tommy McClain
Give it up Paul. You are making yourself look bad, really bad. Stick to PS3 + Cell topics. Please.....
hmmmm....I say instead of "I HATA MS DIE ANTI CHRIST!!!" around in an internet forums, why dont you do something about it? Write a better OS? Pool your money together and buy Linux to success? Demostrate outside MS headoffice? Something...anything?
hmmmm....I say instead of "I HATA MS DIE ANTI CHRIST!!!" around in an internet forums, why dont you do something about it? Write a better OS? Pool your money together and buy Linux to success? Demostrate outside MS headoffice? Something...anything?
I'm making myself look bad? No, I stated my own god damn opinion of what I think about MS and what they are doing, but of course their are always the "ms is god" crew around to try and dispell any of this.
Look whose talking, the forum troll. Instead of telling me to stick to PS3 topics how about I tell you to stick to Teamxbox.
Yea I say ms is the antichrist around internet.. you obviously have no god damn clue.
Go back to ruining topics with ps2 gfxx are crap garbage.
How about instead of whining about how ps2 graphics suck on internet forums you GTFO and go do something about it.. I dunno maybe write Kutaragi a letter?
Look whose talking, the forum troll. Instead of telling me to stick to PS3 topics how about I tell you to stick to Teamxbox.
Yea I say ms is the antichrist around internet..
you obviously have no god damn clue.Go back to ruining topics with ps2 gfxx are crap garbage.
How about instead of whining about how ps2 graphics suck on internet forums you GTFO and go do something about it.. I dunno maybe write Kutaragi a letter?
randycat99
Veteran
...but Chap never takes his own advice!
Paul said:I'm making myself look bad? No, I stated my own god damn opinion of what I think about MS and what they are doing, but of course their are always the "ms is god" crew around to try and dispell any of this.
Look whose talking, the forum troll. Instead of telling me to stick to PS3 topics how about I tell you to stick to Teamxbox.
Yea I say ms is the antichrist around internet..
Go back to ruining topics with ps2 gfxx are crap garbage.
How about instead of whining about how ps2 graphics suck on internet forums you GTFO and go do something about it.. I dunno maybe write Kutaragi a letter?
And there is allways Sony are god people running around fighting with the ms are god people .
randycat99 said:...but Chap never takes his own advice!
Elaborate.
Paul,
Seriously, quit while the chance is around(i hope your last "last reply" thing stands). Leave the MS hating to more sensible(in a sense...
) people like Cybamerc. You are just digging yourself into a pit of no returns.can we just stick to "discuss about different opinions" and not "u're an idiot" kind of thread?
thank u.
(see that, how classy was that)
thank u.
(see that, how classy was that)
Joe DeFuria:
> Um....when there is no competition, it's generally bad. When there is
> competition, it's generally good.
Generally yes. But in actuality it depends on the competing party, if they are serious, capable and focused on running a viable business. Throughout history we have seen many companies driven out of business by new competitors entering the fray, looking to make a quick buck. Often these competitors don't last long themselves because they've prioritized accumulating market share rather than running a healthy business. Since these companies typically die and never resurface balance will usually be restored to the market. In M$' case they have so much money that running a viable business isn't a necessity, hell it's not even a requirement. They just want to be there and kill everyone standing in their way. And they have the money to do it.
M$ is not and never will be healthy competition. Their behavior in the PC market should be proof of that.
> A "mega corporation" (of which both Sony and MS can be accused),
> that has deeper pockets has a higher liklihood to succeed, because it
> can spend more on R&D (for a better product), marketing, etc.
It has a better likelihood to succeed because it can outspend and outlast the competition. Quality isn't necessarilly a factor.
> I plop in a game and "play it" just like every other console I've ever owned.
After it has copied it's content to the harddrive and downloaded the latest patches
There is PC software that can be used without prior install as well. Does that make the PC a console?
> Lol...and Sony doesn't support developers either?
Sure they do. And I'm not saying that Sony are saints. However, their business practices are far less questionable than M$' and unlike M$ they're not trying to hide what their ultimate goal is.
And besides that, if they didn't pay, those games would in all likelihood still come out for PS2. And probably still be exclusive (unfortunately).
> but those who do are, well, dumb
Most ppl are.
LogisticX:
> I'm not sure if they even said that Xbox would solely be a gaming
> console stripped right down to the basics.
They did.
> If they do chooose to move in the same direction as the PS3
> (ie. multi-functioning device) then I don't think there's any fault to that.
They made that choice during the conception of the Xbox.
AzBat:
> Let's say Microsoft never produced the Xbox and that left just Sony and
> Nintendo, then how do you think things would have turned out for the
> console business?
Pretty much the same. A little more stable, less uncertainty, less shovelware, more marketshare for Nintendo. It would be slightly better but ultimately M$ hasn't had much of an impact on the market as a whole. That might change the next gen.
> I think Sony's market share numbers show its more than capable of
> taking control.
The console industry is vastly different from the music and movie industry. Sony's success in establishing PlayStation as the de facto development platform doesn't say much about their ability to amass support for a broader standard. See Betamax, MiniDisc, Memory Stick (and soon UMD) for that.
Consoles are closed boxes that are replaced every fifth year or so. That kind of product can't be made by an organization. It has been tried before with failure as the result. With the speed at which computer technology is developing and the money it takes to do R&D you need to have someone who is responsible for making all the decisions and investing the money it takes. This is what consumers want and it is what developers and publishers want.
Media formats however are not subject to such rapid development because the average consumer, and this includes those who are not interested in games, doesn't want to replace his or her VCR, CD player, DVD player etc. every five years - including the library they've acquired in the mean time. Moreover music and movie content doesn't constantly require more processing power because it isn't generated in realtime. You don't introduce a new standard until there are significant gains to be made, the whole production pipeline is ready for the changes and there is equipment capable of taking advantage of the new technology. As such, the creation of media formats is suitable for an organisation where a wide range of interest groups can have a say. In fact, an open format is much more likely to succeed.
There is no way any music or movie company will give up control and support a proprietary Sony standard that would in all likelihood cost them money and make Sony more.
> Microsoft doesn't have near as much of their hand in the media content side.
They want to however. The one who controls the media has the power
> Media formats is only a part of what you need to get control of the living room.
Of course. Ultimately its the content that drives the business but if you have that support and control the media format, then you have awesome power.
> There's no need to add the quality issue to the debate.
As a consumer, as a user, I care about quality. I know a lot of people don't but I do.
> We're talking about competition here and how it keeps the big guys in check.
Right now they are more out of control than anything.
> The consoles are not always about hardware technology.
M$ had to buy the games as well. They were equipped to supply software for a PC but not a console.
> BTW, Sony was a new comer to the console industry too and they had
> to buy some technology as well.
Some yes, Not an entire system like M$.
> If Sony had no competition, they would be free to charge whatever
> they wanted.
Certainly, and to some extend they still do. But even without M$ in the market Sony would still have competition in the shape of Nintendo. A company that actually runs a viable business.
> So far Microsoft is not doing too bad despite your belief they're
> just "also-rans".
They are 3-4 billion in the hole and #3 worldwide and you think they're not doing too bad? The power of PR!
> Um....when there is no competition, it's generally bad. When there is
> competition, it's generally good.
Generally yes. But in actuality it depends on the competing party, if they are serious, capable and focused on running a viable business. Throughout history we have seen many companies driven out of business by new competitors entering the fray, looking to make a quick buck. Often these competitors don't last long themselves because they've prioritized accumulating market share rather than running a healthy business. Since these companies typically die and never resurface balance will usually be restored to the market. In M$' case they have so much money that running a viable business isn't a necessity, hell it's not even a requirement. They just want to be there and kill everyone standing in their way. And they have the money to do it.
M$ is not and never will be healthy competition. Their behavior in the PC market should be proof of that.
> A "mega corporation" (of which both Sony and MS can be accused),
> that has deeper pockets has a higher liklihood to succeed, because it
> can spend more on R&D (for a better product), marketing, etc.
It has a better likelihood to succeed because it can outspend and outlast the competition. Quality isn't necessarilly a factor.
> I plop in a game and "play it" just like every other console I've ever owned.
After it has copied it's content to the harddrive and downloaded the latest patches
There is PC software that can be used without prior install as well. Does that make the PC a console?
> Lol...and Sony doesn't support developers either?
Sure they do. And I'm not saying that Sony are saints. However, their business practices are far less questionable than M$' and unlike M$ they're not trying to hide what their ultimate goal is.
And besides that, if they didn't pay, those games would in all likelihood still come out for PS2. And probably still be exclusive (unfortunately).
> but those who do are, well, dumb
Most ppl are.
LogisticX:
> I'm not sure if they even said that Xbox would solely be a gaming
> console stripped right down to the basics.
They did.
> If they do chooose to move in the same direction as the PS3
> (ie. multi-functioning device) then I don't think there's any fault to that.
They made that choice during the conception of the Xbox.
AzBat:
> Let's say Microsoft never produced the Xbox and that left just Sony and
> Nintendo, then how do you think things would have turned out for the
> console business?
Pretty much the same. A little more stable, less uncertainty, less shovelware, more marketshare for Nintendo. It would be slightly better but ultimately M$ hasn't had much of an impact on the market as a whole. That might change the next gen.
> I think Sony's market share numbers show its more than capable of
> taking control.
The console industry is vastly different from the music and movie industry. Sony's success in establishing PlayStation as the de facto development platform doesn't say much about their ability to amass support for a broader standard. See Betamax, MiniDisc, Memory Stick (and soon UMD) for that.
Consoles are closed boxes that are replaced every fifth year or so. That kind of product can't be made by an organization. It has been tried before with failure as the result. With the speed at which computer technology is developing and the money it takes to do R&D you need to have someone who is responsible for making all the decisions and investing the money it takes. This is what consumers want and it is what developers and publishers want.
Media formats however are not subject to such rapid development because the average consumer, and this includes those who are not interested in games, doesn't want to replace his or her VCR, CD player, DVD player etc. every five years - including the library they've acquired in the mean time. Moreover music and movie content doesn't constantly require more processing power because it isn't generated in realtime. You don't introduce a new standard until there are significant gains to be made, the whole production pipeline is ready for the changes and there is equipment capable of taking advantage of the new technology. As such, the creation of media formats is suitable for an organisation where a wide range of interest groups can have a say. In fact, an open format is much more likely to succeed.
There is no way any music or movie company will give up control and support a proprietary Sony standard that would in all likelihood cost them money and make Sony more.
> Microsoft doesn't have near as much of their hand in the media content side.
They want to however. The one who controls the media has the power
> Media formats is only a part of what you need to get control of the living room.
Of course. Ultimately its the content that drives the business but if you have that support and control the media format, then you have awesome power.
> There's no need to add the quality issue to the debate.
As a consumer, as a user, I care about quality. I know a lot of people don't but I do.
> We're talking about competition here and how it keeps the big guys in check.
Right now they are more out of control than anything.
> The consoles are not always about hardware technology.
M$ had to buy the games as well. They were equipped to supply software for a PC but not a console.
> BTW, Sony was a new comer to the console industry too and they had
> to buy some technology as well.
Some yes, Not an entire system like M$.
> If Sony had no competition, they would be free to charge whatever
> they wanted.
Certainly, and to some extend they still do. But even without M$ in the market Sony would still have competition in the shape of Nintendo. A company that actually runs a viable business.
> So far Microsoft is not doing too bad despite your belief they're
> just "also-rans".
They are 3-4 billion in the hole and #3 worldwide and you think they're not doing too bad? The power of PR!