S.T.A.G.E. said:
1.Funding is contributing, its not actually developing, but moreso acting as a benefactor so a job can reach its end. Gears of Wars development was funded to keep the game from going to Sony. Once again, Halo was developed to prove Apple computers could be seen as gaming machines, but steve jobs did not want to purchase bungie, so Microsoft saw the real estate after the popular tech demo of halo with jobs and yes contributed to the changing of its directions. The point is that Halo was already seen as prime real estate by Microsoft before product was finished. 2. Games much like opinions are subjective. Trust me I love Halo and Gears hence hy I own and Xbox one. The second Microsoft lost those two key franchises (If they didnt create newer fresh IP to replace them like Sony) I probably wouldnt buy an Xbox again. With their PC initiative, theres little reason to do so, especially since I can get third party titles elsewhere. 3. What has nothing to do with Sony? Sony has to fix their issues in the electronics industry before they lose marketshare and thus continuing to lose popularity. I was referring to the electronics industry, not just the playstation brand. If I was talking about playstation by itself, its one of the major reasons why the console industry is so large and why Microsoft is even in it. Sony is more popular on more contenents than any other brand because of their offerings and thats why they always win. They have the perfect blend of first, second and third party games. Something (once again) their comeptition lacks. Microsoft doesnt need to make a console with the greatest graphics to beat Sony. They just have to outmatch them (with tech, price and game selection) and knowing how Sony has dominated the console industry since 1994, I cannot see this happen anytime Sony. They just get what people want which is why they keep winning. Dont take for granted that the highest selling Sony home console was the weakest of all of the competition. They just had all of the games. Trying to wow people with graphics when you lack games is only a distraction from the real issue. The issue is Microsofts ability to make games. |
1. Wrong. Halo for example was an RTS. Microsoft redid it to make it Halo. Also, when you're funding a game you have a say on the direction of the game.
2. Not everyone likes PC gaming. Best selling games on xbox and playstation are found on PC, but people choose consoles. I prefer consoles for multiple reasons that I won't get into (because I know I will get banned lol).
3. Playstation isn't the same situation as Sony tvs. Just like xbox isn't in the same situation as the Zune. One failure device doesn't determine other devices or products. Sony exclusives once again don't sell all that well. Sony hit around 60 million before this year and it wasn't because of bloodborne or uncharted 4. It had to do with brand name, cheaper console (something I blame Kinect and Microsoft on), world wide appeal and where people friends play.
Microsoft can beat Sony in North America and UK, but rest of Europe/Japan they will lose unless something bad happends to Sony. PS3 outsold the 360 in one year in Europe despite the 360 have a year and half head start, better multiplatform games, better online, better exclusives for the first year and was cheaper. They still gravitated to ps3 eventhough they weren't buying it's exclusives and there wasn't much exclusives for the first year. Playstation is just a bigger brand in those areas because people grew up with playstation more than xbox. Sony started at the right time and xbox although very successful will never get playstation popularity unless they buy out GTA or another huge exclusive in my opinion. I think Minecraft can help a lot honestly in the future, but won't be enough for Europe. Japan, isn't something Microsoft shouldn't worry about because Consoles aren't selling well there currently.
