Frequently Asked Forum Questions
Search the HBO News Archives Any All Exact		Search the Halo Updates DBs Halo Halo2		Bungie Webcam HBO XBL Gamertags *Ar's Simple HTML Guide Shishka's Guide for Newcomers The Lowdown on Download Accelerators Red Loser's Anti-Spamming Guide Egg FAQ | More Egg Stuff c0ld's Movie Starter Guide Shishka's HaloPC Pre-Release FAQ 3.1 AutoMagic 117 StripzMaker
Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts

Why PCDestroyer is a mental midget LONGGGGGG
Posted By: protexts <protexts@cs.com>	Date: 4/18/02 4:46 a.m.
In Response To: Re: Geez... why the negative spin? (PCDestroyer) : I'm not saying some of your views aren't correct... but it would be better : received (by some) if it were said by someone non-affiliated. Whether it is well received or not has nothing to do with the argument put forth. : I would say the same if this post had come from a diehard PC gamer... or : someone who works for a PC Gaming Magazine (online or newsstand)... Then you would be engaging not in the argument but the person behind the argument, which is just an ad hominem fallacy. : I tend to believe that Microsoft is a company that is only out to make a : buck, and only responds to customer feedback and supports those : customers... when it means they will make a buck. And this is different from what large company? : Bungie has supported it's community of gamers for many many many years : without a thought towards a financial goal really... Oh really, so they were kind of like ummm Jesus Christ or perhaps Mother Theresa. Making games for the love of it -- screw food, shelter, and a nice ride. You really need to wake up. I mean, it is and it : isn't... because in doing so you built a loyal fanbase... so much so that : you could shite in a box and people would buy it... (but the real question : is would Matt's shite be worth more than say a Marty shite..? lol) NO, that's not a real question because Halo isn't crap. It's the exact opposite. : But Microsoft does things like intentionally hold back things that are : ready... or development to get something ready... if it means releasing it : into a market primed to buy it at a later date. : This is the position I hold on Mac/PC Halo... because the Mac/PC version will : NOT come out until Microsoft is satisfied with the sales of Halo on the : XBox in Europe and the rest of the world. It doesn't even come out in : Japan until May... so it will be at least August or September before they : approach the MILLION mark for those markets (EUR and JPN). Halo sells : XBoxes... because people that can't wait for it on Mac/PC have bought an : XBox just to get to play it. If it were out for Mac/PC... it would not : have reached the Million mark on the XBox as quickly... and not as many : XBoxes would have been sold... guaranteed. : The proof for this? Name the other Million-copy sellers from Microsoft or any : 3rd Party game developer... for the XBox. There aren't any... and which : one is closest? Oddworld? I mean... come on. : It is a marketing strategy. So is that like a mathematical proof? Let's rephrase your argument and cut out the rhetoric to see what you are saying. Unstated Premise: A company that is unable to sell more than one million copies of a game will hold back on the release date of that game for the PC market. Premise: The only game sold for the Xbox that reached over a million sales is Xbox. Conclusion: They are holding back the sale of Xbox for PC/Mac. Now what I want to know is, what is your evidence for the first premise? From whose a$$ did you pull this premise? Where are your facts? And DON'T RESTATE YOUR CONCLUSION OR PREMISE IN ANOTHER FORM AS EVIDENCE. Give us some insider information, not your hackneyed interpretation of what's going on. : And if Bungie people say "That's not true, because we don't have Halo : for Mac/PC ready... we haven't done this... and we haven't done : that..." Well, maybe that is because you are busy working on getting : the XBox side of things done and the Crimp was put on the Mac/PC side of : things... so it won't hit until the right moment on the market. And maybe if someone from the Bungie team does say that, it means what they say. Perhaps it doesn't, but what you should be telling us is where you get your psychic powers to know this. : I would not have bought an XBox if Halo were out for the Mac/PC. I own other : XBox games only because they were given as gifts... and it sits in my : House with Halo loaded in the tray... but most recently the XBox stays : packed up for week and weekend battles of 16 players or more. I have : beaten it on legendary and multi is all that is really left for me... and : it is damn fun. Ah, now it's starting to make sense from a psychological perspective. You are extrapolating from your situation to the market. You believe that since you, PCDestroyer, were not that interested in the console but very interested in the game and purchased the console (or recieved it as a gift), that hell, that must be the consumer profile of the Xbox consumer. This is just not the case. The consumer profile of an Xbox purchaser is similar to the profile of a PS2 consumer or a Nintendo consumer, although the mean age of the PS2 and Xbox consumer will be a little older than the Nintendo one. Nonetheless, you are in the minority as a consumer-type. If MS' foray into the console market was based on the potential -- I-don't-have-much-interest-in-consoles-but-I-love-halo/Bungie-so-I'll-get-Xbox-just-to-play-halo-- customer, then MS' Xbox endeavor would over by now. This may fit the profile of a lot of people on this board, but it's not where MS' bread is buttered WRT Xbox. : However, with a Mac/PC version... I'd be online playing it all the time... : and wouldn't have to go anywhere to do so. Now we are at the heart of the matter -- PCDestroyer's personal disappointment. It all makes sense now. : That's just the way it is... and it will always be so until Gates dies or : something and someone takes over that has half a heart. Yes, yes, all of this has absolutely nothing to do with business. : They don't throw creampies at rich people with morals... Too bad the Pope isn't availabe to take over Microsoft. You'd be one happy camper then. The Pope...the Catholic church... morals... hmmmm... nevermind. : PCD : PS- : All of the above is a matter of opinion... and when the Mac/PC version is : finally released, we'll have to see how close I was to being correct on : the date and circumstances. So let's see. It's now April, and you're predicting it will be out in August, is it? So that's about 1 in 8 (months). Those aren't bad odds. Add to that the fact that if occurs in July or September, you'll probably claim that's close enough to your prediction to claim you were right, so that bumps your odds up to 3/8 -- not bad at all. Problem is, even if it does happen then, it won't prove your point, as the delay could be easily caused by any number of alternative factors creating a spurious connection between your prediction and the event of PC/Mac release.

Message Index

Big News!! - DirectX for Macintosh!	Miguel Chavez	4/17/02 11:19 a.m.
Yeah... Kinda	Mr. Zarquon	4/17/02 11:56 a.m.
Geez... why the negative spin?	ferrex	4/17/02 1:03 p.m.
Because, I am.	Mr. Zarquon	4/17/02 1:10 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	Kanen Faud'r	4/17/02 1:26 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	PCDestroyer	4/17/02 2:32 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	Mark Levin	4/17/02 3:07 p.m.
Carmack...	Miguel Chavez	4/17/02 3:22 p.m.
Re: Carmack...	ferrex	4/17/02 7:08 p.m.
Re: Carmack...	Mr. Zarquon	4/17/02 9:31 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	PCDestroyer	4/17/02 3:45 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	ferrex	4/17/02 7:02 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 9:57 a.m.
Why PCDestroyer is a mental midget LONGGGGGG	protexts	4/18/02 4:46 a.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is a mental midget LONGGGGGG	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 10:11 a.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is off	protexts	4/18/02 2:11 p.m.
Make a 1AC!	123456789	4/19/02 11:47 a.m.
Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget	kiro69	4/18/02 11:19 a.m.
Re: Speak for yourself there, parnter...	Lophan	4/18/02 12:09 p.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget	protexts	4/18/02 2:30 p.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 4:37 p.m.
The place where your whole argument falls down...	Louis Wu	4/18/02 4:54 p.m.
Re: The place where your whole argument falls down	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 5:04 p.m.
Ack.	Louis Wu	4/18/02 5:16 p.m.
Re: Ack.	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 5:45 p.m.
Re: Ack.	protexts	4/18/02 9:34 p.m.
Re: Ack.	kiro69	4/19/02 10:36 a.m.
Re: Ack.	Louis Wu	4/19/02 10:54 a.m.
Re: Ack.	protexts	4/19/02 10:01 p.m.
As I said before, I agree.	123456789	4/19/02 5:36 p.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget	protexts	4/19/02 5:38 a.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 4:26 p.m.
awesome reply, pcd *NM*	kiro69	4/18/02 10:43 a.m.
Re: Quick note...	Lophan	4/18/02 12:38 p.m.
Re: Quick note...	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 4:40 p.m.
Re: Quick note...	Warbow	4/18/02 4:42 p.m.
Re: Quick note...	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 4:57 p.m.
Re: Let's look at this a little closer...	Lophan	4/19/02 12:24 a.m.
Re: Let's look at this a little closer...	PCDestroyer	4/19/02 10:24 a.m.
Re: Let's look at this a little closer...	vector40	4/19/02 9:03 p.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	Lophan	4/20/02 12:13 a.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	vector40	4/20/02 1:12 a.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	PCDestroyer	4/21/02 6:27 p.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	protexts	4/20/02 5:15 a.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	vector40	4/20/02 4:09 p.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	PCDestroyer	4/21/02 6:24 p.m.
Implementation and Stealing	protexts	4/22/02 3:24 a.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	Aida-kun	4/22/02 5:15 a.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	PCDestroyer	4/22/02 9:56 a.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	protexts	4/22/02 2:45 p.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	PCDestroyer	4/22/02 9:49 a.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	protexts	4/22/02 3:05 p.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	PCDestroyer	4/22/02 8:34 p.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	kiro69	4/23/02 10:35 a.m.
I agree	123456789	4/17/02 3:19 p.m.