RauLeCreuset

@Lightning

"As I said for the 1000th time I'm going off of past history of Sony simply put."

We know. You were going SOLELY off of Sony's past history that is divergent enough from what you joined in to accuse them of that YOU SAID it would be "a very, very, VERY new low from Sony."

"As I keep saying if Sony has little track record of such things. This whole thing wouldn't mean nothing at all."...

@Lightning

You have a painfully transparent desperate need to try to convince yourself that you are smart if you spend enough time on N4G slinging insults while crowning yourself a genius.

"You can't tell me that I'm wrong or refute that I'm wrong."

1) You're using refute incorrectly in that sentence. What you were trying to go for is that I can't refute your argument.

2) Lesson aside, ...

@Outside

There are no commenting guidelines permissible words that do justice to capturing the inanity of Lightning demanding we give deference to the absurdly illogical thinking that led them to such an embarrassingly incorrect position.

The reality is that Lightning trying to single out and vilify Sony for engaging in a practice common throughout the industry is a smokescreen fabricated excuse for the real reason Lightning deliberately disregarded any e...

"So after that long useless long winded commentswe finally got to the point."

So after trying to make big boy threats, all you were able to do in response was throw another barely intelligible tantrum full of the same tired insults? The only thing I ended up fearing for was the state of your poor keyboard after all of the spittle you doubtlessly drenched it while angrily banging out that drivel.

"Please enlightened me on that."

@Lightning

One other thing.

You can desperately try to hide behind the excuse that you were following patterns to explain why you doubled down on wrong for so long to believe something Jez said that Microsoft notably would not explicitly claim on the record, but it was you who said that Sony doing what they were accused of would be "a very, very, VERY new low from Sony."

So if you're asking what my point is, my point is th...

For reference, here's the comment I made under your own in response in a futile attempt to keep you from falling for the okey-doke and embarrassing yourself.

Me (trying to save you from yourself) 193d ago:

[Begin quote]

I would be cautious about going full tilt off of an implication that Xbox isn't willing to commit to by explicitly saying what they are implying.

The relevancy of the implication to why the gam...

@Lightning77

"I will strike back so don't test me kid..."

Oh, no. You threw the ellipsis at the end to leave the threat hanging. I'm scared. /s

Let's start with a reality check. You do realize that the image you hold of yourself in your head is the inverse of the reality? Here's a question: Or what? What are you going to do? Drag me into an overlong argument in which you double down on being obviously wrong whi...

@Lightning77

"Like I said before I can admit when I'm wrong and I was wrong on this one."

You weren't just wrong, you were played by your beloved Microsoft into raging against Sony and people who pushed back on the narrative you were gleefully spreading on their behalf, in multiple posts in which you were aggressively obnoxious despite being warned from the start by myself and others that MS may have been trying to play you. We gave you ...

Phil is a fan of trying to score 'pro-consumer' points by waiting for moments when he can deny that Xbox is actively engaged in certain behaviour to pretend that he is not a fan of the behaviour. He is also a fan of reminding everyone that he is a CEO responsible for growing the business when engaging in the behaviour becomes more profitable for Xbox than maintaining the pro-consumer spin..

@Obscure

It is unfortunately not what the article makes it seem. Part of it is on the article for not digging further. There are tells in the article that the writer did not read the FTC rule. Part of it is on the FTC for leaving room for misinterpretation in communications meant for public consumption announcing the rule.

The article's premise is based on the supposed ban on "fake online reviews and testimonials." The article pulled that q...

The reason it is a big controversy starts with Xbox leaning into playing the underdog despite being well into their fourth generation in the home console market and being part of a trillion dollar multinational corporation. It's an identity they promote to their fans, the media, and even the government.

You put it in a way that makes it not seem like that big a deal even if it's true.Recontextualize it to ignore Microsoft's similar conduct and the story becomes...

"IGN's source is Pual Tassi & Forbes, IGN hasn't independently verified this claim."

I'm not going to completely rule it out given how sloppily Forbes and IGN have reported their stories, but what you're suggesting would represent a deliberate attempt by IGN to trick their audience, making them a willing accomplice as opposed to potentially being unwitting puppets being played by a source whose information they should have vetted more before du...

Game Science already put out a statement on the delay. It's in the IGN article:

"We are currently optimizing the Xbox Series X|S version to meet our quality standards, so it won't release simultaneously with the other platforms. We apologize for the delay and aim to minimize the wait for Xbox users. We will announce the release date as soon as it meets our quality standards."

Sony has incentive to avoid commenting either way. If there is...

"First, Microsoft. Then, Forbes. Now, IGN."

Microsoft: MS has not gone on record claiming there was a deal.

Forbes: Paul Tassi, the Forbes contributor, now appears to be less certain than when he boldly claimed he received "information that I consider the final word on the situation" from a source claiming the delay was due to an exclusivity deal.

592d ago 8 agree4 disagreeView comment