KBG29 said:
We've already been there before with PS3, PS4, and Vita. Things didn't work out because, Sony did an absolutely terrible job with the Vita. Right now you can do exactly what I am talking about across any Windows 10 device, with all MGS games, and a handful of 3rd parties that support play anywhere. Phil Spencer said at E3, that they are going to continue to expand the ability to play your games on more devices, via new streaming tech and new hardware. There are rumors right now that Google, is making a strong move to bring an Android based Gaming platform to the market, both through physical hardware, and streaming. Games like Fortnite, and PUBG are now playable on everything from Phone to PC. Elder Scrolls:Blades was announced from everything at E3. More and more games are being made to work on every platform you own. It is not a future pipe dream, it has been happening for almost 10 years, and each year we are getting more and more games, on more and more ecosystems, that can be played on more and more devices. The technology to deliver games at an acceptable level of performance and quality on everything from Phone to high end PC/VR is already here. With 7nm fabrication, we will be at the point where it is possible to produce these expereinces at console and handheld friendly prices. Any company that wants to stay afloat is going to have to offer more value, and more ways to access your content. Nintendo, PlayStation, and Xbox no longer live in a bubble. They compete directly with every other personal computing platform on the market. If they can't compete with iOS, Android, Windows, Amazon, on non gaming, they will eventually be squashed out. That is why Nintendo has to expand their platform to a larger range of products. If you can play a better version of your favorite game on your iPhone and Apple TV, then their is no point for a Switch, Xbox, or PlayStation. If SNM can show that they can replace your iPhone and Apple TV, and offer better exclusive content, then they remain viable. Simple as that. |
I can play Metal Gear Solid 4 on anything other than a Playstation 3? Do tell. Play Anywhere allows Xbox gamers to play select games on PCs. This is yet again one of those things that you were *totally sure* was going to lead to hundreds if not thousands of games instantly being playable on multiple devices you own as soon as you bought one copy. As it turns out the program has led to some terrible ports, and it gained almost no traction outside of Microsoft's first party games. To this date there are less than 50 Play anywhere games, and the program appears to have gained less traction as time goes on, not more. Looks like you took a huge cut on that one, and never even made contact.
So now you're going to use multiplatform games as justification? Skylanders came out on pretty much every platform on the planet. Same thing with Just Dance. Publishers have been making cheap to develop multi-platform games for decades now. You can find a bunch of titles every single year that do this. The only difference now is that instead of porting older platforms like the 3DS, developers are now targeting cell phones. How does this indiciate that soon Sony are going to start offering the ability to play "PS5" games that can be played on your phone or your tablet, or a PS5, or a PS5 Pro, or your PS5 "Fuck you I'm rich" ultra mega performance edition, and your PC? Ohh right. It doesn't. Ohh hey look, another strike.
Now streaming is indicative of your master plan that has Sony making phones and car stereos with a Playstation OS? Playstation Now has existed for a long time. Sony keeps offering new plans, cheaper rates, and more incentives. Eventually you're probably going to see it as a cheap add-on to PS+ at this rate. Even still, despite all of the time and investment, and multiple game streaming solutions, (remember "THE POWER OF THE CLOUD!"?) bandwidth still isn't there to offer a seamless experience over wired connections, and it degrades from there. Most people don't have gigabit wireless, and 4G/LTE is still a far ways off from offering enough bandwitch for players on cell phones to not have a severe disadvantage against a PC or console player. It's an adorable little niche at this time, but let's not pretend it's anywhere close to prime time. "The cloud" hasn't changed gaming in nearly the amount of ways you thought it would. Five years after the Xbox One came out the vast majority of gamers are still playing on game pads in front of TVs, playing games on discs, or downloaded onto their harddrives, as they have been doing since the original XBox. Strike three.
You claimed that with the progress Nintendo has made with the Switch platform? Weren't you just sure the Switch was not only going to come in multiple form factors (home/portable/tablet) but also that it was going to run an android-based OS and be compatible with Android apps, and be ridiciously easy to port to? Here we are over a year later, and you can't even watch Youtube or Twitch on your Switch. Yet somehow this indicates that Nintendo is soon going to offer its games on multiple devices? Because maybe they'll make a "Switch Pro" just like they made a "new 3DS" and a "DSi"? Even if they do a "Switch Pro" it STILL doesn't indicate that your dream is any closer to reality. Let's never mind how completely awful games like Wolfenstein have ended up running on the Switch, and how Capcom has come out and said that games like Monster Hunter World "isn't possible on the Switch"?
The Switch is nothing like you claimed it would be. Accept it. Strike four.
And now you think reducing chip fabrications from 12nm to 7nm is going to be the tipping point? Why? What if the PS5/XB2 uses a 7nm fabrication process and takes the low TDP to leverage even more performance out of their design? How are you going to use the same 7nm fabrication process to make a chip that has to have a TDP that's a fraction of what the PS5 uses and offer enough performance to make ports as easy as you would thought they would be on Switch? Your whole concept assumes the whole home console and PC space is going to stand still or not leverage the same technologies any kind of mobile device could use. It's completely foolish. Strike five.
Its so sweet that you think Sony, Nintendo and Microsot are just going to go the way of the Dodo if they don't take Apple and Google head-on. I mean it's total bullshit, but sweet. How's Microsoft doing in the cell phone space. Ohh right. 0.3%. That's Microsofr, with enough resources to actually take a huge swing. How many hundreds of millions have they lost so far? If only they spent that money trying to compete with Sony instead.... But lets be real. Google and Apple aren't going to get into the serious gaming spaces because frankly there's not enough money in it. Apple sold 200 million iPhones last year alone. Why would they start making devices that ideally would sell about 10-15% of that? You'll probably see a google branded Android box, and you already have the apple TV. Adding a controller to that isn't going to have people jumping ship from Nintendo to a Google console. If Google or Apple really want to get into the console space, they'll just buy Sony or Nintendo. They don't need to compete against them when they can just purchase the revenue stream. It's pretty much what these companies do everywhere else, why should the console space be any different? But this is what you do. You take a little rumor or nothing burger of a device and turn it into a sign Sony putting the playstation OS on a cell phone. While you're at it, perhaps you need to tell Atari they need to start making car stereos if they want to survive in the console space. I'm sure they'll hire you as an advisor right then and there. Or not. Strike six.
You're a big baseball fan, Kev. How many strikes do you need before you've struck out? I'm pretty sure it's less than six. How about you accept that you struck out, take your seat in the dugout, and admit that standing at the plate when you don't even know how to hold the bat properly isn't a very good idea.
