Top
290°

Xbox One vs. the PlayStation 4: A battle over services, not chips

Engadget is not saying that hardware specifications don't matter -- they absolutely do -- but this time, the two leading armies are packing painfully similar heat. On paper, the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 really aren't that different. So, what's going to win the war? Software, services and brand.

Read Full Story >>
engadget.com
The story is too old to be commented.
TomShoe1489d ago

I thought games decided who won? That, or I must be crazy.

Godmars2901489d ago (Edited 1489d ago )

Gamers miss/ignore the "example" of the Wii succeeding in appealing to a broader audience while outselling the 360 and PS3. That chances are if Nintendo had tacked on an XBL-like subscription, it wouldn't have mattered to Nintendo if no one bought games, because they wold have shown a profit. But of course Nintendo being Nintendo games mattered.

Their online being the crap it is, wholly besides the point...

Regardless, MS observed what happened with the Wii, and being MS, proceeded to focus on services rather than games. Sony's followed suit, but again being themselves, are trying to present game related services while presenting games right beside.

GameNameFame1488d ago

and last i checked. Sony's first party studios are insanely ahead of its main competition.

This is easy to tell given how metascore of 100-90 , 90-80 retail games on PS3 vs Xbox 360.

PS3 doubles xbox 360 retail exclusive.

dedicatedtogamers1488d ago

How predictable that the western media is downplaying hardware power (the area where Microsoft is behind).

Fact: there is a bigger gap in power between the PS4 and X1 than there was between the PS3 and 360. Hardware power mattered back then. Why does it magically not matter now? Just like 1080p doesn't matter any more?

HammadTheBeast1488d ago

What MS forgot is that Wii was insanely cheap, and no one knew that motion was a gimmick back then. Now, Wii's collect dust everywhere.

xXxSeTTriPxXx1488d ago

Even a 10yr old can see that going after casuals isn't enough to sustain long time costumers.

They don't care about specs, tripleA budgets, resolution or framerates, what's fun for them today will be fun for them tomorrow so its a hard sell to get them to upgrade for stepe asking prices and making depth of gameplay a reason to buy games.

Some party games will do them just fine and the ones who actually take to core gaming will jump ship because as your gaming taste mature you'll be better suited with other options besides mario, zelda and metroid.

Biggest1488d ago

"the two leading armies are packing painfully similar heat. On paper, the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 really aren't that different."

With such an obvious lie leading into the story it's no wonder that the story is terrible. Definitely a story.

Kryptix1488d ago (Edited 1488d ago )

It's not a battle of services, it's WAY more than that. If the Xbox One had hundreds and hundreds of apps and services but kept that DRM, most likely, having better apps and services wouldn't have mattered at all. (pre-order numbers were really low before the change)

It's a console in the gaming market, games will always be the deciding factor that will separate both. A gamer will pick the console that has the better games or whichever one offers the exclusives that interests them.

Godmars2901488d ago

@Kryptix:
Considering the original DRM and announcement gamers were not XB1's focus. If MS could get the general non-gaming audience to buy into needing XBL gold to access the console's features, they wouldn't have had to worry about gamers for the most part. Between the online requirement and the need to subscribe for features, the XB1 would have shown a profit even if owners never bought so much as a $1 arcade title. So of course if they had pulled off everything else, they would have felt like they could dictate terms in which games were bought and resold. They could have ignored gaming completely.

There one big mistake however was the initial showing off of their non-gaming intentions to a mainly gaming audience. If they had done what they had with the kinect, heard out a bunch of silver poncho-wearing gamers during E3 in hopes of selling off their ideal of motion control to the general media, much of the Xbox camp would have likely jumped on a bandwagon not meant for them.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1488d ago
xXxSeTTriPxXx1488d ago

Your not x360 proved it its 1st two and a half years and ps3 proved it the rest of the gen.

1488d ago Replies(4)
JackISbacK1488d ago

yeah you are right games are the first and we still needs some services ,yeah the package of amazing gamews and services define a console ,i'am realy impressed that ms is also now focusing on exclusives like there have been may exclusive projects in work at newly opened 6 microsfts studios,with big names like black tusk and european studios ,i'am excited for announcement of their games and more announcements from sony studios.this time i think there will be plenty of good exclusives on both consoles but now now what left is sevices ,i hope both provide us better services but this time i'am more impressed with ms for their dedicated servers provided with xblive for every game ,yeas for ecery game ,the games coming on xb1 will see dedicated severs for better online play and sevices ,i hope sony also provide it dedicated servers means very much ,if sony does not provide it to us so many peopel will go in favor of ms because of multiplats plays best when there use to be dedicated servers and obviosly exclusives wil also use it .

Deltaohio1488d ago

You are crazy. To have a device these days that only has one function is almost ludicrous. If your toaster doesn't have wifi and stream netflix you're behind the curve.

If the PS4 ONLY played games it wouldn't be as popular. The hardcore will buy it but who else? Ppl would find more value in their iphone that plays games among many other things. In a few years we will have graphics as good as PS3/360 in our phones.
I'm not saying it would fail but it wouldn't sell as much. Same would go for any console including xbox.

But in the end if there are no GOOD games then that's a 100% failure.
Makes the games just don't skip out on the features that appeal to a broader audience.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1488d ago
Hatsune-Miku1489d ago

I thought these consoles main points are about playing games

Pandamobile1489d ago (Edited 1489d ago )

Not since the Nintendo 64 has the sole purpose of a console been games.

PlayStation 2 and Xbox were both DVD/CD players.

The PlayStation 3 was probably most people's first bluray player. 99% of my time spent on my PS3 is on Netflix.

Consoles aren't really game machines anymore. They're a digital entertainment hub for your livingroom. Obviously, the hardware is designed for games, but the platform's services and features are just as, if not more important than the games.

Outside_ofthe_Box1489d ago (Edited 1489d ago )

***"but the platform's services and features are just as, if not more important than the games."***

Stop. Just stop it. Lol no man, which would sooner make you switch/choose one console over the other, apps or games? Nobody is buying a console to use apps/services that they can already use on their PC or smartphone. They're more like bonuses that can way in a decision/provide convenience.

I'm not saying that apps don't matter, but to say they matter just as much or even worse, are more important than games is silly. You know very well that if all of your favorite franchises were exclusive to one platform you'd pick that console up over a console that contained all of your favorite apps because mostly likely they are already available on your computer or phone as well.

Pandamobile1489d ago (Edited 1489d ago )

You do realize that a sizable chunk of the people who buy consoles don't even buy games, right? Hell, my grandparents have a PlayStation 2 that they use as a DVD player.

Unless you're already a die hard supporter of one platform, these features and services are likely going to impact your purchasing decision.

Outside_ofthe_Box1489d ago

You do realize that the PS3 is the only current-gen console with blu-ray and was one of the cheaper blu-ray players when it released, yet it still didn't see the same success as the PS2 right?

I'm not denying that they'll impact people's decisions. I'm just saying that the games will have a lot more impact than the features. Remember this gen Sony was marketing the PS3 as an "it only does everything device" now next gen they are marketing the PS4 as a gaming device, I wonder why that is?

Pandamobile1489d ago (Edited 1489d ago )

Probably because the Xbox One is being marketed as the all in one device.

(Hence the name of the system itself)

xXxSeTTriPxXx1488d ago

Wait so you brought a ps3 to watch netfilx on it 99percent of the time?

I'm confused as to the reason you even brought one in the 1st place smh.

Seems like a waste of money if you ask me when their are more simpler to the point options out their for just streaming movies.

And if you watch Netflix so much(on a gaming console) are you even a gamer? You'd be better off commenting on rotten tomatoe then n4g lol.

Pandamobile1488d ago (Edited 1488d ago )

I bought the PS3 to play the handful of PS3 games that interest me. I've played probably around 300 hours of games on by PS3 (split mostly between FIFA and All Stars). I also don't purchase many PS3 games because they are a lot more expensive than I can get them for on PC. I have like 200 games for PC and I've put probably 10,000 hours of gaming in since 2006. I don't have hours of free time like I used to, to spend playing for more than a few hours of games per week, so I watch a lot of Netflix in order to relax.

Hence it being the #1 reason I turn my PS3 on every day.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1488d ago
1488d ago
AaronMK1488d ago

To say that I agree that consoles are about games will sound silly coming from someone who bought the PS3 because it was the only good blu-ray player that was reasonably priced and performed well at the time. Now, with so many devices that do the auxiliary services already attached to my TV, it is the games and hardware capabilities that drove a console purchase this generation.

Majin-vegeta1489d ago

*Looks at submitter*

Lol i'm out.

Outside_ofthe_Box1489d ago

LOL didn't even notice that!

Haha, puts a WHOLE different perspective on this article now... I feel like an agenda is being pushed here...

jeffgoldwin1488d ago

All you conspiracy rats need to stop outsmarting yourselves. The media's only "agenda" is to keep fanning the flames so the fanboys click on their articles to stand up and defend their consoles in the virtual war on words toward each other.

At the end of the day, it's all about shock and awe journalism to generate hits.

malokevi1489d ago

*looks at source*

Hm, real media outlets talking about real issues! Whoda thunk it?

Veneno1488d ago

Sooooooooo... if either of the 3 consoles just stop putting out games it wouldn't matter? No one will even notice? Because the winner is going to have the best apps? Jesus Christ STFU.

PSNrandom151488d ago

Oh well at least there is one good thing to take away from this. Xbots have finally although quietly accepted that the ps4 is the more powerful console. K bye

jeffgoldwin1488d ago

In all fairness, psbots have to accept gaming pc's from several years ago are more powerful. K bye.

Show all comments (40)
The story is too old to be commented.