You know, ever since Game Informer printed that survey about console failure rates I've been somewhat annoyed by most of the major gaming publications. It's almost like everyone is surprised that out of the 5,000 people surveyed that 54% of them have had their Xbox 360s die on them. Most of those mags sat there and suckled at the teat of Microsoft for some 3 years or so simply because they looked at numbers and declared that obviously the Xbox 360 is the best because it makes more sales. That to me doesn't necessarily point to Microsoft having the best console or is doing the right marketing, it just means they're the best con artists. You know damn good and well Microsoft was lying about those failure rate numbers for years and you know damn good and well they knew about that RROD before they even released the system. Every single person amongst my personal friends and family has had the RROD problem. I even know a guy who's had four 360s die on him. Microsoft knew this crap so they released their console before anybody else and everyone bought it because they wanted to be the first on the block to have a next gen console and once the few intelligent people caught wind of what Microsoft was doing it was already too late and they were stuck with sending their piece of shit console back for "repairs". I promise you that the total failure rate of that console is higher than 54%. I promise you.
But really, is it Microsoft's fault everyone bought into the bullshit? They played a smart con and even still there are people dumb enough out there to defend this crap and say that they only surveyed 5,000 people, that's just a small group ironically not realizing that because it is a small group having over half of that group with a failed console makes Microsoft look even worse. It's just flat frustrating to see how so many excused many of Microsoft's constant failures over the past few years and all of a sudden turn around and state that perhaps, maybe Microsoft conducted bad buisness this console generation. Gee, ya think!?
I'm not really a Sony or Nintendo fanboy or anything like that. I mean, I can't stand the Wii personally but I don't particularly say too many bad things about it because at least people who buy a Wii don't have to send it back for repairs. At least Nintendo makes products with quality. I may not care for Wii games but at least they work. I'm just against bloated companies who become too arrogant for their own good and I'm equally against people excusing bad buisness practice or writing it off like it's no big thing.
By this logic, over 50% of Japanese women are cheaters, since there was a survey of a few thousand Japanese women where over 50% said they have cheated before. Yeah, doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?
ReplyDeleteIt's *because* Microsoft put it out early that it has such a high failure rate, which is actually estimated somewhere more around 30-40%. The PS2 failure rate for its entire lifetime was probably more than this because there were even more problems with it than the 360. Sony claims that the PS3 has a failure rate of less than 1%, but Sony has gone crazy this gen... It's assumed to be somewhere around 15-25%.
In the end, I think it's pretty safe to say that Nintendo is really the only company that makes decent hardware, even if their consoles have had generally poor game selection since the N64.
Oh, I've hated on Sony big time back in the PS2 era, believe me.However, I think once Sony designed the slim PS2s the quality improved a lot. I think the PS3 is significantly better designed than the PS2, but you are right, even a 10 to 11% failure rate (which is what I think the article said if I recall) is actually unacceptable as well. The point of my rant was more or less how people continue to defend Microsoft, not necessarily a condemnation of the company itself.
ReplyDeleteBut I agree, when it comes to performance quality, nobody beats Nintendo regarless of what you think of their games.