Poll: Out of the big 3 (Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony), who is the most anit-consumer?

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I'm going to go through each one in alphabetical order listing everything I recall each company doing (only with regards to gaming) that is anti-consumer. Feel free to correct or add on to anything wrong or anything I missed.

Microsoft
-Have tried to buy the gaming market. Microsoft bought so many exclusive rights or timed exclusives, it's not even funny. Remember they tried to buy their way into the Japanese market with buying games like Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey. There's times Nintendo and Sony made a few deals to get exclusives like Nintendo with RE on GameCube and Sony buying Square stock (which I'm sure wasn't merely just to help out Square as reported). However, it wasn't until Microsoft jumped into the market do we start seeing the number of exclusive deals greatly jump up along with a huge rise in timed exclusives and even timed exclusive content.
-Paywalls all over the place. Remember when Microsoft makes you pay for Live to utilize features and services that have nothing to do with Live. With 360, you had to pay for Live to watch Netflix or use Facebook; with Xbox One, you have to pay to use Hulu and Amazon, you even have to pay to be able to record gameplay or use Internet Explorer. Of course, Microsoft ushered in the online multiplayer paywall that Sony and now Nintendo have followed suit with. Microsoft didn't even put an internet browser on the 360 to make paying for "free internet stuff" that much more necessary, even freaking Nintendo's Wii had an internet browser.
-RROD (Red Ring of Death). I can't believe I forgot this one in the original post. Microsoft had to have known about 360's hardware issue because of how quickly and frequent it occurred and thus they released to beat Sony out the gate and get a year head-start. Sony's PS3 had a similar problem as console makers have to switch over to lead-free solder but at least the PS3 issue took years for a hardware failure and I doubt Sony would have known about the issue beforehand.
-Xbox 360 proprietary hard drive. Instead of just being able to stick in a laptop hard drive into the 360, you had to buy one from Microsoft.
-Being against cross-platform play. When Microsoft was on top during the 360 gen, they denied cross-platform play with Sony. Sony returning the favor will be mentioned in the Sony section.
-Games for Windows Live. Its DRM coupled with the fact that games were made unplayable when it was shutdown because of said DRM no longer being able to be authenticated.
-Xbox One and it's DRM shit storm. It was so bad Sony "won" E3 by showing a used game instructional video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWSIFh8ICaA]. Obviously, Microsoft basically reneged on it all at basically the last second as you can tell the Xbox One had that DRM stuff gutted out of it just by the fact you can't do anything with a new Xbox One until you connect it to the internet (I'm hoping Microsoft has eventually fixed that).
-Xbox One's forcing the Kinect on people. Obviously, tons of people don't like the Kinect and didn't want to pay for it yet Microsoft made people buy a Kinect if they wanted an Xbox One and eventually reneged on that too a year or so after release of the console.


Nintendo
-Not nice to 3rd parties. Nintendo is notoriously not nice to 3rd party publishers (even during their heyday on top with NES/SNES) and charged higher licensing fees than the competitors while also having their consoles (N64/Gamecube) use inferior physical media. Basically, Nintendo handed Sony so many great games during the N64/PS1 era that they basically gave Sony the market for free. This attitude has caused Nintendo systems missing out on a lot of games that its consumers could've been able to play.
-Delaying a Zelda game to launch with a new system (not once, but TWICE). Both Twilight Princess and Breath of the Wild were ready for Gamecube and Wii U but Nintendo held off releasing them for a killer app for the soon to be released new system. Nintendo even had the gull to release Twilight Princess on Gamecube AFTER the Wii version was released.
-Nintendo's copyright claims. Not much needs to be said here as Nintendo's Youtube copyright claims are completely ridiculous.
-Artificial hardware scarcity. Nintendo purposefully doesn't make enough hardware so that all their products can utilize the "sold out" marketing to make their product look more popular and in the end hopefully get more total sales. This makes dedicated Nintendo fans have to pay more for something because of scalpers snatching them up and selling them on eBay.
-Amiibos AKA limited supply of costly on-disc DLC. Of course, Nintendo just doesn't let you buy such content digitally if you don't want the plastic figure. Sure, amiibos as a way to unlock in-game unlockables is fine but several recent games have content only unlocked by amiibos. Of course, you have the whole scalper thing with amiibos too.
-Downloaded and sold a ROM of Super Mario Brothers to its consumers when actively denouncing ROMs and emulators. Nintendo being hypocritical as fuck basically.
-Online paywall. Soon to come to the Switch.


Sony
-PlayStation 3. After riding high with PS1 and PS2, Sony thought nothing could stop them. The PS3 released as an expensive console that Sony thought would just sell based on the brand name alone. It was also a play to Trojan horse blu-rays into consumers homes that did work much like the PS2 with DVDs (but at least a new media was needed because CDs were too small). Sony did lose money on every PS3 sold for quite awhile so it didn't really have to do with Sony printing money on the backs of consumers but more to do with making a system the consumer really didn't want.
-Removal of Linux support (from PS3). Even though a very small amount of people used Linux on PS3, it was a pretty bullshit move making people choose between keep using Linux without updating and not being able to play online (and just play games that require newer firmware) or losing Linux as a feature. Sony lost a class-action lawsuit over this.
-PSN hack. Getting hacked in and of itself isn't anti-consumer but it really did seem like Sony's network security was extremely lacking and possibly even what you'd call a joke.
-Online pass. I THINK Sony is the only one of the big 3 to at any time utilize online passes for its 1st-party games.
-Against cross-platform play with only Microsoft this gen. Sony is most likely just returning the favor to Microsoft for last-gen.
-Exclusivity. Sony has a bunch of exclusivity deals as well.
-Mod support. Sony has been pretty tough and difficult with regards to mod support. I'm guessing that is do to opening up hacks to the system like what happened with PS3 but that's not a good enough excuse.
-Online paywall. Started on PS4.

---

-Microtransactions/lootboxes. SO FAR, I think Microsoft has been the biggest offender with just Forza 7 alone even though they have the least exclusives right now. I don't know of / recall any Sony 1st party games with such elements. Same thing with regards to Nintendo.

 

[sXeth]

On a lifetime scale they're... all probably prettymuch even. Sony and Microsoft both usually push some thing or another when they're on top (or think they will be). Nintendo kind of floats off in its own direction, though it has a wider bearth of stuff to get poked about, being more diverse (as gaming goes) then the other two in its product lines.

Sony's largely proven some capability to at least fill in the gaps their competitors have left open. Missteps with the PS3 aside (even then, the PS3 did manage to catch up), there's a reason they've dominated 3 of their 4 generations. I wouldn't say they hand out free kittens and ice cream, but they don't make some of the more comical missteps. As a publisher, they seem mostly hands off on their studios, other then a tendency for massively overmarketing things (see Killzone 2, or No Mans Sky)

Microsoft seems to struggle mightily to maintain its share. Its much worse outside the US (And abysmal in Japan) and seems unable to adjust to foreign markets. They've started all 3 of their consoles with seemingly escalating PR blunders (Paying to use your own internet, the Red Ring of Death, and the whole mess of Xbone). And their initial wave of big ticket titles seems to have petered out with CliffyB wandering off Gears, Molyneux not doing great anyways and also wandering away, and Halo just being sort of there.

Nintendo's a bit of an odd case. Its hard to tell if they're purposeful in some of their missteps, or just not adjusted to the size and scope of modern gaming, or incredibly conservative in culture. Clinging to cartridges, fighting tooth and nail against online, never quite matching demand with product. These are all negative to the consumer, but speak more to a company that has issues evolving with a changing audience then a shadowy agenda of conspiracies.

 

[Yoshi178]

Nintendo
-Not nice to 3rd parties. Nintendo is notoriously not nice to 3rd party publishers

3rd Party Publishers aren't consumers.....

 

[Avnger]

It depends on the day of the week.

Nintendo
-Not nice to 3rd parties. Nintendo is notoriously not nice to 3rd party publishers

3rd Party Publishers aren't consumers.....

yes but slagging off 3rd parties can mean consumers are forced to buy another console/pc to play the games. This isn't nearly as bad as some of the other way these 3 companies fuck with customers, but it is still somewhat anti-consumer.

In an ideal world, a consumer would be able to play any game on any system.

 

[Yoshi178]

It depends on the day of the week.

Nintendo
-Not nice to 3rd parties. Nintendo is notoriously not nice to 3rd party publishers

3rd Party Publishers aren't consumers.....

yes but slagging off 3rd parties can mean consumers are forced to buy another console/pc to play the games. This isn't nearly as bad as some of the other way these 3 companies fuck with customers, but it is still somewhat anti-consumer.

In an ideal world, a consumer would be able to play any game on any system.

consumers aren't "forced" to do anything.

If wanted to to play God of War, then i HAVE to buy a Playstation. i don't give a shit about God of War so why should i care if i can't play that on my Nintendo console? obviously i'd just buy a Playstation instead instead in the first place if i wanted to play that instead of Mario.

same thing applies to AAA 3rd Party games. i don't give a shit about turds like GTA so why should i care if i can't play it on my Nintendo Switch?

 

[Rangaman]

I'm not a fan, but Sony really isn't in the running here. They've done some shitful things in the past, sure, but they're probably the least anti-consumer of the three.

Microsoft are the easiest target of course. It seems like every generation they try to outdo their previous record for embarrassing themselves. On the other hand, they do at least seem to try and make amends. People complaining about a lack of single-player exclusives? Well here's Recore. Want to play on PCs? Sure thing, as long as its Windows (okay that's still a bit shitty, but better than "no, fuck you").

But any arguments against those two can be dismissed, because of the three companies up there, Nintendo is the one that has displayed laughable incompetence most frequently. How about the time they blacklisted third parties for making games for other systems? Or the several times they've gimped perfectly good systems because of piracy? Or how they made games intentionally obtuse to sell copies of Nintendo Power? Or the Wii's friend codes? Or forcing players to buy GBAs to play Zelda: Four Swords Adventures multiplayer? Or the fact that they routinely ignore want consumers actually want in favor of trying to appeal to the iPhone demographic (all of whom have moved on with their lives)?

Maybe it's unfair to judge a company that's been in the business of consoles for over a decade longer than either of it's competitors. But a company that has been around that long shouldn't make fuck-ups as regularly as they do. The fact they manage to churn out good games regularly is the only thing that keeps them from being as despised as EA or Activision.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Microsoft seems to struggle mightily...the Red Ring of Death

I can't believe I forgot to mention the RROD, added to the original post. Microsoft just had to know of the issue before launch but went ahead to launch it anyway and get a head-start for last-gen.

Nintendo's a bit of an odd case. Its hard to tell if they're purposeful in some of their missteps, or just not adjusted to the size and scope of modern gaming, or incredibly conservative in culture. Clinging to cartridges, fighting tooth and nail against online, never quite matching demand with product. These are all negative to the consumer, but speak more to a company that has issues evolving with a changing audience then a shadowy agenda of conspiracies.

Nintendo is the one that has displayed laughable incompetence most frequently...
Maybe it's unfair to judge a company that's been in the business of consoles for over a decade longer than either of it's competitors. But a company that has been around that long shouldn't make fuck-ups as regularly as they do. The fact they manage to churn out good games regularly is the only thing that keeps them from being as despised as EA or Activision.

A company continually fucking up is definitely a consumer problem and the fault of the company. Sure, there are issues and problems you can't foresee or you just occasionally fuck up, it happens. But Nintendo continually has the same problems over and over again. When will Nintendo ever fucking understand the internet?

consumers aren't "forced" to do anything.

If wanted to to play God of War, then i HAVE to buy a Playstation. i don't give a shit about God of War so why should i care if i can't play that on my Nintendo console? obviously i'd just buy a Playstation instead instead in the first place if i wanted to play that instead of Mario.

same thing applies to AAA 3rd Party games. i don't give a shit about turds like GTA so why should i care if i can't play it on my Nintendo Switch?

 

[Arnoxthe1]

In the recent past, I would have said Nintendo hands down but now... Sony probably. Microsoft did pull a massive **** move with Halo 5 though. But then, so did Nintendo with Project M.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

After having my debit card information stolen due to hacks and hands down THE most unhelpful customer service I've ever experienced, I have to go with Sony. Pretty much had to abandon my PSN account and create a new one for security reasons, which means I lost all my saves and if I want to play a game I owned on PSN I have to do this weird shuffle in my settings where I switch my PS4's "main" account and any time I need to sign into it again I need to manually contact support.

Maybe I'm jaded but no other company has put me in a situation where I can't afford rent because I'm waiting 10-15 business days for fraud reimbursement.

 

[Yoshi178]

consumers aren't "forced" to do anything.

If wanted to to play God of War, then i HAVE to buy a Playstation. i don't give a shit about God of War so why should i care if i can't play that on my Nintendo console? obviously i'd just buy a Playstation instead instead in the first place if i wanted to play that instead of Mario.

same thing applies to AAA 3rd Party games. i don't give a shit about turds like GTA so why should i care if i can't play it on my Nintendo Switch?

This may come a shock to you as well, but not everything is about you either.

not everyone else gives a shit about 3rd Party games like you do.

 

[Dalisclock]

Nintendo
-Not nice to 3rd parties. Nintendo is notoriously not nice to 3rd party publishers (even during their heyday on top with NES/SNES) and charged higher licensing fees than the competitors while also having their consoles (N64/Gamecube) use inferior physical media. Basically, Nintendo handed Sony so many great games during the N64/PS1 era that they basically gave Sony the market for free. This attitude has caused Nintendo systems missing out on a lot of games that its consumers could've been able to play.

Don't really see this being a big deal. As you said, this was Nintendo shooting themselves in the foot for 2 generations by basically making the Pee-Pee consoles(if they didn't want them called that, they shouldn't have named them Wii) essentially Nintendo Exclusives only. They wanted to be the "Party"/"Family Friendly" console and found out that pretty much everyone else passed them by. The motion control gimmick didn't help either.

They've apparently learned their lesson with the Switch, considering all the 3rd Party games that are/will be available.

-Delaying a Zelda game to launch with a new system (not once, but TWICE). Both Twilight Princess and Breath of the Wild were ready for Gamecube and Wii U but Nintendo held off releasing them for a killer app for the soon to be released new system. Nintendo even had the gull to release Twilight Princess on Gamecube AFTER the Wii version was released.

This has been standard Console Industry practice for pretty much forever. A Killer App helps draw attention to the new system and it's been a thing since Super Mario Bros and Sonic(maybe as far back as Pong?).

I can't see this as something to hold against Nintendo specifically or it being anti-consumer.

I don't have any particular love or hate for Nintendo. I used to love them back in the SNES games. I just haven't found much reason to go back since then(though the Switch is starting to Tempt me).

Sony
-PlayStation 3. After riding high with PS1 and PS2, Sony thought nothing could stop them. The PS3 released as an expensive console that Sony thought would just sell based on the brand name alone. It was also a play to Trojan horse blu-rays into consumers homes that did work much like the PS2 with DVDs (but at least a new media was needed because CDs were too small). Sony did lose money on every PS3 sold for quite awhile so it didn't really have to do with Sony printing money on the backs of consumers but more to do with making a system the consumer really didn't want.

I have to ask how is having a Blue Ray player in a console a "Trojan Horse" as opposed to having better tech for your new console?

I agree with most of your other points. I personally vote for Microsoft because of the stupid XBONE "Always internet connected" thing with the Kinect thing being part of that.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Currently, Sony's complete refusal to entertain the idea of cross-play is putting them in the lead for me. Nintendo would be in the running for all its YouTube crap, but YouTube itself is doing it's level best to prevent me from ever being able to monetize anyway, so it's not like Nintendo's copyright claims are doing anything.

EA's still the worst though, along with most "AAA" developers in their own way.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I also remember having to have a USB reformatted to work in Xbox 360. The whole online craze and most of the bad console-centric practices that have gone with it primarily started with Xbox Live and 360's popularity as well. PS2 had online functionality, but it wasn't until 7th gen that your game was automatically considered inferior if it didn't have some kind of multiplayer. It was a jump in off point for 3rd parties to begin the raping process with the various micro-transactions, loot boxes, day one dlc on disc, season's passes, etc.

Sony's exclusives and free online pretty much saved them last gen, because 360 pretty much dominated 3rd party support for at least 3/4 of it. Part of that was Sony's fault for sure, but considering how their exclusives are still exceptionally clean in contrast to Microsoft and big 3rd party publishers, it speaks to a cultural difference in how they present their games.

 

[Yoshi178]

Sony
-PlayStation 3. After riding high with PS1 and PS2, Sony thought nothing could stop them. The PS3 released as an expensive console that Sony thought would just sell based on the brand name alone. It was also a play to Trojan horse blu-rays into consumers homes that did work much like the PS2 with DVDs (but at least a new media was needed because CDs were too small). Sony did lose money on every PS3 sold for quite awhile so it didn't really have to do with Sony printing money on the backs of consumers but more to do with making a system the consumer really didn't want.
-PSN hack. Getting hacked in and of itself isn't anti-consumer but it really did seem like Sony's network security was extremely lacking and possibly even what you'd call a joke.
-Online pass. I THINK Sony is the only one of the big 3 to at any time utilize online passes for its 1st-party games.
-Against cross-platform play with only Microsoft this gen. Sony is most likely just returning the favor to Microsoft for last-gen.
-Exclusivity. Sony has a bunch of exclusivity deals as well.
-Mod support. Sony has been pretty tough and difficult with regards to mod support. I'm guessing that is do to opening up hacks to the system like what happened with PS3 but that's not a good enough excuse.
-Online paywall. Started on PS4.

BTW you forgot to mention that Sony also promotes plagiarism on its official Youtube page.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Nintendo
-Not nice to 3rd parties. Nintendo is notoriously not nice to 3rd party publishers

While that is a piss poor business decision, it is not inherently anti-consumer.

As for my answer, I'm going to go with pretty much what Seth Carter said. They are all big corporations and therefore these days I distrust them on principle. Although of the 3 I'm only still only will to give my money to Sony and Nintendo. ...or at least I would be if I had any money to give them.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

consumers aren't "forced" to do anything.

If wanted to to play God of War, then i HAVE to buy a Playstation. i don't give a shit about God of War so why should i care if i can't play that on my Nintendo console? obviously i'd just buy a Playstation instead instead in the first place if i wanted to play that instead of Mario.

same thing applies to AAA 3rd Party games. i don't give a shit about turds like GTA so why should i care if i can't play it on my Nintendo Switch?

This may come a shock to you as well, but not everything is about you either.

not everyone else gives a shit about 3rd Party games like you do.

Gamers like games and missing out on games is a big fucking deal. Sure, I only really care about probably 5-10% of games that release because I'm pretty picky but for all of them that I do care about to be 1st-party games would either be quite the coincidence or the other much more likely reason being that I haven't, *gasp*, given them a chance. For example, your precious Xeno series was 3rd-party and most likely better than it is now (from what I've seen of the new ones, Xenoblade 2 I wouldn't play unless you paid me to play it). When Nintendo is charging the same price point for their hardware than everyone else, I should be getting the same amount of quality software as the other systems but I'm not and it's not even close.

Nintendo
-Not nice to 3rd parties. Nintendo is notoriously not nice to 3rd party publishers

While that is a piss poor business decision, it is not inherently anti-consumer.

Don't really see this being a big deal. As you said, this was Nintendo shooting themselves in the foot for 2 generations by basically making the Pee-Pee consoles(if they didn't want them called that, they shouldn't have named them Wii) essentially Nintendo Exclusives only. They wanted to be the "Party"/"Family Friendly" console and found out that pretty much everyone else passed them by. The motion control gimmick didn't help either.

They've apparently learned their lesson with the Switch, considering all the 3rd Party games that are/will be available.

"Gamers like games and missing out on games is a big fucking deal. When Nintendo is charging the same price point for their hardware than everyone else, I should be getting the same amount of quality software as the other systems but I'm not and it's not even close."

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

None of them really because I don't believe in Anti Consumerism.

I believe in Consumer responsibility.

I vote with my wallet. I haven't bought Star Wars Battlefront 2 or its microtransactions because I don't want to.

I bought Total War: Warhammer and all its DLC because I deem it of good value and worthy of my money.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

After having my debit card information stolen due to hacks and hands down THE most unhelpful customer service I've ever experienced, I have to go with Sony. Pretty much had to abandon my PSN account and create a new one for security reasons, which means I lost all my saves and if I want to play a game I owned on PSN I have to do this weird shuffle in my settings where I switch my PS4's "main" account and any time I need to sign into it again I need to manually contact support.

Maybe I'm jaded but no other company has put me in a situation where I can't afford rent because I'm waiting 10-15 business days for fraud reimbursement.

Were you actually part of any fraud against you? Like did anyone take money associated with the account linked to your debit card? All you had to do was get a new debit card and you could still use the same PSN account just fine. I never heard of an actual loss of money directly from the PSN hack because it seemed like the hackers just wanted to hurt Sony vs steal people's money basically. Not that it makes having shit network security OK or anything, which is why I listed it obviously.

I had both of my PlayStation accounts stolen. Screw PlayStation.

Really? How? Maybe I've just been lucky but I haven't really heard of PSN accounts getting stolen unless you're game sharing with people that end up being untrustworthy. Or, of course, the normal ways like being phished or just having piss poor passwords.