Lol! I'm getting flashbacks too. It will be fun quoting these articles and some of the comments here 3 years later.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Engadget: Xbox Is Poised To Dominate The Next Console Generation
- Thread starter Sillegamer
- Start date
Lol! I'm getting flashbacks too. It will be fun quoting these articles and some of the comments here 3 years later.
I just don't think it's feasible long term. It cost alot of money to run studios. The current subscription rate isn't enough to sustain that especially since that money is being split among third parties as well. If you only ever buy one full priced MS-produced game a year, and then switched to Gamepass instead, then MS might make a little more money on you. If you buy 2 or more, then they've lost significant money. They would have to bank on alot of people being such casual consumers that they wouldn't have bought games in the traditional sense, but are fine with a subscription service. And to be honest, I don't associate that kind of casual consumer with Xbox.
I mean my Atari 7800 played 2600 games, while my PS3 couldn't play PS2 games, but keep on going at people for not knowing history.
Two things:
- Why can't you discuss the point without bringing the author into it? Argue her points. It just seems weird.
- Nothing that you wrote disproves that XBOX has made a PR about face, which most in here will easily agree with.
I could be wrong, but I think the goal isn't existing customers (no matter how many games they buy) but rather an attempt to bring in new customers who wouldn't have gotten the system either way
The bloody irony.
The Atari 7800 (which launched in 1986), was backwards compatible with the Atari 2600. But to be fair, you'd need to have been on earth for like.. 5 minutes.. to google that information.
But it's not like Sony were alone setting a trend here regardless. Gameboy Advance which launched only a year after PS2 was backwards compatible with Gameboy and Gameboy Colour cartridges. And note every Xbox has had backwards compatibility.
And how can you say "it was till this gen an integral part of the Playstation ecosystem"? Did you miss the part where Sony cut backwards compatibility from the PS3? Pretty sure that was last gen. And PS4 firmware has a built-in PS2 emulator but it won't let you play any of your own PS2 games, nor even any of the PS2 games you purchased digitally on PSN via PS3.
But Microsoft has established more than just BC: X enhanced BC is on another level. Just one example: Ninja Gaiden Black looks glorious in native 4K at a locked 60fps, and that's a 14 year old game.
No for the whole post. That's simply not the reality. PS now and PSN are available on PC without the need of buying a Playstation console. It doesn't matter how well journalists can spin this up, particularly those last months on several known websites.
Microsoft and Google are actually behind Sony on Game streaming and are only recently trying to catch up. Sony already thought bigger than both MS and Google when they created PS Now 4 years ago. From there they never stopped improving their services and content.
Last edited:
What a ridiculous, completely tenuous and one-sided article. Reads like it was written under the influence of reactionary (now-dead) concerns.
With gems like this:
The author is happy to mention B-tier studio acquisitions, but doesn't even fairly mention Sony's first-party game studio expansion either. They probably don't want to. Then there's the point they make about E3, and don't even put any of that into context (as if Sony is going to be absent of announcements during 2019). It shows their mindset when writing this piece. It's not written from a truly honest angle. I suppose that's what happens when you use the word "dominate" to sensationalise something for clicks. They should really have a better peer reviewing system before hitting publish.
With gems like this:
"The right side of history". As if anybody with a good head on their shoulders looks at cross-play through that lens. I wonder if anybody is talking about cross-play in the same manner as they were a few months ago. Clue: they're not because it turns out it's not as dramatic a concern as everybody (incuding Microsoft) made it out to be. If we're going to look at it like this, then Sony was on the right side of history a decade ago when Microsoft didn't give a flying hoot about it. And this gem:
I mean, read the preceding paragraph, and then tell me that it actually is actually an honest or even valid comparison at all. Sony still "courts" independent developers like they used to traditionally, but now also with their VR product. Sony is still supporting indie developers with their "China Hero Project". Games like Lost Soul Aside, Pervader etc. This is just particularly poor research from the author and very, very misleading.
The author is happy to mention B-tier studio acquisitions, but doesn't even fairly mention Sony's first-party game studio expansion either. They probably don't want to. Then there's the point they make about E3, and don't even put any of that into context (as if Sony is going to be absent of announcements during 2019). It shows their mindset when writing this piece. It's not written from a truly honest angle. I suppose that's what happens when you use the word "dominate" to sensationalise something for clicks. They should really have a better peer reviewing system before hitting publish.
Last edited:
And that's fine, but those customers probably aren't going to care that they can play something like Halo Infinite day one. As an existing customer, why would you buy any MS game again, instead of just using Game Pass? I'm just talking about the revenue stream loss there.
I love Game Pass, their BC efforts and games like Forza Horizon, but they really haven't released buzz-worthy titles on a consistent basis like Sony for me to even think that's a possibility.
Some studio acquisitions don't suddenly equal a fantastic library or assured dominance. They'll do better, but dominate? It's a laughably hyperbolic narrative to be pushing.
Some studio acquisitions don't suddenly equal a fantastic library or assured dominance. They'll do better, but dominate? It's a laughably hyperbolic narrative to be pushing.
Am I understanding you correct that you think I tried to disprove that MS did PR?
Yes, MS is digging themselves out of the selfmade "undesirable hardware, too high price point and anticonsumer moves" hole, I literally said that.
I also said Nintendo dug themselves out of their selfmade "undesirable hardware, too high price point" hole and Sony is still market leader and has catched up to Nintendo in terms of exclusives. The author(better? Btw, I'm always calling out authors when they write nonsense, sorry) even shortly acknowledged Nintendo reignited the fire and than made zero attempt to explain why all these factors won't matter.
I think that a lot of people will end up owning/enjoying both next-gen. It's not as much of a red ocean anymore.
Yes, in 2012, which still proves that Sony was years ahead and not behind in regards to the "future of gaming".
Yeah seriously Google has an ecosystem already in place with Billions of users, Microsoft does as well. Sony does not at all have one. That's the hard difference between them. What is Sony offering outside of games? Nothing really. Sony is gonna have a really damn hard time to expand out of this hard locked ecosystem. PSNow really is just not the best selection sony has and they know that and refuse to change it.
I truly believe Sony sees themselves Xbox and Nintendo and that's it. They don't see any other devices, nothing more as a way to play all of their games. Google/Microsoft see everydevice we have as a way to play Xbox games, I can see xCloud being a part of smart TV's.
Now imagine a world where you can play PC games and Xbox games with just a TV and a controller. This is the ultimate goal. Where you can swap to your TV then to any other device that you have to pick up your games.
This is what those two see that Sony does not.
Yes Gaikai did create it and Sony bought them and their Competitor OnLive and promptly shutdown OnLive as they only were looking for patents so Gaikai could use them.
Very much Sony didn't spend any time developing this while microsoft has been going at it since 2013.
Why does that really matter though? Sony still saw a future in streaming gaming services.
Touche on Gameboy, but I have admittingly my doubts that Atari established it. Did it, yes, but establish, I kinda doubt it.
You don't think Sony will stream to TV, phones, and PCs if there hand is forced?
I think Microsoft are poised to not lose as badly as they have in previous generations, but the notion they are poised to dominate is hilarious click bait.
Irrelevant in their first generation. Third in a two horse race in the second. Trashed and humiliated in the third. Domination in the fourth seems extremely unlikely.
To dominate they need to be the obvious better choice for early adopters. Without the promise of compelling exclusives, that's a huge ask.
Irrelevant in their first generation. Third in a two horse race in the second. Trashed and humiliated in the third. Domination in the fourth seems extremely unlikely.
To dominate they need to be the obvious better choice for early adopters. Without the promise of compelling exclusives, that's a huge ask.
Lol, there's a reason why Sony bought Gaikai. Game streaming was already a thing years ago.
I honestly can't tell if this is sarcasm or not.
I can play PS4 games, right now, without a PS4 on a monthly sub.
If you think Sony is not interested in bringing their games to 'everything', you just haven't been paying attention.
It's absolutely true that Sony hasn't put most of their 'best' content on PS Now to date, but it's telling that even with that stance, their catalog is arguably as good or better as what MS has put together to date on gamepass. Here's the thing - neither of these catalogs are particularly brilliant right now.
But who has the shortest path to a legitimately great subscription catalog though? On the first party side, undoubtedly Sony. Microsoft has practically a five year hole to fill by comparison. If ahead of PS5's release, Sony puts most or all of the best of their PS4 catalog on PS Now - and I see little reason why they wouldn't - Gamepass will have a mountain to climb to match it. And PS4/XOne content will be dominant in terms of first party content on these services in the early years.
Last edited:
Enhanced BC is a nice addition(though they were hardly the first here either, even this gen) - but I fail to see why MS gets lauded for BC when each outing to date resulted in roughly 10% of legacy library being compatible. Sony and Nintendo have been much more inconsistent - but the times they did have BC, it's been above 90%, so even on average they have higher compatibility than MS ever achieved.
Anyway the article seems to be saying that doing exact same things as last gen (early next-gen leaks, strong finish to the cycle etc.) gives MS a better starting position than the time when they were actually considered a market leader by many, because... reasons. I suppose the crux is that it's 'their turn' since Nintendo and MS were the last two with products that didn't meet expectations.
Ppl are entitled to their opinions, but this is article consistent with a previous video by the same person claiming the Xbox 1 was actually awesome at launch and gamers were wrong to balk at the always-online reveal. I disagreed with that video, and I disagree with this piece. I just don't understand how you can use a word like "dominate" when we don't know what games will be coming out.
More importantly, from a financial standpoint Xbox has been doing excellent for a while without leading in overall hardware sales. If they continue with consumer-friendly practices, it's perfectly reasonable to assume that they'll continue to be super profitable. Therefore, I'm not really onboard with a narrative that frames the future success of Microsoft in console war terms, when I don't think that's their goal any more.
More importantly, from a financial standpoint Xbox has been doing excellent for a while without leading in overall hardware sales. If they continue with consumer-friendly practices, it's perfectly reasonable to assume that they'll continue to be super profitable. Therefore, I'm not really onboard with a narrative that frames the future success of Microsoft in console war terms, when I don't think that's their goal any more.
I still cannot believe they wrote this article and never mentioned Game Pass. That is one of the biggest things Microsoft has going for them and they never mention it in the article. I dont know how you can write an article about how Microsoft is going to "Dominate" next generation and never mention one of the biggest things they have going for them.
And I still think because of brand awareness and 1st Party Studio output that Sony has, the word "Dominate" is still pretty silly. As was stated before, if they used something like "Even the playing field" or "poised to close the gap" or something nobody would even bat an eye.
But still, they dont even mention Game Pass lol.
And I still think because of brand awareness and 1st Party Studio output that Sony has, the word "Dominate" is still pretty silly. As was stated before, if they used something like "Even the playing field" or "poised to close the gap" or something nobody would even bat an eye.
But still, they dont even mention Game Pass lol.
Sony PSNow + Samsung have done exactly this already years ago, so long ago it's been shut down / abandoned (and forgotten, clearly).
people arguing for BC as if that is the deciding factor..no one buys a console to play a decade-old game. BC is so overrated. I have never heard or read anyone buying a console because you can play last-gen games on it natively.
As for Game Pass, how does everyone feel about it further devaluing games as it is? $10 a month and you can access Hollow Knight, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, etc...
I mean it is beginning to feel like Netflix, and it's kinda sad that we can now just take the games at a disposable level. I'm a cheapskate too but idk how to feel about bringing months-old games to a platform like Game Pass.
As for Game Pass, how does everyone feel about it further devaluing games as it is? $10 a month and you can access Hollow Knight, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, etc...
I mean it is beginning to feel like Netflix, and it's kinda sad that we can now just take the games at a disposable level. I'm a cheapskate too but idk how to feel about bringing months-old games to a platform like Game Pass.
Not saying this will never happen - but the "TVs will take over the gaming world" has been paraded around for the past 6 years (at minimum) and a ton of money has been thrown (or attempted to) at it as well.
More to the point it's something that MS's original XB1 strategy involved as well - they were never looking at their hw-box as a way to get to 1Billion users, and much of their games as a service strategy people just started noticing in 2018 dates back to 2011-2012 also.
Last time a console really dominated a generation was PS2 in the 6th one. The notion that one side could dominate a videogame generation nowadays is hiperbolic when both Sony/Nintendo/MS are selling well and the pc market is more relevant than ever. The press just use this word to clickbait and Sony fanboys to...sony fanboying. It's just a silly word that doesn't make sense in the industry anymore.
That said, i can feel the next Xbox striking back and possibly taking first place, if their game pass effort really reach the masses. It would be great for third world countries to have a "netflixation" of videogames for people that would never spend $60-converted-to-inacessible-price on big games.
But i doubt PS5 and Switch/Next Nintendo stuff will flop in any way. All of them will get a healthy share from the next gen.
That said, i can feel the next Xbox striking back and possibly taking first place, if their game pass effort really reach the masses. It would be great for third world countries to have a "netflixation" of videogames for people that would never spend $60-converted-to-inacessible-price on big games.
But i doubt PS5 and Switch/Next Nintendo stuff will flop in any way. All of them will get a healthy share from the next gen.
In what respects ?
Truth is MS having maybe a few million lead in the US next gen won't change anything .
For all the talk about Sony doing it first, etc. that MS is putting their biggest 1st party games on Gamepass day 1 is a big deal and needs to be addressed. Yes we can crack jokes about the dearth of exclusives, etc. but if they keep it up and utilize these new 1st party studios to create content for gamepass it will be a very attractive product that will force Sony to react to and that's good for everyone. I'd gladly pay 10 bucks a month for PSNow if Sony released their latest and greatest on it. Who wouldn't?
I think you're right in how Sony sees the videogame market, but I don't think it's a problem if you have games more ppl want to play. Without dedicated studios and bespoke hardware, Google will be beholden to 3rd party software and hardware. Being able to play any PC game on any device will appeal to a lot of people, but Sony will still sell a ton of consoles with games like God of War, Last of Us etc., and they've shown that they don't need to step out of the existing ecosystem.
Microsoft has this same problem right now, but they've made significant efforts to course correct. However, they're going to need exclusive content to convince ppl to pay to play games on any smart TV or tablet. If it's just 3rd party content, then there's not a compelling reason to play those same games somewhere else when they're available on the Sony system you have.
Wait. Let me see if I get this: Are you saying its better to have been the first to offer some run-of-the-mill streaming service compared to having a robust quality Cloud infrastructure like MS has with Azure? MS has been investing in Cloud tech for years now. It's why its arguably the best in Cloud technology in the world today.
Sony saw something...that involved streaming. Not sure how far into the future they were looking as they haven't made the same kind of investments into it like we see with the competition.
The problem with Xbox is it's lack of worldwode appeal. Even when Microsoft did everything right with the X360 and Sony did everything wrong with the PS3, the PS3 still sold around the same (if not a bit more) than the X360. Even when releasing a year later.
I think if the PS5 releases around the same time as Xbox Two and is backwards compatible with all PS4 games, than Microsoft will have a tough time in most countries outside of UK/US.
I think if the PS5 releases around the same time as Xbox Two and is backwards compatible with all PS4 games, than Microsoft will have a tough time in most countries outside of UK/US.
And the big difference between then and now is the protection of digital libraries. They didn't exist on consoles then and thus this point becomes rather moot. Why abandon it on a time where it actually matters? And it's not just BC we have grown accustomed to now. It's enhanced BC. A new standard has been set on that front and regular plain BC with no enhancements will seem mediocre.
This is hilarious, Xbox doesn't even have a streaming service currently.
This isn't entirely true. You can stream your Xbox one to your windows 10 device so long as you're on the same network. Same with oculus i think.
What an embarrassment this article is, I mean, I know theres clickbait on the internet ... but this kind of speculation would make Mr C Team, Mr Xmedia Xbox faux-Nostradamus's blush.
I mean... insinuating MS was foward thinking in policing our free use of an offline device like the Xbox 1, speculating that the entire earth's population of disabled gamers are an untapped market that will flock to the next Xbox because of that controller? Shoddy shoddy unprofessional piece. Such a pity to see such a big site write such drivel. She may have well speculated having 100Tflops of power by plugging Scarlett into the "cloud" if Sony launches with beefier specs in PS5. Theres a clear line between fanboyism and journalism, clearly this author has crossed it, this article reads more like a Mr X/ Mr C Team live journal fanboy post of hopes and dreams in his blog, rather than a journalistic piece by someone who gets paid to be impartial and accurate with facts.
I mean... insinuating MS was foward thinking in policing our free use of an offline device like the Xbox 1, speculating that the entire earth's population of disabled gamers are an untapped market that will flock to the next Xbox because of that controller? Shoddy shoddy unprofessional piece. Such a pity to see such a big site write such drivel. She may have well speculated having 100Tflops of power by plugging Scarlett into the "cloud" if Sony launches with beefier specs in PS5. Theres a clear line between fanboyism and journalism, clearly this author has crossed it, this article reads more like a Mr X/ Mr C Team live journal fanboy post of hopes and dreams in his blog, rather than a journalistic piece by someone who gets paid to be impartial and accurate with facts.
The thing is Gamepass is a reaction to their current issue they have had all this gen. They tried Playanwyhere first to attract more people to their games outside of their hardware, it didn't really set the world on fire. They have yet made any significant changes to increase the amount of people outside of maybe 2 titles like forza and SOT that did somewhat well on PC numbers wise.
This whole gen their games are selling less than previous franchises, the thing carrying them is BC/XBOX ONE X/ and free games with gamepass and crossplay. Gamepass is a great service, but why did it take them so long? PS NOW was out years ago, why didn't they release it then?
I would argue people who were in control back then are gone for one, but other was I believe they thought their titles still had more clout. When gears 4 performed the way it did, you bet your ass a service like plan was made up to combat that, which would if enough signed up make up for some games sales shortcomings.
MS has been reactionary this whole gen and nothing has really worked. Sure some of the things they've done lays some ground work going forward for a better launch, but that's not saying much. The 2013 debacle was honestly one of the worst in recent history because of some of the tone deaf policies.
Now that it's been all corrected, it still leaves MS with a brand issue which is something they didn't really work on in 360 days outside of stable franchises. GAMEPASS should have been out way back then, because there's no streaming involved. They could have had gamepass early on with 360 titles to start.
Sony has WW branding and is now known as the Console to get for some of the best produced single player content next to Nintendo. Until these new studios start showing games that blow people away, Xbox is still going to have a uphill battle.
GAMEPASS/STREAMING SERVICES won't make people buy your box unless the games on it are amazing. Putting Shadow of the Tomb raider on it is a nice bonus, but the game has been on sale for so long at this point it doesn't matter.
The Playstation and Nintendo brand are so strong, and with VR doing as well at it has for a niche piece of hardware. They now have shown that they can do both and that other VR companies need to up their game when it comes to quality developed software for VR.
I really hope these new studios are not heads in the clouds pipe dreams, I really do hope they help elevate Xbox, and help reinvigorate the other studios like Coalition,343 to be able to make other things outside of halo.
User warned: platform wars
MS can brag about BC when they achieve compatibility worth a damn. Enhanced doesn't mean shit if there's only like 10 games. You might as well sell me full blown remasters/remakes at that point if you're just going to sell some BS "selective" BC.
The point of BC is to be able to play any old game, physical or digital, no exceptions. Sony and Nintendo have achieved that multiple times, more than they haven't. MS has not; and when they haven't it's because of obvious technical reasons. Yet you guys keep pointing at the PS4 like it's the way it's going to be moving forward.
I'm almost certain all you guys who keep shilling the X1X were probably the same people trashing the launch PS3 and posting "arrogant Sony" back then, despite the latter being the actual wonder machine that could do everything and with the most pro-consumer features on any console ever, especially compared to the laughably anti-consumer 360.
Bottom line, if you think BC is going to be some ace in the hole for MS next gen, forget about it. Everyone will have it and it will be more comprehensive than MS' solution.
So many posts in this thread read like they're from 2010. "Pssst, consoles don't matter anyway, MS is going to take over mobile and PC and make way more $$$ than those losers at Sony!" No, they're not. They already tried and failed miserably and now those markets are controlled by bigger and more capable players (Apple/Google). They bought some new studios? Who cares, they have nothing to show for it yet. As if MS doesn't have a history of throwing money at a problem that they still can't fix. And there is no secret plan. Their only avenue to control gaming is through Xbox. If that doesn't sell, they're out of the market. All this streaming/Netflix type of stuff will be done by many other players and probably better, MS does not have the exclusive rights to streaming tech nor do they have the exclusive content to sell it on.
[mod edit: post reverted to its original content for full context]
Last edited by a moderator:
If Sony was truly interested in bringing their games to everything then they wouldn't lock PSNow to just the games they select and would have allowed any game you own to be played on their streaming service, basically any of the streaming services for PC as of right now do just that even NVIDIA see's the bigger picture with GeForce Now being a really damn good example of how it should be run.
Sony honestly doesn't seem to care about PSNow, and it shows. The support for games, and the fact that a queue exists shows that they aren't pushing it at all. Even Gaikai's original competitor OnLive, never had a single user queue. They too also allowed to push your already owned games on their platform. Just a fact that MS is willing to put new games at launch on Gamepass just shows how much more their invested with it. If that's how much they'll invest into Gamepass then what about xCloud. Do you think it's just gonna be limited to the games on GP? I honestly entirely doubt it. Your entire game library will be available they've already made that readily apparent. And that spans Xbox's entire lifespan. Scarlett already will have BC back to the OG Xbox so knowing these facts just will show how much more investment Microsoft has done.
I mean really they already had a working 360/one emulator on their internal systems back in 2014.(https://www.neowin.net/news/microsoft-is-testing-playing-xbox-games-in-your-browser/)
Sony's already shown that they would want you to pay for remasters, and upscaled ports then allowing the games you've already bought a generation ago to be played again. There's a PS2 emulator on the PS4, and they won't enable it? Why? There's a lot of things Sony does that shows how little they care about BC, and Streaming.
I do not in the PS4's life time, and honestly during the PS5 life time either expect to see native PS1-4 support on their consoles. Nor PSNow coming with day one launch titles. It's just not in the Sony MO they want money and have proven time and time again that's their only goal. (e.g PSClassic, PS2 ports).
Yeah sony does that, and so does google, Microsoft usually tries something till it's run into the ground. (or at least they used to)
I do, but I can see them having troubles with it.
One which they promptly forgot about and waited on for a year or two.
I mean it makes sense does it not? They see themselves, and I mean Nintendo does this a lot as well. They and the NSO really poor NES Games doesn't help either. Microsoft now has dedicated studios so this gives them a one up on Google, but this is Google they can no doubt go hard with that exclusive train which I expect them to do.
Yeah I know it's a old saying but I truly believe this time around it'll happen.
Im always confused when ever I see "A company just wants to make money"
I mean, yes? Isn't that the point? Why does that need to be stated?
I mean, yes? Isn't that the point? Why does that need to be stated?
Well, good luck. Doubt the next one can even reach the Switch, which is killing right now. If Nintendo play it right the next gen is theirs, Sony and MS will fight for second like the Wii gen.
I stayed out of this thread because I knew it would be overrun with console warriors.
Reading this post, it's clear that I was right.
FFS, man, these are just $399 boxes!
I'm sorry, but that seems like two completely separate and independent issues.
Sony has obviously gone with the Netflix model with PSNow - it's an all-you-can-eat library. It's not a hardware rental service for your existing games. It could be in the future also, but these are separate models. One is not more valid than the other in terms of showing how 'serious' a service is about what they're doing.
That model choice has nothing to do with what spread of devices they want PSNow to be on though, I'm not sure what the connection is there. Contrary to the point I was replying to, PS Now is available today on non-Sony hardware and I've little doubt will be available on more.
What are you talking about? As a PSNow user I've never seen a queue. I'm sure they exist, but they probably will in any at-scale service! OnLive and PSNow were not operating at the same user levels.
I've little doubt that PS5 will be backwards compatible with PS4. I'd be fairly sure also that by that time, most of Sony's very acclaimed PS4 content will be on PSNow.
I think the reason Microsoft made the policy of day-and-date content on GamePass is precisely in anticipation of the day that competitiors bring their much greater catalog strength to bear in their services, and make for a less comfortable comparison for GamePass. I also, though, think that 'newness' of content is a good idea on any subscription service, and Sony should rise to that challenge.
Anyway, suffice to say, I will agree to disagree with you. I think you're vastly underestimating Sony's intentions and capability. I don't think MS is though, and they shouldn't.
Last edited: