tehpees3 (User)

  • Trainee
  • 5 bubbles
  • 5 in CRank
  • Score: 22760

Sony Will Beat Microsoft next-gen

tehpees3 | 849d ago
User blog

I've been doing a lot of thinking about this and I have come to the conclusion that Sony will beat Microsoft. I will explain. Microsoft and Sony are the ones in direct competition. They are after the same fan base. They both take similar approaches. Both have similar gaming experiences. The difference is Microsoft has no clear path.

Sony continue to put out plenty of core first party exclusives. Microsoft however seem to think that instead of wanting a proper Banjo you want some horrible car hybrid platformer. The patches they fill are filled with mainly Halo, Forza and Fable. A side of Gears is added but these are the same sequels that consistently get pumped out. So instead of putting their resources to much needed new IPs (although they have 4 new IPs in the works now) they would rather put resources into Kinectimals, Kinect Sports, Kinect Joyride you get the idea. Its basically Kinect. So that has to raise a big question. How many of these four new IPs are for the core?

But that brings me to another big question, why are you suddenly doing new IPs now? Even Nintendo trademarked The Last Story towards the end of Wii's life cycle (trademark means they own it). It seems to me Microsoft throw stuff at the wall to see what sticks when they launch and then roll with what did for the rest of the generation. They write contracts on DLC for timed exclusivity and use third parties to fill the massive holes which they should be doing. This is where the key point comes in. Its these mistakes that will cost Microsoft next generation. These mistakes are what is showing Microsoft don't have the experience in the hardware market that Sony or Nintendo do.

This will be Microsoft's third big launch so they need to get it right. But the problems they have set for themselves going from this generation into the next will make it more difficult then people seem to realize. For one Sony will not be giving them the luxury of over pricing themselves or being late to the party so they can cruise it through. Call of Duty DLC cannot last you forever. The series will fall eventually as the shooter market collapses. Then Microsoft have admitted they are putting online charges into XBL again but this is a big mistake. The only thing XBL has over PSN in my view is cross game chat. You can almost guarantee PS4 will have that this time since Vita has it. Why bother paying subscription fees for the price of a whole game (I am in the UK so £40) when you can get it for free on Playstation? At least consider lowering the price.

But this is the biggest obstacle. Kinect. They are heavily focusing their resources towards motion controllers. Smart Glass being their latest example. The only reason this hasn't effected them now is because they have constant releases of multiplatform games. If those games vanished the core gamer would have jumped ship long ago. Having Kinect as your primary focus is going to hurt you. Nintendo have a fan base that like the innovation they put out. They make different games to the others and those types of schemes work for them and help them stand out. With Xbox it is setting up for fan base alienation. Microsoft seem to be focusing so much on trying to be the best of both worlds they are not noticing the rug is about to be pulled underneath them and make them fall.

If you are doing new IPs this is great but give me one reason to believe that in 2 - 3 years time it will still be a focus and you aren't just going to pump sequels of what was successful. Stop writing contracts for timed exclusives and put the money towards proper exclusives. Drop the online charges. But most importantly of all DROP KINECT! Forget it. It is the fastest selling consumer electronics device which is a great achievement but it is also paving the way for losing respect. I will repeat, the reason this works for Nintendo is because they make different games to you. They have game ideas planned around the controllers before they even launch. Actually they have worked on dual screen as far back as Gamecube. Something like Kinect just doesn't work for games like Halo, Forza or Fable (actually its debatable if it works for games as a whole) and its time to stop forcing it down people's throats and accept that.

As stated before Sony are not giving you the luxury you had last time. They will come hard and fast. Your games target the mature gamers but Kinect targets casuals. Your games have been built around realistic games. You cannot suddenly add something that works for Nintendo and expect it to work for you. If Microsoft make the mistake of making Kinect their primary focus the core gamers will run right under their feet and won't look back. Sony will continue focusing on the core and if they get it right then all your hard work in building the Xbox brand will have been for nothing. Third parties won't be there to carry your system in the 720's early life cycle like they are now so if you lose your fans it will be your own fault.

The image you crafted will make it virtually impossible to get both sides. You cannot get casuals without this type of thing and you cannot keep people who play your games by putting such heavy emphasis on Kinect. It shows that Microsoft is the least experienced of the three and unless they clear their path they will lose.

It is one or the other Microsoft. Make your choice.

majiebeast   849d ago | Off topic | show
Valenka  +   849d ago
"Sony will beat Microsoft next-gen."

Is that an opinion or are you trying to give us that with implied facts? I have no doubts that Sony will be a top contender, but no one knows for sure what Sony or Microsoft has up their sleeves, so statements like this are rather unjustified, in my opinion.
#2 (Edited 849d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
darthv72  +   849d ago
"This will be Microsoft's third big launch so they need to get it right."
I think they got it right with the 2nd release. In fact, looking through the console window into the past we can see that pretty much every major console release that made it to a 2nd outing was a greater success than their first.

When going from the popularity of a successful 2nd into a 3rd is where things take a turn. Not saying a 3rd outing flat out sucks but something happens and consumers are either content with their 2nd system or have desired a taste for something different and so the success of a 3rd isnt up to par.

Atari's 2600 was 'technically' their 2nd system (after PONG) and most successful of the lot as compared to their follow-ups of the 5200, 7800 and even the Jaguar.

Sega and the Genesis hit it big after the Master system, but fell short with the Saturn and gave up on the Dreamcast so soon after it launched.

Sony had a much greater success with their PS2 even though their PS1 was no slouch either. The PS3 will likely reach PS1 numbers but reaching PS2 numbers is also possible given the length Sony will go to keep it relevant over the next several years.

Nintendo had a hit on their hands with the NES and lost some market share to Sega when Genesis came out but they fought back with the SNES to gain 'some' of that back. The N64 didnt fare as well and the GC was even worse and yet both were great platforms on their own. The release of the Wii marked their 5th entry and return to huge numbers so the Wii-u would be akin to the SNES (if we looked at it as the wii=NES).

MS's XBOX was their 1st and while they pulled the plug on it rather soon....it was a risky move that paid off. The success and popularity of the 360 was substantial when compared to their 1st. Their 3rd could face the same challenges all other 3rd console releases have. Meaning that while being superior in tech than the previous, consumer demand can change to something else.

We just have to wait and see.
unchartedxplorer  +   847d ago
Oh yes the "third curse". It happened with battlefield, it happened with uncharted, it happened with the Modern Warfare series. If Microsoft suffer the third curse it won't be the first and it definitely won't be the last to suffer it.
If MS does the same thing as this gen sony will beat them. We already know sony is restructuring and getting over mistakes going into next gen. MS is making mostly kinect games and are at the top of their game. For those who like kinect anyway.

I always thought the company who focuses more on casuals would do better. True for nintendo but not true for MS.
#2.2 (Edited 849d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
miyamoto  +   848d ago
Given M$ last two performance I come to a conclusion that they do not know or understand what they are doing. Nothing they do show any real passion, or drive to push gaming to new heights.

They are just in this for the money.

If Sony and Nintendo were as big as they are or like Apple and Google or in equal footing in terms of finances Xbox could have suffered the same fate of Bing, Windows Phone 7, Zune.

If they are a gaming company where are their own original games? None except for a few "bankable" franchises. Their creativity and innovation is zero.

They are just free loading or cashing in on what is popular they do not make their own path like Sony or Nintendo does. They are like traditional politicians that rely on more money to make more money not bringing anything new to the industry.
#2.2.1 (Edited 848d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(9) | Report
dcbronco  +   848d ago
It's funny how silly ideas can grow and grow. People no longer seem to be able to put two and two together. They call Microsoft money hungry and use the money symbol instead of an S in MS. But then they believe MS will focus on low return casual games instead of the hardcore games that bring in the money. No Kinect game brings in the profits of Halo or Gears. So it's ridiculous to think MS will concentrate on Kinect.

What they will do though, is use the Xbox platform to finance the development of a technology that will have, and has had, implications that stretch far beyond gaming. MS has moved most of their hardcore to the next platform while still pushing proven products and casual games this generation.

Looking at it as far as success, MS has made far more money in gaming than Sony has over the last few years. So I'm not sure how anyone can say MS has failed with their planning and Sony has faired better. Sony is on the verge of bankruptcy and is selling off assets with a junk bond stock rating in some circles. Not sure in what part of the world that is considered successful.

For a company that doesn't know what they're doing, they seems to be growing by leaps and bounds each year. And they have learned from their mistakes. Oh, and Bing is slowly gaining market-share. Remember how long it took for people to make inroads on Explorer. Same thing applies.

MS is new to console gaming. They started in 2002. They have brought new things to the industry. APUs, more efficient GPUs. APUs will bring the cost of cost of consoles down. Unified Shaders are standard now. Comfortable controllers. They were the ones that were able to bring on-line gaming to where it is now.

This silly hate for one company or the other says more about the hater than the company. Both MS and Sony are trying to make money. They do it in differently, but the competition has been good for gamers. Would you prefer just Sony and Nintendo and a still $400 PS3?
Godmars290  +   849d ago
If Kinect becomes a "forced option" which is always on and MS using that to gather information becomes an issue, one damage-control ads can't fix, then there's going to be trouble.

More so and especially if hackers get into them.

But that's the thing: regardless of defending fans, Kinect has become a weak-point in MS's mindset. If Kinect 2.0 doesn't work any better than 1.0 its going to be sitting in the system doing nothing - but watching you.
#3 (Edited 849d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
thorstein  +   847d ago
I would have sworn, somewhere deep in my comments, that I mentioned that the Motion Control model was best done by Nintendo; SONY was developing it but not making it the "be all" and MS would make a mistake by focusing so much on Kinect.

I hope MS backs off on the Kinect only perspective. If they can't then there is Steambox.
EffectO  +   849d ago
Somebody still lives in 2005,I think...Sony,MS,Nintendo and nobody else

The harsh reality is that that there are tons of new players around now and they directly or indirectly take large pieces of console pie on a daily basis.

Console wars were never core wars,PS2 for instance was full with casuals.
edonus  +   849d ago
Your reasoning is completely foolish at best. 1st your kinect hate has poisoned you from seeing that kinect has been a major success. The only games that under perform are those meant for core gamers and that because core gamers didnt buy kinect and have been poisoned against it. Everything else make profit do to low dev costs. MS is doing something more advanced than it seems the core market understands. They are reshaping the market to be what they want it to be as Sony tries cater to a jaded and shrinking or stagnant market.
Making core games is easy everyone has been doing it for decades now. Making something truly new is higher risk but higher reward. MS is invested in augmented reality full body motion controls voice and facial recognition kinect 2 is said to able to track finger movemments and they are rumored to have google glasses and we have seen ilumiroom. Thats a much stronger vision than anything I have seen from sony.
For Sony all I have seen is it will be the same thing just with better graphics... I did see that they had rumors of a temperature changing controller and their own version of kinect... but even if true it wouldnt be as developed as MS kinect.
BitbyDeath  +   849d ago
What i'd like to know is how is Kinect considered a major success when it's sold 20million and had a 500 million advertisement budget. Yet Move is considered a failure with sales of 15million and no where near as much advertisement? (Maybe 50 million max)

Kinect Sales - http://www.digitaltrends.co...
Move Sales - http://www.engadget.com/201...
#5.1 (Edited 849d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
darthv72  +   849d ago
could be the perception of
expectations. Meaning that kinect delivered on the expectations of the control in using your body as the controller (albeit a tad clunky in some games).

Move was more of an after thought in that there hasnt been as much dedicated development to games made specifically to use it. Or more specifically....as many dedicated games. Move support exists as an alternative control scheme for existing games. Its the originality of games that use it that makes it viewd as a failure (which IMO it isnt).

A kinect game is made for kinect and could be adapted to use regular controls but that wasnt the primary focus during the development phase. A move game is technically a controller based game with move as an option instead of the only way to play.

some move games you simply cant play any other way but the amount seems to pale in comparison to those that are designed for kinect.

Perhaps sony will make move a primary control input this time around instead of treating like an afterthought. The wii uses the wiimote for EVERY game so regardless of how its used...the point is you need the wiimote to play. Whether it be using the wiimote as a host for the classic controller or simple motion input....you cant play any other way. That includes games that support gamecube controllers (sans actual gamecube games of course) because if it supports the classic controller or gamecube controller then its guaranteed to support the wiimote by default.

Kinect/controller hybrid games are coming/available but for every kinect game, you have to have kinect. You just cant say that for every move supported game as sony didnt push for the use of move "only" as hard as MS did with kinect "only".
edonus  +   849d ago
First the 500 million was for the long haul like several different outlets and over a long period of time. Kinect made enough to cover the marketing budget with in a few months. Its dev cost are very low so all the games that sold 100k-500K all bring in good money and they have several million plus sellers as well.
Even though I like MOVE its numbers are shrouded in mystery because one several MOVE controllers can be bought for one system meaning its saturation isnnt 1:1 per console like 20 million kinects means 20 million 360s so MOVE penetration is inconclusive. Another thing MOVE has no MOVE specific games that have sold well. Were kinect has several, Dance Central, Kinect Star wars, Disneyland adv. Kinect sports are all over 1 million and they are exclusive kinect games multi plat. MOVE hasnt done that at all so the consideration of the success comparison between kinect and MOVE are valid.
nukeitall  +   848d ago
With PS Move, on top of the fact that it multiple wands for one system is counted as different units, it has had several fire sales to clear stock from several major retailers.

I bought an additional PS Move kit with PS Eye and wand for $30 around Christmas time. It's still in the sealed box.

Also, the half a billion dollar investment into Kinect (which was just a rumor, and also included Windows Phone 7) is a platform investment that also reaps rewards in the future i.e. Kinect 2. The device itself, and the games sales probably more than paid for the advertisement several times over. Kinect is the fastest selling device in history, even beating Apple's iPhone:


The Kinect single handedily lifted the Xbox 360 sales significantly.
BitbyDeath  +   848d ago
I wasn't implying Kinect wasn't a success but rather that both sold well. 5 million difference is not that large.

@Nukeitall, Sony did have the cheaper option but you also can't neglect that MS bundled more.
nukeitall  +   848d ago

Again, you are ignoring what we are saying. We are saying the difference isn't necessary 5 million units, it is likely much larger. Sony doesn't state how they count PS Move units?

For all we know, they could have counted the camera, the wand and the navigator as each their own "unit", which means Sony only sold 5 million complete sets. Sony doesn't state what a "unit" is and you bet Sony will inflate that number (as any manufacturer will).

Bundling more or not is of no consequence, because there are plenty of standalone units available on all platforms. It isn't the Wii here.

The Kinect has been by far the most successful accessory in the history of video games. Some of it's exclusive games sell better repeatedly than many hard core games.

I remember when almost everyone under the sun proclaimed the Kinect will die a horrible death due to the price tag of $150 alone. Turns out everybody couldn't have been more wrong.
#5.1.5 (Edited 848d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(5) | Report
dcbronco  +   848d ago
Death part of the reason Kinect is considered a success has less to do with gaming. Microsoft has licensed the technology for many other products. TVs, including Sony TVs(eventually), are using the tech or signed deals to use it. And I'm sure you've seen all of the other devices that use it from medical to industry machinery. Kinect has brought the gesture UI to the masses. Gamers don't even use Move.

Also, Kinect was only around$56 to make. It was first sold for $150 and the first 10 million were at that price or close. So there is your 500 million budget and some more. Pretty good return on investment.
#5.1.6 (Edited 848d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report
BitbyDeath  +   848d ago

Either case it's still all money to Sony, i don't think they care where it comes from as long as it arrives.

So from a sales perspective they are close.

My point is you can't call one a failure and the other a success when sales are only at a 5 mill difference.

Either they both failed or they were both successful their is no in between here given the sales numbers.
#5.1.7 (Edited 848d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report
dcbronco  +   847d ago
Death the difference is that Move isn't selling any games. Kinect is. Plus Kinect is creating revenue from all of the other sources I named. Move is creating little income for Sony.
DragonKnight  +   849d ago
@edonus: what you just said was a wall of text that amounts to "Kinect is great when it isn't pushed, it sucks when it is." It's a real problem that Kinect is such a shallow experience and that it is terrible for core games. That you don't consider it so is irrelevant but still a problem. If you honestly think Sony has been standing by twiddling their thumbs, you're naive, and you're also naive if you think the core market doesn't represent something worthwhile and significant. The casual market represents an unpredictable audience that will one day buy your product, and the next not because something else came along. The core market represents years of guaranteed revenue, which is FAR more important.
edonus  +   849d ago
Your interpretation is actually cherry picking terribleness. Your analysis corrected would be kinect games that push kinect arent bought by core gamers because they dont didnt buy or own kinect. The casual market went out and bought kinect so the more casual games sold well.
Kinect has plenty of deep experiences, thinking its shallow is just the poison talking and shows you havent played kinect because even if say you didnt like something you cant deny the depth of something like the variety in gameplay of Kinect Star Wars or the challenge of saving you entire squad through Steel Battalion or the seamless combination of spells in Fable the journey to name a few.

Now that part of your argument is just wrong but I do like the thought that went into the market analysis. Thats based more in reality. The truth is we dont know exactly what the market will do. I didnt think kinect would sell as fast as it did but it came out breaking records. Same thing with the Wii. The core market can and does represent years of guaranteed revenue but I have seen them as a tightening stagnant market. Look at the games that sell well that are core games they are usually sequels or at least genre standard meaning similar to games that already exist. This has led to studios closing and sales shrinking. The casual market is truly unpredictable but its easier to try and entice them because their gaming and entertainment preferences arent set in stone like the core market. Look at reception of the Wii U which was suppose to be Nintendos grab at the core market, they are not setting the world on fire.
DragonKnight  +   848d ago
Your usage of Kinect Star Wars and Steel Battalion instantly invalidates anything you had to say. You could not have picked worse games if you tried. I'll leave you with this video.


Oh, and this one.


The fact remains that Kinect generated its own poison. Core gamers didn't make anything up with that.
edonus  +   848d ago
Actually your usage of Angry Joe reviews proves my point. That the poison. You went straight to cancer to prove cancer doesnt exist. I have already went through the debate with those poisoned gamers and left with nothing of substance. The IGN Angry Joe Kotaku are all just echo chambers of a bunch of people feeding each other wrong information.

See unlike you I own these games and i have played them, and i am good at them I beat them and explored their depth. Angry Joe as an example played the games completely wrong I saw what he did wrong I commented on what he did wrong I explained what he did wrong. But the truth is you, him, the poisoned masses of core gamers dont care. You want kinect to suck and the poison tells you it sucks so you wallow in your bliss.

Just to explain in kinect Star Wars Joe never learned the combat or how to use the force so certain areas would ramp up and be extremely difficult for him. He got through the game by spamming one power move and there are like 3. 98% of the reviews including Joe never even learned how to play Duels of fate and completely misrepresented the game. I have actually only seen one video of a gamer playing duels of fate correctly since the game launched. (But I have seen thousands of Dancing Han Solo vids, more poison). So the mass of reviews just wrote it of and never progressed past the 1st 2 fights which are very easy. There are 3 more that require skill to access. Funny thing Joe even comments on how responsive the game is during the space battle but said it wasnt in the land sections, when reality was it is you just have to learn the moves.
Steel Battalion Joe was making hand gestures and moving all over the place basically not following the directions of the game. He bundled up with a bunch of pillows at the beginning when you clearly shouldnt. If you follow the directions Steel battalion work good and offers a level of immersion that is so advanced gamers would have to learn a totally new skill. See Steel battalion is a game for high skill kinect users (you probably didnt know there was such a thing) its not made for casual or new to kinect gamers. You need to understand what it is looking for and be able to process the moves or it gets brutal. Thats why most reviewers hated it so much they didnt have have the skills to play and it very telling about the industry because out of their entire staffs no one could play the game properly.... Poison.
DragonKnight  +   848d ago
Played the game wrong? Lol, you really sound delusional you know that? You say most of the reviews are the same as Joe's, and yet they are all the problem and NOT the Kinect? Yeah ok there buddy. Like I said, the Kinect is its own poison. You're cherry picking the moments that Joe purposely exaggerated to prove your non-existent point. The Kinect is horrible. That's a large consensus of gamers, reviewers, just people saying that. You're trying to say that you're right and looking at the Kinect objectively and everyone else is poisoned. But you never once considered just where that "poison" came from.
FriedGoat  +   847d ago
This argument is hilarious, Anyone who has owned a Kinect knows it blows. Edonus is just trying justify his purchase... his bad purchase..
HonestDragon  +   847d ago
I agree with you. The Kinect is its own poison. I've said it once and I'll say it again, the Kinect sucks. The only thing that works are those dancing games and Fruit Ninja. Every other game (which in particular the ones from 2012) fail miserably because the Kinect cannot detect movements well and the controls are just awful. Your example of showing Joe playing these Kinect games ring true to any potential problems we encounter.

@edonus You say that Joe was playing the game wrong? How do you play a game wrong? Don't be a back seat gamer. So, I guess many of us were playing it wrong, too. I had many problems with the Kinect. Good on you if you can get it to work and actually like these games, but the majority of people are tired of the Kinect. Also, Joe is not part of the problem, it's only the Kinect. The ideas are there and some concepts are interesting, but the execution per game is incredibly lackluster and they always fall short.
maniacmayhem  +   849d ago
Don't really agree with this article because you seem to think that Sony will come hard out the gate and not MS for some reason.

And you are only basing it on what you perceive MS is doing now. I'm positive MS has heard the same criticisms you are stating which is why we have seen the articles of new studios and them secretly working on games that could potentially be new IP's.

You want them to drop Kinect because you personally don't like Kinect but Kinect has been a huge success and those Kinect games you hate have been some of the biggest sellers for MS. And if the rumors are true the next Kinect will work as originally intended and shown in the the early tech demos and from the many hacks we have seen on the net. Why drop it when it could finally have the power it desperately needed to enhance "some" games and give them the extra features that could better immerse a player?

"Microsoft seem to be focusing so much on trying to be the best of both worlds they are not noticing the rug is about to be pulled underneath them..."

What proof do you have for this statement?

"If you are doing new IPs this is great but give me one reason to believe that in 2 - 3 years time it will still be a focus and you aren't just going to pump sequels of what was successful."

You can put this statement and apply it to any of the other industry big names. How do we know that Last of Us won't have 4 sequels down the line or that Uncharted won't go up to 8 or 9. And don't even talk about Nintendo who's many franchises have already hit 5 or 6 in terms of sequels. Why even be upset about this?

"It is one or the other Microsoft. Make your choice."

This is probably why you are not in business yourself. You can't just have focus on one element "the core" and expect to prosper or grow as a company. You have to take chances and expand in other areas of the market. Every company does it, Sony, Nintendo, Apple, etc etc. You either grow or you flat line and die.

Do you only get one bubble in your own blog posts? If so that sucks.
#6 (Edited 849d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Nicaragua  +   849d ago
Its way too early to tell. Personally i hope that MS pull something amazing out of the hat for the next Xbox - i dont think that will be the case though based on what i have seen of MS last few E3 events.

Go back to the vision of the original Xbox - a hardcore gamers console with games like Steel Battalion and its 50+ button controller, then you'll have my interest again.
SuperLupe  +   849d ago
A long troll disguised as a blog.
Captain Tuttle  +   849d ago
Ouch haha

It does seem like alot of wishful thinking though. "The shooter market collapses"? I'm not seeing it.
#8.1 (Edited 849d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Outside_ofthe_Box  +   849d ago
If it was the other way around you'd view it as "The truth disguised as the truth"...
Captain Tuttle  +   849d ago
I think you're putting too much emphasis on Kinect, MS isn;t going to abandon the "hardcore"
DragonKnight  +   849d ago
Except they pretty much have for at least 2 years now. If you can't see a fundamental shift in their priorities, you should look harder. The only ones catering to the core market on the 360 are 3rd party developers, and they release games multiplatform anyway so you can't really include them.
DK286K   848d ago | Spam
Sleet  +   849d ago
errr newsflash....MS abandoned the hardcore about 2 years ago
Godmars290  +   849d ago
By attempting, and largely failing, to make hardcore appealing titles like Steal Battalion and the Panzer Dragoon spiritual sequel - which for a $9-$15 download title is taking forever to release - aren't they doing worse than abandoning them?

I mean, SB fans wanted to revisit the original monster control-panel series but instead got an example of exactly why and how Kinect can mess up a game.

And the best way so far its worked best with the hardcore is as a voice command and gameplay enhancer, which is largely what the Move is: an option to play a game.
Kevlar009  +   849d ago
I would expect MS to focus more on multi-media and online than power. Maybe have Kinect come with the system

Sony will be about power, MS about media, and Nintendo about gamepad
NeverEnding1989  +   849d ago
SONY is the sick man of the console wars while M$ is the up and coming competitor. I predict a Xbox 720/Wii U tie (or very close) next gen while SONY will continue to fall.

In two gens from now I see M$ coming out on top.
Karpetburnz  +   848d ago
GTFO troll.
Yodagamer  +   848d ago
I think the only reason why sony didn't win this console gen until now is because they simply do not advertise. You can have a good product, but if no one knows it's good they will not buy it. It's simple sony needs to get it advertisements right this gen.
MrBeatdown  +   848d ago
I don't think advertising played that big of a role. That seems more like something that would hurt games over hardware, where there's only a few choices that become obvious the second you step into a gaming section of a store.

I'd say it's the hardware that was the root of all their problems. It really killed their momentum early on. Sony has come a long way, but still, they've always been held back by the hardware.

The hardware required a higher price that slowed sales, and is still keeping it from selling for under $200, which is where the PS2 racked up the bulk of sales.

It made it difficult for developers, meaning PS3 more often than not got the short end of the stick in performance, and the difficult development even discouraged a few devs from doing PS3 versions of their games, giving Microsoft's exclusive line-up a boost in the process. Valve, for example.

And it kept Sony from catching up to Live. Things like cross-game chat just couldn't be done.

If the rumors are accurate, it looks like Sony's doing hardware right this time, so if they can just keep doing with the PS4 what they did with the PS3 in every other department, they'll be sitting pretty.
#12.1 (Edited 848d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
dcbronco  +   848d ago
I also have to disagree with the idea that a console maker has to choose between casual and hardcore. As all devices converge, they are going to have to cater to a variety of members of a given market. I have friends that play Kinect with their kids and then shooters on-line. The whole family watches Netflix.

And the exclusives argument is maybe the dumbest argument made this generation. It neck and neck with MS is only about casual gaming. Blu-ray was a stupid decision. The added cost made the console more expensive than needed. The Cell too. Two things that should have been a huge advantage pushed Sony down to third place.

Blu-ray adoption has been slow. I know people believe it has been huge, but it really hasn't. It's still represents just a third or so of the disc market. More of the revenue market because it cost so much more and has bigger margins. The Cell was never what Sony thought it would be. It was supposed to be the CPU and GPU. But they realized that it wasn't strong enough for that. It's hard to get people to willingly move to a new architecture when it's not profitable to do so or there are no big advantages.

Those two things made Sony number three in gaming. Those two things killed their ability to do things in other divisions that would have made them a more profitable company. And all of the exclusives in the world did nothing to change that. MS moved up and are stronger than ever in gaming and with the infrastructure they have in-house now they will only get stronger.

Sony will be strong again. They realize their mistakes and have come back to reality. They are selling assets and shrinking to make themselves profitable again. Now it's time for their fans to do the same. Exclusives don't matter when you cost too much. Fanboys have scared a lot of people away from making an informed decision to buy a PS3. And you may have tricked Sony into making a lot of games that no one really wanted. Twisted Metal? Only fanboys wanted that. Exclusives may matter next generation when consoles will be more evenly priced and supported by developers. But this generation they were mainly money thrown away. Overly expensive exclusives that barely sold are not good for a company strapped for cash.
Enemy  +   848d ago
Sony beat Microsoft last gen and this gen too. Obvious predictions are obvious.
Kingdom Come  +   848d ago
*Looks at blog title, shakes head* Sigh.
This site's community has deteriorated into a bias pit of unsophisticated trolls, churning out opinion as fact. Basing arguments on rumours, worshipping Sony and immaturely brandishing Microsoft as money-grabbers with no respect for their communities.

When I first joined this site nearly 3 years ago, I was about 16 years old and yet still majoritively more open minded regarding the video game industry than most adult members of the site. It's laughable really, but quite tedious and frustrating that the site has become obsolete for enjoyable conversations regarding games, the comments section used to be a fairly funny place, now it's just plunged into unnecessary hostility, and what over? Who's console is better than the others? What difference does it make to yourselves?

This is why I love being a Multi-platform gamer. I highly anticipate information regarding both Microsoft and Sony's next gen platforms.
#15 (Edited 848d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
peanut72  +   847d ago
Kinect is big with the family gamer - a much larger audience than the core gamer. Kinect is why Microsoft has won the home sales for consoles the last 24 months straight in the US. Kinect is why the Xbox 360 is steadily catching the Wii in worldwide sales. Kinect is not Microsoft's downfall, its their savior.

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login