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

Forums - Microsoft - Using Sony's Playbook, Microsoft Will Attempt Xbox One's Turnaround

mornelithe on 14 May 2014
Capulous said:

So you don't believe Sony put blu-ray on the PS3 to help them win the format wars? You don't believe any of the cost associated with the PS3 came from the decision to include blu-ray? What do other companies have to do with it? Does Sony recieve profits from blu-rays? Yes. What does it matter that they didn't collect profits alone? They still collected profits from it.

You can keep rewriting what you 'meant' all you like, but you said Sony transferred their costs onto the consumer, which is a complete fallacy.  As in, not true, as in, incorrect, as in your facts are wrong.  Deal with it, or don't, I was simply correcting the statement.

 

"They forced the cost onto consumers in order to profit from it." - Wrong



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 14 May 2014
Capulous said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Capulous said:

Sony pushed blu-ray onto the playstation to help them win the next format wars. They forced the cost onto consumers in order to profit from it. You actually do not recall the whole people will work 2 jobs just to afford a PS3, and stuff like next gen doesn't start unless we say it does. Yea, it really shows how Sony always only had the gamers in mind for all that.

MS has made plenty of games worth a damn; you yourself list a few. Halo may have existed, and it may have complete failed without MS behind it. Gears probably would have existed, but we don't know in what state. You speak in what may have been, but there is no way to really argue that one way or the other because it didn't happen that way. MS has done plenty for console gaming. Their presence help drive innovation and value; that is why have multiple competitors in the market is a good thing.

Sony is extremely dependent on third parties as well. If you think otherwise, you are sorely mistaken. The best selling games on both these consoles are third party.


Look up how many first party games Sony actually created last gen. Third parties aside. Microsofts existence increased Sonys hunger to be self sufficient. 

As for Blu Ray. Blu Ray had to live or else the Blu Ray association consisting of the top brands (not just Sony) would've died. Sony spearheaded Blu Ray, so much like DVD they would use Blu Ray. Remarkably, it seems the demand was still there despite the price, because the PS3 still outsold the 360s first year at $200 higher than the Xbox 360 launched.

I enjoyed Sony's first party games and I enjoyed MS' first party games. It doesn't change the fact that the best selling games are from third parties on both consoles. These consoles are dependent on the third parties.

If blu-ray failed, HD-DVD would have been there or another format could have arisen. The PS3 could have cost less. These companies are all concerned with the bottom line. I'm not sure why you are trying to paint them differently especially since history has shown otherwise.


I cannot share your sentiment about Microsofts first party. Its exactly why they barely depend on it and go dry after the first couple years of the Xbox. The first impression is all they care about. They aren't like Sony who constantly try to push out something new. They try to make what they think sells and if it doesnt they get bored and then hire third party to cover their tracks.

I also predicted that Fable as a franchise would fall apart from the inside out because it was uninspired and it eventually happened. Sales didnt have to tell the story. The team knew the game franchise was weak and uninspired in the RPG genre.



tinfamous12 on 14 May 2014

How is this copying from Sony in any way?



Capulous on 14 May 2014
mornelithe said:
Capulous said:

So you don't believe Sony put blu-ray on the PS3 to help them win the format wars? You don't believe any of the cost associated with the PS3 came from the decision to include blu-ray? What do other companies have to do with it? Does Sony recieve profits from blu-rays? Yes. What does it matter that they didn't collect profits alone? They still collected profits from it.

You can keep rewriting what you 'meant' all you like, but you said Sony transferred their costs onto the consumer, which is a complete fallacy.  As in, not true, as in, incorrect, as in your facts are wrong.  Deal with it, or don't, I was simply correcting the statement.

"They forced the cost onto consumers in order to profit from it." - Wrong

"Sony pushed blu-ray onto the playstation to help them win the next format wars. They forced the cost onto consumers in order to profit from it."

Their* decision to include blu-ray on the PS3 raised the cost of the system. The cost of the system was increased due to the inclusion of blu-ray. I don't need to deal with anything, I'm fine.



mornelithe on 14 May 2014
Capulous said:

"Sony pushed blu-ray onto the playstation to help them win the next format wars. They forced the cost onto consumers in order to profit from it."

They decision to include blu-ray on the PS3 raised the cost of the system. The cost of the system was increased due to the inclusion of blu-ray. I don't need to deal with anything, I'm fine.

Yeah, reality doesn't seem to be your strong suit.  All good.

Moderated,

-Mr Khan



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 14 May 2014
tinfamous12 said:
How is this copying from Sony in any way?


- The copied PSN+

-The DRM turn around was inspired by how Xbox and Sony fans alike applauded Sonys E3 regarding used games.

-They dropped Kinect to keep their price point low and stopped forcing it on people like Sony. Sony didnt see the need to force the Eyetoy on people. If they feel the need to buy it they will. They've accepted the fact that people dont want Kinect.

- They will abandon the paywall with Xbox Live to be fair to gamers who pay for those services outside of Microsofts existence much like the Nintendo or Sony already have set up for their fans. 

 

Microsoft still doesnt get it. If it wasnt for Sony things could've gone either one of two ways:

1. They completely botched their launch.

2. The fans of Microsoft would've been dragged kicking and screaming into DRM hell, while everyone else enjoyed used games from Gamestop.

If Microsoft succeeded with the DRM the prices on Xbox One games would've been through the roof at Gamestop.



Capulous on 14 May 2014

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

 
I cannot share your sentiment about Microsofts first party. Its exactly why they barely depend on it and go dry after the first couple years of the Xbox. The first impression is all they care about. They aren't like Sony who constantly try to push out something new. They try to make what they think sells and if it doesnt they get bored and then hire third party to cover their tracks.

I also predicted that Fable as a franchise would fall apart from the inside out because it was uninspired and it eventually happened. Sales didnt have to tell the story. The team knew the game franchise was weak and uninspired in the RPG genre.


I know you don't. It is obvious by your posts. However, everyone has their own opinions, that is why we have discussion.

First couple of years? I disagree with you, but it may be just our taste in games are differnt. I think they did fine for most of the years of the 360's life. So what are some of the examples of Sony trying to push out something new? They have done plenty of copying as well.



Capulous on 14 May 2014
mornelithe said:
Capulous said:

"Sony pushed blu-ray onto the playstation to help them win the next format wars. They forced the cost onto consumers in order to profit from it."

They decision to include blu-ray on the PS3 raised the cost of the system. The cost of the system was increased due to the inclusion of blu-ray. I don't need to deal with anything, I'm fine.

Yeah, reality doesn't seem to be your strong suit.  All good.

So you failed and now you resort to personal attacks. Whatever.



S.T.A.G.E. on 14 May 2014
Capulous said:

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

 
I cannot share your sentiment about Microsofts first party. Its exactly why they barely depend on it and go dry after the first couple years of the Xbox. The first impression is all they care about. They aren't like Sony who constantly try to push out something new. They try to make what they think sells and if it doesnt they get bored and then hire third party to cover their tracks.

I also predicted that Fable as a franchise would fall apart from the inside out because it was uninspired and it eventually happened. Sales didnt have to tell the story. The team knew the game franchise was weak and uninspired in the RPG genre.


I know you don't. It is obvious by your posts. However, everyone has their own opinions, that is why we have discussion.

First couple of years? I disagree with you, but it may be just our taste in games are differnt. I think they did fine for most of the years of the 360's life. So what are some of the examples of Sony trying to push out something new? They have done plenty of copying as well.


2005-2008 was the height of the Xbox 360's first party. The decline started from 2009-2013.



Capulous on 14 May 2014
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Capulous said:


I know you don't. It is obvious by your posts. However, everyone has their own opinions, that is why we have discussion.

First couple of years? I disagree with you, but it may be just our taste in games are differnt. I think they did fine for most of the years of the 360's life. So what are some of the examples of Sony trying to push out something new? They have done plenty of copying as well.


2005-2008 was the height of the Xbox 360's first party. The decline started from 2009-2013.

I enjoyed their first part offerings for longer than that, but to each their own. Now what about the second part?