By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - PlayStation 4 boss: Microsoft's Xbox One policies surprised us

Euphoria14 said:

There is nothing to prove that 2nd hand sales caused studios to close. Studios close due to mismanaging budgets and releasing products that people do not want to buy.

No truer words.

On a side note, I believe games are too expensive, which is why I wait a couple of months usually and buy them at £25 or less. Am I hurting the industry for buying games new just not at full price?



Hmm, pie.

Around the Network
The Fury said:
Euphoria14 said:

There is nothing to prove that 2nd hand sales caused studios to close. Studios close due to mismanaging budgets and releasing products that people do not want to buy.

No truer words.

On a side note, I believe games are too expensive, which is why I wait a couple of months usually and buy them at £25 or less. Am I hurting the industry for buying games new just not at full price?

No, you are not. You are making a choice as a consumer who believes $60 is too high an asking price. This is something the industry needs to understand and stop with this stupid line of Cliffy B. style thinking where they believe gamers only want a game if it has this exorbitant budget. If the moment your games drops price you begin losing tons of money then you are doing something seriously wrong. If your game can no profit unless it sells 3M+ copies then you are doing something seriously wrong.

Maybe, just maybe the industry needs to stop thinking games need to cost $100M to create and another $50-$100M to market. Maybe they need to stop expecting games to need to sell 3M copies or so just to be considered successful.

Maybe, just maybe the industry needs to start looking towards themselves as the culprits instead of continually trying to shift the blame on their consumers. I can tell you one thing, if they got rid of piracy and 2nd hand sales like they want and things don't suddenly result in higher sales, higher profits and increasing consumer base they will just find themselves a new scapegoat while the $1M+ salary CEOs continue to make stupid decisions.



iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.

Currently playing:

Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)     

    

Got a retro room? Post it here!

landguy1 said:
theprof00 said:
 

To comment on a point you made about the "more powerful ps3", it just stands to reason that Sony performed their job correctly, by focusing on the gamers, and making everything else secondary. Another user likes to use Ford as an example by dropping the quote, "had I asked consumers what they'd wanted, they would have said faster horses".

I agree that change is good, and xbox DID have some interesting policies, and Sony seems to think so as well. However, Ford sold the car when the market was ready for the car. The market was simply not ready for this huge leap with the xboxone. 5-6 years down the line? Obviously...Totally...A no brainer.  Right now...no. I think, had the current gen stayed stronger for a year longer, and consoles released in 2014, xboxone would've been accepted less begrudgingly than it was.


Did Sony perform their job correctly though?  THat question won't really be answered in 2013-2014, it will be answered later like you said.  If you re going to tell me that people buy consoles to use for 1or 2 years, then Sony did the best job possible.  Because consoles are built to be used 5-7 years plus 2-3 years past the next gen launch, not having the emerging technologies built into your console isn't performing your job correctly. Your quote of Ford actually makes my point.  Of course, M$ didn't need to present their console the way the did, that was their big mistake.  The people who are buying in 2013-2014 are the core gamers and the message needed to be "GAMES".

That's the thing though, Sony IS the one who is evolving over time. They have the technology ready for it. They have Gaikai, they have their mobile platform, and they have their playstation suite....(games label over all systems), and they've been licensing content for mobile...and they're in mobile phones. They have the time to make Gaikai into the MS cloud. They have time to work on their phone content. They have time to work on their streaming and tv. Look how they're now making game movies...what were the two latest confirmations? I think watch dogs and gran turismo? They have their own camera, and they have patents showing that it's capable of one day interacting with consumers in the same level as ms is doing with kinect.

The difference, the main difference, is they didn't try to control all these facets. They said "take em or leave em". Here is the games box. We will try to create content that gets you to purchase these products...gaikai...pseye...ps+...etc. MS said "we'll force" and Sony said "we'll allow". Dollars to dimes, when it comes down to it, if consumers aren't satisfied with the MS total package, then it won't see sales. But if any one of Sony's technologies don't work out for them, it won't affect total sales. Sony knows how it is to release failed products lol. They understand, and MS doesn't, that if even one feature of a console fails, then it deflates the value of the system.

Right now there is no perceived value in the xboxone. Of course, I'm trying to paint it in a bad light with these examples...but what's worse, is consider the reverse. Consider the people who are interested in those features as standalones. For kinect features there's samsung and google tech. For streaming tv, there's chromecast among other dongles. For tv control there's apple tv. All of these things are a fifth of the price of an xboxone. So you see, there are actually two major discrepancies in their strategy. Gamers don't want to pay for things they don't want, and the extended market doesn't wanna pay for the gaming hardware. This makes the xboxone demographic only a slice of both markets, that being the overlap of those who want both, and don't currently have either. That's a tough spot to be in for MS.

My quote of ford makes my point. Surely you can see that if you step back and look broadly at the situation. IE; you can make horses every year, and when the market is ready, make a car.....but a console gen lasts 7 years. We don't have a yearly hardware release model, therefore, you need to be right on time...and that's extremely hard to do when you're looking at every 7 years.

A while back I had a thread about this exact point. I said that Sony and MS should come out with step-consoles. The idea would be to have a games system that could play all the ps3 and 360 games, as well as have games of its own that could be forward compatible on the next systems. This could have enabled an extra year or two and put MS in a much better position for release. These consoles could have been MS and Sony's "nintendo dsi". Regardless of why this wasn't done, in hindsight, pushing off new console release for another year could've pulled it off for MS and their xb1.



MS wanted to create a Steam like environment that also allows physical game selling/reselling/lending cause they felt that the masses(and obviously retailers) werent exactly ready for an all digital console. This whole idea was absurd and couldnt happen without things like 24 hour check. Its was MS looking out for everyone that caused the XBone problem. How could Sony really forsee that.



Getting an XBOX One for me is like being in a bad relationship but staying together because we have kids. XBone we have 20000+ achievement points, 2+ years of XBL Gold and 20000+ MS points. I think its best we stay together if only for the MS points.

Nintendo Treehouse is what happens when a publisher is confident and proud of its games and doesn't need to show CGI lies for five minutes.

-Jim Sterling

theprof00 said:
landguy1 said:

 

That's the thing though, Sony IS the one who is evolving over time. They have the technology ready for it. They have Gaikai, they have their mobile platform, and they have their playstation suite....(games label over all systems), and they've been licensing content for mobile...and they're in mobile phones. They have the time to make Gaikai into the MS cloud. They have time to work on their phone content. They have time to work on their streaming and tv. Look how they're now making game movies...what were the two latest confirmations? I think watch dogs and gran turismo? They have their own camera, and they have patents showing that it's capable of one day interacting with consumers in the same level as ms is doing with kinect.

I am not sure that Sony is evolving that much.  In most of those fields, their marketshare is shrinking.  It will be a few years before we really know if the PS4 eveolves or can evolve into the future gaming console.  We will just have to wait and see.  I agree that M$ was trying to "Push" gamers into the next generation, but that is what market leaders or people who want to lead the market do.  Sony tried that with the PS3's bluray player, and it literally cost them billions.  Remember the advertising for the PS3 the first year - it was all about multimedia, you would have thought that M$ would have learned a thing or 2 from that.



Around the Network

its funny with all DRM exchanges...all devices eventually fail=brick...

I do not see the benefit in trading in games...won't mention the stores by names but why trade in a game to get 1/10 of the market value...sure you can sell on craigslist or amazon and get close to market value but that takes time and isn't really worth it to me either.

Trading in may look appealing when you are younger because the value of money is still a lost concept early on.

I embrace the "netflixs/steams/spotifys" of the future

The XBOX1 was that but MS PR really screwed up and how they tried to sell the future...

when I say the "Future" digital only services...

Xbox and Playstation will be brands that will be licensed out in the future...