Has Microsoft Revolutionized Console Gaming???

Well we all know that if Microsoft wouldnt have entered the current console war we'd only be left in choosing a non-hardcore console or an expensive one....which would have been lackluster to say the least,So its a good thing they entered. But I also realized that if it wasn't for Microsoft which was the first to fully implement and perfect online gaming on consoles, even before Sony and Nintendo really thought of heading into which in my opinion puts MS in its own gameing league, and now just look at current gaming, online has become essential on all consoles.and That in my opinion is revolutionary by any means

So people should give them there due respect, But the question I ask is, Do you honestly think MS revolutionized Gaming???

good god no

Yes Microft revolutionized online gaming but Sony have been level with them for about a year and facebook isn't going to change that.LiquidSnake1001

but If it wasnt for MS there wouldnt even be online gaming on console

I don't believe that at all. They make a good system, but it isn't revolutionary. And neither is Xbox Live.

[QUOTE="LiquidSnake1001"]Yes Microft revolutionized online gaming but Sony have been level with them for about a year and facebook isn't going to change that.scarface_dm

but If it wasnt for MS there wouldnt even be online gaming on console

[QUOTE="scarface_dm"]

[QUOTE="LiquidSnake1001"]Yes Microft revolutionized online gaming but Sony have been level with them for about a year and facebook isn't going to change that.AAllxxjjnn

but If it wasnt for MS there wouldnt even be online gaming on console

Yes, the Dreamcast had online. Microsoft wasn't the first to do it.

I would say no.

[QUOTE="scarface_dm"]

[QUOTE="LiquidSnake1001"]Yes Microft revolutionized online gaming but Sony have been level with them for about a year and facebook isn't going to change that.AAllxxjjnn

but If it wasnt for MS there wouldnt even be online gaming on console

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="scarface_dm"]

but If it wasnt for MS there wouldnt even be online gaming on console

Phoenix534

Yes, the Dreamcast had online. Microsoft wasn't the first to do it.

Correct, and MS even recruited Peter Moore from the Dreamcast team at Sega.

[QUOTE="LiquidSnake1001"]Yes Microft revolutionized online gaming but Sony have been level with them for about a year and facebook isn't going to change that.scarface_dm

but If it wasnt for MS there wouldnt even be online gaming on console

Except for the Dreamcast, which was out before MS even thought of the Xbox. And the PS2's network adaptor, which was announced as an add-on before the Xbox was out (even though it took forever to actually come out)...

But yeah, MS invented online gaming.

[QUOTE="scarface_dm"]

[QUOTE="LiquidSnake1001"]Yes Microft revolutionized online gaming but Sony have been level with them for about a year and facebook isn't going to change that.ZIMdoom

but If it wasnt for MS there wouldnt even be online gaming on console

Except for the Dreamcast, which was out before MS even thought of the Xbox. And the PS2's network adaptor, which was announced as an add-on before the Xbox was out (even though it took forever to actually come out)...

But yeah, MS invented online gaming.

And Halo 2 invented dual-wielding in FPS games. XD

Well we all know that if Microsoft wouldnt have entered the current console war we'd only be left in choosing a non-hardcore console or an expensive one....which would have been lackluster to say the least,So its a good thing they entered. But I also realized that if it wasn't for Microsoft which was the first to fully implement and perfect online gaming on consoles, even before Sony and Nintendo really thought of heading into which in my opinion puts MS in its own gameing league, and now just look at current gaming, online has become essential on all consoles.and That in my opinion is revolutionary by any means

So people should give them there due respect, But the question I ask is, Do you honestly think MS revolutionized Gaming???

scarface_dm

Honestly? No. Kind of ironic how you say if it wasn't for Microsoft we'd have to buy an expensive console considering they usually cost more than Nintendo or Sony :? .... I'm looking at you, f'n $100 wireless adapter. :evil:

Well we all know that if Microsoft wouldnt have entered the current console war we'd only be left in choosing a non-hardcore console or an expensive one....which would have been lackluster to say the least,So its a good thing they entered.

scarface_dm

Uhmmm...how do "we all know" this exactly? I wasn't aware that crystal balls peering into alternate realities were = to fact. One could easily make the case that if not for the additional competition in a market that can't support 3 consoles, then Nintendo wouldn't have done so poorly with the GC and might possibly have never bothered looking for new, non-gaming audiences. And Sony, not feeling the pressure of MS, might not have felt the need to try and over power the competition and therefore would have stuck to their original plan releasing consoles every 5 years, and therefore it would have been cheaper and not included BR.

You can't just take MS out of the picture and then act like everything else would just logically be identical as it is now.

Yes, by being the first to really incorporate online in a console.tehsystemwarior

[QUOTE="tehsystemwarior"]Yes, by being the first to really incorporate online in a console.Tjeremiah1988

it means that if it werent for Microsoft...online on consoles would just be a luxury rather than a necessity!!!

and who ever is voting no, thanks for explaing why :roll:

Microsoft has implemented systems that have become the standard, but look to what they are doing wrong, such as proprietary hardware costing so much etc.

No company is perfect.

[QUOTE="tehsystemwarior"]Yes, by being the first to really incorporate online in a console.Tjeremiah1988

[QUOTE="Tjeremiah1988"][QUOTE="tehsystemwarior"]Yes, by being the first to really incorporate online in a console.scarface_dm

it means that if it werent for Microsoft...online on consoles would just be a luxury rather than a necessity!!!

and who ever is voting no, thanks for explaing why :roll:

Online isn't a necessity. It's simply a growing trend that developers are poorly implementing it instead of focusing on the singleplayer. If you ask me, popularizing multiplayer 1) PSN would have done that, 2) Microsoft has taught developers that they can over-charge and not include as much and people will still buy, and 3) has started hurt gamers.

WOW.

You can tell by the posts in this thread that alot of people only started gaming mid last gen. Dreamcast anyone? Dreamarena?

And before you go and denounce it as crap, it wasnt. Although it didnt have a standardised serivce, each game was of very high quality. Quality that easily matched last gen Xbox live games. Oh and the DC also had a web browser, something even the 360 doesnt have.

Clarification on the terms being used here:

In my eyes, there's a significant difference between being innovative and being revolutionary.

Was MS innovative this gen? Not really. Most of today's features on any console can be traced back to previous innovations. At this point, many things are derivative.

Was MS revolutionary? I think so, with Xbox Live. It's not that it's innovative. We've been gaming online for decades now. What MS did to revolutionize it was to redefine was being online is. By concentrating on the idea of community, they've evolved the term "online" for them. It's not just being able to play with each other in multilayer sessions. The online experience begins the moment you turn your console, whether in a game proper or watching a movie or listening to music, you're always connected to the community. That community is managed by people whose job it is to talk to and nurture the people they serve. And that service extends beyond being on the console. MSN Messenger, Xbox.com and now Facebook and Twitter offer even more ways to connect to your friends list.

Their introduction of profile pages and gamerpics and gamerscore showed starts of social networking from day one.

MS enjoys the luxury of being on a console, so they can enforce standards across the whole platform.

Meanwhile, Sony and Nintendo seem to be stuck in the archaic mentality that being online is only about being in a multiplayer match. This is painfully obvious with Nintendo's ignoring of more robust online features, and Sony's patchwork of online additions to emulate what XBL already has.

In that respect, yes, MS has revolutionized this gen. You can be sure that the next gen will feature even more social networking features that further enhace the concept of online community....not just playing online.

yeah by being the first to charge for online playkweeni

I assume you never played online on dreamcast, anyone remember phantasy star online, they charged to go on there servers

besides you fail to experiance xbox live so, your thoughts are irrelevant here !!

[QUOTE="LiquidSnake1001"]Yes Microft revolutionized online gaming but Sony have been level with them for about a year and facebook isn't going to change that.scarface_dm

but If it wasnt for MS there wouldnt even be online gaming on console

[QUOTE="kweeni"]yeah by being the first to charge for online playscarface_dm

I assume you never played online on dreamcast, anyone remember phantasy star online, they charged to go on there servers

besides you fail to experiance xbox live so, your thoughts are irrelevant here !!

[QUOTE="kweeni"]yeah by being the first to charge for online playscarface_dm

I assume you never played online on dreamcast, anyone remember phantasy star online, they charged to go on there servers

besides you fail to experiance xbox live so, your thoughts are irrelevant here !!

Subsicroption fee

------Ver.1------- Ver 2

US---No----------Yes

EU ---No-----------No

Only the US version of PSO ver.2 was had a subscription, which is why most US gamers stayed on Ver1. And im pretty sure Japan is the same as EU, no subscription at all.

By doing what exactly?

When it comes to online gaming I think they did. And I am aware about the Dreamcast.

Get your facts straight, gaming noob. Nintendo is king of the mountain.

[QUOTE="LiquidSnake1001"]Yes Microft revolutionized online gaming but Sony have been level with them for about a year and facebook isn't going to change that.scarface_dm

but If it wasnt for MS there wouldnt even be online gaming on console

[QUOTE="scarface_dm"]

[QUOTE="LiquidSnake1001"]Yes Microft revolutionized online gaming but Sony have been level with them for about a year and facebook isn't going to change that.LiquidSnake1001

but If it wasnt for MS there wouldnt even be online gaming on console

Until Sony invokes platform-wide standards and further streamlines their online features, it will always be behind Xbox Live.

They didn't "revolutionize" console gaming. But as far as online goes, they definetly helped it form on consoles. And we'd likely be stuck with pc's for multiplayer gaming if it wasnt for them. And they're the ones that got Sony into gear for their online.

I don't believe that at all. They make a good system, but it isn't revolutionary. And neither is Xbox Live.

Phoenix534

Microsoft Revolutinoized gaming in a sense that they had the lease relialable console in the history of ALL consoles hence the RROD, disk reading errors, disk scractching, and E74.

I really don't think see that at all. Maybe online a bit.

Microsoft Revolutionized gaming in a sense that they had the lease reliable console in the history of ALL consoles hence the RROD, disk reading errors, disk scractching, and E74.

MetalGearSolidZ

thanx for letting us know, now begone from here

No, I don't think so. That either belongs to Sony or Nintendomgkennedy5

Im not saying they revolutionized console gaming more than Sony or Nintendo, all Im saying is that they did do something revolutionary in a way

WOW.

You can tell by the posts in this thread that alot of people only started gaming mid last gen. Dreamcast anyone? Dreamarena?

And before you go and denounce it as crap, it wasnt. Although it didnt have a standardised serivce, each game was of very high quality. Quality that easily matched last gen Xbox live games. Oh and the DC also had a web browser, something even the 360 doesnt have.