MLD Archives #2: The end justifies the means.

Since most of us are gamers from a consumer point of view, naturally many of us have a resentment to Microsoft for them making a console that breaks down. Sure it isn't bad now, it only happens to a select unlucky and those who foolishly play non-stop for a dozen hours at a time. But the point is that millions of people, many on multiple occasions, have experienced the red ring of death, including me. PS3 fanboy propaganda would have you believe that Microsoft knew their console was faulty (true) and released it upon the market because they don't care about the quality of their product (untrue). That same PS3 fanboy propaganda also does a surprisingly good job of concealing the fact that the origional Xbox was more reliable then the PS2. In the end, I see that Microsoft was simply in a tuff position in 2005 and had to make a difficult choice. It was either release early with faulty hardware and ensure healthy competition, or release later (with reliable hardware) and loose. It ain't pretty, but the end justifies the means. Here is my rationale.

The PS2 had a 70% marketshare. Microsoft was the new player in the industry. Amazingly, even without Japan, they were managing to outsell the Nintendo Gamecube worldwide by a few million units. However hardware and software sales flopped compared to the PS2. Multiplats, and even exclusives (with the exception of Halo), no matter how superior to any PS2 game, only sold a fraction of what the PS2 offerings sold. The Xbox never was sold for profit as Microsoft had to cut the price to compete with the PS2 price. Many believe that Microsoft quit the generation early because they simply didn't care. It is really because they were drowning and needed out. You guys can thank Sony for that.

Microsoft noticed that one factor to the PS2's success was that it released one year sooner then the Gamecube and their Xbox. With one year comes many perks..... notably a higher install base, the 3rd party industry being familiar with your console, and finally the 3rd party industry making more exclusives/timed exclusives due to said install base. The perks of being out first, coupled with the fact that PS2 was choking all life out of the competition made the decision clear for Microsoft. They had to get a head start on Sony at all costs.

Microsoft had the 360 design ready to go in 2005, but there wasn't enough quality control testing to truly work out the bugs concerning overheating issues. No corporation is perfect. No corporation has unlimited resources, not even Microsoft. For Microsoft there was simply an issue of time, or lack there of. In the end, they chose to release early, knowing there were still issues to be worked out. The mentality was that through the years, they would improve the reliability so that in a few years the average 360 sold would have tolerable failure rates. Today that is largely true with the 360 Slim. PS3 fanboy propaganda has done an excellent job showing some 360 Slim failures, neglecting to say that the failures were achieved by leaving the 360 on non-stop until said failures occured. While Microsoft obviously isn't getting much sympathy from gamers who suffered hardware faulires, I can at least see Microsoft in the position they were in. No corporation likes bad PR. Bad PR (public relations) has the potential to ruin your brand. Pissed off customers traditionally aren't return buyers and will say their negative experience to their peers. Microsoft, realizing that the problem was bigger then expected, had to pay one billion dollars to pay for a 3 year warranty program. Do you people really think Microsoft wanted this to happen? It sucks for everybody involved, both gamers and Microsoft, but they knew it had to be done. For the sake of preventing another Sony monopoly, they had to do it.

I myself had the red ring of death with my 2007 launch Elite 360. It was while I was playing an online match of Halo Wars. My honest reaction when I saw that red ring for the first time? It was "Hmm, guess I am going out tonight". I knew that my console was covered by the 3 year warranty so I wasn't angry at that. Even if it wasn't I would still pay for a repair simply because I know exactly the mentality behind Microsoft releasing their console with a high failure rate. That, and that 360 has games that I want to play, namely Halo Wars at the time. It is also just a gaming console. It doesn't play me, I play it. People who get overly upset, even brake their 360 are people who show signs of gaming addiction and show they depend on their 360. These are people who have to have their gaming fix every night or get that spot on the leaderboards or get a high kill/death ratio. These are people who are played by their 360, not the other way around. I simply use my 360 for some fun when i'm home for the night and when all work is done for the day. My console got the red ring, and I didn't care. I went out with friends that night. I called Microsoft the next day and arranged for a replacement. I didn't even play my 360 right away when I got it back. I guess the point of this is that the red ring should only upset you if you have to pay for a repair fee. Otherwise it is just a gaming console. You don't need it and it shouldn't have control over you.

Today their strategy largely paid off. The end did justify the means. We now live in a generation with healthy competition. Nintendo, while the undisputed winner of the generation, isn't holding a monopoly like when Sony was winning. Due to the Wii taking the casual/motion control route this generation, many core gamers feel the Wii simply isn't for them. Since mostly casuals and Nintendo fans are the main customers of the Wii, this doesn't in any major way impact the market of Xbox 360 and PS3, which mostly appeal to the core market. As of now, the 360 holds a lead over the PS3, but the PS3 isn't that far into last place. Competition between these two consoles is healthy as neither has a clear advantage over the other in the market. Hardware failures are still there today, but they are nothing like they were in 2005. All though history will remember the 360 for being extremely unreliable, at least Microsoft can operate in its 5th year and beyond knowing the problem is largely behind them, and that they helped ensure proper competition in the industry.

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

I've had my PS2 since 2001 and it never bricked on me.

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

Sorry, I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.
So obviously the PS2 is reliable and your experiences are irrelevant. Does that make sense to you? Thats what your basically saying to me.
And did I say the PS2, no, I said the DreamCast.

Freemon34-YT wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

I've had my PS2 since 2001 and it never bricked on me.

I know some people who still have their launch 360. The PS2 was the second most unreliable console ever made, and it didn't have a good warranty either. I know some people who have gone through multiple PS2's, just cause 1 here and there didn't it doesn't mean they never broke.

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

Sorry, I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.
So obviously the PS2 is reliable and your experiences are irrelevant. Does that make sense to you? Thats what your basically saying to me.
And did I say the PS2, no, I said the DreamCast.

You're talking about hardware, therefore PS2.

Quote :

I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.

Quote :

So obviously the PS2 is reliable

Yeah that totally proves it.

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

Sorry, I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.
So obviously the PS2 is reliable and your experiences are irrelevant. Does that make sense to you? Thats what your basically saying to me.
And did I say the PS2, no, I said the DreamCast.

You're talking about hardware, therefore PS2.

Quote :

I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.

Quote :

So obviously the PS2 is reliable

Yeah that totally proves it.

Dude, double standards.
"I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?"
And I only said that to mimick what you said.
The PS2 is more reliable then the old 360.
Also consider there are 120 Million PS2 sold. Some are bound to break. But they never had anything called Ps2 of death.

I was googling and I honestly can't find ANYTHING saying the PS2 has a bad failure rate.

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

Sorry, I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.
So obviously the PS2 is reliable and your experiences are irrelevant. Does that make sense to you? Thats what your basically saying to me.
And did I say the PS2, no, I said the DreamCast.

You're talking about hardware, therefore PS2.

Quote :

I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.

Quote :

So obviously the PS2 is reliable

Yeah that totally proves it.

Dude, double standards.
"I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?"
And I only said that to mimick what you said.
The PS2 is more reliable then the old 360.
Also consider there are 120 Million PS2 sold. Some are bound to break. But they never had anything called Ps2 of death.

It's more reliable than the old 360, but is it reliable? No, DRE plagued the fats, and sometimes they'd shit out and stop working.

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

Sorry, I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.
So obviously the PS2 is reliable and your experiences are irrelevant. Does that make sense to you? Thats what your basically saying to me.
And did I say the PS2, no, I said the DreamCast.

You're talking about hardware, therefore PS2.

Quote :

I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.

Quote :

So obviously the PS2 is reliable

Yeah that totally proves it.

Dude, double standards.
"I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?"
And I only said that to mimick what you said.
The PS2 is more reliable then the old 360.
Also consider there are 120 Million PS2 sold. Some are bound to break. But they never had anything called Ps2 of death.

It's more reliable than the old 360, but is it reliable? No, DRE plagued the fats, and sometimes they'd shit out and stop working.

Ok, not the point. I said DreamCast because it came out first, like the 360. I'm just saying MLD's excuse is not justifiable if Sega could do it.

Freemon34-YT wrote:

I was googling and I honestly can't find ANYTHING saying the PS2 has a bad failure rate.

http://forums.obsidian.net/index.php?showtopic=43743

http://forums.ngemu.com/hardware-discussion/18992-howly-crap-ps2-defect-rate-30-40-percent.html

PS2 30 - 40% defect rate? Yeah that's not bad.

BlackStigma wrote:

Freemon34-YT wrote:

I was googling and I honestly can't find ANYTHING saying the PS2 has a bad failure rate.

http://forums.obsidian.net/index.php?showtopic=43743

http://forums.ngemu.com/hardware-discussion/18992-howly-crap-ps2-defect-rate-30-40-percent.html

PS2 30 - 40% defect rate? Yeah that's not bad.

lol, so your links are from a guy who bought a PS2 and had it break on him after 5 years. And a Guy who sold old PS2s from a small store.

xD

Freemon34-YT wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

Freemon34-YT wrote:

I was googling and I honestly can't find ANYTHING saying the PS2 has a bad failure rate.

http://forums.obsidian.net/index.php?showtopic=43743

http://forums.ngemu.com/hardware-discussion/18992-howly-crap-ps2-defect-rate-30-40-percent.html

PS2 30 - 40% defect rate? Yeah that's not bad.

lol, so your links are from a guy who bought a PS2 and had it break on him after 5 years. And a Guy who sold old PS2s from a small store.

xD

Yeah in the first link the OP was complaining about it, then almost half the people who posted said they had problems. In the second link the PS2 has a 30 - 40% failure rate. You are trying to discredit links, you aren't getting anywhere.

BlackStigma wrote:

Freemon34-YT wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

Freemon34-YT wrote:

I was googling and I honestly can't find ANYTHING saying the PS2 has a bad failure rate.

http://forums.obsidian.net/index.php?showtopic=43743

http://forums.ngemu.com/hardware-discussion/18992-howly-crap-ps2-defect-rate-30-40-percent.html

PS2 30 - 40% defect rate? Yeah that's not bad.

lol, so your links are from a guy who bought a PS2 and had it break on him after 5 years. And a Guy who sold old PS2s from a small store.

xD

Yeah in the first link the OP was complaining about it, then almost half the people who posted said they had problems. In the second link the PS2 has a 30 - 40% failure rate. You are trying to discredit links, you aren't getting anywhere.

did you read it. The guy said he is in a SMALL business that sells USED PS2s. And 30-40% of the buyers want refunds. Its like determining the failure rate of a console just by checking the returns of used consoles at 1 gamestop.

Freemon34-YT wrote:

did you read it. The guy said he is in a SMALL business that sells USED PS2s. And 30-40% of the buyers want refunds. Its like determining the failure rate of a console just by checking the returns of used consoles at 1 gamestop.

Quote :

I'd like to point out that Microsoft was planning on a price drop first. Sony dropped its price as a counter tactic based on a leak, nearly overnight. Sony pulled it off so fast that retail stores barely even had time to react. We were still selling pre-owned PS2s at the same price as new yesterday cuz the home office had no time to update the price.

Nope those 30-40% weren't necessarily bought used. He said that Sony did a price drop and they were selling their pre owned ones at the same price as the new because they hadn't had the chance to update the price. And so what if it's only from 1 store? There are some surveys for the 360 failure rate. Should those be discredited because they are only from 1 website? That argument holds no weight.

Oh and this isn't addressed to you, just something funny and ironic I found on there.

Quote :

Lesson: everyone thinks Microsoft is bad; you should all get on the inside and see the **** Sony pulls. Sony is a total bastard compared to Microsoft. Sony does not care about the consumer; they just pump the stuff out, everyone else (including retailers) be damned - and they can do it "because we're sony." And they get away with it, and Joe Blow who loves his playstation doesn't even hear about it. Microsoft only screws over other companies; Sony screws everyone over.

lol, that's like what PS3 fanboys say about Microsoft now.

BlackStigma wrote:

Freemon34-YT wrote:

did you read it. The guy said he is in a SMALL business that sells USED PS2s. And 30-40% of the buyers want refunds. Its like determining the failure rate of a console just by checking the returns of used consoles at 1 gamestop.

Quote :

I'd like to point out that Microsoft was planning on a price drop first. Sony dropped its price as a counter tactic based on a leak, nearly overnight. Sony pulled it off so fast that retail stores barely even had time to react. We were still selling pre-owned PS2s at the same price as new yesterday cuz the home office had no time to update the price.

Nope those 30-40% weren't necessarily bought used. He said that Sony did a price drop and they were selling their pre owned ones at the same price as the new because they hadn't had the chance to update the price. And so what if it's only from 1 store? There are some surveys for the 360 failure rate. Should those be discredited because they are only from 1 website? That argument holds no weight.

Oh and this isn't addressed to you, just something funny and ironic I found on there.

Quote :

Lesson: everyone thinks Microsoft is bad; you should all get on the inside and see the **** Sony pulls. Sony is a total bastard compared to Microsoft. Sony does not care about the consumer; they just pump the stuff out, everyone else (including retailers) be damned - and they can do it "because we're sony." And they get away with it, and Joe Blow who loves his playstation doesn't even hear about it. Microsoft only screws over other companies; Sony screws everyone over.

lol, that's like what PS3 fanboys say about Microsoft now.

No those surveys shouldn't count if its from the company and not small business like the ones in that forum(which was posted in early 2002 BTW). But if its a huge survey with thousands of ppl and not just from a small store or a small survey yes it should. Now I can't find one true source that has a survey the size of the ones that we're getting this generation, its still a reliable system.

Freemon34-YT wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

Freemon34-YT wrote:

did you read it. The guy said he is in a SMALL business that sells USED PS2s. And 30-40% of the buyers want refunds. Its like determining the failure rate of a console just by checking the returns of used consoles at 1 gamestop.

Quote :

I'd like to point out that Microsoft was planning on a price drop first. Sony dropped its price as a counter tactic based on a leak, nearly overnight. Sony pulled it off so fast that retail stores barely even had time to react. We were still selling pre-owned PS2s at the same price as new yesterday cuz the home office had no time to update the price.

Nope those 30-40% weren't necessarily bought used. He said that Sony did a price drop and they were selling their pre owned ones at the same price as the new because they hadn't had the chance to update the price. And so what if it's only from 1 store? There are some surveys for the 360 failure rate. Should those be discredited because they are only from 1 website? That argument holds no weight.

Oh and this isn't addressed to you, just something funny and ironic I found on there.

Quote :

Lesson: everyone thinks Microsoft is bad; you should all get on the inside and see the **** Sony pulls. Sony is a total bastard compared to Microsoft. Sony does not care about the consumer; they just pump the stuff out, everyone else (including retailers) be damned - and they can do it "because we're sony." And they get away with it, and Joe Blow who loves his playstation doesn't even hear about it. Microsoft only screws over other companies; Sony screws everyone over.

lol, that's like what PS3 fanboys say about Microsoft now.

No those surveys shouldn't count if its from the company and not small business like the ones in that forum(which was posted in early 2002 BTW). But if its a huge survey with thousands of ppl and not just from a small store or a small survey yes it should. Now I can't find one true source that has a survey the size of the ones that we're getting this generation, its still a reliable system.

He said 8 PS2's were returned within 1 week. If it's a 40% failure rate that's 80 PS2's sold each month. 160 every 2 months. If it's a 30% failure rate that's like 96 PS2s sold each month. 192 every two months. So we are talking about 100's of PS2. It may not be 1000's, but it more than validates a survey.

Would such a "reliable" system have gotten a lawsuit filed against it's company?
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6139482.html

You know how many lawsuits get approved every year. All you need is one person to call it a horrible senario. for example, last year a person sucessfully sued McDonalds because they spilled their coffee in a car accident and her cup didn't have "caution: May Be" Hot on it. People can sue and win at almost everything. MS was getting lawsuits up the ass about hte RROD, so to make sure no one got a sucessful lawsuit they gave every xbox user a 3 year warrenty. Plus again with that 1 article its old systems, not factory made systems straight from Sony. and to be honest don't you think this "arguement" is getting a little out of hand. Its a console that finished first last gen, and has very little relevence this gen.

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

Sorry, I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.
So obviously the PS2 is reliable and your experiences are irrelevant. Does that make sense to you? Thats what your basically saying to me.
And did I say the PS2, no, I said the DreamCast.

You're talking about hardware, therefore PS2.

Quote :

I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.

Quote :

So obviously the PS2 is reliable

Yeah that totally proves it.

Dude, double standards.
"I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?"
And I only said that to mimick what you said.
The PS2 is more reliable then the old 360.
Also consider there are 120 Million PS2 sold. Some are bound to break. But they never had anything called Ps2 of death.

It's more reliable than the old 360, but is it reliable? No, DRE plagued the fats, and sometimes they'd shit out and stop working.

Ok, not the point. I said DreamCast because it came out first, like the 360. I'm just saying MLD's excuse is not justifiable if Sega could do it.

your comparing different generations........and are thinking about this from a strict gamer point of view, rather then seeing this from a business sense. Understandable but still........

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Well it was either they launched the console early with a bad failure rate but also with an amazing games library or released it late and only got scraps of what there was to offer in the gaming industry.

It is a fail, for sure. It's inexcusable of course but I don't see too many people complaining. Even before the warranty scheme was put in place people were getting their 360's returned.

And those few unlucky ones who weren't able to get theirs replaced were still willing to buy themselves another one. The console is so good it just seemed worth it.

No one covered up the rrod either. MS weren't covering it up, no one was. Everyone knew this system had a huge failure rate. It's consumer's own fault if they bought this system even when warned of it's tendency to die.

Tbh I'm very glad that MS did what they did. I prefer most 360 games to ps3 games, and if ps3 launched before it then ps3 would've dominated and the xbox 360 would've lacked in it's gaming library. I bought a 360 late in it's life, when the Jasper was introduced. I play it sensibly, I never leave it on all day, the only exception was when I played Oblivion one day for over 10 hours. The system was fine and it has all the games I could possibly want.

Yes I feel sympathy for early 360 consumers and they shouldn't have had to go through what they did but look at the end result! The Xbox 360 is ahead in sales over the ps3 (sure only by a few million but it is ahead no matter which way you look at it) and has the most games and what I believe is the best online service ever known.

I sure as hell can't complain.

GeneralMLD wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

Sorry, I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.
So obviously the PS2 is reliable and your experiences are irrelevant. Does that make sense to you? Thats what your basically saying to me.
And did I say the PS2, no, I said the DreamCast.

You're talking about hardware, therefore PS2.

Quote :

I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.

Quote :

So obviously the PS2 is reliable

Yeah that totally proves it.

Dude, double standards.
"I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?"
And I only said that to mimick what you said.
The PS2 is more reliable then the old 360.
Also consider there are 120 Million PS2 sold. Some are bound to break. But they never had anything called Ps2 of death.

It's more reliable than the old 360, but is it reliable? No, DRE plagued the fats, and sometimes they'd shit out and stop working.

Ok, not the point. I said DreamCast because it came out first, like the 360. I'm just saying MLD's excuse is not justifiable if Sega could do it.

your comparing different generations........and are thinking about this from a strict gamer point of view, rather then seeing this from a business sense. Understandable but still........

But, you always go back to different gens. You say the PS2 has unreliable hardware and inferior hardware to the Xbox, but, no one cared..

demondragondude wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Well it was either they launched the console early with a bad failure rate but also with an amazing games library or released it late and only got scraps of what there was to offer in the gaming industry.

It is a fail, for sure. It's inexcusable of course but I don't see too many people complaining. Even before the warranty scheme was put in place people were getting their 360's returned.

And those few unlucky ones who weren't able to get theirs replaced were still willing to buy themselves another one. The console is so good it just seemed worth it.

No one covered up the rrod either. MS weren't covering it up, no one was. Everyone knew this system had a huge failure rate. It's consumer's own fault if they bought this system even when warned of it's tendency to die.

Tbh I'm very glad that MS did what they did. I prefer most 360 games to ps3 games, and if ps3 launched before it then ps3 would've dominated and the xbox 360 would've lacked in it's gaming library. I bought a 360 late in it's life, when the Jasper was introduced. I play it sensibly, I never leave it on all day, the only exception was when I played Oblivion one day for over 10 hours. The system was fine and it has all the games I could possibly want.

Yes I feel sympathy for early 360 consumers and they shouldn't have had to go through what they did but look at the end result! The Xbox 360 is ahead in sales over the ps3 (sure only by a few million but it is ahead no matter which way you look at it) and has the most games and what I believe is the best online service ever known.

I sure as hell can't complain.

lol same..i dont play it all day,mostly few hours then few hours break and i repeat that,but when i got dragon age origins,it really addicted me and i played it all the day,it was that fun,thats the same with oblivion and probably mass effect 1 and 2,rpgs are fun as hell

ColorfulNose wrote:

GeneralMLD wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

Sorry, I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.
So obviously the PS2 is reliable and your experiences are irrelevant. Does that make sense to you? Thats what your basically saying to me.
And did I say the PS2, no, I said the DreamCast.

You're talking about hardware, therefore PS2.

Quote :

I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.

Quote :

So obviously the PS2 is reliable

Yeah that totally proves it.

Dude, double standards.
"I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?"
And I only said that to mimick what you said.
The PS2 is more reliable then the old 360.
Also consider there are 120 Million PS2 sold. Some are bound to break. But they never had anything called Ps2 of death.

It's more reliable than the old 360, but is it reliable? No, DRE plagued the fats, and sometimes they'd shit out and stop working.

Ok, not the point. I said DreamCast because it came out first, like the 360. I'm just saying MLD's excuse is not justifiable if Sega could do it.

your comparing different generations........and are thinking about this from a strict gamer point of view, rather then seeing this from a business sense. Understandable but still........

But, you always go back to different gens. You say the PS2 has unreliable hardware and inferior hardware to the Xbox, but, no one cared..

Let me put it this way. Sure Dreamcast and 360 were each first out. However the dreamcast was built nothing like 360 is. Dreamcast had by far the least graphics power potential, even PS2 could outdo it by a lot. Never mind the slightly more powerful Gamecube and mammoth Xbox. Less power under the hood is perhaps what led them to making the console faster, and since it didnt push the console too hard, overheating issues were no problem. he 360 however has a lot of power, way more then Wii and almost as much as the PS3. Overheating issues are bound to happen unless sufficient quality control was done. But again if you read my article Microsoft simply didn't have the time.

GeneralMLD wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

GeneralMLD wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

ColorfulNose wrote:

Sorry, but thats no excuse.
The DreamCast came out before all the competitors, but, they didn't have faulty hardware.
The DreamCast was in the same position as Microsoft was in 2005. But, their hardware was fine.

Yeah cause the PS2 was so reliable right? I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?

Sorry, I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.
So obviously the PS2 is reliable and your experiences are irrelevant. Does that make sense to you? Thats what your basically saying to me.
And did I say the PS2, no, I said the DreamCast.

You're talking about hardware, therefore PS2.

Quote :

I got my PS2 on launch and it still works.

Quote :

So obviously the PS2 is reliable

Yeah that totally proves it.

Dude, double standards.
"I guess it crapping out on me 4 times was just misfortune right?"
And I only said that to mimick what you said.
The PS2 is more reliable then the old 360.
Also consider there are 120 Million PS2 sold. Some are bound to break. But they never had anything called Ps2 of death.

It's more reliable than the old 360, but is it reliable? No, DRE plagued the fats, and sometimes they'd shit out and stop working.

Ok, not the point. I said DreamCast because it came out first, like the 360. I'm just saying MLD's excuse is not justifiable if Sega could do it.

your comparing different generations........and are thinking about this from a strict gamer point of view, rather then seeing this from a business sense. Understandable but still........

But, you always go back to different gens. You say the PS2 has unreliable hardware and inferior hardware to the Xbox, but, no one cared..

Let me put it this way. Sure Dreamcast and 360 were each first out. However the dreamcast was built nothing like 360 is. Dreamcast had by far the least graphics power potential, even PS2 could outdo it by a lot. Never mind the slightly more powerful Gamecube and mammoth Xbox. Less power under the hood is perhaps what led them to making the console faster, and since it didnt push the console too hard, overheating issues were no problem. he 360 however has a lot of power, way more then Wii and almost as much as the PS3. Overheating issues are bound to happen unless sufficient quality control was done. But again if you read my article Microsoft simply didn't have the time.

No offense, but, I honestly don't believe that they just couldn't have placed the fans in a better place because they didn't have the time. The fans were flawed and a minor redesign wouldn't take so much time.