Phil Harrison Says Sony and Microsoft Are Not Broadening The Gaming Audience, Unlike Nintendo

Phil Harrison said that Sony and Microsoft are not broadening the gaming audience, unlike Nintendo with the Switch console.

[KingKionic]

I would say that before switch we have seen lots of kids on xbox and playstation.

Does Phil harrison not see the popularity of minecraft and rocket league on these consoles? O__O

[Imp0ssibl3]

True but he does have a point. If XB1 and PS4 could also be taken on the go, the audience would get much larger

[-Foxtrot]

Honestly most people are just happy with playing on the big screen

I mean I couldn't play something like Halo or Last of Us 2 on the go...it's something I want to sit down and play on the big screen to fully appreciate it

[freshslicepizza]

Sony is pushing VR, that could help broaden the market.

[KingKionic]

Highly unlikely that the audience would be drastically bigger. The switch just came and Nintendo is saying they hope it would do Wii numbers in the future as in 100 million install.

The gaming install base for consoles reached 260 million culminated between Microsoft,Sony and Nintendo last generation. We wont see it higher then 280 million any generation.

http://www.gamesindustry.bi...

The current console generation will be a decline in comparative sales too from the last generation.

Switch benefits only nintendo because nintendo can not compete next to Microsoft and Sony directly.

[Yo Mama]

You CAN take PS4 with you. It's called Vita Remote Access. I play my PS4 at home from work all the time.

[ABizzel1]

Broadening the market is not something any of the Big 3 are really doing, because honestly it's a huge financial risk for them.

PlayStation is pretty much the "global-core console". It has international appeal, and it's design is pretty much to be an easy, accessible, and affordable entry to high-end gaming. This is also the same group Xbox has found itself but with less global appeal, and also a reason why they can't win against PS without a significantly lower price.

The problem with PS is they can't deviate too far from that, especially at launch because they run the risk of having media backlash and alienating the casual-core audience (which is that group of gamers who pick up a console 2 - 3 years down the line when they hit $249 - $299). Sony can't really take a chance, because if they take a chance and miss the mark, then it opens the floodgates for Xbox to take their marketshare just like the 360 did.

And the same thing for Xbox. Adding Kinect Day 1 in XBO caused them problems by making the console $100 more than the PS4, and even worse the console was $100 more and less powerful. That being said Xbox would benefit from trying something new, to alienate themselves from being a Western (mainly NA) PlayStation with a perceived better online experience. If they could find a better niche in the market then they wouldn't be in direct competition with Sony as much as they are and it would help generate more sales for the division.

Nintendo is the only company that can really take a risk, because their games and market aren't in direct competition with Sony and MS (they compete for the same gaming dollar, but their core audience gaming preference is vastly different). This is why the Wii, Wii U, and DS lines came about.

I would say the Switch is less of that philosophy and more a AIO-Nintendo device, but of the 3 only Nintendo can take a risk without having to worry so much about the consequences.

VR is an attempt to reach more people, but it's too expensive for the average consumer who are just now spending $199 - $299 on consoles.

A revolution won't come until someone manages to create something new and viable in the game space, without causing their platform to cost over $499 at launch. The problem is PlayStation is the only console that has a chance at launching at $499 and being successful, and that's only if it's more powerful than the competition (and by being more powerful it means it's innovation budget shrunk down to $50).

2006 - 2009 was Motion controls
2010 - 2013 were Cameras (mainly Kinect)
2014 - 2017 went back to basics with simply good hardware and games
2018 - 2021 will probably be the big push for AAA VR experiences

So we won't see something until around 2022 which will probably be a wireless AR/VR hybrid for $299.

The next-revolution
The AR/VR hybrid sounds like the best idea. You can go AR and have the menus offscreen so you can use the TV completely for the game and have maps, HUD, etc... floating off to the sides of the TV. You could play mini games that build worlds for you in your home. Or go VR for a full isolated immersive gaming experience with better head tracking or simply IMAX mode.

[_-EDMIX-_]

Like PS Vita?

Heck, like 3DS? Isn't 3DS struggling just to match PSP sales right now?

That market isn't what was like 10 or even 15 years ago.

Its not the same. Even Nintendo is struggling against mobile right now.

People buy PS4 and XONE to have a HOME experience, they want to have something that was 100% made to be played at home, not a portable with a HDMI cord.

If that was the case 3DS would be moving DS numbers, PS Vita would not have failed etc.

The portable market is not the same as it was years ago, mobile has taken a huge chunk of that market share.

[modelgod]

I dobuy it. Gaming on the go isn't practical in American culture, it's more suitable for Japanese culture. If the Xbox and Playstation was on the go, it wouldnt bolster sales at ALL!!

[RabbitFly]

That doesn't make any sense.

Sony tried pushing a home console experience on the go for 2 generations. It did not work out. The argument was and probably still is that on the go experiences need to be different from home console experiences. Nintendo dominated the market not only because they had more games, but also because their games were designed to play in short bursts. Most home console experiences are not.

I don't understand this idea that switch somehow is revolutionary because it offers a home console experience on the go. Does no one remember the Psp and the Playstation Vita? That is exactly what they tried and that is more than likely why they failed. I am sure Nintendo will have a better go at it, well at least I hope so. At the very least they have a lot of experience in that market.

[Army_of_Darkness]

I have yet to see anyone playing with a switch in public... Just saying :p

[Skull521]

Lol, Nintendo had the Wii fluke that sold consoles to people that never actually bought another game. Switch has now narrowed that stuff down to the Nintendo fanboys only once again.

[fr0sty]

When you factor in sales from both Sony and MS, the console industry is healthier than it was for several generations back (if not ever). More numbers equals more people gaming, which equals broadening the market. Phil has no idea what he is talking about.

[naruga]

i say a mummy of the past (phil harrison) escaped from its tomb , mumbling a ton of BS nonsense , dreaming its old job positions....Mummy get back to your tomb ..no one want to hear you and most importantly none fing cares what you r saying

[Xx_Pistol_xX]

@moldybread There the most vital part to VR right now.

[mamotte]

Did you mean call of duty?

[KwietStorm_BLM]

There's always going to be kids playing video games. That's doesn't really broaden the medium. Getting people who don't play videogames to play videogames would be furthering the reach of the industry. And that's all well and good, but honestly I'm not necessarily with the idea of popularity and reach , if it is at the expense of quality and the gaming experiences that we want, as the core audience.

[GamingIVfun]

What, does Phil Harrison want a job at Nintendo now?/S

I love Nintendo and the Nintendo Switch but I think most people are using the Switch primary for portable gaming, so in effect they just reinvigorated a market they have always done well in. Nintendo Switch isn't really in direct competition with PS4, Xbox One or even PC.

[moegooner88]

" What I wonder about and maybe worry about a little bit is that (both Microsoft and Sony) are they growing the market? Are they building and investing in the content and broadening the experiences to bring in more players? It looks to me, from the public announcements at least, that they are increasingly going for the same kind of core, hardcore gamer. "

They don't have to, that's not their audience, the later mostly comprises smart phone/casual gamers, who are no where as dedicated as the hardcore ones. Last gen they both tried to and didn't end up that well, let them play to their strengths.

[FallenAngel1984]

You don't sell as fast as PS4 without broadening the audience.

Xbox One selling on par with its predecessor in the same time timeframe shows that's its brand's demographic doesn't seem to be expanding in any way.

[Alexious]

But PS4 won't sell more than PS2. At least not significantly more, which means that the audience is largely the same.

[PigPen]

The PS4 won't sell the PS2 numbers period.

[toddybad]

Ps2 didn't have a competitor pumping in cash like ms is

[_-EDMIX-_]

None of us actually know that right now.

For all we know, PS4 might end up selling for the next 6 plus years at $99.

PS2 sold 60 million more units AFTER PS3's release, in many countries.

I don't know if it will, but I think its too soon to say it won't. Consider more are in the market now.

[Big_Game_Hunters]

PS2 will never outsell PS2. I don't think any home console will considering PS2 had 25 mil in japan.

[Omnislashver36]

PS2 sold that much because of the DVD craze, the fact it was cheaper, and the economy was better.

Nowadays we're paying a premium for lesser gains, most people stream or have a Blu-ray player, and the economy is dirt. Not to mention AAA games require much more attention to detail.

Where PS4 stands is amazing for what it is. But they have been expanding the audience very well. Just because it doesn't catch up to PS2 means nothing about them not doing a good job at appealing to gamers with different tastes.

[subtenko]

You even say it yourself, PlayStation has the broadest audience. PS1 did great, PS2 blew it out the park, PS3 got craft and PS4 dominating the crap out of the console market.

[JackBNimble]

Alexious and pig pen
So far the ps4 is on par with how well the ps2 sold in the same time frame.
Also don't for get the ps2 was supported for 12 years I believe, so the 150 million sales was still being counted even after the release of the ps3.

I am willing to bet that ps4 will also be supported well into next generation just like all playstation consoles have been.
I won't be surprised if ps4 comes close to 100 million before ps5 is released.

[foxdie2k15]

No not really do your research b4 shitting out your mouth ps4 is moving faster than ps2 did in sales month to month and it hasnt slowed down

[modelgod]

And the Wi selling more than its predecessor shows exactly how Nintendo is expanding the market, correct? Or making 8 Mario's a year is expanding the market, correct? Or what about Pokemon? That should get grown ups into gaming, correct? How about this, I don't know 1 person w/ a fucking SWITCH..They need to "SWITCH " their marketing strategy. If MS released like 80,000 consoles every 6 months, I think the demand will be high as well. Nintendo is good for releasing a system, waiting on line to purchase it, and selling the trash on Ebay for 3x's the amount. Aside from Zelda, I have no use for a kiddy ass system.

[PigPen]

You sound like a child.

[JackBNimble]

The Wii also lost its core audience to the creation of the smart phone and its casual mobile games. That audience is gone from console gaming forever. 😁

[DanteVFenris666]

How is it a kiddy ass system? The games are surely fun which is why I bought one

[PhoenixUp]

Nintendo and Sony have always expanded the gaming demographic since they entered the console industry.

Can't exactly say the same for Microsoft. Seems like Phil just wants to group Sony with his company to cover Microsoft's shortcomings.

[porkChop]

His company? He doesn't work at Microsoft anymore, so what are you talking about? He briefly worked at MS, whereas he worked at PlayStation for nearly 20 years. I highly doubt he has any sort of loyalty to MS.

[Imalwaysright]

"Can't exactly say the same for Microsoft"

What? MS is the company that shaped console gaming the most in the past 16 years and as a result they also shaped today's gaming demographic.

Let me ask you which consoles are more similar to the PS3/PS4: PS1/PS2 or Xbox/Xbox 360.

Let me ask you what kind of games dominate today's console industry and how much of that is the result of MS pushing online gaming since the original Xbox?

You're either blind or you've been sleeping under a rock for the past 16 years. Console gaming wouldn't be what it is today if it wasn't for MS with their focus on online and services and many of the things we take for granted in our consoles today were introduced by MS. Just ask those obnoxious snotty kids you sometimes find while playing an online game.

[Imalwaysright]

.

[PhoenixUp]

@ fleece

It pretty much goes without saying that a large portion of the Xbox 360 install base was made up of previously PS2 gamers.

@ Imal

I already know that Microsoft contributed to evolving the gaming industry, but I stand by the fact that the Xbox brand didn't do much to expand the demographic beyond pre-existing gamers like when Nintendo & PlayStation entered the market.

[Imalwaysright]

Get back to me when the best selling games on consoles today aren't online focused games and when Sony stops making consoles more similar to the xbox/xbox 360 and starts making consoles more similar to the PS1/PS2.

[Imalwaysright]

So the youngest generations of gamers that take the things that MS introduced to console gaming as granted don't count? The kids that buy consoles just to play CoD or FIFA with their friends don't count? Can't agree with that. MS contributions not only have extended today's console demographic but also shaped it to the point that the other big 2 had to follow in their footsteps (what Sony did) or carve a completely different path for them to stay relevant (what Nintendo did with the Wii, Wii U and now is trying again with the Switch).

[PhoenixUp]

@ fleece

You don't need a study when you have common sense.

- When Magnavox entered the market they practically created home consoles and sold 350K units.
- When Atari entered the market they dramatically expanded the market and ultimately sold 26 million.
- When Nintendo entered the market they made gaming even more broader and sold 61 units.
- When Sony entered the market they greatly widened the demographic and sold 105 million units.
- When Microsoft entered the market they did no such thing and mainly appealed to pre-existing gamers and ended up selling 24 million.

Sure some gamers could've logically started with Xbox, but it wouldn't be people who wouldn't have eventually become gamers on another platform. Xbox's introduction can in no way be considered expanding the market especially when it's put in comparison to past market leaders. Xbox didn't dramatically increase the gaming audience like Magnavox, Atari, Nintendo & Sony.

In direct contrast PS2 expanded the market and ended up the highest selling gaming platform while DS & Wii brought in a lot of non-gamers.

I'm not saying I don't like like the brand, but basic facts should tell you Microsoft didn't increase the industry's demographic.

@ Imal

New gamers are introduced to gaming every generation yes, but that's not to say that those gamers are created because of Xbox. They could've easily gamed on PlayStation since those games you listed are on that platform as well.

Sony's contributions are way bigger than Microsoft's.

[Imalwaysright]

"New gamers are introduced to gaming every generation yes,"

And those gamers expect consoles to have features that MS introduced in the console industry.

" gamed on PlayStation since those games you listed are on that platform as well"

Really? that's your way out to avoid giving any credit to MS? Oh well, that may be true ONLY because Sony followed Microsoft's footsteps. It's very apparent that you just don't want to give any credit to Microsoft.

"Sony's contributions are way bigger than Microsoft's."

What's way bigger than online gaming on consoles?

[PhoenixUp]

Yes but the majority of them would still be gamers even without Microsoft. The 24 million that Xbox sold showed that Microsoft's entry didn't dramatically expand the industry.

Dude I already gave Microsoft credit for adding to the industry, but you keep ignoring what I keep repeating. Microsoft's contributions, while nice, didn't garner a lot of people who otherwise wouldn't have started gaming in the first place. When you compare it to the other industry leaders of the past, Microsoft's success clearly comes from preexisting gamers.

You can't be serious can you? Firstly it was Sega that introduced an online service to console gaming. Second Sony has done a lot more to shape modern gaming.

[Imalwaysright]

"Firstly it was Sega that introduced an online service to console gaming."

Never said it wasn't. I'm well aware of it and yet, it was MS that had a clear plan to push online gaming on consoles and it was MS that made online gaming prevalent on consoles through their contributions.

It was MS that brought an unified online system which revolutionized online gaming on consoles and literally made it what it is today. It was MS that started selling games on Xbox market place to which having an HDD was fundamental (also fundamental to having indie games on consoles). It was Halo that showed how online gaming on consoles was done and it was the game that popularized online gaming. It was MS that brought achievements. It was MS that brought DLC alongside Bethesda and the infamous horse armor. It was MS that brought voice chat. It was MS that brought services such as Netflix to consoles. It was MS that pushed social aspects on consoles.

MS and Live are much more important to the advent of online on consoles than seganet ever was with its short lived 11 months. It were MS contributions that cemented online gaming on consoles and it was their contributions that made it such an important part of gaming today. Ask those snotty little kids what they would think of a console without those contributions and tell me again that MS contributions aren't important for the youngest generations and if those contributions aren't essential for them as gamers.

"Sony has done a lot more to shape modern gaming." Such as? No empty words. Give me examples of it and what have they done that is "way bigger" than online gaming on consoles.

[PhoenixUp]

You keep reiterating Microsoft's contribution to online gaming and I keep stating I acknowledge it, so idk why you continue to feel the need to repeat it.

Yet you continue to fail to realize that didn't expand the demographic. The original Xbox appeal mostly to preexisting gamers. It didn't widen the industry's consumer base, especially not to the degree that PS2 did with its install base of 157 million. Xbox selling less than a quarter of that is clear proof that the console didn't dramatically expand the industry. Idk how you can easily overlook something as blatant as that.

Online gaming was done on consoles way before Halo 2 released. Quake 3 Arena had done so on Dreamcast, Socom had done so on PS2, and Final Fantasy XI being the first major title with cross platform play.

Sony's contributions to the gaming industry include popularizing the disc format, appealling to an older demographic, provides tools that made developing 3D games easier than on the competition, giving us the dual analog controller with four shoulder buttons that's become an industry standard even Microsoft and Nintendo adopted, lowering license fees to increase the number of third party support, introduced the DVD format for consoles, greatly expanded the console market in Europe, introduced USB ports on consoles, introduced consoles that could stand vertically, introducing the idea of turning consoles into entertainment hubs, popularized the idea of increasing a console's long term appeal and lifecycle, introduced Blu-Ray into the gaming industry, first console with a hard drive, HDMI port built into the console, rechargeable controllers, streaming your games from one console to another output, popularizing region free consoles, introduced the idea of selling retail games digitally as well as physically on day one, introduced a subscription service that gave free games monthly, introducing VR to consoles, digital storefronts that used actual money instead of digital points conversion, etc.

PlayStation's contributions far exceeds Xbox's. In fact Xbox wouldn't even exist if it for the tremendous success of PlayStation, which is very notable as it was the first time a company that wasn't previously primarily a gaming only company found success in the industry.

[Imalwaysright]

"Yet you continue to fail to realize that didn't expand the demographic."

Because you didn't say anything that proves that whatsoever. I on the other hand showed you how prevalent online is on consoles and how it clearly shaped the console market. How can something change console gaming so much and not have any impact on its demographics especially the youngest ones?

As for those contributions you listed, most of them combined aren't absolutely nowhere as important, impactful and did absolutely nothing to change and shape the console market as much as online on consoles aside from making console gaming mainstream wich is by far Sony's biggest contribution to the console market and the only that is on par with the advent of online gaming on consoles. Disk based consoles were also important even if Sony wasn't the 1st company to introduce them and so are the dual analog sticks but I would never rank those contributions as high and as important as making console gaming mainstream or online gaming on consoles. Some are hilarious such as standing consoles or the idea of turning consoles into entertainment hubs when the xbox 360 was the 1st true all in one console and one is a downright lie such as introducing HDDs to consoles when the original xbox was the 1st console that did that. Then there is another one that I'm not sure what you're trying to say "introduced the idea of selling retail games digitally" If you mean that they were the 1st selling games digitally on consoles, they weren't, It was MS.

Since both companies have been competing on the market MS has by far been the company that shaped console market the most and as result they also shaped console's demographics the most as well since then. VR might be important in the future but right now is proving to be nothing more than a gimmick and to be even less successful than MS very own gimmick: kinect.

[PhoenixUp]

Online on consoles did not dramatically increase the audience. How many times do I have to repeat this? As much as you boast about XBL, the Xbox still sold 24 million. In comparison N64 sold more hardware with its heavy focus on local multiplayer.

Yes most of them combined are important. Many of them are aspects that Microsoft itself adopted for its Xbox brand. Xbox wouldn't exist without the success of PlayStation.

You seem to be underestimating Sony's contributions while overestimating Microsoft's. In fact online seems to be the only thing you can say about Xbox while PlayStation covers far more aspects of modern gaming.

PS2 was the first entertainment hub and PSP continued on from that. 360 followed suit after those two Sony platforms.

Xbox was the first console with a built-in HDD, but PS2 had already had an HDD accessory in July 2001 before Xbox launched.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/...

PS3's Warhawk was the first console game to be released simultaneously physically and digitally in 2007. Microsoft on the other hand was still enforcing size limits for Xbox Live downloads at the time. In fact the size limit in 2007 on XBL was a mere 150MB. So Sony's influence helped convince Microsoft to later increase download sizes and also offer retail games digitally as well. Sony's own Day 1 Digital program in 2012 helped influence the entire console and handheld industry to adopt this method of distribution as a standard across many games.

You can't compare Microsoft's contributions to Sony's when the latter has done far more to shape this industry. PlayStation's legacy is far greater than Xbox's.

[Imalwaysright]

Online on consoles did not dramatically increase the audience. How many times do I have to repeat this"

As many as you want unless you can back that up because right now their only meaning is "because I say so"

Online had a huge impact in console gaming and for better or worst, it without any doubt shaped today's console's demographics. No question about it.

Also why do you just say Xbox when you should be saying Playstation as well? As I pointed out Sony clearly followed MS footsteps borrowing most of the online features that MS introduced to gaming. They also had their own contributions with that home thing and that (I don't remember how it was called) very commendable feature to help find a cure to cancer however we both know the fate of those contributions. Their biggest contribution to online gaming was PS plus and its the only online feature that I believe MS borrowed from Sony..

"Online gaming was done on consoles way before Halo 2 released"

It doesn't change that it was Halo that showed this industry how online gaming was done on consoles and it doesn't change that it was MS "hand" that made online so prevalent in console's gaming today. Do you remember PSN begginings? I do, I was "there", it was rough and I saw how it grew. How did it grew? By borrowing MS contributions. MS was the company that showed Sony how important online was and it was the company that showed Sony how to do it. Nintendo followed a completely different path.

"In fact online seems to be the only thing you can say about Xbox"

Well, it completely revolutionized console gaming. Other than making gaming mainstream what has Sony done to completely change this industry?

Turbografx was the 1st cd based console, N64 did 3d gaming much better than the PS1 and I still say that the Xbox 360 was the 1st true all in one console.

"while PlayStation covers far more aspects of modern gaming."

Does it? You just need to take a look at today's best selling games to say that it doesn't. On top of that you have digital sales on the rise, devs relying on DLC due to the increase of development costs, how every game seemingly has a day one patch... For better or worst online completely changed this industry.

PS2 had an external HDD as an afterthough? MS built their console around HDD which tells me that they were planning to have a HDD since they started designing it.

You claim download sizes as influence? Without MS influence warhawk wouldn't even be sold digitally.

"You can't compare Microsoft's contributions to Sony's when the latter has done far more to shape this industry."

Oh yes, I definetely can. I'm going to repeat my question above. Are the PS3/PS4 more similar to the PS1/PS2 or are they more similar to the original Xbox/Xbox 360? The answer to this is obvious and it shows who have been the leaders, who have been the followers and who has shaped modern gaming the most.

[PhoenixUp]

I've already backed it up with common sense. Microsoft's entry into the console market only sold 24 million while GBA sold 80 million & PS2 sold 157 million. Idk how you can look at a number like that and think Xbox widened the market when it sold exponentially less than both of those platforms. It's not because I say so, it's clear evidence demonstrating that you are wrong and you refuse to accept it.

You seem to confuse shaping and already existing market with gaining a whole new demographic. People who enjoyed XBL were mostly already gamers prior. They didn't just enter the medium because of a service like they did when NES, Game Boy, & PS1 arrived on the scene.

Like I said earlier even the N64 which emphasized local multiplayer sold more than. Xbox, but of course you'll just ignore that daming evidence because it ruins whatever point you're trying to make.

In addition to free monthly games, Microsoft also adapted Sony's use of real world currency on the digital market instead of points, not locking basic apps behind a paywall, Day 1 Digital downloads, larger file sizes for downloadable games, cloud saving, & game DVR. So once again you're selling PlayStation short in an area you seem so appealing.

[PhoenixUp]

Yet if XBL was so critical towards increasing the gaming demographic it should've had no problem selling tens of millions more than GameCube which exclusively emphasized local multiplayer instead of a few 3 million more. I know you're not going to gloat about a 3 million gap ahead of GameCube when PS2 had a 133 million gap ahead of Xbox because it expanded the gaming audience.

Now I know you're delusional. How dafuq can you downplay making gaming more mainstream when it's the entire point of this article? You just admitted that your entire point is BS and you're using XBL to cover for Microsoft's shortcomings. I can ask you what has Microsoft done other than XBL to contribute to this industry?

For Sony I can easily tell you they made developing 3D titles easier for developers so we could get titles like Resident Evil, Final Fantasy VII & Silent Hill that otherwise wouldn't have happened on Saturn cuz of its difficult architecture and not on N64 cuz of cartridges. Sony popularized disc media so developers can expand their visions on a successful platform. Sony introduced DVD & Blu-Ray which further allowed developers to have bigger tools for their games. Sony made Europe a major market in the industry.

In fact why am I repeating myself. I already told you all their other contributions but that huge list seems to fly over your head while the only thing about Microsoft you can bring up is XBL. Newsflash, Sony had just as big a hand in shaping modern online gaming than Microsoft, so idk why you keep bringing it up like Microsoft are the sole trendsetters in anything relating to online.

I said PS1 popularized CD gaming, not that it was the first. If you think that's not significant and are going to try to somehow downplay that, idk how you can also prop XBL up when Sega had an online service of their own years prior to XBL.

N64's cartridges very much limited the scope of developers visions, so idk why you'd even bring that pointless opinion up. You wouldn't have iconic titles like MGS1 or FFVII on N64.

Even in the face of PS2 & PSP having tons of multimedia features you still want to ignorantly believe 360 did it first even though it just followed Sony's lead in expanding the functionality of a gaming device? Man that's pure denial right there.

Your denial is clearly blatant when you do look at sales charts and see that software sells more on PS4 than any other platform. Microsoft's own exclusives outside of Halo, Forza, & Gears rarely chart high while you consistently see Sony's first party titles have success. Why dafuq hasn't Halo 5 reached 9 million when Uncharted 5 has already done so in less time on the market?

You are truly a broken record. You keep saying online changed the industry like that's something I don't know, yet fail to acknowledge that Sony had a big hand in shaping online. PSN makes far more revenue than XBL does and it has more subscribers and active accounts as well.

[PhoenixUp]

PS2 had HDD as an accessory for MMO titles, something that Xbox didn't even receive with its own built in hard drive. Speaking of afterthoughts Microsoft actually wanted consumers to buy a separate accessory just to play DVD movies on Xbox while PS2 easily did that out of the box.

Steam had already showed digital distribution of games was possible in 2003, so don't even try to give Microsoft credit for that. It is because of Warhawk & Burnout Paradise on PS3 that you are able to play retail games digitally thanks to Sony.

The PlayStation consoles are similar to one another because they are more popular around the world, receive more support of eastern and western varieties than its competitors, are successful in Japan, and have the best golden years of any gaming brand. You can't say that for any other manufacturer.

If you really believe Microsoft are on top then you're beyond reason and logical thinking

[Imalwaysright]

"I've already backed it up with common sense. Microsoft's entry into the console market only sold 24 million while GBA sold 80 million & PS2 sold 157 million."

Your common sense makes no sense whatsoever. In this day and age of social networks and social aspects, you can bet your ass that there wouldn't exist as many gamers as there are today if it wasn't for the ability to play your games with your friends. The likes of Minecraft, COD, Destiny, Battlefield, FIFA or Overwatch dwarfing ANY single player focused game in terms of sales is proof of this. MS did expand console demographics and so did Sony by following in their footsteps.

Online COMPLETELY changed console gaming and its market and I'm sorry but you have to be blind to not see this. Online on consoles IS the last great revolution in console gaming and it is so because MS had a clear plan for it and did it RIGHT. Online gaming COMPLETELY overshadows ANY Sony's contribution to console gaming aside from making it mainstream by appealing to older audiences so I'm not downplaying the importance of Sony's contributions. Most of them simply do NOT have the impact that online gaming had on consoles. NOT EVEN CLOSE.

Your XBOX sales are absolutely irrelevant and absolutely do NOT change how important MS contributions were for this industry. Online gaming/services/social aspects are essential for today's youngest generations of gamers and unlike you Sony realizes this.

"You seem to confuse shaping and already existing market with gaining a whole new demographic."

No I don't. I just see today's society for what it is. This is not the 90s any more. Get with the times old man.

"Like I said earlier even the N64 which emphasized local multiplayer sold more than. Xbox, but of course you'll just ignore that daming evidence"

I laugh at your evidence. One just needs to not be blind to see how online completely changed console's market thus changing its demographics as well.

"software sells more on PS4"

The same PS4 that is FAR more similar to the Xbox/xbox 360 than it is with the PS2/PS1 not only with its focus on online gaming but also easy to develop for architecture?

"For Sony I can easily tell you they made developing 3D titles easier for developers"

N64 did 3d gaming FAR better than the PS1 ever did while using cartridges.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8...

"N64's cartridges very much limited the scope of developers visions"

LMAO how can you say that when Mario 64 and TR1 that was released on Sega Saturn before it was released on the PS1 were THE games that showed every developer out there how 3d gaming was done and are the pillars of 3D gaming? LMAO and you call me delusional?

"I said PS1 popularized CD gaming, not that it was the first...."

I can prop up Live because did it right and completely revolutionized online gaming on consoles by being an unified online service. Sony weren't the 1st to do disk based consoles and as far as I'm aware, the technology worked fine on the Sega CD and turbografx while online on the PS2/dreamcast were less than optimal and thus would never make online as prevalent as it is today on consoles.

[Imalwaysright]

"Even in the face of PS2 & PSP"

Because the Xbox 360 did streaming 1st and we all know how important services like Netflix are today don't we? I'll say it again, the Xbox 360 is the 1st one in all console and nothing you say will change my opinion on that.

" when Uncharted 5 has already done so in less time on the market?"

https://www.gamespot.com/ar...

Not the whole world but the biggest console market. How many of those games focus on sp and how many of them focus on mp?

"Steam had already showed digital distribution "

So Steam is part of the console market now? Well then Sony's contributions to online are irrelavant as well. You can't have it both ways. That's not how this works

"The PlayStation consoles are similar to one another because they are more popular around the world, receive more support of eastern and western varieties than its competitors"

LMAO complete and utter BS and that list above proves it. After the Xbox and Xbox 360 Sony started focusing on online by following into MS footsteps. Not only that but japanese industry took a dive in the 360/PS3 era and is just now resurging.

You just don't want to give MS any credit and don't point your fanboy fingers at me because I acknowledge that making gaming mainstream was extremely important and just like online it completely changed console gaming by showing this industry that it was time to be more mature.

[PhoenixUp]

Dude get back to me when Microsoft can release a console that sells over 100 million units

[XiNatsuDragnel]

Oh Harrison people still called Xbox theshooterbox for a reason. Sony and Nintendo have broadening their audiences since day 1.

[subtenko]

Nintendo is boradening yes....but not as much as sony...but they still have time to do stuff with switch generation...

[XStation4pio_Pro]

no shit. they cater to gamers. the switch caters to casual gamers and casual situations... like parties. its more common for average people to play mario kart in a social setting than say bloodborne or whatever.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

Jesus, if there's one story title that's guaranteed to get clicks out of pissed-off Sony and Microsoft fans, much less graphics lovers, this would be the title that does it.

[VersusDMC]

The Wii definetlly broadened the audience. But the switch is just combining the console and handheld Nintendo audiences.

[subtenko]

This guy went daft. Sony has the most broad audience out of all 3 of them....They literally do it all and have every kind of game. Nintendo is the one that needs to broaden their audience because there is a reason why me am millions of others dont have the latest nintendo products anymore....

[modelgod]

@Moldy bread VR is a gimmick and it will NEVER take off.

[madpuppy]

If Sony and MS went with a hybrid system like the switch for the next generation I would go back to PC gaming. Portable gaming is a 12 year olds pass time. and the switch just happened to be one out of a bunch of failed Nintendo ideas that just happened to stick. They are merging their user bases from console/portable seeing that the gameboy user base is so large it is pushing up the numbers of the switch. if it wasn't for that, the switch would just be another mediocre Nintendo console that only fanboys and parents buy for their pre teens as a "safe" alternative to Sony and MS.

[PigPen]

I wouldn't be surprised. Sony is good for copying Nintendo (Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale, Little Big Planet Karting). Oh, I can't forget about "PS Move". The Switch is selling cause it's the hot item right now. Console games you can play on the go, that's awesome. I have one and love it!

[madpuppy]

Funny how Sony is "copying" all if Nintendo's "experiments" but, Nintendo keeps failing and Sony is number one by over double it's closest competitor.

Nostalgia is the only thing that keeps Nintendo afloat or it would have went to way of Atari years ago.

[GamingCentaur]

PS4 is selling just fine. I think Sony will be ok.

[ShadowWolf712]

Right. With all 12 mil of its sales with the Wii U and constant shortages with the Switch and all, gaming's really been broadened.

[frostypants]

Huh? The people buying the Switch are the typical video game core audience. It's not like the Wii where everyone and their grandma was buying one.

[TheOttomatic91]

So Phil Harrison to join Nintendo? Unless of course he has done so already and I missed the memo.

[DiRtY]

After Phil Harrison had a key role at Sony and ruined the PS3 launch, he joined MS and ruined the Xbox One launch.

Now this guy has the guts to tell us, where Sony and MS are failing. Even though they are doing just fine. They sold 100 million in 3 1/2 years.

This guy is a plaque both Sony and MS suffered from. Go ahead, join Nintendo. Wii U 2 is coming.

[DialgaMarine]

What is this guys deal? He screwed up royally when he was the head of PlayStation, has been jumping from company to company since, and got insanely butthurt when Phil Spencer was given the job he wanted. Now he's trying to butter Nintendo up? This dude just needs to leave the gaming industry all together.

[MagicBeanz]

LOL, good stuff Phil. He must have invested in Switch.

[jaycptza]

What Nintendo released a handheld with doc, how the phaak is that "broadening"?

[Bismarn]

The best compliment ever paid to Sony and Microsoft. "Broadening the gaming audience" gave us the Wii, shovelware, and years of crappy gimmicks.

[Stevonidas]

Both the PS3 and the Xbox One had disastrous reveals, marketing, and launches, and Phil Harrison was on board for both of them. Why anyone listens to anything he says is beyond my understanding.

[VTKC]

You dont need to broaden the audience. The last time it got broadened it spawned casual gamers and because there was so many thanks to gimmicky control play methods with guitar and camera and movement. The industry decided to create games catored just for casual gamers which were heap of shit games and even the good games were made shit in their sequals to suit them since they came by the masses. Broaden the target audience, yeah thats why Nintendo is doing so well unlike PS4 and Xbox. Seriously does anyone actually carry their oh so portable Switch around?

[Skankinruby]

How in the hell is regurgitating franchises and giving you a smaller screen to play them on broadening the gaming audience? It's merely a less convenient version of the 3ds, just another gimmick

[Jamaicangmr]

I had to google to be reminded who he is... Lol! So now it makes sense why he feels this way...

[Matpan]

I´d argue Sony and later Microsoft took the baton Nintendo and Sega had in the 80s and 90s and brought games to a mega massive market. Playstation brand has done a great deal in making the industry what it is today.

While I have nothing but respect for Nintendo and I find their flagship titles to be at the vanguard of gaming quality, Nintendo always seemes as the more Niche market to me (albeit the Wii which while a success in hardware sales due to it´s novelty factor fell short on software sales, which is the backbone of any system)

[sampson3121]

when the Switch surpasses the ps4 then talk.

[Godmars290]

This from a guy who just announced a console aimed at a niche audience.

Supposedly.

Or not.

Maybe.

Or on the other hand...

[GamePeace]

They all have their pros and cons. I would support them all if I would have more money. Sadly time and money is always lacking somehow ...

[caffman]

Well his kids play Fifa, Forza and breath of the wild so no console wars in that house

[Godmars290]

Unless said kid is an actual kid and the parents don't or can't afford to supply and support three game systems.

[caffman]

My kids have access to PS4, xbox one and switch as well

[sk8ofmnd]

Impossibl3:

Yeah and if the switch could play AAA 3rd partys ALSO on the go it might be actually wort a shit.

On topic:

If Sony wasnt broadening the gaming market they wouldnt be releasing new I.P.'s every year, and sure as shit wouldnt be smashing the ps3's sales #'s, or releasing new hardware (psvr) ya know, that device ms nor nintendo would dare to touch?? Remember all those rumors before the switches launch with marios face with a vr on his head? Yeah i knew that was bullshit... The only thing nintendo knows how to innovate anymore is the controller in which controls their games, and finding new ways to screw over its consumers...

[DivineAssault]

Its true in some aspects. One of the many reasons Sony respects and says "they need nintendo to thrive." The others might refine graphics n all but nintendo innovates the industry..

[Orionsangel]

I don't play games on the go. When I go outside I like to experience the outside world and not be preoccupied with a game. Gaming has always been a home or arcade thing for me. I'm old school.

[bluefox755]

Know who else broadened the gaming audience? The makers of Candy Crush. To broaden the gaming audience, you must necessarily make your games appeal to a broader audience, i.e. casual gamers. This is exactly what Nintendo did with the original Wii, and the reason I never bought one. The day Sony shifts their focus to casual gaming is the day I stop buying Playstation.

[Kribwalker]

Lol they already did that with the psmove

[THEBIG360]

And that my friends is why they both let him go!!!

[paulogy]

I would say Crash remaster, Knack 2, Moss and maybe VR in general are trying to bring in a younger audience.
And PlayLink titles are trying to bring in people that don't even normally play games.
Will any of it work? We'll have to see.