140°

Why Sony is winning

An opinion piece from Digitally Downloaded. Quote "So, while I believe (and certainly hope) there’s room for all four vendors to have a slice of the very big gaming pie, I do believe that Sony is poised to capitalise best on the gaming market and that lucrative mindshare."

Read Full Story >>
digitallydownloaded.net
darthv724571d ago

its the drug called: playstation

360ICE4571d ago

PlayStation is a brand covering a series of video game consoles created by Sony Computer Entertainment. It's not a drug.

At least according to Wikipedia. I know it's not all that reliable.

gameplayingfool4571d ago

PS3 is my favorite console ive ever owned. It's at least a winner in my book.

MaxXAttaxX4571d ago (Edited 4571d ago )

This^^

You don't need "proof" to let you know some obvious things.
If you're enjoying and getting the most out of your PS3(or other PlayStation systems) then there you go. That's all you need to know.

It's mostly subjective really.

BlackTar1874571d ago

I don't know how ps3 beats out ps2 or even ps1 for that matter. sorry i love PS3 but it imho doesn't stand with the past 2

BlackTar1874571d ago

disagree system should require at least something.

rezzah4570d ago

The advantage the PS3 has over the other 2 is that it can play their games as well.

The only issue is that it doesn't play all.

Still i can play my favorite game on the PS3 (SOTC) which gives me reason to pick PS3 over PS2.

BlackTar1874570d ago (Edited 4570d ago )

Rezzah that has nothing to do with what i said.

PS2 games in genral where better games sorry that is my opnion the GTA's the GOW's the Socoms . Just cause this system can play them is actually quite irrelevant.

PS2 is one of the greatest systems of all times which is heavily documented on opinion pieces all over the web. PS3 is a great system but has not accomplished in terms of games anything close to PS2.

Of course this is all opinion but your comment does not really even go together with my comment.

When ps2 was ut could you pick up a ps3 back then? No of course not no one debating backwards compatibility were comparing merits of one system and that should always be the games that released for its platform and sorry but ps2 games in numbers and overall exp of all of them outweighs ps3 games by a country mile. IMHO

-Alpha4571d ago (Edited 4571d ago )

The article is all over the place, the title is never once proven since all it talks about is the future of Sony.

Since this is an article about the market, I expected to see some objective facts, but all I see are weak predictions and a lot of assumptions. We can at least wait to see MS's plans for next gen or actually wait for next gen to roll out before declaring anyone poised for victory

tiffac0084571d ago (Edited 4571d ago )

Thank you for seeing the same problem that I do with the title. I too think its misleading.

I mean I'm fine with opinions and predictions and all that but with that kind of title... I just don't know if its proper.

gamingdroid4571d ago (Edited 4571d ago )

Yeah, the article is pretty poor and didn't do much "proper" analysis other than citing at best some trends and jumping all over the place.

Bathyj4571d ago

Why do you need objective facts?
Why does the title have to be backed up or proven?

Those are the sort of things I want to see in reviews but I keep getting told reviews are simply OPINIONS.

Now that someone writes and actual OPINION PIECE, (says it right there under the photo) its suddenly the time for some sort of consistancy or integrity? Hard facts to back up predictions and assumptions?

Its an opinion guys. It cant be wrong. Your just supposed to respect it.

PS
I dont know if what he said is bollocks or not, I didnt read it and therefore, I'm not defending it, just seems like theres a bit of a double standard here.

Ryudo4571d ago (Edited 4571d ago )

"Its an opinion guys. It cant be wrong. Your just supposed to respect it."

So if someone hates someone else simply because of there skin colour am supposed to respect that?

Opinions can be wrong and downright misinformed, anyone saying otherwise is a twit. Also why jump to the defence of an "opinion" piece you didn't even read or are you simply jumping to the defence of Sony like usual.

Not that this effects Sony in anyway it's just nonsense written by a halfwit.

-Alpha4571d ago (Edited 4571d ago )

@Bathy

That's a complete red herring. Of course reviews are opinions, the same standard applies in both cases: opinion pieces need to be backed up with reasonable support from the writer.

An opinion can be proven wrong depending on what the person says, just because you have one doesn't mean that it should be respected. I expect opinion pieces to have some form of critical construction, not just a pointless series of statements.

Why does the title need to be proven? Because you can't just slap a title onto something and then not follow through with it. That's known as bait and switch, misleading the reader, not supporting the conclusion, etc. He makes a claim, I expect him to back it up with reasonable premises

In this case, the writer puts a title that is completely flamebait to begin with, and then writes in a way that doesn't even back up his point.

"Sony is Winning" implies Sony is currently "winning", yet that's not what the opinion piece is even about. The opinion piece talks about the future, and how Sony is "poised" to win. On top of that, it's based on assumptions that do not guarantee or even relate to the topic.

Bathyj4571d ago

Thanks for clarifying guys, you said alot of things I think people need to hear.

And just so we dont get any further wires crossed I will NOT being using any sarcasm in this reply.

For starters, no Ryudo, I'm not defending Sony, or the writer. I'm making a point about what everyone keeps telling me about reviews.

About how even the most poorly written (3 paragraph long) reviews with the most inaccurate scores are mearly opinions and that we all just have to accept them, as if that means some guy with a laptop is beyong questioning because he writes for a blog or website.

I'm glad we can all agree that opinions (and therefore by extention, reviews) can be wrong, misinformed or even down right corruptted, and I dont have to agree with it just because they have the privilege of being printed on the internet.

People talk about proof and facts. So if I see a review that I believe is hitseeking in its mediocrity, is it unreasonable to expect some sort of justification or facts to back up shabby treatment of a game, when the vast majority is overwhelmingly positive? I think it is.

I only thing I have to pay to a review like that, is not respect for the review itself, but respect for the writers right to expess it, which I do even if I think its wrong, but then all in turn have to pay me the same respect to my right to express that I think he might be off the mark.

Sorry if this got off topic, it was more a reply to your post then to the article, so I think it has its place in this context.

kaveti66164571d ago (Edited 4571d ago )

Opinions can be wrong.

It's a matter of perspective, is it not?

Someone could say Sony is winning and point out the auspicious future of their upcoming products as evidence.

Another person could say Sony is losing and point out that Sony has lost a lot of marketshare to Nintendo and Microsoft since their last console cycle.

I would say both are wrong because Sony as a company makes many products that are not associated to the Playstation brand or to gaming at all. Like Microsoft and Nintendo, Sony has a diverse portfolio of products, and when a game enthusiast tries to argue that a company is winning based only on game-related products, I conclude that their opinion, or at least how they formed their opinion, is wrong.

Being objective when talking about this topic takes time and research.

People who write opinion pieces just want to get their views out there without making too much of an effort.

rezzah4570d ago

In the eyes of the beholder the opinion is fact, however the one who receive the opinion are left to decide based on perspective, if they see the opinion as fact or false.

What else needs to be said?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4570d ago
OC_MurphysLaw4571d ago

yeah... not a big supporter of this article. Author says MS is focused on non-gaming alliances...and completely ignores all the Sony moves like the MLB and NFL Direct Ticket deals... or partnerships with Hulu, Netflix. Heck even Sonys PSN website talks about more than just games:

PlayStation®Network is your all-access pass to a world of entertainment. Get games, movies, TV series and community all in one place. PlayStation®Network is full of exclusives like new games, add-ons and video and, best of all, it’s free for everyone.

Yup, sounds very focused on games.

Face it, both MS and Sony are trying to be the all in one box for the living room.

MaxXAttaxX4571d ago

They both do it.

But I think it's the focus that makes a bigger difference.
Microsoft made it a big event at E3 showing off ESPN, for example.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4570d ago
retro4571d ago

WINNING like Charlie Sheen? ^^

death2smoochie4571d ago

"An opinion piece"

That sums it up.....

Show all comments (52)
120°

Xbox, do you even have a plan anymore?

TSA asks what is the future for Xbox.

Read Full Story >>
thesixthaxis.com
Chocoburger2h ago

They clearly never did, hence why they spent so many BILLIONS on other publishers as a last resort.

anast2h ago

They have a plan. It's to move everything toward streaming and mobile. This is just the next step.

Cacabunga1h ago(Edited 1h ago)

With half of the money they spent, they could have been on the very top and the gaming industry would be way bigger than it is.. encourage developers, indies, make them grow trust them and they will deliver.

Tody_za36m ago(Edited 36m ago)

What are you talking about Cacabunga? The Xbox faithful insisted that Microsoft has infinite money, and after Activision they should buy Square Enix and Capcom before Sony does. There was no chance ever that Microsoft would do this. They would use their infinite millions and Bitcoins to invest in 50 new IP and beat everyone.

andy851h ago

To ruin great studios it's looking like

Skuletor1h ago

Sure, a plan to be a more hated game company than EA. Ubisoft were recently giving them a run for their money but I think Xbox have really knocked it out the park with their latest stunt.

neutralgamer19921h ago

Absolutely not, their whole plan is at odd with what MS wants

Phil wants GP to become big
MS wants to sell games and make billions

GP can’t be sustained with AAA games which take 3-5 years and 7 figure budgets. Only go put those games on GP day one. Why do you think games are coming out on other platforms?

People want a change and want Phil gone without realizing if someone new comes along they may want to change everything again so we just keep going in circles. Phil has to realize that and give clear message on the direction of Xbox

Show all comments (13)
300°

Brad Hilderbrand explains the reason behind the recent Xbox studio closures

There are two reasons why all those Bethesda studios closed, and neither of them have anything to do with Bethesda (directly)...

Game Pass and Activision.

Read Full Story >>
linkedin.com
Christopher6h ago(Edited 6h ago)

The guy confirming what we've all (well, most of us) been saying since the latest purchase.

crazyCoconuts3h ago

Remember the relatively common counter that went something like "I'm sure you arm-chair CEOs know better how to run a company than the biggest company in the world"?

I mean - there's a lot to running a company for sure, but on this topic it's hard to understand how Phil and team didn't see this coming.

Tody_za3h ago(Edited 3h ago)

Phil and team knew it was coming and planned for it. It's not even a conspiracy, it's simply the business of cutting costs and superfluous studios after a major acquisition. They don't give a damn about Tango Gameworks or other small creative studios that won't recoup their losses. They don't care about investing in this industry. They have no interest in risky and expensive new IP. They are only interested in profiting off ownership of Bethesda IP, Call of Duty and Candy Crush.

I guarantee you that not one single game under their banner will improve or become bigger and better.

Welcome to the Xbox family, what a pathetic joke.

Anyone who continues to support this, enjoy your future, because this is it. Ninja Theory is next, and Perfect Dark after that.

Christopher1h ago

Especially not with the evidence of tons of existing movie streaming subs out there and how they fail to make a profit with over 100m users each quarter.

Lightning7734m ago

Apparently they're debating if they wanna put the new Cod on Gamepass or not.

Either grow GP with Cod or don't put it on GP and grow the revenue the traditional way while GP will suffer.

The mess that MS puts themselves in.

XiNatsuDragnel5h ago

I'm not surprised Microsoft guys are crock nuff said

isarai5h ago(Edited 5h ago)

Honestly i think Bethesda needs to buy themselves out of zenimax/MSs hands and do their own thing, i honestly think that would fix a lot of issues and save them from a potential closure.

Zeref5h ago

There's a reason they sold in the first place. And Bethesda is not closing anytime soon lol. As much as I hate the studio closures. They were all small studios 2 of them were mobile studios.

I think these are growing pains and Xbox will get back on track. But they're not getting any more passes.

jwillj2k43h ago(Edited 3h ago)

I’d like to see your reaction to being growing pained out of your job after the launch of a successful product.

Mr_cheese1h ago

Excuses, Excuses, excuses.

If growing pains have been happening for the best part of a decade, they're not growth.

XiNatsuDragnel1h ago

Zeref nii San
I'm sorry but xbox has been rightfully bashed due to constant incompetence

romulus231h ago

Yet you literally just gave them a pass, being "small studios" or "mobile studios" is irrelevant. There's no excsue for closing Tango, none. They praise the game, they PR talk about it's the kind of game the company needs and yet they shutter the developer, that's foul on every level.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1h ago
Tacoboto1h ago

Bethesda greenlit Redfall, launched Fallout 76 in the condition it was in (and the fiasco with the bonus bag), and spent all that time on Starfield finishing it as it was with that same engine. Wolfenstein Youngblood exists because of them too, not Microsoft.

Are you *sure* leaving them alone would actually result in a better outcome, not just a different one?

isarai26m ago(Edited 24m ago)

A lot of this excessive monetization, and GAAS crap started when Zenimax decided to start looking for a buyer. Not a coincidence that there was a sudden shift in prioritizing profits above quality or even coherence at the same time. They wanted big numbers to attract buyers, now that they've been bought, MS wants exactly what they were baited with.

However even under Zenimax they made enough to self publish sometimes, so i would imagine it's not too far fetched that they could pay their way into independence if they REALLY wanted to.

Also even people at Bethesda and Arkane were hoping MS would cancel the game as again, they were forced to make something they didn't want to make.

Einhander19725h ago

Ah, we can see how the Microsoft media machine works.

Every article I read now is some kind of attempt to shift the blame off Microsoft and paint them as the victims or convince people that Microsoft mistakes were just some kind unforeseeable unfortunate twist of fate.

The shills are out in full force today.

Christopher5h ago

This is not at all what this article is saying. It's saying that honest and useful studios are getting closed because of big money deals elsewhere and the faults with game pass as a model.

Einhander19725h ago

I understand what the article is about.

It's a deflection, it's a putting the cart before the horse article.

Let me tell you how this problem wouldn't have existed in the first place.

Microsoft not creating a service funded by subsidization and having the foresight to see that it would disrupt consumer spending habit to begin with. Then not buying Bethesda and undertaking costs for a service that was already failing to pay for itself because their own expectations of Game Pass having "billions" of subscribers was unobtainable from the very start.

And if you don't think that was the case go back to the article on the day Game Pass launched and read the comments from people from day one who foresaw that this would be an unsustainable model and would cause people to stop spending in the same way.

Christopher4h ago

***Microsoft not creating a service funded by subsidization and having the foresight to see that it would disrupt consumer spending habit to begin with.***

This article literally supports this opinion. He's not praising Game Pass or the ABK purchase.

Einhander19724h ago(Edited 4h ago)

This is an explanation of why it failed, there is zero blame put onto Microsoft itself.

Yes, it talks about what went wrong, but it doesn't say Microsoft shouldn't have done it. It doesn't say Phil should have foreseen this outcome and stopped before it got to this point.

"convince people that Microsoft mistakes were just some kind unforeseeable unfortunate twist of fate"

Christopher4h ago(Edited 4h ago)

***but you're seeing the impact; all those smaller studios making really interesting games are going to fall away, simply because as good as games like Hi-Fi Rush are, they're never going to make enough money to make up that $70B hole that Xbox now has to dig itself out of.***

If you see that as support or you explicitly just want people to end their argument with "and, in conclusion, Microsoft bad" then that's on you. This article does not support Microsoft's choices and highlights the faults. Nothing it says is good about these choices, even saying that putting CoD on Game Pass would be money losing for them because they've set themselves up for failure (and not putting it on there will drop subscriber numbers like crazy, meaning their Game Pass plans were shit to begin with).

No matter how you look at it, they're saying Microsoft made decisions that hurt the bottom line, force closures, and leave Game Pass in a situation where they lose no matter what they do. It's all negative.

Einhander19724h ago

Christopher, if Microsoft hadn't made Game Pass and bought a bunch of publishers would this article even need to exist?

Christopher3h ago

***Christopher, if Microsoft hadn't made Game Pass and bought a bunch of publishers would this article even need to exist? ***

How is this an argument to anything being discussed? This is just as valuable of an argument as "if fish had stayed in deeper waters, they wouldn't have evolved to tetrapods, adapted to shallow water and then to land, and we wouldn't even exist and have to worry about game pass at all."

You're bringing nothing to this argument and then complaining that other people are highlighting the issues with Game Pass and spending tens of billions on studios because what we should be discussing is what it would be like if Microsoft hadn't done any of that.

Well, they did do it. Now pull up your big boy pants and join in on the discussion of what that has meant for the industry since then and, especially right now, how that is affecting the industry and game studios under Microsoft. None of us are able to go back in time and change what was done.

Einhander19723h ago(Edited 3h ago)

Christopher, this isn't me not understanding what the article is about, it's you not understanding what I am saying.

If you want me to make excuses for Microsoft's bad decisions you're not going to get that or just agree with people who are doing that, it's not going to happen, nor are you going to convert me into thinking xbox "needs to exist".

Ya know what, maybe "Microsoft bad".... maybe their decisions ARE having a negative effect on the industry, and instead of deflecting from their actual actions and making excuses for them we stand up and say "no" "Microsoft is hurting the industry"

And maybe, just maybe, it was so obvious that this was going to be the outcome that even nobodies in comment sections on websites were able to easily predict this outcome, yet Microsoft did it anyway then kept doing and even when it became undeniable that it was having a negative impact on their business and and the industry itself, then they knowingly made even bigger purchases and caused more problems.

And the one thing you're right about is that I can't go back in time, but I CAN speak up and try to keep it from happening again...

Maybe if the people who were speaking up 7 years ago were listened too we wouldn't be having this discussion and Tango and Arkane would still be in business along with all the other people who have lost their jobs due to Microsoft's actions.

Do you like analogies?

What you're saying is like an alcoholic crashing their car then trying to explain it by saying it was caused by everything except the fact that they were dunk because they are an alcoholic and don't want to stop drinking.

TiredGamer3h ago

The article is essentially focusing the blame on MS. GamePass was a hail mary play to change the gaming paradigm and carve out a special niche for themselves, emulating the Netflix model, that might have led to MS becoming the leader in the long-term. Unfortunately, the subscriber growth isn't really there, and the model isn't really built to weather that lack of revenue. MS is now in a restructure mindset to figure out how they balance out their model in a way that can still make them money.

've always believed that GamePass was a high risk shot that had a very low chance of long-term success. But the problem with it, whether it succeeded or not, is that it accelerated the proverbial "race to zero" consumer expectation that ran its course in the mobile gaming industry in the late 2000s. When consumers start thinking that games should be "cheap" (as in through a $10/month all-you-can-eat subscription model), it turns the narrative against games being priced at realistic levels. So with the GamePass failure, they've not only sabotaged their market share, but they've impacted the entire industry and devalued the cost of game development to the average consumer. So now it's harder to develop mega-big budget games and to earn the revenue needed to pay for them.

XiNatsuDragnel1h ago

Again terrible excuses in the 1st place

Christopher2h ago

***If you want me to make excuses for Microsoft's bad decisions you're not going to get that or just agree with people who are doing that, it's not going to happen, nor are you going to convert me into thinking xbox "needs to exist". ***

No one is asking you to make excuses for Microsoft's bad decisions nor is anyone asking you to convert to anything.

***Ya know what, maybe "Microsoft bad".... maybe their decisions ARE having a negative effect on the industry, and instead of deflecting from their actual actions and making excuses for them we stand up and say "no" "Microsoft is hurting the industry" ***

Literally no one here is doing this. They're literally discussing how Microsoft's decisions have hurt the industry. Except you. You're rambling about why people aren't complaining about Microsoft when people are in fact complaining about Microsoft.

*** And the one thing you're right about is that I can't go back in time, but I CAN speak up and try to keep it from happening again... ***

Then perhaps actually add something to the conversation other than calling people shills when people are complaining about the decisions and repercussions of Microsoft's actions.

Tacoboto1h ago

Christopher, you're fighting a block wall here - Ein will continue twisting and contorting any remark to fit his self-created narrative.

Einhander19721h ago(Edited 1h ago)

"Then perhaps actually add something to the conversation other than calling people shills when people are complaining about the decisions and repercussions of Microsoft's actions."

Cristopher, in no way is the author of this article complaining, they are explaining what happened it's literally the title. They never once say that Microsoft shouldn't have bought Zenimax or Activision or that Game Pass was a bad idea to begin with. They think the problem with Game Pass is that it didn't grow fast enough, not that it was a bad idea from the get go.

BTW this is his job title.

"Public Relations and Communications Leader"

What do you think a Public Relations and Communications Leader does to make money?

Edit: I have read a dozen of these articles that just started coming out in the last 24 hours that are trying to shift the conversation away from blaming Microsoft, the shift here and in several other articles is trying to say it just didn't gain subscribers fast enough, not that it was a bad idea to begin with that was doomed to fail or placing the blame on anyone.

It was all just an unforeseeable outcome, no one should be held responsible it was just a billion dollar oopsie that's costing thousands of people their jobs and has caused a downturn in the entire industries sustainability.

Oopsie!

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1h ago
MrDead3h ago

It's greed. MS has the IP's it wants now it's dumping the studios that it's raided, MS will still make money from Tango's games unlike the people that made them. If anyone follows MS outside of gaming you'll see this is what they do, buy companies take what they want consolidate some of the workforce and shut them down. I don't know why people are acting so surprised when this is Microsoft being Microsoft.

MS is a three trillion dollar company, if it enters a market it has no need to compete, they take what they want and with the financial influence it can bypass laws that are meant to protect the consumer and the workforce. Just look at how they are cornering the AI market right now with buyups and investments.

Show all comments (33)
70°

Game Developers Have Begun Confirming Nintendo Switch 2 Support

Game developers have already started to confirm that they will support the Nintendo Switch 2 with their future titles.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com