Shahid Ahmad spent a decade at Sony Interactive Entertainment, most recently in the role of director for strategic content, where he played a large part in the indie push on PS Vita and PS4, ahead of his departure in 2015.
Thankfully PS4 turned out to be a major success. If my only choice was Xbox I’d give up gaming.
Sony and PlayStation made the right choices and moves, and provided the console and its users with plenty of excellent content. That's the best we can hope and ask for. I don't see the people turning away from that, and I anticipate even more excitement for PS5. From PS1 to PS4, it's only gotten better.
Sahid Ahmad talkes nonsense no matter if he is ex executive ...PS3 no matter the difficulties was nowere near failure /or failure of Playstation brand .... exceptional games released on it under Sony s guidance (MGS4 absolute love there ) ....the problems was nt Sony s , but Japanese devs should take the blame for , as they bored to exploit the system and collectively jumped the wagon to develop games for X360 or Mobile
PS3 is my favorite PlayStation console. I won't call it a failure.. It's also an insult to the company that came in third place last gen who actually had its best gen ever🤣
This generation will be so much tougher for them though. PS5 will sell most likely at loss, and they will face stiff competition from Xbox. Walk in the park is over.
@ Marquinho I don’t know... that ramping up production of PS5’s and that 84% of survey takers wanting PS5s tells me otherwise. Oh and that terrible Xbox showcase too.
Well I mean... you could build a PC...
but I wanna play those AAA Game of the Year Sony exclusive.
...you could also build a coffin. They are pricey too.
The downvotes on this are outrageous. Lol. The idea, that the choice is Sony or no one is equally outrageous.
Why? Sony releases only a very small amount of overall games released. Unless you play only Sony titles, that's a fairly questionable statement to make.
Yeah no its not. Never has been until this generation when the world has gone upside down.
@s2k Yeah. No. It really is. To say "I'm a gamer, but I'd stop gaming of it was only Xbox". You know, the thing that plays the vast majority of games released. It really is a dumb take. Then again, it was only meant as a flame comment, being it refrains from mentioning the several other ways of playing games, so. I'm a PC and Playstation guy. If I woke up tomorrow, and the only hardware allowed to run games was the Switch, I'd play the freaking Switch.
@Ted Come on, you know the fanboy power is strong here
MS dominating the console market would mean that they'd do whatever they want, and probably not care what people say about it. Moving to always on, potentially shutting down the used market like they wanted to. Focusing more on services while they don't care about the actual games output. You know....all the things they did when they had equal market share with their closest competitor. when people had a choice, they choose not to accept MS. take away that choice, and people just follow like sheep. MS has improved on a lot of things this gen, but I have no doubt that if you let MS dominate a market, they will do whatever they want, and probably get away with it. Their entire history is about trying to, or actually dominating markets. That said, Sony has had some of the best games this gen. Not because they had to compete with MS, but because that's what they built their brand on. MS hasn't done that, and without competition, there is nothing that suggest they would have done all they did this gen. Sony's games have also made up a lot of the lack of the big SP games that seem to have dropped off this gen as almost all publishers chase after the next big MP GaaS game to make billions, instead of taking more risks on the SP stuff that was over-saturated last gen. If Sony left the market, I'd hope someone would step in to replace them. I wouldn't want MS to be my only choice, or best choice. i just don't think they'd be good for the industry for the long run.
"Sony releases only a very small amount of overall games released." Frankly, still more than MS has put out. That what comes out is often better received, gains attention from outside the gaming community, is especially why the PS4 has done so well. "You know, the thing that plays the vast majority of games released." No. it doesn't play VR titles. Xbox also doesn't play the ones I just mentioned that get more honest attention and are better received. I'm also with Jin, as far as consoles go, if Xbox were the only game in town that would be it for me and consoles. They may say they're "For the Gamers" yet they cater to a specific type of gamer while expecting everyone else to just come along. As if those other types of gamers had no other choices, yet we do - and why the Xbox is where it is.
Some people prefer mainstream muliplatform titles like COD, FIFA, or GTA. Some prefers Battle Royale, MMO, Indies or even Mobile Games. While it's true Sony's titles only small amount compared to all games released, they are on the top list when it comes to action-cinematic genre, which i (and maybe many people) prefer most. My most favourite games on PS3 and PS4 belong to Sony. It's not a fanboyism, it's a preference.
"Sony releases only a very small amount of overall games released." And their games are awesome. There is no question about that.
Agreed. I love video games & if there was no PS I may have just started gaming on PC only.
I would have stayed with PC and Nintendo if Xbox had give up gaming
Saying if Xbox was your only choice you'd give up gaming... Jesus Christ you are a melodramatic person lol... Also, no you wouldn't
Lol if you can't find something to like on Xbox then you're not really a gamer, and you wouldn't be missed. Games are made by developers, and they wouldn't disappear with Sony. Xbox has focused on multiplayer and existing franchises up till now because Sony had majority market share for single player story games. If Sony wasn't there, Xbox would take over that role along with their current role. And we know that for a fact because they are investing in studios like Obsidian and Ninja Theory. Great games would continue to exist and you would be stupid to give it up because of your ignorance.
I probably wouldn't give up gaming. There is too much there to be worried about the console one plays on, and there is always PC which saw a huge increase in the kinds of games that consoles get. But a MS dominated console market doesn't sound like it would be a good thing. Seeing what they'd do when they had equal success to their main competitor, and then how much they want to do when they are last in the current console market, doesn't make me think that they'd be the best company to guide the market in the kind of growth that it's been seeing since last gen.
Still could have done better with more casual over AAA support.
No you wouldn't and you know it...
That’s such an arrogant statement. Why can’t you just be happy for Playstation without crapping all over Xbox?
wow idiot. Xbox is not that bad.
I don't believe anyone who says they would give up gaming if PS wasn't around unless they're aren't really a gamer.
This blows my mind. This is a gaming web site not PS lifestyle. Y'know your right if xbox and pc were my only options I would never be a gamer. My hobby for 40 years would all of a sudden disappear. Only sony studios and popularity make me visit this site. I stand corrected. Look at all of our upvotes, we are right
I ditched PS4 when Sony gave up on backwards compatibility E3 2013. I bought an Xbox one early on in the gen, played mostly multiplats. Eventually bought a PS4 slim and loved that console. Don't care about Xbox one any more. I'm off put by PS5 design. Not buying it at launch. Will try the Series S most likely early this gen, couple of sweet games I want to play. Will wait for eminent PS5 slim. I'm in no hurry to buy PlayStation 5 at launch.
Thank god and the universe the ps4 was a super successful console gaming would probably be dead or almost dead if Microsoft was the only ones making traditional consoles.
Of course, it didn't hurt the PS4 that Xbox shot itself in the foot leading up to launch. Also, this just confirms that Sony had alot of trouble in the beginning with the PS3. Which also helped them to change for the better.
[email protected] yeah ps3 600$ price tag almost killed the PlayStation brand. I don’t think Sony would ever release a 600$ console again at least not in the foreseeable future.
I'm old enough to remember when there were no Sony consoles and there was only Nintendo and Sega. I still enjoyed gaming just fine. Gaming is bigger than Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo. The players have changed over the years (Sega, Atari, others etc no longer make hardware) but gaming continues and will find a way to continue no matter who leaves or stays.
I remember when Sony was first entering the market, I thought they'd probably fail. I was a big NEC fan, and still liked Sega. I wasn't against them joining the market, and I gave them a fair shake. I felt much the same way when MS entered the market...although because it was MS I was more apprehensive about it. that was back when MS was still in their control the world phase where they were buying out companies and forcing all their crappy policies on windows.
@ rainslack Sega was the one failing back then.
Sega was on the road to failure when Sony entered, but it was as apparent to most. Was a different time before you had tons of people who would analyze such things in real time with their internet degrees. I know at the time, I hadn't even considered Sega would leave the market. I think I only read one thing on a use net forum about it once. Wasnt until the dreamcast came out that it started being more apparent to more people.
I look at it as growth and maturity. PS1- Gawl Sony had the gawl to challenge Nintendo and Sega. No one thought an electronics giant could be a videogame company. Or even threaten Nintendo's grip. Crash was outside the gate ready to crash the party. The child was born. PS2- Confidence With the success of PS1, Sony was confident that they could make lighting strike twice. Turned into a thunder storm with PS2. The preteen becomes big headed. PS3- Arrogance With Ken Kutaragi at the helm, and although a genius engineer, he lead with that idea that nothing can top a Sony console or his technical prowess. They became arrogant. Cocky. Like a teenager. PS4 - Humility Returning to the confidence they had with a successful rebrand of the console, and the shedding of the old guard that became arrogant, their humility even with a powerful console and advanced game engines, Sony with PS4 dominated in all areas from games, awards, sales and add-ons like with VR. It was a return to form. When many thought their competitor would run away with the win. Like Pachter. Sony matured. Grew up. They have the hardware know how. They have the software. And, they have the humility of a console maker with 25 years of experience in the industry. Just as a boy becomes a man. So did Sony.
And so be it with Xbox... Xbox - Gaul 360 - Confidence One - Arrogance ...the saga continues. (Wu-Tang, Wu-Tang.) lol
Only time will tell. Gaming is bigger than anyone company.
We'll have to see how it turns out for them. Even Nintendo followed the pattern. Challenged companies like Atari, Magnavox, Mattel, etc. Then became confident with SNES. Then arrogant with N64 and those expensive cartridges. Then hit and miss onwards. Sega had gall with the master system. Then confidence with Genesis. Then arrogance with Sega Saturn. Then floundered afterwards. Microsoft could make a hit with Series X. Or miss. We won't know until it happens. Either They mature or flounder next. It's an interesting pattern.
More like: OG Xbox - Arrogance: Came into the industry expecting to own it, only to get outsold 20-1. 360 - Gile: Used every trick possible to look like they won. Dominated US market though competing sells were 1-1 One - Overconfidence: Bought into own hype. That is all
@ApocalypseShadow: "Challenged companies like Atari, Magnavox, Mattel, etc." ??? Atari was what passed for the industry back then, and it was pretty much dead when Nintendo came in to both revive and expand it. And there was no - absolutely no - arrogance where the Sega Saturn was concerned. Dumped on the market shortly after being announced there was far more desperation and panic there than anything resembling something positive. Nevermind all the BS surrounding Genesis add-ons or them letting everyone know the Dreamcast was coming. The PS1 was "Nintendo f**ked us on the CD add-on, lets f**k them", where the PS2 was, "Wait, it did HOW WELL?! But we were just f**king w/Nintendo! Guess we need to do it right this - WHAT DO YOU MEAN MS WANTS SOME?!?" PS3 was, "WHOA! You see that - WE F**KED UP MS!! MOTHERF**KIN' MS!!! Boys, we own this sh-WE DO NOT OWN! WE DO NOT OWN!!! UNF**K OUR S**t--*NOW*"
Your first comment was funny and on the money god mars. Your second comment looks like a pill wasn't taken. Or a joint laced with something. Anyway, Nintendo came into a market previously owned by others. Even if they helped bring gaming back after the crash, one of the other companies would have built a home console again anyway even if Nintendo didn't enter the market. They still entered a market others were in before them. I was there when it all happened. And bought many bargain bin Atari games at the time. Intellivision was still there. Colecovision was still there. Amiga too.
@ApocalypseShadow: Atari literally built several consoles after the 2600. None of the older console makers had the traction Nintendo, and later Sega, had. But to say Nintendo a confident? They were an old fashioned arcade cabinet making who took a shot at home electronics, made something that was popular in Japan that attracted popularity in the US. There was never an outlining plan to become what they were.
@ Apocalypse Nintendo had no challenge, everyone world wide was gaming on PCs. Nintendo actually brought back consoles. But the 3rd console curse does exist
CREAM! Get the Money.
Whoops! Lol GALL Where did that W come from. Lol
For me, I would mark PSVR as a sidestep gen. Its own platform and Im very glad Sony did it. And they did it right. I would already buy a PC VR headset if there is no PSVR. Its these little things like not great but greatest games, psvr, nice and sleak ui that made me stay with ps4 whole gen and made me decide to buy ps5. I simply liked Sony decisions this gen. And if may I choice between BC or VR features that distincts the brands, I would always choose VR.
Thankfully, PS5 is giving us backward compatibility for PSVR! Can't wait to play Iron Man again without the load screens - for me it was the only real drawback to that game, as it broke immersion. With those loads gone, it will be up there with the best!
Say what you want about the PS3 but the PS3 is the best console of the 4. The piano finish, the HDMI, the Blu-ray, the wireless controllers, internal HD, media player, free online play. Best 600 bucks I spent on a device. Then the games. Uncharted 2, Warhawk, Motorstorm, RFOM, KZ2, MAG, Demon Souls, Infamous 2, LBP, TLOU
PS2 is the undisputed champion, best console ever ever made, the library was superb, dynamic and had all kinds of genres.
Same. I bought the launch PS3. Which had features PS4 doesn't. I filled my HDD with movies, music, photos. I miss that.
I feel like Microsoft is really trying to get rid of the $60 games upfront model which is why I’m glad PlayStation continues to be successful. If PlayStation fails Microsoft will be raping us with mt’s
I think having both ecosystems is important? It give the best of both worlds.
No it's not.
Very true, Microsoft is trying to lure people in with free Halo multiplayer and gamepass, but I can guarantee they will increase the prices of their subscription models when everyone is in their net. I'm just glad that people still prefer to old model that Sony and Nintendo represent. Full games on day one, not half baked games that improve over time. Gaas is not for me.
Imagine how much more monetized and restricted Console gaming would have been if Microsoft were the only Console maker in it's market demographic? going back to the PC would be the only sane option.
It would be the same if any one company controlled the market/space
I agree, Competition is a good thing. a company unchallenged in the market will definitely exploit their position. Microsoft tends to be a special case though, They are ready and willing to destroy all the things that make console gaming fun and a good value. If there was no Sony to push back on what MS was trying to do at the start of this current generation, physical copies would have died 7 years ago, and the average gamer would need their own Rosetta stone just to translate all the convoluted "rules" of what you could and couldn't do with the games you purchased.
I think if Microsoft was the only traditional console maker on the market. I think a lot of the Japanese game market would be screwed because they games will lose a lot of their marketing and potential western sales.
Also helped that MS kicked themselves in their own balls and fell to the ground writhing which pretty much describes how they started out the gen. PS just walked over the comatose body and never looked back.
Sony gets a lot of flak, but they're honestly the only ones that seem to be putting actual work in. There are hardcore Playstation fans for a reason, and that's because Sony usually deliver. No offense to the other two, but I have no interest in anything they're doing anymore. I think I've outgrown Nintendo. I don't even check what they're up to anymore, and MS just wants to shove live services and subscriptions down our throat. That's just my opinion, though.
After all the 3rd party exclusives didn't show up from PS2 to PS3 ( it was the selling point for PS2 ) they did pit in the work
The PS2 had lots of 3rd party exclusives.
I still like Nintendo because they just do what they do. They do have their things worth criticizing of course, but when they stopped trying to compete directly they just seemed to get better with their games output. Wouldnt mind if they competed a bit more on their online stuff though.