{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
7/2/2017 2:40:21 PM
2
I don't get it. Microsoft got better, and improved their console. Why is that a bad thing?
I don't know why you think Microsoft would cancel crossplay if they were leading. Why would they give up an advantage?
English
-
Edited by LahDsai: 7/2/2017 4:48:35 PMThe same reason anyone gives up an advantage, you get cocky. Sony did it with the PS3; they dominated with the PS2 and thought they had a free ticket to gamers' wallets so they released at too high a high price. Microsoft botched up the release of the reveal of the XB1 because they thought they had a hold of the market and gamers would be complacent. Both were cases of "You've got this, just don't f*** it up," and both times they made the mistake of thinking they were to big to fail (relatively, neither the PS3 and XB1 could be called a "failure"). It's like an election, you make promises, but when the time comes to fulfill them after you've won, they often either take a back seat to "more important matters" or suddenly become "more complicated than we anticipated" and abandoned.
-
Neither company was purposely giving up a disadvantage in those scenarios. They just got ahead of themselves and made mistakes. Crossplay, on the other hand, would be an already implemented feature, and there would be no reason to ever disable it. There's a difference between getting cocky and purposely shooting yourself in the foot.
