By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
theprof00 on 22 August 2013
Edit Thread
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.