Nothing suggested MS or NIN wasn't going to do it after last gen either. So what is the point of your invalid argument?When no evidence exists to support this.
Sony have taken a different route this gen than MS, they have piled up the onine passes, and offered PS+, a way to get sub money without preventing people from playing half a game they already own if they chose not to subscribe.
More recently they did a survey of different 'tiers' of PS+, so that if you pay more, you get more benefits, such as discounts on every item on the PS store.
Sony have used free online as a selling point over the competition, and it works. I would never pay for Xbox live, when I can get PSN for free. (although those free trial codes that come with 360 games are handy :lol: )
Just wonder why lems are so certain they will charge for online play next gen, when nothing suggests they will.
Is it because they are trying to justify the money they have spent on live this gen? or because they are certain that MS will be charging them again next gen?
Or does some evidence exist that Sony will be charging? I'd like to see it if so.
BibiMaghoo
Containmomentum's forum posts
What? Where were u last gen?What is the best console era released until now ? For me it the era of the previous consoles because you don't have the stupid DLC or the complex systems just pure gaming.
Savoritias
You pay for the box, you keep paying for the service. Xbox 360: You pay fr the box you have an OPTION to keep paying for the service.[QUOTE="Containmomentum"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]
Stop comparing this to Cable TV or a cellphone service. It doesn't make sense.
dream431ca
Huh? Did you read the fine print?? If you cancel the service on your 360, MS will charge you a termination fee, so you sign a contract. You really have no option, unless you want to pay more money to cancel it.
Ok, Prepaid phone: By the phone optional payment plan, get more features Xbox 360: By the phone optional payment plan get more features Wanna try again?Have you played Xenoblade? How about pointing out what you don't agree with instead of false assumptions of me not having played the game? Also, another thing about Xenoblade Square makes no sense about, no matter how much you liked or like Xenoblade, no matter how much, it's not PRORESS. Or if there is any, it's very little. Xenoblade at the very least might partially be a step in the right direction for Jrpgs. But if people atart ripping from that instead of only taking some of what it did and progressing with it, they will make a 360 and end up back to 2007.[QUOTE="Containmomentum"]SquareEnix need to pull and Sears/Kmart and have Enix somwhoe owning more of the company and dissolving Square becase they are becoing dumber and dumber as we go forward. How can you possibly, and anyone here agree, that making large Jrpgs (Xenoblade is not that big, and I highly doubt people would have appreciated it during when Jrpgs were starting to die out at the start of the gen.) is taxing when um, WRPGS which are not linear in events, have more going on, bigger, have in some cases cinematic section or events, and have dialouge and decision systems that changes thing entirely, having no problem at all? But a game like Xenoblade is too hard to make on 360 and Ps3 (or to progress as they are implying in general?) What? How? What ass did they cut open to take that kind of crap out?nintendofreak_2
The rules are simple, but mostly SP.BadoshThe rules are simple? Yeah, but MP gets very repetitive, and seems to be lacking much challenge now that as they say "Dumbing down" has become popular.
It would be smart. Think about it, Nintendo after all these gens would have a full circle of genres to attract people. You have a mature themed action adventure in moden settings. A simulator racer A realistic arcade racer. A Mech action game An arcade quality shooter time crisis like game Vehicle race game off road Biking A non-violent game that offer the same action. Regular action game then you have mother, an rpg with original concepts Wario, a platforming puzzle hybrid with some other things. Kirby, variety of maze like platforming and family friendly fun. Metroid, Action Adventure and FP action adventure Fire Emblem strategy game Sci-fi rail shooter, Action 3rd person shooter at times as well. Custom Robo with custome arcade F-Zero, action non-weapon based arcade sci-fi racer. Plot based pokemon games for more traditional console rpg with exploration. I mean, they would have a full circle grabbing all the sales and fans of those. To be honest, they seem to be just as dumb as MS for having all these IPS and acting like they will die if they bring any back. not saying that they suck or anything, just that both (Heck MS has even more genre diversity, they both could expand easily) have no idea what they are doing. But back on Nintendo, their decisions mostly this gen have not made much sense to me. But I believe doing anything similar to the above with the Wii u will have them legitly eat the competition down with sales instead of making a system with forgettable games and such. They got it all right there. now if only they themselves would realize this.I'd like to see Fire Emblem on consoles again. Wii U seems like it would be perfect for it.
Mother localization would be great too but I'm not holding my breath on that.
PatchMaster
Do you have Cable TV? Then your whole post is invalid.[QUOTE="Containmomentum"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]
Sony doesn't charge for online play, nor do they do "subscription" deals (the new Xbox deal, which is terrible). You buy a Sony console *ONCE* unless it has a hardware issue, but that should not count because all consoles have hardware issues now and then which is a part of owning a gaming console, or even a PC. You don't buy a Microsoft console just once, you have to keep on paying for online. Microsoft doesn't need to come to your house to rob you, you let them in willingly to rob you.
dream431ca
Stop comparing this to Cable TV or a cellphone service. It doesn't make sense.
You pay for the box, you keep paying for the service. Xbox 360: You pay fr the box you have an OPTION to keep paying for the service.Yeah it was enough to make the GC profitable and sell over 20 million units so Nintendo could stay in the console races. Nintendo games have appeal that other games just don't have and you pretty much just proved my point, because no other console could get over 20 million just off of first party support. No it wasn't if the GBA hadn't backed up the fast falling progress they would have 2 systems now actually generating back-up profit and they both would have started selling at a loss by the end of the 2nd year. Also to add, 3rd-parties started to be the number one console movers (except maybe brawl) by the last few years. This is why even though the Xbox ended early the GC still ended up in last place as well. No, Nintendo games do not have a magical appeal you made up. No one should like a company that much to believe that before it starts scaring people and bordering obsession.[QUOTE="Containmomentum"]When did this happen? the GC was the only time where third-parties or sucess of the last system didn't transfer over and all they had to go with was first-party support to gain any traction and look where that ended up.nintendofreak_2
Log in to comment