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

Forums - Sony Discussion - The difference between PlayStation and Xbox/Nintendo

So... basically, in this topic, we're going to take one feature from a Nintendo or Microsoft console, and act like it's the only feature of the system... then we're going to list every individual feature big or small for Sony's system... then we conclude that Sony's systems are more "holistically innovative" on that basis...



Around the Network
JWeinCom said:
So... basically, in this topic, we're going to take one feature from a Nintendo or Microsoft console, and act like it's the only feature of the system... 

No. What I'm saying is that Nintendo and Microsoft's platforms are built around one single idea, and all the features that are in their consoles are designed to support that single idea at every angle. In contrast to Sony, who's consoles don't really focus on a specific premise, rather focus on elevating the overall gaming experience. 



Count of words starting with innov in the OP: 6x for Sony, none for the two others.

Here‘s one more innovation: Just yesterday Sony announced the unique idea of an all-digital console. Never seen before.



TheMisterManGuy said:
JWeinCom said:
So... basically, in this topic, we're going to take one feature from a Nintendo or Microsoft console, and act like it's the only feature of the system... 

No. What I'm saying is that Nintendo and Microsoft's platforms are built around one single idea, and all the features that are in their consoles are designed to support that single idea at every angle. In contrast to Sony, who's consoles don't really focus on a specific premise, rather focus on elevating the overall gaming experience. 

But they're not based on one idea.  It's just that you're ignoring all of the other ideas.

For example with the 360, you're saying that power is the only idea.  Yet, you're ignoring XBox Live which was a huge focus of the 360. You mention the camera for the PS2, but not the Kinect, which was as much of an improvement aver the eyetoy as the Move was over the Wii-mote.  We're ignoring the various multimedia apps the XBox 360 app and Smart Glass.  We're going to mention advanced physics and massive HD worlds as if the XBox 360 didn't have pretty much pretty much the same games.

Going to ignore haptic feedback for the Switch, but mention it for the PS5, even though we really don't know how, if at all, they'll use it differently. Going to bring up X86 for the PS4 as if XBox One doesn't have that.   We're going to ignore Gamepass entirely.  Not going to bring up how the N64 had 4 controller ports out of the box (no need for a multitap or anything), Gamecube's wireless controller, how the Gameboy let you trade between your game and a friend's etc etc.

I'm not saying all of these are revolutionary features... but all of them are at least as important as the speaker in the Dualshock 4 (Wiimote has one btw).  I mean if you're going to include the PS4's speaker and ignore XBox Live... come on man.



badskywalker said:

While I would say that Sony did bring some new concepts to the table, the main distinguishing factor is more that they focused on multimedia aspects of devices, PS1 doubled as a cd player while giving better deals to third parties, but it wasn't the first console to use discs, just as it wasn't the first console to have a 32 bit processor. The PS2 allowed for DVDs to be read, while adding the idea of backwards compatibility, whilst making the graphics better than both the PS1 and N64. The PSP acted in a similar light, allowing music on the go, as well as videos (I don't remember if I just downloaded that illegally, or if it was apart of the system). After this however, Sony more or less was the same as its competitor microsoft. Yes it did bring in more ideas, however these ideas were tried by its competitors, while PS2 had internet capabilities, I believe that the Xbox Live was better for the time.The wiimote had a speaker in it before the playstation had a controller that did.

Many of the things you pointed out about the PS3 and 4, in my eyes were just natural evolutionary steps, with the exception of the psmove (copied from wii), everything you listed for the PS3 was really related to graphics. The things about the PS4 was just minor things, I never really used the touchpad, actually I found it quite annoying, and using x86 was kinda a given for this era in gaming.

In short I believe Sony's biggest strength came not from innovation, but rather from being able to see what worked well and what didn't, it wasn't really innovating so much as copying and pasting. Does this make Sony a bad company? No, it makes them a great company. Does this make Sony innovative? No, there consoles are in an evolutionary pattern, building on the previous and ditching what it doesn't need. This does mean that as you stated, they do the good job of looking at what can be improved, but calling them innovative is a bit of a stretch.

Also N64 did a lot more than you give credit, with a rumble pack, analog stick (which sony copied), personalized controller memory, etc. It wasn't a single Idea console.

I will admit I own every nintendo console except the gameboy advance, but I also own a PS1,2, and 4, as well as an Xbox and Xbox 360. 

I've read most of the posts now and think this one sums it up best. The OP is clearly a passionate Sony fan and I respect that but they're romanticising it a little too much for me. Sony have come up with great console designs (except the PS3) and made sure they had extra multimedia capabilities whilst also pushing graphics and ensuring they have a large gaming ecosystem. I've made it sound simple but it's not, they've hit their targets and exceeded. But to say they're the leaders in innovation is just false in my opinion - Nintendo are easily the more innovative. Like the above post said Sony took already established ideas and improved them whilst avoiding the aspects they thought wouldn't work.

The pressure sensitive buttons on the Dualshock 2 were pointless let's be honest - as were the gimmicks they added to the PS3 and PS4 controllers (they just wanted to throw in a little extra tech and use it as marketing so they were ultimately smart decisions). I could break down each point but i'd be typing forever so to summarise my overall belief is that Sony and Microsoft do largely the same thing - it's just Sony do it better.



Around the Network
okr said:
Count of words starting with innov in the OP: 6x for Sony, none for the two others.

Here‘s one more innovation: Just yesterday Sony announced the unique idea of an all-digital console. Never seen before.

Come off it man - that idea isn't even new to Sony. 

If you really class this as innovation for the PS5 (which it isn't) rather than an obvious next step then you could have at least mentioned the PSP Go. To my knowledge that was the first major all digital console and it came out in 2009! 



JWeinCom said:
TheMisterManGuy said:

No. What I'm saying is that Nintendo and Microsoft's platforms are built around one single idea, and all the features that are in their consoles are designed to support that single idea at every angle. In contrast to Sony, who's consoles don't really focus on a specific premise, rather focus on elevating the overall gaming experience. 

But they're not based on one idea.  It's just that you're ignoring all of the other ideas.

For example with the 360, you're saying that power is the only idea.  Yet, you're ignoring XBox Live which was a huge focus of the 360. You mention the camera for the PS2, but not the Kinect, which was as much of an improvement aver the eyetoy as the Move was over the Wii-mote.  We're ignoring the various multimedia apps the XBox 360 app and Smart Glass.  We're going to mention advanced physics and massive HD worlds as if the XBox 360 didn't have pretty much pretty much the same games.

Going to ignore haptic feedback for the Switch, but mention it for the PS5, even though we really don't know how, if at all, they'll use it differently. Going to bring up X86 for the PS4 as if XBox One doesn't have that.   We're going to ignore Gamepass entirely.  Not going to bring up how the N64 had 4 controller ports out of the box (no need for a multitap or anything), Gamecube's wireless controller, how the Gameboy let you trade between your game and a friend's etc etc.

I'm not saying all of these are revolutionary features... but all of them are at least as important as the speaker in the Dualshock 4 (Wiimote has one btw).  I mean if you're going to include the PS4's speaker and ignore XBox Live... come on man.

im not even sure why you actually responded with a proper reply this is like a fan of liverpool saying manchester city sucks

and a fan of MC will say the same thing the other way around



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

Am I the only one concerned that the whole first page was blank avatars? For a moment, I thought I entered into a cult thread.



It's all about content most times. Nintendo is quite limited in terms of genres, third party content and has an expensive library. Xbox doesn't offer many exclusive experiences. PS has the best content for everyone (different genres, experiences, choices and prices) I think.

I see Xbox like a plug and play PC. Nintendo is its own thing and its more expensive to maintain. PS is the true everyone's console, full of choices and fair prices. I don't think PS is unique and that's the good thing about it. PS is just the easiest gaming platform to like. If an intelligent alien gets to this planet, it couldn't go wrong with a PS.



God bless You.

My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


0D0 said:
It's all about content most times. Nintendo is quite limited in terms of genres, third party content and has an expensive library. Xbox doesn't offer many exclusive experiences. PS has the best content for everyone (different genres, experiences, choices and prices) I think.

Nintendo isn't really that limited. None of the big three are. They all offer a wide range of games for different players. Some more than others granted, but I wouldn't call Nintendo or hopefully Xbox limited in genres.