soon you will see people coming in here and saying Era is all sony fanboys and xbox doesn't get a fair shake, well ignoring everything else said.Bundy/ Nib and Lothars all in a xbox thread, maybe nib makes a moment......
soon you will see people coming in here and saying Era is all sony fanboys and xbox doesn't get a fair shake, well ignoring everything else said.Bundy/ Nib and Lothars all in a xbox thread, maybe nib makes a moment......
just wowSony DOES predominantly push out CGI trailers at conferences. They still do it.
Well I think the Xbox and Microsoft have really turned their potential Titanic around gracefully, but the article reads like it was written by Arthur Gies. Yeesh.What y'all think of where Xbox One has come since launch? What stands out and what needs more work?
sony has had a long history of backward compatibility since before the ps3. .
I like how you phrased that as [making people] - not once to open your argument, but twice to close it - and that kinda falls in line with what I'm reading above from other posters, about certain calculated efforts. Sony didn't make anyone re-buy any games, like how said you had the option to fire up your PS3 (as if it's a legitimate "jeopardy" lol, did you really just want to squeeze a reference to YLOD in there?).I want to believe you're right. I do. But I don't think Sony will do this. They have made a lot of money making people rebuy remastered games. I don't think Backward Compatibility is a technical hurdle, because if it was, we'd have all our PS1 classics on the PS4. I'd kill to play MGS on my PS4 instead of jeopardizing my PS3, you know? I don't want a YLOD. They've rereleased Jak twice now instead of going "well, if you own Jak digitally on PS3, we're giving it to you free on PS4." Tons of stuff like that. I'd love to get Persona 3 FES on my PS4, and the PS4 HAS a PS2 emulator, but Sony hasn't just said "hey, every PS2 game you owned on PS3 can be played on PS4 now, have fun." They consistently make us repurchase those games.
So like, I'm really, really doubtful that Sony wants to do BC. I think they'll only do it if they start losing badly, just like Microsoft did.
The only thing more oppressed than gamers are xbox gamerssoon you will see people coming in here and saying Era is all sony fanboys and xbox doesn't get a fair shake, well ignoring everything else said.
You just wait! If the Bluepoint Demon's Souls Remaster is really happening..... ;)What I think is the reality is that Sony will make more money on being able to sell additional PS4 content to PS5 gamers, than they will with a handful of remasters. I don't think Gravity Rush Remastered or God of War III Remastered did too hot. Other than The Last of Us Remastered, I can't think of a single Sony-published remaster that knocked it out of the park for them. Can you?
can you bookmark me too. add me to favorites, and tweet this out.
So a game like TLOU, with bad gameplay and repetitive game design is going to win awards that a game like Forza Horizon 4, possibly the best racing game of all time, could never compete for.
That isn't why people have an issue with some of your content and past posts, it's because you have a history of posting such slanted, misleading or downright factually incorrect things to push a pro Microsoft and anti-Sony agenda.
Eg you'll claim Sony has the worst first party meta averages of all the platforms when factually that is incorrect several years on the trot, and then ignore the posts that correct you on this.
You'll claim its predominantly Sony pushing out CGI trailers at conferences as one of the reasons you prefer Microsoft showings, and then when people highlight how Microsoft actually showed just as many if not more CGI trailers, you'll also ignore that post.
You'll state that you prefer Microsoft because they only show stuff that is coming out soon at conferences, and when someone responds with a bunch of games they'd shown years in advance, many that were cancelled, you'll ignore that too.
Then there's tweets like these.
And these are all just a few examples. It isn't like people's skepticism of your journalistic or other content is completely misplaced or aimless.
Edit: And I didn't go digging through either, just Goggle searched DocSeuss Twitter Sony and these were some of the very first tweets that came up lol.
I think the point here is that both platforms pushed CGI trailers in those early years.
....snip.....
I didn't want to straight up get into console war territory in my piece. Like, yeah, the "PS3 has no games" meme was real, and Xbox was bringing the heat by 2006, but this isn't a piece about Sony, it's a piece about Microsoft and why they made the decisions they did. I tried to keep competitor talk to just "why Microsoft made specific decisions" and then to contrast the reveals of the two consoles.
I'm really sad that my line "the PS4 is the most basic bitch console" got cut tho.
....snip....
Another gem :)I love my PS4 for a bunch of shit that isn't Sony-published, like Godzilla, Yakuza (now it's on the PC tho! hooray!), and Digimon. It's still a basic bitch console. It does nothing unique or interesting except maybe VR, but like, the PC stomps that.
These are some fair points, but most of it is circumstantial and doesn't really build much of a case.While the PS5 should logically play PS4 games, nothing Sony has done in the last decade suggests that will be the case
- Removed PS2 BC from the PS3
-Made us re-buy digital PS2 purchases from PS3 on PS4
- Release a SHIT TONNE of successful remasters and remakes which is the market telling them they'd rather re-buy old games
- Really ramp up the number PS4 games on PS Now
- Publicly shit on old games
I'm not sure why so many people are so confident it'll happen when recent history suggests it won't. I'm not saying it won't, I'm just saying I'm not overly confident it will.
What I think is the reality is that Sony will make more money on being able to sell additional PS4 content to PS5 gamers, and retain income from massive audiences on massive service-based games, than they will with a handful of remasters. I don't think Gravity Rush Remastered or God of War III Remastered did too hot. Other than The Last of Us Remastered, I can't think of a single Sony-published remaster that knocked it out of the park for them. Can you?
He's got a history of this stuff. A long history. Just go back a page or so to see some examples.
That isn't why people have an issue with some of your content and past posts, it's because you have a history of posting such slanted, misleading or downright factually incorrect things to push a pro Microsoft and anti-Sony agenda.
Eg you'll claim Sony has the worst first party meta averages of all the platforms when factually that is incorrect several years on the trot, and then ignore the posts that correct you on this.
You'll claim its predominantly Sony pushing out CGI trailers at conferences as one of the reasons you prefer Microsoft showings, and then when people highlight how Microsoft actually showed just as many if not more CGI trailers, you'll also ignore that post.
You'll state that you prefer Microsoft because they only show stuff that is coming out soon at conferences, and when someone responds with a bunch of games they'd shown years in advance, many that were cancelled, you'll ignore that too.
Then there's tweets like these.
And these are all just a few examples. It isn't like people's skepticism of your journalistic or other content is completely misplaced or aimless.
Edit: And I didn't go digging through either, just Goggle searched DocSeuss Twitter Sony and these were some of the very first tweets that came up lol.
People don't seem to realize that MS enjoyed so much success with the 360 largely because of Sony's blunder.
TheRulingRing here is obsessed with tradition to the point of accusing me of "twisting facts." The reality is that I just really fucking like unique hardware, and if you look at every statement I made, my fascinating with uniqueness is why I enjoy the Xbox. That's cool to me. So by my own metrics, what I personally value in a console, I'm going to say the unique console is best. TheRulingRing is a very conservative person, based on this post, and clearly wants a very standard, normal console. See that weird statement about "properly carried on that old tradition." I don't value carrying on old traditions. We have different value systems.
But TheRulingRing wants to make it personal and make me out to be a bad person. That's fanboyism for you.
Also, TheRulingRing, your obsession with "objectivity" is fucking weird lol. Opinion pieces aren't supposed to be objective.
Official Staff CommunicationThis thread is about the article in the OP and not about Doc's post history. If you'd like to argue about the article that is fine, but this thread is not about Doc so get back on topic.
Conversely, Sony only succeeded with PS4 to this degree because the WiiU was completely dead in the water and Microsoft bungled their launch and marketing so badly. Complete dominance isn't necessarily their default state - we've never seen what it looks like when all 3 players are firing on all cylinders. It's going to be an exciting generation, imo.
It's a opinion piece, I'd say the author is pretty relevant to it.Official Staff CommunicationThis thread is about the article in the OP and not about Doc's post history. If you'd like to argue about the article that is fine, but this thread is not about Doc so get back on topic.
I wouldn't even consider Wii U a competitor to the PS4 as you said because it was already dead and technologically, competing against PS3/360. Microsoft essentially pulled a PS3 this gen and it sounds as if they're going that same route, speculatively, based on price. I welcome it honestly, it'll be a bloodbath if all 3 console makers basically offer the same experience and the only determining factor is first party software. Because of increasing dev costs, I think we'll see both more multiplatform games (except Japanese produced and appealing games that don't make it to the Xbox ) and timed exclusivity.Conversely, Sony only succeeded with PS4 to this degree because the WiiU was completely dead in the water and Microsoft bungled their launch and marketing so badly. Complete dominance isn't necessarily their default state - we've never seen what it looks like when all 3 players are firing on all cylinders. It's going to be an exciting generation, imo.
So then are you then claiming that the 360 and PS4 did not in fact enjoy as much success as they did because of the blunders of their respective competition? It's silly to claim they didn't, that is a direct factor as to why they were as successful as they were.Agreed. It's silly to claim any company's success is largely due to the faults of the competition. It completely dismisses what the competition does right. It also dismisses the importance of competition when one assumes a specific company will always dominate regardless of how well the other parties do.
If Timdog or Dobby made an article we shouldn't bring their history? Why every thread that includes Pacther his history is brought up with a lot of mockery with no mod action? Some consistency would be nice.Official Staff CommunicationThis thread is about the article in the OP and not about Doc's post history. If you'd like to argue about the article that is fine, but this thread is not about Doc so get back on topic.
It's a opinion piece, I'd say the author is pretty relevant to it.
It's a opinion piece, I'd say the author is pretty relevant to it.
Official Staff CommunicationThis thread is about the article in the OP and not about Doc's post history. If you'd like to argue about the article that is fine, but this thread is not about Doc so get back on topic.
Way to start the article/thread there bud. It's great console and Microsoft has been killing it since the initial missteps but..no, that's false and subjective at best. The UI alone makes me not want to start my xbox.
If you ignore that 2/3 of their home consoles(soon to be 3/4) sold north of 100 million with their worst effort being slightly north 80 million and neck and neck with Xbox's best performance so far, I guess you can say thatConversely, Sony only succeeded with PS4 to this degree because the WiiU was completely dead in the water and Microsoft bungled their launch and marketing so badly. Complete dominance isn't necessarily their default state - we've never seen what it looks like when all 3 players are firing on all cylinders. It's going to be an exciting generation, imo.
It's a opinion piece, I'd say the author is pretty relevant to it.
Doc's article is an extension of the content of his post history, therefore it's pretty relevant to the discussion.
yep I agree with this, many of us have known Doc for years between ERA and the forum that will go unnamed, why is the context of his previous posts not relevant? it's not like he's changed any of his views
also this, let Doc defend himself, he's perfectly willing as his posts in this thread prove
banning Nib95 and giving DocSeuss seeming protected status make it feel like ERA isn't all that different from the previous forum where some users were obvious favorites of mods who got away with stuff others couldn't
https://www.usgamer.net/articles/xb...on-rise-fall-comeback-feature-5th-anniversary
-
From our very own DocSeuss
I quoted the more general quotes on the Xbox, but the article delves into the history and potential future of the Xbox/Xbox One. A lot more at the link.
What y'all think of where Xbox One has come since launch? What stands out and what needs more work?
I think the point the mod is trying to make is people are making it personal by bringing up his history, as controversial as it may be, which is different to someone defending themselves or their view. I get why people have an issue with the article, but then debate the content of the article and see where the opinions stem from, not attack the person in question directly.
I don't think it is, I think it's entirely in line with what the article is about and his history. it's extremely relevant to the topic.I think the point the mod is trying to make is people are making it personal by bringing up his history, as controversial as it may be, which is different to someone defending themselves or their view. I get why people have an issue with the article, but then debate the content of the article and see where the opinions stem from, not attack the person in question directly.
Exactly. The article is worth having a thread about, but it shouldn't turn into people digging up crap and making it personal. There's plenty of stuff in the article you can argue about and use to discredit the point it's making if that's what you want to do.I think the point the mod is trying to make is people are making it personal by bringing up his history, as controversial as it may be, which is different to someone defending themselves or their view. I get why people have an issue with the article, but then debate the content of the article and see where the opinions stem from, not attack the person in question directly.