Rayman Pirate-Community

I can just imagine the millions and millions of shitty game forums having hours of debate about how the XBox One will still fail because it doesn't have Infamous.

Various articles are covering this, like this one.

I wonder if this is true, and if so, why didn't Micro$oft do the right thing to begin with?

"thur only doin it fur teh money sony DUS care about us TEY reely do cuz exlcusivs"

Hoodcom wrote:Micro$oft

Please, enough of these jokes, unless you're willing to write Sony as "$ony." Sony has made far, far more money scandals and grabs than Microsoft has in the past, so smarten up.

It's good to see that they have the decency to pull out, even if it's out of desperation. Hopefully it means that something like this will never happen again.

What I wonder is where this puts Microsoft. They are certainly a better position than before, but at this point I have no idea how much better it can get for them. Is the damage done? Are people going to stay away simply because they now know that Microsoft fully intended to do all this? Or is the fact that the restrictions are gone and that the overall product has improved all that matters to them? Seems to me like it could go either way.

Adsolution wrote:

Hoodcom wrote:Micro$oft

Please, enough of these jokes, unless you're willing to write Sony as "$ony." Sony has made far, far more money scandals and grabs than Microsoft has in the past, so smarten up.

Who said anything about joking? I'm pretty serious, since I still don't like them for stripping away the start menu off windows with their precious windows 8.

Oh come on now, I've had Windows 8 for a while now and there's tons to complain about, but the start menu is still simple to navigate after a few tries and more visually appealing.

Hoodcom wrote:Who said anything about joking? I'm pretty serious, since I still don't like them for stripping away the start menu off windows with their precious windows 8.

If you're serious, then you haven't done your research into the histories of the respective companies. It's a pretty hard fact that Sony has made many more money-grabs than Microsoft in the past, which is why using the informal "Micro$oft" when in comparison with Sony is just wrong on so many levels. I'm not saying you should call Sony '$ony,' because it's quite annoying either way, regardless of the fact that they are more deserving of the title.

Besides, what does removing the Start menu on Windows 8 have anything to do with money? It's a UI modification, nothing else. Even though it is annoying in its own right and Microsoft is to blame for that, it has no bearing on money and therefore can't contribute to the validity of addressing them as 'Micro$oft.'


Not in defense of Microsoft, but Windows 8 is much better than Windows 7 if you download the extension called "Classic Shell." It brings back the Start menu, and it actually works better than before as it provides full customisation. Windows 8 is functionally a lot more optimised than 7, a lot smaller, and a lot faster, so if you combine that with Classic Shell, you've got an operating system that is in every way superior to its predecessor. That is, unless you see the rare compatibility issues as a major flaw and a cause for inferiority.

Those PS4 beating up Xbox One GIFs are so last week.

GNineify wrote:Those PS4 beating up Xbox One GIFs are so last week.

The sad part is that we all know they're still gonna be arrogant pieces of shit... :c

Xbox still the most expensive, I may still consider Wii U.

Also sad on no PSO2 showings at E3.

Adsolution wrote:If you're serious, then you haven't done your research into the histories of the respective companies. It's a pretty hard fact that Sony has made many more money-grabs than Microsoft in the past, which is why using the informal "Micro$oft" when in comparison with Sony is just wrong on so many levels. I'm not saying you should call Sony '$ony,' because it's quite annoying either way, regardless of the fact that they are more deserving of the title.

I don't really have any desire to research other companies, I've been calling Micro$oft with the dollar sign in their name for years, nothing new here. I'd do the very same for Apple if they had an 'S' in their name. However it's not like I've often done this constantly here either.

Adsolution wrote: Besides, what does removing the Start menu on Windows 8 have anything to do with money? It's a UI modification, nothing else. Even though it is annoying in its own right and Microsoft is to blame for that, it has no bearing on money and therefore can't contribute to the validity of addressing them as 'Micro$oft.'

Them refusing to listen to what a lot of customers want is validation enough to me, while there are some people who like the full start screen, there are just as many who do not. Then Microsoft wishes to charge for major updates from what I've been hearing with their new operating system... my desktop isn't some huge tablet, thank you.

Adsolution wrote: Not in defense of Microsoft, but Windows 8 is much better than Windows 7 if you download the extension called "Classic Shell." It brings back the Start menu, and it actually works better than before as it provides full customisation. Windows 8 is functionally a lot more optimised than 7, a lot smaller, and a lot faster, so if you combine that with Classic Shell, you've got an operating system that is in every way superior to its predecessor. That is, unless you see the rare compatibility issues as a major flaw and a cause for inferiority.

I shouldn't have to download this or that just to customize the system to have a start menu, even though I did. If I want to bother doing something to make it useful to me, then I'll go customize a linux distro with help of some friends. Now there is no denying in performance optimization between windows 7 and 8, but thus far between my two desktop systems, there is not enough difference in performance of the operating system alone to make me be all saying how 'better' Windows 8 may be.


Also it seems Microsoft has not yet updated this, on their online requirements:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/pre- ... disclaimer

Hoodcom wrote:Them refusing to listen to what a lot of customers want is validation enough to me, while there are some people who like the full start screen, there are just as many who do not.

That logically doesn't have anything to do with money still. If anything, it's what they felt was best for users, which I do disagree with, but doesn't make any sense for it to be income-related.

Hoodcom wrote:Then Microsoft wishes to charge for major updates from what I've been hearing with their new operating system

This is completely false, the updates work the exact same way they do in Windows 7: When you restart your computer, it will automatically update. I'm not certain what qualifies as a 'major update,' but nothing has cost me a penny so far.

Hoodcom wrote:I shouldn't have to download this or that just to customize the system to have a start menu, even though I did.

Of course you don't, and this is no excuse. I'm simply saying that this is literally the one thing you need to make the UI work pretty much exactly like Windows 7, but better.

Hoodcom wrote:If I want to bother doing something to make it useful to me, then I'll go customize a linux distro with help of some friends.

Whoa, no need to go all the way there. We're talking about taking thirty seconds to download and install an extension, not spending days budding your own OS out of Linux. It's like downloading Adblock; you can't possibly say that you would rather code your own browser from the ground up that automatically blocks ads instead of downloading a tiny extension to your current browser that does the job perfectly, right? I mean, unless you wanted to create your own browser anyway.

Hoodcom wrote:Now there is no denying in performance optimization between windows 7 and 8, but thus far between my two desktop systems, there is not enough difference in performance of the operating system alone to make me be all saying how 'better' Windows 8 may be.

From my experience, I had actually quite a noticeable efficiency increase. It's not as much as upgrading from Vista to 7, but it's probably about 70% as significant.

NNNNNGH!!!!!!!

THE GAMERS HAVE SPOKEN.
Finally, glad Microsoft got their shit together, it's about god damn time. If it weren't for us gamers constantly complaining, this dream would have never became reality, not saying I care to buy an Xbox One still, there are still quite a select few problems, however, I'll give Microsoft a few props for actually doing something... GOOD lately. Golf clap everyone.

Adsolution wrote:That logically doesn't have anything to do with money still. If anything, it's what they felt was best for users, which I do disagree with, but doesn't make any sense for it to be income-related.

I think they may have been hoping for it to be a better seller for the change, or cost less by having something that tends to both desktop and tablet environment. Just my theory, but I could be wrong.

Adsolution wrote:This is completely false, the updates work the exact same way they do in Windows 7: When you restart your computer, it will automatically update. I'm not certain what qualifies as a 'major update,' but nothing has cost me a penny so far.

I wasn't referring to your typical updates, I'm more speaking of what should be considered as service pack updates... such as Windows 8.1 or Windows Blue.

Adsolution wrote:Of course you don't, and this is no excuse. I'm simply saying that this is literally the one thing you need to make the UI work pretty much exactly like Windows 7, but better.

Well, I think they could have at least gave us a choice between either, so that way everyone can be kept happy.

Adsolution wrote:Whoa, no need to go all the way there. We're talking about taking thirty seconds to download and install an extension, not spending days budding your own OS out of Linux. It's like downloading Adblock; you can't possibly say that you would rather code your own browser from the ground up that automatically blocks ads instead of downloading a tiny extension to your current browser that does the job perfectly, right? I mean, unless you wanted to create your own browser anyway.

Well I know it doesn't take much, but I am just saying what I would rather do, just the only thing that sucks is my favorite programs don't run under Linux, nor wine.

Adsolution wrote:From my experience, I had actually quite a noticeable efficiency increase. It's not as much as upgrading from Vista to 7, but it's probably about 70% as significant.

Probably varies, but I did notice a fast boot up in a virtual machine off a harddrive. That is about all I really have noticed between it and older versions.

However I do find the BSoD of Windows 8 kinda useless, after seeing my first one from just unplugging an Xbox 360 controller.

Hoodcom... Ad.... are you going to marry or something? can you two please cut the crap already? Neither Microsoft or Sony are paying you to defend them or attack each other.

Hoodcom wrote:I think they may have been hoping for it to be a better seller for the change, or cost less by having something that tends to both desktop and tablet environment. Just my theory, but I could be wrong.

Perhaps, and-

Hoodcom wrote:Well, I think they could have at least gave us a choice between either, so that way everyone can be kept happy.

-agreed. They clearly really want people to use their new Metro view, but when you take into consideration what it is, they should at the very least have given you the option to use the classic Start menu, even if it isn't enabled by default.

Hoodcom wrote:However I do find the BSoD of Windows 8 kinda useless, after seeing my first one from just unplugging an Xbox 360 controller.

Admittedly, the Windows 8 bluescreen is a lot less... 'scary looking' (you know what I mean). The downside is that it doesn't display any technical information or cause until the computer boots up again.

Though, as far as consistency goes, I've only run into one, maybe two bluescreens since I've installed Windows 8 on both my laptop and desktop, pretty much the same as Windows 7. As for what causes them, it hasn't really changed either. The causes for me tend to be very arbitrary, not usually by anything unusual, and sometimes not even from something. It might just be sitting there and it bluescreens.

sergiomonty wrote:Hoodcom... Ad.... are you going to marry or something? can you two please cut the crap already? Neither Microsoft or Sony are paying you to defend them or attack each other.

We're not even really arguing anymore, just discussing... Windows 8.

Adsolution wrote:-agreed. They clearly really want people to use their new Metro view, but when you take into consideration what it is, they should at the very least have given you the option to use the classic Start menu, even if it isn't enabled by default.

I do wonder if this choice of Metro could have been avoided if Bill Gates hadn't retired... or at least a choice be given..

Adsolution wrote:Admittedly, the Windows 8 bluescreen is a lot less... 'scary looking' (you know what I mean). The downside is that it doesn't display any technical information or cause until the computer boots up again.

Though, as far as consistency goes, I've only run into one, maybe two bluescreens since I've installed Windows 8 on both my laptop and desktop, pretty much the same as Windows 7. As for what causes them, it hasn't really changed either. The causes for me tend to be very arbitrary, not usually by anything unusual, and sometimes not even from something. It might just be sitting there and it bluescreens.

Bad graphics drivers tend to cause bluescreens the most anymore, that I've seen, or unstable overclocks, but it would help if technical information is shown in case of an event where windows does so on boot. Whether by a bad overclock (BSoD codes kinda help you figure what you may need to change to remedy it), or if you suddenly switch from IDE to AHCI mode before changing a simple setting in the registry. But at least they do try to keep it friendly, but if they really want to do something, they could at least give you the ability to get more information before it auto reboots. In my opinion.

Adsolution wrote:

sergiomonty wrote:Hoodcom... Ad.... are you going to marry or something? can you two please cut the crap already? Neither Microsoft or Sony are paying you to defend them or attack each other.

We're not even really arguing anymore, just discussing... Windows 8.

There's no cat fight going on here.