does the X1's 180 prove that Sony has the better vision for the gaming industry?

[platformmaster918]

S.T.A.G.E. said:

platformmaster918 said:

S.T.A.G.E. said:

platformmaster918 said:

 

Sony dodged no questions. Yoshida has been answering questions about the PS4 since february. People were speculating because the Xbone was rumored since about that time to be always online and trying to use DRM. Then that "microsoft employee" opened his mouth and said basically "who gives a crap if its always online" and the internet went nuts. All Sony did was understand their consumerbase. Thats not really that hard. Microsoft ignored their userbase and went to create a lockdown internet dependent console that the majority of their consumerbase was just not ready for and the policies only got worse from there. What Sony did didnt take a rocket scientist. Push the changes, just wait until the time is right. This was obviously not the time.

I wasn't insulting Sony or saying they were planning on any of these policies.  I think maybe they didn't come out with any statements beforehand (or at least weren't quite so clear or emphatic about it) before E3 because they wanted that moment.  MS had to show A TON at E3 to try to drown out the always on backlash and it STILL didn't work.  Those games they showed should have stolen the show.  Instead Sony beat them on policy and multiplat footage.  We know Sony has more first party games in the first year (20 vs. 15) so they've obivously played this masterfully.  They knew they would win E3 on policy and price.  Now MS blew their load and can't match their Gamescom announcements.  They needed a lot of help from MS but they're set up beatifully to take Gamescom with so many games left and they still won E3.  It's a nightmare and that E3 will resonate for years just like the 2006 one.

The reason Sony won E3 is because they listened. Everyone knows even Sony wants to go all digital one day, but they are moving at the pace of the hardware that exists in the homes of their primary consumerbase. Microsoft knows the only way they could be a market leader techwise is to have an internet/software dependent console over Sony because thats their strong suit. Sony has been the market leader for formats but relinquished that to Nintendo with the Wii for gaining the casuals (and theres always a chance that can happen but its much more rare than most people admit.). Sony knows if they are launching  head on with Microsoft that they can take them. Their confidence spoke volumes when they called out Microsoft to show off their console first so they could kill them with the price for value deal at launch. MS wasnt ready yet for Sony which is why they showed off the box in May and not February or march, because Sony was like a giddy child trying to get them to show what they had since they knew MS wouldnt let them launch ahead of them away since they are after relatively the same way. This game was Sonys to lose the whole time games or not.  

I fully agree about going head to head.  Look at all the advantages 360 had (most notably the killer combo of $200 price difference and a full year head start on the competition) and it's still ending up behind PS3.  I know people will cite profitability but that has no effect on mindshare or marketshare.  Sony spent a lot in R&D and the average consumer doesn't know about financials.  The PS3 selling more despite these disadvantages shows that people just want Playstation and its exclusives more.