Yeah, this gen is indeed fun.

I assume you're talking about the games.

You don't want a PS4?

Let me post that line, again.  "It's just they either come too late, when others products have already filled the void, or they just don't offer anything really better than the competition."

And no, X1 isn't forcing Sony to do anything.  All Sony did was correct the mistakes they made during the PS3's launch, which were the cause of their poor start last gen.  I mean, what has the X1 forced them to do?  NOT give quick discounts of $50+?  NOT package all their big exclusives in for free?  NOT change any of there policies?  NOT abandon their "vision?"  No, what makes Sony competitive is wanting to be on top like they were for the PS1 and PS2 gens.  And they know putting out a good product, while not pissing off their fans, is the way to go.

Edit:  And no, that's not quite what I meant.  But, I'll leave it at that. 

MS made a mistake launching a system with the wrong guy. Mattrick concentrated too much on making a HTPC/Steambox. Too ambitious for the casual gamer, and majority of the public that still think games, and other entertainment should be separate. While more people are starting to use internet entertainment (Hulu, Netflix) people know they can connect their laptop or tablet by chromecast to watch it on their TV instead of buying a $400-500 machine.
MS corrected their mistake by removing Mattrick, and his vision for the X1. with Spencer. Will this pay off? It has shown to be working so far, but goodwill and policy reversals only go so far. Like others have said MS needs to start creating new IP's that will make their system more appealing.

Sony did the same thing last gen with the launch of the PS3. Kutaragi was replaced by Shuhei Yoshida during the launch of the PS3 by Kaz Hirai.

Shuhei has already said he like Spencer much more than Mattrick, as he can understand what Spencer says. There is mutual respect between the two. I think the appeal for both of these guys to their user base is that they are straight shooters. Which is nice to have especially dealing with consumers as fickle as gamers.

Ken Kutaragi made the PS3 horrible for developers by creating a hard to work on system, and put it in a negative light with consumers with the high price. The really nice thing about the PS3 was it was also a very forward thinking system (their slogan was "It only does everything").

Mattrick, and MS thought they could do it better than Sony this time, but did the exact same thing High price, and difficult to develop system that wants to do everything.

I think praise need to go out to the CEO's that replaced Mattrick, and Kutaragi early enough to be able to reverse policies.
PS3 floundered in the beginning for awhile, but came on strong in the end. Hopefully, MS can do the same to keep competition alive, so we as gamers benefit from these companies competing for our dollars in the form of great games, and services.

But Xbox wasn't too late, they have been a serious competitor and had a significant impact on Sony inparticular.

The PS3 had signficiant price cuts and bundled with many games. Why? Xbox 360 forced them.

News flash, Sony bought marketing for a game like Destiny in direct response to Xbox. Sony will continue to make moves to compete with the Xbox even with their sales edge.

good read

http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2014/04/playstation_maker_ken_kutaragi_complimented_shuhei_yoshida_twice

I should point out that MS wasn't listening to the consumers even before the abysmal X1 announcement. MS basically abandoned the core audience in favor of the Kinect late in the 360's lifecycle. Transitioning into the next generation with only Halo, Forza, and Gears is a huge no-no. Meanwhile, the PS3 kept getting a wide variety of games that could only played on the system. Tales of Xillia 1 & 2, Ni No Kuni, Journey, Beyond: Two Souls, The Last of Us, Ratchet & Clank: Into the Nexus, Kingdom Hearts I.5 & II.5 Remix, Final Fantasy X|X-2 HD, Uncharted 3, Killzone 3, Rain, Puppeteer, and Tales of Symphonia Chronicles. It's no wonder why the 360's post-Kinect library was unappetizing in comparison to its competitor's.

Consumers buy the product in which they consider to be the best short and long-term investment. MS's lackluster support of the 360 at the tail end of last gen probably got the consumers thinking twice before investing in an Xbox system again. After all, this was not the only time MS has done this (i.e. pulling the plug on the OG Xbox in favor for the 360). There were probably a lot of consumers that went from definitely wanting the next Xbox to wait-and-seeing. However, instead of convincing the consumers, MS went the opposite direction with the horrid reveal and DRM debacle. The "wait-and-see's" turned into definite "no's".

Buying Sony PR BS all the way, are we? They always had the choice of not putting that Bluray player in, but they did it since they were a big investor into the format and used their fans to get a foothold in the marketplace. At least I acknowledge that they both behave exactly the same way whenever they come from having a strong position in the market.

I think so, most companies even when struggling refuse to make any real meaningful changes, MS/Xbox was the exact opposite they listened to fan feedback and to overall consumer feedback.

You should know. My Dad bought me 1 yesterday. This is gonna be my 3rd playthrough of The Last of Us.