James from Gaming Respawn asks if the rivalry between Microsoft and Sony worth the anti-competitive behavior?
"No, it’s divisive behaviour like this that limits consumer choices and is anti-competitive!" This makes no sense at all. How would wanting to have something your competitor doesn't be anti-competitive?
Business 101 USP's
The things they do is the very definition of competition. Anti-competative involved doing something unfairly, or colluding with your competition to not compete so the customer can benefit, but the companies can.
I usually won't use this word to describe people, but this article is retarded.
Article is garbage. Look, both consoles have games that you can play that are fun. But there's a difference in strategies that aren't the same. Which creates rivalry. Sony for the past 20+ years, has expanded the idea of who plays games from kids to adults and has raised the quality of games by their 1st party continued efforts. Microsoft on the other hand, has expanded their efforts to fleece the gamer's pocket books with subscriptions and services while doing the least amount of effort to make top quality games across the board when they have way more money to do so. When gamers shunned their ultimate money grab and attempt to control what you own and what you can do with your games, did they change their stance to be more like Sony. But their goal is still the same: Least amount of effort for the highest profit in subscriptions and services. Games are only a means to an end by using its base. Buying studios is to only push Game Pass. Releasing a next gen console is to not upset the core Xbox fan as they push into being more of a multi platform publisher and subscription/service pusher. This gen was a perfect example of one company doing its best to give you their best. The other, whatever gets them by. Who would you support the most? And that's excluding all the lies, backpedaling, misleading statements and useless metrics to make it look as if they're selling as many games as Sony with player log in accounts. Either you want a company to make the industry better by allowing their developers to freely express themselves. Or a company looking to control the industry, make you pay more out of pocket and do the least amount of work. I'm not sorry for speaking thet truth.
"Microsoft on the other hand, has expanded their efforts to fleece the gamer's pocket books with subscriptions and services while doing the least amount of effort to make top quality games across the board when they have way more money to do so." Soooo I guess you're gonna leave out the part where MS bought new studios for new AAA experiences? What do you have to say about that?
They've bought studios before and at this juncture (former Xbox fan) I'll wait and see what comes of the acquisitions because this gen hasn't been pretty from my perspective (former Xbox fan) The "fool me once " idiom works well for me as it pertains to M$ at this point.
Jesus. . .there's a difference between premise and final products. There have been many promises . . . . . Let's wait and see how the new teams do. Good luck to them. But you should never count your chickens until they hatch. Following on from hardiman, Microsoft have had a number of studios at their disposal for generations. You have to call their management of some of the studios and projects into question. If they don't change they may end up repeating some of the same errors.
Those studios were already making exclusive 2nd party games, the portfolio of mid-tier devs has expanded.
Is that a wait till E3 I smell cooking?
Buying studios doesn’t mean high quality games are here now. The Xbox one x didn’t all of a sudden cause a smorgasbord of high quality exclusive experiences to pour out and didn’t sway the hardcore gamer to play exclusively on team green. And, in this hobby, the hardcore gamer sets the pace for the market. They’re the ones who tell all they’re friends what to buy. They’re the ones who often work in gaming sections or game stores and promote games. They’re the ones who create content and share on social platforms. They’re also the ones who take the first plunge and decide where to commit their hard earned dollars to. The vast majority of people who read gaming news like above are hardcore gamers. This is why a large number of people disagree with your comment. Because buying studios alone, especially with the history that Microsoft has, isn’t enough to convince many of us that Xbox is a must have. the exclusive experiences that make people want to share it, talk about it, showcase it will do that. Great games need time, money and tlc. They need to be fresh and exciting and pull the core gamer in. This is not the ethos that I see Microsoft pursuing; they care more about gamepass, subscription numbers, and engagement metrics. This is so they can have a constant revenue stream. Why go and spend a lot of money, time and tlc to make high quality exclusive experiences when you can just release something safe on gamepass? It’s kind of why I see gamepass, despite the sheer praise media outlets offer it, doesn’t really generate much money (see IGN article on subscription services 2018). Most core gamers want more. I’m sure when/if MS starts delivering on that content, gamepass subs will rise. It would be really interesting though to see what gears 5 is gonna do sales wise with gamepass in tow.
Go ahead AngelicIceDiamond list those AAA games!!! Wait there are none announced so far. Thats called a baseless opinion. Get some FACTS please. You have no idea what if any of those games released are AAA. " What do you have to say about that? " They haven't produced a single AAA game between all the acquisitions so again pretty baseless opinion here. Buying studios with the intent to create AAA games is one thing, actually making AAA games is another thing completely.
And you just showed why it's bad, you are praising the hell out of sony and dogging on Microsoft because of the console wars. Now granted my love for Microsoft is dropping since last E3 but still to say that they are fleecing gamers when sony and Nintendo do the same shows favoritism and fanboyism. Competition is great and creates innovation but not when the consumers join in on it too.
Explain how Sony and Nintendo are “fleecing” gamers? From the original post and, last I checked, I don’t see practices such as microtransactions, loot boxes, live services, extensive post launch content based exclusives from them. When I buy a PS4 and switch first party game, I’m reasonably sure that the game I’m buying is a complete experience and meets a standard. There might be added dlc or post release patches or added experiences later, but that doesn’t affect the main game at the time I buy it. And it’s not a game that starts out one way and then changes over time. A good example of the latter (a, sadly, typical Xbox one exclusive) is Sea of Thieves. This is a game that was shallow and limited when it first launched but then later added “free” post launch content to bolster it up (I added “free” because a significant number of players dropped the game and never looked back (myself included, don’t have time to waste on games like this), they are the ones that “paid” for the content that current players now enjoy. It’s nice they did this BUT DOES NOT JUSTIFY RELEASING THE GAME in this poor quality state. “A delayed game can be good. A bad game is bad forever.” - Miyamoto. Microsoft should take notice and not aim to just release gamepass filler crap.
Surprising lack of any mention of Nintendo in this article
You're always going to have tribal idiots that can't just enjoy their preferred brand; they have to dump on what others enjoy also. People are stupid, and stupid isn't going out of fashion anytime soon, unfortunately.
Two tribal idiots disagreed with this comment ^
Label people with derogatory names, lump people in group - the outcome will be the same. If 'preferred brand' you mean xbox, then it is rightly dumped upon. People are just spreading common sense, it's up to listen or not.
I didn't lean towards a certain brand; not at all. I merely pointed out the stupidity of tribalism while dropping no names. If you feel like you've been named, that isn't my problem.
Nah - I'm thick skinned, but if we don't have what you've alluded to - what do we have? People holding hands and getting along drinking milk and cookies? And you can be diplomatic by writing 'while dropping no names' that's probably worse than what you first alluded to. An inflammatory comment without conviction, that means you don't stand by what you've said.
You're not thick skinned if you saw my comment and immediately took umbrage, as my statement was ambiguous. You immediately thought "Is he talking about me?" I'm talking about fanboyism in general and I can see why you took offense, as you've literally admitted to being a fanboy previously and have done so with pride.
I am a Fanboy, I don't see anything wrong with that. You're trying to make it into something bad. Calling people 'tribal idiot's', that's what I took umbrage too. Where do you get to call people derogatory names and not get heat? Grow up mate, you're so called ambiguity is transparent AF.
And more people get dismissed as "tribal idiots", than get taken seriously even if they are just speaking their mind, and criticizing because they actually have a problem. What's your point? Instead of just saying that fan boys suck, why not encourage people just to talk about the topic at hand, and address any arguments or concerns they may have? It's easy enough to get caught up in the console war, as you are doing so with your very comment, because all you're doing is making it into a black and white issue.
Well Xbox gamers didnt buy Sunset OD, Quantum Break, Dead Rising 3 n 4, Ori etc etc. All they seem to buy is Halo, Gears n Forza
All the new studio acquisitions will find that out, before long they'll be shovelware specialists with Day 1 games on gamepass.
Sadly, this is true.
Dollar store gaming.
You're literally proving his point. Why do you care if you love your playstation so much??
Spreading the gospel mate, just don't see how there can be another option. I understand the some of Switch, I understand (though don't agree with) the appeal of PC. Just not the other mob, they've done more harm than good - but just keep getting a pass from their customers. The penny will drop one day.
Only game on here that Xbox gamers didn't really buy is Dead Rising 4. Ori sold the best out of all of them except Gears, Forza, and Halo.
That was a really stupid article and gave a reply over there saying as much in much more detail.
Ladies and gentlemen, I gave you today's journalists.
Sony and Microsoft both sicken me but I hope that in the end they both die. Then Nintendo will survive, Sega returns and we can all live happily ever after. Nobody will miss the other two.
It was the same with Sega and Nintendo, both had their die hard supporters. We just didn't have the internet to fuel the flames but there were flames.
You tried to hard, you gotta dial it back a bit or it's not funny. If people can tell your not serious it's not working. 2/10
To the author, do you walk into McDonalds and complain that you cant order a Whopper? Do you walk into a Ford dealership and complain that you cant buy a Corvette? Do you walk into Yankee Stadium and complain that you cant watch the Braves? There are brand-specific goods associated with virtually every company in the free market.
@WickedLester You. You understand perfectly.
Absolutely - The rivalry is what drives the industry forward. It's a good thing that ms pockets are deep, Sony has already seen the death of 3 Console makers. Atari, Sega and 3DO and Nintendo caters to the 'Nintendo crowd'. Their reluctance to embrace CD/DVD/BluRay limits what they can achieve with their hardware. And - Anti-competitive behavior? You must be high mate. ms can fall on their smoke and mirrors, sales pitched sword for all I care. ms can release shovelware 'Day 1' on Gamepass and Sony can continue to release GOTY contenders year after year.
Rivalry creates competition and pushes companies to develop great games and push boundaries. Without competition there would be little choice.
How are Exclusives anti-competitive? If that's the case, what's the point of having all these different systems if they all play all the exact same games. The whole point is to make your system different or offer something different from your competitors. You give a reason for the customer to buy your system instead of the competition. This is how business works. It's like we are living in an alternate reality to these people. Come back to Earth please....
I tried to give this article a proper read but its more silly game journalist nonsense.
These articles are dumb, console makers are free to invest in and differentiate however they want. You're not entitled to Playstation games just because you have an Xbox and don't want to buy another console.
This article makes about as much sense as compairing nazi concentration camps to modern U.S. detainment at the border
But rivalry is what drives competition fgs lol.
What's up with all of the dumb articles and topics this morning?
The article is stupid but so are most of the comments on here.
Modern day "journalism" is such garbage
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.