• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Forbes Contributor - Xbox Losing The Console War Looks Like The Best Thing That's Happened To Gaming In Years (Positive article).

IbizaPocholo

NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinmurnane/2019/01/13/__trashed-18/#7593b785828c

The Xbox One launch was screwed up so badly you were left to wonder how a company of Microsoft’s size and experience in the console space could be so arrogantly unaware of the needs and desires of game players. Sony grabbed the opportunity and the PS4 crushed the Xbox One from the git-go. Five years later, Xbox hasn’t closed the gap.

Stake holders were yammering for Microsoft to sell off the Xbox and get out of the console business when it became clear the PS4 was doing much better in the marketplace. Fortunately for everyone who loves video games, Satya Nadella didn’t listen. Microsoft shed the Xbox management team responsible for the launch, and Nadella put Phil Spencer in charge of Xbox in March 2014. The result has been a steady stream of innovation from Xbox that’s squarely focused on making things better for players.

The Xbox One X is the clearest example. Microsoft’s flagship console is so superior to the PS4 Pro that it’s reasonable to think the only reason to buy a Pro is to play PlayStation’s outstanding collection of console exclusives. That’s a very good reason, but virtually every cross-platform game looks and plays better on the One X.

Microsoft didn’t build the most powerful console ever seen, pat itself on the back, and then sit and wait for the world to recognize its achievement. The company reached out to developers and helped them enhance previously released games to take advantage of the processing power in the One X. Microsoft also continued to innovate in console hardware with Design Lab and the Adaptive and Elite wireless controllers.

While Xbox’s hardware innovations lead the industry, a strong argument can be made that the company’s most important innovations lie in broadening opportunities for players to play games. Backward compatibility is the most obvious example. The story when the Xbox One and PS4 launched was that games from previous console generations were unplayable on the new consoles because of fundamental hardware incompatibilities. And then Xbox engineers built a virtual Xbox 360 that runs on the Xbox One and old games could be played on the new console.

Perhaps the most remarkable thing about backward compatibility is that Microsoft didn’t treat it as an opportunity to squeeze more money out of players by making them buy back-compat versions of games they already own. Instead, backward compatibility exemplifies the idea that players should have a library of games they carry with them from one console generation to the next. If you paid for it once, you shouldn't have to pay for it again. It’s hard to imagine a policy that operates more for the benefit of players.

The buy-it-once ethos Xbox introduced to console gaming continued with Microsoft’s Play Anywhere policy. Xbox exclusives generally appear on the console and Windows PCs at the same time. Buy a game for either platform and you can play it on both. You get two platforms for the price of one.

Xbox surprised the gaming world a year ago with another new idea that’s all about benefiting players. Henceforth, Xbox console exclusives would be available to play for free on Game Pass on the day the game launched. Since then, a selection of cross-platform games such as the recently released Mutant Year Zero: The Road to Eden appeared on Game Pass on launch day. A cheap subscription service that includes access to new games on launch? Who saw that coming?

Xbox also looked to benefit players in the future when it added next-gen technology to the One X and S last year in the form of support for variable refresh rate, automatic low-latency mode and 120 Hz refresh rate. These features won’t come fully into play until HDMI 2.1 becomes widespread, but Xbox is helping players navigate the transitional stage by supporting the technology now.

There are also some indications that the blinkered arrogance that produced the Xbox One launch disaster has gained a foothold at PlayStation. In June 2017, Sony’s global sales chief Jim Ryan told Time magazine “When we’ve dabbled with backwards compatibility, I can say it is one of those features that is much requested, but not actually used much.” A little less than a year later Xbox reported players had logged almost a billion hours on back compatibility games. A more recent example can be found in PlayStation’s resistance to player demands for Fortnite crossplay.

The situation today seems almost the reverse of what it was at E3 in 2013 when an agile PlayStation crushed a clueless Xbox and electrified the gaming world. Now Sony feels staid and hidebound while Microsoft forges ahead. PlayStation has never lacked for innovative thinking and it's hard not to wonder whether the company would have done more to change gaming for the better if the PS4 didn't have such a decided advantage in sales.

The Xbox One quickly fell behind the PS4 in the competition for console sales. Microsoft responded by bringing in Phil Spencer who infused Xbox with a sustained commitment to innovative ideas that benefit players. The consequences illustrate the value of thinking about competition rather than war in the console space. Xbox’s innovations have markedly changed the world of console gaming for the better. From a player's viewpoint, it’s the best thing that’s happened to gaming in years.

 
Great article and I agree with everything. This gen they spend fixing stuff ,bringing new ideas and preparing for future .Next gen Xbox will bring everything including more exclusives from new studios.
 
Last edited:

dirthead

Banned
That's all fine and good but I think they're a bit melodramatic when they try to make it sound like they were some underdog doing an unprecedented thing when it's fucking 800lb gorilla Microsoft adding backwards compatibility to a console 100 years after freeware open source emulators did orders of magnitude more complicated work getting old machines to run on modern platforms. I mean, come on.
 

ZywyPL

Banned
Seriously, all those childish losing/wining debates are getting boring as hell, the financial reports show that MS is earning the same as Sony does from the gaming market, that's why they are still in it, and that's why they are heavily investing into it. And none of that would happened without Spencer in charge, that's the best thing that actually happened to Xbox.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Article is quite a nice passionate read and the contributor does not necessarily lie or anything: it slightly puts things in the rosiest of the rosy lights one side and only mention the other in passing as they need to say something nice (exclusives) when they blanket state the other craps all over it from every angle. Funny beginning when MS is the experienced console manufacturer and Sony the nimble whippersnapper that gets one over them by luck (and that apparently does not reach out to developers for Pro patches, does not have a subscription service they positively compared with GamePass and was actually started much earlier, etc...).

It is not a piece meant to analyse things comparatively or even from an independent point of view, but someone deservedly happy with their choice and excited about its prospects.
 
Last edited:

ANIMAL1975

Member
... "PlayStation has never lacked for innovative thinking and it's hard not to wonder whether the company would have done more to change gaming for the better if the PS4 didn't have such a decided advantage in sales."
Wtflyingf??? :

Remote play with Vita (first to the show), afterwards with mobile and pc

Share Play, virtually lending your game to a friend on the internet?! _ who need demos if you have a friend with a big library lol _ no one else has this, it isn't game changing?

PS Now, both game subscription and a way to play bc games, for me a bad solution but, nonetheless, first to the show allowing competition to learn from mistakes

PS Vue, don't really care or need it but isn't it innovative?

PSVR?.... You want more change gaming, what mate?¡
 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
... "PlayStation has never lacked for innovative thinking and it's hard not to wonder whether the company would have done more to change gaming for the better if the PS4 didn't have such a decided advantage in sales."
Wtflyingf??? :

Remote play with Vita (first to the show), afterwards with mobile and pc

Share Play, virtually lending your game to a friend on the internet?! _ who need demos if you have a friend with a big library lol _ no one else has this, it isn't game changing?

PS Now, both game subscription and a way to play bc games, for me a bad solution but, nonetheless, first to the show allowing competition to learn from mistakes

PS Vue, don't really care or need it but isn't it innovative?

PSVR?.... You want more change gaming, what mate?¡
Not only that, PSNow allows you to download games and play them online without paying for PSN+. Yeah, your points still stand, Sony is just assumed to never innovate in some circles... no matter what they did while excuses and focus on the positives is allowed for their competitors in some professional game bloggers’ eyes.

BC with PS3 has an obviously higher degree of complexity in terms if emulation so that should taken into account for the analysis (while saying that Xbox One BC approach is better than what Sony has on PS4 just offering PS2 Classics if you buy them again on PS4’s store)... yet, reminding people of what they did for PS2, PS3, PSP, and PS Vita may balance the article a bit more, but again it was not meant as a comparative article... it was a love letter to Xbox One X from and Xbox fan that went a bit too far in some spots (I would not completely fault it as it is a console that does turn some eyes and packs a strong punch... that can be admitted without having to take things away from the PS side IMHO).
 

Hayfield

Banned
What's with Jesus Xbox narrative? "Xbox died for our sins this gen. Next gen will be the resurrection."

Surely it's too premature to be sure of such things?
 

angelic

Banned
I like my xbox but Sony will always have the most Japanese games, so for that reason they'll stay as my main. Where's EDF 5 on xbox? The PS library is just so diverse it wins easily for me.
 
It's definitely a nice narrative for the Xbox brand. I agree that the things the author brought up are positive for Xbox, but to say they're "the best thing" when they've actually contributed the least this generation is pretty silly in my book.

Actually, I take that back. Wii U contributed the least. But the equivalent would be worshipping the Wii U's failure as some kind of good thing "because look what happened next: Nintendo made the Switch! Therefore, Wii U is the best thing that's happened to gaming in years".
 

HeresJohnny

Member
It’s a puff piece article that overlooks glaring flaws still present at the Xbox division while gently blowing a soft, steady, wispy stream of smoke up the reader’s ass.
 

lock2k

Banned
Nothing better for consumers than a company taking a beating for a while. When they're winning, they always become comfortable.

Failure makes us grow.
 
Last edited:

Shifty

Member
I can get down with celebrating a company doing good stuff due to no longer being the market leader, but I'll not soon forget that MS are entirely capable of being The Absolute Worst when they aren't motivated by stiff competition.

Also, paging Afro Republican Afro Republican because clearly the Xbox One launch was actually great and not at all a disaster :messenger_halo:
 

mejin

Member
Ow, boy. I wonder what will be the excuses if Sony smashes MS again next gen.
 
Last edited:

Inviusx

Member
Ah so this is the new narrative that the press are going to push onto us for the next few years. Buckle up folks, Xbox One died for our sins.
 

Fake

Member
Their failure was a victory for the consumers in fact. Many pro-consumers actions with time. I wonder if this 'TV/always online' have won the media what moves Microsoft would do...
 
Last edited:

DonF

Member
Dude, the marketing machine is starting. I bet we will see many more news of, as someone mentioned, "the redemption of microsoft".

I bet that the whole Nextbox schtick is going to be "we learned a lot from the past gen", "we won't repeat the same mistakes, " we heard you loud and clear", "we now know what you want".
 

The_Mike

I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Ow, boy. I wonder what will be the excuses if Sony smashes MS again next gen.

There is no excuse, because it probably will sell better because Sony garners are loyal to the brand more than xbox.
 
Last edited:

pr0cs

Member
Pretty excited to see what next gen looks like. I expect both Microsoft and Sony are going to be pulling out all stops to get consumer time and dollars.

The companies working hard to attract customers is good for all gamers, no matter where your preference lies.
 

Blam

Member
... "PlayStation has never lacked for innovative thinking and it's hard not to wonder whether the company would have done more to change gaming for the better if the PS4 didn't have such a decided advantage in sales."
Wtflyingf??? :

Remote play with Vita (first to the show), afterwards with mobile and pc

Share Play, virtually lending your game to a friend on the internet?! _ who need demos if you have a friend with a big library lol _ no one else has this, it isn't game changing?

PS Now, both game subscription and a way to play bc games, for me a bad solution but, nonetheless, first to the show allowing competition to learn from mistakes

PS Vue, don't really care or need it but isn't it innovative?

PSVR?.... You want more change gaming, what mate?¡

Didn't make PSNow they bought someone who made the tech and contract them to do it. PS Vue is just a TV service lmao. VR isn't innovative. They literally didn't bring a single thing new to the table with that.
 

GenericUser

Member
The arguments the article uses to underline the positive aspects of the xbox platform makes it hard to not think of this as a paid advertisment.
 
Last edited:

Calibos

Member
Dude, the marketing machine is starting. I bet we will see many more news of, as someone mentioned, "the redemption of microsoft".

I bet that the whole Nextbox schtick is going to be "we learned a lot from the past gen", "we won't repeat the same mistakes, " we heard you loud and clear", "we now know what you want".


An article written by Forbes, who has many articles smashing xbox for various things, is a marketing machine starting?


It's real simple here. Actions speak volumes. MS has been doing great things ever since Phil took over and Terry "the miser" Myerson was booted from MS. They are not perfect, but they are acting on what gamers want, and that is starting to pay dividends. MS is NOT going to crush Sony next gen, nor are they even giving a shit anymore about plastic box sales. They are attacking the market on 3 physical platforms next gen, PC, Xbox and mobile, and probably going to offer up their streaming service to Nintendo and Sony too. People really can't see the forest through the trees these days.
 
Apparently the only correct way to write anything about the xbox is to trash it into the ground and be sure to remind the world how superior the PS4 is in every way.

w1A2Pjr.gif
 
An article written by Forbes, who has many articles smashing xbox for various things, is a marketing machine starting?


It's real simple here. Actions speak volumes. MS has been doing great things ever since Phil took over and Terry "the miser" Myerson was booted from MS. They are not perfect, but they are acting on what gamers want, and that is starting to pay dividends. MS is NOT going to crush Sony next gen, nor are they even giving a shit anymore about plastic box sales. They are attacking the market on 3 physical platforms next gen, PC, Xbox and mobile, and probably going to offer up their streaming service to Nintendo and Sony too. People really can't see the forest through the trees these days.
How can any person on GAF of all places -- home of the astroturfers, "BISH BAN" gifs, Top 5 referrer to Hillary Clinton campaign, and home of numerous other fumbled attempts from various devs to "reach out to the community" -- seriously doubt that these corporations, politicians, and interest groups pay money to shill their products and standpoints?

The exchange of money and favors in gaming "journalism" is pretty much an open secret at this point.
 

Vawn

Banned
Until it results in actual Xbox exclusive games I care about I am going to remain skeptical about dropping another large chunk of cash on an Xbox in the future.
 
I can get down with celebrating a company doing good stuff due to no longer being the market leader, but I'll not soon forget that MS are entirely capable of being The Absolute Worst when they aren't motivated by stiff competition.

Also, paging Afro Republican Afro Republican because clearly the Xbox One launch was actually great and not at all a disaster :messenger_halo:

Not my fault the article can't tell the difference between the reveal and the Launch post-reveal.

Also, the fact that the writer took a debunked rumor of what "happened" during the pre-launch, as well as the debunked rumors of natella "reshaping" the company and wrote about it like it actually happened. (not to mention a good chunk of the staff that were rumored to be removed were and in some cases are still there)

It was also a very select number of shareholders 2-3 that were skeptical and only ONE actually said he would prefer they sell-off which he shut his mouth AFTER launch and we never heard from him again, the launch with 1 million sold in 24 hours and being near PS4 sales despite launching in 13 countries at a higher mark-up. And those articles shopwing that the Xbox One has a higher margin of profit than the PS4 during the launch months.
 

Calibos

Member
How can any person on GAF of all places -- home of the astroturfers, "BISH BAN" gifs, Top 5 referrer to Hillary Clinton campaign, and home of numerous other fumbled attempts from various devs to "reach out to the community" -- seriously doubt that these corporations, politicians, and interest groups pay money to shill their products and standpoints?

The exchange of money and favors in gaming "journalism" is pretty much an open secret at this point.


I do not doubt that it happens. Forbes has had so many articles about Sony dominance and MS blunders though, that I think that this is just a contributor writing an article. Mostly because it is just taking a bunch of facts and actions that are true and have occurred and putting them into an article. It isn't spinning anything really...In the midst of all the controversy of MS not nurturing their first party games line-up, they have been steadily bringing the heat in services.

No need to tin-foil hat or trash every positive Xbox article.
 

ANIMAL1975

Member
Didn't make PSNow they bought someone who made the tech and contract them to do it. PS Vue is just a TV service lmao. VR isn't innovative. They literally didn't bring a single thing new to the table with that.
Introducing those three services (and the others you not mention) to a home gaming console was not innovative? I'm not bashing on the positive things about Xbox in the article, i agree with almost all of it! What i dont agree or understand is the downplaying of the Ps4 at the some time, particularly in the piece i quoted!
 

Blam

Member
Introducing those three services (and the others you not mention) to a home gaming console was not innovative? I'm not bashing on the positive things about Xbox in the article, i agree with almost all of it! What i dont agree or understand is the downplaying of the Ps4 at the some time, particularly in the piece i quoted!
No it wasn't. Because those services aren't new. Just because you brought them to a console doesn't mean you changed the market. I know you're not bashing xbox but it's just the things sony did weren't really that special.
 

Dabaus

Banned
"There are also some indications that the blinkered arrogance that produced the Xbox One launch disaster has gained a foothold at PlayStation. In June 2017, Sony’s global sales chief Jim Ryan told Time magazine “When we’ve dabbled with backwards compatibility, I can say it is one of those features that is much requested, but not actually used much.” A little less than a year later Xbox reported players had logged almost a billion hours on back compatibility games."


The only thing they use as an example of Sony being arrogant is an out context quote from a guy who has no say in what the hardware can and cant do. Has anybody noticed that it comes to xbox and next gen it can only be spoken about in hyperbolic and fantastical terms? Instead of do better next time, its dominate. Instead of expand cloud gaming its some bullshit 4 billion users number, instead of a very capable machine it most powerful hardware.
 
Last edited:

mejin

Member
There is no excuse, because it probably will sell better because Sony garners are loyal to the brand more than xbox.

I believe the market has space for all 3 manufacturers. They just need to offer good stuff that's only possible in their machines. Sony had it with ps4. Nintendo didn't have with WiiU, but they found their space with Switch. Both have in common great exclusives. If they mess up in their next machines, they will suffer again. Loyalty has its limits.

Right now, the key difference is: PS4 has a better lineup than Xbox One and the gap increases after each year. If MS bring the games next gen, people (not only diehard xbox fans) will buy it. Just remember, people are not stupid, better hardware never really had an impact before (ps4 was an anomaly), softwares are what really matter.
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinmurnane/2019/01/13/__trashed-18/#7593b785828c

The Xbox One X is the clearest example. Microsoft’s flagship console is so superior to the PS4 Pro that it’s reasonable to think the only reason to buy a Pro is to play PlayStation’s outstanding collection of console exclusives. That’s a very good reason, but virtually every cross-platform game looks and plays better on the One X.

Its shit like this that draws all the negativity. It fails to note the price disparity and leans hard on MS own marketing slogan how every "game looks and plays better". Which is debatable, particularly on the plays better part when generally the only difference is resolution.

Its an advert masquerading as an article, and as such invites criticism.
 
I believe the market has space for all 3 manufacturers. They just need to offer good stuff that's only possible in their machines. Sony had it with ps4. Nintendo didn't have with WiiU, but they found their space with Switch. Both have in common great exclusives. If they mess up in their next machines, they will suffer again. Loyalty has its limits.

Right now, the key difference is: PS4 has a better lineup than Xbox One and the gap increases after each year. If MS bring the games next gen, people (not only diehard xbox fans) will buy it. Just remember, people are not stupid, better hardware never really had an impact before (ps4 was an anomaly), softwares are what really matter.

Wouldn't say that, one of the reasons people initially held-off the 360 was because the PS3 was believed to be vastly more powerful based on what was being promoted until that E3 and post launch tp support.

Also power was a big factor as for why the Xbox was smacking the GC before they pulled out early .
 

mejin

Member
Wouldn't say that, one of the reasons people initially held-off the 360 was because the PS3 was believed to be vastly more powerful based on what was being promoted until that E3 and post launch tp support.

Also power was a big factor as for why the Xbox was smacking the GC before they pulled out early .

GC and Xbox both sold like shit. I mean I remember they were finished at 20M. I do remember reading something about xbox selling a little better than GC. Although I loved my GC, it's fact nintendo screwed up big with it.

360 had a year advantage over PS3. If I remember right it was enough for MS getting 10M in its first year. It was really good for them. Nowadays, we have One and 10M a year would be amazing for it, but it never sold it this much since ever.
 

ethomaz

Banned
Some can think like that...

I like to think like PS4 was the best thing to happen this generation.

The console war winner was just a result of that.
 
Last edited:
GC and Xbox both sold like shit. I mean I remember they were finished at 20M. I do remember reading something about xbox selling a little better than GC. Although I loved my GC, it's fact nintendo screwed up big with it.

360 had a year advantage over PS3. If I remember right it was enough for MS getting 10M in its first year. It was really good for them. Nowadays, we have One and 10M a year would be amazing for it, but it never sold it this much since ever.

Xbox sold really well and even beat PS2 in some NPD's, its sales stopped short of 25 million because from 2005-07 they were focusingon the 360 and Xbox support was pulled early. The GC had a quicker drop in price and had issues selling and was quite a bit behind but got closer to Xbox because they actually still pushed the GC on the market during the time the XBox was replaced in 05 (and still lost)

As for the 360 remember that 10 million was shipped and it was based on a silly narrative an exec made about first to 10 million wins the generation. After the Wii started exploding he must have been twitching on the floor for awhile.
 

Pejo

Member
What's with Jesus Xbox narrative? "Xbox died for our sins this gen. Next gen will be the resurrection."

Surely it's too premature to be sure of such things?
I honestly can't help but think it's high tier astroturfing going on. There's just been too much of it in the past 2 months for it to have been coincidence.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
Xbox sold really well and even beat PS2 in some NPD's, its sales stopped short of 25 million because from 2005-07 they were focusingon the 360 and Xbox support was pulled early. The GC had a quicker drop in price and had issues selling and was quite a bit behind but got closer to Xbox because they actually still pushed the GC on the market during the time the XBox was replaced in 05 (and still lost)

As for the 360 remember that 10 million was shipped and it was based on a silly narrative an exec made about first to 10 million wins the generation. After the Wii started exploding he must have been twitching on the floor for awhile.
The 360 performance is strong related to the year head start...

When PS3 and Wii released it was already consolidated for devs and the userbase was growing while Nintendo focused in a different userbase (the Wii sales was to a way different gamers) and PS3 at super expensive price struggled to sell.

But the talk is about the year head start... it strong supported these 80+ million sales of 360... if it was launched head a head with PS3 perhaps it should have crossed 50 million but never reached 80 million.
 
Last edited:
The 360 performance is strong related to the year head start...

When PS3 and Wii released it was already consolidated for devs and the userbase was growing while Nintendo focused in a different userbase (the Wii sales was to a way different gamers) and PS3 at super expensive price struggled to sell.

But the talk is about the year head start... it strong supported these 80+ million sales of 360... if it was launched head a head with PS3 perhaps it should have crossed 50 million but never reached 80 million.

The 360 still would have had the advantages in its best regions due to the PS3 price and PR so this is ridiculous. That 10 million also, was shipped. The 360 sold over 40 million in US as long you think it wouldn't pass 50 if that 10 million shipped was 5 million shipped? Nonsense. The head start is overly exaggerated as beneficial. In the 7 regions the 360 was good in the PS3 still would have faltered for the same reasons, and the areas where the 360 wasn't good at the PS3 was outselling day one anyway.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Apparently the only correct way to write anything about the xbox is to trash it into the ground and be sure to remind the world how superior the PS4 is in every way.

w1A2Pjr.gif

No, that is what one ought to do when talking about PS4 Pro or Naughty Dog ;).
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
The 360 still would have had the advantages in its best regions due to the PS3 price and PR so this is ridiculous. That 10 million also, was shipped. The 360 sold over 40 million in US as long you think it wouldn't pass 50 if that 10 million shipped was 5 million shipped? Nonsense. The head start is overly exaggerated as beneficial. In the 7 regions the 360 was good in the PS3 still would have faltered for the same reasons, and the areas where the 360 wasn't good at the PS3 was outselling day one anyway.
If you align the launch PS3 never sold less than 360... every year it sold more... what maintained 360 ahead for almost the generation was that year head start.

Xbox One could have another result if it had a year head start perhaps selling way over 50 million like 360.

If NextXbox launch head a head with PS5 it will suffer another generation lose.
There is no way to compete with Sony if you don't have that head start.

360 success started with that year head start... even US it won't sell 40 million if it didn't have that head start.

The head start build hype and userbase... userbase means friends calling friends to play and buy more consoles... part of the console buyers buy consoles where most people are playing.

360 had that.

PS4 has that.

But for different reasons... 360 had that due the head start... PS4 has that due what brand power.
Xbox brand power is way weaker than PlayStation.

Head at head launches PlayStation will always sell more than Xbox... forever.
 
Last edited:
If you align the launch PS3 never sold less than 360...

Except for 2007 and 2011.

Xbox One could have another result if it had a year head start perhaps selling way over 50 million like 360.

360 year head start was a SHIPPED only ten million. The 360, like the PS3, is around 90 milion. That year head start had a minimal effect that you are increading to unrealistic proportions. You also downplay the regions the PS3 PR and price gave 360 the win.

360 success started with that year head start... even US it won't sell 40 million if it didn't have that head start.

This is not true as the PS3's momentum in the US was mainly hampered by it's price, it's PR, and early games line-up.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
Except for 2007 and 2011.

360 year head start was a SHIPPED only ten million. The 360, like the PS3, is around 90 milion. That year head start had a minimal effect that you are increading to unrealistic proportions. You also downplay the regions the PS3 PR and price gave 360 the win.

This is not true as the PS3's momentum in the US was mainly hampered by it's price, it's PR, and early games line-up.
PS3 2008 (12.4m) > 360 2007 (7.3m)...

Sony didn't release PS3 2012 data to compared with 360 2011... maybe you can be right here... 2011 360 sold more than 2012 PS3.

The year head start fully affect the overall sales of the consoles last generation... head a head 360 may sell less and PS3 may sell more even with it price.

Even in US if they both were launched together the PS3 may have more sales than actually had (not more sales than 360 but the gap may be smaller) because gamers will choose one... and PlayStation is the first choice even if high priced.

360 build the hype in the first year and devs got the felling of development to it making the best multiplatforms... most friends were playing on 360 CoD... that happened because that year head start.

Imagine if the situation was the opposite... PS3 launching in 2005 and 360 only in 2006... you can see what could happen?

Editado - I have a theory... the only way to MS make strong competition as 360 is if NextXbox have a year head start ;)
 
Last edited:
PS3 2008 (12.4m) > 360 2007 (7.3m)... you see near 2:1.

Sony didn't release PS3 2012 data to compared with 360 2011... maybe you can be right here... 2011 360 sold more than 2012 PS3.

The year head start fully affect the overall sales of the consoles last generation... head a head 360 may sell less and PS3 may sell more even with it price.

Even in US if they both were launched together the PS3 may have more sales than actually had (not more sales than 360 but the gap may be smaller) because gamers will choose one... and PlayStation is the first choice even if high priced.

360 build the hype in the first year and devs got the felling of development to it making the best multiplatforms... most friends were playing on 360 CoD... that happened because that year head start.

Why are you comparing 2008 to 2007?

It really didn't effect anywhere near as much as you're saying. It did ok in America as it did in other regions where it was on top but the boost came from Sony's E3 and post launch in those regions. Xbox head start barely did anything in MOST of Europe, and Asia was a temporary thing as the 360 collapse straight down.

The areas the 360 beat the PS3 in were also ways going to do that because Sony was the reason the 360 won those regions, not the head start. Just like the PS3 won in the region it won due to lack of 2 generations of Xbox appeal in thos areas.

The gap in the US, for example, would likely be around the same since the hard to develop for architecture was a US dev bottleneck, the Price was often used against it, as well as it's early game library and PR. This was 2006 so most of video social sites were in the US, and people were making videos about the the PS3 PR and E3.
 

ethomaz

Banned
Why are you comparing 2008 to 2007?

It really didn't effect anywhere near as much as you're saying. It did ok in America as it did in other regions where it was on top but the boost came from Sony's E3 and post launch in those regions. Xbox head start barely did anything in MOST of Europe, and Asia was a temporary thing as the 360 collapse straight down.

The areas the 360 beat the PS3 in were also ways going to do that because Sony was the reason the 360 won those regions, not the head start. Just like the PS3 won in the region it won due to lack of 2 generations of Xbox appeal in thos areas.

The gap in the US, for example, would likely be around the same since the hard to develop for architecture was a US dev bottleneck, the Price was often used against it, as well as it's early game library and PR. This was 2006 so most of video social sites were in the US, and people were making videos about the the PS3 PR and E3.
Launch aligned means...

2005 360 vs 2006 PS3

And go on... it is 1st year... 2nd year... etc

A year head start did wonders to 360 for the whole generation... it helped a lot to build it userbase.
 
Last edited:
Launch aligned means...

2005 360 vs 2006 PS3

And go on... it is 1st year... 2nd year... etc

A year head start did wonders to 360 for the whole generation... it helped a lot to build it userbase.

This doesn't make any sense. By doing this you basically destroy your argument about the year-head start being significant. It's also, again, false.
 

ethomaz

Banned
This doesn't make any sense. By doing this you basically destroy your argument about the year-head start being significant. It's also, again, false.
No it support my point.

Both releasing in 2005 the 360 may be lower to it 2005 sales and PS3 higher or even with it 2006 sales.
Without build the head start userbase where friends are "playing" together the sales of 360 may be not the same.

Like I said... imagine PS3 releasing in 2005 and 360 in 2006... it should be another PS4 vs XB1 situation and in that case with a $500 launch console being the leader of the generation.

When PS3 launched... 360 already had name plus the price of PS3 make some choose to go with 360... that is what a year head start do... you have a library of games on 360 while PS3 had the NO GAME meme because it was it first year vs the second year of 360.

The mindset was already build for 360.
 
Last edited:

mmorg

Neo Member
Didn't make PSNow they bought someone who made the tech and contract them to do it. PS Vue is just a TV service lmao. VR isn't innovative. They literally didn't bring a single thing new to the table with that.
Buying someone who made the tech..... isnt supporting innovation ? Having VR on a low-specced machine aka consoles isnt cool ? idk.
 
Top Bottom