Quantcast
The PS4 Won The Console Generation By Being Boring: Can The PS5 Do The Same?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - The PS4 Won The Console Generation By Being Boring: Can The PS5 Do The Same?

The_Liquid_Laser said:

Most of the time Sony has an advantage, but if you think about it carefully, then you'll see that Sony does not have the advantage this time.  Here is how it breaks down:

1) If all of the big 3 do a traditional strategy (playing it safe) then Sony wins.  This is what happened in Generation 6 and Sony had it's best performance yet.
2) If Nintendo or Microsoft try something different, but it's a bad idea, then Sony wins.  That is what has been happening in Generation 8 with the XB1 and Wii U screwing up.
3) If Nintendo does something different and it's a good idea, then Nintendo wins.  This is what happened with the Wii in Generation 7.
4) If Sony competes against Nintendo's handhelds, then Nintendo always wins.  Nintendo is undefeated in the handheld market.  They have defeated countless competitors including everything Sony has thrown out there.


This time the PS5 is competing against the Switch.  We already know that we are in situations 3 and 4.  Nintendo is trying something different and it's successful.  Also the Switch is a handheld.  But this handheld is special, because it is also a home console.  It already will get the entire handheld market, but it will also get some of the home market too.  That is the problem with Sony playing it safe.  If they do so, then Switch is just going to take all of their customers away. 

Everyone is acting like the PS5 is competing against the Wii U again.  Nope.  Switch is a much tougher competitor than the Wii U.  Switch is a high powered handheld that can also act as a home console.  Sony needs to worry that they won't get a repeat of the PSP vs DS.  The PSP was a very solid system with a lot of great games and it still lost to the weaker DS.  The same situation can very easily happen with the PS5 and Switch.

If the Switch had little to no affect on the PS4's sales, it will continue to have little to no affect on the PS5's sales, as well.  They are selling to two different types of people, and some are buying both.  If someone had a PS4 or a XBO as their main console, they are not going to pick up a system that is weaker than those two to be their main console next gen.  They want an actual upgrade in power.  Not a downgrade that is also portable.



Around the Network
EricHiggin said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

Most of the time Sony has an advantage, but if you think about it carefully, then you'll see that Sony does not have the advantage this time.  Here is how it breaks down:

1) If all of the big 3 do a traditional strategy (playing it safe) then Sony wins.  This is what happened in Generation 6 and Sony had it's best performance yet.
2) If Nintendo or Microsoft try something different, but it's a bad idea, then Sony wins.  That is what has been happening in Generation 8 with the XB1 and Wii U screwing up.
3) If Nintendo does something different and it's a good idea, then Nintendo wins.  This is what happened with the Wii in Generation 7.
4) If Sony competes against Nintendo's handhelds, then Nintendo always wins.  Nintendo is undefeated in the handheld market.  They have defeated countless competitors including everything Sony has thrown out there.


This time the PS5 is competing against the Switch.  We already know that we are in situations 3 and 4.  Nintendo is trying something different and it's successful.  Also the Switch is a handheld.  But this handheld is special, because it is also a home console.  It already will get the entire handheld market, but it will also get some of the home market too.  That is the problem with Sony playing it safe.  If they do so, then Switch is just going to take all of their customers away. 

Everyone is acting like the PS5 is competing against the Wii U again.  Nope.  Switch is a much tougher competitor than the Wii U.  Switch is a high powered handheld that can also act as a home console.  Sony needs to worry that they won't get a repeat of the PSP vs DS.  The PSP was a very solid system with a lot of great games and it still lost to the weaker DS.  The same situation can very easily happen with the PS5 and Switch.

Well if MS offers an affordable next gen system and a much higher performing elite model at launch, that would be something new and different. Also, I believe Nin and Nvidia have both said they have a 10 year plan/deal, and with the Switch Mini and Switch Pro rumors, how long before Switch is no longer considered new and different? What if PS drops a Switch competitor (aside from their home console(s)) during that same old, same old Switch phase in a couple of years? What about VR?

Offering multiple SKUs of the same console is not new.  Both PS3 and Wii U did it and neither got good results from it. 

When will Switch no longer be considered new and different?  Generation 10

What about VR?  Depends on if it's bundled with the PS5 or not.  If it isn't then it won't matter.  If it is, then it will be a big mistake.

thismeintiel said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

Most of the time Sony has an advantage, but if you think about it carefully, then you'll see that Sony does not have the advantage this time.  Here is how it breaks down:

1) If all of the big 3 do a traditional strategy (playing it safe) then Sony wins.  This is what happened in Generation 6 and Sony had it's best performance yet.
2) If Nintendo or Microsoft try something different, but it's a bad idea, then Sony wins.  That is what has been happening in Generation 8 with the XB1 and Wii U screwing up.
3) If Nintendo does something different and it's a good idea, then Nintendo wins.  This is what happened with the Wii in Generation 7.
4) If Sony competes against Nintendo's handhelds, then Nintendo always wins.  Nintendo is undefeated in the handheld market.  They have defeated countless competitors including everything Sony has thrown out there.


This time the PS5 is competing against the Switch.  We already know that we are in situations 3 and 4.  Nintendo is trying something different and it's successful.  Also the Switch is a handheld.  But this handheld is special, because it is also a home console.  It already will get the entire handheld market, but it will also get some of the home market too.  That is the problem with Sony playing it safe.  If they do so, then Switch is just going to take all of their customers away. 

Everyone is acting like the PS5 is competing against the Wii U again.  Nope.  Switch is a much tougher competitor than the Wii U.  Switch is a high powered handheld that can also act as a home console.  Sony needs to worry that they won't get a repeat of the PSP vs DS.  The PSP was a very solid system with a lot of great games and it still lost to the weaker DS.  The same situation can very easily happen with the PS5 and Switch.

If the Switch had little to no affect on the PS4's sales, it will continue to have little to no affect on the PS5's sales, as well.  They are selling to two different types of people, and some are buying both.  If someone had a PS4 or a XBO as their main console, they are not going to pick up a system that is weaker than those two to be their main console next gen.  They want an actual upgrade in power.  Not a downgrade that is also portable.


Apply that statement to another generation.  "If the Wii had little to no affect on the PS2's sales, it will continue to have little to no affect on the PS3's sales as well."

Obviously that statement is false.  PS2 kept selling well after the Wii and PS3 launched.  But the Wii sold like a rocket out of the gate and the PS3 sold poorly for the first couple of years.  Consoles compete against their current generation.  They don't compete against previous generations even if you can find both at the store at the same time.

Also, the weaker console usually sells the best.  Weaker means cheaper.  Most people just buy the cheaper console as long as it has plenty of games, which the Switch does.



The_Liquid_Laser said:
EricHiggin said:

Well if MS offers an affordable next gen system and a much higher performing elite model at launch, that would be something new and different. Also, I believe Nin and Nvidia have both said they have a 10 year plan/deal, and with the Switch Mini and Switch Pro rumors, how long before Switch is no longer considered new and different? What if PS drops a Switch competitor (aside from their home console(s)) during that same old, same old Switch phase in a couple of years? What about VR?

Offering multiple SKUs of the same console is not new.  Both PS3 and Wii U did it and neither got good results from it. 

When will Switch no longer be considered new and different?  Generation 10

What about VR?  Depends on if it's bundled with the PS5 or not.  If it isn't then it won't matter.  If it is, then it will be a big mistake.

Multiple SKU's of considerably different performance overall, not just differences in storage.

So if Nin doesn't come out with something other than Switch 2 then they are likely to fail since Switch 2 will just be more of the same?

Depends if it's bundled or not? If it isn't then it won't matter and if it is it will be a mistake? So your saying VR sucks or is useless regardless?



The Canadian National Anthem According To Justin Trudeau

 

Oh planet Earth! The home of native lands, 
True social law, in all of us demand.
With cattle farts, we view sea rise,
Our North sinking slowly.
From far and snide, oh planet Earth, 
Our healthcare is yours free!
Science save our land, harnessing the breeze,
Oh planet Earth, smoke weed and ferment yeast.
Oh planet Earth, ell gee bee queue and tee.

It amazes me that many still believe that the PS4 beat the competition based on its games.. when in fact the PS4's early line-up wasn't that much better than the XB1 and WiiU's games. PS4 strived off indie games for the first couple of years and PS4's real big game came from Bloodborne which launched more than a year after the launch and sold around 3m copies leading into its 4th year on the market.. in other words a niche game not for everybody.

Point is PS4 was selling like crazy before the games arrived and in fact id argue that the XB1 had a better library of games during the launch years and had the critically acclaimed Respawns 1st game Titanfall which was considered one of the highest AAA rated games in its year. PS4 sold due to extreme hype, marketing and competition failing to deliver on the innovation front. Credit where credit is due, Nintendo and MS tried something difference with WiiU building on the Wii Motion faze and adding a new way to play with the Touch Pad and MS pushing Kinect 2.0 which was a huge success with the 360 and is in the Guinness Book of Records for fastest selling electronic accessories. They went with what worked and tried to double down on it. PS4 didn't change much from the PS3 aside from the power jump and the DS4 controller which all companies added new controller features etc.

The games was the icing on the cake however even if the PS4 didn't bring the games in its later years, it still would have sold well, much like how Steam is the most popular gaming app on PC and its not because of the AAA exclusives it rarely puts out yearly.



This blogger seems a little butthurt and posting of lower quality than most threads here in VGC.

MS didn't revolutionize anything or brought anything relevant to console gaming this gen. PSVR alone is more revolutionary than the whole X1 project. Still Sony didn't won because it is boring, it won because it was the better proposition to its userbase.

This article seems just like a recycle of endless threads on VGC that basically have that all playstation consoles that succeed were out of luck and competitors mistake, Sony never have any merit.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network

PS5 will win, easy. But the game experience is what really matters, and Playstation exclusives always win for me. Add BC with PS4, and for me is Game Over.



”Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.”

Harriet Tubman.

TranceformerFX said:
d21lewis said:


It's like the media chooses the winner early on and then shapes a narrative to support it. But when things look too bad for a company, they swing the other way.

In my perspective and personal account, the media, retail companies and gaming outlets REALLY wanted Microsoft's Xbox One to be the winner - even after sales statistics and forecasts clearly showed that the PS4 was outselling the X1 two to one.

The X1 is obviously an American product (Microsoft) but E3's 2013 shit show DRM controversy totally f**ed them. I remember that demonstration, that whole keynote was about TV, Cable, Football and Kinect. Videogames was clearly an afterthought for Microsoft and everyone saw it. Microsofts stock took a dive and gamers crucified it's marketing pitch - which was completely justified. The PS4 is for gamers.

I remember all the articles minimizing the inferiority of X1 and trying to push it early on, from the same places that would magnify pixel difference on ports of X360 and PS3.

As you said US-centric media and paid by MS marketing, so it is quite easy to know why it happened.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

their exclusive games and the first choice for FIFA made them the winner...



 

Azzanation said:
It amazes me that many still believe that the PS4 beat the competition based on its games.. when in fact the PS4's early line-up wasn't that much better than the XB1 and WiiU's games. PS4 strived off indie games for the first couple of years and PS4's real big game came from Bloodborne which launched more than a year after the launch and sold around 3m copies leading into its 4th year on the market.. in other words a niche game not for everybody.

Point is PS4 was selling like crazy before the games arrived and in fact id argue that the XB1 had a better library of games during the launch years and had the critically acclaimed Respawns 1st game Titanfall which was considered one of the highest AAA rated games in its year. PS4 sold due to extreme hype, marketing and competition failing to deliver on the innovation front. Credit where credit is due, Nintendo and MS tried something difference with WiiU building on the Wii Motion faze and adding a new way to play with the Touch Pad and MS pushing Kinect 2.0 which was a huge success with the 360 and is in the Guinness Book of Records for fastest selling electronic accessories. They went with what worked and tried to double down on it. PS4 didn't change much from the PS3 aside from the power jump and the DS4 controller which all companies added new controller features etc.

The games was the icing on the cake however even if the PS4 didn't bring the games in its later years, it still would have sold well, much like how Steam is the most popular gaming app on PC and its not because of the AAA exclusives it rarely puts out yearly.

Eh....that's pretty debatable. InFamous Second Son came in just a couple of months after the PS4 dropped. Xbox One wasn't the only one with a stellar title at that time. The PS4 did beat the competition with it's games as time went on. That's what kept it afloat. Not just from 1st party. You shouldn't downplay a game because it's niche. Bloodborne was heavily sought after on Xbox One.

You do have a point about the INTIAL sales in the PS4's infancy with hype, failed promises, unwanted features, etc. Still I feel like you're trying to, again, downplay when it comes to PS4. You're basically saying that PS4 is a suped up PS3. You can say the same about Xbox if we're going by that logic. The DS4 is more innovative than Xbox One's controller. I don't feel like naming the features it has. However, seeing as the Xbox One's controller is a slight redesign of the incredible 360's controller...it's not really debatable about what new controller features the DS4 had compared to Xbox One's. Comfortability and preference is an entirely different discussion.

To jump back into the PS4/PS3 thing, it's unfair to say that it didn't change that much outside of a power jump. Once more I don't want to do a comparable feature thing between the 2 consoles. That's been done to death over the years. I do know that PS4 is the only one that offered proper VR out of the 3. Xbox One and PS4 are pretty identical in a lot of ways though outside of VR. Kinect and PS Camera are pretty much the same, except the Kinect is much better in my opinion. Still it's something they both do. So if the PS4 didn't change much from PS3, then neither has Xbox One from the 360. Btw that last statement before this one is totally ignorant and I don't agree with that. Just going by the logic that's presented.



PSN ID- Rafie27

XBL Gamertag- RAFIE82

NNID- RAFIE82/ Friend Code: SW-6006-2580-8237

YouTube- Rafie Crocheron

I want my Playstation to be my old Playstation with more power. That's the best case for me.

Playstation is just the true SNES successor. Dualshock is just the true SNES controller successor.

I don't want Playstation to change that.

Keep it boring, please.



PLAYING: Horizon Zero Dawn (PS4), For Honor (PS4)

My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?