Boycotting PS3 Malarky

Hedge · 30 Oct 2006 at 12:41

Ive read, that in light of the whole Lik Sang situation that some people claim to be boycotting the PS3..

I really cant see anyone standing by this claim whatsoever. Do you honestly think that if the ps3 proves to be a great console that you arent gonna buy one just because they screwed Lik Sang over?

I dunno why people say such things, cos its very unlikely that they will stand their ground when its released.

NokkonWud · 30 Oct 2006 at 12:46

People always spout one thing then don't stand by it, it happens all the time and has happened on these forums many-a-time.

Fortyseven · 30 Oct 2006 at 12:46

I don't think that the boycot is going to affect the PS3 sales, but I do believe it when people say that they won't buy one because of what Sony did. It would possibly make them feel better but not supporting such a company. There are other options out thereso even if the PS3 is an amazing console, people can still choose not to buy it.
I will not be getting a PS3 because I don't see how it is going to be better in terms of gaming than the 360 (To be honest, I haven't even looked into it.)

fini · 30 Oct 2006 at 12:52

I don't think anyone's said they're boycotting the PS3 per se - people are boycotting Sony products full stop.

I am and I don't see any reason why I wont stick by it. I was offered a really decent deal on a Sony television the other day and turned it down for that reason.

fini

Kohaashi · 30 Oct 2006 at 12:55

Sony just aren't what they used to be.

Too many times at recent have Sony been relying on their brand name to sell their gear.

I've had enough of Sony's **** so now take my custom elsewhere, nothing personal to the PS3.

MoNkeE · 30 Oct 2006 at 12:55

You'll find a very high percentage of these people have been against the PS3 from the beginning - it makes it look like they have the moral high ground, rather than just following the current trend

-RaZ

Mr-White · 30 Oct 2006 at 12:57

i'll be standing by my boycott, i've never liked sony since released that heap into the gaming market they called the "playstation". they released cheap 2nd rate games and nintendo and sega had to compete with the pricing and i think the gaming industry suffered because of it and ultimately pushed sega to stop selling hardware to concerntrate on games.

MW

Fortyseven · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:03

Mr-White said:
i'll be standing by my boycott, i've never liked sony since released that heap into the gaming market they called the "playstation". they released cheap 2nd rate games and nintendo and sega had to compete with the pricing and i think the gaming industry suffered because of it and ultimately pushed sega to stop selling hardware to concerntrate on games.

MW

To be honest, the majority of games made for the Playstation weren't made by Sony themselves which, I guess, saved them a lot of hassle. Yes, you can blame them for allowing the games to come out on their console, but if people buy them then why not sell them?
I would like to say that pushing Sega to concentrate on games only would make their games better...but it hasn't.

Phil99 · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:10

Mr-White said:
i'll be standing by my boycott, i've never liked sony since released that heap into the gaming market they called the "playstation". they released cheap 2nd rate games and nintendo and sega had to compete with the pricing and i think the gaming industry suffered because of it and ultimately pushed sega to stop selling hardware to concerntrate on games.

MW

oh, I didn't realise it was Sony specifically that released all Playstation games, or did they just tell developers to make second rate games because Sony are clearly evil and are completely ruining the gaming market?

I guess the Playstation brand is a household name because Sony released all those second rate games so everyone rushed out and bought them for the sake of it.

If Sony hadn't released the Playstation, would the gaming market be so big today? Would Microsoft have gone in with the XBOX if Sony hadn't released the Playstation?

I'm not a Sony fanboy and probably wont be getting the PS3 purely down to the price of it (and I already have a 360), but to boycott an entire company over something like that seems a little silly.

fini · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:13

Phil99 said:
but to boycott an entire company over something like that seems a little silly.

Sony's business practices over the last couple of years have been nothing short of diabolical. Rootkits, shutting down liksang, blatant lies over the performance of their consoles, pushing release dates further and further back, practically putting a bomb in every home (their batteries)... the list goes on.

fini

Mr-White · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:18

sony choose what games they want to release so at the end of the day it is down.

sony is a big brand in its self but the reason it has such a big name in the gaming industry is because of it's initial cheapness it became a hit with the kids because of that cheapness not for its quality of games. The PS2 was aimed at that market hence why it was named the PS2. sony thought if they named it anything else it wouldnt sell as well as the kids wouldnt associate it with the playstation. i'm just hoping the PS3 is good as it's hyped up to be.

MW

Kohaashi · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:22

Mr-White said:
i'm just hoping the PS3 is good as it's hyped up to be.

All I've heard about the PS3 is Down-Hype, which infact isn't hype atall? lol

MoNkeE · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:28

fini said:
Sony's business practices over the last couple of years have been nothing short of diabolical. Rootkits, shutting down liksang, blatant lies over the performance of their consoles, pushing release dates further and further back, practically putting a bomb in every home (their batteries)... the list goes on.

fini

For a company their size, which dabbles in just about every sector of home entertainment, it's impressive that they haven't made such a blunder as the batteries before now. It was a one off mistake, which they've since corrected; can't really blame that on their business princibles...

Lying over the consoles is pretty bad - but that's just one sector of Sony; I wouldn't avoid purchasing a fantastic TV made by Sony due to their marketing team behind the consoles!

Mr-White said:
sony choose what games they want to release so at the end of the day it is down.

sony is a big brand in its self but the reason it has such a big name in the gaming industry is because of it's initial cheapness it became a hit with the kids because of that cheapness not for its quality of games. The PS2 was aimed at that market hence why it was named the PS2. sony thought if they named it anything else it wouldnt sell as well as the kids wouldnt associate it with the playstation. i'm just hoping the PS3 is good as it's hyped up to be.

MW

Do Sony actually chose what games to release? My understanding is that the software developer purchases the license, then can do what they wish in regards to what their end result will be.

The cheapness of the games did not reflect the quality of the game at all - the Playstation had a lot of fantastic games. If games were cheaper to knock out than that of their competetors, they're more than allowed to reduce the cost for the customer!

And you can't really pick fault with their naming conventions - basically every console does it! Sony uses the Playstation prefix in all of their names, Microsoft uses the word "Xbox" and Nintendo use their company name (nintendo DS, N64, Super Nintendo). Kids are going to know that the Nintendo Wii is the new Nintendo console just as easily as they're going to know thw PS3 is the new Sony console.

-RaZ

dirtydog · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:29

fini said:
blatant lies over the performance of their consoles

Didn't MS say all 360 games would have 'free AA'? And that all 360 games would be rendered internally at 720p? Oh and that all 360 games would work on the core system without a HDD. All three of those have already been proved wrong.

The Sony is the devil vs Microsoft is whiter than white thing is very silly. MS's business practices are infamous as well, they are like the Borg the way they have assimilated smaller companies and their technologies over the years. Yet I use Windows and I have an Xbox, and I love both.

oweneades · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:34

dirtydog said:
Didn't MS say all 360 games would have 'free AA'? And that all 360 games would be rendered internally at 720p? Oh and that all 360 games would work on the core system without a HDD. All three of those have already been proved wrong.

IIRC Microsoft only stated that the 360 allows for 'free AA' in games however it is down to the developer to utilize this ability properly.

Also the 360 itself natively renders every game (except PGR3 for some reason :confused:

) at 720p and then scales either way.

And the last point well I can see your point. But I have a premium anyway

JUMPURS · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:39

oweneades said:
IIRC Microsoft only stated that the 360 allows for 'free AA' in games however it is down to the developer to utilize this ability properly.

Didnt peter moore say 'The end of jaggies is here'
Every xbox game was going to run at least 2x AA (think it was initially 4x but they changed it to 2x)

Also live is ment to be a cheat and glitch free environment, but isnt either

Manlove is my forte · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:39

I am going one of 3 ways on this.

1) Only buying Pre-owned PS3 stuff and there for never increasing Sonys sales or contributing directly to their profits. I will not be buying a console until it affordable (which means under £150 with a AAA title)

This is my Personal Protest and I am 90% likely to do this

2)Buying as many PS3s as I can get my dirty hands on and Ebaying them for ££££ This will be done at launch.
This is the capatialist in me and I am only 9% likely to do this (depends entirely on Launch Volumes)

3)Not bother with the ps3 - 1% likely

Edit: With regards to other Sony Products. I already avoid them so I probably will not change my shopping habits drastically on this.

Films and movies will be purchased on their merits not on who funded their production.

Moonpie2 · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:41

I was not getting a PS3 in the first place, but after the Lik-sang fiasco, I am certainly going to "try to avoid" Sony products if at all possible.

If I get a new TV I'm going to exhaust all the Toshiba, Panasonic etc.. options first for example.

gjrc · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:41

people will always have gripes at big corporations, due to its size Sony cant please all of the people all of the time, its just the nature if the beast

oweneades · 30 Oct 2006 at 13:49

JUMPURS said:
Didnt peter moore say 'The end of jaggies is here'
Every xbox game was going to run at least 2x AA (think it was initially 4x but they changed it to 2x)

Also live is ment to be a cheat and glitch free environment, but isnt either

No idea tbh I always read that the xenos allows for 'free' AA up to a maximum of 4x however it is all down to the game developers and what they decide to use (depending on time costraints etc).

Also I believe if the 'free' AA is used then certain other features have to take a backseat. I can't remember where I read this but I can definately remember reading it.

Having said all of that the main issue I noticed with the launch lineup of 360 games (and something we could possibly see with the launch lineup of PS3 games) is the complete lack of AF.