I defend it because its the american thing to do.

Medic_B

It will never cease to amaze me how people continue to commit this much mental energy and productivity into such useless arguements. How people are this obsessed with their gaming console that they lack the ability to look at things objectively. The beautiful thing about system wars is, that I could make this exact same thread tomorrow, but word it differently, and it will still go on for 12 pages :lol:

This is my second and last post in this thread, as I prefer to be a spectator in these debates, but here is my take. I have to side with the cows on this one.

If the Lemmings switched out the topic of this arguement (Xbox Live) with ANY other topic in ANY other field or aspect of life (non gaming included), they would be perfectly capable of seeing the arguement objectively. The ONLY reason they are incapable of judging the subject matter at hand in an objective mindset is because of their predisposition towards the subject matter (xbox live).

Basically, in the least harsh way possible, it is their "feelings" or "bias" towards the subject matter will make them ALWAYS turn the other cheek, no matter what.

Switch out Xbox live with, say.......the Iphone. For people who own an Iphone, you have to pay your phone bill (which included your data plan), but what if Apple were to charge you their own proprietary fee just to give you the privilege of using their Iphone? In addition to the phone bill your already paying. If Apple were to do this, it would be easy for one to see how rediculous it is, no matter how much "better" you think the iphone is than the droid. That is because you have no bias towards the subject matter, therefore you are capable of thinking objectively.

But because the subject matter is something that you are inherently biased against, you will defend it NO MATTER WHAT. I promise you Microsoft could impliment a World of Warcraft style payment plan tomorrow, and the majority of the people in this thread will defend them no matter what, because of their inherent bias (for those unaware, WoW costs $30 for 60 days subscription, or $15 a month).

Thats my final piece on this.

I honestly dont think sony went into this gen with the intention of being #1 (despite what their PR says). PS3 was used mainly as a vehicle to usher in Blu-Ray as the standard.

I agree with you, but here are the real problems:

-sony did not have a developer conference when they were designing the PS3 (which PS1, PS2, and all of nintendo and MS systems had). Sony did not consult with developers when building the PS3. They created a complicated architecture, and dropped in into developers hands and said "do something with it". This lack of developer feedback hurt the PS3. Not only that, but the PS3 had almost no software tools to aid development. Developers had to build everything themselves.

-microsoft DID have a developer conference. During this conference (when they rally up developers and publishers) it is rumored that they gave ALL DEVELOPERS who attended FREE development kits. It should be noted that at the begginning of the gen, Sony was charging $15,000 for their SDKs, whereas Microsoft spent a considerable amount of time giving them away for free, as well as rallying up as much support as possible. Basically, Microsoft kissed every possible ass they could, and made it as favorable to develop for their platform as they could, while sony sat on their asses doing nothing.

-Now from a developer point of view, which platform would you want to develop for? A platform which has an engine and several tools already built for you, where MS is giving you free SDKs to make games for them, or a platform with no toolsets or netcode whatsoever, with $15,000 development kits? (which developers would have to buy hundreds of, or maybe less)

-not to mention the 360 already had a userbase while PS3 had nothing, not to mention a $600 price tag. You can see now how at the begginning of the gen, it was more favorable to make games for 360 right?

Lol @ the ugly MGS4 pics, and bullshots of Uncharted 1.

I feel the exact same except with Uncharted 1 and 2. (and 3).

Uncharted is the most overrated franchise this gen (possibly of all time) and I am mostly a cow. I cannot wait for next gen when Naughty Dog abandons this franchise and puts out something new.

I was just playing the beta BTW.

[QUOTE="StrongDeadlift"]Nintendo 64 and Gamecube say hellofunsohng

I find it ironic that someone bashed Call of Duty in this thread in defense of the Wii, but ignored the MOUNTAINS and MOUNTAINS of worthless shovelware the Wii has put out, garbage like "cooking mama", and a WORSE AAA library on metacritic than the dreamcast? After 5 years? Add to that, last gen graphics?

Oh but its ok because it SELLS good right? What has the Wii done for gamers, and the industry as a whole other than put money in Nintendo's pocket?

Now, what has the Nintendo 64 and the Gamecube done for gamers? They produced some of the best franchises of all time.

[QUOTE="StrongDeadlift"][QUOTE="funsohng"] And what is so wrong with that? That is EXACTLY what I am asking for. Just give me an Xbox 360 with Mario on it and I will call it a day. Is it really that hard for them?charizard1605

Why have everything the same? Personally I like to have different experiences on the different consoles rather than having them be roughly the same.soulitane

I would have no problem if they gave me a gamecube with next gen graphics.

[QUOTE="sailor232"]

Im on the fence with the wiiu at the moment, I really need to see more about the system before deciding. If a lot of games use the controller as a classic controller then I'll probably get one if the games are there. There's nothing stopping companies from making games play using a classic controller style on the wiiu, it has all the buttons needed.

funsohng