Stupid Consumers

This thread is about neither - neither was the teacher student sex thread I started earlier - yet you still post about Chuck Norris in them.

Allow me to add the "Advertise on Snapzilla" thread, which is about a legitimate service offered to SL residents. The trolling is at a much lower quality these days.

I'll buy one if there's ever enough games to make it worthwhile. I liked Perfect Dark got the N64, but i'm not gonna pay $400 for the sequel.

I'm kinda regretting having bought the first Xbox. Fable and Jade Empire are the only two games I really liked, the rest were just... eh... (Halo is overrated, shut up.)

I'm still a Nintendo fangirl I guess... though I got a PS2 for the rpgs. Not regretting either of those purchases.

I love Nintendo and can't wait to see thier new system. Kinda bummed it won't be HD though. I stopped playing my PS2 when I got an HDTV because it looked so bad. No anti-aliasing, means in HD you see wierd pixel outlines.

Well I don't care about HD either. Course eventually they'll do that thing where all the signals will be broadcast in HD, so if you don't have one you're hosed.

Then i'll keep an old tv for my old, better games.

I haven't really played video games in a long time. Altho, if I were to get one system this post-holiday, it'd theoretically have to be a PlayStation 3. The formfactor looks excellent, Sony has a history of great games on an unlikely platform (I remember all the snickering at CD-ROM compared to cartridge loading times when Sony usurped Sega and Nintendo), aaand... backwards compatibility perhaps? Details are yet to be released but I'd get a game system for games, and sure looks like there'll be a lot of quality entertainment for the PS3.

Ahhhhh yes... backwards compatability. What xbox games can you play on the 360? The big name ones... with other ones maybe if they can be bothered to get around to it.

On the other hand, I hear the Nintendo one will have online support for downloading EVERY SINGLE OLD NINTENDO GAME EVER. I can't remember where I heard that, but I think it was reliable. God I hope so.

Backwards compatability is also a big reason why the PS2 completely dominated the console market. No gamer wants to hear the word "obsolete."



[edit] Did I switch this thread from consumer stupidity to nexgen console feature discussion? I'm sorry...

[editx2] Ah looking back I see it was plenty derailed already. No worries then

Lianne
-Stupid consumer

I thought backward compatibility was a big deal but never ever played a PS One game on my PS2... it's all a mental thing.

I read the same about downloading ever Nintendo game on the new console... that will rock. I really like the downloadable casual/arcade game feature of the 360.

You have just given a textbook example of the logical fallacy known as ad hominem to quoque. What you thinking?

Discuss instead how consumption supports the machinations of unethical corporations (Wal-Mart, Microsoft, Apple, Halliburton) and what we as consumers can do to mitigate the damage.

~Ulrika~

Now you're talking!

(Is that what that angry dwarf fellow I've heard so much about actually looks like? Someone call a periodontist quick!)

~Ulrika~

My sister works for Microsoft. She's having a baby in May, we're waiting to see if it's demonspawn or not. Exorcist on standby.

I swear you have the first setence on a macro to reuse it to dodge what someone says to you. If you were saying that you do all of these things to avoid supporting oppressive corporations, then your statement about the MacOS did not fit.

Better yet, why don't you explain how Cristiano is wrong instead of handwaving?

You win the goddamn prize. <3

I would submit that the use of a tu quoque is the definition of a dodge. In a logical debate only a fool would allow a "you too fallacy" to misdirect the argument. It is the fundamental tool that people use to remove guilt from themselves and, doggone it, it just doesn't work on me.

Instead, we should discuss how consumption supports the machinations of unethical corporations (Wal-Mart, Microsoft, Apple, Halliburton) and what we as consumers can do to mitigate the damage.

For instance, one could say that given the choice of existing operating systems, they pick the lesser of the evils. One could say that given that a company holds a monopoly in one area and not another, that they selectively choose products from a business area where a monopoly doesn't exist. One could even continue to consume but choose retailers that pay living wages or support unions. The important thing, I would say, is to think about how one's consumption affects the world around them and to deny themselves that consumption if the impact is negative.

~Ulrika~

So what you're REALLY saying is that you just like Apple and 'so there'?

Yet her argument again about finding an area where the company does not hold a monopoly runs afoul of her original criticism of the XBOX, as Microsoft does not have a monopoly in gaming consoles - they are a distant second to Sony.

Now you're on topic with a good point. I almost gave it to you above but thought I'd give you another try.

In this post I would state the proven predatory behavior of MS, their unequaled-in-the-history-of-business monopoly, and their tendency to adopt and then break standards. I'd then give a list of companies that MS has put out of business, finishing with the recent (uncorrelated?) loss of Sega from the gaming market. I might even throw in a reference to Netscape.

I'd finish with the tenet that future behavior correlates strongly with past behavior and build a moral argument based on utilitarianism that one must select from the lesser of evils. I would then demonstrate how MS does not qualify as the lesser of evils in any of its business units.

I would do that but you'd already know all of it anyway. The real challenge is getting you to see that your purchase was to satisfy a need to consume at the expense of feeding a corporate monster and ultimately to have you ask yourself, can I do without? So can you?

Can you make a statement at the expense of not having?

~Ulrika~

I absolutely could do without, I choose not to. Video games are a passion of mine - they have been since I was a small child, and what I am building my career around. The XBOX 360 represents the next major step in their evolution, and it is something I want to experience. I do not agree with all of Microsoft's business practices, but I also don't view them as the evil empire. I make choices on what I purchase and where I purchase them from based on many reason - not just simply an anti-Microsoft bias or blind loyalty to another company.

BTW, there is a flaw in your Sega argument - it was Sony that pushed Sega out of the market, not Microsoft. Sega is still alive and well as a software company.

You state above the reasons why your desire outweighs your aversion. It is this logical process that enables consumption in situations when one shouldn't. Whether we're rationalizing how we'll pay the credit card off next month when we get the extra paycheck, treating ourselves because times have been tough, or convincing ourselves that the company isn't really that bad, it's the same process.

The argument then is, how bad is Microsoft? If you feed the beast for pleasure now, will we all pay for it later like we do with their OS, productivity suite, and predatory business practices now? Will the revenue from the Xbox be used to put under companies like Netscape in the future? Does you consumption make you complicit? I say yes and that's why I stopped buying MS products.

The Xbox and PS2 followed Sega by one year. I would submit that it was the competition from both those megacorporations which ended Sega's development of hardware and why I included the parenthetical "uncorrelated" interrogative in my post above.

~Ulrika~

You don't know your video game history very well for someone making claims, however unsubstantiated, about Sega. The original Sony Playstation was launched in 1995, followed by the Nintendo 64 in 1996 and Sega's Dreamcast in 1998. The Playstation 2 was not launched until 2000, and the XBOX at the end of 2001. The Dreamcast was a modest success when it came out, but the timing was horrible. It failed to put a dent in the sales of the surprisingly successful Nintendo 64 and the Playstation, and then was squeezed further by the Playstation 2.

The Dreamcast was Sega's big gamble at a next gen console - it was actually positioned to be the same generation as the PS2 and the XBOX, but it came out too soon, and thus died too soon on the vine. Fierce competition from dark horse Sony and a resurgent Nintendo which had stellar success with the N64 (followed by failure with the Gamecube) is what put the nail in Sega's coffin, not Microsoft. Sega was in no position to rush out another console to compete with the current crop of them. If Microsoft has been a thwart to anyone in the console space, it has been Nintendo - though much at Nintendo's own doing.

I also wanted to also point out that the above rationalization is similar to those used by individuals who shop at Wal-Mart, purchase gas-guzzling SUVs from car companies, or support the RIAA through media purchases. Consumption is what enables these corporations to exploit workers and export costs onto society; to negatively affect our environment, safety, and resources; and restrict our freedom to use media that we own how we want. If people consumed wisely, companies would change their behavior accordingly.

~Ulrika~

This is precisely why I suffixed my statement with an "uncorrelated?" parenthetical. We can now change the the question mark to an exclamation point.

~Ulrika~

Then kindly remove thyself from your broadband connection and your computer, Ulrika.

PS - furthermore, your purchase of Apple hardware went to support a company that is a huge supporter of the RIAA, and has the most restrictive DRM of the media companies - and near monopoly control of the digital music market.