Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

So apparently Microsoft investors are pressuring them to drop Xbox, E&D division

hanselthecaretaker

High End Bro
Platinum
After J. Allard said peace-out it seems the shareholders are becoming more vocal about their thoughts-
________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Microsoft's Latest Video Game Gamble
Investors think Microsoft would do better if it just exited consumer businesses

By Peter Burrows, Dina Bass, Adam Satariano and Cliff Edwards

On June 15, at a video game convention in Los Angeles, Microsoft (MSFT) will unveil a little box of outsize importance. Code-named Project Natal, the device will be an add-on to Microsoft's aging Xbox 360 game console, which has shipped 40 million units in five years. Xbox sales have been slowing since Sony (SNE) cut the price of the PlayStation 3 console last summer, but Microsoft hopes Natal will revive the Xbox—because it lets users play games without a controller. Just drive your pretend car or swing your virtual baseball bat and Natal, which sits in front of the TV and has built-in sensors, picks up the motion. Following the event in L.A., Microsoft is launching an ad blitz leading up to a consumer release in October.

Microsoft needs Natal—or whatever it's called by the time it goes on sale—to be a hit. The technology is inarguably cool, and is a rare bright spot in Microsoft's decade-old—and thus far mostly disappointing—push to move beyond PCs and into game consoles, music players, and smartphones. Operating income at its Entertainment & Devices unit, which is responsible for those products, is expected to come in at $773 million for the year that ends June 30, according to UBS Securities (UBS). That's a 10 percent operating margin, compared with 72 percent for Windows, its most profitable business. While the Xbox is a strong No. 2 in the video game market (after the Nintendo Wii), the entertainment division has lost $8.6 billion on sales of $49 billion since 1999, estimates Katherine Egbert of Jeffries & Co. An initiative to build Internet-based TV systems has yet to take off, and its iPod-like Zune music players have bombed. While Apple (AAPL) just sold its two millionth iPad, Microsoft recently scrapped a tablet code-named Courier. In smartphones, Microsoft's share in the first quarter was 6.8 percent, down from 10.2 percent the year before.

The Natal device, which is expected to retail for about $100, won't sell in volumes high enough to matter much financially for the world's largest software company. But since it works with the current Xbox 360 console, it could reinvigorate sales of that device. That means Microsoft could put off having to field a new console, which would lose hundreds of millions of dollars for a few years; profits come from higher-margin sales of games it creates such as the Halo franchise, as well as its cut on Xbox titles made by other companies. Natal could also fuel greater interest in Microsoft's most impressive consumer play, the Xbox Live online service. More than 23 million gamers use it to play each other over the Net, as well as to download movies and music.

If Natal takes off, Microsoft might be able to extend its reach into other platforms. It could be built into PC monitors and big-screen TVs, allowing consumers to control those devices by speech or motion, moving family photos the way Tom Cruise moved pictures and videos around in Minority Report. Forrester Research (FORR) analyst Sarah Rotman Epps envisions families synching their Natal-based Xbox console with Windows-based tablets such as the new model just announced by ASUSTeK, so each family member could easily download movies or books. "That would make Microsoft relevant for the next decade," she says.

Even as the company hypes Natal and its new mobile software, Windows Phone7, investors don't expect smash hits; in fact, they'd settle for small losses on these and other gadgets. "It's hard to make the case this has been a good use of shareholder capital," says Todd S. Lowenstein, who runs HighMark Capital's value fund. "I don't fault them for trying this stuff, but investors are getting impatient." Other investors suggest that, like IBM (IBM) a decade ago, Microsoft should refocus its efforts on its massively profitable PC and corporate software businesses. Its cash from operations last quarter alone was $7.4billion, a company record. Yet its shares are down about 50percent since Steve Ballmer took over as CEO on Jan.13, 2000. "The stock would go up if Microsoft exited its consumer businesses," says Bill Whyman of ISI Group.

Whyman knows Microsoft won't give up on entertainment. The company has long poured money into maturing markets from word processing to Web browsers, beating market pioneers by underpricing them into submission. "Ballmer's answer is always, 'We'll keep coming,' " says Whyman. "That's not a very comforting answer."

The bottom line: Despite pressure from investors and a flat stock price, Microsoft will keep searching for hits in games, phones, and other devices.

Microsoft's Latest Video Game Gamble - BusinessWeek
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If that were the case and Xbox went kaput along with Zune and Windows Mobile, then maybe they could finally put an honest effort into cultivating Game for Windows into something worthwhile, seeing as how it's still part of their bread and butter, which could only end up dominating even more. Why they didn't do this in the first place is a big wtf.
 
good...next up is sony. Once that corupulent anal refuse is out of the market we can get back to sega/nintendo....they way it's supposed to be. But I'm sure if microsoft exits apple will take a stab at it...they still might anyway. These companies that are beholden to their shareholders to the extent that sony, microsoft and apple are.....gotta go, no place for you in consoles.
 
good...next up is sony. Once that corupulent anal refuse is out of the market we can get back to sega/nintendo....they way it's supposed to be. But I'm sure if microsoft exits apple will take a stab at it...they still might anyway. These companies that are beholden to their shareholders to the extent that sony, microsoft and apple are.....gotta go, no place for you in consoles.

I agree to an extent but Apple wouldn't be any better than MS or Sony. Microsoft, Intel, AMD, Nvidia, etc. should start investing more in fortifying the PC gaming market and replace DRM with a less intrusive, more dynamic authentication process. IE think more like Valve/Blizzard. Any sales still lost to piracy would be small change compared to the ocean of marketshare available. Nintendo can have the consoles (I doubt Sega will ever get back into hardware), chump change next to what PC gaming could be.

Also, it'd be nostalgic to see arcade make a comeback. But that's wishful thinking.
 
good...next up is sony. Once that corupulent anal refuse is out of the market we can get back to sega/nintendo....they way it's supposed to be. But I'm sure if microsoft exits apple will take a stab at it...they still might anyway. These companies that are beholden to their shareholders to the extent that sony, microsoft and apple are.....gotta go, no place for you in consoles.



man how epic those 2 were, wish they were still around as for nintendo atleast the way it used to be
 
XBOX is a hell of a more solid unit over FANBOY PS3, people just don't like to admit it. Hell they havent done any changes to their controllers since PS2. Let alone all the times that thing froze up on the internet on me and the 9 hour load times per game.

So why would Microsoft DROP xbox 360, when they admit all the loses are from other things such as those TERRIBLE ZUNE players. The investors are retarded, they need to tell them to make better OTHER products, no reason to drop something that actually SELLS just because they hate the REST of the division. Retards...
 
XBOX is a hell of a more solid unit over FANBOY PS3, people just don't like to admit it.

lol, xbox 360 failure rate vs ps3 - Google Search

Hell they havent done any changes to their controllers since PS2.

No point in fixing what ain't broke. I played through MW2 on Veteran just fine with the "horribly placed" analog sticks. Killzone 2 is even more challenging a game with the weighted aim but no problem there either.
Now, try playing a fighting game with that clunky ass Xbox 360 D-pad. Maybe they should've changed that.

Let alone all the times that thing froze up on the internet on me and the 9 hour load times per game.

I've had the internet freeze up too lol. Load times, it depends on the developer. When Xbox is lead platform, it loads faster. PS3 lead platform, it loads faster, or at least comparable. Exclusives are generally even better. Boot up a new game of God of War 3 and you won't find any load times, not to mention the game streams from the Blu-ray disc with no HDD install. That's what a good developer can do.

So why would Microsoft DROP xbox 360, when they admit all the loses are from other things such as those TERRIBLE ZUNE players. The investors are retarded, they need to tell them to make better OTHER products, no reason to drop something that actually SELLS just because they hate the REST of the division. Retards...

Sounds like you didn't even read the article, which explained all that pretty clearly.
 
lol, xbox 360 failure rate vs ps3 - Google Search



No point in fixing what ain't broke. I played through MW2 on Veteran just fine with the "horribly placed" analog sticks. Killzone 2 is even more challenging a game with the weighted aim but no problem there either.
Now, try playing a fighting game with that clunky ass Xbox 360 D-pad. Maybe they should've changed that.



I've had the internet freeze up too lol. Load times, it depends on the developer. When Xbox is lead platform, it loads faster. PS3 lead platform, it loads faster, or at least comparable. Exclusives are generally even better. Boot up a new game of God of War 3 and you won't find any load times, not to mention the game streams from the Blu-ray disc with no HDD install. That's what a good developer can do.



Sounds like you didn't even read the article, which explained all that pretty clearly.


LOL @ not reading, The division is shitty out money, has nothing to do with Xbox as it clearly states so Im not sure what you're referring to.

Those controllers are terribly designed, so just because you are used to them, that dual joystick non-sense is terribly designed...

I don't play arcade style fighting games, they bore me to death, and that d-pad only selects gadgets and things in shooters and minimally used for more than options in sports games. Works perfectly and perfectly placed to work for it's uses.

lol @ not bad load times, 95% of the games I played have 20min "updates" the first time I played them and god was online multiplayer laggy on the majority of games I played.

As I said, FANBOYS are what keeps PS alive...
 
LOL @ not reading, The division is shitty out money, has nothing to do with Xbox as it clearly states so Im not sure what you're referring to.

Those controllers are terribly designed, so just because you are used to them, that dual joystick non-sense is terribly designed...

I don't play arcade style fighting games, they bore me to death, and that d-pad only selects gadgets and things in shooters and minimally used for more than options in sports games. Works perfectly and perfectly placed to work for it's uses.

lol @ not bad load times, 95% of the games I played have 20min "updates" the first time I played them and god was online multiplayer laggy on the majority of games I played.

As I said, FANBOYS are what keeps PS alive...

LOL @ you being an MS fanboy.



I'll agree with you on the ps3 controllers.. that said, I play the same games on both consoles and don't notice a difference between my gameplay, it's just a comfort thing.
 
I USED to LOVE PS2 and I HATED XBOX but PS3 and Xbox 360, I just dont see anything appealing about the ps3. I had 2 ps3's go up on me and they did nothing to make up for it. I had one xbox go up on me and they sent me an Elite and a year of Live free. Most graphics are only better in Single player game on ps3 and in cutscenes, these dont make or break it for me because Im all about online multiplayer and only a few select single player titles for their stories.

So no Im not a FANBOY, I actually made the SWITCH over :-)
 
LOL @ not reading, The division is shitty out money, has nothing to do with Xbox as it clearly states so Im not sure what you're referring to.

Those controllers are terribly designed, so just because you are used to them, that dual joystick non-sense is terribly designed...

I don't play arcade style fighting games, they bore me to death, and that d-pad only selects gadgets and things in shooters and minimally used for more than options in sports games. Works perfectly and perfectly placed to work for it's uses.

lol @ not bad load times, 95% of the games I played have 20min "updates" the first time I played them and god was online multiplayer laggy on the majority of games I played.

As I said, FANBOYS are what keeps PS alive...

Their Entertainment & Devices division only accounts for 10% operating margin compared to 72% for Windows. Xbox is the biggest investment in that division, and also accounts for the most losses. It's sad that they have to charge people to use an online service (when no one else does) and still have a meager profit margin compared their other divisions. Xbox Live has lag while supporting far fewer players in-game than PS3 exclusives, which you couldn't have been playing since most use dedicated servers (something XBL doesn't have), meaning little to no lag. Gears of War 2 multiplayer issues lit up the gaming forums with problems people were having even connecting to a server at all.

As far as fanboys, to imply that Xbox is devoid of them is laughable, especially since most people who have an Xbox in the first place are "hardcore gamers", whereas PS3 has a far more diverse fanbase, some who may not even play games at all.

[/Pot:Kettle].
 
I agree to an extent but Apple wouldn't be any better than MS or Sony. Microsoft, Intel, AMD, Nvidia, etc. should start investing more in fortifying the PC gaming market and replace DRM with a less intrusive, more dynamic authentication process. IE think more like Valve/Blizzard. Any sales still lost to piracy would be small change compared to the ocean of marketshare available. Nintendo can have the consoles (I doubt Sega will ever get back into hardware), chump change next to what PC gaming could be.

Also, it'd be nostalgic to see arcade make a comeback. But that's wishful thinking.



didn't say they would be, just that they'd try......no I have no illusions about apple being anything stellar in the console market. But they will try, mark my words. And they will use their size to muscle their way in and crowd out anybody who's doing something legit. But it would be funny to see them use those tactics on sony.
 
Their Entertainment & Devices division only accounts for 10% operating margin compared to 72% for Windows. Xbox is the biggest investment in that division, and also accounts for the most losses. It's sad that they have to charge people to use an online service (when no one else does) and still have a meager profit margin compared their other divisions. Xbox Live has lag while supporting far fewer players in-game than PS3 exclusives, which you couldn't have been playing since most use dedicated servers (something XBL doesn't have), meaning little to no lag. Gears of War 2 multiplayer issues lit up the gaming forums with problems people were having even connecting to a server at all.

As far as fanboys, to imply that Xbox is devoid of them is laughable, especially since most people who have an Xbox in the first place are "hardcore gamers", whereas PS3 has a far more diverse fanbase, some who may not even play games at all.

[/Pot:Kettle].

LMAOLOLOLOLOL @ The "dedicated servers" argument! I love how PS3 fans bring this up all the time but if I polled my friends that have both consoles, they ALL play the MAJORITY of their online games on Xbox Live. I know 6 people locally that I play with online that BANNED PS3 online play from their lives because of how BAD the lag and disconnects are on MULTIPLE GAMES. Gears 2 is the only game anyone ever brings up that had issues because they jacked their servers settings up for the first week before fixing things. My friend has been trying to play CODMWF2 on PS3 and says he gets disconnected 3 out of 4 matches even with his PS3 stating he has 90-100% connection to the internet. Also Ps3 has no options for reading an N-network. I stopped playing online on PS3 for the same reasons, I could barely get through a full game without myself or the hosts dropping games. All of your arguments look good on paper and very few translate into the real world.
 
The majority of people (not the hard core gamers) will be playing app games on smart phones or tablets (ipads). Why? Because they are $1.99 and fun and don't have to have another device to play.

Xbox will never make a profit while iPad has been out 3 months and has probably already made more money on game sales.
 
LOL @ Ipad

Yeah they have sold alot, I can also name about 20 down south ghetto horrible rappers that have sold a TON of CDS? Does this make them good? Or just mean that humans are TRENDY as FUCK and will buy whatever advertising tells them to...Im going to go with choice 2...

Ipad, I nice BIG tablet with NO ability to CONNECT ANYTHING to it...Until version 4 after all the retards buy the first 3 editions that are all about the same minus a few minor tweaks here and there...

Like the first iPhone, NO CAMERA?! lmao People still bought it up like retards...
 
LOL @ Ipad

Yeah they have sold alot, I can also name about 20 down south ghetto horrible rappers that have sold a TON of CDS? Does this make them good? Or just mean that humans are TRENDY as FUCK and will buy whatever advertising tells them to...Im going to go with choice 2...

Ipad, I nice BIG tablet with NO ability to CONNECT ANYTHING to it...Until version 4 after all the retards buy the first 3 editions that are all about the same minus a few minor tweaks here and there...

Like the first iPhone, NO CAMERA?! lmao People still bought it up like retards...


Not until here recently did cell phones start to have decent cameras built into them. At the time of the original iphone the only pic you got with a cell phone was a grainy ass shitty quality picture anyways.
 
Not until here recently did cell phones start to have decent cameras built into them. At the time of the original iphone the only pic you got with a cell phone was a grainy ass shitty quality picture anyways.

Incorrect, at the time the iphone was released phones overseas had up to 8mp cameras. At the time the original came out phones had up to 2mp cameras in the US and talks of 5mp were all over the net and rumor mills, I know I was selling phones at the time.
 
Incorrect, at the time the iphone was released phones overseas had up to 8mp cameras. At the time the original came out phones had up to 2mp cameras in the US and talks of 5mp were all over the net and rumor mills, I know I was selling phones at the time.

who gives a fuck about overseas. The quality of pics w/those 1.3 and 2MP cameras was still utter shit.
 
who gives a fuck about overseas. The quality of pics w/those 1.3 and 2MP cameras was still utter shit.

LMAO, right APPLE had no way to putting a good camera in their phone, because they are half retarded and aren't in on technology at all (rolls eyes), oh wait didnt they start with a 2mp camera in their next iphone LOL

Please, give me a break, VGA cameras, 1.3mp, and 2mp cameras had been in phone for years...Try again...
 
LMAO, right APPLE had no way to putting a good camera in their phone, because they are half retarded and aren't in on technology at all (rolls eyes), oh wait didnt they start with a 2mp camera in their next iphone LOL

Please, give me a break, VGA cameras, 1.3mp, and 2mp cameras had been in phone for years...Try again...

I didn't say they haven't been around for years. I said they were garbage (and they are/were).

You worked the cell phone booth in the mall, not R&D. So lets not pretend you know why Apple does what they do.

kthxbye
 
I didn't say they haven't been around for years. I said they were garbage (and they are/were).

You worked the cell phone booth in the mall, not R&D. So lets not pretend you know why Apple does what they do.

kthxbye

I know exactly why thy do it, because they know retards will buy version 1 and then when they add a camera as their only change they will still go buy #2, then 3 will just be a little smaller as the only change, and retards will go buy that also, number 4 finally will have a removable battery and look pretty, and retards will pay to upgrade to that...lol at thinking that isnt their plan.
 
Last edited:
I know exactly why thy do it, because they no retards will buy version 1 and then when they add a camera as their only change they will still go buy #2, then 3 will just be a little smaller as the only change, and retards will go buy that also, number 4 finally will have a removable battery and look pretty, and retards will pay to upgrade to that...lol at thinking that isnt their plan.

*know
 
LOL @ Ipad

Yeah they have sold alot, I can also name about 20 down south ghetto horrible rappers that have sold a TON of CDS? Does this make them good? Or just mean that humans are TRENDY as FUCK and will buy whatever advertising tells them to...Im going to go with choice 2...

Ipad, I nice BIG tablet with NO ability to CONNECT ANYTHING to it...Until version 4 after all the retards buy the first 3 editions that are all about the same minus a few minor tweaks here and there...

Like the first iPhone, NO CAMERA?! lmao People still bought it up like retards...

All of that and they are still making more money off of games than Microsoft has in all the years of xbox.

Microsoft's gaming business model is broke. Apples is generating cash.
 
All of that and they are still making more money off of games than Microsoft has in all the years of xbox.

Microsoft's gaming business model is broke. Apples is generating cash.

It's the ungodly amount they spend on marketing because they know people will buy anything that's "shiny" and packaged into an ad every 2 minutes on tv.
 
It's the ungodly amount they spend on marketing because they know people will buy anything that's "shiny" and packaged into an ad every 2 minutes on tv.

No they don't advertise any software. They build fun machines, have people write software for it at no cost to Apple, and then charge 30% to sell it for these software developers.

They are charging $1.99 for game software and making money on it. Microsoft is charging $40 for their games and losing money on it. Who do you think has a better business model?
 
Exactly, people are too lazy to actually research things on their own so they just go off of whatever they see pumped up on tv.

*smh*

maybe some people, but I know I did a lot of research when I bought my Imac. Took me a couple of years to decide to take the plunge and I'm glad I did. Hands down the best computer i've ever owned.

I'd definetly buy an ipad, but for what i'd want to use it for I think i'll wait until it's wifi capable.
 
Hence the reason I despise Apple
DJ is spot on with the camera thing, they knew they could throw one in. Phones around here at the time were around 3 megapixel.
Also lol@ the Ipad not having a USB port, that's insult enough for me to never want to give them ANY of my money.
 
No they don't advertise any software. They build fun machines, have people write software for it at no cost to Apple, and then charge 30% to sell it for these software developers.

They are charging $1.99 for game software and making money on it. Microsoft is charging $40 for their games and losing money on it. Who do you think has a better business model?


yeah that model works with shitty flash games that any 1st year entry level software eng. student can design for. THat isn't going to work if they get into the multimillion dollar design cost per game console industry. They will suck ass just as hard as microsoft and sony do because they do not intrinsicaly understand gamers. An apple entry into the video game market will be so nauseatingly bland and marketed to such a diverse segment that it won't do anything right.....only half ass lots of things, just like their products now save the ipod's.
 
didn't say they would be, just that they'd try......no I have no illusions about apple being anything stellar in the console market. But they will try, mark my words. And they will use their size to muscle their way in and crowd out anybody who's doing something legit. But it would be funny to see them use those tactics on sony.

It's an endless cycle ever since Nintendo. I still think as far as consoles go Sony is putting out the most high quality stuff, at least exclusive wise. Microsoft needs a bigger stable of in house devs and to stop charging exorbitant prices for proprietary add ons (not to mention online gaming) to stay ahead. They already lost their lead in every territory outside the U.S. Won't be long before they lose that too. I think they realized they won't be able to hang technically with the PS3 which is why the introduced Natal for the casual crowd to try and stretch out the 360's lifespan.
 
It's an endless cycle ever since Nintendo. I still think as far as consoles go Sony is putting out the most high quality stuff, at least exclusive wise. Microsoft needs a bigger stable of in house devs and to stop charging exorbitant prices for proprietary add ons (not to mention online gaming) to stay ahead. They already lost their lead in every territory outside the U.S. Won't be long before they lose that too. I think they realized they won't be able to hang technically with the PS3 which is why the introduced Natal for the casual crowd to try and stretch out the 360's lifespan.

Id rather pay for internet gaming, because I have had ZERO problems other than GOW2 which was their fault for the first week. I couldnt keep a full game going in PS3 without dropping connection, or another host or someone dropping connection. It was terrible and I mainly only play multiplayer games online.
 
The first iphone had a 2mp camera. With a video camera as a downloadable app later on. 3.2mp SonyE k790a was the best camera phone available in the US at the time.
 
LMAOLOLOLOLOL @ The "dedicated servers" argument! I love how PS3 fans bring this up all the time but if I polled my friends that have both consoles, they ALL play the MAJORITY of their online games on Xbox Live. I know 6 people locally that I play with online that BANNED PS3 online play from their lives because of how BAD the lag and disconnects are on MULTIPLE GAMES. Gears 2 is the only game anyone ever brings up that had issues because they jacked their servers settings up for the first week before fixing things. My friend has been trying to play CODMWF2 on PS3 and says he gets disconnected 3 out of 4 matches even with his PS3 stating he has 90-100% connection to the internet. Also Ps3 has no options for reading an N-network. I stopped playing online on PS3 for the same reasons, I could barely get through a full game without myself or the hosts dropping games. All of your arguments look good on paper and very few translate into the real world.


Wow, now who sounds like a fanboy lol. Some of the most incredible exaggerations I've seen.

Both 360 and PS3 games are well documented to have instances of lag, a quick google or youtube search will prove that.

However, here's what dedicated servers can do-

First one is beta footage-



-game supports 32 players


-game supports 32 players


-game supports 60 players


-game supports 256 players

Name one 360 game that does any of the above, not to mention for free. Read some game forums, reviews, etc. before regurgitating the absurd lag comments. Any second of lag experienced in the above games is pretty insignificant considering 360 games apparently aren't even capable of any of that in the first place.

Yeah they may not be as popular as MW2 but I guess the fratboy, media-slave mentality of most gamers these days clouds their judgement of what a high quality game is.
 
Wow, now who sounds like a fanboy lol. Some of the most incredible exaggerations I've seen.

Both 360 and PS3 games are well documented to have instances of lag, a quick google or youtube search will prove that.

However, here's what dedicated servers can do-

First one is beta footage-



-game supports 32 players


-game supports 32 players


-game supports 60 players


-game supports 256 players

Name one 360 game that does any of the above, not to mention for free. Read some game forums, reviews, etc. before regurgitating the absurd lag comments. Any second of lag experienced in the above games is pretty insignificant considering 360 games apparently aren't even capable of any of that in the first place.

Yeah they may not be as popular as MW2 but I guess the fratboy, media-slave mentality of most gamers these days clouds their judgement of what a high quality game is.

If I couldnt get through a full 20 person game on Ps3 why would I even want to attempt 250+? I'm sure I can go find complaints about all types of issues with those games due to the size of them but I dont really care enough to do so. I cant even imagine what a cluster fuck dealing with that many people in a game is, and ign only barely gave it a "7" rating, sounds GREAT!
 
If I couldnt get through a full 20 person game on Ps3 why would I even want to attempt 250+? I'm sure I can go find complaints about all types of issues with those games due to the size of them but I dont really care enough to do so. I cant even imagine what a cluster fuck dealing with that many people in a game is, and ign only barely gave it a "7" rating, sounds GREAT!

Yeah it's a wonder any PS3 multiplayer games are even on youtube given that it's so impossible to stay connected! And the point with MAG was, it works. Even the shitty reviews admit it's a technical achievement. Though again, very strange since PS3 games can't even keep an online connection!

Not every game is designed to be noob friendly and for people who need something ZOMG!! happening every 10 seconds.
 
One of the dude's I'm working with right now is a big PS3 fanboy and we're gonna game it up here in a few days when we have a day off.......so I'm going to get my first full gaming dose of the PS3. Unfortunately he doesn't have Killzone anymore cause he said it sucked and he hated it....and he's a big FPS dude. When I asked him why he didn't at least keep it for multiplayer even if the single player sucked, he said the online sucked. I'll ask him to elaborate but I assumed he was talking about the quality of the online play. :whatever:
 
One of the dude's I'm working with right now is a big PS3 fanboy and we're gonna game it up here in a few days when we have a day off.......so I'm going to get my first full gaming dose of the PS3. Unfortunately he doesn't have Killzone anymore cause he said it sucked and he hated it....and he's a big FPS dude. When I asked him why he didn't at least keep it for multiplayer even if the single player sucked, he said the online sucked. I'll ask him to elaborate but I assumed he was talking about the quality of the online play. :whatever:

You know what the biggest complaint has been about Killzone 2's gameplay? That it doesn't play like MW2 or Halo 3. It's more tactical than run and gun, plus it doesn't rely on auto aim in MP which for me is a big plus. Imo it's the first shooter since Black that doesn't feel like every other shooter out there. Gunplay, sound, environments, action, etc. all make more "popular" shooters feel paper thin in their design. I suppose because it's different it falls into a "love it" or "hate it" category. Of course it naturally drew a lot of haters out too because of all the hype and controversy etc.
Basically though, if Sega made it, chances are you'd probably dig it Red :)

btw, what games does this fanboy have?
 
So it plays more like rainbow six or ghost recon? That's actually a plus to me as I prefer those kinds of shooters. To me the half life games still had the best balance of both plus an awesome story that reeled you in like a fish. Tis why it's still my favorite shooter series.

Fanboy has all the fighting games....so I've been promised an assraping in street fighter and tekken. He's got the new UFC game coming in and I know how to play that but I haven't let on yet, that'll be my ace. I beleive he's also got some racing games.
 
So it plays more like rainbow six or ghost recon? That's actually a plus to me as I prefer those kinds of shooters. To me the half life games still had the best balance of both plus an awesome story that reeled you in like a fish. Tis why it's still my favorite shooter series.

Fanboy has all the fighting games....so I've been promised an assraping in street fighter and tekken. He's got the new UFC game coming in and I know how to play that but I haven't let on yet, that'll be my ace. I beleive he's also got some racing games.

Single player is like Rainbow Six in terms of the cover mechanic, but I think the difference is in KZ2 you stay in first person the whole time. Multiplayer unfortunately doesn't use the cover mechanic though and is more action/objective oriented.

Yeah I haven't played any of those modern fighters. I'm still throwing down in MK2 online ahh what a blast from the past.

You won't find any real difference in those games from the 360 versions, other than the DS3's Dpad perhaps being easier to pull stuff off with in fighters. The recent PS3 exclusives are all that really separate it a bit from the 360.
 
Of course investors want that. They're only concerned about the immediate or not so distant bottom line.

It won't happen though. Why? Because microsoft's presence in the video game industry transcends profitability. Would they like it to be? Sure, but the goal of Microsoft was to expand beyond PC O/S and software development and become even a larger conglomerate than it is. They're shooting for a Proctor and Gamble type approach, which is obviously wildly successful. And aside from that, they've already invested way too much to just shut it down now. It's not a sinking ship. It takes many, many years to become a force in the ultra competitive gaming industry.

What people don't realize is that brand recognition is a huge part of a company's image, and more importantly their brand value. Companies are largely valued based on how big their brand recognition is. P&L and operational profitability doesn't necessarily dictate that in itself. The investors scope of things is very narrow and they're more concerned about dividends and quarterly reports.
Microsoft has a much bigger plan in mind that will take 5-10 years to fully see fruition (assuming it's executed as planned), and shareholders really don't care about that


case in point? Amazon.com

how much money did amazon spend for years while constantly being in the red ? Look at what they've achieved now. The value of the name "amazon.com" alone is worth billions and billions.
 
Of course investors want that. They're only concerned about the immediate or not so distant bottom line.

It won't happen though. Why? Because microsoft's presence in the video game industry transcends profitability. Would they like it to be? Sure, but the goal of Microsoft was to expand beyond PC O/S and software development and become even a larger conglomerate than it is. They're shooting for a Proctor and Gamble type approach, which is obviously wildly successful. And aside from that, they've already invested way too much to just shut it down now. It's not a sinking ship. It takes many, many years to become a force in the ultra competitive gaming industry.

What people don't realize is that brand recognition is a huge part of a company's image, and more importantly their brand value. Companies are largely valued based on how big their brand recognition is. P&L and operational profitability doesn't necessarily dictate that in itself. The investors scope of things is very narrow and they're more concerned about dividends and quarterly reports.
Microsoft has a much bigger plan in mind that will take 5-10 years to fully see fruition (assuming it's executed as planned), and shareholders really don't care about that


case in point? Amazon.com

how much money did amazon spend for years while constantly being in the red ? Look at what they've achieved now. The value of the name "amazon.com" alone is worth billions and billions.

True. I read a while back though that Microsoft was thinking of scrapping the very name "Xbox" to go with something else. Very strange to think they'd do something like that after spending so much trying to build a brand. I'll have to watch their press conference from today to see what went down.
 
yeah that model works with shitty flash games that any 1st year entry level software eng. student can design for. THat isn't going to work if they get into the multimillion dollar design cost per game console industry. They will suck ass just as hard as microsoft and sony do because they do not intrinsicaly understand gamers. An apple entry into the video game market will be so nauseatingly bland and marketed to such a diverse segment that it won't do anything right.....only half ass lots of things, just like their products now save the ipod's.

What you don't get is game consols are not making any money. Sony lost over $1 billion on their last playstation in 1 yr. Nintendo is the only one that made any money and that is falling fast. MSFT never made a dime.

Aapl is already in the game market without doing anything. Kids are playing Angry Birds or Doodle Jump at school on their phones. Games they bought for $1.99 that Aapl kept 30% of without lifting a finger.
 
What you don't get is game consols are not making any money. Sony lost over $1 billion on their last playstation in 1 yr. Nintendo is the only one that made any money and that is falling fast. MSFT never made a dime.

Aapl is already in the game market without doing anything. Kids are playing Angry Birds or Doodle Jump at school on their phones. Games they bought for $1.99 that Aapl kept 30% of without lifting a finger.


the console is losing money but are the software companies? We all know why they lose on teh consoles....but well received games are still making their due. My point was that if apple thinks it can crash the console market with their i-somthing or other business model, they will fail. Which is why I"m not sure they'll even try unless both microsoft AND sony fail. And even then they'd probably try and buy a company like Sega and focus strictly on hardware.
 
Top Bottom