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

Forums - Gaming - I think I figured out why PS4 is really winning in sales against XB1.

McDonaldsGuy said:
a) The PS4 barely has more games than the Xbox One, maybe not even that. There is a negligible difference.

b) The reason the PS4 is selling so well are due to these reasons:

1. Price ($399)
2. Not shoving the camera down our throats
3. Momentum from the PS3 (PS3 was dominating 2011-2013, Xbox 360 slowed down significantly)
4. Microsoft's DRM policies. Even though they reversed them the damage was done

c) Both the PS4 and Xbox One are mega disappointments

^THIS.

Well, except for "c". Not sure I'd call either console a mega disappointment, but that a matter of opinion I suppose.

 

btw, fantastic avatar.



Around the Network
Samus Aran said:

Let's take a look at these 6 games shall we.


Grand Theft Auto V (a remaster of a PS3 game that's also on xbone)

The Last of Us Remastered (a lazy remaster of a PS3 game where they charged you full price)

flower (a game that has been on the PS3 for years and also Vita. Oh, and it only has 11 reviews. And it doesn't deserve its score.)

Diablo III: Ultimate Evil Edition (a remaster of a PS3 game that is also on xbone)

Rayman Legends (overrated and on any console imaginable)

Fez (another small indie game that has been out for years and everyone with a 10 year old pc can play)

Yeah, next time don't use metacritic as an argument. All these games are also on PS3.

So metacritic is only valued argument when it comes to nintendo? The last of us remastered isnt a lazy port at all given how complicated the architecture of the ps3 was. All DLC was also included on the disc of which Left behind alone costs 20€ in psn store for the ps3.

Its cheaper to buy the ps4 version than buying all dlc right now



Samus Aran said:
TheObserver said:

Same is true of the XB1 games with a 90+ meta, except there's only 2 instead of 6.

I think you're missing the part where the topic isn't about how great the PS4 library is but rather how much better than the XB1 library it is.

It isn't better. Reviewers prefer to review the PS4 game whenever there's a multiplatform title. That explains your difference.

Lot's of pro-bias Sony media as well (contrary to what some people on this site think). Unless you believe people bought a PS4 to play Fez and Flower.

pro-bias Sony media from a guy with a Nintendo franchise sig and avi?  Seriously?  Nintendo nostalgia drives up WiiU game scores more than Sony and MS combined (and I have a WiiU)

Moderated,

-Mr Khan




Get Your Portable ID!Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers

When the competition fucks up and you don't of course you being the only one who didn't fuck up would look amazing in the eyes of others, we can't bring age as an argument itno this since Nintendo is far older and brought consoles to where they are from the crash.

It's more about how Microsoft fucked up with their e3, their pricing factually was more than the PS4's, of course by marketing standards people would normally buy something that is cheaper than the other if it does the same thing if not better, the kinect camera also didn't help since the camera was never a one hit wonder just like the Move.

I hear a lot about the general public not knowing but really when I popped into my local GAME store a few times during 2013 and 2014 I could hear parents talking about the e3 that went down and what happened, news people generally gathered from newspapers and blogs, facebook feeds, the casual crowd can and does use facebook which is a place where ifno like that can easily spread and translate to the masses, the casuals aren't completely braindead, even my stepdad who hardly plays any games besides pac-man found out what happened with MS through a weekly newspapers.

I wouldn't go using meta scores though, all they are is just score points, you can still get a game that scores bad and still sell well or have a cult following, it;s more to do with what happened with e3, the marketing and pricing of both units that are what they are now.

I still believe MS can turn things around though, they've already done a faster few 180's than Sony did last gen and Sony managed to turn things around after selling at a loss and not getting as much treatment as the 360 had last gen, MS only happens to be in Sony's position from last gen, they'll turn it around eventually.



Mankind, in its arrogance and self-delusion, must believe they are the mirrors to God in both their image and their power. If something shatters that mirror, then it must be totally destroyed.

Samus Aran said:
TheObserver said:

Same is true of the XB1 games with a 90+ meta, except there's only 2 instead of 6.

I think you're missing the part where the topic isn't about how great the PS4 library is but rather how much better than the XB1 library it is.

It isn't better. Reviewers prefer to review the PS4 game whenever there's a multiplatform title.


And? That happened with the 360 last gen as well.

That tends to happen when it's known which platform that game will run better on which in this case is the PS4.



Around the Network

Plot twist how many of those high scores are actual big games and not small indies, to each his/her own though.

PS before you mention Ori, the developers talked about how MSFT assisted in man power and funding. Plus MSFT owns the ip, Ori is as big as knack to me

ps4 is outselling Xb1 mainly because of MSFT blunders and the initial price.



FloatingWaffles said:
EricFabian said:

1 - Better Hardwere - CHECK

2 - Better Games - according to Metacritic yes, but also is a matter of personal taste

3 - More Games - CHECK

4 - A far stronger brand - CHECK

Both #2 and #4 are just opinion. Plus, like Samas Aran said, for #3 how many of those games are just remasters/ports.


#4 is not opinion. PS Brand > Xbox Brand



Samus Aran said:
TheObserver said:


Most multiplat titles have more or less the same metacritic score, give or take 1-2 points, which is fair considering PS4 versions are almost always better so they shouldn't have the same score. 

And people have varied tastes in gaming, the more titles you have the greater the possiblity of a diverse library which appeals to greater range of consumers. You may hate a game, but it might be someone else's favorite. 

Diversity is the most important aspect in selling your console, this is probably the biggest shortcoming Nintendo has which explains why Wii U is failing even worse than XB1. While XB1 is far behind PS4, it's 3rd party support affords it enough diversity to do better than Wii U.

Except your arguments are deeply flawed.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-one/diablo-iii-ultimate-evil-edition

It only has 18 reviews.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/diablo-iii-ultimate-evil-edition

This scores 4 points higher even though it's the exact same game and it has 63 reviews.

You're basically saying that PS4 is winning because it has PS3 ports.

PS4 is winning because:

- Better hardware

- Cheaper price initially

- MS fucked up big time at E3 2013 with their DRM policies. It still haunts them today as it ruined their reputation.

- Stronger brand: the PS brand is much more popular outside of the USA than the xbox brand.

What good exclusives does the PS4 even have currently?


What do you consider a good exclusive?

There's also the fact that exclusives only matter if you're only getting one of the two consoles, which in turn makes the concept of exclusives meaningless cause now the entire library of the console is equally exclusive as far as you're concerned cause you only have that console.

simple fact of the matter is PS4's library is over 40% larger in sheer size, and is better rated by a similar margin.

BTW, Diablo 3 runs better on PS4 so it's not so surprising that it has a better score on PS4. We live in an era where LBP 3 got a 79 while LBP 1&2 got 90+ despite LBP offering numerous improvements but having some performance issues. FPS dips are serious business for reviewers these days.



Ruler said:
Samus Aran said:

Let's take a look at these 6 games shall we.


Grand Theft Auto V (a remaster of a PS3 game that's also on xbone)

The Last of Us Remastered (a lazy remaster of a PS3 game where they charged you full price)

flower (a game that has been on the PS3 for years and also Vita. Oh, and it only has 11 reviews. And it doesn't deserve its score.)

Diablo III: Ultimate Evil Edition (a remaster of a PS3 game that is also on xbone)

Rayman Legends (overrated and on any console imaginable)

Fez (another small indie game that has been out for years and everyone with a 10 year old pc can play)

Yeah, next time don't use metacritic as an argument. All these games are also on PS3.

So metacritic is only valued argument when it comes to nintendo? The last of us remastered isnt a lazy port at all given how complicated the architecture of the ps3 was. All DLC was also included on the disc of which Left behind alone costs 20€ in psn store for the ps3.

Its cheaper to buy the ps4 version than buying all dlc right now

Where did I mention Nintendo? You guys really need to drop the behaviour of reading my name and bringing Nintendo up. It tells me you don't have any real arguments of your own to make.

And yeah, it's a lazy remaster. Look at MM 3D to see how a remaster should be done. I can get TLOU on PS3 for $15 if I want.



true_fan said:
Plot twist how many of those high scores are actual big games and not small indies, to each his/her own though.

PS before you mention Ori, the developers talked about how MSFT assisted in man power and funding. Plus MSFT owns the ip, Ori is as big as knack to me

ps4 is outselling Xb1 mainly because of MSFT blunders and the initial price.


MS funding and owning Ori doesn't make it like knack, it makes it like Flower, Jorney, Unfinished Swan, etc. "Indies" funded and owned by Sony.