Sony stumbles

[Apl_J]

What I don't understand is how people don't learn from the previous generations.

If I remember right, the N64 only had like 6 games for its first six months. The 360 had its hardware fiasco, and the PS3 was, what, $600? It was also a complete nightmare to develop for. Do you remember any launch titles that held up well? Has any launch title ever been spectacular?

There is no such thing as a great launch in video game world, aside from perhaps the Wii and SNES. What's more is this generation is primed to make the most changes to what exactly the home console is. When I see how different development is on the next-gen consoles, plus the fact that multi-plats for current/next gen don't take full advantage of the hardware, and I personally can't find a reason to turf my 360.

I haven't reserved anything next gen, not out of responsibly managing money or anything like that, but purely out of utter disinterest. Unlike the rest of the electronic road, the X1 and PS4 will be exactly the same next year, only likely to be cheaper, with better hardware, better dashboard, more features, and last but not least, exclusively next-gen titles that actually use all those shiny parts on the inside to make something truly great. I'll just wait till then.

 

[Something Amyss]

I never said fanboys would keep up with the PS3 if the DRM was still true, fanboys would only keep the xbone afloat compared to completely bombing.

Outselling 20to 1 is not being kept afloat. Be realistic.

Fanboys couldn't keep the original Xbox from taking losses with likely higher numbers. Fiscally, it was a failure. Yet somehow, this would be more successful (than an almost complete failure by any real metric) wth a much more lopsided run?

Yeah, sorry, don't buy it.

 

[Matthew Jabour]

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.)

Not since the 16-bit generation has there been a console launch that could be considered "successful" by any stretch,

Gonna stop you there. There's a successful console launch almost every generation. The PS1 blew all prior sales records out of the water, and the PS2 sold even better at release. The Wii fared even better than those other two at launch, with their supply chains outright failing to keep up with all the demand. If those weren't successful launches, I don't know what would be considered one?

Next time you think of calling someone out for spouting unresearched gibberish, make sure your own house is in order.

 

[Brotha Desmond]

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?

Justout of curiosity, you do know that TitanFall isn't a launch title, right? The game has no official launch date yet. It's also not an exclusive. Aside from the X1, it'll be on the 360 and the PC.

 

[Atmos Duality]

At this point, watching either next-gen console bomb is going to be more interesting than the endless, knee-jerk topics speculating about who is screwing up and how.

Sony hasn't "done much" because just like at E3 (and how everyone was so quick to point out at the time), their offering is more or less the Status Quo...with a social media button.

 

[lunavixen]

For me, what's more important than "What's out at launch?" is "What's out a year from launch? and have their been any major technical issues with the console? (RRoD, i'm looking at you) I'm waiting a year before I get a PS4, one, to see what else comes out for it, two, gotta wait for a price drop, and three, that's when we'll see what titles are available.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

DISCLAIMER: I'm not defending MS, nor am I hammering SONY. I am merely stating that both systems have a fair shot and the "PS4 is better" claims aren't backed up by any real proof, just the blinding idea that it isn't an XBONE.

1. Launch titles don't mean squat. How many launch titles from the current on-the-way-out generation do any of you remember as the best thing since sliced bread and the savior of their respective console? I don't think that Resistance: Fall of Man made the PS3 great, nor did Perfect Dark Zero do that for the 360.

2. System flaws don't necessarily kill a system. The 360 RRoD didn't do much to halt its momentum, considering it was still beating the ever-loving crap out of the PS3 for a long time. PS3 never really outsold the 360 and only caught up (barely) in the latter years of the 7th gen.

3. SONY "winning" E3 doesn't mean jack. They sold the public an implied slogan, that the PS4 isn't the XBONE. Beyond that what really did they promise? No backwards compatibility for either system (though PS4 is supposed to "stream across the cloud" which means nothing if you have to re-buy those games) so they're equal (and MS has said they intend to do the same, but again no idea if you have to re-buy). The biggest takeaway from E3 2013 was the PS4 is "more powerful" but does that really mean much? Graphics power isn't necessarily an automatic gate to better games. Sony didn't really promise anything groundbreaking or "better". Microsoft just fucked up on their PR, which they've done a decent job of backtracking in the wake of consumer feedback.

4. Sony did remove a lot of functionality from their PS3 consoles, first with the PS2 backwards compatibility in newer "slim" models, and later with the firmware update removal of the OtherOS functionality which apparently people completely forgot about. That OtherOS removal was some of the biggest hate I've seen in a long time and its interesting that people just set that aside with their "stars in their eyes" love to PS4 again not being XBONE.

5. Time and mid-life exclusives will really show which system actually is better. Despite hate for the Kinect, people will still buy an XBONE if it has better exclusives and if their multiplayer service works better, as LIVE seemed to beat out PSN's free servers. Interesting note, people will pay for a service that is better functionality/efficiency/experience-wise than a free one. Free doesn't mean better.

So I'm not saying SONY won't pull out ahead this time, I'm saying take off the rose-colored glasses and look at what you see in front of you, what went on before and what is actually fact. Also another note, the Dreamcast was supposedly more powerful in hardware than the PS2, but the 3rd party games on PS2 looked better. Hardware isn't necessarily a game-changer.

Just give things time, judging a system pre-launch is ridiculous anyway. Myself I'll probably end up with both systems because I don't choose sides. I play games and the more I can play the better. This whole vs. shit is stupid anyway. Corporations exist to make you part with your hard earned cash, and while one may have better PR than the other, they're not necessarily your friend. All it means is they know how to get you to pay them better than the other guy.

 

[Thr33X]

Next time you think of calling someone out for spouting unresearched gibberish, make sure your own house is in order.

So then you admit to your post being "unresearched gibberish" as well then? I did had some counterpoints to make, but I guess you hit your own nail on the head. Bottom line is that in a few weeks people will tell the tale of how successful the PS4 will be and drivel like yours will be long forgotten.

I've done a disservice by just bumping this back up to the first page, but if only to make the message clear that people speak with their dollars and controllers louder than any long-winded poster on a internet forum. Take that as you will.