SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
what were the specs?Yes it did.
what were the specs?Yes it did.
Over 3 years ago Jim Ryan said the above quote to VGC and the response online was...interesting and was mocked online (including on neogaf as well). Specially before PS5 and Series consoles released and there was some goodwill and hype for MS in the months prior the new consoles released.
Now that these consoles have been out for 3 years, do you agree with this quote? Has your stance on cheaper models changed with how Series S / X are selling opposite to the PS5? Or do you guys still think something like this can work but not the way MS is doing it? If so, how would you plan a cheaper model like Series S?
Their next console (that was leaked) literally does away with hardware, costs $99 (or less) and runs off GamePass.Yes. They will close their platform where they get 30% cut for all games and MTX and allows them to create a subscription service for third party games.
You do realise Game Pass can't function if they go third party and remain at the mercy of another platform holder. It would basically be EA Play since they can only put first party games and still give a cut to the platform holder.
Just so you understand "Xbox" generates more revenue than ActiBliz because they own a platform where third sell games.
Console warring whole day on GAF really makes people clueless.
1/4 of the HDD space, no stand and cradle for the console and game pad respectively. No pack in game (Nintendo Land).what were the specs?
This sentiment really doesn't hold up when you look at how long Sony and other developers held onto cross-gen. Having two specs wasn't that big of a deal. Considering the majority of games also release on PC where every game has minimum and recommended specs the majority of developers are already comfortable scaling games. This "weakest platform holds everything back" thing is just console war ammo.He was right. Sony/Cerny have been trying to make game development easier over the past years not harder. Sometimes it feels like MS intentionally handicaps themselves.
Yes he was check all the attacks on the thread
I don't disagree with you here Jim but you're still a cunt.
He wasn't attacked for being right or wrong tho ...
My man G here ...
so same as the 360 Arcade and PS3 20 GB models. Reduced HDD space. The CPU, GPU, Vram, ram and all the other crucial specs needed to run the games at the same quality were there.1/4 of the HDD space, no stand and cradle for the console and game pad respectively. No pack in game (Nintendo Land).
It was literally called the Wii U Basic (compared to the Wii U Deluxe).
Yeah, I know. All Jim said was ‘reduced spec’ which includes things like HDD and ports.so same as the 360 Arcade and PS3 20 GB models. Reduced HDD space. The CPU, GPU, Vram, ram and all the other crucial specs needed to run the games at the same quality were there.
whereas the Series S has 1/3rd the tflops, 1/3rd vram bandwidth. 60% less ram size and runs most games at really poor resolutions compared to the xsx. This was not the case with the 360, ps3 and wii u which all ran the game at the same resolutions, framerates, and graphics settings.
Ps3 20gb cheaper model flopped. (Or was it 40?) it was the most expensive model that was selling out. That’s why Sony discontinued it.The S is selling more than the X so no, I mean he's objectively wrong. Also when the hell has there ever been a history of releasing a lower spec machine at the start of the generation that he's citing? The Wii crushed it.
It was available forever while X wasn't. I don't think we get splits often, apart from Japan. I think X is the more desirable machine of the two for consumers.Doesn't the Series S sell better than the X?
The 20GB ps3 also didn’t include wifi. That was one of the main issues with it. Sony also didn’t sell any solution to add wifi to it, so there wasn’t any way to add it in later. 60GB model included wifi.the only thing lacking in the 360 arcade was the HDD and the 20 GB PS3 was identical save for the 60 GB HDD and some memory card slots. it even came with PS2 BC.
The Wii U didnt have a basic version.
There has never been a series s like console so not sure wtf he was talking about, but yes, the series s didnt light the charts on fire.
I totally disagree here. Most devs are exclusive because of the bigger audience. If MS plan had worked out to be great so people would buy those boxes, more devs would automatically support the consols. The hardware ist not really the problem for years now. Almost everything is possible even on last gen, just with lower graphics settings. Just look at the switch how this works. Hardware itself is just not important.Obviously he was right. Series S in an anchor to the Series X to the point where it inadvertently made some games exclusive to PS because parity couldn’t be achieved between S&X.
Dumb ‘strategic’ move from totally inept XB management.
So why make a PS5 Pro?Over 3 years ago Jim Ryan said the above quote to VGC and the response online was...interesting and was mocked online (including on neogaf as well). Specially before PS5 and Series consoles released and there was some goodwill and hype for MS in the months prior the new consoles released.
Now that these consoles have been out for 3 years, do you agree with this quote? Has your stance on cheaper models changed with how Series S / X are selling opposite to the PS5? Or do you guys still think something like this can work but not the way MS is doing it? If so, how would you plan a cheaper model like Series S?
When 90% of the library is shared, there is no chance in gaining meaningful market share as a 2nd console.Without Series S I think MS would be completely destroyed. If you have a dominant competitor breaking sales records like PS5 you have to plan as being people's 2nd or even 3rd console. Most people just dont need 2 $500 consoles. Series S requires a little extra work but its generally been extremely smooth other than local splitscreen. I have X and S and switch between them without it even being that noticeable. The majority of Xbox sales are the S. Both Xbox and Nintendo are approaching consoles with a focus on affordability as a 2nd or 3rd console. They could likely make it even smoother next time with more RAM and a couple small adjustments.
How often has a company released a lower spec and normal spec system at the same time?Over 3 years ago Jim Ryan said the above quote to VGC and the response online was...interesting and was mocked online (including on neogaf as well). Specially before PS5 and Series consoles released and there was some goodwill and hype for MS in the months prior the new consoles released.
Now that these consoles have been out for 3 years, do you agree with this quote? Has your stance on cheaper models changed with how Series S / X are selling opposite to the PS5? Or do you guys still think something like this can work but not the way MS is doing it? If so, how would you plan a cheaper model like Series S?
It just had a smaller internal hdd.what were the specs?
Serious cope here, but the answer is NO. There is no historical data to back this up. Even Microsoft's own data proves otherwise. Microsoft's most successful console, the Xbox 360 (single performance config) launched at 499. The PS3 launched a year later, also at 499. They competed neck to neck with Sony during that generation.Without Series S I think MS would be completely destroyed. If you have a dominant competitor breaking sales records like PS5 you have to plan as being people's 2nd or even 3rd console. Most people just dont need 2 $500 consoles. Series S requires a little extra work but its generally been extremely smooth other than local splitscreen. I have X and S and switch between them without it even being that noticeable. The majority of Xbox sales are the S. Both Xbox and Nintendo are approaching consoles with a focus on affordability as a 2nd or 3rd console. They could likely make it even smoother next time with more RAM and a couple small adjustments.
Because I want one.So why make a PS5 Pro?
Where? In Europe, Series S has been in stock and sitting on store shelves since December 2020, nobody wants it.70% of Xbox sales are Series S. Seems like the Series S saved the Xbox Series consoles not hampered it.
When 90% of the library is shared, there’s no reason to pick it up as a 2nd console. Most people would rather invest the $300 into games, services or accessories for their PS5 or into a very different device like the Quest or Switch.He’s right… for the most part. But we’ll have to revisit this topic all gen.
Sure, the SS helped keep Xbox afloat with its cheaper tag early on and the performance isn’t optimal with CGO games, but it “works”.
As a 2nd home device though?
In year 4, you’d now have to convince someone it’s a better choice than the 6-7 yr old Switch, given the lack of games that currently take advantage of the SS.
A similar situation akin to BG3’s would also give Xbox another fright.
How many devs will suffer through developing for it, before simply opting for a PS5/PC exclusive knowing they won’t receive many sales on Xb behalf anyways? Hopefully not many, but we still have 4-5 yrs left of this gen.
Saved it? The Series sales are abysmal. It was outsold 3:1 this year by the PS5. Next year will probably be worse.70% of Xbox sales are Series S. Seems like the Series S saved the Xbox Series consoles not hampered it.
When 90% of the library is shared, there’s no reason to pick it up as a 2nd console. Most people would rather invest the $300 into games, services or accessories for their PS5 or into a very different device like the Quest or Switch.
Without Series S I think MS would be completely destroyed. If you have a dominant competitor breaking sales records like PS5 you have to plan as being people's 2nd or even 3rd console. Most people just dont need 2 $500 consoles. Series S requires a little extra work but its generally been extremely smooth other than local splitscreen. I have X and S and switch between them without it even being that noticeable. The majority of Xbox sales are the S. Both Xbox and Nintendo are approaching consoles with a focus on affordability as a 2nd or 3rd console. They could likely make it even smoother next time with more RAM and a couple small adjustments.
The Series S has been awesome for us. Bought it for my son for a birthday. It's just a Madden, Fortnite, Siege box and he gets a ton of use out of it.
If Xbox hadn't fucked up other aspects of their rollout, I think it would have done extremely well.
As a PS5 gamer, there is no way in hell I would ever spend 400-500 on a Series X. 200$ for Series S will eventually get me in their ecosystem though. I'm still waiting for the "must buy" game to actually buy one. I thought Starfield was going to be that game, but nope, no longer interested. Maybe once Fable is released?
Of course, current gen only games look worse because of Series S.Over 3 years ago Jim Ryan said the above quote to VGC and the response online was...interesting and was mocked online (including on neogaf as well). Specially before PS5 and Series consoles released and there was some goodwill and hype for MS in the months prior the new consoles released.
Now that these consoles have been out for 3 years, do you agree with this quote? Has your stance on cheaper models changed with how Series S / X are selling opposite to the PS5? Or do you guys still think something like this can work but not the way MS is doing it? If so, how would you plan a cheaper model like Series S?