Hmm, aren't you the one who profusely claims that the PS2 DRE issue was nowhere near as bad as the 360 RROD issue without having any proof to back up your claims? Verge_6
It is exactly because there is no proof that the DRE was as bad as RROD that I am given carte blanche in this matter.
RROD became a sub-cultural phenomenon. DRE has only been extrapolated by Microsoft faithful as a way of combating the Sony crowd when they bring up Microsoft's blunder.
I have proof of RROD's widespread havoc from Microsoft's admission of a defect. Posters like Blackbond and Game21x have past lawsuits lodged against Sony that they feel empowered enough by to make imbalanced and defensive allegations with. Such statements like, "Sony had that opportunity and instead chose to fight the case. Shows how much they cared," carry strong subtext that expresses RROD as so much of a liability that Microsoft junkies are willing to compromise facts and stretch the definition of "proof" so they won't be miserable in solitude.
DRE is so culturally obscure that one cannot assume anything about the intent of Sony to go through with fighting a lawsuit beyond why they say they are--Especially when you're trying to compare their lawsuit to the infinitely more prevalent Microsoft lawsuit, which is only one of many. Trying to hold up the apparent noteriety of RROD and the nature of its emergence to the DRE's is groundless.
Beyond this, Microsoft consumers are laboring under the perpetration of a catch-22. If Sony fights the case and says the claim doesn't warrant pay-up, they're labeled mizorly crooks; if they settle, they consider that an indirect admission that the system has an inherent flaw like RROD. All the while this is going on, Microsoft's consumer zombies are rationalizing Microsoft's conscious release of a less than coherent product. Every single one of my game systems has lasted for at least eight years--My launch PS2 has still yet to die and yet Microsoft's ilk is content with a three year warranty. The bias in the air is so thick, one could choke on it.
What I find most hilarious about this situation is how many people on this very board were trying to dispute the ginormous amount of feedback in regards to RROD by both mass complaints posted online and the retailer outlets. Up until Microsoft's admission, people refused to acknowledge these reports existed and claimed that hundreds, if not thousands, of online responses were all apart of some kind of anecdotal campaign spear-headed by Sony supporters. And yet, even without negative feedback as voluminous as this, the 360 crowd still thinks it can force hyperbole down everyone's throats about DRE. To try and compensate for the disparity in company admission, consumer complaints, and retailer reports they try to fabricate as much anecdotal evidence as possible on this very messageboard. Whenever Microsoft gets scrutinized over this matter, embittered posters suddenly pop up with complaints of multiple defective PS2s. What makes this such an oddity is how sparse such complaints were in the PS2's more publicized lifetime whereas the RROD phenomenon has yet to die down.
But going back to the courts: If I really wanted to make a case about someone based on the claims lodged against them, I wouldn't simply be able to assign warrant to scrutiny at face value (as certain posters here would feel appropriate). One has to take a look at the nature of the lawsuit: How much does the company really stand to lose in fighting the case before pre-empting it or settling? In the case of Sony, from a purely financial perspective, they felt the error was too negligible to be considered inherent to the system and, therefore, not a possibility of a re-occuring threat (and they were right; after the initial lawsuit, there were no more thereafter; the product itself was fine). So they fought the case that, as a class action lawsuit, hosts multiple plaintiffs. If they felt there was a large enough number of plaintiffs that would equate to a bigger ratio within their consumership, it is much more likely to assume they would have mimmicked Microsoft's move. But as it stands, Microsoft had real hindsight of an inherent design flaw in conjunction with a number of plaintiffs that was likely more numerous than Sony's own number of plaintiffs. Case in point: In regards to Microsoft--Again, from a purely financial perspective--We see Microsoft being barraged by an enormous amount of complaints that anyone is able to see for themselves. It is much easier to come to the conlclusion that the class action lawsuit against them was not only larger than Sony's, but also a preface to more class action lawsuits.
The particulars of Sony's lawsuit are too ambiguous for any of you to draw to specific conclusions. Microsoft on the other hand, is an open book. So you see, the door doesn't swing both ways here.
Even if I were to agree that DRE was on the scale of RROD and that Sony is just as bad as Microsoft, I'd still be pointing out that Sony fixed past mistakes by learning from the PS2's DRE and creating a product that's actually reliable this generation. This is opposed to Microsoft who purposefully left a flaw in their system and felt that a three year cap for a consumers would be a fair compromise in leiu of a system that's actually reliable. Either way, the 360 camp is left looking desperate.
Also, I like how you, and the rest of the cows try and make the DRE problem seem non existent just because the numbers may not be as high as the RROD problem. You also, in your own words, called the lawsuit against Sony frivolous.MortalDecay
I didn't say the problem was non-existent. I said the problem wasn't inherent to the system's design as is the case with RROD. The PS2's laser reader is sound; the problem is that not all the disk formats, that are supposed to work on it, work as well as the initial DVD-9's that were designed for the PS2. I also didn't call the lawsuit frivolous. I said that companies in general aren't guilty of all complaints lodged against them since some can be frivolous. It is because of this that it would be unreasonable to automatically assume the case brought up against Sony was totally legitimate simply because it was brought up at all.
You pariah fail everytime you post i have went through 2 360s and 4 ps2s the simple fact is DRE was as bad you can talk BS for 5 days on the forum it aint gonna change the fact both were unreliable so i now must proclaim you a fanboy and a fool because you have too much time on your hands replying to posts that actually prove you wrong yet you let yourself look like a prat.
enjoy the failure that flows through you.
ps
i love using star wars quotes.
TX360
I minor in English. This is good practice for me. So I'm not wasting too much time here.BTW: You're still trying to apply anecdote as proof.
Ya know, I wonder if the RROD will be downplayed as much as the DRE is now in a few years time. I mean, that fatal PS2 error has gone from being a world-wide gaming crisis to ,apparently, something so small that it's not worth bringing up. Either there is a significant amount of selective memory going on here, or alot of the current PS3 users didn't start gaming until this generation.Verge_6
The amount of hyperbole in this quote is critical. Not only was DRE not a "world-wide gaming crisis," but you're also assuming more than you actually know about the Playstation demographic. If DRE was, and still is, a problem, a 120 million people install base would be posting ten times more complaints than Microsoft's victims.
Where is your proof the DRE wasn't as big as RROD? Do you have anything? Anything at all? If so, you have access to information that only the heads of the MS and SONY gaming divisions are allowed to see. Verge_6
"Prove God doesn't exist."
By that painfully selective logic, you inadvertantly admit that you yourself have no grounds for calling DRE a "world-wide gaming crisis."
I could bother quoting more, but this thread has turned into a 360 love-fest with Verge and Game21x passing chops back and forth with ****-eating grins. You gotta wonder what exactly that's supposed to prove.
Log in to comment