Sony stumbles

Matthew Jabour

New member
Jan 13, 2012
1,063
0
0
Remember how big and strong Sony seemed at the last E3? Remember how they seemed to respond to the Xbox One's policy like a rational person might, suggesting that deep in their heart, they really did have humans who cared for their customers? Remember when they vanquished the tyrant Microsoft and everyone swore that they had the next console generation all sewn up? Remember when you thought nothing could bring them down?

Well, nothing lasts forever.

Months have passed, and Microsoft has since regained some of their ground. Apologizing for their mistake, Microsoft seems to be trying to regain their consumer's trust. Now, I'm not one to forgive and forget - I made a blood pact with some of you to remember it to the end - but now that Matrick has been Nixoned, they might just have a chance. They have done what they can, and it seems to have somewhat worked.

But what has Sony been doing in this time? Well, aside from taking a few small swipes at Microsoft, they really haven't been doing much of anything. They basically seemed confident that they had this coming generation locked up, much like they did with the PS3 and Nintendo before with the Gamecube. But perhaps this was not the case.

Let's take a look at the most important part of all this. The part that Microsoft neglected and started their PR nightmares with, and the only part Nintendo seems to work on: games. An important fact from the PS4 reveal and at E3 that people seem to have forgotten was that, when you get right down to it, there weren't that many actual games announced. The most impressive one, hands down, was Watch Dogs, and Ubisoft recently pulled that one back. (Take it from someone who was looking forward to Rayman Legends back last year; I know that feel.) Apart from that, what's left? Killzone at launch and Infamous on the way. Good games, but not capable of supporting a system, especially since you can't play PS3 games on it either. There's a handful of indie titles, and while strong independent support is definitely a plus, in this case it seems more like an asterisk on the back of the box than a system seller.

And it's not just at launch; in the following months, not a lot of new games are coming to the system. The ones that are coming are mostly multiplatform, including PS3, and that might be the most damning feature of all - why buy a new system when you can get the same games on your old one? This is exactly the dilemma Nintendo had with the Wii U, and that was with no opposition. Now Sony has to compete with not only a Nintendo that, after a year, is finally offering a steady stream of good games, but a Microsoft that actually does have quite a few games of its own. Dead Rising, Ryse, Titanfall - their launch lineup practically blows the other two out of the water.

Did I mention financials? Sony has been suffering a string of financial setbacks for months now. The fact that their games section only losing $8 million is the least of their worries is, in fact, the greatest of their worries. Nintendo hasn't quite been in the black, either, but their sales numbers allow a lot more optimism than Sony's, with a slow growth steadily emerging. And Microsoft's doing just fine, especially since they also make money off of their PC sales. (By the way, nice job, PC master race! You're certainly striking a bold move against the Big 3 by picking one of them and supporting them financially! Truly, you are the wise ones.)

Now, I'm not saying Sony is doomed. A few months ago, we were all convinced that Microsoft was destined to go down like Sega, and we certainly messed up there. However, they haven't won yet. And they might not win. Perhaps S&M will end up locked in another endless tug of war, while Nintendo collects the large pile of money nobody else seems to have noticed. But hey, that's just my theory. And, judging by my previous experience with arguing on the internet, I'm wrong and my mom was a whore. So, what do you think?

Bonus: Did you ever think that Sega would win the console wars back in the day? And why?
 

josemlopes

New member
Jun 9, 2008
3,950
0
0
They basicly revealed nothing during E3 other then "We are not selling you a Xbox ONE" and the consumers somehow thought that they were selling a console from the heavens made from magic and rainbows, now comes the time where they actually have to reveal their dirt so obviously they arent looking their best right now.
 

BreakfastMan

Scandinavian Jawbreaker
Jul 22, 2010
4,367
0
0
Did we learn nothing from Jim Sterling? Doesn't matter what comes out at launch. What matters is what I am playing 6 months from launch, and Sony seems to have things better evenly distributed than MS. That also doesn't mention the fact that the PS4 is more powerful than the Xbone, that Ryse looks like ass, and that Titanfall (which isn't coming out at launch, btw) is way overhyped for some reason. PS4 will do just fine.
 

TehCookie

New member
Sep 16, 2008
3,919
0
0
I don't see any console failing, nor there being any winner. I expect the PS4/Xbone sales to be like the PS3/360, pretty similar. The only major change is Nintendo will no longer be in the lead with the casual crowd, but I'm curious to see if they will be at the same level as their competitors or fall behind trying to pander to all kinds of gamers.

Though I never suspected Microsoft of failing, or even doing poorly. There's too many fanboys for that. Sony was never caring about the customers beyond their wallets, I just hoped they would stick with classic gaming customers and not get distracted by gimmicks like the kinect or touchscreens or DRM. I was also hoping the touchpad they put on the controller is as easy to ignore as the PSmove. If they stayed the same since the E3 announcement things would be dandy, but it seems like with all the new press it keeps looking worse (no external HDD support, removing media center). A lot of systems are seeing slower starts and end up doing fine later on so the initial sales don't worry me as much. Look at the 3DS or even the PS3.

Bonus: I wish Sega would've won but I was too much of a realist to actually think that. I had a Sega and loved it, but everyone else I knew had a Nintendo. Nintendo characters never appealed to me either.
 

WhyWasThat

New member
Jul 2, 2010
381
0
0
BreakfastMan said:
Did we learn nothing from Jim Sterling? Doesn't matter what comes out at launch. What matters is what I am playing 6 months from launch, and Sony seems to have things better evenly distributed than MS. That also doesn't mention the fact that the PS4 is more powerful than the Xbone, that Ryse looks like ass, and that Titanfall (which isn't coming out at launch, btw) is way overhyped for some reason. PS4 will do just fine.
This, basically.

It amazes me how short-sighted even apparently 'hardcore' gamers are being about this console launch. In case any of you have forgotten, a console's success in the eyes of the gamer is not dictated by the quality of its offerings in the first month, 6 months or even the first year. Chances are, PS4 and Xbox One will be around for at least the same length of time as PS3 and 360.

The games will come, and I can almost guarantee that Sony's will be far and above the better exclusives. Microsoft will continue to try and buy their way into an industry they don't understand, as they've always done.
 

josemlopes

New member
Jun 9, 2008
3,950
0
0
BreakfastMan said:
Did we learn nothing from Jim Sterling? Doesn't matter what comes out at launch. What matters is what I am playing 6 months from launch, and Sony seems to have things better evenly distributed than MS. That also doesn't mention the fact that the PS4 is more powerful than the Xbone, that Ryse looks like ass, and that Titanfall (which isn't coming out at launch, btw) is way overhyped for some reason. PS4 will do just fine.
lol, 6 months? Im going to wait 1/2 years before judging what console can offer the best in my interest (still mostly leaning to the PS4 since if it can handle these games better it probably can handle whatever comes next better too).

People deciding what console to get by looking at the launch line-up really dont have a clue that the console is supposed to last more then a year.

Just remember the launch line-up of the 360 and the PS3 and how in about 2 years the games coming out were already miles ahead of what came back then.
 

Eclectic Dreck

New member
Sep 3, 2008
6,662
0
0
WhyWasThat said:
TehCookie said:
Sony was never caring about the customers beyond their wallets
Explain how you arrived at this belief, please.
It is a massive corporation that is beholden to stockholders who expect return on investment. Really, it's the same across the board and ultimately a company that actually does care about such things is the slim exception.
 

krazykidd

New member
Mar 22, 2008
6,099
0
0
The bigger question is, who buys these consoles at launch, and why? Seriously have we learned nothing over the years? It's not before 1-2 years in that games become interesting. And by that time the interesting "series" will already have their first games pretty cheap. If you have heaps of cash,fine more power to you, but the rest should do the smart thing and wait.
 

Phrozenflame500

New member
Dec 26, 2012
1,080
0
0
Matthew Jabour said:
Now, I'm not saying Sony is doomed. A few months ago, we were all convinced that Microsoft was destined to go down like Sega, and we certainly messed up there. However, they haven't won yet. And they might not win. Perhaps S&M will end up locked in another endless tug of war, while Nintendo collects the large pile of money nobody else seems to have noticed. But hey, that's just my theory. And, judging by my previous experience with arguing on the internet, I'm wrong and my mom was a whore. So, what do you think?
Frankly I think Sony still is in the lead. It's more powerful, and while that didn't make a difference last generation this time they're also 100$ cheaper. You're right in that the games may be one of the big deciders, Microsoft still has Halo and will have Titanfall and that's a major blow to Sony. I'd say that the xBone won't show a major initial disadvantage, but unless they drop the price and/or increase the power later on sales will drop off late-gen.

That being said, you're still better off with a PC.
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0
josemlopes said:
People deciding what console to get by looking at the launch line-up really dont have a clue that the console is supposed to last more then a year.
It's pretty easy to tell which console will be best for you as you buy the console that will have the most 1st-party games you like. Sony has always made the better 1st-party games vs Microsoft or Nintendo IMO. Plus, Sony puts out more games than Nintendo and Microsoft combined and makes games of ALL genres, they've published 2 AAA adventure games this gen for crying out loud. The PS4/Xbone are going to have all the 3rd-party with the occasional exceptions like M$ buying Titanfall and PS4 getting probably the same amount of Japanese exclusives (like this gen) since the Japanese don't give 2 shits about the Xbox. The Wii U will have your Nintendo games and that's just about it. Nintendo again put themselves on an island by creating a next-gen console with last-gen hardware. Once next-gen comes into to full swing, it won't be a simple job to port games over to the Wii U due to its hardware just like the Wii of this gen; so by buying a Wii U, you get Nintendo games but lose out on pretty much all the other games.
 

SNCommand

New member
Aug 29, 2011
283
0
0
Sony proved this generation that they can deliver exclusives at a decent pace, and that was during a generation they trailed behind for a long time in the beginning

This year the Xbox 360 had Gears of War Judgement, and State of Decay, while the PS3 had God of War: Ascension, Ni No Kuni, Last of Us, and Beyond: Two Souls with Gran Turismo 6 to be released in December

I'm confident that the PS4 can match or beat the competition regarding exclusives
 

TK421

New member
Apr 16, 2009
826
0
0
I honestly hope that the PS4 fails. I don't want Microsoft to succeed, mind you, I want them to crash and burn too. I feel betrayed by Sony with the PS4 because of the PS+ membership being required to play games online. The only reason they are implementing that is because they know they can get away with it, and that makes me sad.

I don't care too much, as I have reverted completely to PC gaming, but before I'd heard that bit about online play I was at least considering getting a PS4, and now there is no chance at all.

:[
 

Simple Bluff

New member
Dec 30, 2009
581
0
0
I don't think anybody thought MS was going to "fail" apart from the incredibly disillusioned. A bunch of nerds on the Escapist and Reddit miffed by DRM or whatever wasn't dooming the X1. It certainly wasn't helping mind, and I'm sure MS will feel the sting, but it was never go down like Sega.
Matthew Jabour said:
And it's not just at launch; in the following months, not a lot of new games are coming to the system. The ones that are coming are mostly multiplatform, including PS3, and that might be the most damning feature of all - why buy a new system when you can get the same games on your old one? This is exactly the dilemma Nintendo had with the Wii U, and that was with no opposition. Now Sony has to compete with not only a Nintendo that, after a year, is finally offering a steady stream of good games, but a Microsoft that actually does have quite a few games of its own. Dead Rising, Ryse, Titanfall - their launch lineup practically blows the other two out of the water.
This has happened since the PS1 launch. And maybe before that too, but that's as far back as I can remember. The PS2 only launched with like eleven games, and most of them were shovelware. Really, it comes down to the first quarter of its release.
What's going to help Sony and MS a lot is Christmas. No one under normal circumstances would buy a console at launch unless they were insanely rich or insanely dedicated to gaming. However, with Christmas coming up, a lot of parents are going to buy the consoles for their kids and a lot of other people are just going to want to treat themselves. The quality of the launch is pretty damned irrelevant at this point. Well, not entirely of course, but none of this is new ground.
Although I agree that MS has the better launch titles, but that's a matter of opinion.

And Microsoft's doing just fine, especially since they also make money off of their PC sales. (By the way, nice job, PC master race! You're certainly striking a bold move against the Big 3 by picking one of them and supporting them financially! Truly, you are the wise ones.)
Wow, there is so much wrong with this. First, Microsoft don't make PCs, they make Operating Systems and software, which you don't need to use. Second, "PC" is NOT synonymous with MS. There are many PC'ers out there foregoing Windows in favour of Linux and whatever else. Thirdly, not everyone is on a valiant crusade against corporations, and rightfully so. Fourthly, despite common complaints, most of Microsoft's software is incredibly competent, functional and easy to use. They deserve the money they get for that stuff (obvious exceptions exist, I know, shut up).
BTW OP, honest question: What operating system are you using right now?

Bonus: Did you ever think that Sega would win the console wars back in the day? And why?
I was too young to understand the concept of a console war when the Dreamcast came out. All I remember is that nobody cared about it. I don't think I noticed when it disappeared. And years later, I wasn't surprised.
 

shrekfan246

Not actually a Japanese pop star
May 26, 2011
6,374
0
0
krazykidd said:
The bigger question is, who buys these consoles at launch, and why?
Funnily enough, the people who are keeping the console side of the industry actually alive.

The "wait for more games" philosophy is all well and good, of course, but if every consumer were to actually do that, then every video game system would crash and burn right out of the gate. Just look at the Dreamcast. If nobody actually owns a console, no games are going to be released on it. And 1-2 years of making absolutely no revenue off of something as expensive as the Xbox or Playstation would likely be enough to send any company packing.
 

WanderingFool

New member
Apr 9, 2009
3,991
0
0
Simple Bluff said:
Bonus: Did you ever think that Sega would win the console wars back in the day? And why?
I was too young to understand the concept of a console war when the Dreamcast came out. All I remember is that nobody cared about it. I don't think I noticed when it disappeared. And years later, I wasn't surprised.
I wanted a Dreamcast back in the day... but I cant for the life of me remember why... I honestly cant think of anything. Than the PS2 came out and that was that.
 

josemlopes

New member
Jun 9, 2008
3,950
0
0
Phoenixmgs said:
josemlopes said:
People deciding what console to get by looking at the launch line-up really dont have a clue that the console is supposed to last more then a year.
It's pretty easy to tell which console will be best for you as you buy the console that will have the most 1st-party games you like.
Following that thought with the launch line-up we have for both consoles would lead me to believe that Microsoft has the upper hand, the thing is that the launch line-up only covers a year so for a console cycle thats supposed to last 10 years that line-up means shit in the decision of buying the console. Yet people still take it way too much into account for that decision.

Remember when the Xbox 360 had a shitload of exclusives and the PS3 had no games? It still went on for a while and things then changed for both. To predict how a console is going to perform throughout its life cycle only based on a launch line-up and previous strategies is dumb, let it sink in for a while and see how it goes.
 

Simple Bluff

New member
Dec 30, 2009
581
0
0
WanderingFool said:
Simple Bluff said:
Bonus: Did you ever think that Sega would win the console wars back in the day? And why?
I was too young to understand the concept of a console war when the Dreamcast came out. All I remember is that nobody cared about it. I don't think I noticed when it disappeared. And years later, I wasn't surprised.
I wanted a Dreamcast back in the day... but I cant for the life of me remember why... I honestly cant think of anything. Than the PS2 came out and that was that.
There was one moment when I would've killed for a Dreamcast - when I saw the cover for Sonic Adventure in the video store. In my naivete I tried renting it, under the impression that you could play it on the Playstation (I wasn't completely down with the concept of exclusivity at the time). Luckily the store clerk was honest enough to inform my parents that it would only work on the Dreamcast.

That was the first and last time I acknowledged the console's existence for years. It's a shame really, by all accounts it was supposed to be a nifty piece of hardware.
 

Saltyk

Sane among the insane.
Sep 12, 2010
16,755
0
0
Speaking of the games, Xbox One exclusives at launch look like shit. Ryse? Dead Rising 3? Forza? Not one of those even vaguely interests me. I don't even care about Killzone, but it looks far more interesting than ANY of those titles. Enough that I am thinking of picking it up. And Sony has a nicer variety which aren't all grey and brown, including one game, Knack, that I could feel comfortably letting a child actually play. Which I think is just as important as anything else in this. Which game do you think parents would buy for little Timmy? Knack or Dead Rising 3?

I'm honestly not that excited about any of the launch titles. But Infamous 3 and Destiny (which has exclusive PS4 content) look damn good. And Sony is promising a hundred games in the first year. I think the 100 games is the important part. Not the small launch lineup. Because...

BreakfastMan said:
Did we learn nothing from Jim Sterling? Doesn't matter what comes out at launch. What matters is what I am playing 6 months from launch, and Sony seems to have things better evenly distributed than MS. That also doesn't mention the fact that the PS4 is more powerful than the Xbone, that Ryse looks like ass, and that Titanfall (which isn't coming out at launch, btw) is way overhyped for some reason. PS4 will do just fine.
Pretty much this. Also, as I mentioned in another thread, the most up to date information implies that Sony has a comfortable lead in the US. And using data on the sales history of the PS3 and 360 and the launch window, I don't think PS4 is in any trouble of having a strong foothold. It's a question of maintaining it. And, if they pull off 100 games within the year and have some good exclusives and Indies, they could hold that.

Let's not predict failure before the system even launches. Also, can we make a deal that the likely rough launch won't be enough reason to forecast doom?

As for Titanfall, I admit I would have probably bought it. If it came out on PS4. It certainly won't get me to buy a Xbox One. My interest was nowhere near that strong.

krazykidd said:
The bigger question is, who buys these consoles at launch, and why? Seriously have we learned nothing over the years? It's not before 1-2 years in that games become interesting. And by that time the interesting "series" will already have their first games pretty cheap. If you have heaps of cash,fine more power to you, but the rest should do the smart thing and wait.
I preordered BECAUSE I don't have heaps of money. It was much easier to put down $20 a week to slowly pay off the console I knew I was going to buy than to wait a year and then pay it all at once. At least one of my coworkers is insanely jealous that he didn't think to do the same, despite the fact that I told him my plan even before I preordered, so he could have easily done the same.