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

Forums - Sales - If Xbox Series S is 100$ cheaper than PS5 All-Digital, does Xbox have a legitimate chance of outselling PS5 this gen?

 

If Xbox Series S is 100$ cheaper than PS5, could Xbox Outsell PS5?

Yes, Xbox is the favorite to win 9 5.77%
 
Yes, it's possible 36 23.08%
 
Unlikely 60 38.46%
 
No chance 51 32.69%
 
Total:156
Intrinsic on 10 September 2020
sales2099 said:

Live Gold also gives you 4 free games per month on top of GP but I see your point. It’s just hard to see how all it offers just doesn’t appeal to someone, more often then not if you can find at least a few-several games to play every year, depending on how new they are you allready made the sub worth while. 

And sure you prefer PS exclusives. Nothing wrong with that. That’s not value paying full price. That’s standard industry practice paying full price to play a game. There no value in what’s standard operating procedure. Value is getting a new game on a sub service day 1. Value is getting another service (EA) bundled in at no charge. Value is getting free streaming to android devices at no extra charge. 

Like you said it’s unfortunate it’s climbing against the popular trend with PlayStation being the dominant brand for several years. Doesn’t matter how good a service is sometimes when the competition has the mindshare. But looking objectively to me it’s clear which side gives you bang for buck. 

Don't get me wrong. I agree that GP is a great service and initiative. But only in theory. And what I am about to say is why your value argument keeps falling flat.

Here are the games I am going to buy in the next 6 months. All games I have not played. FF7R, GoT, TLOU2, Cyberpunk, Kena, Spiderman MM. There are many more, but I have only listed the ones that are either available or at least confirmed to be available in the next 6 months. To someone like me, what value is there in having GP? Even if I was only looking forward to just 2 games I have listed ou there, those games are not going to be on GP. So what value is it to me?

Your issue here is, not only are you seemingly ignoring the above as to what determines what is valuable to someone, you seem to not know (or believe) that there are millions of people just like me. That what they want to play, may not even be on the Xbox platform. Or even if it were, it may not be on GP.

Now... if game pass at the very least meant that in addition to every MS studio game, you are also getting access to at least 70% of every third party release on day one... hell 70% is even too much, let's bring that down to 30%... no, make it 20%. Then yes, GP would be a killer of a service. If Cyberpunk is on GP on day 1, or GTA6, then yes, GP is something. As GP stands right now, it only has value for like 1 or two months in a year. Why? Because I will pay for it for a month or two when an xbox game comes out that I cannot get on the PS5.

But is it something that will make me buy an Xbox over the PS5? absolutely not. Because everything I really want to play this year, everything that everyone will be talking about this year, not a single one of those things will be on GP. You don't believe me? Forget exclusives, look at every major third party game releasing in the next 6 months. The games people will be buying and playing. Fifa 21, NBA2k21, COD, Cyberpunk, AC...etc. Not a single one of those names will be on GP in the next 6 months. So how is it useful to anyone buying an xbox then? Because it let's them play games released sometime in the last 2+ years?

Hence, (again), value is a very, very, very subjective thing. And it's seldom ever as clearly marketable as you are making it out to be. If it were, as I and many others have said multiple times already. then the XB1 would be the best selling console on the market today. Not the PS4. Why? because this value that you are talking about is something it has had and offered since 2017. It's not a new thing.

Last edited by Intrinsic - on 10 September 2020

Around the Network
sales2099 on 10 September 2020
Runa216 said:
sales2099 said:

For what I’ve played in the last 2 years, I would have spent several hundreds more had I played the multiplats alone if I had a PlayStation. Sorry I sound like a walking ad lol, but as an adult with a mortgage and family it’s a nice thing to play what you want and save your money for other things at the same time.

Otherwise, I’m sure you can think of many situations where a superior product doesn’t necessarily mean they are the market leader. I’ll say it: Sony has a longer and richer history in the industry. They are consistent, they have the peoples trust and confidence on their side. They have all the mindshare compared to Xbox. Xbox has to be objectively better going forward to just be considered as an option compared to PlayStation. Doesn’t matter how good Xbox does or what they offer: it’s not PlayStation if that’s what core gamers today are used to. 

But ultimately people like PS for their 1st party and that’s something Xbox can’t replicate so end of day I recognize that as well. 

That's great for you and all, but GamePass doesn't exist in a vacuum. If it did, yeah it'd be a great deal. However, there are a tonne of external factors that make it so that, while the deal is good, it's not as appealing as you think to most people. As I said, people still like hard copies. They already have a bunch of games on the gamepass. They like to chose what games they have. Not all games will appeal to all people. You still have to buy an Xbox for it or get a higher-end PC. 

The point is, on paper Gamepass is amazing! IT's the netflix of games! PRoblem is, we still live in a world where games could come or go from the service, people still care about ownership of their games, and most people who could afford GamePass already have most or all of the games they want. 

I personally seriously considered getting gamepass, but then I remembered I hate gaming subscription models, I wouldn't get anything out of it since I tend to not really care about Xbox exclusives, and the only reason I was considering it was to try what amounted to a demo for Sea of Thieves so I could play with my brother. Just like my Xbox One, I'd get it, and it'd sit in the corner not getting any use for years on end. IT'd just be a drain on my funds. So yeah, there's more to it than just 'pay x dollars per month, get hundreds of free games!', which is why it's not pushing consoles as well as it seems like it would on paper. 

That's why, as much as the Series S sounds like a good mid-gen jump from the 8th, I just don't think it will matter. In the end, exclusives clearly matter and it seems Microsoft is doing everything in their power to convince the world otherwise. 

It’s funny seeing how most people online are willing to throw away their principles for that PS5 digital edition to save a buck. Not like you can’t buy games in addition. Just bought Skyrim recently, it’s not on GP, my time isn’t devoted exclusively to the service. 

But end of day your argument revolves around the 1st party and that’s fair to say, it’s something that won’t change for some time. Those new games seem about 2 years off more or less before they start to change perceptions. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

sales2099 on 10 September 2020

@ intrinsic

Hey I get it, you want what you want. I’m just saying paying full price for games you want isn’t value. It’s just standard practice of buying a game. Value is getting more for the money you pay, at least that’s the definition I go by.

I guess you going by the definition that if you spend enough hours playing a game there’s value in that as well, bang for buck if you spend 100 hours for $60. While true, I got that same experience playing certain GP games as well. You right, the term is very subjective.



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Intrinsic on 10 September 2020
sales2099 said:
@ intrinsic

Hey I get it, you want what you want. I’m just saying paying full price for games you want isn’t value. It’s just standard practice of buying a game. Value is getting more for the money you pay, at least that’s the definition I go by.

I guess you going by the definition that if you spend enough hours playing a game there’s value in that as well, bang for buck if you spend 100 hours for $60. While true, I got that same experience playing certain GP games as well. You right, the term is very subjective.

some may see value in paying $300/month to a car rental company and being able to drive any car they want. 

Some may see value in paying $30k for a car and own it forever.

Value is subjective. We all respect what you see as value. The issue is, you seem hell-bent on telling us that what we consider as value is wrong.

Last edited by Intrinsic - on 10 September 2020

Runa216 on 10 September 2020
sales2099 said:
@ intrinsic

Hey I get it, you want what you want. I’m just saying paying full price for games you want isn’t value. It’s just standard practice of buying a game. Value is getting more for the money you pay, at least that’s the definition I go by.

I guess you going by the definition that if you spend enough hours playing a game there’s value in that as well, bang for buck if you spend 100 hours for $60. While true, I got that same experience playing certain GP games as well. You right, the term is very subjective.

But it IS value to those who either want physical copies or want to own the game even if they stop paying for GamePass. 

Sure, GamePass is a good deal, but it's also a commitment. Either you keep paying or you lose your games. If I pay for Ghost of Tsushima, I pay for it once and I have it forever (virtually forever, of course. Discs do eventually break and digital versions might not always be available, but functionally it's forever.) Between the various factors and the whole 'commitment' element, there are lots of reasons why GamePass isn't as gangbusters as some people think. 

Personally, I don't even BORROW games from friends because the idea of not playing games on my own time at my own leisure gives me anxiety. I know I'm in the minority here, but that's one of the reasons I don't play online games, will never pay a subscription for a game, avoid gamepass, and will not get involved in any 'games as a live service' game. 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

Around the Network
0D0 on 10 September 2020
Intrinsic said:

$300 4TF watered-down version of the XSX vs $400 10.3TF version of the PS5 with the only difference being a disc drive?

I said this before this reveal, that the XSS would be in the $300 - $350 range and would likely be all digital, and even then, I said the only thing sony needs to worry about is not having a $399 console.

The XB1 has been at a lower price than the PS4 (albeit unofficially) all of this generation and that didn't stop the PS4 from outselling it. A $100 difference is not going to suddenly make someone that wants a PS5 to go and get an XSS instead. Especially when for that $100 more with the PS5AD, you get a larger SSD and almost 2.5x the power.

I also said this before, the last thing S would want, is a $399 10TF PS5 that falls in the middle of their $299 4TF offering and their 12TF $499 offering. The XSS existing at $299 actually makes a $399 appear to have the better value and a $499 XSX be too expensive.

If however the cheapest PS5 you can buy costs $449/$499 (which as I also said before would be dumb on sony's part if there is a $299 XSS on the market), then you can kiss all this goodbye and then in that case you would have a decent fight on your hands in some territories.

Agree

DonFerrari said:
It will do better than this gen, but being so much weaker and only let's say 100 less than PS5 Discless it won't really change that many sales... the paying option will do more on that front.

Agree

Xbox has been cheaper than PS for a long time (plus they've got gamepass). It made no difference.

I'm not saying that Xbox hasn't improved things a lot and they might present a tougher battle for PS this new gen. But I don't see Xbox winning in the long run.

I'm mixed about the low income regions of the world, tho.



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?


DonFerrari on 10 September 2020
sales2099 said:
DonFerrari said:

Perhaps to you it is like that... for me value really depends on the content, if most of those 200 (isn't 100?) aren't of my liking then it is worthless at any price point. That is why I said you confused and is still confusing price with value.

You are doing simple math "180 per year/100 games = 1.8 USD per game", even if you won't play 100 games a year even if you liked all those games. That is determining price not value.

Why do you think Nintendo can keep their games at 60 USD for almost the whole gen while Fifa go half price like 2 months after release and 1/5 a year after release? It is because their userbase see the value of a Nintendo game being 60USD irrelevant of the age while Fifa userbase don't. So shoving "Gamepass is better value because it have 30x more games for the same price" over other throats simply isn't true. When only 20% of X1 userbase thought there was value in signing up even with those promotional prices you can tell the service isn't as valuable to everyone as it is for you. Price is the same for all, value isn't.

I counted just for you Don, you good people. 249 games as of this post on GP. EA Play adding 60 something games when it merges. You don’t have to play them all, nor can you. You play the games you want to play. And given the high number, the odds of finding what you like dramatically improve. 

I’m not going to give you all the AAA games and the 80+ Metacritic scores of every game on GP. Quality is implied, you can’t have a service grow if everything is shovelware. And leave Nintendo out of this, their pricing of games years later is downright criminal lol. 

It’s a new thing, gaming is not used to a sub model for games. But I tell you once your in it changes your whole perspective. It’s very hard to make a argument that nothing it offers will appeal to people. I just don’t see paying full price even for a game you want as value, as it’s just standard procedure. Value is getting a game you want for cheaper then full price. 

I was using 100 because that was the number on MS ad. And sure if you only consider 80%+ Meta (basically only slightly above average) AAA this number drops immensilly.

I won't ask you to explain how this with the lower price of X1S or higher power of X1X didn't made Xbox sales increase (won't even talk about passing PS4), but at least try to explain if this value was so absolute as you try to pass it (yes I can certainly see it is valuable to you and several million people) why it isn't like 80% of the userbase using it regularly.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

sales2099 on 10 September 2020
Intrinsic said:
sales2099 said:
@ intrinsic

Hey I get it, you want what you want. I’m just saying paying full price for games you want isn’t value. It’s just standard practice of buying a game. Value is getting more for the money you pay, at least that’s the definition I go by.

I guess you going by the definition that if you spend enough hours playing a game there’s value in that as well, bang for buck if you spend 100 hours for $60. While true, I got that same experience playing certain GP games as well. You right, the term is very subjective.

some may see value in paying $300/month to a car rental company and being able to drive any car they want. 

Some may see value in paying $30k for a car and own it forever.

Value is subjective. We all respect what you see as value. The issue is, you seem hell-bent on telling us that what we consider as value is wrong.

I’ll make this simple then. We both playing the games we want to play. Let’s assume both sides have quality games so we remove the subjectivity out of the equation.

Difference is I’m playing more games then you and for hundreds less per year then you. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

LivingMetal on 10 September 2020

Without having to read all fourteen pages: Microsoft has the most powerful console on the market this gen and has the most cash flow among Nintendo and Sony. Nintendo has the least powerful console on the market this gen and has the least cash flow among Microsoft and Sony. The Switch has outsold the Xbox while being on the market for a shorted time span. The title and focus of this thread should be between Microsoft and Nintendo before even considering Sony. Just is.



sales2099 on 10 September 2020
DonFerrari said:
sales2099 said:

I counted just for you Don, you good people. 249 games as of this post on GP. EA Play adding 60 something games when it merges. You don’t have to play them all, nor can you. You play the games you want to play. And given the high number, the odds of finding what you like dramatically improve. 

I’m not going to give you all the AAA games and the 80+ Metacritic scores of every game on GP. Quality is implied, you can’t have a service grow if everything is shovelware. And leave Nintendo out of this, their pricing of games years later is downright criminal lol. 

It’s a new thing, gaming is not used to a sub model for games. But I tell you once your in it changes your whole perspective. It’s very hard to make a argument that nothing it offers will appeal to people. I just don’t see paying full price even for a game you want as value, as it’s just standard procedure. Value is getting a game you want for cheaper then full price. 

I was using 100 because that was the number on MS ad. And sure if you only consider 80%+ Meta (basically only slightly above average) AAA this number drops immensilly.

I won't ask you to explain how this with the lower price of X1S or higher power of X1X didn't made Xbox sales increase (won't even talk about passing PS4), but at least try to explain if this value was so absolute as you try to pass it (yes I can certainly see it is valuable to you and several million people) why it isn't like 80% of the userbase using it regularly.

Both your points I can only say: Gaming subs are very much in their infancy and it’s hard to retrain habits of gamers used to decades old practices of buying their games, whether online or physical. It’ll catch on eventually. And as for sales stats, I am very much aware that Playstations greatest weapon is also intangible (brand power). I said it above, Xbox has to be objectively better in many respects just to be considered, nevermind overtake an ingrained brand loyalty. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.