|
|
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=20419 |  dangadget (51) May 02, 2008 - 07:29 am
| Why?
Seriously.
Why?
There is no such thing as brand or consumer loyalty, nor should there be IMO.
As an educated consumer, decide on what it is you want and what you're willing to do or put up with in order to get it, then go patronize the services or products that best fit those criteria.
FS no longer does that for some apparently, and as they themselves have been so kind as to point out, there are plenty of other places where such needs might be fulfilled. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=13094 | dangadget (51) Nov 07, 2006 - 04:09 pm
| .02 cents cheaper, and in one case without a HDD, and in the other case having 40GB less HDD space.
Nice logic.
Try comparing them with comparable capabilities.
Are you seriously deluded that you think MS has any chance of selling thru a $200 add-on that adds ZERO gameplay value to 50% of its playerbase?
When that same playerbase is already paying yearly fees to be able to play online?
Pass that crap over man, and give me a toke. It was a rough day at work and I could use the buzz. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=12765 | dangadget (51) Oct 18, 2006 - 12:48 pm
| It's not a matter of them suing, it's the very real possibility of them not activating a copy of Vista that has been transferred more than once.
This pretty much kills whatever nascent desire I had to upgrade to Vista.
I bought my legal copy of WinXP Pro shortly after release, and it has been used on 3 machines since then due to full rebuilds/upgrades.
I don't consider myself anything near a power-user, so I don't see how they hope to reconcile this with the DIY crowd who often rebuild or upgrade their rigs. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=12770 | dangadget (51) Oct 18, 2006 - 07:17 am
| pfffft.
Left WoW months ago.
Crappy endgame unless you're in an uber-elite guild, and no longer casual gamer friendly after about lv45 or so, at least not for someone who works full time IMO.
Went back to CoH and brought my wife with me, and we're finding it far easier to have fun with it given our busy schedules.
We can log on for an hour after the kids are in bed and do a door mission or two, if one of us feels like soloing and we outlevel our partner, no biggie with the sidekick/exemplar system in place. Flag this | Edit this post |
| This message was posted anonymously and is hidden |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=12521 | dangadget (51) Oct 03, 2006 - 05:09 am
| Of course, one could also make the argument that for $200 more, you're getting exclusive titles like FF, MGS, and Virtua Fighter, but obviously people who think that way must be retarded or something.
Let's not forget about the completely retarded and utterly useless HD movie playback, because, you know a whole lot of people buying the PS3 won't have HDTV sets, because, well it just makes sense to drop $600 dollars on an HD console without an HDTV.
Know your target audience. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=12067 | dangadget (51) Sep 05, 2006 - 05:12 am
| ????
Most people can't use the added features of the 360 too then if you follow that reasoning.
Really, what does the 360 really have over the Wii if you take HD completely out of the equation?
Not a whole lot, as on a regular TV, the visual quality of a Wii game and a 360 game look very, very comparable.
If that is true, then that means that the 360 and the PS3 have targetted HDTV owners.
This is irrefutable fact, as so much of the early 360 promo material makes much of the 360 being the first true HD game machine, HD being standard on all 360 games, yadda yadda, blah blah.
So if they both target HDTV owners, then how on earth is the Bluray functionality on the PS3 useless to its targetted market??
Simple answer; it's NOT.
Even if you completely disregard Bluray, the price of the PS3 is comparable to a similarly equipped 360.
360 w/ 20GB HDD $499
2 20GB HDDs, bringing total HDD capacity to 60GB $99ea = $198
Wireless adapter $99
Oops...wait...thats MORE than a PS3!!
Price guaging, money hungry bastiches, how DARE they!!!! Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=12067 | dangadget (51) Sep 05, 2006 - 03:14 am
| Why on earth would you spend good money to help MS finish beta testing their new OS?
XP still works, and unless and until Vista gives the end-user something they just have to have, I don't see myself upgrading my hardware (HDCP compliant vid cards and monitors anyone?)or my software.
The whole DX10 being Vista exclusive ticks me off, but even so, no upcoming DX10 titles scream "UPGRADE" at me yet. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=12067 | dangadget (51) Sep 05, 2006 - 03:09 am » Edited on Sep 05, 2006 - 03:06 am
| That's great, except that your "facts" are anything but.
They are your opinions.
Sony lied about the PS2 and PS3?
Back that up by quoting a deliberate falsehood please, otherwise you're just stating an opinion, and everyone knows what one of those is worth.
Bluray has had a bad start?
Again, back that up with something quantifiable.
Less sell-thru?
Fewer titles?
Did you factor in time from launch?
Or is that too much fact checking for you? Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=12067 | dangadget (51) Sep 04, 2006 - 10:17 am » Edited on Sep 04, 2006 - 10:17 am
| Wrong and ill thought out.
What does the 360 have to offer over the Wii if you don't have HDTV?
An online service that you have to pay to play on?
If you follow your line of reasoning, then both the 360 and the PS3 are the big losers, as the market for HD games isn't there yet according to you.
In reality however, if you own an HDTV, then the 360 and/or the PS3 are viable options, as their major selling points really lie in the HD content.
I've seen the 360 playing on a regular television, and it looked like ass.
I was so underwhelmed, until I was informed that the big screen TV it was playing on wasn't a true HD display.
Nintendo is catering to the current market, while MS and Sony want to corner the future market, and after everything I've seen from the Wii, I think Nintendo probably chose wisely. Flag this | Edit this post |
|
|
|
|
