hmm I guess that def would be a big impactYep, but its effect still persisted and resulted in a few games being compromised due to having to accommodate it. Mass Effect 2, for example.
Nintendo is a special case with their handhelds. Looking at this comments again and he mentions "consoles". So yeah. Whatever, it's his opinion and imo the right choice. A powerful next-gen PlayStation for $399 is a mass-market price. Good decision overall.Even in that comparison if you look at the 2DS which launched on a healthy ecosystem and did extremely well. It's really new ground. Recent indications would show that it might be great. The Switch is selling amazing at that price point. It's a great entrypoint for children which do well on Xbox because of exclusives like Roblox.
Yeah i dont see him wrong here, thats just me though.People will jump on him because of the latest PR spins...but he is not wrong in this one.
Yes I know what he's talking about but he's got nothing in history to compare to because none of the examples are the same as what MS is doing with S and X and the £200 difference. Hence it's easier to look at different competing products that are on the market at the same time.
And again, you could simply look at PS4 base and XBO S and how they continued to outsell their Pro/X counterparts every month.
But there are hardly any reduced features. It simply targets a lower resolution. The feature set is exactly the same.To be fair, while I do plan on getting a Series S myself, I can see the model being discontinued in 3 years or so. I think it will sell considerably worse than Series X.
Most, if not all, console versions with reduced features failed to impact the market, let alone one with reduced specs too.
It could fuel console wars. The new one is more about their own console (PS5).Why was the thread title changed? My original thread title literally came straight from the Twitter post I linked in the OP...
Unless they put the game on pc or until sony puts out a ps5 pro in 3 4 years time
I haven't seen anyone wishing Sony had made a Series S equivalentThis dude is like the Reverse Spencer, everything he says is a problem instead of solution.
Nintendo is a special case with their handhelds. Looking at this comments again and he mentions "consoles". So yeah. Whatever, it's his opinion and imo the right choice. A powerful next-gen PlayStation for $399 is a mass-market price. Good decision overall.
You turn 1.5 degrees and walk away?
Less storage space, no disc drive and lower specs. Only time will tell if these specs will be enough to run the same games, only at lower resolutions.But there are hardly any reduced features. It simply targets a lower resolution. The feature set is exactly the same.
Yep, but its effect still persisted and resulted in a few games being compromised due to having to accommodate it. Mass Effect 2, for example.
Which spec? The Series X? PS5? or the current gen consoles that will be supported for the next four years by Sony?
I'm not talking about strategy, i'm talking about a low spec next-gen console. A Next-Gen console, must be NEXT-GEN.
If you create a low-spec PS5, you can't show the true power of next-gen (because of bottleneck).
Agree. The DE was a good move for that middle spot and 399 price point.They hit the 399 price point, no point in making a weaker PS5 that will only impact game development the longer the gen goes on. PS5 has got itself in a great spot, sandwiched between a cheaper and weaker system and also one which is stronger.
They both made the right decision. There's a right decision for PlayStation and a right decision for Xbox and they aren't always the same thing.I guess he was looking at the gimped versions that released mid-gen and said "Nah, we don't needed that". And yeah, releasing a high-spec and low-spec console at the same time at launch? Can't remember that ever happened.
In the end it's the right decision. $399€ is a mass market price for a powerful next-gen console. And it's a new PlayStation. They made the right choice.
He added: "Based on our research, it's clear that people who buy a game console want to continue using it for four, five, six or even seven years. They want to believe they have bought something that is future-proofed and not going to be outdated in two-to-three years.
"They want to have faith that if they end up buying a new TV that their current console will be able to support that new 4K TV they are considering on buying."
The base Xbox 360 didn't come with a hard drive and couldn't even play some games that needed one
I think he means a weaker spec than an existing sku in the same family?
I struggle to think of examples.. Wii mini? Was that successful?
But there are hardly any reduced features. It simply targets a lower resolution. The feature set is exactly the same.
This dude is like the Reverse Spencer, everything he says is a problem instead of solution.
IMO it is a bit of a gamble that they'd hold up well when even 'normal' base consoles have had problems historically as a generation has worn on.