Support NeoGAF

[Menzies]

Pretty impressive isn't it? I mean, yeah it's a bit concerning, but to watch it in real time leaves you a bit impressed if you're aware of it, and know what you're looking at.

I've talked about this phenomenon in a couple of other threads lately. To watch Sony fanboys create a desired narrative, repeat it, cultivate it, support and nurture it... Until it eventually becomes a widely accepted fact is crazy. I refer to it as "impressive" because while something like this might start here, it's effects can spread far and wide.

For instance, you can see people in this very thread still claiming the uncontested notion that the PS3 outsold the 360, but you'll also see it on several other websites as well that deal with mass stastics. Not any that are actually credible, but regardless. You can easily see the far flung effects of that narrative, which was created right here at GAF. And in that context, it is indeed impressive.

I hate the word 'narrative', but I can see how one unsubstantiated interpretation gets repeated enough times that it snowballs into a commonly held belief.

Not arguing that they probably agreed that they needed to change things in up in light on their position against the competition. But when the new CEO comes in trumpeting accessibility and availability as company values, namely to promote Azure growth, surely they were always going to veer into this direction regardless.

I’ll reword it to “fans of the third place console”

I would stray far away from hyperbolic and sensationalist grabbing headlines, Sony is still the market leader right here and now. However, the value proposition of Game Pass has a real opportunity to stay in the headlines and grab mind share. I don't believe it's rippling effects have been felt fully yet from gaming enthusiast forums > gaming media > YouTube influencers > retail clerks > the school yard. If you want to talk right here and now, that's pretty banal conversation. To look past the tip of your nose and discuss the future is intriguing.

 

[Jokerevo]

Sony's plan to compete with Xbox: Stay the course | Opinion | GamesIndustry.biz

I can't really think of a reason for Sony to make drastic changes. Their first party output is stellar. Gamers obviously continue to invest heavily in the ecosystem. Sony could smooth out some bumps in their services, but for the most part, they continue to provide top notch games and that is what their customers clearly want.

Keep in mind how Sony is doing, especially in Xbox home territory and there isn't a single AAA IP out yet.

Yes Miles Morales was a dlc.

 

[Yoboman]

I hate the word 'narrative', but I can see how one unsubstantiated interpretation gets repeated enough times that it snowballs into a commonly held belief.

Not arguing that they probably agreed that they needed to change things in up in light on their position against the competition. But when the new CEO comes in trumpeting accessibility and availability as company values, namely to promote Azure growth, surely they were always going to veer into this direction regardless.



I would stray far away from hyperbolic and sensationalist grabbing headlines, Sony is still the market leader right here and now. However, the value proposition of Game Pass has a real opportunity to stay in the headlines and grab mind share. I don't believe it's rippling effects have been felt fully yet from gaming enthusiast forums > gaming media > YouTube influencers > retail clerks > the school yard. If you want to talk right here and now, that's pretty banal conversation. To look past the tip of your nose and discuss the future is intriguing.

Gamepass has existed for 4 years. A period in which Sony has had record sales of hardware and software. How much of a build up does it need before it becomes the promises Sony killer we keep hearing about?

 

[Warnen]

Yes, you are, and a few people already explained to you that ND and Insomniac joining Sony, is akin to what happened with Playground on the MS side. The Zenimax deal is NOTHING like it. You know it, buddy, so stop the hypocrisy.

my bad didn’t know Insomica and Naughty Dog joined Sony with no exchange of money (iE were bought)…

Seems like someone is trying to twist facts to fit there narrative.

I do agree the sales are nothing alike, MS bought a Ferrari and Sony bought 2 Honda Civics. They still both bought cars…

 

[Menzies]

Gamepass has existed for 4 years. A period in which Sony has had record sales of hardware and software. How much of a build up does it need before it becomes the promises Sony killer we keep hearing about?

And now you're the one being hyperbolic. "Sony killer"? Why is there this dichotomy view that one has to be 'killed' for the other to increase their competitiveness?

To your response though; are you arguing in bad faith? Do you really need me to fill out a response to that?

What has happened with Game Pass in the last 6 months?

- EA Access (console and PC)
- xCloud beta trials
- Third-party day and date releases and what...2 month delays for NBA 2K21 and Dirt 5?
- 20+ Bethesda games or thereabouts?

Do you think they've been just a tad more focused lately on expanding it? Do the last 6 months efforts sit comparable with the previous 3.5 years?

xCloud hasn't been fully released for the prime time yet.

 

[Shelookdlvl18]

Well if Phil said that then he must be telling the truth

Except


And

Sea of Thieves launches microtransaction store, includes £25 ship set

Pets have finally arrived in Sea of Thieves as part of this month's Smuggler's Fortune update, and with them comes the …

www.google.com

And

Buy Halo 5: Guardians – Power Up REQ Pack | Xbox

The Power Up REQ Pack includes one Power Up Certification, if available, and 16 single-use Power Up REQs.

www.microsoft.com

Gee seems Phil isn't listening to his own ideas. Who would have thought.

I'm not necessarily arguing your point, but your post here doesn't disprove anything he said. At least in it's context.

The vast amount of multiplayer games these days have some form of MTX. Despite your first instinct to post that bad faith argument, you might not want to die on that hill, because it wouldn't be difficult at all to argue against it.

Sony can barely muster enough ineptitude to add multiplayer to some of its games, yet when it does... they typically have MTX such as TLOU and UC4 for instance. In UC4s case, they're even worse than the examples you mentioned.

And it's not as if Phil and Xbox is filing patents such as...

 

[JohnnyFootball]

I’ve always thought this is a funny assumption of everyone about Gamepass. It’s more expensive than a Spotify or Netflix, and because games are such a time sink the average user will barely touch many games. I know for me personally its a reason I don’t subscribe to GP or Now. I just don’t have the time.

As GP adds more games, this will definitely start to factor in.

My concern with Gamepass is and will always be, is it sustainable? That remains to be seen. They are in the "spending big bucks to get good content" phase. What will the content be like once Nadella and the board start wanting to see more profit?

 

[Shelookdlvl18]

My concern with Gamepass is...

Could've saved yourself the time and stopped right there. Everyone knows anything following those words is likely to consist of .

 

[Stooky]

They don't need multiplayer, but certainly is way more profitable if it catches on. Somewhat less work also developing a story and such.

To make multiplayer that’s significant and last is not easy to make. You gotta cultivate the community around it and much as the gameplay for it to be lucrative and last. Think of how many multiplayers were great for the first 5 months then disappeared.

 

[Papacheeks]

Keep in mind how Sony is doing, especially in Xbox home territory and there isn't a single AAA IP out yet.

Yes Miles Morales was a dlc.

And yet it continues to chart everytime there's more PS5 stock.

 

[Three]

I'm not necessarily arguing your point, but your post here doesn't disprove anything he said. At least in it's context.

The vast amount of multiplayer games these days have some form of MTX. Despite your first instinct to post that bad faith argument, you might not want to die on that hill, because it wouldn't be difficult at all to argue against it.

Sony can barely muster enough ineptitude to add multiplayer to some of its games, yet when it does... they typically have MTX such as TLOU and UC4 for instance. In UC4s case, they're even worse than the examples you mentioned.

And it's not as if Phil and Xbox is filing patents such as...

It does disprove it when the majority of his games are microtransaction heavy games and follow that model. If it didn't as he claims he wouldn't need to add these microtransactions to his big budget games. Just collect the monthly subscription you are so happily paying.
Make huge budget single player games for gamepass if they are just as successful on there, go on Phil put your money where your mouth is if what you say is true.

Make no mistake Sony will likely follow too if/when they go as hard into GaaS as MS have. MS were all about Lootbox microtransactions in literally all their mainline IPs this gen (Halo, Gears, Forza), but those are slowly being phased out thanks in part to some court rulings and backlash. Fake currencies are taking over though. Halo Infinite if free to play as rumoured will also very likely be full of microtransactions.

You have people defending this model MS have adopted just like people defended paying for online play and these fake ingame currencies will become normal like they already have in free mobile games you aren't paying a subscription for. As much as it pains you to admit Sonys current model makes a lot of big games without any traces of microtransactions but playing God of War and seeing hacksilver especially so scarce in NG+ showed me that they were possibly preparing people for the idea of buying fake currency if they lean into GaaS as heavily as MS have. The Last of Us factions 'free' on PSNow! I bet you now.
MS normalise this nonsense and people defend it and seeing its just money on the table when some so willingly accept it I can see others doing it too.

 

[CityHunter1981]

I will never understand why people think negative about Sony for not changing anything. Microsoft was in urgent need to do something and they did, Sony is doing great, proven by the PS5 sales numbers. I am happy with staying on course if it means we get great exclusive titles. I mean Sony is rocking it similar to Marvel, nearly every game they release is great. Also Sony already said they will even invest more money in their Studios and exclusive games, so what do People want more?

 

[Shelookdlvl18]

It does disprove it when the majority of his games are microtransaction heavy games and follow that model. If it didn't as he claims he wouldn't need to add these microtransactions to his big budget games. Just collect the monthly subscription you are so happily paying.
Make huge budget single player games for gamepass if they are just as successful on there, go on Phil put your money where your mouth is if what you say is true.

Make no mistake Sony will likely follow too if/when they go as hard into GaaS as MS have. MS were all about Lootbox microtransactions in literally all their mainline IPs this gen (Halo, Gears, Forza), but those are slowly being phased out thanks in part to some court rulings and backlash. Fake currencies are taking over though. Halo Infinite if free to play as rumoured will also very likely be full of microtransactions.

You have people defending this model MS have adopted just like people defended paying for online play and these fake ingame currencies will become normal like they already have in free mobile games you aren't paying a subscription for. As much as it pains you to admit Sonys current model makes a lot of big games without any traces of microtransactions but playing God of War and seeing hacksilver especially so scarce in NG+ showed me that they were possibly preparing people for the idea of buying fake currency if they lean into GaaS as heavily as MS have. The Last of Us factions 'free' on PSNow! I bet you now.
MS normalise this nonsense and people defend it and seeing its just money on the table when some so willingly accept it I can see others doing it too.

It's not inherently defending microtransactions to see things for the way they are. MTX are one way or another a thing in online games these days. I personally don't hate MTX so long as it doesn't consist of loot boxes or pay to win variety. I greatly benefited from R6 Siege's MTX system for example. Idoits would buy the most god awful outfits, and then attempt to camp with said outfits. A game where stealth, and checking corners is paramount... I probably logged thousands of kills players that under normal circumstances, would've been at least somewhat obscured in dark corners... Had they only not dressed their character up as either a clown or pirate.

But my original point wasn't to defend Microsoft in it's particular MTX case, any more than to say that singling out Phil or Microsoft as compared to just about everyone else in the industry is a false equivalency. There should be no defending MS or Phil for trying to implement loot boxes into their games, but it's also not accurate to portray them as being any worse than any of the other gaming companies out there.

It wouldn't pain me at all to admit Sony's model makes games without a trace of MTX. But MTX are inherently implemented into multiplayer online games, and seeing as Sony doesn't make many of those... It's easy to see why. Your argument would hold more weight if the very slim multiplayer offerings that Sony does produce such as TLOU and UC4... Weren't loaded with MTX and loot boxes. While simultaneously claiming that Halo, Gears, and Forza lootbox MTX are "slowly being phased out thanks in part to court rulings and backlash" when Gears 5 didn't even have loot box MTX, and Forza 7 canceled their implementation if it prior to launch.

I could say "you've got people that are defending this model Sony have adopted", but that wouldn't be a particularly fair or accurate statement to make considering the context here. Neither would me saying "Sony normalize this nonsense and people people defend it". Same as your assertion that MS was.

About the best I can do is give you credit for trying, because there's simply no way to argue that MS is considerably worse than Sony here. And it's not even difficult to argue.

 

[sinnergy]

Just like Nokia stayed the course !

 

[Panajev2001a]

Just like Nokia stayed the course !

I wonder who bought Nokia and sank it… .

 

[Zannrebel]

So in one corner we have Sony who has dominated sales and delivered a steady stream of blockbuster games. In the other we have Microsoft, who made a splash with Halo 20 years ago, back in the race because they purchased a bunch of studios. The same Microsoft which, since the beginning of days, has a history of buying up companies that become mediocre under their umbrella.

Look, we don't know what's gonna happen. It could be healthy competition, it could be Microsoft tears Sony a new one. But anyone trying to count this race right now, calling out Sony as in trouble, with Microsoft's track record of acquisitions, is a lunatic. I used to be a die-hard Rare fan, but Rare didn't do much to compel me to buy an Xbox 360.

Look at 343 under the direction of Microsoft. Appears to me they offer them neither oversight nor direction. Just money and a mandate for diversified hiring.

Fact is, in order for MS to catch up, they have a lot to prove reversing their own history, while Sony is already killing it right now as we speak. You guys are crazy.

Im not sure this point applies when Sony have closed down more studios than Microsoft. Playground games took over an entire genra in the quality department under MS.

 

[Panajev2001a]

It's not inherently defending microtransactions to see things for the way they are. MTX are one way or another a thing in online games these days. I personally don't hate MTX so long as it doesn't consist of loot boxes or pay to win variety. I greatly benefited from R6 Siege's MTX system for example. Idoits would buy the most god awful outfits, and then attempt to camp with said outfits. A game where stealth, and checking corners is paramount... I probably logged thousands of kills players that under normal circumstances, would've been at least somewhat obscured in dark corners... Had they only not dressed their character up as either a clown or pirate.

But my original point wasn't to defend Microsoft in it's particular MTX case, any more than to say that singling out Phil or Microsoft as compared to just about everyone else in the industry is a false equivalency. There should be no defending MS or Phil for trying to implement loot boxes into their games, but it's also not accurate to portray them as being any worse than any of the other gaming companies out there.

It wouldn't pain me at all to admit Sony's model makes games without a trace of MTX. But MTX are inherently implemented into multiplayer online games, and seeing as Sony doesn't make many of those... It's easy to see why. Your argument would hold more weight if the very slim multiplayer offerings that Sony does produce such as TLOU and UC4... Weren't loaded with MTX and loot boxes. While simultaneously claiming that Halo, Gears, and Forza lootbox MTX are "slowly being phased out thanks in part to court rulings and backlash" when Gears 5 didn't even have loot box MTX, and Forza 7 canceled their implementation if it prior to launch.

I could say "you've got people that are defending this model Sony have adopted", but that wouldn't be a particularly fair or accurate statement to make considering the context here. Neither would me saying "Sony normalize this nonsense and people people defend it". Same as your assertion that MS was.

About the best I can do is give you credit for trying, because there's simply no way to argue that MS is considerably worse than Sony here. And it's not even difficult to argue.

The bulk of the issue is how games are designed and how they make the bulk of the money invested in them. While there are MTX in some first party titles on the Sony’s side we are talking about outliers and we can see that the core was not designed around them. You are convinced to buy the game?! You buy it and have fun, period. The point you made about Sony not making games that lend themselves to be exploited with MTX / are designed around them is exactly THE point.

The problem is taking an industry that for better or worse (worse) has been introducing more and more MTX into games and inching their way on a model of engagement where you getting the game is just the beginning of monetisation: the game is designed to get you to come back often and incentivise you to buy more stuff over and over (not a new level or a bigger expansion, but yet another trinket or consumable over and over again).
A model where software publishers see perceived price eroded to almost zero is the next step in the evolution of MTX with games getting designed around MTX first and foremost and cut up in smaller episodic chunks to keep people subscribed and spending (the fear is GamePass bringing the same consumer behaviour / disruption that occurred in the mobile space: in the console arena nobody tried to disrupt the current mode in such a manner because it required a helluva lot of startup cash for many years and deep media ties… on mobiles devs did it to themselves as they saw this gold rush of the mobile ecosystem expansion).

 

[Panajev2001a]

Im not sure this point applies when Sony have closed down more studios than Microsoft. Playground games took over an entire genra in the quality department under MS.

Sony has also invested heavily in internal studios, bought Insomniac, and on top of that invested almost $5 Billion in internal studios growth since 2019 as they recently revealed. The organic growth people refused to give them credit for and mocked.

 

[Bergoglio]

Sony has also invested heavily in internal studios, bought Insomniac, and on top of that invested almost $5 Billion in internal studios growth since 2019 as they recently revealed. The organic growth people refused to give them credit for and mocked.

5 billion on 10 studios.

This does not guarantee you a continuous influx of exclusives.

They will need more teams in the coming years to face up xbox output.

 

[Pedro Motta]

Well if Phil said that then he must be telling the truth

Except


And

Sea of Thieves launches microtransaction store, includes £25 ship set

Pets have finally arrived in Sea of Thieves as part of this month's Smuggler's Fortune update, and with them comes the …

www.google.com

And

Buy Halo 5: Guardians – Power Up REQ Pack | Xbox

The Power Up REQ Pack includes one Power Up Certification, if available, and 16 single-use Power Up REQs.

www.microsoft.com

Gee seems Phil isn't listening to his own ideas. Who would have thought.

This is going to be the Gamepass model, people just have to deal with it.

 

[JerryinSoCal]

I hate the word 'narrative', but I can see how one unsubstantiated interpretation gets repeated enough times that it snowballs into a commonly held belief.

Not arguing that they probably agreed that they needed to change things in up in light on their position against the competition. But when the new CEO comes in trumpeting accessibility and availability as company values, namely to promote Azure growth, surely they were always going to veer into this direction regardless.



I would stray far away from hyperbolic and sensationalist grabbing headlines, Sony is still the market leader right here and now. However, the value proposition of Game Pass has a real opportunity to stay in the headlines and grab mind share. I don't believe it's rippling effects have been felt fully yet from gaming enthusiast forums > gaming media > YouTube influencers > retail clerks > the school yard. If you want to talk right here and now, that's pretty banal conversation. To look past the tip of your nose and discuss the future is intriguing.

Gamepass is pushed in every conversation where xbox is mentioned, you never hear an actual game mentioned just "value" but as someone who has GPU right now (had to get it to get my series x) and has had GP in the past, there are a lot of games but I struggle to find anything I actually want to play that I haven't either already played before and traded in or still own digitally. Do I give some games a try that I had no interest in? sure but I also generally give them about an hour and then give up and delete them. I'm someone who on average buys like 12-18 games a year depending on what's released and I know that's more than most so I won't pretend others have as hard of a time finding something to play as I do but if it's not something you were really interested in any way is there really any point? It's almost like buying something you never really use just because you have a coupon.

 

[JerryinSoCal]

5 billion on 10 studios.

This does not guarantee you a continuous influx of exclusives.

They will need more teams in the coming years to face up xbox output.

Don't forget several of the studios MS bought were already only working with xbox anyway.

 

[Panajev2001a]

5 billion on 10 studios.

This does not guarantee you a continuous influx of exclusives.

$5 Billion + the Insomniac purchase… and that is $5 Billion on already big established and very efficient studios that collaborate together very well already (not purchasing other companies at a premium). They already had a steady stream of exclusives and they are not focused on flooding the market with smaller games each month or multiple times a month at a lower scope/quality or in episodic format.
Sony will probably form additional teams in those studios to tackle pre-prod and production of more games in parallel (and slow them to help each other when needed).

You are underestimating how much money that is IMHO, but yet I think they are going to grow them further, make exclusive partnerships with other studios., and I think some acquisitions.

The important thing for Sony in terms of acquisitions is that they prioritise (as they should) acquiring studios they know they can work with well and that are a good company fit / can work well as part of their World Wide Studios group to minimise departures post acquisitions (you need to get the talent not just the IP). You will see how close they world with studios for years and years before purchasing them and that tends to strengthen the entire WWS group which pays off as they are involved heavily in their next generation consoles designs (this is perhaps the biggest Cerny difference over Kutaragi: continuous third party developer outreach and involving the SIE WWS devs in the console design early on instead of doing it all in secret and then suddenly trying to gain internal and key external third parties support).

You build a workldwide studio group, not just buy companies left right and centre (and I mean to place the emphasis on the word “just”, I am not saying MS buys random companies without a plan).

 

[Menzies]

Gamepass is pushed in every conversation where xbox is mentioned, you never hear an actual game mentioned just "value" but as someone who has GPU right now (had to get it to get my series x) and has had GP in the past, there are a lot of games but I struggle to find anything I actually want to play that I haven't either already played before and traded in or still own digitally. Do I give some games a try that I had no interest in? sure but I also generally give them about an hour and then give up and delete them. I'm someone who on average buys like 12-18 games a year depending on what's released and I know that's more than most so I won't pretend others have as hard of a time finding something to play as I do but if it's not something you were really interested in any way is there really any point? It's almost like buying something you never really use just because you have a coupon.

As you've said, that's highly anecdotal. Now that you have it, it may change your purchasing habits or you might actually discover a gem or two you wouldn't otherwise have given the time of day.

TBH I don't care if you like it or not, as I'm not paid to give glowing endorsements of Game Pass. Not every game on the service is to my interests either, but it's not that hard to grapple that it's got wide-spread appeal.

 

[megreotsugua]

This is going to be the Gamepass model, people just have to deal with it.

Basically free-to-play games behind a paywall.

 

[Shmunter]

Quality. The bottom line.

One Returnal vs 100 shelf fillers is all it takes.

 

[xShaun]

Sony cant compete with Xbox as they are a different category.

Sony's competition is Nintendo.

Xbox competition is future Apple+Amazon.

 

[Tomeru]

5 billion on 10 studios.

This does not guarantee you a continuous influx of exclusives.

They will need more teams in the coming years to face up xbox output.

 

[BlackTron]

Im not sure this point applies when Sony have closed down more studios than Microsoft. Playground games took over an entire genra in the quality department under MS.

My point that you need to wait and see what actually happens DEFINITELY applies. Nobody is sure of anything. Before assuming that history will suddenly change because of a bunch of news, let them prove it.

This ultimately is not about how many studios each company has, doesn't have, shut down, or purchased. That only fuels speculation as to what matters, which is how many games they put out that people actually like and make an impact in real life. Making some sort of assumption that MS is going to suddenly slay Sony in this regard is a HUGE assumption. Not only is Sony actually releasing games right now, MS's new assets will take years to produce, and then we have to hope that the taint of MS doesn't turn the studio's into shells of their former selves as usually happens since the 90's. Besides that, we have no idea what Sony will show by the time MS's gears are fully turning in several years. You think they are just haplessly waiting to get destroyed with no plans going on in the back room?

Again, anything can happen, but acting like MS's total return to dominance is already assured is laughable. They haven't even delivered Halo yet, their biggest IP in development hell. You guys need to have a drink and calm tf down lol.

 

[BlackTron]

Sony cant compete with Xbox as they are a different category.

Sony's competition is Nintendo.

Xbox competition is future Apple+Amazon.

People rewrite the definition of competition to fit their narrative now? Man gamers are a unique bunch.

 

[West Texas CEO]

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

Sony cant compete with Xbox as they are a different category.

Sony's competition is Nintendo.

Xbox competition is future Apple+Amazon.

Xbox lost the competition with Playstation and Nintendo. So they gave up the race and decided to compete with game companies that don't even exist yet.

It is so easy to beat the competition, when the competition isn't even born. I am, right now, on equal grounds with future Apple and Amazon on being the owner of a gaming platform, because I have made eactly as many compelling AAA games as both of them combined. See how that works?

And here you are, saying it like it is somethig to be proud of. You might as well say you could win a wrestling match against a toddler.

 

[sinnergy]

I wonder who bought Nokia and sank it… .

That ship was a lost cause that’s what you get when keeping things stuck in the past …

 

[Panajev2001a]

That ship was a lost cause that’s what you get when keeping things stuck in the past …

Sure sure… the change is good because it is change argument . Not related to who it is pushing it eh ? That to me is a very unconvincing argument as what it leads to is the joy of mobile gaming as a landscape. .

Nokia was an example of MS entering late, not questioning their strategy and going at it checkbook first and ecosystem second. Then failing at mobile is not related to continuing a true and effective previous strategy.

 

[xShaun]

People rewrite the definition of competition to fit their narrative now? Man gamers are a unique bunch.

Isn't it pretty obvious they are both taking completely different paths?

This isn't a diss to Sony. I love Sony, and Nintendo but they are not lined up to compete with the Multi screen, easy accessible future just yet.

Just look at how much mobile is absolutely killing games consoles for player base. It's only a matter of time we will see games consoles the same way as we see Cameras and Calculators, etc.

For the next 2-3 years I feel PS5 will be the best console, but they are not the same. Their visions are very different.

 

[Thirty7ven]

I’ve been following games since the PS2 era and can’t remember a third place console ever so triumphantly claiming the market leaders need to compete with them. It’s like we’ve gone to an alternate reality

The power of manufactured narratives on social media.

In 2020, PlayStation was getting slam hit after slam hit, breaking industry records, critically and commercially, launching a record breaking device with next gen exclusives, a controller that got adulation and becomes the best selling controller month after month after month.

But because Gamepass is successfully converting existing Live Gold subscribers, apparently... it’s over for PlayStation lol

Both Nintendo and Sony can match Gamepass with their own service and convert their userbase at record speed. If need be.

 

[sinnergy]

Sure sure… the change is good because it is change argument . Not related to who it is pushing it eh ? That to me is a very unconvincing argument as what it leads to is the joy of mobile gaming as a landscape. .

Nokia was an example of MS entering late, not questioning their strategy and going at it checkbook first and ecosystem second. Then failing at mobile is not related to continuing a true and effective previous strategy.

Nokia missed the touch screen phone market completely..

Much like subscription services now …

 

[BlackTron]

Isn't it pretty obvious they are both taking completely different paths?

This isn't a diss to Sony. I love Sony, and Nintendo but they are not lined up to compete with the Multi screen, easy accessible future just yet.

Just look at how much mobile is absolutely killing games consoles for player base. It's only a matter of time we will see games consoles the same way as we see Cameras and Calculators, etc.

For the next 2-3 years I feel PS5 will be the best console, but they are not the same. Their visions are very different.

They ARE taking completely different paths, to compete with each other.

The pizza place that delivers isn't competing at all with the Italian restaurant next door, because they take "different paths". Look, they're still both trying to sell you a pizza, and business with one was still potential money for the other.

Even if Sony and MS are taking different paths, that's an entirely different question as to whether they're competing, which they are.

The notion that MS isn't competing with Sony right now, because of some fight with Apple/Google in the future that hasn't even happened yet, is embarrassing.

That being said. The multi-screen, easily accessible future you refer to is not coming in 2-3 years. For 3-10 years Sony and Nintendo will continue to move tons of hardware and physical software units regardless of what MS is doing, and regardless as to whether their streaming options become more robust.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Nokia missed the touch screen phone market completely..

Much like subscription services now …

Faint correlation oversold as causation … hilarious point to use as any innovation that was a different approach to the industry norm that tanked and/or that was worse than the rest can be then used against the argument you are making.

 

[Raonak]

MS is going it's direction because it's the only thing they can do. Sony, Nintendo and Steam have their respective niches firmly entrenched.

All of this services are the future talk is just an echo of the mobiles will kill consoles, and consoles will kill pcs talk of the previous generations.

MS will create a new niche to put itself in. Let's hope it works for them. But there's no guarantee of it.

 

[Three]

It's not inherently defending microtransactions to see things for the way they are. MTX are one way or another a thing in online games these days. I personally don't hate MTX so long as it doesn't consist of loot boxes or pay to win variety. I greatly benefited from R6 Siege's MTX system for example. Idoits would buy the most god awful outfits, and then attempt to camp with said outfits. A game where stealth, and checking corners is paramount... I probably logged thousands of kills players that under normal circumstances, would've been at least somewhat obscured in dark corners... Had they only not dressed their character up as either a clown or pirate.

But my original point wasn't to defend Microsoft in it's particular MTX case, any more than to say that singling out Phil or Microsoft as compared to just about everyone else in the industry is a false equivalency. There should be no defending MS or Phil for trying to implement loot boxes into their games, but it's also not accurate to portray them as being any worse than any of the other gaming companies out there.

It wouldn't pain me at all to admit Sony's model makes games without a trace of MTX. But MTX are inherently implemented into multiplayer online games, and seeing as Sony doesn't make many of those... It's easy to see why. Your argument would hold more weight if the very slim multiplayer offerings that Sony does produce such as TLOU and UC4... Weren't loaded with MTX and loot boxes. While simultaneously claiming that Halo, Gears, and Forza lootbox MTX are "slowly being phased out thanks in part to court rulings and backlash" when Gears 5 didn't even have loot box MTX, and Forza 7 canceled their implementation if it prior to launch.

I could say "you've got people that are defending this model Sony have adopted", but that wouldn't be a particularly fair or accurate statement to make considering the context here. Neither would me saying "Sony normalize this nonsense and people people defend it". Same as your assertion that MS was.

About the best I can do is give you credit for trying, because there's simply no way to argue that MS is considerably worse than Sony here. And it's not even difficult to argue.

Gears 4 had lootboxes, Forza 7 also had Prize crates and still Tokens are bought with real money. As I said these are slowly being replaced for in game currency like Iron in Gears 5 because lootboxes were classified as gambling in some countries and Battlefront got some huge backlash coverage around that time.

My argument is a simple one. One of the reasons MS has so heavily concentrated on multiplayer online games is because they started charging for online multiplayer, one of the reasons they started adding MTX is because games aren't about sales anymore but 'amount of players' from which they get MTX money.

Phil can't say it isn't about MTX heavy games when that is pretty much all he has concentrated on and released. The excuse that well all their games are MP doesn't work because them charging there too pushed them towards that model. Make a huge budget single player game then if that's the case. Where are those though? Why hasn't MS made a AAA single player game akin to God of war, Spiderman, Horizon Zero Dawn, Ratchet and Clank or even a Bloodborne . Have you ever asked yourself this?

 

[Dlacy13g]

If it ain't broke why fix it? Sums it up and I tend to agree... I don't really think Sony needs to do anything to combat what Microsoft is doing because they are still doing very well in their model.

 

[iceatcs]

Sony cant compete with Xbox as they are a different category.

Sony's competition is Nintendo.

Xbox competition is future Apple+Amazon.

Haha true. xbox is like damn they are so hard to catch. Let go back to nursery for easy to catch.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

They don't need multiplayer, but certainly is way more profitable if it catches on. Somewhat less work also developing a story and such.

More profitable.
Sells more hardware.
Way stickier.

The counter to GamePass is having a contingent of players who are one game gamers. The people who like playing relatively short single player games are susceptible to the Siren song of GamePass. The people who play one game for hundreds + thousands of hours aren't nearly as impressed with GamePass.

 

[Three]

More profitable.
Sells more hardware.
Way stickier.

The counter to GamePass is having a contingent of players who are one game gamers. The people who like playing relatively short single player games are susceptible to the Siren song of GamePass. The people who play one game for hundreds + thousands of hours aren't nearly as impressed with GamePass.

Exactly and way less big games as is evident from Xbox and EA. A lot of the online players are actually the ones who become hooked on one game like Destiny and play for years in 'seasons' . People who play single player games move from one game to another after completing them.

GTA5 is a good example of multiplayer online and MTX taking over. It's been 8 years and 3 gens and still no new GTA. GTA online shark cards probably making way too much money. Fingers crossed we hear something soon of a new one.

 

[McCarth]

5 billion on 10 studios.

This does not guarantee you a continuous influx of exclusives.

They will need more teams in the coming years to face up xbox output.

Hey look, I hope so... but I'm amazed at the amount of individuals on this board that are thinking this is an inevitability.

MS' track record does not support that, and even now their entirety of 2021 and 2022 is riding on Halo and a handful of games that haven't shown a second of gameplay. That's not the change they are somehow getting credit for.

 

[Bergoglio]

Hey look, I hope so... but I'm amazed at the amount of individuals on this board that are thinking this is an inevitability.

MS' track record does not support that, and even now their entirety of 2021 and 2022 is riding on Halo and a handful of games that haven't shown a second of gameplay. That's not the change they are somehow getting credit for.

I wrote in the coming years. So starting 2022/23 Xbox will be a factory of FP games. This is not a dream or random speculation. It’s a fact.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

I will never understand why people think negative about Sony for not changing anything. Microsoft was in urgent need to do something and they did, Sony is doing great, proven by the PS5 sales numbers. I am happy with staying on course if it means we get great exclusive titles. I mean Sony is rocking it similar to Marvel, nearly every game they release is great. Also Sony already said they will even invest more money in their Studios and exclusive games, so what do People want more?

I agree after PS4 was a success there is no need for them revolutionise anything.

 

[N1tr0sOx1d3]

The enormous success and brand loyalty of PS4 (in essence, having an entire generation all to itself), and the pedigree of PlayStation's 'exclusive' IPs are what's carrying PS5 right now.

However they don't have the luxury of MS throwing in the towel like they did last gen. Xbox is baring its fangs and playing hard, half a year into the lifespan of these new consoles. Sony can't afford to simply assume things are going to go the same way they did with PS4. Staying the course would be unwise.

Baring their fangs? Playing hard? .

Sony got this covered. Generation in, generation out. It’s always the same.

I like my XBSX, but let’s be honest, it’s also barren of next gen only titles, with a drought that will last for at least a couple more years.

 

[yurinka]

Sony's plan to compete with Xbox: Stay the course | Opinion | GamesIndustry.biz

I can't really think of a reason for Sony to make drastic changes. Their first party output is stellar. Gamers obviously continue to invest heavily in the ecosystem. Sony could smooth out some bumps in their services, but for the most part, they continue to provide top notch games and that is what their customers clearly want.

The guy of the article is acts as if Xbox would be selling like PS or if Sony and MS had the same subs. It isn't the case, there isn't competition: Sony doubles (at least) them the userbase in both areas. Sony game division have been making way more money than the MS one, mostly because of the amount of (mostly 3rd party) games sold for their platform. This decade Sony exclusives were selling more than ever and earning more GOTYs than anyone.

MS had a long way to catch up, so this is why they aggresively acquired Zenimax and ABK: after 20 years they haven't been able to outperform Sony. So wanted to highly increase their amount and quality of internal teams and IPs, plus the adding on top the revenue and profits of these publishers to get numbers more similar to the Sony game division ones, while also providing way more content for GP.

Meanwhile Sony kept their strategy of expanding the manpower of their already existing teams plus acquiring other ones who partnered with them for a long period of time and that can help them improve in some areas where their 1st tparty teams don't excel or needed some extra help to keep growing and expanding.

Regarding expansion, both started to expand on PC (specially MS for obvious reasons, they have Windows), streaming and mobile. Even to consoles they don't own: MS published many games until now on PS and Switch, and now with Bungie will start publishing games on Xbox. But has more to do with needing to grow and reach more players because games are getting more and more expensive than to react to each other.

Think about the 3rd parties, who don't own platforms: each generation the budgets rise, so some 3rd party series that in the past were exclusive needed to go multi because they needed extra revenue to compensate the risign dev and marketing costs. Many of them did it on the PS360 gen, others did it on the PS4XBO gen. Even regarding the moneyhatted exclusives Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft now rarely pay full exclusives but instead now they frequently do timed console exclusives, because even if devs welcome moneyhats they also need the revenue from the other platforms.