Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Third parties would either refuse seeing how much bigger the PS4 install base is or ask for expensive prices. Money hatting won't be sustainable.
-
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.
When do you think Microsoft will react to potentially losing next gen battle?
- Thread starter Tak3n
- Start date
Third parties would either refuse seeing how much bigger the PS4 install base is or ask for expensive prices. Money hatting won't be sustainable.
StealthGoblin
Banned
Come to think of it, I think removing Kinect might hurt their vision long term. What about the oft-rumoured Fortaleza glasses? They require Kinect to function I believe.
thewhitehawk
Member
Historically, it is not the most powerful console that succeeds in the market place. There are numerous examples of this.
StealthGoblin
Banned
The weaker ones, however, had a better mix of compelling price/value, games and good PR. Microsoft's mix isn't right. Its especially unpalatable in the EU.
I agree, I have already decided that by xbone will be nothing more than to play MS exclusives. Sony did so much right with PS4 because they listened to what people wanted. MS didn't and they deserve everything that happens to them and f the xbone gets cancelled there will be no love lost.
I don't know a single person that liked kinect for the 360 so I've no idea where they get their stats from.
CheDominik
Member
I can only think of one example(Wii) over the last 20 years.
PS1 was released 12/94 and was more powerful than the Saturn and the SNES. The N64 was released 1 1/2 years later. too late to stop momentum of the PS1.
Same thing with the PS2. More powerful than Dreamcast,N64 and came out 18 months before the Xbox and Gamecube. Of course consoles that released that much later would be more powerful with the way technology evolves.
But let's not pretend the PS1 and PS2 weren't significantly more powerful than their competitiors when they were released.
denshuu
Member
They didn't even exit the console business when it was literally the PS2 scenario, so no.
ValeYard
Member
This GDC survey (quoted here e.g. at Gamespot) would lead me to believe that any reaction to "potentially losing next gen" is a ways away, if at all realistic. 20 % of devs asked are working on games for ps4, 17 % for xbox one, that's minimal right now, especially since that kind of survey has limited explanatory power. Compare that to the 4 % for WiiU; that's what losing looks like.
Of course, it all depends on how you define salient words in OP's question: What does losing a generation mean? Dreamcast or Gamecube? What counts as "potentially"?
For now, it seems that MS is trying to improve very quickly on things that went wrong at launch or just weren't possible in the time frame they had - I really think those rumors on MS hoping to have another year sound credible. So, reacting is going on right now. Indeed, I think that will be most important for these companies this gen: Both Sony and MS need to react to changing markets, tablet technology constantly improving, maybe Steam machines being a viable option. That's were Nintendo has trouble. They had this tablet idea, and just stuck with it. They have some really great games, but the console doesn't seem to be gaining traction. It's then that new ideas or at least a change in messaging would be necessary. At the moment, MS has more work to do than Sony in this regard, but they already seem to be reacting quite quickly.
Of course, it all depends on how you define salient words in OP's question: What does losing a generation mean? Dreamcast or Gamecube? What counts as "potentially"?
For now, it seems that MS is trying to improve very quickly on things that went wrong at launch or just weren't possible in the time frame they had - I really think those rumors on MS hoping to have another year sound credible. So, reacting is going on right now. Indeed, I think that will be most important for these companies this gen: Both Sony and MS need to react to changing markets, tablet technology constantly improving, maybe Steam machines being a viable option. That's were Nintendo has trouble. They had this tablet idea, and just stuck with it. They have some really great games, but the console doesn't seem to be gaining traction. It's then that new ideas or at least a change in messaging would be necessary. At the moment, MS has more work to do than Sony in this regard, but they already seem to be reacting quite quickly.
thewhitehawk
Member
The PS3 and 360 are immensely more powerful than the Wii.
The Xbox, and Gamecube were significantly more powerful than the PS2.
The N64 was significantly more powerful than Playstation 1, in some ways the Saturn was also more powerful than the PS1.
The GameGear/NeoGeo Pocket were significantly more powerful than the Gameboy.
The Genesis, in some ways, was more powerful than the Super Nintendo.
The Master System was significantly more powerful than the Nintendo Entertainment System.
I'm not familiar with consoles before the NES era, but as you can see with these examples, you are wrong.
Business
Member
They actually entered the console business then, it's a different situation and it's a different situation now at MS too.
They've been grasping since their own reveal.
Are you suggesting Kinect is going to save Microsoft? The paradigm for this generation is pretty clear so far.
Are you suggesting Kinect is going to save Microsoft? The paradigm for this generation is pretty clear so far.
Freeman
Banned
I don't know how MS could react, they have always been too dependable in buying exclusives and its going to be hard to maintain that strategy if the PS4 is selling 2:1 compared to the Xbox. The situation becomes especially difficult if there really is internal pressure to get rid of the Xbox division. They messed up with the Xone.
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
I could imagine MS selling off the Xbox business to Samsung or Apple if they loose this time around. No way their going through another generation like with the Xbox 1.
That said, I don't see how they want to salvage the Xbone now without taking huge losses. They could either lower the price and leave Kinect in or leave Kinect out and lower the price. Seeing how smart MS is nowadays I could easily see them lowering the price but not excluding Kinect, which would be extremely stupid imo.
But I don't see the price cutting it. They have to gain trust again with gamers and imo that could be even more expensive and risky for them then to lower the price.
At the end of the day I think the damage is too big. I've flocked over to PS4 after playing an entire generation almost only on 360 - and so did like 70% of my 360 friend list. One of my 360 buddies got the PS4 yesterday. This is his first PS ever. He sold the Xbone at loss and paid 50 EUR more than in retail to get the PS4. So much about the damage caused.
That said, I don't see how they want to salvage the Xbone now without taking huge losses. They could either lower the price and leave Kinect in or leave Kinect out and lower the price. Seeing how smart MS is nowadays I could easily see them lowering the price but not excluding Kinect, which would be extremely stupid imo.
But I don't see the price cutting it. They have to gain trust again with gamers and imo that could be even more expensive and risky for them then to lower the price.
At the end of the day I think the damage is too big. I've flocked over to PS4 after playing an entire generation almost only on 360 - and so did like 70% of my 360 friend list. One of my 360 buddies got the PS4 yesterday. This is his first PS ever. He sold the Xbone at loss and paid 50 EUR more than in retail to get the PS4. So much about the damage caused.
SneakyStephan
Banned
If they think there is money to be made they could go back into first xbox tryhard mode
the problem is how they think the money is to be made now (IAPs, paywalls, premiums, dlc) so nothing good can come from it anyway
if they stay they'll keep lowering the bar for what console gaming is as they have been since the 360 released, if they discontinue xbox it's a monopoly for sony and things will be just as bad
lose lose
the problem is how they think the money is to be made now (IAPs, paywalls, premiums, dlc) so nothing good can come from it anyway
if they stay they'll keep lowering the bar for what console gaming is as they have been since the 360 released, if they discontinue xbox it's a monopoly for sony and things will be just as bad
lose lose
CheDominik
Member
I guess you missed my point. The PS1 and PS2 were the most powerful when they released. What happened 18months down the line is pretty much irrelevant. The PS1/2 had too much momentum to be outsold then.
thewhitehawk
Member
I don't think the Xbox One is significantly weaker than the PS4, it's just slightly harder to get good performance out of it because developers haven't been leveraging its capabilities properly.
If Microsoft did not have a PR fiasco for the better part of last year, if they priced the Xbox One more aggressively and if they had better reception on their launch titles and weren't as abusive with the micro-transactions I think they would have performed significantly better than Sony. Sony didn't do anything special for this console launch other than simply not being Microsoft. The launch lineup was mediocre, the launch features are lackluster and yet it is sold-out in most places. All they had to do, was to tell gamers what they wanted to hear. In my opinion Microsoft gave Sony the head-start on a silver platter.
thewhitehawk
Member
Within each console generation it's not typical for the most powerful console to win so it is wrong to make assumptions that specifications alone will drive a console to success. It is a combination of many things that drive a console to its success or demise. I'm not going to discount a console from a generation because of your arbitrary and nonsensical 18 month "rule". It doesn't make any sense, it's like playing hide-and-go-seek with a 5 year old and finding him with his feet visible behind a curtain: "no, YOU lost because you found me before 5 minutes passed".
Specifications are simply something that most of the gaming audience does not care about as is evidenced by console sales history.
Did you somehow miss the Jan NPD numbers?
The current setting is very unique. Two competing consoles launched within 2 weeks. With a very similar architecture and the biggest games are multiplatform titles. Also the internet is a thing now and word of mouth about visual and performance differences spread fast. Uncontrollable by marketing. Then one console is 100$ cheaper and has better versions of the multiplatform titles and you pretty much can see what happens.
I honestly believe that if the 100$ kinect dollars went into a better gpu, the X1 would be the 1080p 60fps machine we all hoped for. Kinect targets mostly casuals and I don't see a casual gamer dropping 499$ for such a gimmick. If you want to sell for 499$ you have to target the hardcore audience and you would certainly get their attention by outshining your competition performance wise. If I was guaranteed the better multiplatform title versions throughout the whole generation I would happily drop 100$ additional dollars. And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one.
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
Not too crazy considering they were outsold 2 to 1 in the second full month of release, in their strongest territory from last gen.
Just over a year ago, if you predicted that, you would have been laughed out of here.
thewhitehawk
Member
Like I said above, I don't think the Xbox One is as weak as some people think it is compared to the PS4. It is factual that most games being released on it do have lower resolution or performance compared to the PS4, but I think it's a scenario similar to what the PS3 had early on it's lifecycle where developers couldn't be bothered or figure out how to take advantage of the hardware properly, hence most multiplatform games had inferior performance.
I think and hope, for Xbox One owners, this issue will be short lived and future developments will take advantage of the hardware better and bring more parity between the two platforms.
Edit: Also, if the internet was as influential as you suggest to determine a product's success based on its quality, we wouldn't have games like Battlefield 4, or Resident Evil 6, Sim City, among others, reaching the sales numbers they did. That's my food for thought.
Yes please. And return of Sega.
Ouch dude, you are going to have a looooong generation. There is a gap.
And it's a big one!
thewhitehawk
Member
So basically, if you include all the PS4 games that aren't exclusive, it starts to look a bit better against the Xbox One's exclusives. All of your list except Killzone and Resogun are available elsewhere, and in some cases are very old. These aren't exclusives much in the way that Titanfall isn't (and at least that hasn't been floating around on another platform for years).
The PS2 was great, but most of my fondest memories from that gen didn't come from that console, but rather the Dreamcast and Xbox. Stuff like Quake 3 Arena, Phantasy Star Online, Rainbow Six 3 etc were great, and the generation would have been much worse if neither Sega or MS had been involved imo. Last gen especially would have been alot worse if the PS3 did not need to compete with the Xbox 360 on the online front.
Here we go again... The PS2 over 150m vs around 20m for the original Xbox. As bad as things look for MS right now, I don't see how a prediction like this can be viewed as anything other than insane.
For the most part no one but Sony first party devs leveraged the power of the system the entire generation.
There isn't any secret sauce , dev tools will mature , but this is true for both systems. The performance gap is here to stay.
MS would be better served if they stopped denying it and just said
"so what , look how cool game X Y Z is"
I'm with you that X1 has certainly not reached its full performance potential, but that also wasn't my main concern. I argued that putting 100$ into additional gpu power instead of kinect would have resulted in better sales. Of course I can't proof anything.
About BF4. I'm pretty sure that if there was a game with a similar experience released at the same time, but without issues. That game would have sold significantly better. As it was the case with nba live vs 2k14.
Kojima said something similar and look how Metal Gear Solid 5 turned out. You're still in the denial stage. Anger's next! I'm out of here...
TheRagnCajun
Member
I have the utmost repsect for that guy, but iirc he made that comment without actually having his hands on a dev kit, or doing any coding for that matter. It was probably a partly diplomatic answer as well, like most other devs did at the time. At the end of the day, when the games came out, we have a 720p vs 1080p scenario here and its pretty clear the gap is there. There's no sense in pointing to comments like these when the proof is in the pudding.
You are right to say the most powerfull console has never 'won', but this argument has been made on GAF so many times and it gets destroyed every time. xbone is not going to capture the casual audience like Wii did. They're not going to garner the same exclusives that PS2 and PS1 did, nor does it get the head start those two systems had.
thewhitehawk
Member
Denial? I own a Playstation 4, I got one on day one and I have no intentions on getting an Xbox One at the moment. You seem to be implying I'm in favour of Microsoft when in fact the opposite is much closer to the truth. I'm just pointing out that performance has never been the most important factor to a console's sales.
thewhitehawk
Member
You can not destroy sales figures. You can justify them, as much as you want, but you can not alter them. It is factual that in most cases the console with the least performance sells the most in each console generation.
In my personal opinion it is the quality, the abundance and popularity of the software and the price of the hardware that define how well a console does in each generation. There are more aspects to consider, specially in 2014, but I still believe those are the main ones.
It's not even a case of if him being wrong, or diplomatic or whatever. It's simply a case of people having different views on what constitues a large gap. Now, pretty much everybody would agree that there was a large gap between the Wii and the PS3/360, however I know plenty of people that don't feel that the gap was that large between the PS2 and the GC or Xbox. To these people, the gap between the Xbox One, and the PS4 would definitely seem minor, but to anyone interested in DigitalFoundry comparisons, or considers the PS3 version of Bayonetta unplayable, then the gap is immense.
It's really not worth arguing how big the gap is in any absolute terms, only that it's there and how many people care about it.
The "most powerful console not winning" argument is somewhat murky. However, this new "least powerful console winning" is EASILY debunked due to the existence of the every Sega home console in barring the Master System (and now the Wii U, lol).
thewhitehawk
Member
Sega was second place or worst in every console generation it participated in yet in all of their early consoles (during the 8 and 16bit generations) they had superior hardware, and even the Saturn was no slouch compared to the Playstation, and in some ways it could trump it technically.
The Dreamcast was the only console which was the unarguably weakest of its generation. You can argue that it is the exception to the rule, and I agree, but there were 3 more consoles released in that generation, and the two most powerful ones lost to the Playstation 2 in a very significant way. Do note that I said "in most cases", I did not say the weakest console always wins each console generation.
Louis Cyphre
Banned
What investors, 2 shareholders out of how many? I'd be more worried about Sony as a whole.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...takes-hit-with-1-1-billion-loss-forecast.html
You go on about the XBox bleeding them money every year since it started (with no data shown to back that up with), meanwhile the TV division keeps losing Sony money but they aren't about to pull out entirely on that are they? Sony instead is cutting jobs and splitting the TV business into a separate subsidiary. That's because they still want to be relevant in that market. Just like Microsoft will want to continue to be relevant in entertainment. They are not about to hand it over to Sony or anyone else but I imagine you will just keep repeating yourself hoping one day it happens.
The Playstation isn't going to save Sony since that only represents a fraction of the company. Instead of forecasting a 300 million dollar profit for the fiscal year they are now forecasting another 1.1 billion dollar loss. How many assets can they sell offf before there is nothing left? The PS3 also erased profits earned during the PS2 era. Now with costs spiraling since to create games who knows what's to come in the years ahead.
TheRagnCajun
Member
Like I said, your comment is factually true. It doesn't dismiss the power difference as being inconsequential though. There were other bigger factors at play in past generations, thats the jist of it.
Yes price and games are more important. But if BOM estiamtes are true, xbone is still more expensieve without kinetc. Its a less powerfull console that costs more money. Thats a bad situation to be in.
As good as Titanfall looks, xbone's exclusive lineup is not as good as 360, which had Mass Effect, Oblivion, Bioshock, Gears of War etc. etc. The game has changed, and its getting too hard to secure these 3rd party exclusives.
thewhitehawk
Member
I agree that their lineup isn't as strong as the 360's, but I'm not certain if that's because of it being harder, or Microsoft being unwilling to put the investment. I think they are being conservative with the way they spend their money on exclusives or in opening more first-party studios. In that regard, they have an issue that Nintendo also shares.
I think part of the Xbox One's problem is that their current lineup is quite anemic for anyone that likes niche genres. Most of Microsoft's focus seems to be centered around sports and first-person shooters with an odd one or two games for niche audiences. Though mind you, I think Sony's offerings for the Playstation 4 are also anemic at this point and for the near-future, but at least they're doing a better job of securing diversity through independent developers and services that provide "free" games.
Riky
$MSFT
Massive loss at all times selling the original Xbox and took time for Live subscriptions to kick in to offset that, this isn't nowhere the same situation. Also do people really think shareholders and a tiny minority of them have any sway in what divisions Microsoft keeps or sells? I've never noticed shareholders have that sort of say in huge multinationals and especially very profitable ones.
The Genesis I suppose is arguable (but most will identify the SNES as being technically superior). The Saturn however was completely obliterated by the Playstation in pretty much all areas that mattered. The Saturn was my primary console for that generation (I'm a rather irrational Sega fan to this day...), but being superior at what was considered previous gen graphics by mainstream consumers, whilst being massively inferior in the arena that 95% of games that gen fell into means that I think it's quite safe to claim it as the weaker console. There are things the PS2 can do better than the original Xbox, but I'm not about to start trying to argue it being more powerful.
Regarding third party support: even if the XONE continues to sell under expectations, I highly doubt we'll see support drop off at all.
Worth remembering, that at the height of the 360's reign, the widely rumoured/accepted 360/PS3/PC split for AAA multiplatformers was between 60%/30%/10% and 50%/40%/10% (obviously, there were exceptions to this). Even then, it was still worth developing for the PS3 (and PC).
We don't need anywhere close to a 50/50 split to see both platforms well supported, they just need to sell a lot.
Worth remembering, that at the height of the 360's reign, the widely rumoured/accepted 360/PS3/PC split for AAA multiplatformers was between 60%/30%/10% and 50%/40%/10% (obviously, there were exceptions to this). Even then, it was still worth developing for the PS3 (and PC).
We don't need anywhere close to a 50/50 split to see both platforms well supported, they just need to sell a lot.
Riky
$MSFT
Also the machines internals are actually not that different so porting should be a no brainer, even if they just make the X1 version 900p instead.
A lot of "reaction" did already happen before the launch, but at this moment it seems like the Xbox team are holding their breath for Titanfall, to see how that effects the table.
The biggest mistake by Microsoft this year is not having Xbox One ready in Tier 2 countries in time for Titanfall. Will they react to that blow? Not likely.
Scandinavia is lost and Microsoft would be better off selling sand to Egypt.
The biggest mistake by Microsoft this year is not having Xbox One ready in Tier 2 countries in time for Titanfall. Will they react to that blow? Not likely.
Scandinavia is lost and Microsoft would be better off selling sand to Egypt.
ReBurn
Gold Member
I felt like playing DOOM, then I read this thread and now I don't need to!
I don't really get the "If you aren't first you're out of business" mindset. It's so obviously not true. I doubt that Microsoft sells as many Xbox One units as Sony sells PS4's. But really, the One will probably pick up momentum once the price comes down.
Also, what compelling reason is there to rush out and buy Xbox One when most of the experiences people are after are still available on the 360 they already have? To be honest I'm surprised the PS4 demand stayed as high as it has with the list of retail games available. Most of the compelling titles right now are indies. The whole thing is hard to figure out.
I don't really get the "If you aren't first you're out of business" mindset. It's so obviously not true. I doubt that Microsoft sells as many Xbox One units as Sony sells PS4's. But really, the One will probably pick up momentum once the price comes down.
Also, what compelling reason is there to rush out and buy Xbox One when most of the experiences people are after are still available on the 360 they already have? To be honest I'm surprised the PS4 demand stayed as high as it has with the list of retail games available. Most of the compelling titles right now are indies. The whole thing is hard to figure out.
thewhitehawk
Member
I also had a Saturn for most of that console lifecycle, but trust me when I say the Saturn was no slouch. It would probably surprise you if I said the Sega Saturn had I think 60% more Video RAM than the Playstation, supported much higher resolutions (close to VGA) and could render larger textures with more colors. Problem is that the Saturn had multiple processors and most developers didn't know how to properly take advantage of the hardware.
In the end yes, for all intents and purposes most, if not all, third-party games on the Playstation ended up looking better, but that does not mean it was because the Saturn had inferior hardware. The PS3 didn't have inferior hardware compared to the 360 yet most of the third-party titles performed worse through most of it's lifetime. It was a similar situation, the difference is that Sega didn't have the capital or market to try to help the console back on its feet. They learned from this with the Dreamcast, by making it very easy and accessible to develop for, but unfortunately it wasn't enough to stand up to the Playstation 2 and in their attempts to make the console very easy to develop for, they also made it very susceptible to piracy. Alas Sega... Alas...
Similar threads
- Poll