With the Rumours of MS going third party what platform are you going to be playing there games on from now on?

Punished Miku said:
Xbox.

I will add that if they're not 3rd party by the end of 2024, no one can deny that the "Xbox tax" is real ever again. This is taxing the brand, taxing console adoption, constantly prodding and pushing negativity and openly insinuating that you shouldn't buy anything from them. If it was all based on misunderstanding and exaggeration, that's truly going to be a statement about gaming discourse.

I'm willing to wait and see what happens, one way or the other. We'll either learn about their 3rd party transition this year, or I'll learn how stacked against them the entire industry narrative really is with relentless negativity trying to tear them down constantly and push gaming into a console monopoly. I'm fine learning the truth either way. Let's see how it goes.
Click to expand...
If the rumors were invented with bad intentions, I could understand some part of your post. But this is a little too far. Because some people in Neogaf, Era, twiter and Reddit got to conclusions too fast( and even you admit that we have to see what wil happen) Xbox tax is real? Huge difference between the two notions to me. How should we react to those rumors,some of them being said by posters here in Neogaf since a few months at least? Even clear Xbox fans/influencers like Colteastwood, Timdog and Klobrille got shocked and had a reaction close to ours. Klobrille in particular had a pretty good post about why it may sucks if games like Hi fi Rush do get a PS5/switch version.
 
GHG said:
But that's the thing we've already had that scenario. If anything, I was being conservative with quoting $800.

In 2006 the PS3 cost $600. Adjusted for inflation, that's ~$950 in today's money.

How did that play out for them?
Click to expand...

That wasn't the same scenario. PS3 was overenginnered, cost way too much to make and things didn't turn out well for them because Xbox 360 was sitting there on the shelf next to PS3 for $200 cheaper.

Zheph said:
It is wild to think there are no other alternatives and PS6 will suddenly cost 1k

the broad statement you just made is true tho
Click to expand...

I didn't say PS6 would coast 1k. What are the alternatives in the console market? Most console gamers don't want a gaming PC under their living room television. That's why they bought a console. And you ain't playing the same games on a Nintendo Switch as you are with Xbox and PlayStation.
 
I only really play on the playstation ecosphere. So it would have to be there if they have a game I want to play.
 
GHG said:
That's cool.

But if you're going to share the stance that you did it would be nice if you could substantiate your thinking.

Based on everything I know it makes no sense and they would only be harming their market position if they were to do such a thing.



But that's the thing we've already had that scenario. If anything, I was being conservative with quoting $800.

In 2006 the PS3 cost $600. Adjusted for inflation, that's ~$950 in today's money.

How did that play out for them?
Click to expand...
I thought I had made it pretty clear that if Sony has no real competition they can charge a little extra for everything and there is nothing to keep them in check

There are still a huge number of gamers that want the console under their TV, come home from a hard day at work and push the button and play and do not want a PC in their living rooms

People still need that convenience

And people are not buying the Switch to play the top PS played games which for 2023 are likely all multiplat games like your COD, Fifa, GTA, Fortnites of the world

In my opinion no real competition is not good

Topher said:
That wasn't the same scenario. PS3 was overenginnered, cost way too much to make and things didn't turn out well for them because Xbox 360 was sitting there on the shelf next to PS3 for $200 cheaper.



I didn't say PS6 would coast 1k. What are the alternatives in the console market? Most console gamers don't want a gaming PC under their living room television. That's why they bought a console. And you ain't playing the same games on a Nintendo Switch as you are with Xbox and PlayStation.
Click to expand...

Not sure why people have a hard time with this
 
Last edited:
Topher said:
That wasn't the same scenario. PS3 was overenginnered, cost way too much to make and things didn't turn out well for them because Xbox 360 was sitting there on the shelf next to PS3 for $200 cheaper.
Click to expand...

They overengineered the console because they thought they could get away with it coming off the success of the PS2. These things don't happen by accident.

I can tell you for a fact that if they were to pull a 2006 again and Xbox no longer exists Apple will enter the market almost instantly, they have the relationships and chips ready to go. But that will be the least of their worries, all of the things I mentioned before would pose a more immediate threat.
 
Last edited:
GHG said:
They overengineered the console because they thought they could get away with it coming off the success of the PS2. These things don't happen by accident.

I can tell you for a fact that if they were to pull a 2006 again and Xbox no longer exists Apple will enter the market almost instantly, they have the relationships and chips ready to go. But that will be the least of their worries, all of the things I mentioned before would pose a more immediate threat.
Click to expand...
You trust Apple to keep prices down?

Oh Come On GIF
 
Topher said:
I didn't say PS6 would coast 1k. What are the alternatives in the console market? Most console gamers don't want a gaming PC under their living room television. That's why they bought a console. And you ain't playing the same games on a Nintendo Switch as you are with Xbox and PlayStation.
Click to expand...
You already have something like a steam deck for example it might not be as plug and play as a console yey but its not a PC either and with a simple dock you can play AAA on your TV.
Nintendo will release a new device eventually that might be up to part
Other companies might see an opportunity
You can play RE4 on iPhone, there will be more alternatives like that too
its not that black and white
 
Topher said:
And you ain't playing the same games on a Nintendo Switch as you are with Xbox and PlayStation.
Click to expand...
And? Why is this a problem? What's the material difference between a cod on PlayStation vs ms? Not much of anything. One can go. You could go to your ps/pc for games like that then go to Nintendo for their games.
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
You trust Apple to keep prices down?

Oh Come On GIF
Click to expand...

That's the point!! (I hate using exclamation marks but they are applicable here)

Apple aren't going to enter unless the door is opened and prices are higher. A scenario where prices have increased for consoles makes it more likely that Apple (who love high prices, and their chips are not cheap) will enter. That would then pose a much bigger threat to Sony than Xbox ever has been. Hence one of my first replies in this discussion:

GHG said:
The reason that's an important point is this - if a company abuses their market position and puts prices up too much then they are putting themselves in a vulnerable position whereby it becomes easier for new (or existing) businesses to enter the market and steal market share. Excessive pricing makes consumers more receptive to alternatives, not the opposite.
Click to expand...

None of the reasons people are coming up with for this scenario where suddenly Sony are going to drop some $800+ console on us are grounded in economic reality, it's all fear and emotional.

Could they do it? Yeh of course (they could do it now with the little threat Xbox are posing), but they would be exceedingly stupid to do so and would risk putting themselves out of business.
 
Last edited:
Astray said:
Always makes me laugh when people think other gigacorps will just let Sony have a nice time alone at the top when that has literally never been the case at any point in time since the NES came out.
Click to expand...
The console market is completely different nowadays, Im pretty confident that no-one will stepping into the business of selling consoles as we know them anytime soon. The market would however see competition from mobile, streaming, fixed format PC (ie deck), lower power alternatives (ie apple tv), GaaS platforms (ie the new robloxy Fortnite).
GHG said:
None of the reasons people are coming up with for this scenario where suddenly Sony are going to drop some $800+ console on us are grounded in economic reality, it's all fear and emotional.
Click to expand...
Sony charging $800 for a console it costs them $800 to make isn't a nutty idea. Apple make a shit ton of money from their app store, but they also make a shit ton of money selling their hardware at a massive profit. And they also have tons of competition - honestly it's the console market that is screwy.
 
Last edited:
GHG said:
They overenginnered the console because they thought they could get away with it coming off the success of the PS2. These things don't happen by accident.

I can tell you for a fact that if they were to pull a 2006 again and Xbox no longer exists Apple will enter the market almost instantly, they have the relationships and chips ready to go. But that will be the least of their worries, all of the things I mentioned before would pose a more immediate threat.
Click to expand...

Right....and competition set Sony straight. They learned the hard way and it made PS4 that much better.

Apple doesn't have any studios to make games to compete with PlayStation. What are they going to offer?

Zheph said:
You already have something like a steam deck for example it might not be as plug and play as a console yey but its not a PC either and with a simple dock you can play AAA on your TV.
Nintendo will release a new device eventually that might be up to part
Other companies might see an opportunity
You can play RE4 on iPhone, there will be more alternatives like that too
its not that black and white
Click to expand...

In the console market it pretty much is. PlayStation has one direct competitor: Xbox. Closest new company I could think of is Amazon since they already have a game presence, but they would already be light years behind where Microsoft is now. I just don't see it. Steam Deck and iPhone are just not viable alternatives, imo.

OmegaSupreme said:
And? Why is this a problem? What's the material difference between a cod on PlayStation vs ms? Not much of anything. One can go. You could go to your ps/pc for games like that then go to Nintendo for their games.
Click to expand...

Sure. And PlayStation sits alone in a console space where they were once had competition. That's my point.
 
Last edited:
I will play Xbox games on Xbox. Depending on the game and console I could play on PlayStation aswell but prolly I'll stick to Xbox. My goal is having both consoles of course. And I don't believe Xbox won't keep any exclusives at all.
 
Topher Topher GHG GHG The biggest FUD Microsoft ever spread to the gaming sphere is the idea that we need them specifically to stay in the console race, when historically, there always were new entrants to the space to replace the old. Hell, even if no one new enters the ring, this still isn't the 90's or 00's.. The gaming sector is far more competitive and agile than it ever was.

The guys who tell us that we're close to a post-console future are the same ones who keep pushing bullshit about how we need them to stay in console. Make it make sense.
 
Topher said:
Sure. And PlayStation sits alone in a console space where they were once had competition. That's my point.
Click to expand...
"sits alone" Okay we aren't going to agree on that. That's cool. I remember the old days. I'm old lol. Consoles used to have vastly different libraries from each other. Somehow we managed. If this were MS of the 360 days I could see the value. They had actual exclusives that couldn't be played anywhere else. I'm also probably warped a bit in my perception since I game primarily on pc and get almost everything anyway.
 
Astray said:
Topher Topher GHG GHG The biggest FUD Microsoft ever spread to the gaming sphere is the idea that we need them specifically to stay in the console race, when historically, there always were new entrants to the space to replace the old. Hell, even if no one new enters the ring, this still isn't the 90's or 00's.. The gaming sector is far more competitive and agile than it ever was.

The guys who tell us that we're close to a post-console future are the same ones who keep pushing bullshit about how we need them to stay in console. Make it make sense.
Click to expand...
No one new is ever going to enter the ring. It's literally impossible. Amazon and Apple would struggle to even develop a single AAA game. Look at the learning curve of 343 industries. Imagine starting just 1 new studio and how many years it would take to get just that up and running. Their 1st game probably wouldn't even be that great. And like you see with Stadia, if you're new then no one trusts you to stay in it. So that means you have to be prepared to just eat loss for a full 6-7 year console gen, and then maybe pick people up the 2nd gen after that when people are convinced you're staying. You're asking companies with no expertise in this area and no experience to set money on fire for 10 years with zero chance of ever catching up to Sony or Nintendo quality. The chance to get in is gone. If you ever wanted to start up a gaming sub like PS+ or GP, the investment up front is even steeper.

All you will ever see is some fire sticks and Apple TVs for 3rd party games. No one else can compete except maybe some CCPS5 from China and Tencent.
 
People have seen the result of this competition. It's not pretty.

Competition doesn't mean you're given a spot out of alternative reasoning.

Your position is earned.

Thats the difference between medals and ribbons and I don't believe in just handing out ribbons.
 
Last edited:
Astray said:
The guys who tell us that we're close to a post-console future are the same ones who keep pushing bullshit about how we need them to stay in console. Make it make sense.
Click to expand...

That's a good point actually. I feel a tad silly for even engaging in this discussion seriously when you take that into account.

Topher said:
Right....and competition set Sony straight. They learned the hard way and it made PS4 that much better.
Click to expand...

Hence my point, them raising prices would expose them to more potential competition, not less. I'm going to repost this again because this is a fundamental principle of markets and competition:

if a company abuses their market position and puts prices up too much then they are putting themselves in a vulnerable position whereby it becomes easier for new (or existing) businesses to enter the market and steal market share. Excessive pricing makes consumers more receptive to alternatives, not the opposite.
Click to expand...

The irony is that while prices are as they are today it makes it more difficult and less likely for other companies to make a console.

Topher said:
Apple doesn't have any studios to make games to compete with PlayStation. What are they going to offer?
Click to expand...

Neither did Microsoft when they first started out. Like Microsoft, Apple have money. They can get what they need if they want to do it. They (or any other company that might be considering this) just need a reason to, and Sony pissing off their customers could be just that.
 
Astray said:
Topher Topher GHG GHG The biggest FUD Microsoft ever spread to the gaming sphere is the idea that we need them specifically to stay in the console race, when historically, there always were new entrants to the space to replace the old. Hell, even if no one new enters the ring, this still isn't the 90's or 00's.. The gaming sector is far more competitive and agile than it ever was.

The guys who tell us that we're close to a post-console future are the same ones who keep pushing bullshit about how we need them to stay in console. Make it make sense.
Click to expand...

I'm not the "guys" saying we're close to a post-console future so not sure what I need to make sense. I have a hard time understanding what new entrant is going to enter the market with the resources needed to compete with PlayStation. A new entrant will require exclusive games. Exclusive games require studios. If Google or Amazon go on a spending spree and buy up a bunch of studios to enter the market then I guess that is possible. But are we really any better off with that than just having Xbox as competition?

The devil you know.....

OmegaSupreme said:
"sits alone" Okay we aren't going to agree on that. That's cool. I remember the old days. I'm old lol. Consoles used to have vastly different libraries from each other. Somehow we managed. If this were MS of the 360 days I could see the value. They had actual exclusives that couldn't be played anywhere else. I'm also probably warped a bit in my perception since I game primarily on pc and get almost everything anyway.
Click to expand...

Well.....I'm old too my man. Will be 55 this year so I'm thinking I remember a lot of what you do as far as the gaming industry is concerned. I also game primarily on PC. I have PS mostly for exclusives and secondly for trophy hunting.

As far as the "sits alone" aspect, I'm simply stating the exact same arguments I made when some suggested Nintendo was equivalent competition to PlayStation as Xbox during the ABK investigation thread. The theory was that since Nintendo existed without COD then Sony can. I pointed out several times that if you look at the games that are popular on Xbox and PlayStation were exactly the same aside from exclusives while games that are popular on Nintendo are completely different. That's the reasoning behind my "sits alone" perspective. But yeah, we won't agree on that and it's fine.
 
Topher said:
I'm not the "guys" saying we're close to a post-console future so not sure what I need to make sense. I have a hard time understanding what new entrant is going to enter the market with the resources needed to compete with PlayStation. A new entrant will require exclusive games. Exclusive games require studios. If Google or Amazon go on a spending spree and buy up a bunch of studios to enter the market then I guess that is possible. But are we really any better off with that than just having Xbox as competition?

The devil you know.....



Well.....I'm old too my man. Will be 55 this year so I'm thinking I remember a lot of what you do as far as the gaming industry is concerned. I also game primarily on PC. I have PS mostly for exclusives and secondly for trophy hunting.

As far as the "sits alone" aspect, I'm simply stating the exact same arguments I made when some suggested Nintendo was equivalent competition to PlayStation as Xbox during the ABK investigation thread. The theory was that since Nintendo existed without COD then Sony can. I pointed out several times that if you look at the games that are popular on Xbox and PlayStation were exactly the same aside from exclusives while games that are popular on Nintendo are completely different. That's the reasoning behind my "sits alone" perspective. But yeah, we won't agree on that and it's fine.
Click to expand...
It doesn't take a PHD to understand what happens when there is no competition in markets

And imo PC and Switch are not direct competition for Playstation
 
GHG said:
Neither did Microsoft when they first started out. Like Microsoft, Apple have money. They can get what they need if they want to do it. They (or any other company that might be considering this) just need a reason to, and Sony pissing off their customers could be just that.
Click to expand...

Well, for the record, I remember playing quite a number of Microsoft games prior to Xbox ever existing. But we won't agree here. I respect your opinion and you argue very well. Leaving it there.
 
This gen I'm gonna stick with playstation 5 and switch. Nextgen switch 2 and maybe I build a PC. But all depends on how the industry moves forward with the games it produces.
 
Given games pass won't move to playstation, I'll likely still use the seriesX for the handful of games per year im interested in from games pass, including some xbox first party games. There will be exceptions for games im really looking forward to for instance if they announce dishonoured 3, I would buy that playstation5 vs playing it 'for free' on the seriesX.
 
This is all moot anyway since streaming/cloud gaming is the future and we'll all be playing from apps on our tvs..... God I hope not lol
 
I haven't owned any Xbox console since X360 era and I don't really want coming back to it in the future. I'm planning to stick to PC / PlayStation / Nintendo combo like I do for two recent gens and play everything I want to play
 
Master plan
- MS goes 3rd party,
- Makes killer games
- All the audience addicted to their games
- MS launches a new console makes all the games exclusieve
- Audience jumps in... :)
 
its Gaming

ask younger people what they think of "high end console market"

There is competition with or without Xbox
 
Huh? Xbox is not going third-party. They are opening up back catalogue for multi-platform in order to make more money. Nothing wrong with that.
 
Topher said:
Well, for the record, I remember playing quite a number of Microsoft games prior to Xbox ever existing. But we won't agree here. I respect your opinion and you argue very well. Leaving it there.
Click to expand...

Ditto, but other than NFL fever 2002 the original Xbox didn't launch with a single game that was made by a Microsoft studio.
 
Topher said:
I'm not the "guys" saying we're close to a post-console future so not sure what I need to make sense. I have a hard time understanding what new entrant is going to enter the market with the resources needed to compete with PlayStation. A new entrant will require exclusive games. Exclusive games require studios. If Google or Amazon go on a spending spree and buy up a bunch of studios to enter the market then I guess that is possible. But are we really any better off with that than just having Xbox as competition?

The devil you know.....
Click to expand...
I didn't say you were the guys specifically, but at the same time, I've seen that line toted out so much it feels like deja vu.

Microsoft being there didn't stop Sony from being part of the pack that raised game MSRP to $70. Hell, they even raised the price of digital slim to $450 this holiday season and still saw record sales.

Microsoft is not the deterrent they are trying to pretend to be here, if they were then things would have been completely different.
 
GHG said:
I completely agree but I get told I'm a hater when I'm critical of their GPU activities.

Matt Leblanc Whatever GIF
Click to expand...
AMD are probably the biggest reason we have so much flexibility of options in the gaming industry (mobile aside).

You look at PS4/PS5, Xbox ONE/Series S|X, the majority of PCs being made today, Steam Deck, ROG Ally and countless Chinese PC gaming handhelds, and all of it has AMD either comprising a key part of it (CPU) or basically the entirety of it (CPU/GPU).

Fucking Intel and Nvidia had the space to themselves for ages and did basically nothing to get us anywhere near as good as we're having it rn.
 
Astray said:
AMD are probably the biggest reason we have so much flexibility of options in the gaming industry (mobile aside).

You look at PS4/PS5, Xbox ONE/Series S|X, the majority of PCs being made today, Steam Deck, ROG Ally and countless Chinese PC gaming handhelds, and all of it has AMD either comprising a key part of it (CPU) or basically the entirety of it (CPU/GPU).

Fucking Intel and Nvidia had the space to themselves for ages and did basically nothing to get us anywhere near as good as we're having it rn.
Click to expand...

I love their CPU's.

I like what they've been doing with APU's. If not for them the Steam Deck doesn't exist and the consoles look very different.

But my God, their discrete GPU's are a disaster, particularly at the higher end. In that area they are "competing" with Nvidia the same way that Xbox is "competing" with playstation.
 
Last edited:
GHG said:
I love their CPU's.

I like what they've been doing with APU's. If not for them the Steam Deck doesn't exist and the consoles look very different.

But my God, their discrete GPU's are a disaster, particularly at the higher end. In that area they are "competing" with Nvidia the same way that Xbox is "competing" with playstation.
Click to expand...
And you see the prices of the 4090
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
And you see the prices of the 4090
Click to expand...

And thanks to the way that AMD have linearly priced their GPU's in line with the performance they offer, it's palatable for those of us who want the best.

Like I've said before, AMD are complicit in all of this as far as GPU pricing is concerned.
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
Imagine the pricing on PS consoles IF Xbox was to stop making consoles.

People don't want this future
Click to expand...

To bad it's not up to us. MS chose to not be better at this game. They had Nintendo and Sony as perfect models to follow, yet they took a hard left.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
What's the next Sony AAA IP to go third party on Nintendo Switch/Switch 2?
32
241
StueyDuck replied
  • Poll
MS a great third party now??
Poll Analysis Game Dev  2
93
3K
BlackTron replied
What unfinished games do you have, and why you are not playing them now?
2
75
473
Chuck Berry replied
  • Poll
Are you going to buy The Duskbloods?
2
73
2K
SlimySnake replied
With PS5 essentially becoming a Hybrid console/handheld now thanks to Portal what Handheld orientated games would you like to see on the platform?
2 3
134
3K
ReBurn replied
Top Bottom