Azzanation said:
I believe a lot of people are misunderstanding whats being said here. Its not that if Playstation was going to end up overtaking PCs, that wasn't the issue. The issue was towards the support leaving windows gaming which was a massive selling point for the OS. When Sega left, no console was pushing Windows and Direct X. This was a problem since Microsoft were worried that majority of 3rd party companies weren't supporting Direct X which is a staple of Windows. MS needed a console to help push DX, Sega were doing it and when Sega left, MS had to step in themselves and push it. The Xbox brand was meant to help support DX and push developers to use MS tools. That's why they named it XBOX, short for Direct XBOX. |
That's not what the documentary says.
If that were the case, going after SNY would have been a no brainer for MS. It wasn't until Windows in general may be under threat, which was simply a future thought experiment, that MS took it more seriously. Even then they weren't entirely sold on it.
Which makes sense because once SNY steps on your turf, what are the odds they'll only remain in this fraction of it?
PS1 - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.
PS2 - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.
PS3 - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.
PS4 - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.
PRO -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.
PS5 - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.
PRO -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.












