• zaph@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    7 months ago

    Claiming a console only player would be more willing to accept this than a pc only player isn’t elitist, it’s common sense. Owning a console is already saying “I’m okay with exclusivity and walled gardens.” If you weren’t you wouldn’t have paid so much for access to exclusive titles. Also just because your friend have both doesn’t make that the norm. I haven’t owned a console since I built my first computer and only know one person who owns a console that isn’t a switch.

    • Farid@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Putting personal experiences side, I already provided 2 examples of cases that would’ve affected exclusively console players and they pushed back enough to cause a reversal.

      • chingadera@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Y’all both look right in certain respects, but I do need to point out, Sony is public, and as much as I’d like to comment them on listening to feedback, I guarantee you they have a set threshold on losses per product before they walk back any decision. This is not something they did for their players, it’s something they did for their investors.

        • Farid@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Of course, Sony is corporation and doesn’t do things purely to appease consumers. But they also care about their reputation, so getting negative press is damaging to them.
          Unlike with the Helldivers situation, where people could refund, the examples I listed had no direct way of causing financial damage, only reputational one. And it still worked, cause at the end of the day, reputation converts into money.