Rant 3 - Microsoft, WTF mate!?

I'm so glad that I went through the extra effort to support Microsoft on day-one of their 360 launch, bought the premium version of the console, and have now had to repair it twice, paying for shipping once.

My story goes somewhat like this (this is the abridged version):

• On launch day, I buy a premium 360 and am pleased as punch.
• Shortly after Dead Rising is released, but after beating the game, I get the red ring of death.
• It's past the period of time where Microsoft is paying for shipping, so I have to pack my 360 up and send it off via UPS, paying for the shipping of the 8lb brick myself.
• I wait about 4 weeks and get a new (refurbished) 360 back in the mail.
• I fire it up and it's a LOT louder than my first 360, but it plays games just fine, except...
• None of my XBLA games work unless I'm connected to the internet and signed into Xbox Live.
• I call Microsoft and tell them about the XBLA problem and after exchanging phone calls with them for literally 3+ months, I finally get new versions of my XBLA games that work on my new console.
• Meanwhile the replacement they sent me is getting louder and louder when I play disc-based games.
• 3 weeks ago, I call Microsoft and tell them that my console sounds like a helicopter (I had it on and in a perfect moment in life, the customer service rep asked me what the noise in the background was because it was hard to hear me. "That's my console", I replied. "Oh, that's not right", she said.) No, Microsoft. No it's not.
• They send me a box this time, and I pack my 2nd 360 into it and prepare to wait the 4 - 6 weeks (or 6 - 8 depending on which email I believe) until I'm gaming on my premium 360 which I bought on launch day, contributing to all those fantastic sales statistics that Microsoft has been using to add to their marketing might.
• Bioshock comes out tomorrow and I'm still waiting for my replacement.

Now, I appreciate them replacing my 360 each time, and extending the warranty like they've done, but seriously, Microsoft, what THE fuck were you thinking releasing this piece of shit product?

A quick disclaimer: when the 360 is working correctly, it is a fantastic piece of hardware.

The problems it has, though, are so gnarly that I cannot help but feel gypped by Microsoft.

To add insult to injury, they've dropped the price, released the "Elite" version of the console, replaced faulty hardware that was used in the first few runs of the console with actually good hardware, and now added an HDMI port to all standard "premium" versions of the console which cost $30 less than what I paid for my "premium" console on launch day.

Again, Microsoft, WTF mate!?

I have a TV that supports HDMI. I would LOVE to have an HDMI port on the back of my console which is branded exactly the same as the new "premium" version of the console. But I guess my premium isn't as premium as the new premiums. Makes sense, really. Wait. No. Actually it makes no effing sense at all.

I say, if you're going to fuck over your fan-base, do it the way that everyone else does; by releasing good products and revising them over and over and over. That's how you're going to get me to make multiple purchases.

Look at Apple and Nintendo for just two examples. You know how many freaking devices I've purchased that play GBA games!? Let's see:

1. GBA
2. GBA-SP
3. Game Boy Player
   
4. DS
5. Game Boy micro
6. DS lite

You know how they got me to purchase each of those? They did it by making each one a high-quality product, making me WANT to give my money to Nintendo.

The way you're going, Microsoft, you're only making me resentful and angry. And, this just in, angry and resentful consumers find brand-loyalty elsewhere.

-CV

Sex and the ESRB

A rant should be nonsensical, right? I mean, it should be raw, aimless, and opinionated without providing any supporting facts. It should be emotionally charged, hard-hitting and without deep intellectual stimulation. When you’re finished digesting it, in fact, you might wonder what it is you’ve just read. Was it something about video games or something about hair gel? In the end, you’ll probably move onto your favorite porn site and forget all about this “rant.” I don’t mind.

But, since your mind is on porn anyway, consider the ESRB (Entertainment Software Ratings Board) and the AO (Adults Only) rating. If you’re reading this, chances are you’ve played your share of E, E10+, T, and M-rated games. You’ve played an M-rated gore-fest full of gratuitous blood, dismemberment, guns, foul language, and racial slurs. It makes sense that this is given an M rating, right? But what’s the difference between M and AO? Why wasn’t your game assigned an AO for all that blood and violence?

It’s simple: sex. Until very recently, the only obvious distinguishing factor between an M and an AO is sexual content. While I don’t advocate sexual content for its own sake, I find it disturbing that our society (as interpreted by the ESRB) finds violence, blood, gore, etc., acceptable for 17 year olds, but naked breasts off limits. This is a fundamental problem with the ESRB’s system. If you’re a game designer and you wanted to make (for example) a violence-free game that told the story of the Kama Sutra in full 1080p detail, you’d earn an AO rating.

So what? Who cares what rating you get, right? Just make whatever game you want, as you want it, and let the ESRB tag it however they see fit. In the end, it doesn’t make a difference, right? Tell that to Rockstar. It’s a little known fact that Nintendo and Sony have a standing policy to reject AO rated games. This is the problem Manhunt 2 ran into. By earning an AO rating (for violence, not sex), the ESRB was essentially telling Rockstar that they couldn’t sell their game. Sony and Nintendo wouldn’t approve it.

Look closely at the ratings and you’ll see an M-rating is for anyone 17 and up. An AO rating is for Adults only. Of course, in America, you’re considered an adult at 18. This implies that 17 year olds aren’t mature enough to view the sexually explicit content that would earn an AO rating. I can’t speak for every man and woman in America, but when I turned 18, I didn’t know much more than I knew when I was 17. And, when I was 17, it wasn’t as though I hadn’t seen a naked girl before.

Of course, this isn’t the ESRB’s fault. They just assign the rating. And, honestly, I’m a huge fan of the ESRB system. I find it much more thorough and helpful than the comparable movie rating system. But the ESRB can improve. With only a year between the age limit for M rated games and AO rated games, is it really fair – or useful -- to have an AO rating? Given the recent political microscope video games are held under, should the ESRB once again refine their rating system? Should they do away with the AO rating, make the M rating apply to anyone 18 or older, and show no rating distinction between adult-oriented violence and sexual content?

I vote yes.