I spent all of about 30 seconds on the dashboard, so I don't feel like ads on the dashboard really affect me at all.
Console Wars: Six Years Later
Mai Valentine
Moderator
mastermario said:
Yeah I sign in and go straight to playing a game most of the time, so I haven't really even paid attention to what's on the dashboard.
aleeock157
Ninja Kitteh
I didn't even really see the ads til you pointed out they were there, tbh. They're not like intrusive or anything so I don't see how it bothers anyone.
This is what I'm thinking. Dashboard ads are an ideological issue, not a practical one. They really don't affect how much I enjoy playing my 360 so they don't affect my opinion of the console as a whole. Consoles should be looked at in terms of entertainment value. Micorsoft's business model is another issue entirely, but in terms of entertainment value, the 360 has been the most entertaining, worthwhile console of the generation for me. That being said, I never owned a PS3 so I'm really not the best judge here. From what I've played I really like the PS3, but I guess I'm biased towards the 360 if only because I've never owned a PS3.mastermario said:
stealth toilet
Moderator
I could totally go off again, but I'll spare you all. :lol
Instead, I'll ask, do you really just think of consoles as entertainment? Or like, a medium for entertainment? What about art? What about education? Can it aspire to anything more than mere entertainment?
And, I'll remark, that one's naivete towards advertising is exactly what a lot of advertisers prey on. They may not seem all that intrusive now, but it is much more intrusive than it used to be (no ads), and so long as people do not mind they will become ever more so.
When we have commercials in games you'll all wish you listened to me. Oh, wait... http://www.tentonhammer.com/node/60433
Too late.
Instead, I'll ask, do you really just think of consoles as entertainment? Or like, a medium for entertainment? What about art? What about education? Can it aspire to anything more than mere entertainment?
And, I'll remark, that one's naivete towards advertising is exactly what a lot of advertisers prey on. They may not seem all that intrusive now, but it is much more intrusive than it used to be (no ads), and so long as people do not mind they will become ever more so.
When we have commercials in games you'll all wish you listened to me. Oh, wait... http://www.tentonhammer.com/node/60433
Too late.
Mai Valentine
Moderator
Games are already used for education. You've heard the term edutainment I'm sure? It doesn't even come up as a word to spell-check so I guess it's a real word now. :lol
Consoles are a vehicle for entertainment and it is really up to each person how they use it.
As far as advertising, to my knowledge I haven't actually seen an ad on XBL and thought to myself, "I need to have that," when I really didn't. To me it's just like a tv commercial; I can't really avoid them, but that doesn't mean I have to buy what they are trying to sell me.
Consoles are a vehicle for entertainment and it is really up to each person how they use it.
As far as advertising, to my knowledge I haven't actually seen an ad on XBL and thought to myself, "I need to have that," when I really didn't. To me it's just like a tv commercial; I can't really avoid them, but that doesn't mean I have to buy what they are trying to sell me.
Sure games, can aspire to be more than just entertainment, but I play games to be entertained and have fun. That is my benchmark when I evaluate both consoles and games individually. I can be entertained by a game because it's beautiful or thought-provoking or artistic, but in the end entertainment value is the scale I evaluate consoles on. Evaluating Microsoft as a company is separate from evaluating the 360 as a console. Even in evaluating Microsoft as a company, I haven't looked at their finances, but creating a more efficient business model through advertising could actually be a good thing for the consumer. Microsoft could very easily provide a better or cheaper product because of the ad revenue, while adding a feature that most consumers don't really mind.stealth toilet said:
There will be a point where I mind but I don't think ads hanging in the background of the dashboardstealth toilet said:
Mai Valentine
Moderator
I have to say that it shames me a little to go back and read old topics and see how much of a fangirl I was. :sick
It's nice to have a couple more years on the subject to actually have more room for discussion based on experience.
Although I have to say that if my PS3 hadn't been a gift, I would only barely be getting one this year for Tales of Graces f. :lol Man it took them long enough to get a Tales game on it.
It's nice to have a couple more years on the subject to actually have more room for discussion based on experience.
Although I have to say that if my PS3 hadn't been a gift, I would only barely be getting one this year for Tales of Graces f. :lol Man it took them long enough to get a Tales game on it.
stealth toilet
Moderator
Mai Valentine said:
Hands down. I 100% agree. But if that is true, then HC's argument that consoles should be evaluated for their entertainment purposes only cannot also be true, because consoles are capable of, and are already doing, much more. And it is very sketchy to have education brought to you by (for ex.) Coca-Cola, because they will obviously support certain kinds of education over others (like education about all the charities they donate to versus education about all the sweatshops they operate, for example). This is actually a debate that is going on right now across my country and yours: should educational institutions be corporately sponsored (in many ways, they already are, but the debate now is should Coca-Cola get the right to blast students with advertisements in the halls between classes, and such).
Clearly I would say this is too reductionistic and the evaluation criteria too narrow, given Mai's evidence as well as my own.
Hands down. 100% agree. But an evaluation of Microsoft's console provides insight into Microsoft as a company, i.e. discovering the ideologies that are manifested in the 360 console speaks volumes about the company that produced it, and as a responsible democratic citizen it is incumbent upon you and everyone else to make purchasing decisions with a full understanding of what it is you are voting for with your dollars. Even in only evaluating the 360 console one can still evaluate elements of Microsoft's business plan (for example) as they can be extrapolated from the console itself. Advertising philosophy is one such extrapolation.
Yes, you can! This is the whole point! Alternatives exist (PS3, Wii, PC, etc) and if you choose to buy other consoles that don't have the same advertising philosophy as the 360's, then you will steer the invisible hand of the market in a direction that results in less advertising! That's why this is important and it should be a factor in HC's console purchasing decision and evaluation thereof, and it's part of the reason why I give the nod to Sony over Microsoft, because if I fear that commercials in games will become as ubiquitous as they are on regular television (one of the major reasons I subscribe to Netflix is because there are no advertisements), which would be very unfortunate indeed.
Mai Valentine
Moderator
What do you do, though, if you actually own the alternatives but prefer the 360? :lol
Exactly. It's an unrealistic alternative when the 360 {arguably} has the best games and best online service. There's not a whole lot of people that would choose the alternative just based on principles alone. I sure as heck wouldn't. If I am spending good money on a console you can be sure it's gonna be the one with the biggest and best game library.
stealth toilet
Moderator
Then you doom us all! :lol
Is your faith in other people really so low? You don't think other people make decisions based on their principles? I will say that my faith in the average gamer is dwindling rapidly...
But I believe we can do better and aspire to more! Or at least, we should, and we can all acknowledge that we should, even if we don't or are incapable of it.
Ok, first of all, biggest and best game library? Really? Aside from Gears, what does the 360 even have?
But minor quibbling aside, what you guys are saying kind of blows my mind. Like, don't you care what you pay attention to (or what you are forced to pay attention to - advertisements)? Doesn't it bother you a little that Microsoft has total control over this gateway into your home, and they can do whatever they want to it/with it, and so far their track record seems to be one of making changes that will help them profit financially at your expense, in addition to making you pay yearly for all of this?
I mean, wind the clock back ten years and pretend you're a Microsoft executive trying to pitch this console at E3. How do even begin trying to tell people that 1) you won't actually own your console, the content on your console, or the means by which you access content on your console, in any traditional sense 2) because you won't actually own any of that, Microsoft has the ability to change it at will whenever they want, and this could mean changing it in ways you might not like by, say, plastering a bunch of advertisements on there, and 3) you are actually going to pay them to do this, and if you don't want to pay (every year!), then you won't even have basic online functionality that has existed on PC for decades and will exist on every one of Microsoft's competitor's systems at no charge. Could you even convince yourself that Microsoft was heading in the right direction?
How can the alternatives to this not look at least a little more attractive? How can you not care!?
So exasperated right now. :lol
Is your faith in other people really so low? You don't think other people make decisions based on their principles? I will say that my faith in the average gamer is dwindling rapidly...
But I believe we can do better and aspire to more! Or at least, we should, and we can all acknowledge that we should, even if we don't or are incapable of it.
x2 said:
Ok, first of all, biggest and best game library? Really? Aside from Gears, what does the 360 even have?
But minor quibbling aside, what you guys are saying kind of blows my mind. Like, don't you care what you pay attention to (or what you are forced to pay attention to - advertisements)? Doesn't it bother you a little that Microsoft has total control over this gateway into your home, and they can do whatever they want to it/with it, and so far their track record seems to be one of making changes that will help them profit financially at your expense, in addition to making you pay yearly for all of this?
I mean, wind the clock back ten years and pretend you're a Microsoft executive trying to pitch this console at E3. How do even begin trying to tell people that 1) you won't actually own your console, the content on your console, or the means by which you access content on your console, in any traditional sense 2) because you won't actually own any of that, Microsoft has the ability to change it at will whenever they want, and this could mean changing it in ways you might not like by, say, plastering a bunch of advertisements on there, and 3) you are actually going to pay them to do this, and if you don't want to pay (every year!), then you won't even have basic online functionality that has existed on PC for decades and will exist on every one of Microsoft's competitor's systems at no charge. Could you even convince yourself that Microsoft was heading in the right direction?
How can the alternatives to this not look at least a little more attractive? How can you not care!?
So exasperated right now. :lol
Mai Valentine
Moderator
I am already a Microsoft slave so I think your point is moot. I freely admit that I haven't bothered to try OSs other than Windows. I also own a Zune and a Windows phone and really don't regret that when the alternative is being an Apple sheep.
stealth toilet
Moderator
Stealth I am simply being realistic. When it comes to the video game world, nobody cares about principles. This crap is too expensive to buy anything other than what is going to give you the most bang for your buck. For many people this gen, it was the 360. Nobody bought a 360 because it Microsoft, or because it wasn't Sony, they bought it because that is what most of their friends have and why would they want to be left out? So they can sit and play their PS3 alone when 10 of their friends are having fun on Live? Who would purposely do that just to "make a stand" against Microsoft? Nobody.
Mai Valentine
Moderator
x2 said:
Yeah that's pretty much my reasoning. Everyone I know has had a 360 at some point and has been on my Friends List. I've played with people all over the US. But I can almost still count on two hands the amount of people I have on PSN. And I don't even need fingers to count the amount of times I've played anything multiplayer on the PS3 (because I haven't done it yet).
I mean a lot of it you can chalk up to personal taste, since there are multiplayer games on the PS3 (I own some of them in fact) but just have found that I enjoy playing games on the 360 more.
stealth toilet
Moderator
The friends thing I get. It's the facebook effect: I'm on facebook because all my friends are on facebook, and if you ask them why they are on it they'll say the same thing.
A lot of my friends initially bought 360s this generation, but only a fraction of those paid for Live, and over time as 360s red-ringed and people got tired of renewing their Live accounts and the dashboard changed and more and more of their friends were buying multi-platform games on PS3 because of the online functionality, it became the dominant system among my friends. So I hear you when you say "all my friends own it so I do too," because it's fun to play games with your friends.
Nevertheless, I initially bought a PS3 when only two of my friends had it, while the rest owned 360s. Now, we all own PS3s. If they were asked why they owned PS3s they might answer "because my friends do too," but I wouldn't. If I were to answer I couldn't use that as an argument, because it wasn't true at the time. The reason I bought the PS3 was because it was the cheapest system that offered the most, and it was made by a company that was less reprehensible than the other. So this is now a response to X2, because I do make some purchasing decisions based on principles. I'm less concerned with purchasing whatever will make me a part of the group than I am with purchasing something that might persuade the group to be better.
That's not entirely true, of course. I'm not that concerned, or defiant, or eager to lead, or whatever. Nor am I that capable of doing so. But I think there are other people, other gamers, who will make better or even just different decisions based on new information, even if their friends aren't keen to follow (at first). I think it can happen, I know it has happened, and I believe it should and could happen more.
Buying a PS3 instead of a 360 for me was also about pure, greedy self interest, as it was the option that gave me the most bang for my buck. If you've owned a 360 for 5 years and paid for Live during that whole time, you could have purchased 2 PS3s. After the initial $299 investment (and a $2 HDMI cord), there haven't been any other expenses necessary to enjoy playing games on the system. No proprietary hard drives, no gold membership online accounts, no proprietary headset, etc.
So, in terms of bigger picture responsibility and principles, and in terms of simple self-interest, PS3 > 360.
A lot of my friends initially bought 360s this generation, but only a fraction of those paid for Live, and over time as 360s red-ringed and people got tired of renewing their Live accounts and the dashboard changed and more and more of their friends were buying multi-platform games on PS3 because of the online functionality, it became the dominant system among my friends. So I hear you when you say "all my friends own it so I do too," because it's fun to play games with your friends.
Nevertheless, I initially bought a PS3 when only two of my friends had it, while the rest owned 360s. Now, we all own PS3s. If they were asked why they owned PS3s they might answer "because my friends do too," but I wouldn't. If I were to answer I couldn't use that as an argument, because it wasn't true at the time. The reason I bought the PS3 was because it was the cheapest system that offered the most, and it was made by a company that was less reprehensible than the other. So this is now a response to X2, because I do make some purchasing decisions based on principles. I'm less concerned with purchasing whatever will make me a part of the group than I am with purchasing something that might persuade the group to be better.
That's not entirely true, of course. I'm not that concerned, or defiant, or eager to lead, or whatever. Nor am I that capable of doing so. But I think there are other people, other gamers, who will make better or even just different decisions based on new information, even if their friends aren't keen to follow (at first). I think it can happen, I know it has happened, and I believe it should and could happen more.
Buying a PS3 instead of a 360 for me was also about pure, greedy self interest, as it was the option that gave me the most bang for my buck. If you've owned a 360 for 5 years and paid for Live during that whole time, you could have purchased 2 PS3s. After the initial $299 investment (and a $2 HDMI cord), there haven't been any other expenses necessary to enjoy playing games on the system. No proprietary hard drives, no gold membership online accounts, no proprietary headset, etc.
So, in terms of bigger picture responsibility and principles, and in terms of simple self-interest, PS3 > 360.
Mai Valentine
Moderator
I'm on the Family Gold account with three other people, so we split it. I only pay $25 a year instead of $60.
retro junkie
All You bases are belong to us.
Mai Valentine said:
No sheep here. I don't use Windows and I don't use Apple. I'm a Linux Penguin.