I don't get why Sony doesn't just come out with it. They outsold Microsoft by a very big margin and they should capitalize on it. Personally I think they should come out and say unlike Microsoft we are confident in our product and it's price point. Make it seem like either cowardice or lack of confidence is what is holding Microsoft back. There only logical reason I can see for waiting is that the supply chain disruptions were more severe or more ongoing then expected and Sony doesn't actually know how much they will sell them for.
Because they don't want Microsoft to look at their numbers, decide to take the hit, and announce a price $50/100 lower.
Brand loyalty really isn't a big thing, it's how the dominant console between the two went from the 360 to the PS4.
It's absolutely a staring contest.
I wouldn't agree that the 360 was the dominant console of last gen outside of the first couple of years.
IMHO, if the difference in price is only $50/100, existing users will tend to stick with their current ecosystems to make the most of BC. For new users, exclusives and what their friends have will be just as important as price.
Things would be different if the gap was $200 like it was when the PS3 launched, but it seems really unlikely that either side is going to make that mistake again.
Sony is probably also going to be the one with more limited capacity than Microsoft, due to Sony's 'unique' SSD. So I don't think they can even capitalize on 'no xbone X available', but I think the reverse will be true.
But one unknown is how will the pandemic affect sales? How can you justify a new console when you're out of a job and just trying to survive on savings and assistance? If either company can answer that question, I think they'll find themselves with a headstart.
I've said it before, but it seems like the biggest sales swings in the last few generations largely haven't been based on doing things really well, but because the other guy fucked things up royal. The PS3 was waaaaaaaay too expensive, and Microsoft's awful-ass One launch (and the price) managed to alienate everyone.
Which will make things very interesting if neither of them fucks up this time (which is looking to be the case). If, say, Series X is $50 cheaper, will it draw people away from Sony, or will there be platform inertia? Or, if Series X manages to be $50 more expensive, will Game Pass be enough of a selling point to regain ground? Could a single game actually help set sales momentum this time? Will the ongoing pandemic amplify even the tiniest difference in price?
This is uncharted territory for video game console launches. It's pretty exciting! ...if you're a nerd about the business like I am.
If Sony were not in a technically (in the sense of system design) more difficult position, I think they would've already undercut Microsoft by forcing their hand. They remember the legendarily bad Playstation 3 reveal with the hilarious controller and the games that no one actually believed would look like that, because they didn't, followed by a legendarily bad launch, because you totally want to put a bounty on unsold consoles, that makes sense.
They didn't repeat those mistakes. Maybe there's something to the rumors about a troubled design process? I would also presume Sony would want to avoid having a massive, tall tower after the positive reception to the Playstation 4 revision that produced a very narrow (though also very deep) console, and the concurrent mockery of the Playstation 4 Pro design, but that was not possible on either model.
But this is the sort of thing we only learn about a few years down the line.
If Sony were not in a technically (in the sense of system design) more difficult position, I think they would've already undercut Microsoft by forcing their hand. They remember the legendarily bad Playstation 3 reveal with the hilarious controller and the games that no one actually believed would look like that, because they didn't, followed by a legendarily bad launch, because you totally want to put a bounty on unsold consoles, that makes sense.
They didn't repeat those mistakes. Maybe there's something to the rumors about a troubled design process? I would also presume Sony would want to avoid having a massive, tall tower after the positive reception to the Playstation 4 revision that produced a very narrow (though also very deep) console, and the concurrent mockery of the Playstation 4 Pro design, but that was not possible on either model.
But this is the sort of thing we only learn about a few years down the line.
I wouldn't say the PS3 launch was legendarily bad -- there were loads of embarrassing missteps, but the controller thing and the bounty didn't really bubble up out of hardcore gamers. Meanwhile Microsoft's "you don't own your games" thing broke into national news and pissed everyone off, even if they weren't hardcore gamers.
Though the PS3's pricealone managed to be be almost as bad as Microsoft's One shenanigans in terms of the effect on sales, and is probably the reason we're in this weird game of chicken. Neither company wants to be the only one stuck with a price that reminds people of the PS3's, but both consoles are apparently so expensive to make it's going to be hard to avoid that.
If Sony were not in a technically (in the sense of system design) more difficult position, I think they would've already undercut Microsoft by forcing their hand. They remember the legendarily bad Playstation 3 reveal with the hilarious controller and the games that no one actually believed would look like that, because they didn't, followed by a legendarily bad launch, because you totally want to put a bounty on unsold consoles, that makes sense.
They didn't repeat those mistakes. Maybe there's something to the rumors about a troubled design process? I would also presume Sony would want to avoid having a massive, tall tower after the positive reception to the Playstation 4 revision that produced a very narrow (though also very deep) console, and the concurrent mockery of the Playstation 4 Pro design, but that was not possible on either model.
But this is the sort of thing we only learn about a few years down the line.
I wouldn't say the PS3 launch was legendarily bad -- there were loads of embarrassing missteps, but the controller thing and the bounty didn't really bubble up out of hardcore gamers. Meanwhile Microsoft's "you don't own your games" thing broke into national news and pissed everyone off, even if they weren't hardcore gamers.
Though the PS3's pricealone managed to be be almost as bad as Microsoft's One shenanigans in terms of the effect on sales, and is probably the reason we're in this weird game of chicken. Neither company wants to be the only one stuck with a price that reminds people of the PS3's, but both consoles are apparently so expensive to make it's going to be hard to avoid that.
Agree to disagree. That many people here still hold it up as a legendarily bad example ("Really? A bounty on unsold consoles? That's incredibly stupid, but it's not like it's the head of Sony of America saying that...") that many years later is telling. Never mind that they completely axed the controller they openly championing because of outcry.
Fast forwarding a decade and a half. I still think the "overheating issues" rumors were overblown if a thing at all (they would explain why the console is so big, but I think Sony just likes how it looks), but I wonder if deciding (I almost said "having to" but even that is dubious) to respond to the desire from Backwards Compatibility considering the state of PSNow is adding an expense, given Sony's history of managing it on the Playstation 3 in the "It only does everything*" era. The PS2 had the distinction of being the eldest, and technological lightest, platform of its generation, as well as being the most successful--the PS4, by contrast, is more powerful than the default models of XB1 and Switch. This sounds like the sort of thing Sony hates to deal with, which is what PSNow was supposed to resolve almost five years ago, but never actually did successfully.
But it could just as easily be the unique yet expandable Nvme storage medium. Or it could not be a technical issue at all. This is the most inside of inside baseball.
Also, I'll take a bet that Super Robot Wars V is not playable on Playstation 5, if anyone's feeling brave.
The PSN hack, lolsony, and PS3 got no games... I mean the PS3 didn't crawl out of its crater until way later on, years later really. Not to mention most 3rd party titles ran on ass for it for the longest time thanks to the processor.
At least with the Xbox they just fucked up the marketing hardcore, but it still had some good games to launch with like Titanfall.
Not to mention most 3rd party titles ran on ass for it for the longest time thanks to the processor.
Weirdly enough, as a Playstation 3 owner (George Foreman grill for life, yo), I don't recall this being an issue until well after the launch. The PS3 did repeat the PS2's troubles of "rather sparing launch lineup", offering the same solution (PS2/PS1 BC), and that's also how we got a complete remake of an original Xbox game as the best hack-and-slash action game on the PS3 for a year or two. But the weird discrepancies between Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 simultaneous releases didn't seem to come until later, I though.
But it was more than ten years ago. Also, I've got Deadly Premonition on the brain lately.
If Sony were not in a technically (in the sense of system design) more difficult position, I think they would've already undercut Microsoft by forcing their hand. They remember the legendarily bad Playstation 3 reveal with the hilarious controller and the games that no one actually believed would look like that, because they didn't, followed by a legendarily bad launch, because you totally want to put a bounty on unsold consoles, that makes sense.
They didn't repeat those mistakes. Maybe there's something to the rumors about a troubled design process? I would also presume Sony would want to avoid having a massive, tall tower after the positive reception to the Playstation 4 revision that produced a very narrow (though also very deep) console, and the concurrent mockery of the Playstation 4 Pro design, but that was not possible on either model.
But this is the sort of thing we only learn about a few years down the line.
I wouldn't say the PS3 launch was legendarily bad -- there were loads of embarrassing missteps, but the controller thing and the bounty didn't really bubble up out of hardcore gamers. Meanwhile Microsoft's "you don't own your games" thing broke into national news and pissed everyone off, even if they weren't hardcore gamers.
Though the PS3's pricealone managed to be be almost as bad as Microsoft's One shenanigans in terms of the effect on sales, and is probably the reason we're in this weird game of chicken. Neither company wants to be the only one stuck with a price that reminds people of the PS3's, but both consoles are apparently so expensive to make it's going to be hard to avoid that.
Agree to disagree. That many people here still hold it up as a legendarily bad example ("Really? A bounty on unsold consoles? That's incredibly stupid, but it's not like it's the head of Sony of America saying that...") that many years later is telling. Never mind that they completely axed the controller they openly championing because of outcry.
Many people here, maybe, but keep in mind the vast majority of the console buying audience ain't us. They don't know who the Sony president is, never mind what he says.
And while the controller was off-putting, they at least had the presence of mind to axe it well before launch. Microsoft bundled Kinect with One for way, way too long even though it was obvious well before launch no one wanted it and it just added $100 to the price. Like I've said, Microsoft's improved mightily since the One launch, but between all that, slowing exclusive game development and essentially telling indies to fuck off, sweet merciful crap that company truly fucked things up for a while.
I remember the differences in Battlefield 4 being stated all over - it’s when the 900p vs 1080p thing started getting big. Tomb Raider though, I don’t recall that.
Yeah, for all of the One's initial problems, I doubt it was hurt at all by performance differences between the systems that are barely perceptible to a lot of hard-core video game enthusiasts.
I really liked some of the games that were announced at the Xbox showcase. The only thing is, I have a PC and the games that are all going Xbox are going to PC.
The PS5 seems like something I would be into, but it doesn't have the games that Xbox showcased, which is angering in some aspects and good in others.
The angering is, I would drop buying a PS5 in a heartbeat if the games showcased were on Xbox console only. The games that are going to be put out for the PS5 don't touch the interest I have in the Xbox games.
Maybe I'm just a PC gamer at heart. Still infuriating to see these things happen this way. I am looking forward to the upcoming launches of both consoles, but this time around, I guess I should wait and buy while upgrading my PC.
I really liked some of the games that were announced at the Xbox showcase. The only thing is, I have a PC and the games that are all going Xbox are going to PC.
The PS5 seems like something I would be into, but it doesn't have the games that Xbox showcased, which is angering in some aspects and good in others.
The angering is, I would drop buying a PS5 in a heartbeat if the games showcased were on Xbox console only. The games that are going to be put out for the PS5 don't touch the interest I have in the Xbox games.
Maybe I'm just a PC gamer at heart. Still infuriating to see these things happen this way. I am looking forward to the upcoming launches of both consoles, but this time around, I guess I should wait and buy while upgrading my PC.
That's a good reason. My "answer" is basically the same one I'd give to myself when pointing out "Actually, almost all the Playstation games I really want to play...ended up coming to PC eventually."
(Sometimes other consoles, but PC yes.)
Namely, they don't always do it well. Nier Automata came to Xbox years ago, and I still think of the very meh PC port at time of release.
Of course, that won't always be true (then again, when HZD comes to PC...it sort of feels like all bets are off, if you wait long enough). Whereas with with Xbox they probably will be. My PC is old enough that it's going to be making the decision for me sooner rather than later, but if by the sounds of it you've updated your setup a good bit more recently than I have. And there is that "maybe."
Microsoft is shifting really hard to make a lot of money on their Game Pass and other software/subscription services. They haven't gone fully to becoming a software company in the console space, but they've made the half step and that's where most of their money is. And it seems those services are making bank for them.
They literally made their own box optional. There's no real good reason to buy an XBox if you're a PC gamer these games outside of the backwards comparability. But they get money from the games and services either way.
They literally made their own box optional. There's no real good reason to buy an XBox if you're a PC gamer these games outside of the backwards comparability. But they get money from the games and services either way.
I mean, I'm a PC Gamer. But the Xbox Series X is going to be cheaper than upgrading my PC to a level of performance comparable to what I'm expecting from the upcoming generation of consoles. So that's a reason--definitely not a universal one, mind you, nor the only one. Microsoft basically introduced the Surface line of devices to get other manufacturers to start making competent Windows tablets and touchscreen laptops, so, ironically, they're the opposite of irreplaceable (they're just widely considered among the best).
The Game Pass library on PC is fundamentally very different than Game Pass on console. If you're interested in Game Pass (a subscription service isn't really for everyone), a large number of third-party games on Game Pass either aren't PC games, or their PC versions aren't on Game Pass (Steam or Epic exclusives, etc., like Ace Combat 7 or Soulcalibur VI). Some are though.
They literally made their own box optional. There's no real good reason to buy an XBox if you're a PC gamer these games outside of the backwards comparability. But they get money from the games and services either way.
I mean, I'm a PC Gamer. But the Xbox Series X is going to be cheaper than upgrading my PC to a level of performance comparable to what I'm expecting from the upcoming generation of consoles. So that's a reason--definitely not a universal one, mind you, nor the only one. Microsoft basically introduced the Surface line of devices to get other manufacturers to start making competent Windows tablets and touchscreen laptops, so, ironically, they're the opposite of irreplaceable (they're just widely considered among the best).
The Game Pass library on PC is fundamentally very different than Game Pass on console. If you're interested in Game Pass (a subscription service isn't really for everyone), a large number of third-party games on Game Pass either aren't PC games, or their PC versions aren't on Game Pass (Steam or Epic exclusives, etc., like Ace Combat 7 or Soulcalibur VI). Some are though.
Which are fair points.
On the other hand, if you have a PC, PlayStation, and Switch you get all the exclusives. And both Sony and Nintendo have banger AAA exclusives that are well worth the price of admission. Microsoft releasing everything semi-multiplatform doesn't have that sell point. To me those exclusives are a bigger pull than the differences between XBox and PC Game Passes but opinions will vary.
They literally made their own box optional. There's no real good reason to buy an XBox if you're a PC gamer these games outside of the backwards comparability. But they get money from the games and services either way.
I mean, I'm a PC Gamer. But the Xbox Series X is going to be cheaper than upgrading my PC to a level of performance comparable to what I'm expecting from the upcoming generation of consoles. So that's a reason--definitely not a universal one, mind you, nor the only one. Microsoft basically introduced the Surface line of devices to get other manufacturers to start making competent Windows tablets and touchscreen laptops, so, ironically, they're the opposite of irreplaceable (they're just widely considered among the best).
The Game Pass library on PC is fundamentally very different than Game Pass on console. If you're interested in Game Pass (a subscription service isn't really for everyone), a large number of third-party games on Game Pass either aren't PC games, or their PC versions aren't on Game Pass (Steam or Epic exclusives, etc., like Ace Combat 7 or Soulcalibur VI). Some are though.
Which are fair points.
On the other hand, if you have a PC, PlayStation, and Switch you get all the exclusives. And both Sony and Nintendo have banger AAA exclusives that are well worth the price of admission. Microsoft releasing everything semi-multiplatform doesn't have that sell point. To me those exclusives are a bigger pull than the differences between XBox and PC Game Passes but opinions will vary.
True. Assuming your PC can run the Xbox exclusives. You'll get none of the BC library, but again, that's a specific area (about ~700 original Xbox and Xbox 360 games, plus a couple hundred Xbox One games before they started coming to PC). Sony's PS3 sales actually did better in the long run after they dropped BC (granted, it was an really low bar in that early period, coincidentally), so there's a logic to it.
Wait long enough, and with a PC and a Switch, you'll probably get almost all the exclusives by themselves (as things stand...you're next, God of War). Personally I don't own a Switch because Nintendo's first party games don't interest me (this is absolutely something that could be applied to Microsoft or Sony, though with a different library size), and it's not necessarily an ideal place to play third-party titles (for performance and networking reasons).
This also gets into making predictions about future policies, which is something I hate (I did not think Sony was going to drop PS2 BC completely, to start).
The benefit of owning a PC + Xbox is Gampass Ultimate, which is a massive value in itself. If you don't see the value in that, then just one or other will suffice.
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
Yeah, for all of the One's initial problems, I doubt it was hurt at all by performance differences between the systems that are barely perceptible to a lot of hard-core video game enthusiasts.
The moment I sold my 360 and all my games was when Don Mattrick was being interviewed at E3 and said "For people who don't have reliable internet, we have a product for them, it's called the Xbox 360". The sheer degree of arrogance and hubris was where they lost me and I decided to get a PS3 plus a Vita. The Vita was one of my favourite consoles of all time and the PS3 had sorted its issues by the time I got one. The PS4 has been a really great experience so far and so, barring Sony doing something stupid, I'll just buy a PS5. Microsoft haven't done very well with exclusives this generation and nothing they showed at their event really caught my imagination - certainly nothing I am invested in as much as a sequel to Horizon for example.
Also the PS3 launch was terrible, but Microsoft outdid Sony with the One by orders of magnitude. MS lost all of their ground everywhere, got outsold a reported 4:1 this generation and completely lost most developers as the primary console they made games for. PS3 was competitive, even outselling the Xbox 360, in many markets. The One by all accounts trailed the PS4 in just about every major market world wide.
I loved my 360, and stuck with their ecosystem for the XBO generation. And the thing is that while I've played some of the best games of my life on the XBO, precisely zero of those were exclusives.
Sony has had the far better exclusives lineup this time around, from the perspective of someone unable to play them.
I'm very likely to switch camps and get a PS5 next year, with the added benefit of catching up on PS4 titles I missed along the way. Barring insane price differentials, or other as yet unknown factors.
Im pretty sure it will be horizon 2 and the rest of the ff7 remake stuff that will sell the ps5. there are also a lot of ps4 games that would be so much better to play without long load times. xbox has like halo, and i guess theyre making another fable. at this point so long as all my ps4 games are backwards compatible, theres no reason to get an xbox. i have the game pass on my computer and it really doesn't have too many games that i want to play.
I’ve never understood the appeal of Xbox. Of Microsoft’s whole library, Rare Replay is the only title I find appealing. The Xbox game showcase did nothing to change my mind. I didn’t see anything that seemed next-gen, probably because they’re all going to be on Xbox One as well.
Between gamepass, xcloud, and not making next-gen exclusives for a while, I wonder if MIcrosoft is gunning for the "too poor to buy sony" crowd. Which could now equal the unemployed crowd.
Between gamepass, xcloud, and not making next-gen exclusives for a while, I wonder if MIcrosoft is gunning for the "too poor to buy sony" crowd. Which could now equal the unemployed crowd.
On a list of hot takes, this one is lukewarm and probably needs more time in the microwave
I’ve never understood the appeal of Xbox. Of Microsoft’s whole library, Rare Replay is the only title I find appealing. The Xbox game showcase did nothing to change my mind. I didn’t see anything that seemed next-gen, probably because they’re all going to be on Xbox One as well.
They acquired a lot of studios lately, the biggest one in my mind being Obsidian. Which isn't quite as big as Sony acquiring Insomniac, but still pretty big.
But yeah, after an entire generation of pretty much no 1st party anything Microsoft started realizing their mistake at the very end of this generation. But it's gonna take a while to see what those studios come out with.... and they'll all be available on PC.
Between gamepass, xcloud, and not making next-gen exclusives for a while, I wonder if MIcrosoft is gunning for the "too poor to buy sony" crowd. Which could now equal the unemployed crowd.
On a list of hot takes, this one is lukewarm and probably needs more time in the microwave
actually i work in cps and therefore with a lot of poorer people and the amount of poor people who have xboxs is way higher than playstations. of course that's only anecdotal to the area i live but i talk to kids about things they like to do as an icebreaker to their interviews and probably 99% of them involve talking about video games so the xbox vs playstation question comes up a lot.
Between gamepass, xcloud, and not making next-gen exclusives for a while, I wonder if MIcrosoft is gunning for the "too poor to buy sony" crowd. Which could now equal the unemployed crowd.
On a list of hot takes, this one is lukewarm and probably needs more time in the microwave
actually i work in cps and therefore with a lot of poorer people and the amount of poor people who have xboxs is way higher than playstations. of course that's only anecdotal to the area i live but i talk to kids about things they like to do as an icebreaker to their interviews and probably 99% of them involve talking about video games so the xbox vs playstation question comes up a lot.
I think this comes down to area then, where I grew up everyone went with Sony by default, but mostly because no one had internet so Xbox live wasn't on the table. Idk maybe things have changed since I was young/poor.
I still think it's an exercise in questionable taste to label one box as the "poor people's choice." Because on a lot of levels, this conversation is pretty gross. Pretty sure if people want a specific console, they'll save for it regardless of which one it is.
Social groups can influence it. If one person buys an Xbox/PS, their friends are more likely to buy an Xbox/PS as well so they can all play Popular Game together online.
I’ve never understood the appeal of Xbox. Of Microsoft’s whole library, Rare Replay is the only title I find appealing. The Xbox game showcase did nothing to change my mind. I didn’t see anything that seemed next-gen, probably because they’re all going to be on Xbox One as well.
They're not all going to be on Xbox One. Which is making people wonder whether some of the games (like Avowed) are not expected to come out for a couple of years.
At least in my case, I usually play RPGs and derivatives pretty exclusively, the sportsball and John Shootman genre of games that XBox was mostly a platform for didn't generally appeal to me. As a result, an XBox was pretty much a non-factor from the outset; but having them available on PC means I'll at least get to play the couple of things I am interested in but wouldn't have played otherwise since I certainly wouldn't have bought an XBoxX for just Fable.
When the Xbox first came out, I had a pretty good PC along with a Playstation, and that's how it's been since. Microsoft isn't getting my money twice, lol.
Playstation is offering jack to people who aren't feeling $400+ up front this holiday. Yes game spending is up from those who have jobs, but many are still locked in their homes even though they have no work from home to do.
Maybe "poor" isn't the best word but we are living in gross income inequality exacerbated by a pandemic. Sony is offering zero new games for those just getting by, or just feeling like they need to save for emergencies. Microsoft is giving you new games for your old console or what will likely be dirt cheap One-S, at the value price of gamepass. Of course there's also the splurge option of Series X etc. but they aren't forcing you down that path to keep up with gaming. Its a market that Sony is leaving wide open, and Microsoft is pursuing it with a pile of smaller, less blockbuster games filling up gamepass that can run on a VCR or phone.
Posts
I wouldn't agree that the 360 was the dominant console of last gen outside of the first couple of years.
IMHO, if the difference in price is only $50/100, existing users will tend to stick with their current ecosystems to make the most of BC. For new users, exclusives and what their friends have will be just as important as price.
Things would be different if the gap was $200 like it was when the PS3 launched, but it seems really unlikely that either side is going to make that mistake again.
But one unknown is how will the pandemic affect sales? How can you justify a new console when you're out of a job and just trying to survive on savings and assistance? If either company can answer that question, I think they'll find themselves with a headstart.
Which will make things very interesting if neither of them fucks up this time (which is looking to be the case). If, say, Series X is $50 cheaper, will it draw people away from Sony, or will there be platform inertia? Or, if Series X manages to be $50 more expensive, will Game Pass be enough of a selling point to regain ground? Could a single game actually help set sales momentum this time? Will the ongoing pandemic amplify even the tiniest difference in price?
This is uncharted territory for video game console launches. It's pretty exciting! ...if you're a nerd about the business like I am.
They didn't repeat those mistakes. Maybe there's something to the rumors about a troubled design process? I would also presume Sony would want to avoid having a massive, tall tower after the positive reception to the Playstation 4 revision that produced a very narrow (though also very deep) console, and the concurrent mockery of the Playstation 4 Pro design, but that was not possible on either model.
But this is the sort of thing we only learn about a few years down the line.
I wouldn't say the PS3 launch was legendarily bad -- there were loads of embarrassing missteps, but the controller thing and the bounty didn't really bubble up out of hardcore gamers. Meanwhile Microsoft's "you don't own your games" thing broke into national news and pissed everyone off, even if they weren't hardcore gamers.
Though the PS3's pricealone managed to be be almost as bad as Microsoft's One shenanigans in terms of the effect on sales, and is probably the reason we're in this weird game of chicken. Neither company wants to be the only one stuck with a price that reminds people of the PS3's, but both consoles are apparently so expensive to make it's going to be hard to avoid that.
Agree to disagree. That many people here still hold it up as a legendarily bad example ("Really? A bounty on unsold consoles? That's incredibly stupid, but it's not like it's the head of Sony of America saying that...") that many years later is telling. Never mind that they completely axed the controller they openly championing because of outcry.
Fast forwarding a decade and a half. I still think the "overheating issues" rumors were overblown if a thing at all (they would explain why the console is so big, but I think Sony just likes how it looks), but I wonder if deciding (I almost said "having to" but even that is dubious) to respond to the desire from Backwards Compatibility considering the state of PSNow is adding an expense, given Sony's history of managing it on the Playstation 3 in the "It only does everything*" era. The PS2 had the distinction of being the eldest, and technological lightest, platform of its generation, as well as being the most successful--the PS4, by contrast, is more powerful than the default models of XB1 and Switch. This sounds like the sort of thing Sony hates to deal with, which is what PSNow was supposed to resolve almost five years ago, but never actually did successfully.
But it could just as easily be the unique yet expandable Nvme storage medium. Or it could not be a technical issue at all. This is the most inside of inside baseball.
Also, I'll take a bet that Super Robot Wars V is not playable on Playstation 5, if anyone's feeling brave.
At least with the Xbox they just fucked up the marketing hardcore, but it still had some good games to launch with like Titanfall.
Weirdly enough, as a Playstation 3 owner (George Foreman grill for life, yo), I don't recall this being an issue until well after the launch. The PS3 did repeat the PS2's troubles of "rather sparing launch lineup", offering the same solution (PS2/PS1 BC), and that's also how we got a complete remake of an original Xbox game as the best hack-and-slash action game on the PS3 for a year or two. But the weird discrepancies between Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 simultaneous releases didn't seem to come until later, I though.
But it was more than ten years ago. Also, I've got Deadly Premonition on the brain lately.
Many people here, maybe, but keep in mind the vast majority of the console buying audience ain't us. They don't know who the Sony president is, never mind what he says.
And while the controller was off-putting, they at least had the presence of mind to axe it well before launch. Microsoft bundled Kinect with One for way, way too long even though it was obvious well before launch no one wanted it and it just added $100 to the price. Like I've said, Microsoft's improved mightily since the One launch, but between all that, slowing exclusive game development and essentially telling indies to fuck off, sweet merciful crap that company truly fucked things up for a while.
(Honestly, the difference isn't that big...I think. But this is all hindsight.)
This is the exact type of thing that hurt the Xbox One early on though, remember the Tomb Raider controversy?
The PS5 seems like something I would be into, but it doesn't have the games that Xbox showcased, which is angering in some aspects and good in others.
The angering is, I would drop buying a PS5 in a heartbeat if the games showcased were on Xbox console only. The games that are going to be put out for the PS5 don't touch the interest I have in the Xbox games.
Maybe I'm just a PC gamer at heart. Still infuriating to see these things happen this way. I am looking forward to the upcoming launches of both consoles, but this time around, I guess I should wait and buy while upgrading my PC.
That's a good reason. My "answer" is basically the same one I'd give to myself when pointing out "Actually, almost all the Playstation games I really want to play...ended up coming to PC eventually."
(Sometimes other consoles, but PC yes.)
Namely, they don't always do it well. Nier Automata came to Xbox years ago, and I still think of the very meh PC port at time of release.
Of course, that won't always be true (then again, when HZD comes to PC...it sort of feels like all bets are off, if you wait long enough). Whereas with with Xbox they probably will be. My PC is old enough that it's going to be making the decision for me sooner rather than later, but if by the sounds of it you've updated your setup a good bit more recently than I have. And there is that "maybe."
So a PS5 wouldn't be a bad idea!
They literally made their own box optional. There's no real good reason to buy an XBox if you're a PC gamer these games outside of the backwards comparability. But they get money from the games and services either way.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
I mean, I'm a PC Gamer. But the Xbox Series X is going to be cheaper than upgrading my PC to a level of performance comparable to what I'm expecting from the upcoming generation of consoles. So that's a reason--definitely not a universal one, mind you, nor the only one. Microsoft basically introduced the Surface line of devices to get other manufacturers to start making competent Windows tablets and touchscreen laptops, so, ironically, they're the opposite of irreplaceable (they're just widely considered among the best).
The Game Pass library on PC is fundamentally very different than Game Pass on console. If you're interested in Game Pass (a subscription service isn't really for everyone), a large number of third-party games on Game Pass either aren't PC games, or their PC versions aren't on Game Pass (Steam or Epic exclusives, etc., like Ace Combat 7 or Soulcalibur VI). Some are though.
Which are fair points.
On the other hand, if you have a PC, PlayStation, and Switch you get all the exclusives. And both Sony and Nintendo have banger AAA exclusives that are well worth the price of admission. Microsoft releasing everything semi-multiplatform doesn't have that sell point. To me those exclusives are a bigger pull than the differences between XBox and PC Game Passes but opinions will vary.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
True. Assuming your PC can run the Xbox exclusives. You'll get none of the BC library, but again, that's a specific area (about ~700 original Xbox and Xbox 360 games, plus a couple hundred Xbox One games before they started coming to PC). Sony's PS3 sales actually did better in the long run after they dropped BC (granted, it was an really low bar in that early period, coincidentally), so there's a logic to it.
Wait long enough, and with a PC and a Switch, you'll probably get almost all the exclusives by themselves (as things stand...you're next, God of War). Personally I don't own a Switch because Nintendo's first party games don't interest me (this is absolutely something that could be applied to Microsoft or Sony, though with a different library size), and it's not necessarily an ideal place to play third-party titles (for performance and networking reasons).
This also gets into making predictions about future policies, which is something I hate (I did not think Sony was going to drop PS2 BC completely, to start).
The moment I sold my 360 and all my games was when Don Mattrick was being interviewed at E3 and said "For people who don't have reliable internet, we have a product for them, it's called the Xbox 360". The sheer degree of arrogance and hubris was where they lost me and I decided to get a PS3 plus a Vita. The Vita was one of my favourite consoles of all time and the PS3 had sorted its issues by the time I got one. The PS4 has been a really great experience so far and so, barring Sony doing something stupid, I'll just buy a PS5. Microsoft haven't done very well with exclusives this generation and nothing they showed at their event really caught my imagination - certainly nothing I am invested in as much as a sequel to Horizon for example.
Also the PS3 launch was terrible, but Microsoft outdid Sony with the One by orders of magnitude. MS lost all of their ground everywhere, got outsold a reported 4:1 this generation and completely lost most developers as the primary console they made games for. PS3 was competitive, even outselling the Xbox 360, in many markets. The One by all accounts trailed the PS4 in just about every major market world wide.
Sony has had the far better exclusives lineup this time around, from the perspective of someone unable to play them.
I'm very likely to switch camps and get a PS5 next year, with the added benefit of catching up on PS4 titles I missed along the way. Barring insane price differentials, or other as yet unknown factors.
I'm getting a PS5 because I want to play the sequels to the exclusives/whatever those teams do next.
I think they have to be done with Uncharted, unless they go with a story about their daughter, and I don't think we'll get LoU3 for a long while.
Steam: https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198004484595
On a list of hot takes, this one is lukewarm and probably needs more time in the microwave
They acquired a lot of studios lately, the biggest one in my mind being Obsidian. Which isn't quite as big as Sony acquiring Insomniac, but still pretty big.
But yeah, after an entire generation of pretty much no 1st party anything Microsoft started realizing their mistake at the very end of this generation. But it's gonna take a while to see what those studios come out with.... and they'll all be available on PC.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
actually i work in cps and therefore with a lot of poorer people and the amount of poor people who have xboxs is way higher than playstations. of course that's only anecdotal to the area i live but i talk to kids about things they like to do as an icebreaker to their interviews and probably 99% of them involve talking about video games so the xbox vs playstation question comes up a lot.
Steam: https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198004484595
I think this comes down to area then, where I grew up everyone went with Sony by default, but mostly because no one had internet so Xbox live wasn't on the table. Idk maybe things have changed since I was young/poor.
I still think it's an exercise in questionable taste to label one box as the "poor people's choice." Because on a lot of levels, this conversation is pretty gross. Pretty sure if people want a specific console, they'll save for it regardless of which one it is.
// Switch: SW-5306-0651-6424 //
They're not all going to be on Xbox One. Which is making people wonder whether some of the games (like Avowed) are not expected to come out for a couple of years.
Maybe "poor" isn't the best word but we are living in gross income inequality exacerbated by a pandemic. Sony is offering zero new games for those just getting by, or just feeling like they need to save for emergencies. Microsoft is giving you new games for your old console or what will likely be dirt cheap One-S, at the value price of gamepass. Of course there's also the splurge option of Series X etc. but they aren't forcing you down that path to keep up with gaming. Its a market that Sony is leaving wide open, and Microsoft is pursuing it with a pile of smaller, less blockbuster games filling up gamepass that can run on a VCR or phone.