Sony is making the same mistake that hobbled Microsoft and almost killed the Xbox

If you're making a video game console, don't try to call it an "entertainment" device — just make a video game console.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
zsquaresoff54d ago

"If you're making a video game console, don't try to call it an "entertainment" device"

But it is an entertainment device which plays highly rated exclusives and third party games, psvr games, netflix, music... all these classify under 'entertainment'.

Sony is not anywhere near close to the blunder Microsoft made with the xbone.

chrisx54d ago (Edited 54d ago )

exactly. aslong as Sony keeps producing these top quality single player exclusive games, they can call it "entertainment" or whatever the hell they like, it's all good. this looks like troll concern to me.

RangerWalk26753d ago

The problem with these single player games is that they end up in the bargain bin. They really need to focus on some multiplayer games. I really want a game to not be a one-and-done. Especially for 60 bucks

Ricegum53d ago


Completely disagree. A single player experience is worth so much more to me than endless multiplayer grinding with no real reason.

mandingo53d ago

They could call it a pornbox if they wanted lol

BitbyDeath53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

The problem with multiplayer games is that you experience everything there is to experience in about 30 minutes.

Then you can choose to either repeat the same loop or find a new game.

nucky6453d ago

RangerWalk267 - what are you talking about? i just bought RE2 on day1 - not in bargain bin. i'm buying metro: exodus in 3 weeks on day1. i'm buying sekeiro: shadows die twice the month after on day1. i'm buying days gone the month after that on day1.
and as far as value for 60 dollars, how about GoW4 - i've got 60 hours in it and i'm still playing - it's a lot of fun.

badz14953d ago


Because no MP games ever ended up in bargain bin?

Because all MP games are doing Fortnite numbers now? Aside from CoD, PUBG, Fortnite and maybe Overwatch, what other MP focus games that are currently dominating? Siege and CSGO seem to be doing good on their own but other than that, Almost NONE!

Godmars29053d ago (Edited 53d ago )

And multiplayer games don't? The only difference is that new owners have to pay for subs DLC and Mts.

When a SP is done right it offers replayability.

JackBNimble53d ago

I have seen very few single player games with any replay value at all .
And not all multiplayer games are FPS .

You guys like playing alone , that's your problem.

remixx11653d ago (Edited 53d ago )


Yo bro sorry but you sound stupid, first how is wanting to play alone a "problem". Second have you seen the landscape of multiplayer games nowadays?? You purchase a platform for 60 beans then you grind it out in the first week and then proceed to wait for the next batch of dlc/content drop/crumbs.

You don't even get a full game now just a gaas platform. This is coming from someone who loves single player and multiplayer games but they are so A. Grindy and repetitive B. Require you to constantly play with others to get anywhere C. Lack any real depth and almost always are either fps or open world D. And they are always featuring /season pass/loot boxes/microtransactions.

Sea of thieves, destiny, anthem, call of duty, overwatch, fallout 76 it's all the same shallow and or grindy shit.

Hit me up when another dev puts out a multiplayer game on the quality level of monster Hunter world or smash ultimate.

indysurfn53d ago

@RangerWalk267 I see what you did there.....

Show you the other side of that.........The problem with Multiplayer is they are a repeat and repeat. And they end up in the bargain bin. They really need to concentrate on Single player (because I am only one person after all) Multiplayer is a also....I know it is not split screen anymore.
But at least be the extra that is expected. Not just multiplayer mas-curating as a full game.

jznrpg53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

@Ranger I just bought Titanfall 2 because it was 4.99 on Amazon . It’s a multiplayer focused game . Plenty of those in the bargain bin too.

Kyizen53d ago

I am fine with single player 1st party games cause so many 3rd party publishers are going multiplayer so you get the best of both worlds

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 53d ago
Apocalypse Shadow53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

Looks like another writer got their check in the mail. Getting sent faster than any tax return checks. Articles are going to keep coming leading to E3.

What the writer seems to not mention is that Microsoft was doing what they always do and was trying to directly copy a successful strategy Sony deployed with the "it only does everything" campaign with Kevin Butler with PS3 but they blew it.
Just like they wanted Xbox 360 to be the PS2 of gaming, they tried to sell Xbox one as a system that was an "all in one" console. Difference between the two companies is that Sony actually **MAKES** television shows, movies, music and games besides hardware. It's part of their DNA.

But even though Sony makes those other things, they always concentrate on what's important for consoles:GAMES. It's always FIRST. Making streaming services like PSVUE or PSNOW doesn't detract away from them making games and new IPs a priority. While Microsoft has it flipped and believes in "services" before games. And is using games to get gamers to buy into those services.

The writer then talks about market leader musical chairs but Microsoft has NEVER won a generation. And only lead in the market because they launched before everyone by abandoning the OG Xbox. When PS3 launched, even while stumbling on price and coming out way later, PS3 was still outselling Xbox 360 worldwide DAY ONE.

Also, we see again this push of "features" like cross play somehow being important over games. Features are nice to have. But you can't play features. You play GAMES.

Sony is no where near the F up Microsoft committed in trying to take game ownership away, sharing and trading. And surely didn't want to lock you in to sell subscriptions like XBL by requiring an always online connection while monitoring you with a camera that was going to push advertising. Cross play is not even close to that.

Even if Sony adds other features or services to PS5, it will still take a back seat to GAMES. The hope these article writers have in Sony failing so that Microsoft can try and introduce another anti gamer scheme behind paying for online, RROD, DRM2013, F2P behind an XBL paywall or GAAS is becoming ridiculous. I hope those checks are paying a lot for all these articles to sway gamers opinion.

The Wood53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

These shill esc bombardment of 'articles' and forced 'opinion' pieces have continued to narrate side dishes being more important than the mains. Side dishes compliment. As it's been proven time and time again. . .People think about the mains first when going out to eat.

Guess these great thinkers gonna tell L James how to shoot and O Beckham how to catch. Save all these helpdesk opinions for the guys who want to be in their place not the guys actually there at the top. . . Yikes

letsa_go53d ago

To me, where xbox one failed, is they released a system that cost more, and was less powerful than the competition because of the forced kinect camera. If they would have dropped the kinect and increased the gpu power before launch and matched sony on price, they wouldn't have had an issue.

ILostMyMind53d ago

It would still be the worst gaming console currently.

rlow153d ago (Edited 53d ago )

Your saying Xbox360 was ahead only because they launched a year earlier? Why is it people point to one thing as though the 360 had no problems that hurt it's sales? Red ring of death.....had that not happened the 360 would have been much further ahead of PlayStation. It was the break Sony needed at the time. Had that not happened and MS not shifted it's focus to almost exclusively relying on third parties (which was a dumb move) instead of investing into first parties titles. They would of ended the generation strong instead of a wimper. Though Sony did lead outside the US, Xbox despite it's issue still lead in overall sales right towards the end. Remember, at the beginning of that generation everyone including Sony never expected the 360 to even remotely be in the ballpark with the PS3. So for that machine to overcome the red ring of death and still lead in overall sales Is impressive. Sony also had plans to do what MS did at the beginning of this gen, but they had the advantage of going second at E3. Did MS loose sight of what it was all about??? You bet, I agree they blew it and turned away from games and towards television. They did try and control the market as doubt. Sony is a great company? Hell I buy alot of thier stuff outside of PlayStation but you talk about Sony like thier a saint. They tried to sneak in censorship on PS3 players until thier was an outcry about it. They also have tried to control just not games but other avenues as well......just like any other corporation wants. To control the market.....I don't entirely agree with the article either and I look at it with a grain of salt. But when you have leadership changes they can effect strategies. I don't see Sony screwing up a winning formula. That said times are changing and more companies are looking at possibly jumping into gaming. Plus the way games are sold is changing. So strategies must change to accommodate those things. Sony jumping into services and leveraging Some of thier assets toward PlayStation is a smart move because they would be left behind if they didn't. That said, I hope both Sony , Nintendo and MS continue on next generation with much success. But stop spewing hate as though MS is this solo evil company bent on totally destroying gaming and remaking it in their vision. Every company that has ever been in the console market has done anti consumer practices.....including Sony. It's us, the consumers that are the equalizer. The problem is you put so much faith in a company that it comes accross as fanaticle. It makes it hard to accept your arguments. Remember, love of a company product is like a has its down and ups........peace.

Saigon53d ago


What the hell are you spewing?

First of all the 360 lead did come because it released a year early. That year early lead gave it a close to 10 million head start to the generation. The RROD did not hinder MS at all, as most outlets reported that MS was counting both standard sales as well as RROD n their reports. You can check online with a simple google search. At the beginning of that generation, MS had a slew of exclusives mainly 3rd Party but if you look at the model of the PS2, which MS followed than this is what MS planned. MS also had many of their own exclusives that helped out tremendously.

Sony did not Model MS 360 plans at all this generation. If anything, they Modeled the Plan from PS3. I mean think about it, if they Modeled the 360 Plan, the focus would have been trying to get as many 3rd Party exclusives but instead, they decided to create the most exclusives in house. Remember that at the beginning of the PS3 lifecycle Sony stated that exclusives will be more important from here on out.

Sony had its issues with the PS3, but in my opinion, that was due to learning the model that MS created when it comes to service before games. I am honestly glad Sony decided to choose its own path will providing the services but focusing on the games first. This is something where MS faulters.

I have more to write, but I have to leave out for a moment, may continue later but my point is no one is faulting MS, MS did it to themselves.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 53d ago
S2Killinit53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

They are pretending that it was just the message that was off with the xbox one. But, 6 years into the generation we are seeing with our own eyes that the message was very much in line with Microsoft’s idea of what xbox is. The lack of first party games is not a message, its a lack of merit where games are not the focus. Sony is not doing that at all, but the author pretends like the message was the only difference and if Sony uses the word “entertainment” device then they are in the same place as xbox.

Hardiman52d ago

Yup I began questioning M$ during the 360 with 3 RRD's and more samey shooters and less Alan Wake's, Jade Emipre's and Stranger's Wraiths. The messaging of the Xbox One reveal did turn me off but it just showed me this wasn't the same Xbox brand that I'd been a fan of so I said no! Throughout this gen they've only reiterated what I saw coming years before.

If Sony were to stop allowing so much creative freedom and funding the games they fund and pushed PSVue or PS Now I'd be extremely worried and start checking out. But they aren't and no matter what features they offer, it's their focus on quality software that carrys them on!

gravedigger53d ago

WTF! Man, i would love to smoke same thing what author of this tried.

rainslacker53d ago

As far as I can tell, Sony primary focus for marketing on PS4 is, and always was the games. The "entertainment" features were there from the beginning, and while they mentioned them, and went into some detail about share play and their streaming stuff, that wasn't a primary focus. PSVue isn't a primary focus like MS did with their TV stuff. And their music channel has been around since the early PS3 days on the console. Netflix, or other streaming services aren't made a big deal about. So on and so forth.

So, nope. Sony isn't making the same mistakes MS did. They are actually doing those services right, by just making them an added service to a game device.

LandoCalrissiano53d ago

They can barely even allow you to change your name and if you do there's a chance it could break everything. The pro can't even play 4k discs. There's no foresight.

KickSpinFilter53d ago

Congrats, 1. No foresight on one being able to change their username for sure was a bonehead move. Realizing most stream/download movies is some foresight for a saving measure on a stop gap device is actually a good move, even if I don’t completely agree with it.

But the biggest and most damaging lack of foresight this gen is MS lack of exclusives, especially SP options.

DarXyde53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

I don't know about that.

I don't think they're making that mistake now, but Kuturagi just kept saying things that made it seem like he wanted to destroy Playstation 3 before it launched.

As long as they keep a consistent message and don't describe future hardware as "a supercomputer", "capable of 4D", or utilizing HDMI so powerful that "it produces colors invisible to the naked eye", they should be okay. PS4 has had a very positive message.

Microsoft had a pretty bad message themselves where if you're not on board with Xbox One, go buy an Xbox 360.

Sometimes, I have to wonder if these people give any thought before speaking.

I don't think Sony or Microsoft will go into next generation being so careless.

ShadowWolf71253d ago

That moment when there really is a Supercomputer made of PS3s.

DarXyde53d ago


Kuturagi said it is "A supercomputer". As in, one PS3 constitutes supercomputer status. No. Definitely not. Not even close.

You need an army of PS3's to do supercomputer computation... just like virtually every other piece of computing technology that isn't a supercomputer on its own.

I worry about people who defend that kind of rhetoric. It is what it is, and a supercomputer, PS3 is not.

rainslacker52d ago

At the time, it most certainly did meet super computer status.

For the time, the raw processing power of the console is what gave it super computer status. That is what he was referring to. The reason for that classification is due to international trade agreements which decide how to levy taxes and fees on imports exports, and dictate how such things need to be classified for tacking which countries have what kind of power. Super comouters are regulated differently.

So, he didn't lie, although the way the systems were used wasn't for that purpose, unless you count that cloud processing thing they did for research.

These classifications are still in effect, and would apply to many high end computers due to the gpu power within some builds. But it only applies to actual built systems, not individual components.

None of the current systems meet requirement to meet this classification.

Muzikguy53d ago

I really don't understand where these crazy comparisons are coming from. PS2 wasn't called a gaming console and it's been like that ever since. Personally I didn't like that but Sony NEVER lost track of putting games first. That's the most important thing right there. Did this opinion writer say the same about the PS3 and PS4? One would be crazy to think that Sony is doing the same things that MS has done. That's not how they got where they are in the industry

sprinterboy53d ago

Exactly, Colin moriarty mentioned on sacred symbol we expect all the chat, mp, entertainment stuff anyway netflix, youtube etc.
There is no need to talk about it on stage as we know it will have it anyway. Just talk about the games.

rainslacker52d ago (Edited 52d ago )

What I love most is that Sony may mention some feature as part of a bigger reveal, or part of a small segment in a show, or maybe the rare random tweet, and that is somehow equated to be the same big push ms does for similar products, where they use all the methods above for months on end.

I think the proof that there is a tangible difference between Sony and ms is easily evidenced by a lot of these articles. The sheer number of articles which seem completely oblivious to what Sony has available already, versus what ms promises in the future, yet for me it's how they're going to win the next gen. Most recent example being the kb/mouse support.

neutralgamer199253d ago (Edited 53d ago )

Main difference between Sony and ms are games. Sony understood early on games matter while ms recently realized they maybe important to their long term success

Sony can make all the blunders but you can always be assured of the fact playstation home consoles will recieve excellent software support. Ps3 started worst tgah Xbox one yet by the end ps3 had caught up to Xbox 360 yet Xbox one couldn't even stay within striking distance. That in itself proves the different of approach. One thing I will give ms is they stuck it out unlike Nintendo who simply gave up on wiiu and released the switch and charged everyone full price for wiiu ports

bluefox75553d ago

Yeah, I'm pretty sure this is just another variation of those "How Xbox is poised to DOMINATE next gen!" articles, lol.

OB1Biker53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

Indeed, but the article here is so full of inaccuracies and stupidity that I wonder if the author tried to write a satire on a Saturday night for the lol
If they want to Ms pr then they could at least put some effort into it.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 52d ago
rowuxa53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

Amerco fired Roseann Orr in Evansville but Roseann now earnes 18290 working with Prudential Financial from home.
you can try this out>>>>>>> ; ;>>>>

ginganinja54d ago

oops, are you hearing this Nintendo...

porkChop54d ago

Huh? How does this have anything to do with Nintendo? Nintendo didn't make an "entertainment" system, the Switch is literally just games. The only entertainment it has is YouTube and Hulu in the US.

Razzer54d ago

I agree. Switch isn't remotely in the same ballpark as Xbox One and PS4 as far as non-gaming entertainment. If anything Switch needs more entertainment services, imo. They are the other extreme.

ginganinja53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

nEs ?
snEs ?
It's literally in the name. I was making the joke that maybe if it hadn't been those consoles might have been successful..

EpicFruityPie53d ago

I thought gaming was entertainment?

porkChop53d ago

Oh lol. I see what you're getting at.

Razzer53d ago

lol....went right over my head.

-Foxtrot54d ago

The difference with Microsoft and the Xbox was that's all they were focusing on while saying it was a entertainment console.

Razzer54d ago (Edited 54d ago )

This guy has no business writing about the gaming industry. Here is an outline of his article:

1) Rehash console industry history
2) Bring up the "cross-play debacle".....again! lol....not even remotely related to the point at all.
3) Rehash xbox one launch
4) Finally.....get to the point of the article.

"Sony trying to convert its very popular gaming service into an "entertainment" service demonstrates a lack of understanding about why people love PlayStation. It handles gaming very well, and attempts to broaden that are likely to be balked at by its most loyal users. "

lol....convert? What is he talking about? Gaming consoles have had movies and music services available since last gen. The author is equating this to the Xbox One launch where "TV TV TV" was not only the focus, but it was actually integrated into the hardware.


"Mr. Yoshida wants to make better use of the company’s online PlayStation Network as a way to bring Sony movies, shows and music directly to consumers."

Not the same thing at all. Bringing more of the companies music and movies assets to PSN is expanding existing services. How is that a "conversion"?

And the primary point of all this.....

Yoshida "plans to use the high-profile platform to showcase Sony movies, television shows and music. He plans to telegraph that not only will his Sony not exit any of these businesses, it will make them a priority as his predecessors have not. "

stuckNhere4Good53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

Thanks for the rundown, and the link to Yoshida. By the way, the folks over in Redmond had "TV, TV, TV" on their brains more than a decade before the XBO's reveal... ... Smh *chortle*

rainslacker52d ago

Ms was actually one of the first companies to put forth the idea of a smart tv which would use the internet to deliver content.

But like smart phones, they failed to realize that potential, and now they are not even part of that market., so Bill Gates dream of having Windows on every computer device failed in a spectacular way in what will be the 2nd largest market for OS and services in the future, the first being mobile phones, which they already failed out of, which is why they're now going back to being so important.

It's one reason they do want Xbox to remain relevant, because it's the only way they can really access that tv market, and is a huge reason why they tried to redefine that experience with the x1. If it had been successful, they probably would have been able to get a leg up on a new class of smart tv. Something Sony tried to make happen on a smaller scale with psnow.

Can't fault ms for trying, but like so many things in their history, they come in late, and lack follow through, or greatly misjudge how people will adopt their ideas. I do give them props for surface making something of itself though. It's one place they saw a need, and adapted quickly to deliver.