Quote:
Originally Posted by runawayprisoner
Then why did you ask Metalmurphy to "admit" something?  |
For his own good
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metalmurphy
Whatever. You see it that way, people that know me don't.
Funny how the 3 people that love their 360s (and there is nothing wrong with that) are the ones seeing me as "biased". Maybe your the ones a bit too much on the defensive side?
|
...or maybe the ones on the knowledgeable side because we actually know what we're talking about. For example, I have no idea where anyone gets off saying that there aren't any games for 360--I have plenty
And us with the working 360's are glad that what we have works. But still living in fear...well at least I am.
Quote:
|
I might have said some pretty stupid things, but that was back in the days JKK was around, and it was only to piss him off.
|
Way to fight fire with fire
Quote:
Please hushy, are you even thinking about what you just said?
Lying to make your company look good is understandable, lying to make your company look bad?...
|
They haven't said that it's around 25%. That number is speculation based on an approximate number of broken ones compared to the ones sold. In the letter/press release, they didn't even admit how many had problems, only that it was too much.
Quote:
|
And btw, it's called annual earnings announcements, they're made public to stock holders, and they had to justify the 1Billion in repairs by stating they had over 2.5 Million defective consoles.
|
No, they
allocated $1.5 billion for 2.5 million consoles. They never said how much of that has already been filled. So if they have ALREADY maxed out their budget (wow, that would be fast), that would be 22% (assuming that exactly 11,000,000 consoles are out there, it's actually closer to 12). Hmm...that's why I keep saying, I want to know, from Microsoft, exactly how many 360's they've repaired.
Quote:
|
Of course depending on the conditions (weather, humidity, etc...) its normal that some people don't have problems. That doesn't mean there isn't one.
|
Right, who was saying that there wasn't a problem?
Quote:
|
Also, I already stated why i i'm against the current live fee. I've been playing online for free for ages, with good dedicated servers, now i need to pay to play on p2p servers? Nop. Charging for the others features is fine, but charging for just playing online is dumb.
|
It's not dumb. You're paying for a service, and that service is fast, always-on (it's never been down for me, not even once) online gaming. Funny that you say charging for other features is fine, when those are the free ones to access, and the gaming costs money
Quote:
|
Oh and hushy... wikipedia?
|
Well, all of the things I said were backed up by 3-4 sources for each blurb in the wiki article, so it was basically a link to a collection of links. I actually like to backup my sources--by the way, good job adding reference links in that post, that's what I like to see
edit: What were we talking about again?
__________________
Dedicated to mediocrity and repetition since 1994.
Last edited by hushypushy; August 2nd, 2007 at 03:03..