By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Microsoft respond to the EDGE article

Dark_Feanor on 14 September 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Dark_Feanor said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
riecsou said:
One thing for sure MS tried to get Sony out of the gaming war with the Xbox 360 and their money. Buying exclusives, releasing the Xbox 360 while Sony was still not ready for the next gen. Selling the 360 cheaper each time Sony would do a price cut (until the Slim came out). If not for the slim (specially for the PS3 Slim) and for system sellers such as (God of war, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, Metal Gear, The last of US) , MS would have crush Sony.
That is why this coming GEN Sony didn't leave much to chance and Microsoft got comfortable because currently they own US big time.
And this is just my opinion, I believe that Sony was planning on doing the DRM thing and online stuff too cause there is no way Microsoft was crazy enough to be the only one to do that. And when Sony saw the reaction of the gamers, they made themselves look like the savior of gaming...


Sony had been saying since February they had no DRM in the PS4, but no one wanted to believe them because if MS is rumored to have it, Sony must be just like them. Look up any "Sony drops the mic on  Microsoft" interview with Jack Tretton after E3. Jack Tretton said they had no plans to have DRM. Companies like Microsoft and EA just see eye to eye so MS took the dive for EA and when EA saw the backlash they stepped away from Microsoft.


Until E3 Sony never said it had or had not any DRM control built-in. I belive it was a very late decision to build moment and "win" the E3.

The last five minuties of their conference was the sole reason (or 75%) for the PS4 hype train that many are riding till now.

A product can´t succed only with Hype. Sony has to show more tangible proves that the PS4 is realy that superior. For now, it´s only cheaper and smaller. 

People (normal people, not gafers) won´t buy a divice only because some guys in foruns BELIVE it is 50% more powerfull. Well, look at the iPhone vs Android (high end), even Lumias more expencive in some markets sell more than Androids that are sheaper. (In fact no one even know how much RAM a iPhone has or how many VPI...).

I love killing misinformation. Sony has had to fan off the MS flames since February before the Xbox One was revealed because people feared always online and DRM. February to June is how much Microsofts leaks had people pissing their pants and some how Sony had to be involved.
http://kotaku.com/5985874/ps4-will-not-require-an-always+online-connection

Nor Microsoft ever told they had a ALWAYS ONLINE console. ALWAYS ONLINE is one kind of DRM.

Sony could have worked in a Stem like once online validation for a game. Or once a week. Or unic instalation codes...

Well, for what I can see games the Disc Base Model is the most ancient DRM model.



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 14 September 2013
Dark_Feanor said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

I love killing misinformation. Sony has had to fan off the MS flames since February before the Xbox One was revealed because people feared always online and DRM. February to June is how much Microsofts leaks had people pissing their pants and some how Sony had to be involved.
http://kotaku.com/5985874/ps4-will-not-require-an-always+online-connection

Nor Microsoft ever told they had a ALWAYS ONLINE console. ALWAYS ONLINE is one kind of DRM.

Sony could have worked in a Stem like once online validation for a game. Or once a week. Or unic instalation codes...

Well, for what I can see games the Disc Base Model is the most ancient DRM model.


Shhhhh my child, stop fighting it. If you read the article they said there were rumors of always online being in the Xbox One (codenamed: Durango at the time) and since Sony and MS are so similar in their style of appealing to games (I wonder why?), Sony had to also be questioned? February to June.  I love this title.

"It's Official Again: PS4 Has No DRM, No Fees, No Internet Registration, No Check-In"

http://kotaku.com/5985874/ps4-will-not-require-an-always+online-connection

Sorry for such bold letters....the press can be so loud. ::Shakes head::



richardhutnik on 14 September 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
richardhutnik said:
riecsou said:
One thing for sure MS tried to get Sony out of the gaming war with the Xbox 360 and their money. Buying exclusives, releasing the Xbox 360 while Sony was still not ready for the next gen. Selling the 360 cheaper each time Sony would do a price cut (until the Slim came out). If not for the slim (specially for the PS3 Slim) and for system sellers such as (God of war, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, Metal Gear, The last of US) , MS would have crush Sony.
That is why this coming GEN Sony didn't leave much to chance and Microsoft got comfortable because currently they own US big time.
And this is just my opinion, I believe that Sony was planning on doing the DRM thing and online stuff too cause there is no way Microsoft was crazy enough to be the only one to do that. And when Sony saw the reaction of the gamers, they made themselves look like the savior of gaming...

Companies get lucky.  I believe Sony got lucky.  They were likely going to do the DRM thing as you said and also very likely were going 4GB GDDR5.   They then see the writing on the wall, and do 8GB GDDR5, and throws Microsoft off.  After this, Microsoft walks into the DRM trap and tips off Sony, so Sony backs off and Microsoft takes the hit.  Sony also was likely going $500 with the camera, but sees the camera is an issue, so they drop the camera and drop it $100.  Microsoft got stuck.

In short, Microsoft handed Sony all the advantages and is trying to win the perception war with these replies.  They replies consists of "wait and see", "you don't understand", and other floated rumors like the second GPU.  And just like Nintendo is hinged upon the second screen with the Wii U being a MUST HAVE feature, Microsoft is now having to push Kinect 2.0 and the cloud (with always on off the table, cloud really isn't even there).  If this were a political campaign, Microsoft got Karl Roved and had all their strengths of the ONE turned against it, saying online isn't needed AND Kinect doesn't need to be on.  


...or Sony didn't change a thing about their model outside of PSN+ and the developer friendliness and watched Microsoft go down in flames in May.

I would say stuff along the lines of not revealing and waiting to see what Microsoft does, and response, allowed things to adjust accordingly.  Case of proper timing and not revealing.  They had decided they didn't need to change anything (even if they could) and then be able to slip in PS+ as akin to Gold.  I had a feeling PS+ was going to be like Gold for XBOX Live after seeing what they were going to do with it.  Individuals on here argued that free online play was THAT critical of a feature.  Well, the option left for Playstation guys is to stick with the PS3 or go to the Wii U.  That isn't viable.  So Sony goes what they did.



Dark_Feanor on 14 September 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Dark_Feanor said:
richardhutnik said:
CGI-Quality said:

Good question. Wasn't the PS2 more expensive than the GameCube? 

Someone has to look into this.  It is tricky.  I would also have to speak about the context of at launch.  What you see is people say "the most powerful system never wins" without the context of price of system also mentioned.  I have to wonder if there is a case of the most expensive system ever selling the most.


The PS3 was more expensive than the 360, it only took Sony 7 years... so it´s not far fechted the possibility that the Xbox One could out sell the PS4.

The adds barely haven´t started yet.


Sony outsold Microsoft almost every year (when you coun't year upon year sales from launches equally). Technically Sony is about eight million ahead in overall sales, they are just a year behind. If Sony had launched with Microsoft (hypothetically based on the stats)they would've been ahead by like what...nearly ten mil? LOL....Imagine this gen when they start off correctly and don't piss off consumers. :)


So, no more questions, a more expencive console can sell better even if it has sub-par mulplats games and a worst online service.

PS: that is the first time a read the "Technically " statement that PS3 is 8mi ahead. Well, to bed mathematics don´t works that way. The PS3 in the bast case scenario could end up leading for 4 or 5 milions, three yars from now. May be China could outbalance it.



richardhutnik on 14 September 2013
Dark_Feanor said:
richardhutnik said:
CGI-Quality said:
richardhutnik said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
CGI-Quality said:

Hard to be aggressive when a lot of sources basically say the same thing. They should just keep quiet about power, like they did with the 360. Even though it was weaker, the PS3 didn't just completely destroy it. Despite the bigger advantage for Sony this time, they should just pump out those games and let all else be.


Exactly.

Has there been a case of a less powerful system outselling a more powerful one at a higher price point?

Good question. Wasn't the PS2 more expensive than the GameCube? 

Someone has to look into this.  It is tricky.  I would also have to speak about the context of at launch.  What you see is people say "the most powerful system never wins" without the context of price of system also mentioned.  I have to wonder if there is a case of the most expensive system ever selling the most.


The PS3 was more expensive than the 360, it only took Sony 7 years... so it´s not far fechted the possibility that the Xbox One could out sell the PS4.

The adds barely haven´t started yet.

More expensive AND less powerful, the way the ONE is. That is the question.  And it would also have to fit into the life of the console, start from day one.  Companies don't slash prices of their systems if they are outselling their competitors.  So the case is to find an example of some console that was less powerful and more expensive, winning the sales war at the higher price point.



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 14 September 2013
Dark_Feanor said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


Sony outsold Microsoft almost every year (when you coun't year upon year sales from launches equally). Technically Sony is about eight million ahead in overall sales, they are just a year behind. If Sony had launched with Microsoft (hypothetically based on the stats)they would've been ahead by like what...nearly ten mil? LOL....Imagine this gen when they start off correctly and don't piss off consumers. :)


So, no more questions, a more expencive console can sell better even if it has sub-par mulplats games and a worst online service.

PS: that is the first time a read the "Technically " statement that PS3 is 8mi ahead. Well, to bed mathematics don´t works that way. The PS3 in the bast case scenario could end up leading for 4 or 5 milions, three yars from now. May be China could outbalance it.


Yes it does, math helps everything and its why we can see such changes. Subtract a year from Microsofts sales and you have the real number of what they would've had year for year. Try it out. :)

P.S.

Yes...a $599 console with a Blu Ray player did that. Kinect will not have the same effect. Some people bought the PS3 just for the Blu Ray player and ended up falling into gaming. 



Dark_Feanor on 14 September 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Dark_Feanor said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

I love killing misinformation. Sony has had to fan off the MS flames since February before the Xbox One was revealed because people feared always online and DRM. February to June is how much Microsofts leaks had people pissing their pants and some how Sony had to be involved.
http://kotaku.com/5985874/ps4-will-not-require-an-always+online-connection

Nor Microsoft ever told they had a ALWAYS ONLINE console. ALWAYS ONLINE is one kind of DRM.

Sony could have worked in a Stem like once online validation for a game. Or once a week. Or unic instalation codes...

Well, for what I can see games the Disc Base Model is the most ancient DRM model.


Shhhhh my child, stop fighting it. If you read the article they said there were rumors of always online being in the Xbox One (codenamed: Durango at the time) and since Sony and MS are so similar in their style of appealing to games (I wonder why?), Sony had to also be questioned? February to June.  I love this title.

"It's Official Again: PS4 Has No DRM, No Fees, No Internet Registration, No Check-In"

http://kotaku.com/5985874/ps4-will-not-require-an-always+online-connection

Sorry for such bold letters....the press can be so loud. ::Shakes head::

"Leave it to the publishers to decided..."

Ohh, the magic words. Oh Sony is so good to us anti-social beens!!! Sony loves us!!

Ok, serious. I think there is some people here still belive the One is still a aways online machine, with no 24h forgiviness. This is part of Microsoft PR desaster, no one can doubt.

The core of the question is not aways onlie, but being able to rent, borrow or sell your games. See that this is not the question in the Kotaku article. But the aways online part that Microsoft never confirmed. People misundertood this with the cloud powered games. 

And yes, the 24h check was to remove Gamestop and others to damage the publishers and developers.

Again, Sony NEVER spoke about sell-in, used or rent games untill E3. And again, Microsoft NEVER spoke of the Xbox One being 100% online.

Deal with it.



S.T.A.G.E. on 14 September 2013
richardhutnik said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


...or Sony didn't change a thing about their model outside of PSN+ and the developer friendliness and watched Microsoft go down in flames in May.

I would say stuff along the lines of not revealing and waiting to see what Microsoft does, and response, allowed things to adjust accordingly.  Case of proper timing and not revealing.  They had decided they didn't need to change anything (even if they could) and then be able to slip in PS+ as akin to Gold.  I had a feeling PS+ was going to be like Gold for XBOX Live after seeing what they were going to do with it.  Individuals on here argued that free online play was THAT critical of a feature.  Well, the option left for Playstation guys is to stick with the PS3 or go to the Wii U.  That isn't viable.  So Sony goes what they did.


Microsoft brought social profiteering to gaming, even Xbox gamers who applauded Microsofts oh-so capitalist enterprises said Sony would eventually follow suit seeing the profit that Xbox Live gets. When you're losing as much money as Sony was because of all the hardware they packed into the PS3 in the end its understandable. I have to applaud them for leaving the rest of Playstation Network free while proving what a value PSN+ was. I was pissed in the beginning, but then I said, "oh yeah....I bought PSN+ even without the multiplayer", then I kind of shut up and kept gaming.



Dark_Feanor on 14 September 2013
richardhutnik said:
Dark_Feanor said:
richardhutnik said:
CGI-Quality said:
richardhutnik said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
CGI-Quality said:

Hard to be aggressive when a lot of sources basically say the same thing. They should just keep quiet about power, like they did with the 360. Even though it was weaker, the PS3 didn't just completely destroy it. Despite the bigger advantage for Sony this time, they should just pump out those games and let all else be.


Exactly.

Has there been a case of a less powerful system outselling a more powerful one at a higher price point?

Good question. Wasn't the PS2 more expensive than the GameCube? 

Someone has to look into this.  It is tricky.  I would also have to speak about the context of at launch.  What you see is people say "the most powerful system never wins" without the context of price of system also mentioned.  I have to wonder if there is a case of the most expensive system ever selling the most.


The PS3 was more expensive than the 360, it only took Sony 7 years... so it´s not far fechted the possibility that the Xbox One could out sell the PS4.

The adds barely haven´t started yet.

More expensive AND less powerful, the way the ONE is. That is the question.  And it would also have to fit into the life of the console, start from day one.  Companies don't slash prices of their systems if they are outselling their competitors.  So the case is to find an example of some console that was less powerful and more expensive, winning the sales war at the higher price point.


Again: What powerfull means? 

I won´t bring the smartphone analogy again. 

The PS3 had for years shitty multplat games. And even the first batche of exclusive games were lackluster. Well, Uncharted 1 was buggy as hell and serius frame, pop-up performance issues.

This is the power people SEE not power people BELIVE.

One the otehr hand the PS3 has more expensive but had a hard drive and a BluRay driver. That was a huge sell point for a lot of people. This is the value that people can SEE not BELIVE.

Nothing is decided, everething is possible.



S.T.A.G.E. on 14 September 2013
Dark_Feanor said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Dark_Feanor said:


Shhhhh my child, stop fighting it. If you read the article they said there were rumors of always online being in the Xbox One (codenamed: Durango at the time) and since Sony and MS are so similar in their style of appealing to games (I wonder why?), Sony had to also be questioned? February to June.  I love this title.

"It's Official Again: PS4 Has No DRM, No Fees, No Internet Registration, No Check-In"

http://kotaku.com/5985874/ps4-will-not-require-an-always+online-connection

Sorry for such bold letters....the press can be so loud. ::Shakes head::

"Leave it to the publishers to decided..."

Ohh, the magic words. Oh Sony is so good to us anti-social beens!!! Sony loves us!!

Ok, serious. I think there is some people here still belive the One is still a aways online machine, with no 24h forgiviness. This is part of Microsoft PR desaster, no one can doubt.

The core of the question is not aways onlie, but being able to rent, borrow or sell your games. See that this is not the question in the Kotaku article. But the aways online part that Microsoft never confirmed. People misundertood this with the cloud powered games. 

And yes, the 24h check was to remove Gamestop and others to damage the publishers and developers.

Again, Sony NEVER spoke about sell-in, used or rent games untill E3. And again, Microsoft NEVER spoke of the Xbox One being 100% online.

Deal with it.


LOL....I'll keep this simple. What type of friend would you like to have...a friend who says "I'd like to hear both sides of the story because I want to make an informed decision" or..."Fuck You"?

I knew it...the latter wins everytime. Masochists....aren't we all.