• bl4ckblooc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Then the companies should pay for the licensing and testing? It’s unfortunate for sure but it does make some sense, and I highly doubt that they knew every single combination of peripherals that’s people were using to overcome disabilities on Xbox. Especially since some of them are for older consoles/pc as the article suggests.

    • schmidtster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      That’s what they want, MS doesn’t like you can make your own controller and they don’t get any cut, it even costs them a sale on a peripheral if you can make your own. Especially now they have their own adaptive ecosystem.

      There won’t be any changes, this was done for the specific reason of removing those devices so they need to pay to allow their customers to use them again, or MS gets people buying theirs.

      • bl4ckblooc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I mean, obviously they would want people buying controllers for THEIR system to use THEIR controllers. And they have had their own adaptive ecosystem for years now, to the point that it is considered the best adaptive controller on the market. But it seems impossible to even have a discussion with you so have fun being angry.

        • schmidtster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Pardon? No other manufacturer has made a decision to lock out third party controllers until now.

          We are having a discussion, no? You’ve made some points, that aren’t entirely correct and I’ve politely explained why that isn’t true necessarily.

          Of course people don’t like having their assumptions pointed out as incorrect, sorry.

          • bl4ckblooc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            That was not a discussion lol that was you shutting down any opposing idea because you seemed to know better. Don’t yell at people and not listen to them and then say ‘ I thought this was a discussion’. You didn’t really refute anything other than saying MS wants money over and over.

            • schmidtster@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Because that’s what they want? What else would it be? This isn’t something that beneficial for the community no how you attempt to swing it.

              I’m not yelling, I’m correcting someone who is attempting to defend a volatile decision. But if that’s what you want to assume, clearly you never came here in good faith either, goes both ways.

              • bl4ckblooc@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Whenever someone proof of their idea is ‘why else?’ they aren’t trying to have a discussion because they already stated that they have no intention of looking at other opinions. You are making just as much if not more assumptions.

                And I made a comment on the post, you replied to my comment. The both ways argument doesn’t really fit here.

                • schmidtster@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  We were having a discussion before that phrase and since you’ve pointed out we weren’t I stopped. So to call that out after is extremely disingenuous… however….all I wanted was to see how you came to the conclusion that this was an error on Microsoft’s part, when part of their policy is to allow ONLY first party devices.

                  That means ones that have paid a fee and gotten their stuff tested. They’ve told you their intentions, and you want to claim I’m making it up? Good lord read some articles about this before spouting your opinion maybe if that’s the case.

                  You made a comment in a public forum, people responding and wanting to have discussions go hand in hand…. Or why else would you be commenting…? To be heard by others but not wanting to listen back? Yeah that’s coming in with good faith lmfao.