- It had one year lead before PS3, which helped them especially in English Speaking Countries - Halo was not a new IP, but based on an already well known brand and company. Now think about Titanfall and XB1 before jumping into conclusions. You're so focused on your idea that you do not allow any other consideration at all. - XB1 had no year lead start, but had to compete against the PS - XB1 had much smaller user base - Titanfall is a new IP versus Halo which was based on an establised IP from a well known company.
And you expected to reap network effects? Titanfall will soon be totally forgotten unless a sequel is released, which will likely be multi-platform. Destiny is already multi-platform but who is it benefitting more? That's why Sony plays it right, MS don't! |
My focus on my idea was the fact that your two sentences contradicted each other. So I am closed minded because I didn't think of Halo and Titanfall when I am focusing on your horrible diction?
I am simply stating that you cannot clearly convey your message. But here you are telling me that I am not looking at the big picture, which is Titanfall and Halo.
Your sentence: What Sony gets and MS don't is that it is the online games that require connectivity and lots of friend circles that push most of the sales, exclusive or not.
Your sentence makes it sound like Sony understands that people will pick up their consoles if all of their friends have it since they want to stay connected online. The other part of your sentence says that Microsoft is completely oblivious to this and they dont understand connectivity and playing with their friends at all. You should have chosen better diction and it is doesn't, not "don't".
