Your disagrees simply feed my Bubble Count
CRank: 14Score: 0

Time-traveller: It's 2006 and Sony's gonna win!

Hey everyone, my name is Dedicated to Gamers. I know we're all excited about the next generation of consoles but I wanted to bring everyone back down to earth and talk about the Xbox 360, the Playstation 3, and the Nintendo Wii.

Now, these are just my personal predictions, but I'll do my best to support them with facts. I really think that Sony is going to go for another landslide victory. There are several reasons why I think that.

Gaming hardware
Okay, this is a pretty big deal. I've seen a lot of comments about the hardware power between the PS3[1] and the 360[2]. Yeah, the 360[2] has a more powerful GPU. So what? Yeah, the 360 has a unified pool of RAM. So what? The PS3[1] has The Cell[3] inside! This thing is gonna give the PS3[1] some crazy power.

I know a lot of people are complaining about the PS3's[1] price. I see all the internet pictures with "599 US dollars"[9] on it. Yes, the PS3[1] is $100 more (it's unfair to say $200 more because there's a basic model, too), but think of what you're getting. Not only are you getting The Infinite Power of the Cell™ with PS3[1], but you're also getting a Blu Ray[4] player, too! Yes, it's unproven technology, and yes Sony[5] is forcing you to purchase it, but just think of the FUTURE! Besides, price won't matter because...

Brand loyalty
Have you not heard of such a thing as brand loyalty? C'mon. This is SONY[5]! It doesn't matter how expensive it is. Everyone is going to trade their Xbox 360[2] in to EB Games and Gamestop to get a PS3[1]. Are you not aware of the PS1 and the PS2? Sure, Sony[5] made a few arrogant comments, but the general public doesn't care about that. All they care about is that Playstation brand! You think they'll switch to 360[2]? Yeah right! Think about that huge PS2 library of games[6] that they've built up for years! You think they'll be so quick to abandon their games[6] when the next generation comes around? Yeah right!

Okay, so some people are remarking that PS3[1] is going to lag behind in the number of games because it's launching a year later than the 360[2]. Um, have you SEEN Resistance: Fall of Man[7]? End of conversation. There are so many amazing games coming out for PS3[1], it's not even funny. The TimeSplitters guys are making Haze (footage looks so sick), Square Enix is making FF13 a PS3 exclusive, and of course we'll be getting Gran Turismo 5 in the next year or two. I'm just pointing out that even though the libraries seem unbalanced NOW doesn't mean that they will stay unbalanced. Sony[5] is...Sony[5], and they have so much money from the PS1 and PS2 that they could just buy up a ton of studios if they wanted. Let me repeat that: Sony has so much money and they're investing so much money into gaming right now that Microsoft has no chance to succeed. It'll be just like the Xbox 1[8]...they only sold 25 million and the PS2 is still selling strong.

[1] Xbox One
[2] PS4
[3] The Cloud
[4] Kinect
[5] Microsoft
[6] huge list of Achievements, Gamerscore, Friend's List, etc
[7] Titanfall
[8] Xbox original
[9]499 Euros

----------------------------- ---------

This transcript has been edited with helpful numbers, in case it wasn't painfully obvious what I was implying.

We've been down this road before. We've seen these boasts before. I've heard "price doesn't matter" before. I've heard "brand loyalty is king" before. It's funny to see companies repeat the mistakes of others, but it's even funnier to hear gamers parrot the exact same talking points from nearly a decade ago.

The story is too old to be commented.
NeverEnding19891623d ago

Funny blog. It's interesting to see those who actually bought into teh cell and how silly the early adopters look now.

For the sake of gaming, I hope no company crashes like SONY crashed their gaming biz with the PS3. Microsoft has already backpedaled on always online, let's see what else they change before release.

Personally, if I keep seeing Steam like sales on Xbox Live, my transition to next gen might take a while. I've got Alan Wake ($5), Dragon Age: Origins ($5), Bulletstorm ($5), Crysis ($5), C&C ($5), Hitman Absolution ($10), and Witcher 2 ($10). This is all within the last 2 months and I've only started one of those games. The many games this gen that weren't worth my $60 look real good at $5.

It could be a while before I have to choose PS4 of X1.

dedicatedtogamers1623d ago (Edited 1623d ago )

You picked up Witcher 2? Siiick. Enjoy it. Easily one of the best RPGs ever.

On topic, yeah, it's funny to see the sentiment change. People forget so easily all of the predictions less than a decade ago, and look how things turned out.

Granted, I'm not saying "predictions back then were wrong, therefore all predictions are wrong 100% of the time".

What I'm saying is using excuses that didn't work last time like "brand loyalty will make it sell the best" will probably not work this time either.

Septic1622d ago

Great blog dedicated, as always.

I opicked up The Witcher 2 as well. I have it on PC but I just can be arsed to play on PC anymore because I'm a lazy bum these days that likes to crash on the sofa. Your post in The Deals thread made me go out and buy it.

OT....I was thinking of doing a piece similar to yours mentioning how the tables have turned but you've done a great job here. Great read lol.

maniacmayhem1622d ago

I'm with NeverEnding, thank goodness for Gamefly because I played a whole slew of games that were not worth 60 buk at all. That is exactly why I was hoping both companies would not have DRM. (I always prefer choice)

There are so many more games coming for the 360 and PS3 that I too will be waiting a while before I even pick up a X1 or PS4. I also want both systems to gain some running legs and see what each has to offer in terms of games, features and (and see if any have any bugs) before I decide.

lawgone1622d ago

@maniamayhem...I would really like to know why the one person that disagreed with you did so. All you stated was your desire for more time to evaluate both systems while still enjoying the 360 and PS3. What is there to disagree with there? Oh wait, I didn't pick a side! You have to pick as side and stick to it no matter what! LOL

maniacmayhem1622d ago (Edited 1622d ago )


You are absolutely right, gracious me this is N4G after all...I'm going to pick the PS4!

No, no, wait...I want an Xbox One!

Aaah heck, no I want a PS4, the hell with Xbone!
Shucks! I want an Xbox Won, flip the bird to the PSBore.

You know what...I'm just going to go with the WiiU.

DragonKnight1622d ago

It's like I said before, history repeats itself but with a twist.

There is a difference though. Yeah, Sony were arrogant with the PS3, but in their arrogance by using the Cell to force developers to have to work hard and bring exclusives to the PS3, their interest in doing so was to make the best games come to the PS brand. Games.

Now MS has taken up that arrogant position Sony had with the Xbox One but their arrogance has nothing to do with games or gamers. Their focus has been clear for years. I honestly can't understand how anyone can think they are going to be good for gaming and the gaming industry when they themselves have stated they are all about living room entertainment first.

I suppose lessons have to be learned hard no matter who it is.

But the funniest thing is definitely the media. Fanboys on all sides are bad, but the media is the worst.

dedicatedtogamers1622d ago

"[Microsoft's] arrogance has nothing to do with games or gamers"

To be fair, Blu Ray had little to do with games. Yeah, it ended up benefiting gaming in certain ways, but you can't tell me that Sony created Blu Ray for the sole purpose of gaming.

But as for Microsoft...the link should open anyone's eyes to how they operate:

I Nope'd out of any chance of getting an Xbox One after dealing with GFWL on PC for years. That's their end-game. If there are enough cool exclusives on X1 down the road that DO NOT require online (because it appears some games will still require it), I might pick one up for the single-player exclusives.

DragonKnight1622d ago

Yeah, I can't argue with Blu-Ray being Sony's non-gaming trojan horse. At least it had a tangible benefit to gaming though. TV and Sports and repealed DRM did/does not.

Godmars2901622d ago

Well that link is certainly...depressing.

But onto actual reply: Blu-ray very much had a dual purpose on the PS3, just like DVD did on the PS2. Sega very well may have lasted a bit longer if not thrived if the had only allowed for movie playback on the Dreamcast. Instead just like with the first Xbox they failed to see and take that one little extra step.

MikeMyers1622d ago

"I honestly can't understand how anyone can think they are going to be good for gaming and the gaming industry when they themselves have stated they are all about living room entertainment first."

But what you fail to neglect is the Xbox 360 has well over 900 games and we still have games coming out for it each month after it's been on the market since 2005. Yes, Microsoft studios are not making much if any more new games for it but the system itself is being carried by 3rd party content. Nothing wrong with that when even the PS3's bulk of software sales stem from 3rd party. How many games will Sony make for the PS3 next year and beyond?

You also fail to mention the Xbox One and how many games Microsoft is investing in it. They have more games in development now than at any time in the history of the Xbox brand. Where are your comments towards the Wii and Nintendo? Oh that's right, The Xbox is in direct competition to the Playstation, therefore you're far more threatened by it.

Funny how you keep going on and on about the Xbox One yet rarely if ever actually talk about any of the games and if you do they conveniently enough have no interest to you. Did you sleep in during E3 and not watch Microsoft's conference or were you too busy just focusing on the DRM issues that are now dropped?

1622d ago
abradley1622d ago

Yes they have plenty of games in development but when their two best looking new IP games aren't even exclusives how is that going to convince gamers to buy the Xbox one when PS4 is offering a much better package in terms of games, free stuff with PS+ and stronger indie support along side a better price tag.

I'm talking about Titanfall and Spark for anybody asking which games. Titanfall is on PC and Spark is on PC, 360. So, other than the boring sequels Xbox, and Sony to an extent, keep pumping out, which console should we pick?

The one that offers TV in my living room or the one that was born, breed and mutated to be a gaming beast?

This is coming from a gamer who started on an Amiga 500 and has owned every major console to date, but is a bigger PC gamer than console. So I ain't no fanboy, I just love new games and gaming consoles that do what it says on the tin. PLAY GAMES!

AtomicGerbil1622d ago

Microsoft are going all out with games for now, but what about two or three years down the line. Will history repeat itself and Microsoft go quiet on the development front? That's what some people are worried about.

As for mentioning Nintendo, why? They aren't mentioned in the blog, so it would be off topic.

dcj05241622d ago

Dead Rising 3 looks boring to me, I am interested in sunstet Over drive, Ryse son of rome also looks boring to me and project spark is somewhat interesting. Quantum Break's story looks fantastic but, no gameplay= no interest. Only game I like 100% is FORZA 5, that game looks fantastic. So I'd buy 1 XBOX ONE exclusive with no F2P games to keep me busy. WOOHOO GO XBOX, yeah no. PS4's exclusives all looks good to me. I'd buy KIllzone shadow fall, Knack, Infamous second son, The witness and I get driveclub for free. Multiplats will be the same on both for a while. Also I get War Frame, PLanetSide 2,Blacklight Retrubution and Elder Scrolls Online exclusive BETA ( full game is multiplat). So lets see, PS4(400)+Killzone: Shadow fall(60)+BF4(60)+PS+(50)+WARFA CE(0)+PLANETSIDE 2(0)+Blacklight:retrubution(0) +Elder Scrolls online BETA(0) DriveCLub PS+ edition(0)=$570 Thats SEVEN GAMES for $70 more than XBOX ONE. XBOX ONE(500)+Xbox LIVE GOLD(60)=560. We almost hit our $570 limit. For $10 more I get PS+ SEVEN games and a PS4 or for $10 less I can get XBOX ONE with no games and XBOX LIVE GOLD. yeah fuck that I'll go with my seven games.

XabiDaChosenOne1620d ago (Edited 1620d ago )

It's not as simple as "derp ther is games on console therefore they are da goods for the industry" It's the policies, it's the philosophies within the company that make them a stain on any industry they enter. Stop being so simple minded. Stealth fanboys like yourself love flaunting the term "competition is good for the industry" to bad Microsoft doesn't agree.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1620d ago
harkki861622d ago

i think this blog is hilarious. you do a good job of picking the most biting topics.

i have seen so many arguments and so many people flipping on their opinion over the last few days. it is so funny. people forget so fast.

nice to see someone who has a memory that lasts more than a few weeks...

abradley1622d ago

I also find it funny that now the console war of this generation is coming to an end, still nobody can decide on who wins. More importantly, why it even matters.

This blog is an example to all of us, what people predict and what actually happens are two totally different things and although one side may seem better than the other, random events can always cause the most interesting of results in the end.

lawgone1622d ago

While I don't agree with all of what you wrote (and obviously you don't agree with it all either) I like the references to past arguments. One of my pet peeves is people that are inconsistent in their arguments. For example, people railing against MS for charging for XBox Live but haven't said a peep about PSN now being fee-based. Or saying you hated the PS3 because the controllers were too small but then not giving them props for making them bigger on the PS4. It's generally people that have picked one side for whatever reason and no amount of logic is ever going to move them. Kind of like hard-line conservatives and liberals. There is really no point in talking to them. You will learn nothing. I prefer to listen to moderates...people who actually consider each side before reaching a conclusion...and can admit when they've been wrong. Unfortunately, that seems to be harder and harder to find these days (both here and IRL.) While I'm leaning towards the XBox One, I am interested in both consoles and may buy both. I'd like insight into them but all I find here is silly squabbling and the same "talking points" repeated ad-nauseaum. Why on earth anyone who says they like games would root for either system to fail is beyond me.

DigitalRaptor1622d ago (Edited 1622d ago )

"For example, people railing against MS for charging for XBox Live but haven't said a peep about PSN now being fee-based."

Please don't pretend the logic doesn't exist there.

Xbox Live for many, many years - in fact, since its inception - was running using P2P technology. In more recent years, Microsoft has been charging its premium subscribers for advertisements and FREE applications.

Now that both companies are using dedicated servers in a large scale capacity, it seems that a fee is just and applicable. When you consider the scale of these online services now, it doesn't fly to imagine a free alternative from a company, unless that company is Nintendo - and let's face it, Nintendo's online ambitions are not stellar. And the value of PS+ speaks for itself. For one less brand new game a year, you get tens of games and additional content and features back.

So there we have it. The only real problem now is that as far as I've heard, Microsoft is STILL charging for free applications and advertisements will sTill appear despite you being a premium subscriber.

On the other hand: cross-game chat, auto-updates, applications and free-to-play games are still free outside the premium subscription.


"Why on earth anyone who says they like games would root for either system to fail is beyond me."

At this moment in time, I think this industry would currently benefit greatly without Microsoft for many a good reason. Their recent attempts at strangle-holding the market, controlling your purchases by removing existing first-sale rights and ownership of physical goods - that is just one instance.

The company's aim, as presented by Steve Ballmer and various others, is to convert the Xbox brand into something closer to a multimedia box for your living room, rather than a dedicated gaming console. You look at the people in charge of the Xbox brand and they don't have a background in gaming at all, which is deeply disconcerting when you look at their focus on "broad entertainment". But then again, this fact is exactly why the Xbox brand is currently what it is.

Then you look at the Microsoft rule book, and you can see that with every product or market they enter, they look to monopolize it, as they feel it is the right thing to do based on the grip they have with the Windows OS. They treat their customers second to their practices that will serve their endgame. They care more about dominating Apple and Google, that they are going to focus increasingly on this broad entertainment until that strategy of theirs either succeeds or falls flat on its face - gaming will still be worse off for it.

Here's something that should be a tough pill to swallow if you care about the gaming industry as much as most of us should:

lawgone1622d ago

@DigitalRaptor...I'm not pretending the logic doesn't exist there. It doesn't! I made arguments for both sides yet you chose to pick out the Sony one. Sigh. You have a notion that MS wants to dominate its industry and Sony doesn't. Both companies want to dominate their industry! You really think Sony doesn't?

And as for your idea that the XBox was built as a grand master plan to dominate Apple and Google, well they must have been clairvoyant then! When the XBox was in it's inception Apple wasn't in anywhere near the position it is in now. Google was getting there but still. MS was focused on taking a bite out of the video game segment that at the time was dominated by Sony. (Oh but, it's OK when they dominate because they do it for the good of the people.) Give me a break. And yeah, so they want their device to have more than just gaming what!? You don't like it because it can do more than gaming? Umm, OK. Guess what, PS4 can do more than gaming as well. They've had to downplay it though because their own fans chastised MS for doing it. Why should I be upset that IF I CHOOSE to hook up my satellite/cable box into my XBox I will have additional functionality? Why should I be upset that would give me the ability to instantly switch between games and TV. (Only, not as instant now that you have to have the disk in the tray. Thanks fanboys.)

I'm not going to get too much into that link. Personally, I don't see how MS forced people to use IE anymore than Apple forces people to use Safari. Sony is in many different areas too so we have to discuss their business practices in oh I don't know, music, movies, televisions...all things PS4 will be involved in as well. No outcry there though right? Because Sony wants to innovate and share. Please.

extermin8or1622d ago (Edited 1622d ago )

@lawgone actually Ms do force people to use their computer programmes, notice how windows is rarely compatible with ANYTHING else, if you use MS word it's hard to get that file to work with a different programme. MS messanging protocols recently started blocking google based stuff. They never allow their services onto other devices at ALL. Skype only exists on other services because the deals were done before purchase. Yes Sony and other companies do this abit although they are opening up more and more in recent years. However MS do this even on PC an OPEN PLATFORM. Hell they even refuse to accept when people don't like a service due to restrictions like windows live marketplace and instead mutate it into something that can run overthe top of 3rd party applications like Steam and be a requirement to be used. Not saying they are the only ones that do this but they are the worst-bar maybe apple but apple's systems are pretty much all closed so...

Also people accept things like the paying for multiplayer because for 6/7 years another company has been doing it, once that's become the norm-any other company joining in isn't seen as doing something wrong that's why the DRM had such a fuss behind it. Consumer psychology may not make sense but crowd mentality is how they think and it's mostly dues to few people wanting to be the only ones shouting out if everyone accepts it. If you got into a lift and everyone was facing away from the doors at the back wall. How many people would still face the door? The answer is not many.

Godmars2901622d ago (Edited 1622d ago )

People have complained about Sony charging for multiplayer. But because MS have been charging for online, because there is a difference between having to pay for multiplayer and online, the blow isn't that hard. Someone with no intention of ever playing an online multiplayer title on the PS4 doesn't have to get PS+ to do something like watch Netflix. They just have to pay for Netflix

Unfortunately it is still true that someone without internet, with no intention or ability of getting internet, wont be able to use an XB1. They'll have to go to the extra effort of finding a connection.

Z5011622d ago

People really have short memories. My favorite is ... "You get what you pay for"

Show all comments (27)