Trying the reverse logic again. It's different for Sony because the Series S is so much weaker than the PS5 that it would be difficult/impossible to get a game designed to run on PS5 to work on Series S. It either wouldn't work at all or it would take loads of development time and money for them only to achieve it running at 30fps. The power differential between the two is enormous. Game sales are also extremely low on Xbox as much users just use gamepass anyway. So yes, if it was easy to get the games on there and people actually bought games on Xbox, sure, I think Sony could go ahead and do that just like Lego horizons on Switch.  

In terms of hardware power, getting a Switch game to run on PS5, no problem at all and the incentive is there because there is good game sales on PS5. They won't though will they, because PS5 is their competitor.  

You know that's not the reason, but it's clear at this point that you're being intentionally disingenuous and arguing in bad faith, and multiple other posters warned me about you, so we're done here.

Like I keep trying to say, if Sony saw the Switch as a threat to them they wouldn't be releasing Lego Horizon adventures on there, like they aren't releasing it on Xbox or PS4. They clearly don't feel threatened by the Switch. No-one has given me an explanation for this, other than trying to reverse-logic me by using Xbox as an example , even though they have explicitly stated they aren't trying to "out-console" anyone anymore anyway.  

The thing is, that Xbox sales do not justify Sony porting games on Xbox even if they wanted to. There's likely a large overlap of ownership between PS5 and newest Xbox anyway. When it comes to Switch and Windows, there's really nothing Sony can do about them.  The thing is, that the market has changed from what it was 20 years ago, because game development is so expensive. It's increasingly harder for even Sony to justify a single platform development, even if the platform was their own. 

Thank you for saying this. This is what I just said above to someone but they just told me I was being disingenuous and arguing in bad faith, even though Xbox sales have fallen off a cliff. With the XBS consoles alone maybe the port isn't worth it but, the game could also run on Xbone and PS4. That's about 180 million consoles right there. Surely put it on those too? Why put it on Switch but leave out 200 million consoles (Xbone,XBS,PS4). There's plenty of sales you could achieve there. PS4 still has about 50 million MAU alone!

Well, you're right. But what people have been telling you is, that MS and Sony operate quite the same way and both are in similar situation. If Xbox had sold the PS5 numbers and PS5 sold Xbox numbers, you'd see Sony releasing games on Xbox, but MS not releasing games on PS5. The current situation in the market isn't whether Sony or Microsoft consider each other as competition, but the threat for Playstation and Xbox divisions is are they able to stay relevant for the companies' shareholders.

The biggest threat to Sony and it's shareholders would be a competitive Xbox outselling PlayStation. I don't think it's right to separate competition and pleasing shareholders. One of the best ways to please shareholders is to beat your competition. I also don't agree with them being in a similar situation either. Look at Palworld as an example. Palworld released on Xbone and and XBS consoles, but on PlayStation it only released on PS5. The PS4 is more powerful than the Xbone and could have ran Palworld too. This shows that Sony cared more about PS5 sales than sales of Palworld. Xbox didn't care what platform you played it on. It just proves that Sony still cares more about selling consoles than selling software, and that brings us back to Lego Horizon adventures. They weren't willing to put Palworld or LHA on PS4 but they were switch, why. It can only be because they are worried about people keeping their PS4's and not buying PS5's. They clearly have no fear of Switch preventing sales of PS5

How Sony operates is that they make devices, and on the other hand, make content for the devices - and other similar devices. Basically the Playstation division has been some sort of exception for bringing in the money. After restructuring, the game & network division have been making money pretty well, but considering the financial risk in releasing new systems and increasing development costs and times for games, it becomes harder and harder to justify exclusivity to consoles. Considering Hirai said years ago that Playstation focuses on service, I'd see it more likely that Playstation will be a service and you can get this set-top box called Playstation you can use to play these games on Playstation network at your living room. And Sony may even license the systems to other manufacturers, so that they either just get royalties from or manufacture some systems themselves. This is pretty much what Google does - they licence their content shop platform to any system possible.

If you look at how the tech world have been for a decade: Sony copies Google, Apple copies Sony, Google copies Apple and Microsoft tries just to hang in there. 

How Sony operates is that they make devices, and on the other hand, make content for the devices - and other similar devices. Basically the Playstation division has been some sort of exception for bringing in the money. After restructuring, the game & network division have been making money pretty well, but considering the financial risk in releasing new systems and increasing development costs and times for games, it becomes harder and harder to justify exclusivity to consoles. Considering Hirai said years ago that Playstation focuses on service, I'd see it more likely that Playstation will be a service and you can get this set-top box called Playstation you can use to play these games on Playstation network at your living room. And Sony may even license the systems to other manufacturers, so that they either just get royalties from or manufacture some systems themselves. This is pretty much what Google does - they licence their content shop platform to any system possible.

If you look at how the tech world have been for a decade: Sony copies Google, Apple copies Sony, Google copies Apple and Microsoft tries just to hang in there. 

This is exactly what Valve is trying to do. They attempted it a decade ago with Steam Machines, but we know how that went lol. Now they've found their own niche with first party hardware, but with their open-source OS that can be downloaded anywhere. Big difference though is Valve having the luxury of Steam being available on practically 99% of all computing OSs.

That would be an interesting prospect on what a set top box PlayStation might look like. Would Sony do what Valve does and make their own first party hardware but rather than it being open source, license out the OS to manufacturers?

This concept isn't new either as Nvidia/AMD have licensed out their GPU tech to other OEMs for a long time now and other manufacturers are able to adjust/modify to make their own unique product.