Rumors of Xbox 360 launch games

[Living-In-Clip]

Originally posted by Unicron!
I was just being sarcastic with L-I-C who was trying to present the HD as if its the same example as the 32X, Jaguar CD etc

It\'s a damn add-on. I\'m sorry that everything is backwards in your third world country, but it\'s an add-on.

You cannot compare the memory card to  the HD. The memory card is a *must* for every single game that allows you to safe.

The HD is required for a certain game. The HD is used for *certain* games. Unlike the eyetoy, which is an accessory. Big difference, but it\'s useless arguing with someone like you. It\'s a waste of time.

Again, MS did not make their decision to include the HD because they were financially capable. They were able to incur that costs because of the financial situation, but that\'s irrelevant. Bottom line is that there was rhyme and reason for their HD. Sony\'s reason, other than FFXI, is what we\'re disputing.

Thank God at least someone knows what the point of this debate was. The main  reason behind Sony\'s HD .

And MM - they didn\'t market it, because there was nothing to market . Not to mention if it didn\'t sell they still wasn\'t going to take a huge loss. Think of the HD just like Nintendo\'s 64DD. Hyped up, then when released, it was done in quiet, because there was nothing to really show.

again, blame the devs, not sony

again, blame the devs, not sony

again, blame the devs, not sony


yes, posted 3 times so perhaps it will sink thru the jaded haze in your head.

oh, and the HD = accessory, not addon

wow

Makes my head hurt

Thank God at least someone knows what the point of this debate was. The main  reason behind Sony\'s HD .

And MM - they didn\'t market it, because there was nothing to market . Not to mention if it didn\'t sell they still wasn\'t going to take a huge loss. Think of the HD just like Nintendo\'s 64DD. Hyped up, then when released, it was done in quiet, because there was nothing to really show. [/B]

Thanks for agreeing and describing the reason why the HD isnt the same example as the 32X, sega CD or whatever

Originally posted by Unicron!
I am not going to spend time trying to find the link that was posted a year ago.I wont try to convince you.But its a fact.Although it is indeed irreleant to the reason why PS2 doesnt have one while the XBOX has

Then don\'t even think about bringing it in to the arguement.

You seem to be quotimg me just to prove me wrong not to discuss.You ignore what followed previously in the discussion.This is the explanation to why it didnt "bomb"

But it did "bomb".  They are no longer supporting it.  The new PSTwo is not compatible with it.

Because there wasnt big amounts of money and time spent to support an accessory.Its there for FF11.You said it by yourself.There was nothing to risk.

You\'re still missing it.  I don\'t care about the financial situation of Sony when they released the HDD.  It doesn\'t matter.  They released it for one game, and that\'s what I can\'t understand.  Then again...looks at my Samba De Amigo maracas

You are comparing them as if Sony\'s intentions and procedures with the HD were the same as MS\'s now.

Bingo.  Why else release an HD unless you\'re going to use for the massive storage it offers?  I highly doubt FFXI did enough with it to justify what, a 40 gig HD?  It was a wasted and unnecessary venture on Sony\'s part, and that\'s because they didn\'t have any plans outside of FFXI.  

Well DUH DUH thats exactly what I ve been saying with the difference that the financial state IS RELEVANT!

The finances still don\'t matter.  I\'m not discussing this with you, stop bringing it up.

You are saying what I said just to argue with me only with different words.

Perhaps if I could understand what you are saying then we wouldn\'t be here.  I\'ll make a mental note to avoid you in the future.  

About the 70 million in dept you mentioned though is way too general.You ommit the fact that MS has already done their online service while LOSING profits thanks to XBOX but Sony is making future plans expecting to GAIN profits from the service and the next PS.Is the 70 million in dept thanks to PS2?No.
This move only shows that they are having positive expectations that they will gain from it and help their situation when its put into action.

How is that relevant?

Otherwise they would have risked and released an online service with the PS2 already to compete MS and make longer long term plans just like MS despite that this would have caused losses to them

They\'re going to experience loss anyway.  You think it\'s cheap to set up an online service?

I\'m going to suggest you and I stop.  We\'re not getting anywhere and I\'ve grown tired of trying to figure out what it is you\'re getting at.

Originally posted by Rikku
But it did "bomb".  They are no longer supporting it.  The new PSTwo is not compatible with it.

When you said it didnt bomb I thought you ment why it didnt do well.Well the point is the explanation was about why it didnt do well.

You\'re still missing it.  I don\'t care about the financial situation of Sony when they released the HDD.  It doesn\'t matter.  They released it for one game, and that\'s what I can\'t understand.  Then again...looks at my Samba De Amigo maracas

You are the one who is missing it.You misread that part.In this part you quoted had nothing to do wiuth Sony\'s financial state.I ment that they didnt spend time and  money for it.

Bingo.  Why else release an HD unless you\'re going to use for the massive storage it offers?  I highly doubt FFXI did enough with it to justify what, a 40 gig HD?  It was a wasted and unnecessary venture on Sony\'s part, and that\'s because they didn\'t have any plans outside of FFXI.

As I said the HD was there for FF11 and at the same time it was an opportunity to see the possibilities with the HD.If it succeeded more than expected it would have brought more possibilities.Sony didnt think "you know lets release it for FF11 onlyand constrain the storage just for that game".They let it open for possibilities and so if another developer wants to exploit the HD they can have the chance to.And here is what mm said.Blame the devs.

The finances still don\'t matter.  I\'m not discussing this with you, stop bringing it up.

You are corneered thats why

Perhaps if I could understand what you are saying then we wouldn\'t be here.  I\'ll make a mental note to avoid you in the future.  

Because you seem to be biased against me thats why and you seem to misread everything I write and create unneeded arguements.I am the one that should have made that note

How is that relevant?

I ve been eexplainig it in every post.But you seem to think that companies can all act the same way when it comes to decisions.

They\'re going to experience loss anyway.  You think it\'s cheap to set up an online service?

I\'m going to suggest you and I stop.  We\'re not getting anywhere and I\'ve grown tired of trying to figure out what it is you\'re getting at.

termporal loss.Not long term loss.Something only MS can do.You are confusing investment expenses with returns in proft/losses from these expenses.I ve explained it in my previous post.They are expecting recovery from it.They expect profit.

I suggest that now we should stop

You didn\'t corner me, in order for you to do that I would have had to understood your arguement.  Had that happened we wouldn\'t have gone on for so long now would we?

I have no bias against you.  I\'m being entirely honest when I say I had a hard time understanding your arguement.  

I am the one that should have made that note

Please do.  Better yet put me on ignore as I am you to avoid any further arguments.  It\'s for the best.

termporal loss.Not long term loss.Something only MS can do.You are confusing investment expenses with returns in proft/losses from these expenses.I ve explained it in my previous post.They are expecting recovery from it.They expect profit.

Same thing.  MS doesn\'t plan to keep losing money, and Sony won\'t start recovering profits from the first day it launches it services just like MS.  They\'re going to have to get a number of subscriptions to recoup their expenses to run such a service.  That will take a while, and MS is already well down that road.

Later

noone could possibly think that if a sony online service with PS3, it won\'t immediatly put xbox live to shame in sheer numbers.

(not that i\'d pay a fee for online console gaming, thats for suckers)

Thats the sad part, because just like everything else from them, it\'ll be poorly done.

im sorry, i read your post and all it says is "blah, blah, blah, sony killed my dog"

please translate

mm, you will not get the attention that you strive for

it just flocks to me, i can\'t help it

thanks, tho

[Jumpman]

hay guys whats going on here?

A lot of worthless banter.

Originally posted by Rikku


Please do.  Better yet put me on ignore as I am you to avoid any further arguments.  It\'s for the best.

You suggested it but you didnt do it

Same thing.  MS doesn\'t plan to keep losing money, and Sony won\'t start recovering profits from the first day it launches it services just like MS.  They\'re going to have to get a number of subscriptions to recoup their expenses to run such a service.  That will take a while, and MS is already well down that road.

Later

you avoided some certain details.MS doesnt plan to keep losing money but the difference is that MS can make longer long term plans than Sony.XBOX hasnt brought profit to MS in its whole life span yet its still in the market and its supported by MS.They are the first to manage and keep a console alive depsite the losses
 Sony can not do the same thing.They can not opperate with a  product that brings nothing but millions of losses for a long period of time hoping it will bring profit later like for example in the next generation.
 As for the example you mentioned with the service as I said earlier there is a difference between investment expenses/expenses to run the service and returns.