robbie_basic's forum posts

Avatar image for robbie_basic
robbie_basic

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 robbie_basic
Member since 2002 • 298 Posts

they always try to prevent the market from deciding. they always were against thing that could threaten windows. people devolop for windows because they have monopoly. while i agree ms revolutionized the pc industry with windows and have given tremendous benefits, they have never given any fair advatage to their competitors. there is nothing great about them, they are just a business comapany, but greedier, powerfull and unethical than the mostnaval
You are almost contradicting yourself in your own post. Of course Microsoft is out to make money and maximise shareholder whealth. That does not make them greedy, they donate plenty of money and reinvest much more into R&D, again you cannot deny how nice their R&D is, even Linux fanatics admit that.

I am not sure what you mean by not letting competitors rise, they make strategic acquisitions for obvious reasons. They want to get the technology before their competitors can. There are plently of competitors to Microsoft, Apple is one, Sony, Google, Adobe, Sun, etc. The only way I think you would accept them not hurting the competition I think would be if there was another OS with higher market share. The issue is that is not possible due to the nature of OS compatibility. I agree it would be wonderful if we could go back in time and have an open source linux ****OS that runs the world and is completely free and open and universal. I'm not sure that is completely realistic though so we have Windows which works great and is much better than having OS X for example which would mean we would all be using crappy over priced computers we can't even upgrade because they are even more monoploistic.

Avatar image for robbie_basic
robbie_basic

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 robbie_basic
Member since 2002 • 298 Posts

I think it would be safe to say that without Nintendo there wouldnt be an Xbox or Playstation and we would probably still be using cartridges...what has microsoft done that is on par with that? in terms of innovation nintendo is the most innovative period exploring new controll concepts and new ways to play games as well as new formats and microsoft does not even come close.

my list of innovation (my opinion)

1: Wii (new controlls etc etc)

2: PS3 (introducing blu ray)

3: Xbox 360 (... insert innovation here ...)

big_smoke_666
I agree that Nintendo is by far the most innovative in this argument. I also agree Sony did get things by bringing CD's to the scene. Blu ray is not innovative but is actually horrible. It is not nessecary in a console and is holding back society by trying to put an uneeded format. The reason is Blu ray requires manufacturers to use a whole new process to make the discs while HD DVD can use existing DVD factories. This is why Paramount went with HD DVD and is a fact that many of the blu ray/hd dvd arguers fail to think of, but is actually the biggest issue.

I'm sure some company could invent some disc that holds 100GB but it's useless unless it's mass marketable. So what I'm saying is the PS and even PS2 are innovative yes, Nintendo for sure. PS3 is when Sony started to go downhill and take advantage of customers (I actually think this is because Stringer was made CEO and he isn't Japanese so the company is dieing from within). But the Xbox 360 is very innovative. It has created Live which is simply amazing concept. The integration with other Microsoft products as well has behind the scenes innovation for developers.

You have to remember Microsoft just came into the gaming industry so obviously they aren't going to take any huge risks right away but in the future you better believe there will be some very innovative things coming down the line.
Avatar image for robbie_basic
robbie_basic

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 robbie_basic
Member since 2002 • 298 Posts
I'm not really in the mood for an argument, I'd much rather be playing mass Effect, so I'll say this: Ok.

But about microtransactions. I'm talking about aditional content. Not big stuff like whole expansion packs, I'm talking about little things that you have pay for on XBL that should have come with the game anyways. I'm talking about stuff like those Rock Band song packs that released on the same day the game released, and for like... what was it, $5? Stuff like that should not be happening. If developers want to keep their released games still "alive" I can understand releasing downloadable content at a later date, but I do not think we should have to pay more for it, especially when they release it the same day the game comes out! That's just BS, plain and simple.

Not-A-Stalker

I agree with you for the most part. But you have to keep some things in mind. We have no idea what goes behind the scenes with song packs. You have to remember they are licencing those songs and selling them. That is not a cheap thing to do and there is most likely nothing they can do. Also the reason they come out the day of is because the game disc can only have a certain amount of songs on it due to the licencing cost. Think of these songs as extra content. They aren't on the disc because they didn't have time to get them on like many people think. It's because of the cost of licencing the songs.

This is kinda like the situation where a company is going out of business and the CEO says to the union "I'm sorry but you need to take a pay cut, don't worry I have already reduced my salary to one dollar to show I am not being selfish." the union negotiators have to keep in mind that it isn't an argument between their old pay and the lesser one. It's an argument between zero pay and their new one.

This is like the songs and DLC you probably wouldn't of seen these songs if it wasn't for DLC. They wouldn't have been included on this disc. But I agree, I should really get back to my finance assignment. :S

Avatar image for robbie_basic
robbie_basic

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 robbie_basic
Member since 2002 • 298 Posts
If I don't win this I'm genna be so stressed.
Avatar image for robbie_basic
robbie_basic

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 robbie_basic
Member since 2002 • 298 Posts

No.

I Am The Best!

*stands up with 2 fists in the air*

Pangster007
>.>
You don't look like Microsoft to me!
Avatar image for robbie_basic
robbie_basic

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 robbie_basic
Member since 2002 • 298 Posts

My response:

ThePlothole

Hahahaha, so far you have the best argument yet. I actually agree with your argument and even mentioned Microsoft having bad stability in the past. That is the key though, it was in the past. Windows XP rarely gets bsod and I have yet to have one on Windows Vista yet.

You also must remember you are using a program on your computer for many hours a day and it has many other programs that windows did not expect to run on it all talking to each other. The opportunity for an error is obvious. Errors happen everywhere they are just more noticable on computer because they are very disruptive and usually cause you to lose data. Regardless, the issue has been mostly fixed for a while now but the legend still lives on and causes the bias you see in this thread.

Avatar image for robbie_basic
robbie_basic

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 robbie_basic
Member since 2002 • 298 Posts

[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]Microsoft is the best thing to happen to the gaming industry, period.Not-A-Stalker

Joke? :?

I do believe Nintendo has done more for the gaming industry than Microsoft, Sony, Sega or even Atari could ever hope to accomplish.

Besides introducing arguably the best unified online system... I can't think of much more good they've done for the industry off the top of my head... They made an OS that a lot of devs developed for? :? They've introduces microtransactions to consoles and... paying for online. Eck.

How do you define "doing a lot for the industry"? it seems your definition would simply be 'being in it'. Innovation is what drives and industry and not just out in the open innovation, behind the scenes innovation. I don't deny Nintendo has done the most, they clearly have or we would all be using joysticks right now. But Microsoft has done a lot of the industry like you even said. The whole online thing is fantastic, the integration with their console and the rest of our electronics is amazing.

They think beyond the scope of just the gaming industry and think in terms of the whole digital entertainment industry which I personally like, although I'm sure some of you gamers do not. As for microtransactions you must remember nothing is free. Do you really think we would get free downloadable first party content ever? That is a pretty silly idea, patches are still free and sometime content even is. The next step is user generated content which I would expect to be free. But expecting first party content to be free is the mind of the generation that grew up downloading music and movies. I'm sorry the real world doesn't work like that.
Avatar image for robbie_basic
robbie_basic

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 robbie_basic
Member since 2002 • 298 Posts
They are still at arms length ascompanies.
Avatar image for robbie_basic
robbie_basic

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 robbie_basic
Member since 2002 • 298 Posts

as i said you don't know much about microsoft. read it up about their business practices before prasing them blindly

naval

That's why I did mention their reach out, embrace, consume strategy. It is debatible whether that is unethical or not but regardless they allow a lot more other companies to work with them than most other companies. If you feel they are evil because they don't "let" anyone else have a big OS then just think about that. The market decides the OS and the market choses Windows because the majority of business applications are developed for it. Why are they developed for it? Because Microsoft is very nice to other developers and are collaborative.

The fact that they buy out a lot of their competition is purely business and doesn't make them an evil company. It makes them successfull and able to develop new technologies that you and I can use.

Avatar image for robbie_basic
robbie_basic

298

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 robbie_basic
Member since 2002 • 298 Posts
You're are a living Ms advertisement, stop praising Ms, this board was meant to discuss the pros and cons of each console.AgentA-Mi6
Considering MS makes the Xbox 360 it seems fairly appropriate. Lets see pros and cons? 360 has goodgames PS3 does not. 'nuff said.