Does Sony care more about gamers than Microsoft?

Gamezone "I go on N4G daily. It's habit at this point. The top article I noticed today was from GameSkinny, title "And This is Why Sony Cares More About Gamers Than Microsoft." It's an opinion piece that actually does very little to point out why Sony cares more about gamers than their rival, Microsoft. There's no stats given to back up the claim, just one single piece of "proof" that is the entire basis of this opinion."

[NextLevel]

Yes.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum...

Microsoft might have load of money but they have weaker hardware, less 1st party, less exclusives, but hey atleast they get COD DLC first.

PS4 exclusives
http://postimg.org/image/5b...

Xbox One exclusives
http://postimg.org/image/u0...

Getting better hardware at the same price and didn't have to backtrack on everything to try be relevant.

Sony cares more for gamers, which is why this will be the 3rd gen in a row Microsoft loses to a Playstation platform. It's not a coincidence.

[nicksetzer1]

Sony also had almost a 10 year head start, I'd say MS's first party growth is perfectly consistent with sony. You don't build a castle in a day. That said, sony is probably a bit more pro gamer, but MS is definitely changing even that with it's new leadership and direction.

[The_Hero]

No and No. In console terms, it's more around 6 years head start.
It's not about the one who came in first.
2013 opened the eyes of a lot of people.

[kratoz1209]

Remember without Sony last year your xbone would of being about TV no trading games and always online

[Prime157]

This article is in response to the last (metrically successful by n4g standards) one... both were sad and this one is more opinionated...

No company cares except for money... money that they receive via shareholders mainly...

And, Nick, Microsoft did as well as they did because they charged for xbl and made BILLIONS more during the ps3 generation... like 32x more than ps plus...

And I'm sorry he got first post btw... hate that "FIRST!" mentality.

Edit: this article said, "There's no stats given to back up the claim, just one single piece of "proof" that is the entire basis of this opinion..." And the ironic part is that the lady article mentioned shuhei saying only 4 PlayStation games in ten are profitable...

Context, PLEASE!

[choujij]

One company has consistently taken risks on funding games that are usually well received, but often are not profitable.

One company has consistently taken risks on using all the dirty tricks in the book to increase their user-base, some of which has backfired.

I don't need to name names.

[Sykoticz]

well said nicksetzer1

[nicksetzer1]

The hero
Ps1 - December 3, 1994
Xbox OG - nov 23, 2011

Last time I checked 7 is almost 10...

[Sheikh Yerbouti]

I think it is the fact that Japanese do business different. They are a good deal more service-oriented; it is a pillar of their business culture.

Heard of Total Quality Management, big end of last century. Japanese had it first in the fifties, even if they got the idea from an American.

From www.venturejapan.com:

"When you enter a Japanese store or even a bar, you will be greeted by shouts of 'irrashaimase' (welcome) and when you leave there will be shouts of 'domo arigato gozaimashita' (thank you) and you will notice that everyone, even the chef will join in the 'chorus'! The difference you should notice is that they are all very service oriented and of course service is a pillar of Japanese business culture. In the US and Europe, personal service has become something that people must pay for with tips - in Japan there is no tipping, personal service is literally 'part of the service'."

Plus they're population is perhaps more heavily into games than most anywhere else, including the US. Vis-a-vis Microsoft, a monopolistic company used to ridiculously low margins because they primarily create and sell is code (not hardware...at least not well)...you get the picture.

[Golden_Mud]

So , ur ready for the war ? wait the war had ended u only have one bubble and u put it on a stupid comment , amazingly interesting !!!

[Agent-86]

"But the core of this opinion article's argument was taking risks on games. Taking losses on six out of 10 games doesn't mean that they're taking risks -- it just means they're losing money."

In his rebuttal article, this writer really doesn't know what he's talking about. Losing money is taking risks. Besides, the 40% that are making money are covering the the 60% that are not, so, in the long run, they are actually making money....not losing money. It's just like the movie business. Not every movie makes money for a studio, but the hits make enough to cover the ones that don't. Either that or the studio would be out of business. No studio or game publisher is going to have a 100% success rate. They just need enough hits to cover the flops.

Personally, I like the fact that Sony takes risks and invests in a lot of genres and new IP's. Not all of them are going to make money, but at least they are given the "light of day" and given a chance to succeed or fail on their own merits. We should applaud risk taking in this industry or we'll end up with just sequels, annualized series, and FPS's. I like a little more variety.

[IndoAssassin]

Actually, Sony and MS are benefitting more from the 3rd party sales than their exclusive games. They would actually be in the red, if it weren't for 3rd party games paying their licensing fees.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

@Agent-86 I do want all the major publishers to take risks with IP both new and old. That said I do have to disagree with your comment on "losing" money equaling taking risk. Losing money is a sign of bad decision making and an example of taking bad risks. You can take risk and have success the two are not mutually exclusive.

[Agent-86]

@Dlacy13g, losing money is not necessarily the result of bad decision making. Look at investing. You have to take risks in order to get a better return. The higher the risk, the greater your chance of a higher return. You can invest conservatively, but the return is less. Invest your money in high risk stocks and you have the chance of a greater return. You just need to have your winners outpace your losers. You will lose money on some of your investments with the greater risk taken. That is not bad decision making....it's the name of the game. That's all I was saying. You can have risk and have success, like you said. But the more risk you take, you're going to have some losers. That's the way investing goes and the same with game publishing or the movie business.

Take a look at MS. They risked a boatload of money on the Kinect 2.0 and I doubt very seriously that they got or ever will get their investment back let alone actually make a profit on it. Was that bad decision making or taking a risk? In hindsight or "Monday morning quarterbacking", it would be easy to say that it was a bad decision. However, I'd argue that they were taking a logical risk that just happened went bad. At the time when they were designing the Xbox One, the decision made sense to them since the 360 Kinect was successful for them; however, the market said otherwise. They then did the reasonable thing and dropped the Kinect from being required and are now selling a Kinect-less Xbox One. The gamble didn't pay off, but that's the nature of risk.

[ThatOneRiggaNob]

It's funny how you bash MS for changing their policies but I bet you were one of the many people who was complaining about those same policies.

[miyamoto]

errrrrr...

1) The title should not be "Does Sony care more about gamers than Microsoft?"

but should be

"Does Sony care more about the whole game industry than Microsoft?"

Then the answer is a huge YES!

PlayStation cares about the gamers, the developers, the publishers, the hardware manufacturers, the retailers, the non gamers.

This is why they have a balanced approach unlike Nintendo and M$.

Sony does not want to get too high or too low like the other two.

They also don't compete with 3rd party developers in terms of sales.

PlayStation's plan is to be the definitive 2nd and 3rd party platform unlike Nintendo.

Their primary objective is to show the power of their platform so 2nd and third parties appreciate the platform - a strategy M$ tried very hard to imitate no matter at what cost.

2) After years of rampant piracy on video games Sony showed the world that decent anti-game piracy can be done with the PS3 & PS Vita while the at company with more money can't do it for Windows PC and Xbox 360. Same with Nintendo with all their money they wont give developers hope of decent anti-piracy for decent revenue.

Because Sony care about the industry like their own rice field.

[Kavorklestein]

Dude. Just FYI.
MOST of those exclusive PS4 games are NOT worth mentioning. And several of the xbox exclusives are not worth mentioning either.

But to be honest, that list is bad in general. It has games that aren't even listed as being released in North America, so unless we are supposed to care about something we'll never get the chance to play, that needs to go, and yes, Indies can be great, but MOST of those on that list are NOT worth mentioning or are not intriguing in the SLIGHTEST.

To be fair, I'm not interested in playing Shape up on Xbox one, or Dance Central, or Fighter within, so we can eliminate those too, (I'm not saying that others aren't interested in those games, but I AM NOT)

The AAA titles on Xbox one that are currently announced are WAY more appealing to me. Whether or not The Order or Bloodborne end up being good, I still don't see any reason to be all: "GO GET A PS4 OMG YOU GOTTA HAVE ONE ITz DA SHITT OMFG OMFG"

Not in the slightest.

Now others likely have a very different opinion than me, and I can accept that! In fact, I embrace their different tastes!

I just think the Sony camp, but MOSTLY the psychotically devoted types such as YOU... Are taking this whole "We're DA BEZT BECUZ OFMG KNACK, KILLZONEZ AND InFAMOUS TILL MID JULY we get da Remasterzzz YA'LL bettur hazs a PEE ESS FOURGH or else you'z izz dumb!"

Take a fucking chill pill.

We get it! you Like those games! Who else fucking cares?
Nobody!

Let people like whatever they like, that's pretty much ALL the xbox fans are saying by now, and if you disagree, then yeah, there's always oddballs (such as you) who are gonna inject Playsation One discs that have been melted down into toxic paste into your eyeballs, but the rest of the gaming community doesn't really give a fucking fuck at all.

We all play games, and we should all have fun.
We all have different tastes, and we all are justified to like whatever the hell we like.

Grow up, grow a pair, and remember that YOU aren't the Fuhrer of GamezTopia. We are all equal citizens.

*Peace*

[Kavorklestein]

@ Disagrees, disagree all you want. There is plenty of truth in my comment.

Different strokes for different folks is the MAIN focus of my Comment.

If you disagree with different strokes for different folks, then those who click disagree are not factoring in the notion that others may disagree with YOU, AND YOUR reason for disagreeing, and your taste in gaming, wine, women, cars, vacation locations etc, etc, etc, etc, until infinity.

There is no "Right" or "Wrong" answer, just preference, no matter WHAT the resolution, or framerate, or game, or console actually is.

[TheFanboySlayer]

I respect your opinion but I disagree with it

[PS4isKing_82]

Next level = huge troll. Possibly the biggest one I've seen on here in quite some time.

[daBUSHwhaka]

Got to agree with you there,the word parasite springs to mind.

[VforVideogames]

Unbiased article unlike the one before it.

[lelo]

Both companies don't give a crap about gamers, they care about money. It's just that one has a better PR department then the other.

BTW one thing I find funny now is that games like TLOU, Dead Nation, are considered PS4 exclusives in spite of already being released on the PS3.

[jackdaniels]

Yeah... a big company cares about gamers...wake up

[daBUSHwhaka]

You really must have more than one arsehole the amount of shit that comes from you.Xbox killed PS last gen.Far better online,exclusives,graphics need I go on.The first thing PS announces for PS4 is that they will be charging for a service that was free with PS3.Don't kid yourself they're not in this to be best buds,they want your money.I suppose at least you can be in a party chat now on PS4,it's just a shame that you have no friends to party up with and decide to spend most nights talking pssh on N4G

[NewZealander]

359 comments in just 20 days? you set the standard for fanboy trolls far too high!

many people enjoy playing games, good games, regardless of platform, a pretty simple concept you clearly fail to grasp.

maybe you should stop judging everyone else's decisions, and unless you get paid to be a troll, maybe get a real job.

[JBSleek]

They both likely care equally enough to try to make the most money.

[Spotie]

And yet they both go about it in different ways, hence the argument that one cares- or presents the illusion of caring- more than the other.

Maybe Sony really doesn't care. But their way into our wallets makes us feel like they do. They act like they want to earn our patronage, like they want to present us with value for our dollar. Microsoft definitely does not do the same.

So while they both do want to make the most possible money, it's as plain as day that each goes about it in a different way; the general consensus in that the Sony way is more gamer friendly.

[JBSleek]

Okay?

[jackdaniels]

LOL - so both are after your cash, but sony (In your opinion) at least pretends to give a sh*t so that makes them care more...NO that makes them more manipulative. and you my friend, have fallen for the oldest trick in the book!

[lifeisgamesok]

All I care about is having good games

And I'm satisfied with the Xbox One so far

[randomass171]

Definitely. Sony is not in a position to fight for consumer trust the way Microsoft is.

[2pacalypsenow]

MS tried and Got knocked out by the cosumers

[SCW1982]

Yes they do.

[GeofferyPeterson]

If I had to ask either Sony or Microsoft to hold my wallet while I changed my underpants it would definitely be Sony.

[JBSleek]

You would pick the one with less money to hold your wallet?

[SuperBlunt]

There is a reason why the other has more money. You morons let THEM hold your wallet. 12 month gold lulz. I cannot believe I paid for that garbage

[JBSleek]

@SuperBlunt

It was a joke lol. You took that way too seriously. I was merely remarking upon would you let a homeless person hold your wallet or a rich person.

Now people please don't go all crazy not calling Sony homeless or poor but they are poorer. Oh whatever people are going to take this however anyway.

[Razputin]

Isn't Sony charging for both Playstation Plus -- and made it mandatory for the PS4, and PS Now?

This whole debate against Microsoft has to stop, both companies want your money, point blank.

[SuperBlunt]

And I replied with an opinion. Its hard to tell if someone is ball busting or is borderline retarded and I sadly assumed the latter

[MysticStrummer]

The one with less money might still have more honor.

Sony definitely gives the illusion of caring more about gaming and gamers than MS does, but it goes without saying that both are in it for the money.

[sinspirit]

@JBSleek

Except.. They are both extremely rich...

So, your analogy has no sense whatsoever.

[JBSleek]

"Except.. They are both extremely rich...

So, your analogy has no sense whatsoever."

Rich is a relative term. Sony compared to MS isn't rich and MS compared to Apple wouldn't be rich.

Also you are looking way too deep into this joke.

[GusBricker]

You do remember that Sony is the one who got hacked and people's credit info was stolen, right?

[HeWhoWalks]

People's credit cards were used? Source. Gets old hearing that without a shred of proof.

OT: Don't know who cares more, but Sony's games better fit my gaming tastes.

[kratoz1209]

You do realise that people use Windows operating system and millions of people loose there credit card information to hackers and ransomware?

[mochachino]

They both care about gamer's money. Sony designed a better game machine. MS tried to convert non-gamers into gamers with TV and Kinect but it didn't really work.

Both just have different strategies for gathering the most gamers on their platform. MS's strategy crashed and burned this gen and now they're using Sony's playbook.

I'd say they both care about gamers equally but Sony had a better understanding of gamers' wants. MS has every gen completely abandoned their core gamer audience for their next project to get more gamers.

[MysticStrummer]

Yeah one company designed a console based on developer input, while the other designed a console based on how they wanted to steer the industry.

[Agent-86]

Very good comment and distills this whole argument into one easily understood sentence. Bravo!

[mochachino]

Well said. I understand your bubble count.

[No_Limit]

All companies care about money...they are not your friends. Sony and MS are no different. To think one cares more about you than the other is just plain silly.

[HeWhoWalks]

Not silly at all. One of them have had a gamer friendly message since unveiling their new product, while the other tried to lay restrictive policies out there.

No matter who cares more, we see who the public chose, but despite that, Sony's message has been more gamer friendly, of late.

[No_Limit]

Com on dude, let's be real here. If that is the case, why is Sony making paywall mandatory now on PS4 online play when it was free last gen?...hint..hint...it is about the benjamin after seeing it become successful from MS last gen on Live.

On the other end, MS has dropped paywall from apps, and provide free games on live gold subscription like PSN+. Does that mean they care for gamers now when that wasn't the case before? hint hint...they want to be competitive because of the success of the competition.

It is competition and make their platform more attractive to consumers, so they can make more $$$$. nothing more, nothing less.

[MysticStrummer]

"why is Sony making paywall mandatory now on PS4 online play when it was free last gen?"

Because a large section of the gaming population let the industry know that they were willing to pay for what was previously free.

Thanks 360 fans! :D

Anyway, there are already multiple online games that don't require PS+ to play, and more on the way, so what you said isn't quite true.

[HeWhoWalks]

Wrong again. Of course it's about making money, but that was never in dispute. As for mandatory online(multiplayer, not PSN), makes sense. To keep the services and things gamers want, it was a necessity (but then, people would still find something to complain about if it had remained free).

Fortunately, despite what you think, they've listened to the gamers. But then, who am I telling, people who generally talk down about Sony won't hear this anyway. ;)

Edit: I see that you disagreed, which is fine, but there's nothing wrong with giving a little credit from time-to-time. Just try it. :)

[MasterCornholio]

Why do people think that making money is a bad thing?

Its how you earn it that determines whether its bad or not.

For example, there's an Asturian restaurant called "Casa Parrondo" that we always eat at because the owner treats us incredibly well and the food is amazing. If he earns his living by providing a good service and treating his customers well I dont see any issue with that.

On the contrary we went to this super sophisticated restaurant where they ripped us off with tiny portions and when I didn't like a certain plate the owner said that I wasn't cultured enough to understand it. We never came back.

[SuperBlunt]

They dont care at all. They just offer us gamers a much better deal and library of "killer apps". Corny gimmicks only go so far

[JeffGUNZ]

Corny gimmicks?

You mean

http://www.handbdigital.com...

or

http://cdn1.vox-cdn.com/upl...

or http://ixbtlabs.com/newsima...

Give it a rest man, every company will try and do whatever they can to bring in new users.

You and I might think some of these things are gimmicks, but they are targeting the most people they can get, so what's the harm in that?

[Bonkerz]

Absolutely not, all companies care about is money. You guys really need to just take a second and think about what you are all saying when you say this company cares about this group of people or that group. They are doing what they can to make something intriguing for the consumer to spend their money on. It is as simple as that, MS, Sony, and every other company in the world cares about money.

[Razputin]

I don't think they necessarily care more about gamers, as they are a business like Microsoft.

But, Sony is smart enough to understand that their product is to sell games, therefore they release some fantastic first party titles for their console.

Sony isn't as bad as Microsoft, but they have had their mishaps where they try to squeeze a few dollars out of people.
As an example this whole Playstation Now rental prices, charging $60 for the digital download of TLOU Remastered, and some others.

But Microsoft is the worse offender, and they are barely releasing any in house AAA, exclusives.

[BobBelcher]

People keep holding on to E3 2013 and won't get over that... We've seen the change in MS. They're reaching out to consumers- to deny that is foolish. Right now, I'd say they're both on par.

[corvusmd]

Nope, both are businesses. Neither is completely evil, and neither will give away their company just to be "cool" with gamers. Any argument for and against why either company is "better" and cares more will be too narrow of a view and will be strictly bias opinion. There is far too much going on for anyone to explain successfully why one cares more than the other. Don't let fanboys from either side fool you.

For every argument why "A" cares more, there is an equal argument why "B" cares more. Picking which "reasons" mean more is only about your personal opinion. How about we stop nitpicking about crap like this and just enjoy all the amazing games we are getting spoiled with, no matter the system.

[AceBlazer13]

When Microsoft decides to actually start developing more games themselves and stop playing keep away with every other platform then this can be a serious question.

[Ezz2013]

They both care about gamers.....money

it happen that i just love most sony exclusives

[chaosx]

I think all the Companies have done little things that have shown they car about gamers.

$ony seem to copy whatever seems popular and brand it as there own for profit.( my opinion from seeing this( https://www.youtube.com/wat... ) ,
M$ saw the market as a massive revenue stream and went after it boots and all.
Nintendo I believe heart and soul is about fun games,

If we wanted to really support the Platform that actually cared about gamers , it would not be Sony or MS. In my opinion.

[Remy_S]

Yes, Sony takes a lot more risks with unique games that are out of the mainstream and are more involved with the feedback of its fans. They also didn't try to screw over gamers with ridiculous DRM, though Phil Spencer is doing a great job cleaning up the PR nightmare the former inept microsoft employees left him with.

[Bathyj]

I dont know the true answer, but I think its telling the the Sony guys think Sony loves them while the MS guys think both companies (or ALL companies) only care about money. A thief believes everyone else steals.

Besides, perception is as good as reality in this case. Does it matter if Sony loves us or not, as long as we FEEL loved?

Clearly Sony guys feel loved. MS guys feel like a Dollar sign. All I know for sure is next year will be 2 decades Sony has been delivering for me and they supported all of their consoles right up to the end, and with the sort of experiences Im after. And that aint bad.

[n4rc]

Thats a bit of a reach..

When you put it the way you did, I instantly thought one group was naive and the other realistic..

Go figure

[LoveSpuds]

Summed up how I perceive Sony exactly, their legacy and the Playstation history means a lot to me and Sony have never let me down as far as stellar games are concerned, even when their consoles are in the twilight of their lives.

[trekka13]

Why the fuck does it matter? Play video games and shut the fuck up!

[Zero-One]

Then why don't you do the same?

[trekka13]

Do the same what? So I'm assuming you love all the bitching between fanboys. Good to know you replied to my comment with such a intellectual retort.

[JeffGUNZ]

@ Trekka13

Thank you. Best comment here.

[Max-Zorin]

No corporate company cares about you.

[jts1891]

Let's be blunt. The only people who think Sony 'cares' or is more 'consumer friendly' than Microsoft are Sony fanboys. The rest of us know that both of them are willing to screw over consumers if we let them get away with it.

[spacecat5050]

Sony doesnt care about gamers anymore than MS does.

people always want to bring up how multiplayer is free on ps3. But its obvious now that the free online was a direct result of competition from the 360 and making the ps3 more attractive with its year delay and higher price tag.

The cost of online was to high as MS already knew, so what does sony do. Offer a plus service, but why would anyone pay for a service thats offered free. Well, lets dangle some free monthly games to get people to actually start to pay for online.

Then to top it off, initiate oonline passes for sony first party games. Which they dropped for ps4 because now its mamdatory to pay for online. All this sony cares more is an illusion created by feirce competition. It is exactly why we are seeing MS "change" their ways from the 360. MS now has to start catering and offering just as great of deals and features while at the same time tell everyone they care about the gamer.

just as sony did.

funny how both fanboy camps fall for such obvious business tactics.

[cyclindk]

It really does take a fanboy to see no difference in this situation and a really deluded one to reveal how the services actually are different in both how they came to be and how they are implemented and with what intent and still believe everything is just apples to apples...

[itisallaboutps]

They both care about money. But sony knows good customer service is a no brainer. Plain and simple

Any business is out to make money but is the ones with that premium service that succeed

[Ninte]

Both companies are here to make money and it's all about business

[elhebbo16]

Who cares just buy what you like, you are still getting butt f*cked this gen with paying online for both consoles.

[cyclindk]

Ask execs and other employees... Sony corp though, sure seems to have a better track record in this regard though, than many other companies that is.

[OUROSMAG]

A company cares about their bottom line, they serve their customers under the guise of "we care" but in truth a companies sole purpose is to make money.

[tgunzz]

Anyone on this site who works for a living know that companies care only about their bottom (including the company you work for). You can like what you like, but please let's not assume this. Hell, companies treat their own employees bad... Businesses want money, and more money, and will portray the best customer service they can to get it... Sony/Ms/Nintendo are only here for the money that they can make off there product. Delusional is the exact diagnosis for anyone who thinks Sony/MS/Nintendo (let alone) any company care about them... BTW, it is ok to own a product from any company that doesn't care about you... That's normal practice.

[zerog]

I think its funny that he says the ps4 had a bricking problem at launch after down playing the rrod with the 360. I figure if a 0.4% failure rate is a problem then terms massive and astronomical don't even begin to desribe the rrod problem or most other electronics launch problems.

[Godmars290]

When Kutaragi made his infamous off handed statement - which cost him his job - it was well before the PS3's release while addressing Sony stockholders. Meanwhile MS's CEOs said theirs in the direct wake of DRM before the reversals and talking directly to the gaming community. The PS4 still carries the burden of what was said of the PS3's launch, while the XB1 is suppose to be excused overnight for everything from policy reversals to having the weaker hardware.

I just don't get it. The console wars seem like an argument of common sense versus childish want with tantrums.

[heisenberguk]

It was 'This is how/why sony cares more about gamers' last time!!

[OiNioB]

Both of them care about money first,

But Sony is in much more trouble,

they therefore have to care about their so called customers more,

otherwise its over anybody who thinks otherwise is mentally a child in denial

[Jdoki]

I wouldn't say either MS or Sony really 'care' about gamers. They are businesses after all.

However, I think Sony have a MUCH better understanding of Gamers than MS. For example - Sony don't seem to target 'casual', 'hardcore' as separate market segments to be dominated. They just make good appealing games across the board.

Also, with MS I tend to feel every decision they make is with profit or market-share in mind rather than the customer. It may just be the general distrust that has built up from years of dealing with Microsoft on many levels - but it does make Sony, in comparison, seem like a more caring for the Gamer company.

[LoveSpuds]

Exactly how I feel squire, of course they both want to make money but its how the go about it that makes all the difference.

[UKzZBULLET]

Nope Microsoft has changed the Xbox one 180.... Anyway Sony and Microsoft are not our friends at the end of the day.

[MasterCornholio]

What I will say with this gen is that in the beginning Sony decided to focus on gamers while Microsoft focuses on the TV crowd. However after sacking Don and putting Philo in charge the Xbox is now focused on gamers. But sadly Phil has to clean up Dons mess and some of that mess he can't fix until the next generation of Xbox.

Despite that in my opinion Xbox is going in a much better direction than before.

[SynestheticRoar]

Yes.