For the gamers? Screen Critics Shaun doesn't think so.
Say what you want, they're outselling both competitors 2:1 Unattractive my ass.
Switch is very hard to come by so I wouldn't include them in your equation at this point. Wait until Switches are readily available before you compare how they are selling. But yes, Sony obviously is in its current position based on smart decisions and great strategies. That being said, a few bad decisions or some laid-back approaches in certain areas can easily start shifting the sands. Sony needs to make sure they are still putting the gamers first and doing what is best for the consumers too, not just their pockets.
Only thing truly shifting sands is if there I'd a lack of games.
@Kingthrash360 - provided Sony doesn't start changing pricing models or forcing things down onto us, then yes I agree.
If you care about what the PS+ service cost, you purchase during one of the numerous sales - or not at all. Vote with your wallets people Peace.
I am not convinced that switch will outsell ps4. If it does though there will be a select few that say it doesn't count because it is portable, its a different gen or it sold to casual gamers etc.
Is it just in NA that the Switch is scarce atm? In the land down under, we have a plethora available instore in both colors. @Armageddon If MS dropped Xbox then they would be missing out on so much profit with the biggest entertainment market on this planet! And Sony would more than double their market.
More garbage opinion pieces without knowing why Sony did it in the first place. And, lumping other off topic nonsense to try and seal the article's notion that Sony is arrogant. In the West, the price was already increased for Plus. From the way it looked, it was cheaper in other countries. Market changed, Sony changed with it. Same with console prices. I remember the market changed and Sony increased the price of the console in places like Canada. https://www.gamespot.com/ar... Happens with multiple products. But Sony isn't trying to lose money. They need to make some money and that may result in a price increase. Is cheaper better? Sure it is. Free is also better. But you can see the underlying problem from the article writer: ** Rather than offer up a solid core of services for free** This person would rather Sony be like they were last gen during the recession. Losing $200 dollars per console because everything was built in including 100% BC, selling off buildings and sections of the company, offering free online play while their competitor is making money hand over fist charging for online play and giving back nothing while things are behind pay walls, giving away their top in house games with PS Plus service and being in the RED every quarter while spending lots of money making award winning games like GOW,Uncharted, TLofU,etc. Sony built a quality next gen hardware that made gamers and developers happy with the side effect of losing direct BC. They spend money making top quality games and making deals with 3rd parties and Indies to have a variety of games. They offered gamers an even better piece of hardware for the same reasonable price as the original released console, they offer a viable, fun VR headset "TODAY" that plays games like Super Hot and they have "optional" services like Now,Vue, etc for you to choose from. All this while **NOT** trying to strip gamer rights away like Microsoft tried to do. But Sony's arrogant for being a business that needs to stay in the black and make money because they can't offer everything for free. Get a clue.
"Switch is very hard to come by" You mean they are holding them back to create this fake media attention? smh. "Sony needs to make sure they are still putting the gamers first" They are. They make more new AAA SERIES every gen then even some 3rd party publishers. You can use their online DAY 1 OF PS3 AND PS4. Putting users first means giving them a working online and actual exclusives day 1, not just ports and sequels to the games....
But what about MS and increasing XBL price last-gen?
People don't want the Switch like you may think they do
Stupid article, it's been $59.99 in the US for a couple of years now, raised from $49.99. The blame for the cost of PS plus going up in Europe and the UK is your own economy and tax system not because of Sony being arrogant or greedy. Xbox live has been priced at the same increased PS Plus price in the UK and Europe for quite a while. Sony has not been any more arrogant than the other console manufacturers, in my opinion Nintendo has always been the most arrogant out of the bunch, hasn't stopped me or most people from buying their products. As far as stupid comments goes they make them from time to time, but probably far, far less than bloggers and gaming journalist.
@EDMIX - in Japan people have to line up for lotteries to determine who gets a Switch. You think that's fake demand? Proven facts buddy, open your eyes. Switch would easily move 250k in a week if there were enough units to go around. Last week alone it did 100k and that was still with supply hampered. Hell, Splatoon 2 did 650k units in 2 days there in Japan. Don't act like people don't want Switches, just because you don't.
@sd11 I get the feeling the Xbox and PS4 will jump to the next gen before we get to know the outcome of that one.
These are leaked NPD numbers, I dont think the Switch is going to be outselling the PS4 2017: PS4 Jan: 210,665 Feb: 398,407 Mar: 396,726 Apr: 206,247 May: 187,182 Jun: 381,196 XBO Jan: 157,545 Feb: 215,418 Mar: 243,514 Apr: 109,950 May: 109,130 Jun: 153,389 Switch Mar: 910,545 Apr: 280,897 May: 165,038 Jun: 215,582
@Neo- " in Japan people have to line up for lotteries to determine who gets a Switch. You think that's fake demand?" It is when they are handing out 5 to that store No one is saying no one wants a Switch, simply that those "sold out" or "lines" are based on Nintendo handing out a small amount to create fake hype. They've done this before...
@Matrix6 No, it is also available in the US online at Walmart but many still believe that Switch is completely out of stock globally because it fits a narrative that Switch would be handily outselling PS4 if not for supply shortages. In reality there are shortages but not to the extent that Nintendo's fanboys are claiming. If Switch were plentiful nationwide in the US it would still not be outselling PS4.
The only area where I'd say they have this perceived laid back approach is in BC, and I'd wager that that criticism is contained to the hardcore forums, and only relevant because it's a console war talking point. There were some people who were upset about the lack of BC at the start of the gen, but since both companies were not offering it, no one made that much of a fuss about it. Now, it's like it's the end all be all of features, and Sony's lack of interest is somehow anti-consumer and the number one reason why they're arrogant and lazy. Now, we get a price hike for PS+, and Sony's arrogant again. I find it rather ironic considering MS talks and acts like it is the most awesome thing in gaming most of the time, while Sony simply remains silent and pushes out new games on a consistent basis. But, I guess MS sees that most people talk about this stuff in gaming forums, so they feel these things are more important, because it's been a long time since the discussion was mostly centered around games themselves, particularly around here, and around here, unless a game has some sort of controversy attached, or can be used in some console war idiocy, it is usually not discussed. To me, Sony is putting the gamers first with the games they're making. As a game consumer that is what I'm looking for most from them, and them doing so is helping their pockets, as it's taking money out of mine. The other stuff I dont' care about as much, although I will probably drop PS+ when my sub expires as the free games offering isn't as compelling as it used to be, and I don't play online that much.
Everything Sony has done this generation seems to be a complete turn of events from the money they lost on the PS3. That's why they are emphasizing Playstation Now instead of BC, while at the same time blocking EA Access for its users. Now they are charging to play online with Plus pretty much a requirement now while they hold back on dedicated servers more than they offered last generation and giving away less AAA games like they did when Plus first launched. Yes, they are indeed coming across as arrogant and cold and the loyal fans don't seem to care as long as they continue to go after (third party) and create their own exclusives. Their attitude towards crossplatform play has been a total embarassment too and some still try their best to defend them there as well. We also have timed exclusive deals many used to hate but now ironically don't seem to be against the practice. PSVR has yet to have a price drop either and you think they would if they wanted a higher than 2% attach rate.
During the PS2 era they had free online (yes it wasn't very good but still), they had BC with PSOne games and they had a ton of exclusives. So why are people defending Sony for not offering BC and increasing the Plus services while having multiplayer behind a paywall and refusing crossplay with other consoles? Especailly when that era made Sony a ton of money. I do not see the investments being made off of the Plus memberships going back into their online infrastructure. Hardly any dedicated servers and they still have to shut down part of it every month to do monthly maintenance.
@Moldy "Their attitude towards crossplatform play has been a total embarassment too and some still try their best to defend them there as well. " Fortnite, which was just released, is cross play and cross progression for PC and PS4. not for Xbox, Who's embarrassed now?
The teeter totter effect. Did you already forget Xbox's popularity one generation ago?.. Or the Nintendo Wii?.. This industry flips on a dime, I swear people force themselves to forget that. By this time next gen, at this rate Xbox 2 might be the market leader while ps5 is back in the corporate doghouse being shamed for being anti consumer.
That's pretty laughable though, MS is in no condition to make a comeback. They've got two AAA 1st party studios aside from Turn 10, terrible relations with Japanese 3rd party, and lastly, but definitely not least the only reason they caught up with PS3 last gen was because it took longer for Sony to come out with exclusives because of the Cell architecture, and the Cell/Blu-Ray combo costed $599. Unless Sony DECIDES to screw up, they'll stay with AMD and roll out a powerhouse with PS5. MS has no chance of making a comeback against PS5. Switch is still niche compared to PS4 as well. They may improve, but the only studio that has a chance of passing another studio nex-gen is Nintendo outpacing Xbox.
people do forget just like the omni poster above me, they forgot how this business changes and for someone to say xbox cant make a comeback to a ps5 is simply fanboyism. if xbox 2 release more powerful then ps5 and has new exclusives to go along wit hte release then there is a big opportunity to overtake sony, not that i care about that in the slightest, i have money so i buy everything and play it all
@bolimekurac Ignorant as hell. Even if MS has money to produce new games, who in the hell is going to produce them for them? They don't have any AAA 1st party studios! The only way MS could even try to match PS is if they straight up bought Rockstar and Activision, neither of which is going to happen. And how are they going to produce a more powerful console without raising the price out of people's budgets? None of these situations are read: EVEN POSSIBLE. Keep it up with your head in the clouds though.
The 360's popularity was largely due to having the market to themselves for 12-24 months in the various regions. Not only did that give them a head start, but for many people, they choose a console based on what their friends have bought, so that early lead makes a big difference. Even so the PS3 outsold the 360 almost its entire time on the market.
In theory Microsoft could buy their way into a better position. I'm surprised they never found a way to buy what is left of Sega to increase their presence in Japan/Asia. It would solve a couple of their perceived issues if global conquest is indeed their goal.
Aside from a few rough years in the beginning of the PS3's life, Playstation has always been on top. Yes, they were quite arrogant early on thinking people would pay $600 for a console, but they bounced back pretty quick and was right back at the top. Something Xbox has been unable to accomplish this gen.
Bolimekurac, Microsoft has a chance in the West, but that's realistically it. PlayStation has such a significant presence globally that it isn't unrealistic to believe Microsoft is hopeless and helpless in their quest to become the market leader. Nintendo can. Sony *is*. Keep in mind that, while Microsoft held their own pretty well last generation, there were some pretty strict conditions for that to happen. A year's headstart for Microsoft ? A $600 console with no must-have exclusives at launch for Sony? Games running better on cheaper hardware in the early days? And the fact that the console with better multiplatform titles and more exclusives (early on) and was cheaper had a high failure rate (which likely prompted people to replace their consoles asap)? It was definitely an aberration. In the end, they were still bested. Sony would need to screw up royally (and I do very much mean it would take an act of unholy proportions) to really lose their global hold.
Sony isn't anti consumer though lol that's just fanboys who don't understand business trying to say that. Sony as been the king every gen except for last and 2 about to be 3 with the PS4 of their consoles sold 100 million plus no other console maker can claim that not one
@bolimekurac The thing is that MS has never won a single generation and has yet to take any of Sony's dominance in other regions so unless Sony makes mistakes or over prices their hardware they aren't losing. I'm not a fanboy just stating facts Nintendo and the Wii where an anomaly because it's know that the reason it sold so many units is because of casual people picking it up and not actual gamers. IMO the Switch will not outsell the PS4 as for the future if I had to put money I would bet on Sony they just have more experience and deliver quality first party games.
The best selling xbox still lost to the worst selling playstation. Anyone who ever thinks xbox could win is living in a fantasy land
Possible, but not probable.
Yeah but last time Sony got arrogant and comfy in their really good position we ended up with the horrible launch of the PS3 and the dark years to follow until they changed their attitude and released the PS3 Silm...then they were back to their great old selfs.
No chance. All Microsoft has to do is use their abundance of resources. Last I checked,all Sony really has is PlayStation. Microsoft could drop Xbox and they would not feel a thing.
@Armageddon: Then obviously, you haven't checked, as they have more than PlayStation.
"comfy"? The risked a lot with Bluray and the RSX and it ended up being the right choice. Bluray drives are cheaper, inside of XONES AND PS4 THUS we have more room on disk for games. RSX and Cell gave birth to series like Uncharted, The Last Of Us, Motorstorm, InFamous etc. The Last Of Us on PS3, legit looks like the START of next gen, LAST GEN! Sooooo I'd say, they made the right call. They invested in the industry and it resulted in Bluray being cheaper FOR ALL! For them to go cheap and use DVD, would have not helped gamers in the long run, I'd argue that would have held the industry back further. 80 plus million PS3's with Bluray drives will help drive that cost down so its affordable for all, faster. I think they made the right call. They took a hit on PS3, but still outsold MS and still established Bluray. Should they have made a cheap, low cost, inferior machine? I mean...are we for the advancement of the industry or the cheapest, lowest quality product to move a number? What they did with PS3, is WHY the PS4 is selling. MANY 360 gamers understood they backed the wrong horse mid gen and came on to PS4. You won't see 80 million XONE owners this gen bud, they likely own PS4's now.
@LP-Eleven You're right, they also own Sony Pictures, which is making great investments like Ghostbusters (2016) and the Emoji Movie
@EDMIX your 100 percent correct. PS3 was an expensive gamble on multiple industries and levels. Almost everything in that machine was new tech at the time. It was just an investment they MADE happen. Not to mention they still killed in most territories besides America last gen. And like you said ended up benefiting the industry in many ways.
@armageddon, aconnellan Check again http://www.hollywoodreporte...
While the outcome of Sony's decisions eventually became standards we see today in various areas, I don't think those things were done in arrogance, but rather with a purpose to drive new technology in a product which has been proven to help new technology succeed. BR was just an extension of what they had done in the past. Technologies in CELL were ahead of their time for game development, and many things in CELL are common practice today, but handled in different ways. There may have been some arrogance with them thinking that devs would just jump on board without a 2nd thought, but that likely came from them believing they would have market dominance again, which they would have had MS not done so well, as while Wii did outsell both, it wasn't practical for high end AAA game development. But when they were designing the system, there was no real way to predict that MS would ever achieve what they did last gen so Sony made a decision to make a system which on a theoretical level would actually provide devs with what they needed for the gen, and they did believe that CELL processing would usher in a new era in technological advances and it'd be a long term thing which devs would come to accept....which obviously didn't happen....but Sony did talk about using the CELL in future consoles too, which at the time they even said would be great for BC like they are now saying with the x86. That isn't exactly arrogance, rather them seeing where things are headed. It's the same thing they did this gen. They saw where the development industry was headed, and designed their system around it. It's just this time, where it was headed was more beneficial to the cost itself, as x86 is now a perfectly acceptable solution for demanding games....when that wasn't always the case. The price of the PS3 reflected the new technology, and in many ways Sony should have been more prudent with what they offered to make the price something much more palatable to the consumer, but the inclusion was not arrogance. Some of the marketing was arrogant, and Sony at the start of the PS3 gen were certainly filled with a lot of pride which wasn't warranted since they did have a low output of games for the first year or so, but arrogance was not part of the design of the system.
One price hike and now they are the worst company and are arrogant... way to go Internet! Always jugding stuff without knowing the full story. For all we know this has more to do with the Europe and east countries' currency. They are not doing this in this region (America). Meanwhile, Brazil is dealing with way worse shit when it comes to gaming, yet you are complaining about some slight price hike
Because being the lesser a**hole equates to being outright "attractive" does it? Love that logic.
“Sony's Increasing Arrogance Is Making PlayStation 4 Unattractive” Maybe they’re gearing up to add more value to PS Plus? Who knows with the beta firmware right around the corner and one of the questions being if you’re currently a PS Now subscriber.
Outselling doesn't mean anything. McDonald's outsells pretty much any restaurant you can name, but are you going there for a good burger, or just a quick one? People always create caveats for Sony, and that's why Sony will always tell you what you like, and will always make anti-consumer moves and then tell you you like them, and you will agree. Every single frickin' time.
McDonalds makes anti consumer moves? Everyone agrees with McDs decisions? Also Nintendo gets away with this same accusations. More than Sony even if it were true. Not to mention any has their share of failures if what your saying was true everything the company churns or half asses would be a blind success and THEN you would have to wonder "why is it we be everything they say or do?" at that point they are doing SOMETHING right to have that following and blind faith.
There is a term that applies to your weak argument. That term is "whataboutism" What it means is that you don't have a valid counter to my argument so you instead deflect to "well this company does this too so..." Which is basically a way to condone the actions of one by citing that if others do it too then what's the big deal? Do you like being told what you want? Like for example Backwards Compatibility or third party subscription services lacking on the PS4 but not on other consoles like the Switch or the Xbox One? Do you like having to pay an increase in PS+ to potentially pay for a service you don't use and don't want? Do you understand that "blind faith" is never a good thing, because it always leads to a bad end? Do us gamers that actually care a favour, and keep your blind faith to yourself. The rest of us would actually like to decide what we like/want for ourselves and not have everything ruined by people with no sense of value and more money than sense.
ITS NOT ALL ABOUT SALES ASS. Lil Wayne sold millions of records. Does that make him a great rapper ?? HELL NO
Lil Wayne can actually rap tho unlike these soundcloud rappers. 😂
XB1 doesn't win in both sales and games, what does that make it then? and the pioneer of paid online subscription.. and forcing always online before they retract it.. bad relationships with Level-5 and Platinum Games, while PS and Nintendo got masterpieces from both of them.. forcing Phantom Dust remake developers to add full-blown single player campaign without either budget or time extension, lmao. (that's why it got cancelled)
A company's arrogant for being a business? Wow, journalism these days.
Love Sony, hate the Sony fanboys
People moaning about price and you mention domination in sales, meaning nothing.
I think the games lineup speaks for itself and the sales reflect that. People want PS4
Actually I think the original 100 dollar cheaper price with a stronger console on top of a landslide victory in pro consumer marketing vs the tragedy that was XBO launch policies ~spoke~ for itself at the start of this gen and snowballed to the point where it no longer matters. If PS4 stopped making exclusives right now, it would keep selling more than Xbox this gen. Obviously not nearly as well as it is now though. I know the games are also part of the reason, but the 2:1 trend was happening from the start, while XBO was delivering the big games people were talking about back when all Sony had was Imfamous Second Sun... for the first 2 years if I remember correctly.
I would have bought the ps4 ever if they were the same price.
♦ ♦ ♦ " If PS4 stopped making exclusives right now, it would keep selling more than Xbox this gen. Obviously not nearly as well as it is now though." ♦ ♦ ♦ In the US and UK, XB1 would outsell the PS4 easily, if Sony came out said they are no longer releasing exclusives. PS4 might still sell more WW, but definitely not at the rate they're currently doing. ♦ ♦ ♦ " I know the games are also part of the reason, but the 2:1 trend was happening from the start, while XBO was delivering the big games people were talking about back when all Sony had was Imfamous Second Sun... for the first 2 years if I remember correctly." ♦ ♦ ♦ The people that buy consoles in the beginning are people that keep up with gaming news like us. Even if you weren't keen on the games within the first two years you knew that all of Sony's 1st party studios were working on new IPs and that most if not all have released a quality title in the past. Also keep in mind that the launch titles for consoles are usually aren't that great anyway.
"If PS4 stopped making exclusives right now, it would keep selling more than Xbox this gen. Obviously not nearly as well as it is now though. " And that is key. The awesome exclusive games are what are what keep widening the gap between the PS4 and X1. Without them, the landscape of the console war would be very different. Backward compatibility hasn't made a dent. Neither will 10 bucks a year increase in PS+. Cross platform play isn't something PS4 owners are even asking for. So the entire point of the article is moot. It is all about games.
The exclusives people claim that are the reason for PS4 selling so well would make more sense of people were actually buying the exclusive games. Horizon is doing extremely well, but that is an exception, not the norm.
I didn't even buy a PS4 until 2 or 3 years after it released and the game releases started to get pumped out on a regular basis. I honestly don't believe buying any consoles in their first or even second year is a good idea. That's why I'm waiting to see how the Switch goes, just in case it becomes like the Wii U (there are pretty strong indications that won't be the case though).
Nier, Nioh, Horizon, Persona 5 have all sold very well this year alone.
Death Shouldn't be too hard to understand. Exclusive game A attracts a few exclusive game B attracts a few more, exclusive game c attracts a few . ........... ............ Etc etc Now add them all together = Congratz sony for attracting a large numbers of gamers! Then you have big time selling exclusives like uncharted, horizon, infamous, gow, gran tourismo, killzone etc. That's what sony does pretty well imho. Let playstation consoles also be a platform for people who are into niche titles. These games won't sell huge numbers in the short run but they can build up their userbase. Games like uncharted.. are there to attract the masses.
Games like uncharted.. are there to attract the masses and show them why they should rather chose playstation than one of the competitions consoles. And ofcourse third party games make the biggest chunk of games but can be played anywhere. On pc you get loads of niche/ indie titles but almost nobody wants to develop AAA exclusives for it On nintendo you get outstanding exclusives but almost no third party support On xbox you get almost all third party but ms' games output is too sparse, and even among those sparse releases there are only maybe 2-3 ip that get the budget and polish enough to make them an xbox showcase. On playstation you get the best of all worlds and that's why it is as popular as it is.
"while XBO was delivering the big games" XBO never delivered any big games they'd already win by now if they delivered any big games on top of almost year-round mad discounts and bundles, lmao. Remember, it's MS who kept throwing free games this and that with XB1 purchase, still no win. big my ass.. @death lol, no brain? SP games can be used by multiple people, that's why they always sold less than multiplayer games. In reality the people who actually played games like Horizon, Nier, Nioh, P5 are more than the people who have copies of it, even in my group of friends there are like 7 of us with only 1 copy for each of those games... BUT, each person still have to buy a console for them to comfortably play long games like those, hence the growing console numbers. why do you think MS pushed multiplayer games hard and removing couch co-op? Money hungry basterds, the lot of them.
@death The flaw in your fatalistic logic is expecting every exclusive to sell the same and attract everyone equally in order to make a difference. Why would they or should they? Someone could easily buy a system for Nier and Nioh yet have no interest in LBP or GranTurismo and vice versa. There's no unwritten rule that if you buy MLB The Show you're obligated to buy Horizon. If a dude buys Gravity Rush and Ratchet&Clank, he's still buying into the same ecosystem as the guy that bought the 9 millionth copy of UC4. He's a sale. They got him.
I agree about the launch. If they stopped making exclusives, then maybe they'd continue to outsell, becauese the competition isn't really offering up much either, and Sony is a stronger brand WW, plus, they have almost all the big marketing deals. But Sony did have more than I:SS the first two years. Some of those games didn't go over so well, but they certainly had stuff to show, and Sony has built a brand off their exclusive content to the point where people actually do know they will deliver. What it comes down to is that Sony has spent a couple decades building faith in it's brand, and that comes from their mostly consistent output of software support, and knowing that they'll support their console for the duration of the generation.....which to date, the Vita is the only exception to that rule.