"His comments come from the very real concerns among some that people snapped up the Power Armor edition in hopes of re-selling it on the grey market for a higher price."
So taking advantage of an opportunity by making yourself and your money available to a limited supply of commodities is now engaging in a "grey market"?
@xravishx: You are completely missing his point. People are not going to buy the Xbox One to play last generation games. They will be happy to know they can, but by and large people are buying the next gen system to play next gen games.
Microsoft is not doing themselves ANY favors with the lack of exclusives. This is evident in their 2nd place status this generation. There is really NO REASON to buy an Xbox One if you have a decent PC, unless you just prefer the console form factor. As a matter of fact if you already own a fairly beefy PC you don't need an Xbox One X.
Microsoft doesn't get any licensing fees for PC games so they are shooting themselves in the foot. Exclusivity is not a catchphrase it is a means to separate your console from the others. Sony has experiences you can only play on PlayStation. Microsoft has VERY FEW. Sony makes PlayStation a necessity if you want to enjoy their first party studio games.
I appreciate you are an MS fan and are well schooled in the appropriate talking points but so far the strategy of NOT having real exclusive games is not bearing much fruit. This generation is nearly over and I doubt if the Xbox One X will turn things around for Microsoft.
@supersnakeplissken: Ars Technica did a write-up on Backwards Compatibility and it wasn't kind. They amended their data, but it shoudln't be a big surprise to anyone that people buy Xbox One systems to play Xbox One games. Otherwise the Xbox 360 is much cheaper option.
Ars Technica already showcased that people watch YouTube on Xbox One more than they play X360 games. Some people are using it, but its not a HUGE feature. I don't think many people are buying Xbox One purely to play last gen games.
MS provided some data about the use of BC but they never properly refuted Ars Technica's claims because they did not have the data to support that IMHO. MS has proven they are very clever with the PR war.
@EricDWright: Sorry dude you were the one being a jerk here. Quite honestly I am suspect that you even played this game. You seem to be the type that just likes to complain about Publisher X and Publisher Y just because they are looking to be a viable profitable entity.
@MarcRecon: Indeed, its a strong game engine, draw distance is superb. Vehicle mechanics vastly improved over the beta. Some of the missions got a bit lather rinse repeat but what game doesn't have that issue when you have a large number of missions?
Was it sublime like Horizon Zero Dawn? No -- but then again HZD didn't feature Coop.
"Bashing someone else with insults just because he has a different opinion from you is low dude ..."
Crashtestguy was bashing no one, I as a bit of a jerk to EricDWright because he was being a bit of a jerk. Quite honestly I am not convinced the guy has played the game. His comments read like someone who avoids Ubisoft games. I was excited for Wildlands when I first saw it too. In many ways it does make up for the shortcomings in the Division, but it someways it has it's own shortcomings. That being said its still a great game and I had a lot of fun playing it. I already got the Platinum trophy for the game.
@EricDWright: The PUBLISHER doesn't create the game they only PUBLISH it -- hence the name PUBLISHER. The studio does the developing. So kindly choke on your own manhood and STFU.
No one is telling you to love the game, someone pointed out that after the first area the game does get a great deal better, especially if you playing coop. If you are a seasoned shooter gamer I would suggest upping the difficulty.
DoucheVader's comments