| thismeintiel said: My point is that the Scorpio will be competing with the Pro, not the OG PS4. I don't think many people are that interested in a mid-gen upgrade. But, those that are would most likely chose a Pro if there is a $100-$150 difference and the first one is just $299. If the difference is larger, then forget about it. |
Scorpio is competing with the Playstation 4, Playstation 4 Pro, Switch, heck even with the Xbox One S.
| thismeintiel said: Also, the Scorpio isn't going to do anything for their brand if it's bought by the same Halo fans that already bought the XBO for Halo, while pricing themselves out of most gamer's price range. |
I don't think you get it. Scorpio doesn't need to be cheap or in a gamers price range for it to do it's job.
Visit most gaming websites and the talk has been about the Playstation 4, most reviews are done with Playstation 4 copies.
Allot of advertising showcases the games on Playstation 4 or PC hardware because of their superior levels of fidelity.
Most graphics and performance comparisons (Such as those done by Digital Foundry) show the Xbox One on bottom, Playstation 4 in the middle and Playstation 4 Pro on top, people then associate the Playstation Brand as being superior, Scorpio reverses all of that entirely.
Think about it, nVidia doesn't release the nVidia Titan X because it sells so many cards... They release it to be better than the competition... It's a Halo product.
The result is that, even if AMD has superior low-end or mid-range hardware, people associate nVidia as being technically superior... Even if they could never afford such a GPU.
When benchmarks are performed, it's usually with nVidia's high-end hardware on top of the list... That Titan X GPU or even the Geforce 1080 is essentially advertising for the entire product stack and that resonates with consumers.
| thismeintiel said: Doesn't help that Halo games will be playable on a PC, either. And yes, it doesn't need to match the XBO sales, but it does need to sell several million to be a success. Otherwise, they just wasted a bunch of money on R&D and production for little in return. |
I personally don't see any problem with having all Xbox One games on PC. If I like a game, chances are I get it on both platforms anyway.
I don't see consoles as a replacement for the PC or vice versa. I don't actually care about exclusives, I actually find them to be a con, not a pro.
I hate my games being restricted to a singular platform.
Whether mainline Halo will be released on PC in future remains to be seen... Halo Wars wasn't a mainline game, honestly I hope Halo 6 does come to PC.
| thismeintiel said: Simple answer for your second quote: PS2. Best selling console and Sony was going to launch its successor just 5 years after its launch. Only thing that stopped them was hitting a snag on the PS3 development, so it came out 6 years after. Which would be the exact age the PS4 would be if the PS5 launches in 2019. Just because the new console is out, doesn't mean sales for the much cheaper previous console dies. |
Well. That's actually not a good example. Because the Playstation 3 launched a year later after the competition launched new consoles.
But you also need to keep in mind that this generation is unique, we have never had half-generation console releases like this, prior examples tend to become irrelevant due to that fact.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
