SymbolicGamer
Banned
I always get a kick out people who say they don't trust Microsoft.
Do you trust Sony or Nintendo?
Do you trust Sony or Nintendo?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
IGN: Why Are Some IGN Readers Passing on Xbox One?
- Thread starter alterego
- Start date
krypt0nian
Banned
You think they are equivalent? huh...
Sure, why not? Sony and Nintendo have both at times done things I can't be sure are true (or are later confirmed not to be), and they slowly and carefully rebuilt my respect and trust. That's how this relationship works.
On top of the fact that Microsoft has not gone through that second step yet, what MS did is also far, far worse than anything Nintendo or Sony have ever tried. And Sony and Nintendo have done some pretty fucked up shit over the years, so that's pretty damned fucked up.
Microsoft is currently far, far less trustworthy than Sony or Nintendo. That may change in the future, it may not. But the present is what matters.
DukeTogo1300
Member
I think it is more a matter of which company seems to be listening, which is an easily identifiable chasm of difference at this present time.
CouldBeWorse
Member
The concept of trusting large corporations is very strange.
The first thing that people need to understand is that these companies exist for only one reason, and that's to make money. They will push the line as far as possible to make as much as possible without going over the line. And there's nothing wrong with that.
Most of us ignore the vast, vast majority of products that are out there on the market. We only spend our hard-earned money when the products that companies make happen to align with our fairly narrow interests. When these interests no longer align, we move on to other things. It's about meeting needs (or utility if you want to get all philosophical).
When you start getting into emotional conversations about trust and start believing that these companies actually care about YOU (and not your wallet), you've gone too far. All companies do shitty things (some more than others) and within this specific industry, all of the major players have plenty of skeletons in their closets.
The first thing that people need to understand is that these companies exist for only one reason, and that's to make money. They will push the line as far as possible to make as much as possible without going over the line. And there's nothing wrong with that.
Most of us ignore the vast, vast majority of products that are out there on the market. We only spend our hard-earned money when the products that companies make happen to align with our fairly narrow interests. When these interests no longer align, we move on to other things. It's about meeting needs (or utility if you want to get all philosophical).
When you start getting into emotional conversations about trust and start believing that these companies actually care about YOU (and not your wallet), you've gone too far. All companies do shitty things (some more than others) and within this specific industry, all of the major players have plenty of skeletons in their closets.
krypt0nian
Banned
Brand loyalty is not baseless. well some here jump through hoops to align themselves with companies, but there is a reason that customer satisfaction exists.
Trusting a companies decisions over time makes perfect sense, as does ditching them once they decide to fuck over gamers.
CouldBeWorse
Member
I don't think anyone would EVER accuse Nintendo or Apple of listening too closely to their consumers, but that doesn't mean that they can't make some kickass products that people all over the world love and cherish.
Listening TOO closely to your consumers or focus groups is often the fastest way to mediocrity. See Fuse. Or see various genres that became too hardcore for stretches.
I think a lot of people here are mistaking Sony's "listening" as thinking they are listening to their consumers. While they might be to a certain extent (see the #NoDRM campaign, which could have possibly influenced Sony), what they're really doing that's great is that they are listening to their content creators and are doing their best to remove the barriers between the consumer and the content. These ultimately are just boxes that feed us content so it's a smart, visionary-esque move by Cerny and company at Sony.
Developers aren't perfect, but they are a hell of a lot better at gauging what customers want than a bunch of engineers are, so it's smart to listen to them.
SymbolicGamer
Banned
What are you talking about? I just asked if the people who say they don't trust Microsoft trust Sony or Nintendo.
You know Sony hasn't exactly had a spotless reputation for keeping customer information private, right?
That's a pretty good reason not to trust someone if you ask me.
I don't trust Sony. I don't trust Nintendo. I don't trust Microsoft. I don't trust anybody.
And that's the bottom line, cause SymbolicGamer said so.
Its all about satisfaction for me. This entails games, user interface and thus experience and control scheme. The hardware matters but to a certain point, after all software is what really matters and defines my gaming experience.
Everyone has a right to be upset at companies for making mistakes because they are potential buyers, its their hard earned cash. But I really dislike it when we collectively behave like we're entitled to define the experience by moaning about it. We don't design or develop (most of us anyway). There's a mature and cohesive way of expressing dissatisfaction to get your point across, fanboy bitching/trolling/berating just won't get any of us respect or more importantly understood by others.
We're all better than this.
Everyone has a right to be upset at companies for making mistakes because they are potential buyers, its their hard earned cash. But I really dislike it when we collectively behave like we're entitled to define the experience by moaning about it. We don't design or develop (most of us anyway). There's a mature and cohesive way of expressing dissatisfaction to get your point across, fanboy bitching/trolling/berating just won't get any of us respect or more importantly understood by others.
We're all better than this.
krypt0nian
Banned
That's you. And good show. Now don't pretend that 1) Microsoft has earned anywhere near the same level of trust that say SONY has recently. They are not equivalent. And 2) Again customer support and brand loyalty stems from proper treatment and trust is garnered.
Yes every corp is out for money and doesn't love us, but the good ones that want to succeed know that maintaining trust is of UTMOST importance. MS seems to have put their aspirations ahead of that now. Time will tell if that continues.
DukeTogo1300
Member
I never specified that they were only listening to customers, or even mentioned them, though don't devs and customers often have a few shared interests? It seems a given that customers would want games faster, that perform better, more risky projects, etc.
Besides, I was talking more about going with the flow of the existing market verses resisting and attempting to change that market with a 'deal-with-it' attitude you arrogantly flaunt. Sticking with the safe stuff can certainly lead to stale output on the artistic side of things, or with gameplay design, but we're talking about a lot of different things here.
1. Track record
2. Dedicated servers
3. Titanfall exclusivity
Despite Sonys strong first party lineup, they've never had a AAA exclusive multiplayer game...this baffles me. UC2 was the closest. MS seems to get mp for me. They've always driven the console market in this category.
Rhazer Fusion
Member
One problem is, most of the games will be on both consoles, look similar visually and PS4 is $100 cheaper. Also, add in the fact that Microsoft had the memorable DRM situation, so maybe some people are not so quick to forget that. I think Microsoft will still fare well against PS4 though.
Flatline
Banned
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than Microsoft. It would be dumb to completely trust corporations but you can trust some a lot more than others.
You are joking right?
Mass Effect
Member
I just have no interest in Microsoft's direction. From their business philosophy to their system design all the way to their games, it's obvious that it's not for me.
lol trusting corporations. A laughable concept. However, I have less "faith" (also a laughable concept, but I use it for lack of better word) Microsoft in terms of how they operate and their treatment of consumers versus the other two companies.
We all know these companies only exist to make money (for the most part anyway, vision is a part of it), but it's how they go about getting that money that matters. The matter is not black and white or trusting one corporation over another.
If it were to be a rank, it'd be Nintendo -> Sony -> Microsoft. At least you know what you're getting with Nintendo for the most part.
lol trusting corporations. A laughable concept. However, I have less "faith" (also a laughable concept, but I use it for lack of better word) Microsoft in terms of how they operate and their treatment of consumers versus the other two companies.
We all know these companies only exist to make money (for the most part anyway, vision is a part of it), but it's how they go about getting that money that matters. The matter is not black and white or trusting one corporation over another.
If it were to be a rank, it'd be Nintendo -> Sony -> Microsoft. At least you know what you're getting with Nintendo for the most part.
D
Deleted member 752119
Unconfirmed Member
I don't trust any big corporation.
But I definitely have less trust for MS. I had a terrible ordeal with their CS when my Live account got hacked and migrated to Russia in late 2011 that only got resolved after BBB complaints and getting the story on a couple big gaming sites etc.
And they tried to pull that DRM crap, which further raised my ire.
I played the hell out of my 360 before the hacking debacle, but have mostly moved to PS3 sicne and just have little interest in giving MS more of my money.
But I don't trust Sony or Nintendo either, as all these big corps care about is getting as much of our money as they can. But there are still different degrees of distrust.
Syphon Filter
Member
yea.
Devilgunman
Member
Look like you misunderstand definition of "trust", at least for me. I don't care if Sony care about me or my interest and I know they're doing business aka making money. But my trust in them is that I believe they can deliver magnificent games as they did in this generation. I trust them that they going to deliver variety of games; from indies to JRPG to FPS to weird fun bullshits and I will gladly support them with my wallet. That is what my trust is.
Jewologist
Banned
Absolutely nothing. It doesn't help that Microsoft pitched dreadful ideas that hinder the user of the machine without a single hint of a good feature to justify their choices. Not to mention many "features" MS wanted to include would violate standing consumer rights in many countries.
I think MS were pushing to see how much people were willing to ignore before saying they have decided to "turn around". What's worse is that people will probably be quick to forget that MS pulled this little stunt.
SymbolicGamer
Banned
- Being able to play physical games without having to have the disc in the harddrive.
- Friends & Family game library sharing
I'm a collector who always buys physical over digital. Installing games to my harddrive, and being able to play any game in my library without having to swap discs. That feature alone made me excited. It's not that I'm lazy. It's just that I have a lot of games, and sometimes they do get damaged from constant handling. More so if other people are handling them.
The problem wasn't that Microsoft didn't have good features. It's that they didn't do a good job explaining them.
Hydrogen Bluebird
Member
MS didn't clearly specify what the fuck family sharing was prior to their 180 so it's a little pointless to use it as a benefit we would have gotten in exchange for putting up with their extreme DRM crap.
SymbolicGamer
Banned
No, it's not pointless because that is a benefit we would have had "in exchange for putting up with their extreme DRM crap", which actually wasn't extreme at all. Microsoft should have been promoting the hell out of things like the family plan and showing it in action but instead they just focused on the downsides to the policy. It's obvious they weren't ready to talk about family sharing, and they should have kept their people quiet about the online check-in until they were able to properly sell us on it.
I trust them more than Microsoft especially after the bull they try to pull with always online
FairXchange
Member
Please, no. The one thing I commend MS for is having the awareness to not spring something like a 24-hour check in policy on consumers a month or two months before a console launch. That would be an even bigger disaster. I'm amazed someone actually would have wanted them to hide this troubling fact for even longer. I'm guessing you would have been fine with them not saying anything, and just letting you find out after you purchased your $500 hardware that it has the most restrictive DRM ever seen on a consumer entertainment device.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
I'll be passing on Xbox One because it's just not a very appealing console, IMHO
- Significantly weaker hardware
- Weak launch/first year lineup in comparison to PS4
- Overpriced by $100
- PS+ is a much better service
So far the only exclusive that looks interesting to me is Quantum Break, but that's likely years off, and one game is not enough to sell me on a $500 secondary system.
I will need years of assurances/dedication from internal Microsoft software groups coupled with a few price drops before I even consider an Xbox One.
Such a complete reversal from the Xbox 360's early days.
- Significantly weaker hardware
- Weak launch/first year lineup in comparison to PS4
- Overpriced by $100
- PS+ is a much better service
So far the only exclusive that looks interesting to me is Quantum Break, but that's likely years off, and one game is not enough to sell me on a $500 secondary system.
I will need years of assurances/dedication from internal Microsoft software groups coupled with a few price drops before I even consider an Xbox One.
Such a complete reversal from the Xbox 360's early days.
maplelord93
Banned
Hydrogen Bluebird
Member
Their DRM plans were extreme, especially the online check ins. It was too extreme that they had to do a 180.
Also, as you mentioned, they didn't tell us exactly what family sharing was which makes it pointless for us to lament its loss because we didn't know exactly what it is.
Edit:
Whatever they were planning for family sharing, it wasn't final which is why they were not able to use it as a way to minimize the bad rap they've been getting because of their DRM plans.
Syphon Filter
Member
I played killzone 2 more than any game. ove the class base system. Playing Warhawk with my friends on and off line MP was the most fun I had all This GEN on a MP game.
Jewologist
Banned
- I don't really see that as anything of worth.
Halo Reach?
- Wasn't this revealed to be a timed trial of full games friends and family own?
CouldBeWorse
Member
James Sawyer Ford said:
I just don't understand this. I love everything about the PS4 but the exclusives they've shown so far are pretty underwhelming, though that's par for the course for a Playstation launch. The games are the Xbone's only saving grace.
I'm a big inFamous fan, but that's the only interesting exclusive (and it's 4+ months after launch) unless Killzone really is a different game. The Order is definitely interesting but we haven't seen the game yet.
What exactly is wetting your whistle so much? Maybe the indie games?
Whipped Spartan
Member
I never played warhawk. I feel like I missed out. It was free too.
Syphon Filter
Member
never liked it,ground combat was horrible but people seemed to like it. To me the two best online games for ps3 were uncharted 2 and killzone 2.
I have even seen some people (on NeoGAF) claim that they should of even only let people find out about the DRM when they buy the console at launch!
One of the dumbest ideas I have ever heard, the shitstorm would be mind blowing!
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
1. With?
2. Ha ha, keep the dream alive.
3. PC and PS4 after.
Warhawk was one of the best MP experiences this gen. We'll ignore SOCOM II on the PS2 since you are probably to young to have heard of it.
Dark_AnNiaLatOr
Member
I'm also very interested to find out more about the Order, but the devs at E3 made it sound like the game was a very long way away. Seems like sometime in 2015. Why did they show it if it's so far off? I don't understand. They have numerous first party studios, so why not show something else off? It almost seems like the devs were lying and the game will actually come out next year. It's frustrating.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Killzone 2 had the best multiplayer for me last-gen. Sony launching a Killzone game that can possibly rekindle that magic is a huge deal for me, and I think in terms of popularity the Killzone franchise is more popular than anything Microsoft has at launch that's exclusive.
Having an AAA graphical showcase like KZ is a pretty big win for Sony in my books, of course they have to deliver on the game, but given what I've seen so far I'm optimistic that it'll be an awesome launch title (better than any PS launch title before it in my view, possibly).
Forza, Killer Instinct, Ryse...these games do absolutely nothing for me. In the case of Forza, it's a quality product...but I'm not a sim racing fan. In the latter two cases? I don't see anything to get excited about if you are a fan of those respective genres.
Titanfall looks decent and intriguing, but it's hard to qualify that as anything more than a timed exclusive given the comments from CBoaT, Respawn/EA, etc.
InFamous is releasing shortly after Killzone and looks spectacular as well, and The Order from Ready At Dawn has me super excited.
CouldBeWorse
Member
Killzone 2 had a great idea but you had to play fucking Killzone 2 to enjoy it.
I beat it pre-patch but it still played like crap afterwards, even though it's a slightly different flavor of crap.
I beat it pre-patch but it still played like crap afterwards, even though it's a slightly different flavor of crap.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
I got used to the controls and enjoyed it immensely.
Even so, KZ3 solved the control issues people had so it's basically a non-issue for those that had a problem with it.
KZ3, even with the improved controls, didn't have the right balance/formula that made KZ2's gameplay great.
If they can manage to merge KZ2's MP gameplay structure with KZ3's controls it could be a very popular launch title.
Dark_AnNiaLatOr
Member
I hope they double up on KZ3's operations mode. Seeing yourself in a cutscenes was a genius idea that felt so damn good.
idrinkalone
Banned
safe to say hardcore gamers will choose ps4.. (to me hardcore gamers want the best specs, and best graphics, along with games.)
I am a multi media dork. I love everything people on here rip on the xbox. TV SPORTS! yup that's exactly what I wanted with the xbox. I play 4 games a year. All multi-plats minus halo. The moment they showed the live fantasy football updates sold me.
Count me and 10 other 30 yr old+ gettin xboxes.
I am a multi media dork. I love everything people on here rip on the xbox. TV SPORTS! yup that's exactly what I wanted with the xbox. I play 4 games a year. All multi-plats minus halo. The moment they showed the live fantasy football updates sold me.
Count me and 10 other 30 yr old+ gettin xboxes.
Friends and family sharing was more like a 60min demo system. In other words pointless. If you don't want a disk in the drive, buy digital instead of physical. That's what it's there for. And lastly, damaged games huh? You should actually buy some blu-rays before you make that judgement. These aren't DVD's and I doubt machines are going to start chewing up disks again like the 360 did, Blu-rays are basically impossible to scratch.
Problem with Microsoft is that they had despicable policies and features, and couldn't explain them properly, because they knew the outcry would be as it was in the end thanks to leaks and PR blunders. The only way they could have presented it better would have been to further gloss it up in PR fluff, lies and trickery.
Randolph Freelander
Member
Will never buy it.
SwiftDeath
Member
Ummmm MAG???
256 multiplayer on the same map so yeah
Massive Multiplayer Game literally
just didn't garner the COD-like following
Devilgunman
Member
When was it free? I bought a disk + Bluetooth mic at launch and it is a very good game. It came out very close to Halo 3 and tbh me and my friends liked it a lot more than Halo 3 MP. Too bad Starhawk changed the theme to space FPS/RTS bullshit and I never liked it.
Is dedicated servers the new secret sauce ?
StUnNeR H2K
Member
I'm still baffled that Microsoft fails to see that price point is far greater than any other factor, especially when jumping out the gate. Look at last gen and how fast the Wii started, followed by the 360's early success, while the PS3 struggled do to it's price point.
I'm in the 18% group, in that I'm waiting for more game announcements before I jump in. This may also be the first generation that I buy more than one console since exclusives seem to become a hot item, and I've already suffered missing out on some of the games PS3 has to offer.
I'm in the 18% group, in that I'm waiting for more game announcements before I jump in. This may also be the first generation that I buy more than one console since exclusives seem to become a hot item, and I've already suffered missing out on some of the games PS3 has to offer.
Zombie James
Banned
What does this even mean?