Xbox Done Discussion - 2016's #1 Master Race Bottom Bitch

[Kalmado]

Gamestop isn't the problem. The public who purchases from them are. Do not blame a company (in any field of business for that matter) for finding a way to increase their profits. I do not like Gamestop nor would I ever recommend anyone shopping there, but they are just a business trying to make as much money as they possibly can by any means necessary. If people didn't buy used games from them at $55(or whatever)they wouldn't continue to do so because their product wouldn't sell and they wouldn't make money.

[Katlan]

At least an Internet connection isn’t required for XBOX ONE’s main feature, watching TV

[Tyrath]

I love this guy.

At least an Internet connection isn’t required for XBOX ONE’s main feature, watching TV

[ringthree]

Let me just illustrate the stupidity of all of this.

I have a friend, who's father had a drinking problem, not violent, but would get depressed. This would cause breaks in employment, and would mean my friend would have to take care of his father and thus have to take care of his mother when she was taking care of his father. When my friend was employed (worked as a construction worker), he had plenty of money and loved to play FFXI and Xbox 360 online. When he wasn't working (because there were no jobs or because he was taking care of his family), he just played his Xbox 360 offline. Eventually, his father killed himself, and now it is hard for my friend to maintain money. He usually has internet, but if his mother doesn't pay it, it can go down for a month at a time because my friend will have to get a quick job if one is available.

Microsoft doesn't give a shit about real people with real issues. My friend is a core gamer.

I don't want to make this a social issue, but it really is. Microsoft just assumes that everyone is a proper nuclear family and no one ever has any financial problems. While internet is ubiquitous, it is not universal and it is a choice to have it. Gaming was a great way for my friend to escape the hell that was life for him at some times. Microsoft doesn't give a fuck. They just want their shit. They just want to sell to nuclear families. There are some deeper racial and sexual contexts here that are being ignored. I am not saying that Microsoft is doing this for those reasons, but there will be a disproportionate impact based on socio-economic conditions.

[Brill Weave]

Or ya know, he could get a different job. Construction is notorious for that type of thing. But I agree on the point you're making.

[Callisto]

Let me just illustrate the stupidity of all of this.

I have a friend, who's father had a drinking problem, not violent, but would get depressed. This would cause breaks in employment, and would mean my friend would have to take care of his father and thus have to take care of his mother when she was taking care of his father. When my friend was employed (worked as a construction worker), he had plenty of money and loved to play FFXI and Xbox 360 online. When he wasn't working (because there were no jobs or because he was taking care of his family), he just played his Xbox 360 offline. Eventually, his father killed himself, and now it is hard for my friend to maintain money. He usually has internet, but if his mother doesn't pay it, it can go down for a month at a time because my friend will have to get a quick job if one is available.

Microsoft doesn't give a shit about real people with real issues. My friend is a core gamer.

I don't want to make this a social issue, but it really is. Microsoft just assumes that everyone is a proper nuclear family and no one ever has any financial problems. While internet is ubiquitous, it is not universal and it is a choice to have it. Gaming was a great way for my friend to escape the hell that was life for him at some times. Microsoft doesn't give a fuck. They just want their shit. They just want to sell to nuclear families. There are some deeper racial and sexual contexts here that are being ignored. I am not saying that Microsoft is doing this for those reasons, but there will be a disproportionate impact based on socio-economic conditions.

With respect, Microsoft is a for-profit company. If marketing solely to the stable nuclear family who can consistently afford the requisites that make their products function is the most profitable business model, I don't really understand why we would place a serious expectation on them to do otherwise.

You're right that they don't give a shit about those with financial struggles, but I don't understand why anyone expects them to be obligated to. If it's the wrong decision to make(business-wise, not morally) it'll sort itself out by them losing tons of money/market share.

[notorious bum]

It's so obvious the industry is on some try-hard wannabe RIAA/MPAA shit, but unfortunately these guys don't have nearly the amount of power nor control to successfully pull off the shit they are proposing.

[Rocl]

Let me just illustrate the stupidity of all of this.

I have a friend, who's father had a drinking problem, not violent, but would get depressed. This would cause breaks in employment, and would mean my friend would have to take care of his father and thus have to take care of his mother when she was taking care of his father. When my friend was employed (worked as a construction worker), he had plenty of money and loved to play FFXI and Xbox 360 online. When he wasn't working (because there were no jobs or because he was taking care of his family), he just played his Xbox 360 offline. Eventually, his father killed himself, and now it is hard for my friend to maintain money. He usually has internet, but if his mother doesn't pay it, it can go down for a month at a time because my friend will have to get a quick job if one is available.

Microsoft doesn't give a shit about real people with real issues. My friend is a core gamer.

I don't want to make this a social issue, but it really is. Microsoft just assumes that everyone is a proper nuclear family and no one ever has any financial problems. While internet is ubiquitous, it is not universal and it is a choice to have it. Gaming was a great way for my friend to escape the hell that was life for him at some times. Microsoft doesn't give a fuck. They just want their shit. They just want to sell to nuclear families. There are some deeper racial and sexual contexts here that are being ignored. I am not saying that Microsoft is doing this for those reasons, but there will be a disproportionate impact based on socio-economic conditions.

life is hard and xbox is making it harder

thanks obummer

[ringthree]

With respect, Microsoft is a for-profit company. If marketing solely to the stable nuclear family who can consistently afford the requisites that make their products function is the most profitable business model, I don't really understand why we would place a serious expectation on them to do otherwise.

You're right that they don't give a shit about those with financial struggles, but I don't understand why anyone expects them to be obligated to. If it's the wrong decision to make(business-wise, not morally) it'll sort itself out by them losing tons of money/market share.

Because every generation of consoles prior they were able to make a profit without requiring a constant online component. Are they obligated? No, but I won't be purchasing an Xbox One, while I did purchase an Xbox and a 360.

While we have issues with this from time to time in our society, just because there is for-profit company, doesn't mean it is or should be for-profit at all costs.

[Callisto]

Which is exactly the correct response people should have, rather than trying to demonize MS for it.

Previous consoles were profitable, but on the software, not the hardware. The marketplace is not the same as it was, and people should at least give a tiny bit of credence to the thought that rather than being just plain evil, MS truly believes that their product should be experienced with online connectivity, and it is otherwise not worth having. If people disagree with vision there is nothing keeping them from not buying it; if that's the case MS will adapt or lose the market and either way it's solved.

This whole thing reminds me of the fat people flipping out because Abercrombie doesn't feel compelled to market to them.

[Callisto]

While we have issues with this from time to time in our society, just because there is for-profit company, doesn't mean it is or should be for-profit at all costs.

Not trying to pick on you here, but it feels like you're equating rendering low-income people less able to play Halo/Forza on the level of things like pollutant dumping and overseas wage-slavery, this is not some sort of great societal issue.

edit: fwiw since I realize I'm coming off very much like a MS apologist, I own every console minus WiiU/portables, pretty equally utilize my PS3, 360, and PC for gaming. I currently probably put more time into the 360 because that's the current standard for offline competive FGs and such, but I will likely not be buying the XBone because it is very obviously not looking to be that for the next generation.

[ringthree]

Which is exactly the correct response people should have, rather than trying to demonize MS for it.

You can do both! It's more fun that way! Especially when at least one and hopefully both other consoles won't have such restrictions

Previous consoles were profitable, but on the software, not the hardware. The marketplace is not the same as it was, and people should at least give a tiny bit of credence to the thought that rather than being just plain evil, MS truly believes that their product should be experienced with online connectivity, and it is otherwise not worth having. If people disagree with vision there is nothing keeping them from not buying it; if that's the case MS will adapt or lose the market and either way it's solved.

Loss-leaders are not new nor are they a bad thing.

Are you fucking kidding me? Seriously, if they wanted to give credence to the notion that it is best experienced with online connectivity, then Xbox Live would be universally free and you could play off-line or on-line and judge the difference yourself. If they want credibility they need to provide choice. All credence is lost when the choice of the consumer is completely negated. Hell, if they were sooooo proud of their integrate online connectivity and how it is transformational, then provide a free internet connection. That is just as ludicrous as believing that this is anything but DRM.

You act as if there is no such thing as customer loyalty and that it means nothing. Poor decisions need to be punished. Demonization is actually the proper consumer reaction to poor decisions by a company.

[ringthree]

Not trying to pick on you here, but it feels like you're equating rendering low-income people less able to play Halo/Forza on the level of things like pollutant dumping and overseas wage-slavery, this is not some sort of great societal issue.

It is an example of the socio-economic problems that our society has. Is it the worst? Not even close, but there is more to it than MS's benevolence in providing the perfect online experience as you previously argued.

[Callisto]

You act as if there is no such thing as customer loyalty and that it means nothing. Poor decisions need to be punished. Demonization is actually the proper consumer reaction to poor decisions by a company.

Customer loyalty does lose meaning once it stops equating directly into profit. A company who is very well-loved, but does not have a great bottom line will cease to be a company relatively quickly; obviously this isn't going to happen to MS any time soon because of their overall scope, but again if this is the wrong way to go they're going to feel it direly in the pocketbooks.

[notorious bum]

All your favorite luxury/comfort items have been taking advantage of the shit economy, gotta learn to adapt and find alternative entertainment or means of acquiring it.

Brand-loyal to Xbone, but don't have any internet? Better hop on your neighbor's wifi or lug that giant pos to the library to do your 24hr activation(I'd start building rapport with the librarians now for a smoother transition).

[ringthree]

Customer loyalty does lose meaning once it stops equating directly into profit. A company who is very well-loved, but does not have a great bottom line will cease to be a company relatively quickly; obviously this isn't going to happen to MS any time soon because of their overall scope, but again if this is the wrong way to go they're going to feel it direly in the pocketbooks.

You are correct, but we are the judge of a company's profitability based on their decisions and our purchases. I never suggested anything else. You are basically saying that all profit-motivated decisions are good. I am saying that profit-motivated decisions that cause you to lose profit are obviously probably not good. And there is more to making a profit than today's profit margin.

[Brill Weave]

Brand-loyal to Xbone, but don't have any internet? Better hop on your neighbor's wifi or lug that giant pos to the library to do your 24hr activation(I'd start building report with the librarians now for a smoother transition).

Rapport. As the English major in me screams in rage.

[ringthree]

Rapport. As the English major in me screams in rage.

As a librarian, it was doing the same for me.

[notorious bum]

Gracias.

[Tyrath]