If true, its nice to see that Microsoft actually cares about what gamers want. They could easily force players into some crazy DRM, and while it would piss off a lot of people and the interwebs would explode, they would probably make more money (at least in the short term).
Conversely, companies like EA seem to honestly not care about anything but the bottom line. They might pay lip-service to caring about their customers, but their actions reflect that they just want revenue by any means necessary. Eventually I think this will bite these companies in the ass, revenue is always a lagging indicator of success.
> If true, its nice to see that Microsoft actually cares about what gamers want. They could easily force players into some crazy DRM, and while it would piss off a lot of people and the interwebs would explode, they would probably make more money
No, they would just hand the next generation to Sony in much the same way that Sony let the last generation slip after being in such a dominant position with the PlayStation 2. Remember, Sega went from being neck-and-neck with Nintendo to leaving the hardware business in just two generations — this is not a field where you can get away with alienating buyers for too long before it catches up to you.
My last two "primary" consoles were the Xbox and the Xbox 360 (I also owned Nintendo's consoles primarily for Nintendo's first party games), and I am heavily leaning away from the next Xbox regardless of the "always online" situation. Sony just seems to be focusing more on things I care about (indie games, etc) while Microsoft continues to increase my prices to play online while simultaneously increasing the number of ads thrown at me on the service I am paying for).
If I do switch, I'll miss the Xbox-style controllers, which I much prefer to the Sony "* Shock" design, but I think I'll adjust eventually.
Comments
If true, its nice to see that Microsoft actually cares about what gamers want. They could easily force players into some crazy DRM, and while it would piss off a lot of people and the interwebs would explode, they would probably make more money (at least in the short term).
Conversely, companies like EA seem to honestly not care about anything but the bottom line. They might pay lip-service to caring about their customers, but their actions reflect that they just want revenue by any means necessary. Eventually I think this will bite these companies in the ass, revenue is always a lagging indicator of success.
> If true, its nice to see that Microsoft actually cares about what gamers want. They could easily force players into some crazy DRM, and while it would piss off a lot of people and the interwebs would explode, they would probably make more money
No, they would just hand the next generation to Sony in much the same way that Sony let the last generation slip after being in such a dominant position with the PlayStation 2. Remember, Sega went from being neck-and-neck with Nintendo to leaving the hardware business in just two generations — this is not a field where you can get away with alienating buyers for too long before it catches up to you.
I agree.
My last two "primary" consoles were the Xbox and the Xbox 360 (I also owned Nintendo's consoles primarily for Nintendo's first party games), and I am heavily leaning away from the next Xbox regardless of the "always online" situation. Sony just seems to be focusing more on things I care about (indie games, etc) while Microsoft continues to increase my prices to play online while simultaneously increasing the number of ads thrown at me on the service I am paying for).
If I do switch, I'll miss the Xbox-style controllers, which I much prefer to the Sony "* Shock" design, but I think I'll adjust eventually.
There are adapters and such to use the XBox controller with the PS3 as well as look-alikes.