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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Your reasons for the PS4 winning this generation despite being the most powerful console.

Aura7541 on 23 October 2014

Another important thing Sony did right was their presence in conferences. Microsoft started off well with a good E3 conference, though it was a bit conservative. Their Gamescom conference was decent, but again, it was too conservative and got flak for the Tomb Raider timed exclusivity. And for TGS, well.... yeah. Meanwhile, Sony got stronger with each conference. It had a decent E3, though it slipped up midway through the conference. However, Sony had a really good Gamescom and TGS. In fact, Sony had two pre-TGS conferences and they'll be hosting Playstation Experience on December.



Around the Network
d21lewis on 23 October 2014
Soundwave said:
d21lewis said:
Soundwave said:
The 'most powerful system never wins' was always kind of a stupid "rule" that some people got too carried away with. Almost always there were other aspects at play there.

The SNES did beat the Genesis and Turbo Grafx 16 too, and it was more powerful than either.

The N64 would have beat the Playstation had Nintendo not been stupid and crippled the console with cartridge only.


It's not a rule.  it's history.  The weakest doesn't always lose but the strongest never wins.....until now.  What we fail to mention is that, historically, the strongest always arrived too late or at way too high of a price port with miniscule support.  The PS4 somehow managed to avoid evey mistake and clock in at $399.  

 

*edit* while the Super Nintendo beat the Genesis and TG-16, there were also more powerful 4th gen consoles....


This is kind of a cop out arguement, the main 16-bit consoles were the Genesis, TG-16, and Super NES. Just because some half-assed $700 machine from 3D0 came out two-three years later doesn't make the SNES the most powerful console of that cycle, it would be like saying well the PS4 isn't the most powerful if/when Steambox eventually releases. 


Hey, if you want to pretend other consoles didn't exist, that's fine with me.  I can't change history.  I only report it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(fourth_generation)



Xeon on 23 October 2014

I'm gonna have to echo what others have said in regards to the price to power ratio. The PS4 is a little bit to quite a bit more powerful than the Xbox one, depending on who you ask, but costs about the same. They'll get the third party support at least as equal to Microsoft and have their own exclusives. Finally, their message was clear, consistent, and strong all the way back to the reveal.



sc94597 on 23 October 2014

It wasn't the most expensive.



TheBlackNaruto on 23 October 2014
Sharpryno said:
Burek said:
PS4 is better, more powerful, less expensive, more user-friendly, more gamer oriented, has better games of wider variety of genres, better performing games, does not treat its customers as criminals, respects even the smallest markets, doesn't nickel and dime its users at every corner....

When a sensible person does even a 3-minute research, it is the best choice by a wide margin.
Lacks features 
Less apps (worse quality too, see twitch)
OS is just dated looking.  The Facebook-esque social UI stuff is crap. 
Controller still has wear-n-tear joysticks from last gen.  The charge it holds is terrible compared to competiton
Sony constantly lies (see killzone resolution.  They know the Sony fanboys hype graphics up more than anything)
Online membership fee why?  PSN constantly suffers more than the competition. 
Driveclub is the worst managed game I've ever seen.  The launch was also plagued with server issues.
XBO metacritic scores > PS4 metacritic scores
Titanfall = best rated retail game since next gen started between ps4/xbo
Lack of updates compared to XBO. 

 

Just some facts and some of my opinions, not trying to troll. 

 

PS4 has a better gpu/ram, but thats about it. 


You just sounded really bitter in your post IMO for some reason. And not only that didn't even try to add anything to the topic the OP presented. And to be honest MOST of what you said is opinion anyway not sure what you were trying to accomplish here.

Back OT:

Let let me also add that the PS4 was also less expensive than the XB1 and yet more appealing than the Wii U to mist from what it seems. And the Sony PR was amazing which got them ahead as well.



The absence of evidence is NOT the evidence of absence...

PSN: StlUzumaki23

Around the Network
Aphelion on 23 October 2014
Burek said:
PS4 is better, more powerful, less expensive, more user-friendly, more gamer oriented, has better games of wider variety of genres, better performing games, does not treat its customers as criminals, respects even the smallest markets, doesn't nickel and dime its users at every corner....

When a sensible person does even a 3-minute research, it is the best choice by a wide margin.


A harsh yet so bang on explanation.  

bravo.



alabtrosMyster on 23 October 2014

The NES was the most powerful console AT RELEASE (The Sega Master System came out later).

The PS1was the most powerful console AT RELEASE (3d games ran better on it than on pretty much any hardware back in 1994)

The PS2 was the most powerful console WHEN IT WAS RELEASED (og xbox and gamecube came in almost 2 years later).

The only times you could say that this was muddy were:

The 16-bit consoles (Genesis, SNES, TG-16/Duo) two of them "won" depending on where you look and when you consider it stopped (1994 the Genesis had a lead mostly in the US, but the SNES surpassed it because Nintendo actively sold the machine all the way into 1998)... The Genesis and TG-16 were released about two years before the SNES, yet were more 'powerful' in some ways (at least when it came to push sprites on the screen without slowing down)... and well the Neo-Geo was the most powerful 16-bit console altogether, but at 700$ with 250$ games it was not really a contender.

Ps3/360/Wii: The Wii sold more machines and we all know the rest of the story... which is more powerful between the 360 and PS3 is still a hot topic, but neither really "won".

Atari 2600: I can't tell, I think the Intellivision/Coleco vision were more powerful, but they came in much later.

So, most of the times "the most powerful console" wins, you just have to look at timing properly, specs (and actual performance) are always a very big deal, this is the main benefit for an upgrade or any technological device.



d21lewis on 23 October 2014
alabtrosMyster said:

The NES was the most powerful console AT RELEASE (The Sega Master System came out later).

The PS1was the most powerful console AT RELEASE (3d games ran better on it than on pretty much any hardware back in 1994)

The PS2 was the most powerful console WHEN IT WAS RELEASED (og xbox and gamecube came in almost 2 years later).

The only times you could say that this was muddy were:

The 16-bit consoles (Genesis, SNES, TG-16/Duo) two of them "won" depending on where you look and when you consider it stopped (1994 the Genesis had a lead mostly in the US, but the SNES surpassed it because Nintendo actively sold the machine all the way into 1998)... The Genesis and TG-16 were released about two years before the SNES, yet were more 'powerful' in some ways (at least when it came to push sprites on the screen without slowing down)... and well the Neo-Geo was the most powerful 16-bit console altogether, but at 700$ with 250$ games it was not really a contender.

Ps3/360/Wii: The Wii sold more machines and we all know the rest of the story... which is more powerful between the 360 and PS3 is still a hot topic, but neither really "won".

Atari 2600: I can't tell, I think the Intellivision/Coleco vision were more powerful, but they came in much later.

So, most of the times "the most powerful console" wins, you just have to look at timing properly, specs (and actual performance) are always a very big deal, this is the main benefit for an upgrade or any technological device.


Dreamcast?



Captain_Tom on 23 October 2014
Euphoria14 said:
Can't speak for anyone else, but this is why I made the jump instead of going with a WiiU and/or XBone.

#1.) Sony has shown over the course of almost 2 decades that they support their consoles, new or old. They do not release a new console and just leave the old one to die. This has built a ton of confidence with me for Sony and their home consoles. Whether this is due to 1st party efforts or strong 3rd party relations matter not to me. All I know is that PS4 has been here for a year and my PS3 is still seeing new exclusive releases, thus causing it to still be used almost daily in my home. It is still relevant.

#2.) Treat me with respect. Say what you want and try to claim whatever, but Sony stood against DRM. People want to be able to sell their games. People want a sense of ownership. Instead of going where some 3rd parties and MS wanted to take the industry Sony chose to stand on the side of consumers, regardless of what you may or may not think was the reason. Only thing that matters is what their choice ultimately was.

#3.) Most diverse lineup of games. No other home consoles has the range of title like Playstation. You have full JPN support, full western support, etc... There is basically no developer who refuses to create games for Playstation. This allows me the confidence to know that if something looks interesting, there is a very high probability of it coming my way.

#4.) Best bang for my buck. Lowest price, highest power, most games. What more do you want?

^This guy just perfectly summed it up.  Amen to everything said, that is exactly why I got a PS4.



game_on on 23 October 2014

The key words are:
1. Price
2. Marketing

A seemingly lower price of 100 dollars/euros for basically the same console.
The total marketing fuckup by Microsoft and the even worse 180 degrees change of heart.