Just for future arguments sake, the burden of proof does kinda lie with you if you make a claim that "the others do it too" and provide nothing to back it up. Like in a proper argument you can't just go "it's there go look it up" when having a proper discussion with someone. Otherwise we can all just make claims all day and say that and somewhere on the internet we'll find some crazy blog that can back our claims.
Here's an example, I can say the Xbox has a secret gpu that can be activated at any time. I show no proof, and say go look it up and you come across the misterxmedia blog that says those exact things. If i present that here in the discussion so everyone can see what the source is and where it comes from others can say "oh shit that source is wrong" or anything to that avail.
This way people will also take your post seriously.
Are we going to go down the "stop acting like a child", "stop treating me like a child" route?
I said what I'd seen. I have no reason to lie, but if you (not specifically you) don't believe me, well quite frankly that's your issue and you're welcome to use the tools you have available to find out if that's the case or not. I'm not going to punctuate every statement I make with a link, because I hope the first thought in most people's minds is that I'm not just bullshitting them for the sake of it.
Why would they do that? We just had another 1.3M Americans cast their vote in support of forced parity. More, if you count all the people who bought software and other stuff from them. Hell, last Nov 21-27 saw the second-highest amount of support for forced parity ever in the US. So collectively, we Americans seem intent on imposing forced parity wherever possible.
That's why as gamers, we should all be happy the US isn't the world, because if it were, we wouldn't have cross-platform play in SF5 and Paragon, or PSVR support in Project Cars, and all of these great indy games would get delayed until the Bone port could be made ready too, or be forced to release on XBox first so the devs don't starve to death in the interim.
Just for future arguments sake, the burden of proof does kinda lie with you if you make a claim that "the others do it too" and provide nothing to back it up. Like in a proper argument you can't just go "it's there go look it up" when having a proper discussion with someone. Otherwise we can all just make claims all day and say that and somewhere on the internet we'll find some crazy blog that can back our claims.
Here's an example, I can say the Xbox has a secret gpu that can be activated at any time. I show no proof, and say go look it up and you come across the misterxmedia blog that says those exact things. If i present that here in the discussion so everyone can see what the source is and where it comes from others can say "oh shit that source is wrong" or anything to that avail.
This way people will also take your post seriously.
Thanks Apathy, appreciate the info. Looks like it was system wide and not game authentication based (actually worse since it killed use of everything). I certainly hope it doesn't pop up again, as I'm a game collector and want to be able to play the games I buy 20 years down the line.
Seeing the number of times issues have happened on the One made me upset and I hope that on all systems they get their shit together to have things work as expected by the consumer.
"In theory, the Xbox One was an improvement on everything fans loved about the Xbox 360: a more powerful Kinect, new hardware that merged the console with your cable box, and lots of talk about the cloud."
"In theory, the Xbox One was an improvement on everything fans loved about the Xbox 360: a more powerful Kinect, new hardware that merged the console with your cable box, and lots of talk about the cloud."
Exactly the point. Microsoft's studies showed people would inadvertently support this kind of stuff because they don't pay attention to details and don't know any better. So if those studies were correct and people will continue to support them despite "details" like their anti-competitive business practices, what motivation do they have for changing said details?
Not being aware you've supported something doesn't weaken your support in any way. They enforce these policies with the money you just handed them*. Hell, we have people here developers and gamers alike who support them despite knowing full well about the parity clause, but they rationalize it to themselves by pretending this isn't really how the clause works, or that MS would never use it that way even if they could and despite having done so in the past or that their support doesn't really make that much difference and c'mon; Scalebound.
*Not necessarily you, one hopes, but their sales are clearly non-zero.
Please show an article or example. I've not once seen any story of PS4 not playing a disc or digital game after purchase (unless it's an online only game, which is different).
It did used to do this. If you were, like me, silly enough to sign out of your PSN account and then for some reason couldn't sign back in again it used to lock me out of most of my library. It's not done that in a while though so it might be one of the many stability fixes they patched in an update.
It did used to do this. If you were, like me, silly enough to sign out of your PSN account and then for some reason couldn't sign back in again it used to lock me out of most of my library. It's not done that in a while though so it might be one of the many stability fixes they patched in an update.
MS has one of the best fighters this generation in KI. (At least until SFV comes out in Spring 16)
MS has one of the best online FPS shooters in Halo 5
MS has one of the best controllers in the Elite
MS has the best online racer in FM6
MS has one of the best Metrovania title in Ori.and the Blind Forest
MS has one of the best open world racers in FH2
To state that MS only has an advantage in updates is a little bit of an oversimplification. I do not want to degenerate into list wars, but at this point the quality is there for them.
1) Well Sony has Guilty Gear Xrd -SIGN and will have SFV/KOF 14 etc...
2) Halo 5 isn't really good and Sony still has Destiny, Battlefront, BO3 etc...
3) controllers are opinion, I love both of them.
4) I don't care about racing game so I get you that.
5) Ori isn't exclusive, you can play it on PC...
6) I don't care about racing game so I get you that.
1) Well Sony has Guilty Gear Xrd -SIGN and will have SFV/KOF 14 etc... 2) Halo 5 isn't really good and Sony still has Destiny, Battlefront, BO3 etc...
3) controllers are opinion, I love both of them.
4) I don't care about racing game so I get you that.
5) Ori isn't exclusive, you can play it on PC...
6) I don't care about racing game so I get you that.
Oh I didn't know Destiny/Battlefront/BO3 was PS4 exclusive. I must have been hallucinating when I was playing them on my Xbone.
And your opinion that Halo 5 isn't really that good doesn't invalidate the fact that it's an incredibly popular franchise with great sales numbers. People like Halo deal with it.
1) Well Sony has Guilty Gear Xrd -SIGN and will have SFV/KOF 14 etc...
2) Halo 5 isn't really good and Sony still has Destiny, Battlefront, BO3 etc...
3) controllers are opinion, I love both of them.
4) I don't care about racing game so I get you that.
5) Ori isn't exclusive, you can play it on PC...
6) I don't care about racing game so I get you that.
Exactly the point. Microsoft's studies showed people would inadvertently support this kind of stuff because they don't pay attention to details and don't know any better. So if those studies were correct and people will continue to support them despite "details" like their anti-competitive business practices, what motivation do they have for changing said details?
Not being aware you've supported something doesn't weaken your support in any way. They enforce these policies with the money you just handed them*. Hell, we have people here developers and gamers alike who support them despite knowing full well about the parity clause, but they rationalize it to themselves by pretending this isn't really how the clause works, or that MS would never use it that way even if they could and despite having done so in the past or that their support doesn't really make that much difference and c'mon; Scalebound.
*Not necessarily you, one hopes, but their sales are clearly non-zero.
The motivation to change the clause would come as a result of external market forces. For example, the sheer number of indies not being released on Xbox One compared to competing platforms like the PC and PS4, and how that affects consumer preference. Once it hurts them enough they'll change it. That's the way most competitive business tactics like this work out and this too will change when they feel the pressure to do so. This is exactly why it's great to have healthy competition.
Personally, it's just not that big of a deal to me. I have a PC for all the indies I could ever want and I use my Xbox One for the exclusives.
Oh I didn't know Destiny/Battlefront/BO3 was PS4 exclusive. I must have been hallucinating when I was playing them on my Xbone.
And your opinion that Halo 5 isn't really that good doesn't invalidate the fact that it's an incredibly popular franchise with great sales numbers. People like Halo deal with it.
My point is that more popular or better games than Halo 5 are on PS4 ( and Xbox One ), they aren't exclusive but have timed exclusive content and bigger community which is really important for gamers in general.
I don't understand what is funny, people aren't really buying consoles for their exclusives, not anymore, exclusive are just a bullet point otherwise Nintendo would have lead every generation ever and yes controller are personal opinions, some of my friends can't stand the PS4 controller and the elite controllers are pretty expensive. for me the DS4 is better than the standard Xbox One controller.
That's why as gamers, we should all be happy the US isn't the world, because if it were, we wouldn't have cross-platform play in SF5 and Paragon, or PSVR support in Project Cars, and all of these great indy games would get delayed until the Bone port could be made ready too, or be forced to release on XBox first so the devs don't starve to death in the interim.
I'm going to go ahead and actually say this can be objectively proven wrong now. Having the ability to press buttons on the back for vital functions in a shooter without taking your thumbs off the thumbsticks can and would be verifiable as "better" in real world tests. That would make it a better controller for most people, regardless of opinions and tastes. =)
That game also released in Feb, IIRC, and it was one of the first major exclusives. Meanwhile TR released within the same 3 week window as the biggest games of the year.
In terms of quality, RotTR is amazing, so at least MS knows how to pick a good game. If anything, MS doesn't know how to market it. I'm still shocked they didn't change the date when they learned Fallout 4 was releasing the same day.
Except that DNA still exists in the box. When a KI tournament can't go because the game glitches and suddenly needs that internet connection to verify purchase, when a game gets pulled from the store and it causes even pre-installed, or disc versions of the game to not work.. those are reminders that deep down, it's the system they promised, they just put band aids on it.
I actually saw that KI tournament on Twitch and the person didn't have their system setup for it to work. All systems have weird quirks about them. That's nothing new. There were articles about it and all and it was all incorrect in what they were saying.
That game also released in Feb, IIRC, and it was one of the first major exclusives. Meanwhile TR released within the same 3 week window as the biggest games of the year.
In terms of quality, RotTR is amazing, so at least MS knows how to pick a good game. If anything, MS doesn't know how to market it. I'm still shocked they didn't change the date when they learned Fallout 4 was releasing the same day.
Tomb raider is an amazing game. I dunno the numbers but launching the same day as fallout 4 is just idiotic of MS. This game should have been delayed till January. Its release window was a big mistake. Never stood a chance and its really too bad cause so far, its my GOTY.
The motivation to change the clause would come as a result of external market forces. For example, the sheer number of indies not being released on Xbox One compared to competing platforms like the PC and PS4, and how that affects consumer preference. Once it hurts them enough they'll change it. That's the way most competitive business tactics like this work out and this too will change when they feel the pressure to do so. This is exactly why it's great to have healthy competition.
Personally, it's just not that big of a deal to me. I have a PC for all the indies I could ever want and I use my Xbox One for the exclusives.
Indies and other devs are going to PS4 first because its the better platform. Its more powerful, it's easier to code for, and perhaps most importantly, it has far more users. The parity clause isn't currently causing developers to flee, because MS are currently not enforcing it. Already released Rocket League on PS4 with cross-platform play? MS will eagerly give you an exemption on parity this time. But again, support is support, and the more developers and gamers that continue to ignore the details, the fewer exemptions will be given. The clause is no different from last generation when Ubisoft needed Microsoft to approve any features that might make XBox users feel less than first class, in the PlayStation versions of games. Current market conditions may have limited Microsoft's ability to enforce the clause, but they still make every developer agree to it, because hey, Microsoft's situation may improve someday.
And again, by buying their products, you are actively helping improve their situation, in hopes that they'll once again be able to veto anything that reveals their competition to be superior. If you really are buying nothing but exclusives, they may not turn a profit on you specifically, but you're still helping to give validity to the platform and the business that operates it.
Personally, I give zero shits about used games. I've given old games away to friends, but I've never sold any, and the only times I've ever purchased used is if a game is out of print and I'm simply unable to purchase a copy directly from the publisher.
That said, fuck MS for actively trying to kill the used games market. Personally, I feel the most efficient model is one like Apple encourages for the App Store, where software is cheap enough that people don't think twice about buying it, or once about attempting to resell it, but that's not my decision to make for everyone else, nor is it Microsoft's. Incidentally, the whole physical/digital aspect of the used games discussion is a red herring; we should be petitioning Congress to make all software licenses transferable, just like any other thing of value is already. The idea that how a product is delivered should have any bearing on something like First Sale seems like a rather arbitrary and artificial distinction in the first place.
Anyway, WRT family sharing, it was unlikely to be what some imagined it to be. Best guess is that it was similar to the Full Game Trials on PS+, but instead of getting to try the game just for being in the club, your buddy had to buy a copy first. Re-watch Hyrb describe it to Angry Joe, and note his careful and repeated use of the phrase, "He can check it out." "Checking stuff out" is what I do at the library, which clearly implies timed lending, wouldn't you say?
Try to imagine Hyrb saying that last sentence after the system launched and everyone figured out how it really worked.
I'm going to go ahead and actually say this can be objectively proven wrong now. Having the ability to press buttons on the back for vital functions in a shooter without taking your thumbs off the thumbsticks can and would be verifiable as "better" in real world tests. That would make it a better controller for most people, regardless of opinions and tastes. =)
Its a matter of price. No one in their right mind would take a computer with less ram or a weaker gpu, they simply get what they can afford. This controller is the same. There is no way anyone can not like more features, more refinement and more customization. Technically, it is a better controller. They just cant all afford it. Just like how some people cant afford a better car.
I keep checking this thread to see which side will realize the other is not gonna back down and everytime it's like I just opened the thread for the first time.
Honestly, if your still in here defending the Xbox to some of these posters, your wasting your time. It's very clear several here in this thread have no intention of admitting any of your points is right, and will continue to keep it going due to....well, personal interest.
1) Well Sony has Guilty Gear Xrd -SIGN and will have SFV/KOF 14 etc... 2) Halo 5 isn't really good and Sony still has Destiny, Battlefront, BO3 etc...
3) controllers are opinion, I love both of them.
4) I don't care about racing game so I get you that.
5) Ori isn't exclusive, you can play it on PC...
6) I don't care about racing game so I get you that.
I won't speak to the campaign, but Halo-5 Arena is probably the best online multiplayer I've ever played. It's very well balanced, the controls are intuitive, the mechanics work very well, and the matches run like butter on dedicated servers.
IMO, anyone who says Halo-5 isn't good, either hasn't played Halo-5 Arena, or isn't very good at it.
Personally, I give zero shits about used games. I've given old games away to friends, but I've never sold any, and the only times I've ever purchased used is if a game is out of print and I'm simply unable to purchase a copy directly from the publisher.
That said, fuck MS for actively trying to kill the used games market. Personally, I feel the most efficient model is one like Apple encourages for the App Store, where software is cheap enough that people don't think twice about buying it, or once about attempting to resell it, but that's not my decision to make for everyone else, nor is it Microsoft's. Incidentally, the whole physical/digital aspect of the used games discussion is a red herring; we should be petitioning Congress to make all software licenses transferable, just like any other thing of value is already. The idea that how a product is delivered should have any bearing on something like First Sale seems like a rather arbitrary and artificial distinction in the first place.
Anyway, WRT family sharing, it was unlikely to be what some imagined it to be. Best guess is that it was similar to the Full Game Trials on PS+, but instead of getting to try the game just for being in the club, your buddy had to buy a copy first. Re-watch Hyrb describe it to Angry Joe, and note his careful and repeated use of the phrase, "He can check it out." "Checking stuff out" is what I do at the library, which clearly implies timed lending, wouldn't you say?
Try to imagine Hyrb saying that last sentence after the system launched and everyone figured out how it really worked.
For advanced users, perhaps, so as Angel said, it's a matter of opinion.
Ah, ok. I just asked because so many times i'll find people get upset about certain policies that hurt devs but went completely batshit when Microsoft tried to take money out of Gamestops hands. The used games market probably hurts devs the most.
I won't speak to the campaign, but Halo-5 Arena is probably the best online multiplayer I've ever played. It's very well balanced, the controls are intuitive, the mechanics work very well, and the matches run like butter on dedicated servers.
IMO, anyone who says Halo-5 isn't good, either hasn't played Halo-5 Arena, or isn't very good at it.
I'm going to go ahead and actually say this can be objectively proven wrong now. Having the ability to press buttons on the back for vital functions in a shooter without taking your thumbs off the thumbsticks can and would be verifiable as "better" in real world tests. That would make it a better controller for most people, regardless of opinions and tastes. =)
And i'm going to add, then why stop on the elite and not just buy a device that allows keyboard and mouse support which is the best thing for like FPS? Why stop at $150?
PS
The only reason i don't have an x1 is the controller it just does not fit in my hands, way too small!
I'm sorry: save the Xbox One from what exactly? It's outselling the 360 to a ridiculous degree. Just because it isn't the top selling console doesn't mean it's failing. Microsoft is laughing all the way to the bank with the Xbox One.
Are they actually? They dropped the price by 150$ in a year. 2 of their 3 main franchises are selling considerably less than usual, with the 3rd still being unknown. How are they laughing to the bank? His comment is about as ridiculous as yours is.
And i'm going to add, then why stop on the elite and not just buy a device that allows keyboard and mouse support which is the best thing for like FPS? Why stop at $150?
PS
The only reason i don't have an x1 is the controller it just does not fit in my hands, way too small!
Well, to be fair keyboard and mouse is extremely different than a gamepad. You aren't changing a few buttons or a slight adjustment to ergonomics, it's a COMPLETELY different input system lol.
I've tried to go from controller to kb/m. I love me some 144hz FPS gaming. Couldn't do it. But now with this controller i don't need to do it. I can hang in most shooters now using a controller on PC, and in some games like Titanfall/COD i can even romp most PC players (i still get crushed by the good ones though).
Are they actually? They dropped the price by 150$ in a year. 2 of their 3 main franchises are selling considerably less than usual, with the 3rd still being unknown. How are they laughing to the bank? His comment is about as ridiculous as yours is.
They aren't laughing to the bank, but that's because they were primed to crush Sony this gen, at least in the U.S and UK. Instead they fucked up. But to think that the X1 is in trouble because of that, that's silly. It's still selling incredibly well. And the price drop was because they dropped Kinect, like Sony did dropping the PlayStation eye prior to launching to get the price $100 below Microsoft.
Are they actually? They dropped the price by 150$ in a year. 2 of their 3 main franchises are selling considerably less than usual, with the 3rd still being unknown. How are they laughing to the bank? His comment is about as ridiculous as yours is.
They might not be laughing, obviously no one goes into anything wanting to finish second or third. But its been consistently outselling 360 which ended up doing very well. So If this pace keeps up, even in 2nd, they really have nothing to worry about.
And there isnt much they can do about the HW at this point. So why cry about it. The power is what it is till next gen so they have to accept it and do the best they can with what they have till then.
There was the rumour of a discless small version of the 360 to be sold as a cheaper, more casual alternative to the XB1. What's to say that that isn't what the XB1 becomes in the not too distant future? Especially now that they're likely to settle on x86, and the next Xbox is likely far more compatible in terms of software.
Well, to be fair keyboard and mouse is extremely different than a gamepad. You aren't changing a few buttons or a slight adjustment to ergonomics, it's a COMPLETELY different input system lol.
I've tried to go from controller to kb/m. I love me some 144hz FPS gaming. Couldn't do it. But now with this controller i don't need to do it. I can hang in most shooters now using a controller on PC, and in some games like Titanfall/COD i can even romp most PC players (i still get crushed by the good ones though).
They aren't laughing to the bank, but that's because they were primed to crush Sony this gen, at least in the U.S and UK. Instead they fucked up. But to think that the X1 is in trouble because of that, that's silly. It's still selling incredibly well. And the price drop was because they dropped Kinect, like Sony did dropping the PlayStation eye prior to launching to get the price $100 below Microsoft.
First of all the people that thought MS would crush Sony are delusional. The amount of clusterfucks that Sony made during last gen on top of coming out a year later still finished around the same number as the 360 and is on the road to finish top 5/6 of the best selling consoles ever. It was obvious that PS4 would win as long as they didn't make colossus moronic mistakes. Saying that, MS quitting because they're doing so bad is also a terrible narrative. They might only stop if the main purpose is to get to people's living room as a do it all box, who knows. But do I see that happening? No. I expect MS will be looking to come out 1-2 years earlier than PS5 because it's obvious they will get bodied (as will everyone really) if they go head to head.
They might not be laughing, obviously no one goes into anything wanting to finish second or third. But its been consistently outselling 360 which ended up doing very well. So If this pace keeps up, even in 2nd, they really have nothing to worry about.
And there isnt much they can do about the HW at this point. So why cry about it. The power is what it is till next gen so they have to accept it and do the best they can with what they have till then.
That's lookingat things incredibly black and white though. It dropped in price by 150$ and 200$ at Black Friday. Someone even told on gaf that there were places that were selling X1s for 200 on BF lol... Laughing to the bank is doing that well without stripping your prices to the biggest price drops out of any console I remember ever happening. Also looking at their 1st first party output looks far worse in terms of software sales compared to how they were during last gen. My point is that they is a middle ground here, neither of which either poster was anywhere close to being.
Ah, ok. I just asked because so many times i'll find people get upset about certain policies that hurt devs but went completely batshit when Microsoft tried to take money out of Gamestops hands. The used games market probably hurts devs the most.
Ah. Yeah, I'm typically gonna come down on the side of what's good for developers hence my strong feelings on parity even if it's a matter of devs "versus" consumers.
That's why I don't really participate in the used market and encourage others to give their money directly to the devs wherever possible. But at the same time, I don't think you can definitively state that used games are what hurt devs most. One could argue as I did just above that what's really hurting developers is their urge to cling to the high prices once/still dictated by physical delivery, and it's those high prices that create a demand for used trading. So even if this monster is killing them, is it not one of their own creation? So what are we meant to do about it?
Like I said, it's a complicated issue, and there are good arguments on all sides. That's why it was completely unacceptable for MS to attempt to dictate how the rest of us would do it from here on out.
Ah. Yeah, I'm typically gonna come down on the side of what's good for developers hence my strong feelings on parity even if it's a matter of devs "versus" consumers.
That's why I don't really participate in the used market and encourage others to give their money directly to the devs wherever possible. But at the same time, I don't think you can definitively state that used games are what hurt devs most. One could argue as I did just above that what's really hurting developers is their urge to cling to the high prices once/still dictated by physical delivery, and it's those high prices that create a demand for used trading. So even if this monster is killing them, is it not one of their own creation? So what are we meant to do about it?
Like I said, it's a complicated issue, and there are good arguments on all sides. That's why it was completely unacceptable for MS to attempt to dictate how the rest of us would do it from here on out.
First of all the people that thought MS would crush Sony are delusional. The amount of clusterfucks that Sony made during last gen on top of coming out a year later still finished around the same number as the 360 and is on the road to finish top 5/6 of the best selling consoles ever. It was obvious that PS4 would win as long as they didn't make colossus moronic mistakes. Saying that, MS quitting because they're doing so bad is also a terrible narrative. They might only stop if the main purpose is to get to people's living room as a do it all box, who knows. But do I see that happening? No. I expect MS will be looking to come out 1-2 years earlier than PS5 because it's obvious they will get bodied (as will everyone really) if they go head to head.
Wait, you did see that i said North America right? In that aspect yes it was primed to really destroy Sony, and to a lesser extent in the U.K. PS3 managed well last gen because of Europe, with a push from Japan. It was a bluray player for a lot of people. Plus, despite the horrific pre-launch backlash the X1 had it's still trailing PS4 only by a small margin in North America.
Wait, you did see that i said North America right? In that aspect yes it was primed to really destroy Sony, and to a lesser extent in the U.K. PS3 managed well last gen because of Europe, with a push from Japan. It was a bluray player for a lot of people. Plus, despite the horrific pre-launch backlash the X1 had it's still trailing PS4 only by a small margin in North America.
And the PS1/PS2 demolished all platforms in NA as well. You can still see it but I don't. They released Halo and all they got out it was 50,000 push. Sony hasn't released any of their top 3 selling franchises which are going to come in the next two years.
And that's why I said it can be argued the publishers themselves create the demand for used trading with their high prices. If games cost less from the outset, there'd be no need to sell your belongings for another fix.
Indies and other devs are going to PS4 first because its the better platform. Its more powerful, it's easier to code for, and perhaps most importantly, it has far more users. The parity clause isn't currently causing developers to flee, because MS are currently not enforcing it. Already released Rocket League on PS4 with cross-platform play? MS will eagerly give you an exemption on parity this time. But again, support is support, and the more developers and gamers that continue to ignore the details, the fewer exemptions will be given. The clause is no different from last generation when Ubisoft needed Microsoft to approve any features that might make XBox users feel less than first class, in the PlayStation versions of games. Current market conditions may have limited Microsoft's ability to enforce the clause, but they still make every developer agree to it, because hey, Microsoft's situation may improve someday.
And again, by buying their products, you are actively helping improve their situation, in hopes that they'll once again be able to veto anything that reveals their competition to be superior. If you really are buying nothing but exclusives, they may not turn a profit on you specifically, but you're still helping to give validity to the platform and the business that operates it.
Devs would put up with the more difficult platform is it had a bigger audience (see the PS2). Indies are going to the PS4 because there are more users, which attracts devs who add more to its library of games, ultimately influencing consumer preferences.
That's a market factor for MS that will, over time, continue to put more pressure on them to become more flexible. As long as Sony continues to kick butt and the PC market grows then MS is going to have a hard time enforcing policies that make the jobs of devs and publishers harder.
I sleep perfectly fine as a consumer of Xbox One. It's not my job to act like some white knight in the industry. I'm just here to play the games I want to play and I'd rather not get involved in the drama (read enough of that shit on GAF as it is).
It was number 1 in October and in November it still was top 10 on 1 console. Need for speed is multiplatform. I'm not saying Halo 5 is selling as well as the previous Halos but it is unfair to not say it has not sold well.
It's not even bad the fact that Halo charted 2 months in a row shows it's selling well. Most game chart 1 once then drop. So if that is poor then the industry is in bad shape
SwolBro;188858705I'm going to go ahead and actually say this can be objectively proven wrong now. Having the ability to press buttons on the back for vital functions in a shooter without taking your thumbs off the thumbsticks can and would be verifiable as "better" in real world tests. That would make it a better controller for most people said:
Its still subjective because of ergonomics. I have an xbox one and buy all mutiplats on ps4 because for me the ds4 is far more comfortable than the xbox one gamepad.
Thats the opposite of objective.
It's not even bad the fact that Halo charted 2 months in a row shows it's selling well. Most game chart 1 once then drop. So if that is poor then the industry is in bad shape
