• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Which company is the most consumer friendly?

Which company is the most consumer friendly?


  • Total voters
    247

levyjl1988

Banned
Which of the big 3 are the most consumer-friendly up to this point and why? I'm curious at Gaf's responses.

L6W6NKR.jpg
 
Easily Microsoft, consumer friendly isn't as valued by the other two Japanese companies. Case in point, first reply in this topic is Valve.
 
Microsoft, but only on a scale where they are 10% and the other two are 0. Last place always has juicy incentives, like Game Pass. Same as Nintendo with their dirt-cheap Gamecube and bundles of their best games + greatest hits. Instead of fanboying for no reason and justifying greedy practices, people should hope consoles don't perform that well (but not horribly) so we get better deals.
 
Last edited:
None! They all want our money all the same. The most accurate answer I suppose as mentioned above is third place. They got the most sucking up to do.
 
If I HAD to choose, and based on just general knowledge and without using much critical thinking for the sake of providing an answer, Microsoft.

Only because Gamepass and Smart Delivery, and so far, I haven't heard of any first-party games being forced to be rebought for a middling upgrade for the next generation.

But honestly, corporations aren't your friends, so the real answer is "fuck all."
 
Last edited:
Microsoft is among the best when it comes to consumer friendly policies in the industry while Sony and Nintendo are among the worst. But why be consumer friendly when you don't need to be. Sony is at the point where their fans convinced themselves paying for performance upgrades is BETTER than them being free, while Nintendo fans see them as impossible to do wrong. Consumer friendly is more of a tool companies use when they need to… hopefully Sony and Nintendo get to a place where they need to but atm they sadly do not.
 
Last edited:
Arrogant Sony is back. Laugh at you while witholding PS5 stock. Lie to you about cross-gen games.

Nintendo has no idea of Western Values and keep scamming the same 200 Zelda and Mario fans who'd destroy their left testicle to buy their games in HD, 4K, 8K on the next system... it will keep happening.

Microsoft is too rich, trying to catch up and will shut shop if shit doesn't work out. Or will end up buying both the companies above.

All 3 scam you with their "network".

I have passed onto fatass Gabe and sit on his lap while buying games on regional prices as console warriors seethe and hurt each other and I just play their games on PC.
 
Last edited:
Microsoft is among the best when it comes to consumer friendly policies in the industry while Sony and Nintendo are among the worst. But why be consumer friendly when you don't need to be. Sony is at the point where their fans convinced themselves paying for performance upgrades is BETTER than them being free, while Nintendo fans see them as impossible to do wrong. Consumer friendly is more of a tool companies use when they need to… hopefully Sony and Nintendo get to a place where they need to but atm they sadly do not.
Couldn't be further from the truth.
 
Microsoft.

Nintendo are well behind in everything from online support to cross-generation support of their games to backwards compatibility. Hell, until a few years ago, User Accounts - including online purchases - were tied to hardware. I can't remember ever thinking Nintendo had wonderful customer-focused ideas.
Sony won my business with their brilliant PlayStation 4 work after Microsoft went full-DRM with the Xbone. Sony lost me with the PlayStation 5. Increasing game prices by 25%, charging for next-gen upgrades, dishonesty with cross-gen support; they're slowly returning to the PlayStation 3 days.
Microsoft bent over backwards to get my business with the Series X. Miraculous backwards compatibility, cross-platform games, cross-gen peripherals, Gamepass, free next-gen upgrades - Microsoft are hungry, and they're being as nice as humanly possible.
 
I think the terms anti and pro consumer are stupid as fuck. Every company just wants to make money. If a company is offering something I want, then I pay them for that thing. Some of you guys hate Nintendo but they are selling switches like candy. If they are so anti consumer than why are consumers flocking to them.
 
This thread topic is asking for it.

I'll just say this. Consumers spend money where they see value. Follow the spending for your answer.
 
Lol at anyone choosing Nintendo. $60 for Skyward Sword HD. Ignoring fans for years in regards to better online. Timed digital content for no reason.

Seriously, what a joke.
 
The one with the most money to burn. Microsoft.

People need to look past company social media profiles and remember that they are businesses, not your friends. They don't give a fuck if you like the style of something from over a decade ago and they also don't give a fuck if a tiny percentage of players get platinum trophies. All they care about is getting your money.

Guarantee that the people who complained about the latest Mario collection, yet still bought it are still living with parents, or are about to get divorced/dumped because they make bad life decisions.
 
Last edited:
Depends on what you've played and what games you prefer.

Microsoft obviously has Game Pass, Smart Delivery, Quick Resume, [insert buzzwords], etc, but they've had very poor first party. They're killing everyone in convenience and quantity of offering (if you don't include PS Now). However, you miss out in most of the best of every generation if you exclusively side with them over Nintendo or Sony.

Meanwhile, if you bought a PS5 at launch, you would've got God of War, The Last of Us Remastered, Bloodborne, Uncharted 4, Resident Evil 7, Final Fantasy 7 Remake, Horizon Zero Dawn, Ratchet and Clank, Battlefield 1 and V, Black Ops 3 and 4, Persona 5, Fallout 4, Control Ultimate Edition, Days Gone, Monster Hunter, Detroit: Become Human, Until Dawn, Infamous Second Son, The Last Guardian, etc etc all for free via PS+ Collection, PS+ Monthly Games and Play At Home Program. Sony even gave away smaller indie classics like Subnautica for free during this period.

I think all the marketing and buzz around Game Pass really overshadows all the free content Sony offers, because if you look at that lineup it's really a crazy roster of many of the best games last gen. One of Game Pass's main draws is how you get access to all of MS first party games, but Sony literally gave away all of their heavy hitter exclusives for free (except for the most recent ones, obviously). So, choosing between Microsoft and Sony is really a matter of whether you prefer quantity or quality.
 
Last edited:
None of them.

Microsoft is the closest I guess, but if you're on PC and have used their dogshit Windows store, there is no way you label them as consumer friendly.
 
Out of these three, Microsoft obviously.

I can even ignore that I'm only paying half a pizza per month for everything on Gamepass. I think it's fantastic that I get console + PC licenses when I buy their games.

Hello Games is the most consumer friendly though.
 
Sony. They've had the quality and quantity for quite a while. PSPLUS is good value as well. The free (paid) games and sales are great.

you literally pay 10 bucks more for PS5 versions of games that release at the same time as their PS4 equivalent.

Sony is the worst here. also PSplus was once just a side thing you can subscribe to, then they made it mandatory to play online without adding any value. in fact they increased the price and over time reduced the value (less games per month)
 
The one that makes the products that I (and the majority of the market) prefer and buy the most: Sony.

Many people here say MS but if it was true then the consumers would be more interested on them, and the sales numbers say they are the least popular among the consumers.
 
Last edited:
This thread topic is asking for it.

I'll just say this. Consumers spend money where they see value. Follow the spending for your answer.
Not even remotely true.

Apple
Nestle
Coca Cola
Monsanto
EA Games
World Bank
Gamestop

Across industries, spend occurs for reasons such as monopolies, prestige, conditioning, social influence, marketing, and cornering - "value" doesn't even have to enter the conversation. Attempting to equate "spending" to "value" to "consumer friendly" is a laughable attempt at corporate apologetics. Across industries, we usually see the top revenue earners in any one given industry engaging in monopolistic business practices and anti-consumer behaviour; it's how they remain on top year after year. There is also typically a reverse-caustic effect on revenue; the smaller cut of the pie a business has, the more likely they are to engage in consumer-friendly practices to woo new customers. You can see this at play in virtually every industry.
 
Not even remotely true.

Apple
Nestle
Coca Cola
Monsanto
EA Games
World Bank
Gamestop

??? Thats still "true" buddy. I don't know why gamers get so hurt and triggered over this shit, someone liking something you don't is not some fucking mystery or conspiracy.


Those companies still exist because they have some value to consumers I might not like or even buy much from what you listed, but we all know someone that does man, get over it. It sounds so fucking butthurt to be like "not even remotely true" as if zero consumer uses any of what you listed or something.

I don't buy Apple products, that doesn't mean I feel consumers to not feel value with those products.

I don't buy many of what was listed, doesn't mean I have this fucking delusion that no one else buys it or something weird like that.

spend occurs for reasons such as monopolies

In order for that to happen in the areas you listed, someone still needs to want those products though bud, so pretty sure Apple, EA, Gamestop etc don't have a fucking monopoly on any of those industries. The world bank being listed is a deep, deep desperate reach.

Attempting to equate "spending" to "value" to "consumer friendly" is a laughable

I disagree.

The fucking thread and forum we are talking on is a GAMING ONE, it literally is a hobby of optional choice, luxury...for fun. You can't really be out here arguing that someone is spending money in something they don't value and seek no fun from what they are spending money on.

Shit, can you really tell me you , right now you are spending money on gaming for zero value?

So in an area like gaming, people do not just buy by default, they buy based on value and an expectation of fun, quality, entertainment etc, they are buying based on something they want. I do not believe you can prove otherwise and the gaming community sadly has a bad history of trying to fucking attack consumers they disagree with as if someone is out here buying Call Of Duty for zero fun and zero quality and ot have a bad time lol

Someone likes those companies man, stop trying to make it seem as if YOU not liking them some how now invalids them as a legitimate business and all customers must hate what you hate or something. Gamers need to get over this shit, its like me pretending no one is buying McDonalds cause they like it, be like " top revenue earners in any one given industry engaging in monopolistic business practices and anti-consumer behaviour; it's how they remain on top year after year." lol yea, nothing to do with them providing a service that people want, a product they like and food they enjoy at blazing speed /s
 
It's pretty clear that Xbox is the one which is last in being consumer-friendly.
It's thanks to them, that online play isn't free on consoles.
You couldn't even play free-2-play games without gold up until shortly, and they only removed the limitation to save face after wanting to double the price of Gold.
Their first party output has been abysmal for multiple years.
Gamepass is the next step in total control over their customers.

Yeah doesn't really look good for Xbox currently.
 
Not even remotely true.

Apple
Nestle
Coca Cola
Monsanto
EA Games
World Bank
Gamestop

Across industries, spend occurs for reasons such as monopolies, prestige, conditioning, social influence, marketing, and cornering - "value" doesn't even have to enter the conversation. Attempting to equate "spending" to "value" to "consumer friendly" is a laughable attempt at corporate apologetics. Across industries, we usually see the top revenue earners in any one given industry engaging in monopolistic business practices and anti-consumer behaviour; it's how they remain on top year after year. There is also typically a reverse-caustic effect on revenue; the smaller cut of the pie a business has, the more likely they are to engage in consumer-friendly practices to woo new customers. You can see this at play in virtually every industry.
You just mixed up some of the most loved brands (Apple, Nestle, Coke) with some of the most hated in an attempt to make a point that isn't there.

Bottom line. In consumer spending, consumers DO SPEND where they think they get the most value for their money. People love Apple. They have one of, if not the most valuable brand in the world.

You lump them in with Monsanto? No consumer knows how much of their money goes to that company or whether or not the produce they buy was grown with Monsanto seeds. That is NEVER a conscious decision.

Please.

I don't disagree that a company like Apple engages in monopolistic practices but as a general rule, people do absolutely spend their money where they see value, especially in non necessary goods like friggin video games and smart phones. Do you honestly believe people are buying iPhones and PlayStations because they feel forced into it? Or because they simply love the product?

It has nothing to do with "corporate apologetics" and everything to do with reality and basic consumer behavior so get your holier-than-thou head out of your rectum.
 
Top Bottom