Support NeoGAF

[John Cowheel]

I was firmly in the PS4 camp for most of the generation, but now I find myself pretty much only using the Xbox One (outside of exclusives). The PS4 is a clunky piece of junk in comparison. If Microsoft can solve the games issue it has a shot. That's a bigger hurdle than any other, there is not a lot of reason to switch teams if you already have a PS4. The only reason why I KNOW the Xbox One is better now is because I'm a tech enthusiast, but the truth of the matter is that Xbox One is better outside of the games and it is by a long shot.

 

[Gavon West]

I was firmly in the PS4 camp for most of the generation, but now I find myself pretty much only using the Xbox One (outside of exclusives). The PS4 is a clunky piece of junk in comparison. If Microsoft can solve the games issue it has a shot. That's a bigger hurdle than any other, there is not a lot of reason to switch teams if you already have a PS4. The only reason why I KNOW the Xbox One is better now is because I'm a tech enthusiast, but the truth of the matter is that Xbox One is better outside of the games and it is by a long shot.

It really is though. Once Microsoft gets the first party sorted, the Xbox will be THE defacto gaming machine for me, personally. It literally slays at everything else.

 

[DForce]

I need to see what MS does with their major IPs because right now, Crackdown 3 looks like it's going to get a lot of mixed reviews, and this is one of their "biggest" releases this generation.

 

[John Cowheel]

I need to see what MS does with their major IPs because right now, Crackdown 3 looks like it's going to get a lot of mixed reviews, and this is one of their "biggest" releases this generation.

Oh it's going to be trash.

 

[CatLady]

Oh it's going to be trash.

I'm not interested in it at all, not my kind of game. Not sure if it's trash, but I definitely don't see 90 + / - MC in it's future.

 

[1inthechamber_]

Oh it's going to be trash.

I don't expect much from it but maybe a fun coop experience. 2 was bad but coop made it playable for me.

At least with game pass i don't have to buy it or anything.

 

[Clear]

Turbografix-16 launched 3 years prior and Genesis launched 2 years prior to the SNES yet all are considered a part of the 4th generation of consoles.

Thanks for bringing this up, this is a glaring inconsistency that's nontheless interesting because it shows the difference between marketing and technology. Its usually folded into the 4th gen because it was promoted as a 16bit machine, when its actually an 8-bit device and should rightfully belong in the 3rd if hardware specifications are your metric.

Its a great example of how as I've been saying all along, its not about tech, its about commerce.

Explain how this is relevant. Without any dates necessary, we already know that the PS5 and X2 (whatever form they take) will be 9th gen systems. They will be contemporaries to the Switch. If they had launched day-and-date with the Switch, would that have suddenly transformed the Switch into a 9th gen console? Conversely, if the PS4 and X1 had waited and launched 3 years after the Wii U, would that have made the Wii U a 7th gen console? I just want to understand your logic.

The relevance, as I've stated repeatedly is that "generations" are about relative performance within the marketplace, hence when the dispartity in market presence extends out much beyond a year, the relative overlap makes it arguable which platforms represent its competitors. In simple terms, if its just a year, its fair to assume that the majority of the device's life will be spent competing with the next generation devices launched by its competitors.

You keep banging on about me making "arbitrary" distinctions, but hasn't it occurred to you the whole notion of "generations" is by its very nature arbitrary? I take my cues for its meaning based primarily on usage, when "generational comparisons" are made, whereas you seem fixated on its meaning in terms of a company's product-refresh cadence.

Something that as I've pointed out repeatedly, only works on single manufacturers/product lines in isolation. You cannot pin it as a designation on the industry as a whole because every participant works at their own speed, what dictates longevity or not is always performance in the marketplace.

The original definitions of being based on bus-width went out the window a long time ago, I was going to bring up the PC Engine the last time I addressed the topic specifically, but I figured the variance between Wii and PS3/360 was a more famous, cut-and-dried example.

 

[DForce]

Oh it's going to be trash.

It's hard to see it getting higher than 74 on MC.

 

[Rogas]

None of these games flopped, they all sold well enough, perhaps not to heightened expectations, but they did well.... Killzone and Knack were the more successful of the lot, remember, they were launch games, so they moved units by default. As a matter of fact, the game I bought with my PS4 was Shadowfall, it's the only disc game I have, since I'm totally digital this gen. I still remember all the gifs of knack out-selling a popular Nintendo game which came out at the time "on this here forums", You might want to revisit some old threads, as Knack did very well.

1886 was successful too. Maybe DC was the least successful, but the weather patch brought lots of folk on, the re-reviews helped and the great support it received in dlc, bikes expansion + the season pass got many folk to buy the game+season pass, due to the the great word of mouth and added content it received. In the end, DC was definitely successful, but it was too little to late for EVO, since their last two launches were not smooth ones, with reports of lots of wastage and underperformance from the higher brass at EVO. Sony just felt they should cut them off for many reasons than just DC...

Even what was left of EVO, after Sony got rid of the old guard, they couldn't catch a break, maybe something creeped into their DNA along the way, because On-Rush failed when they went to Codemasters. People wanted a traditional Racer or at least a mode that represented traditional racing and they expected more content at launch, after trying the beta, Onrush lost lots of potential sales.... because the messaging for what it was was not quite clear and people were looking for podium finishes and the like....

It is what it is, but sometimes you just have to do what you have to do for the bottom line, and Sony felt they had to let EVO go under the circumstances. I have to say, Evo's games are fun, their tech is amazing. Even On-rush is a very beautiful looking game with great IQ and tech and of course lots of fun, but they needed to hit their messaging better, they should have traditional podium finishes in there day 1 and with more content. EVO just needed to nail their launches better, so maybe they had a fundamental management issue after all...

As for your assertions on if these games were really successful, it's not quite right. If Playground abandons Forza Horizon for a bit and focus on Fable, does it mean Horizon 4 flopped? Should Naughty Dog only make Uncharted because the sales are great? Then we'd never get Tlou. Killzone series was successful on PS3 and so was Shadow fall, but if Guerilla did not try something else, we would never have received the magnificent Horizon Zero Dawn. It's good to give a series a break or shift it to another team or even reboot it, to keep things fresh or change it up......

FYI, From the rumor mill.......Guerrilla is working on an MP style Killzone. They have two teams btw and San Diego is rumored to be working on a new Uncharted. This means that Naughty is already working on something new for PS5 after they wrap up Tlou2 soonish, as they have two teams just the same. The UC team should be working on something new as we speak.....

You see, you don't need to buy a million studios. You can expand on the ones that you have, split them. You keep the great talent pool, they share tech and help each other out on their projects. You shift talent and resources on a project as you see fit....That's s why you can have two franchises coming out of ND, perhaps 3 soon, if they expand again. All the games will look great, perform great and younger directors can get guidance from the seasoned UC and Lou directors. You need to read the market, you need to see how things can evolve beyond saying "we bought five studios" on an E3 stage.....

A thelastword post, I'm not reading that dribble. Get it through your thick, self-centered skull that Knack, DriveClub, Killzone and The Order were all failures of epic proportions.

Tip: stay in the racing thread so you can get constantly owned. FH4 > every single racing game Sony has ever made

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

I feel the love in here. It feels warm.

 

[Jigsaah]

All their games have underperformed, that is why they have resorted to number of players, gamepass subs who share games and who used the free trial and significant reductions in gamepass subscription prices....

It's always a riot to see people defend that.....MS said all their games are doing fine....Sunset Overdrive, SOD2, Quantum Break, Sea of Thieves, Forza 7, SLT all did well.....and "met expectations", but yet these games see serious reductions in quick order and are packed in at every turn without significant movement at the $60.00 pricepoint as was the case with UC4, BLoodBorne, GOW, Spiderman etc....


These are good points and ones I have made, but what's more is that the XBONEX still has worse framerate in many games vs PRO.....They're trying to hit 4k when the console can't always handle it, even with dynamic resolutions and sometimes resolutions below 4k, PRO still has better consistency......Right now, the XBONEX is doing checkerboard Rendering something fierce too....So many promises by Phil, "Promises By Phil TM".......Got to trademark that tbh......Yet, persons will say "it has 4k games, but so does PRO", which means that the odd 4k title like Farcry5 and Red Dead at the same 30fps with some med to low settings in part, does not really detract from the fact......

The XBOX horde tries to pretend XBONEX was great value 1 year later @ $500.00, but tries to belittle PRO like it's not powerful enough....If PRO was $500.00 with XBONEX specs or better 1 year earlier, they would say Sony would be crazy to go back to that pricepoint.....The truth is, XBONEX coming 1 year later with the same jaguar cores, 4Gb more memory, less CU complexity and custom features, less rops on board and a few upgrades in clockspeed at the cost of better cooling should not cost you $500.00 one year later, when prices have decreased for parts, silicon have matured and better deals could be garnered in mass production....XBONEX should have been $400 (1) year later, perhaps even $350.00 since it's no big shift from PRO, frames are not significanlty better, then perhaps they would have forced Sony to get the PRO to $300 in 2017. Yet at $350.00, an XBONEX is still a hard sell over a PRO at $400.00, because PRO has the games...So yes, it's not all about hardware and of course the majority of gamers are still on 1080p sets, which the vanilla PS4 has catered to the entire generation.......whilst XBOX-ONE vanilla even falls below 720p territory in certain titles.......And this is where the majority of folk are btw....


They dominate in Warface, Smite, Fortnite as F2P's...They dominate in Monster Hunter, Overwatch, FF, COD, BF as third parties....They dominate with GTS, H1Z1, SFV as exclusives....They dominate with Fate Grand Order on mobile...They dominate with remote-play and shareplay, they dominate with crossplay....Should I go on?



So you don't know, but you want to challenge.....These are stats for PS4 only....

https://venturebeat.com/2018/06/28/...aystation-4-one-month-after-open-beta-launch/




So again, you don't know.....But yes, GTS trumps Forza 7 online.....Forza 7 has been playing catchup and only recently implemented online features GTS had day 1, like ghosted cars et al.......Online events are always bubbling and packed in GTS, motorsport aspect is superior, better cars, better production values, higher quality racing with a tutorial to show you proper etiquette.....Pit crews, fuel managment, tire management all up the game in an online race......In essence, a much superior online game with the players to show...

As for the players and events....and who this attracts.....

Watch this first....



Then upgrade to this...



It's not even close in favor of GTS...


So in order words, give MS a pity win.....? Tbh, you don't just concede a win to a company, they have to earn it...MS has never earned a win, so let them keep trying, but all this fake hyperbole "for an MS future" is harming them the most...They're only digging their own pits, because they're hyperboling expectations to flatline delivery.....FYI, when MS does not deliver next gen like they didn't this gen, people will only go back to all their promises and cite "their bs", just as we're doing now...History has a way of repeating itself....MS has not changed their strategy, they just hype every thing that has no impact in the generation; crossplay, BC (very partial bc at that, with titles they so please, bad framerates persists and stutter in many titles), E3, I mean Sony is not going to E3, WOW that's big....MS is going to win next gen....Goodness gracious, wake-up....

Tv, Kinect, Snap, Skype, power of the cloud, Azure, Creators of Direct X.....So many talking high points of pure hype drek......They were unto crossplay to show Sony as a bad guy when Sony has been a pioneer of CP since PS2, now they're unto the X'cloud hype train, when no one from MS or any Xbox fan in the last year or since PSNOW on PS3 many moons ago, had nothing positive to say about streaming or PSNOW, because Sony was on that train, lonesome you see, in other words to Sony, those talking points, been there done that and doing that and have even shown tremendous success with it......Now what do you know, streaming is the future, but only promised on a hype check from MS in the distant future, but that's enough for us, we need nothing more...Forget a service that exists, we offer you this superior promised one......So we have foretellers like this author and others speaking about streaming and all those great designs by the Gods at MS....That MS'Manna from heaven, if you will.....It will change the gaming landscape you see, it will change gaming as you know it....

Yet, I'm still waiting on my "give me a bevy of great exclusives check to clear on the XBOX-ONE", I'm still waiitng on "my power of the cloud games check that gives unlimited power to the games", "I'm still waiting on my true 4k console check to clear, not the PRO and XBOX-ONE S with checkerboarding and upscaling, certainly not that check", I'm still waitng on all my games having dedicated servers check to clear" and lo and behold, so many other checks which bounced.....Yet now, you're asking me to believe in some upcoming Xcloud check with my name on it...WHY? I never got the ones before.....


XBOX-ONE will slay PS4 in 2024 confirmed.......You see all you have to do is wait...It's coming......WHYDONTYOU wait..?[/QUOT]

Lmfao!!! I just can't where did Gaf get this guy?

 

[Great Hair]

What happens when Microsoft start to make entries for Uncharted, TLOU, GoW?

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

Making excuses? I really don't care, fact is in the df videos and I find it hilarious fanboys are making shit up now.

If it was the other way around you'd boast about it. But unfortunately it isn't, so all you kids talk about is sales now in every thread .

When it was Ps4 vs Xbone, it was "lol720p" or whatever and "lolps4hasnogames". But now "power doesn't matter" and sales are everything lol.

I'll continue to laugh at you kids till someone shows me Sony cutting them a check for their sales.

It’s irrefutable that the X is more powerful than the pro. No one is denying that, but it’s to be expected from later hardware. I don’t condone console wars and I support and own both consoles, but when you have a $500 system running resolutions that 13 years old hardware can run, of course you are going to garner negativity unfortunately. Yep, people were making fun of a $600 ps3 that had worst running and looking third party games as well. It’s unfortunate, but it happens in the console world. The launch of the Xbox one didn’t exactly do Microsoft any favors either.

Xbox x is great hardware, but sadly most people will never get to experience it due to its higher point of entry. Yeah ps4 was at a point where it had the better performing and looking games, but it is also selling the best at the time. I’m not taking sides, just stating facts.

 

[1inthechamber_]

It’s irrefutable that the X is more powerful than the pro. No one is denying that, but it’s to be expected from later hardware. I don’t condone console wars and I support and own both consoles, but when you have a $500 system running resolutions that 13 years old hardware can run, of course you are going to garner negativity unfortunately. Yep, people were making fun of a $600 ps3 that had worst running and looking third party games as well. It’s unfortunate, but it happens in the console world. The launch of the Xbox one didn’t exactly do Microsoft any favors either.

Xbox x is great hardware, but sadly most people will never get to experience it due to its higher point of entry. Yeah ps4 was at a point where it had the better performing and looking games, but it is also selling the best at the time. I’m not taking sides, just stating facts.

You're just now coming here then I guess. Read some of the comments from the people here actually denying that the X is more powerful lol.

I enjoy both my consoles for different games and reasons.

 

[Pallas]

I don’t know about dominating but I think it’ll be a lot tighter race next gen.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

You're just now coming here then I guess. Read some of the comments from the people here actually denying that the X is more powerful lol.

I enjoy both my consoles for different games and reasons.

Lol really? I had no idea people actually thought the pro was more powerful than the x. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the x obliterates the pro like many people I talk to claim, but saying the pro is stronger is simply crazy.

 

[Kagey K]

Do a 360 and walk away.

This was the worst meme ever and a backfire in most people that actually thought a 360 was a 180.

It’s way to soon to call anything on the future, but it’s funny to watch these next gen prediction threads go the way they do.

Why can’t we wait until we have some info before starting this stuff?

 

[Kagey K]

The Xbox 360 fell off a cliff in 2009 and never recovered.

U high?

 

[Lort]

U high?

His high on his own supply..

https://www.statista.com/statistics/680526/global-xbox-gaming-consoles-unit-sales/#0

2010 2011 and 2012 were all 10 million + a year and bigger than 2009.

 

[Kagey K]

His high on his own supply..

https://www.statista.com/statistics/680526/global-xbox-gaming-consoles-unit-sales/#0

2010 2011 and 2012 were all 10 million + a year and bigger than 2009.

I’m always a fan of fan fiction, but sometimes you just have to call it out.

 

[FStubbs]

Thanks for bringing this up, this is a glaring inconsistency that's nontheless interesting because it shows the difference between marketing and technology. Its usually folded into the 4th gen because it was promoted as a 16bit machine, when its actually an 8-bit device and should rightfully belong in the 3rd if hardware specifications are your metric.

Its a great example of how as I've been saying all along, its not about tech, its about commerce.



The relevance, as I've stated repeatedly is that "generations" are about relative performance within the marketplace, hence when the dispartity in market presence extends out much beyond a year, the relative overlap makes it arguable which platforms represent its competitors. In simple terms, if its just a year, its fair to assume that the majority of the device's life will be spent competing with the next generation devices launched by its competitors.

You keep banging on about me making "arbitrary" distinctions, but hasn't it occurred to you the whole notion of "generations" is by its very nature arbitrary? I take my cues for its meaning based primarily on usage, when "generational comparisons" are made, whereas you seem fixated on its meaning in terms of a company's product-refresh cadence.

Something that as I've pointed out repeatedly, only works on single manufacturers/product lines in isolation. You cannot pin it as a designation on the industry as a whole because every participant works at their own speed, what dictates longevity or not is always performance in the marketplace.

The original definitions of being based on bus-width went out the window a long time ago, I was going to bring up the PC Engine the last time I addressed the topic specifically, but I figured the variance between Wii and PS3/360 was a more famous, cut-and-dried example.

The tl;dr of your argument is still "Sony and Microsoft decide generations, not Nintendo, because reasons."

 

[ZywyPL]

The tl;dr of your argument is still "Sony and Microsoft decide generations, not Nintendo, because reasons."

You guys are fighting a lost cause, none of you will convince the other, just give up already. Bottom line is, all three console are 2010-2020 gen of hardware, they were released in the same period, hardware specs or the console concept don't matter.

 

[TLZ]

Maybe a little harsh?

I think he's being sincere since he suffers from the same. Not sure it's working for him though. Needs more sessions maybe?

 

[Clear]

The tl;dr of your argument is still "Sony and Microsoft decide generations, not Nintendo, because reasons."

Not at all. Just pointing out that when a generation has 2.5 to 3.5 years left in it at the time of product launch, its more useful to consider that product as part of the current generation, rather than the next.

Who provides the product is irrelevant, its entirely about timing and what the competition is.

Yes, every platform holder periodically refreshes their product line, and yes you can consider each refresh a new generation of that line. But if you did that for every provider on the market, and applied that increment across the board we'd be at Generation fucking 69 by now!

There has to have more to it than "company x has released their next gen widget" because if that was the case, generational designations wouldn't mean anything for the industry as a whole.

I'm frankly stunned that I've had to argue this simple point ad-nauseum for the last few days. Its crazy, it's not like I'm claiming anything controversial.

 

[PropellerEar]

Happy with PlayStation since PSX.

Had OG Xbox and 360, but towards the end of 360 they managed to kill any interest in their IP. Phil "Bag of hot air" Spencer doesn't impress me at all, let's see if studio purchases will result in quality games. (I have worked at one of MSFT's acquisitions that they have managed to squander.) Haven't seen anything that would make have any confidence at Xbox dominating consoles next gen, or me to consider Xbox again. X1x and elite is nice hardware though.

 

[geordiemp]

I think most journalists are worse fanboys than your average poster.
If they could predict markets thet would not be a journalist and be retired from now.
I cant be bothered to give them a click.

 

[Gavon West]

I don’t know about dominating but I think it’ll be a lot tighter race next gen.

They could dominate next gen though. And they wont necessarily need to sell a bunch of hardware to do it. Cloud gaming is coming. That expands the potential consumer real estate that's been virtually untouched for decades. This is one of the primary reasons why Microsoft is beefing up their 1st party stable.

What's the number -- like, 2 billion potential gamers they'll have access to???

GaF isnt going to want to hear any of that, but its the facts. Microsoft is playing to their strengths. Cloud technology (Azure) is definitely one of them. Sony just doesnt have the means to really compete in that arena. That's why Microsoft are more in preparation for Amazon and Google. Much bigger fish!

 

[Snake29]

They could dominate next gen though. And they wont necessarily need to sell a bunch of hardware to do it. Cloud gaming is coming. That expands the potential consumer real estate that's been virtually untouched for decades. This is one of the primary reasons why Microsoft is beefing up their 1st party stable.

What's the number -- like, 2 billion potential gamers they'll have access to???

GaF isnt going to want to hear any of that, but its the facts. Microsoft is playing to their strengths. Cloud technology (Azure) is definitely one of them. Sony just doesnt have the means to really compete in that arena. That's why Microsoft are more in preparation for Amazon and Google. Much bigger fish!

And again...you are overreacting. Internet for most people in the US didn't change much in speed over the years. In Europe, it's a different talk, much higher speeds overall. Cloud gaming is not going to change much with xCloud. internet speeds are still not stable globally. It's the beginning for both Sony and Microsoft, but it's not going to be the default way since the mainstream will not go full cloud gaming coming year...

GaF isnt going to want to hear any of that, but its the facts. Microsoft is playing to their strengths. Cloud technology (Azure) is definitely one of them. Sony just doesnt have the means to really compete in that arena. That's why Microsoft are more in preparation for Amazon and Google. Much bigger fish!

How do you even know? Cloud Tech Azure is not build for xCloud...Since the have to build it for xCloud with custom blades. Same thing Sony does with PSNow. You are ignoring the fact that PSNow is already running several years and it is Cloud technology. They also expending atm and for next-gen, Microsoft isn't even better in cloud tech if they don't have the people inhouse. Both companies hire people with Cloud background.

 

[Gavon West]

And again...you are overreacting. Internet for most people in the US didn't change much in speed over the years. In Europe, it's a different talk, much higher speeds overall. Cloud gaming is not going to change much with xCloud. internet speeds are still not stable globally. It's the beginning for both Sony and Microsoft, but it's not going to be the default way since the mainstream will not go full cloud gaming coming year...

First off, you saying Cloud technology is just the beginning for Microsoft just proves you must live in a bubble or something. Cloud technology is massive in this day and age, and its only getting bigger.

Secondly, Microsoft is said to have made huge modifications when it comes to Cloud streaming to tackle a lot of the challenges when faced with streaming games. Don't know about you, but if anyone could handle such a challenge between MS and Sony, it's Microsoft.

Third, no one said its supposed to be the default way. It doesnt need to be. It's just another viable option to play your games while on the go -- from the devices you already own. You also have to consider Microsoft are coming at next gen from various SKU's as well. Game Pass is also extremly affordable. Imagine having access to over 100+ game while on the go? You're thinking way too small. And worse, in a traditional way of measuring success when speaking on console gaming.

No, I'm not overreacting. Cloud gaming has certainly made huge advancements. If it weren't so, Amazon nor Google would be a part of the cloud streaming conversation. You keep the blinders on if you want to. Static devices (consoles) was just a starting point, not the end game.

 

[Aurelian]

I was firmly in the PS4 camp for most of the generation, but now I find myself pretty much only using the Xbox One (outside of exclusives). The PS4 is a clunky piece of junk in comparison. If Microsoft can solve the games issue it has a shot. That's a bigger hurdle than any other, there is not a lot of reason to switch teams if you already have a PS4. The only reason why I KNOW the Xbox One is better now is because I'm a tech enthusiast, but the truth of the matter is that Xbox One is better outside of the games and it is by a long shot.

Aren't the games... y'know, the main reason you buy a console?

I'm reminded of how some Android fans wonder why the iPad dominates the tablet market even though it doesn't have home screen widgets or have a desktop-like mode or... in both cases, it's all about the apps. Just as I don't buy a tablet to stare at the home screen, I don't buy a console to marvel at the theoretical GPU power or the multitasking. So it's technically better, but I wouldn't call it an overwhelming advantage when the games aren't there.

I do think Microsoft stands a real shot if it tackles the game situation, but that's a big "if." And I'm not sure all those recent studio acquisitions are going to lead to major exclusives. I can't help but think some of those games will be closer to Recore (that is, exclusive but mediocre) instead of something to rival Uncharted or Horizon Zero Dawn. I'd like Microsoft to recapture the coolness it had in the Xbox 360 era -- I'm just not counting on Microsoft to recapture that spirit a decade-plus later.

 

[ZywyPL]

That's why Microsoft are more in preparation for Amazon and Google. Much bigger fish!

But then again, what do Amazon or Google have? The infrastructure, yes, but what about the content? I saw that The Grand Tour game trailer recentyl made by Amazon - it looks literally like an Android game, and doesn't even hit 30FPS once, is that what they want to compete with against MS or Sony? Experience? Zero. Customer base? Non-existent. Sony is in waaay better position than those two. Overally - MS has the full package, while Sony has only software, and Google and Amazon only hardware. MS is already testing the grounds with all sort of subscription models like All Access, Game Pass etc., they will have recognizable brands before the streaming era arrives, what about the rest of the party? Sony has PSPlus and Game Now, not the biggest deal but still better than nothing, And again where is Google and Amazon at? Really, starting from scratch in such a mature market will surely be one hell of a hard task to perform, just throwing the money left and right won't cut it.

 

[DForce]

Sony has had PS Now for years and they're aiming to put it on other devices. I know Xbox guys seem like MS is in a very unique position, but they're not. Xbox fans were so sure MS didn't need any more studios, but as we can see, MS went on a spending spree, which means it was a major problem. They will pretty much say everything is ok and MS is doing fine when it becomes painfully obvious that its not the case.

 

[Gavon West]

But then again, what do Amazon or Google have? The infrastructure, yes, but what about the content? I saw that The Grand Tour game trailer recentyl made by Amazon - it looks literally like an Android game, and doesn't even hit 30FPS once, is that what they want to compete with against MS or Sony? Experience? Zero. Customer base? Non-existent. Sony is in waaay better position than those two. Overally - MS has the full package, while Sony has only software, and Google and Amazon only hardware. MS is already testing the grounds with all sort of subscription models like All Access, Game Pass etc., they will have recognizable brands before the streaming era arrives, what about the rest of the party? Sony has PSPlus and Game Now, not the biggest deal but still better than nothing, And again where is Google and Amazon at? Really, starting from scratch in such a mature market will surely be one hell of a hard task to perform, just throwing the money left and right won't cut it.

I agree but the point still stands. Amazon and Google are making their own acquisitions as well. The mobile market makes more money than the console market - you have to consider this. That's pretty much where I think we'll see the bulk of their games, and they'll make their money hand over fist. Sony is in a much better position software wise when it comes to Amazon and Google, but it doesnt mean either of the two companies are completely ignorant on the topic of games. Thats why they are making acquisitions in studios with people who have the experience gauging the market. And their cloud services will be head over heels better than what Sony can bring to the table - when they do.

Hardcore gamers keep thinking in more traditional terms when it comes to gauging success when it comes to gaming -- hardware sales. It's no longer like that now. That's not to say hardware doesnt matter, it does. It's why Microsoft is approaching next gen with four SKU's.

But again, Microsoft doesnt have to sell a ton of hardware to dominate next gen. In fact, hardware is just a welcoming matt at this point. Cloud gaming, I believe, is going to be much bigger than most people think. It may not be 1:1 with latency issues but, if they can make the experience enjoyable and worth consumers time and money while on the go, next gen wont be determined by hardware sales like it has been. IT'll be software and services on the backs of the most affordable, and most convenient way as an access point. That's Cloud streaming. That's cell phones, tablets, smart Tv's etc.

I stand by the fact that Microsoft can very much "Dominate" next gen with the landscape expanding like it is. This is why I think its incredibly short sighted for people to just assume Sony will dominate next gen too. With the way Microsoft are approaching next gen by all fronts (not to mention Amazon and Google making waves) I can't see them being the runaway success they were this generation -- even with their first party games.

 

[Snake29]

First off, you saying Cloud technology is just the beginning for Microsoft just proves you must live in a bubble or something. Cloud technology is massive in this day and age, and its only getting bigger.

First off, you need to read better. I said "Cloud Gaming"....

Secondly, Microsoft is said to have made huge modifications when it comes to Cloud streaming to tackle a lot of the challenges when faced with streaming games. Don't know about you, but if anyone could handle such a challenge between MS and Sony, it's Microsoft.

We have to see if it's all true. Those are still words atm and not reality. And again, how do you know only Microsoft is capable reducing latency? You think Sony engineers can't optimize latency for PSNow if it's needed? Maybe because MS talks a bit much lately so we have no clue if it will change much.

too many assumptions around here, since you don't know anything about the capability from the competition.

Third, no one said its supposed to be the default way. It doesnt need to be. It's just another viable option to play your games while on the go -- from the devices you already own. You also have to consider Microsoft are coming at next gen from various SKU's as well. Game Pass is also extremly affordable. Imagine having access to over 100+ game while on the go? You're thinking way too small. And worse, in a traditional way of measuring success when speaking on console gaming.

You said "They could dominate next gen though. And they wont necessarily need to sell a bunch of hardware to do it. Cloud gaming is coming." So i read this correct, you say they will could dominate next gen because of Cloud gaming? I'm not thinking small, but Cloud gaming is not what is going to make them dominate next-gen in console gaming. Also various SKU's wont really work for the mainstream, so i think that would really be a bad idea. Every cloud tech or cloud gaming tech tries to reduce latency, it's not if Microsoft has fixed that forever, because there much more obstacles that the client will have.

No, I'm not overreacting. Cloud gaming has certainly made huge advancements. If it weren't so, Amazon nor Google would be a part of the cloud streaming conversation. You keep the blinders on if you want to. Static devices (consoles) was just a starting point, not the end game.

Funny that Cloud gaming is suddenly so hot for the Xbox fan, but they where like shitting all over PSNow and that Cloud gaming would never be a thing bla bla bla. I don't see Google or Amazon fans in the future..lol They can build some nice Cloud gaming stuff but people are not really Google fan in the first place. We have to see so that's why you are a bit overreacting about it right now. Same goes for exclusive games, those where not important anymore and Microsoft didn't need any new studios. Would you look at it now, i can only see hyperbolic reactions when some rumor about a new Microsoft acquisition takes place, with reactions like "Sony needs to step up their game next-gen".....funny reads.

 

[Gavon West]

And again...you are overreacting. Internet for most people in the US didn't change much in speed over the years. In Europe, it's a different talk, much higher speeds overall. Cloud gaming is not going to change much with xCloud. internet speeds are still not stable globally. It's the beginning for both Sony and Microsoft, but it's not going to be the default way since the mainstream will not go full cloud gaming coming year...



How do you even know? Cloud Tech Azure is not build for xCloud...Since the have to build it for xCloud with custom blades. Same thing Sony does with PSNow. You are ignoring the fact that PSNow is already running several years and it is Cloud technology. They also expending atm and for next-gen, Microsoft isn't even better in cloud tech if they don't have the people inhouse. Both companies hire people with Cloud background.

Doesnt matter if Sony has been [barely] using CLoud tech, they arent even almost in competition to Azure or Google or Amazon! WTH is wrong with people???

Because you offer something doesnt automatically mean it's in the same league. That's like saying Miss Piggy is a girl like Sandra Bullock. It's correct in saying they are both of the female species but there's only one that I'd actually sleep with. Give me a break, breh!

Sony isnt in the same league as Microsoft when it comes to Cloud. They've been making investments in their Cloud technology for years and years. They OWN the infrastructure. It's World Wide! Sony simply can't compete in this arena, and if they do, it'll fall way short of what other Cloud services like Azure can do. And do you have proof that Sony uses PS4 blades like Microsoft is doing with Xbox One? I havent heard of it.

Sony is great when it comes to games. They have a near peerless stable of developers that stand out. That cant be disputed. But you're trying WAAAAAY too hard to make them out to be anything else than that. You're spinning a half attempt like PSNow into something it just.......isn't. This is known pretty much throughout the gaming community as a whole. And are you serious when you say Microsoft doesnt have the engineers who work exclusively with their Cloud technology?????

You keep stating how thebeen streaming games for years. This is true, but it's a substandard service that hasnt made many advancements in that time frame. And it's more expensive than the competition.

You gotta face facts: Sony is going to struggle with Cloud technology and they'll be up against behemoths next gen when streaming arrives. That's not fanboy shit. Those are facts.

 

[Gavon West]

First off, you need to read better. I said "Cloud Gaming"....



We have to see if it's all true. Those are still words atm and not reality. And again, how do you know only Microsoft is capable reducing latency? You think Sony engineers can't optimize latency for PSNow if it's needed? Maybe because MS talks a bit much lately so we have no clue if it will change much.

too many assumptions around here, since you don't know anything about the capability from the competition.



You said "They could dominate next gen though. And they wont necessarily need to sell a bunch of hardware to do it. Cloud gaming is coming." So i read this correct, you say they will could dominate next gen because of Cloud gaming? I'm not thinking small, but Cloud gaming is not what is going to make them dominate next-gen in console gaming. Also various SKU's wont really work for the mainstream, so i think that would really be a bad idea. Every cloud tech or cloud gaming tech tries to reduce latency, it's not if Microsoft has fixed that forever, because there much more obstacles that the client will have.



Funny that Cloud gaming is suddenly so hot for the Xbox fan, but they where like shitting all over PSNow and that Cloud gaming would never be a thing bla bla bla. I don't see Google or Amazon fans in the future..lol They can build some nice Cloud gaming stuff but people are not really Google fan in the first place. We have to see so that's why you are a bit overreacting about it right now. Same goes for exclusive games, those where not important anymore and Microsoft didn't need any new studios. Would you look at it now, i can only see hyperbolic reactions when some rumor about a new Microsoft acquisition takes place, with reactions like "Sony needs to step up their game next-gen".....funny reads.

I can't even respond to this post. There's just so much wrong here it's giving me a toothache. You can't even acknowledge facts. Not going to continue this with someone who just ignores reality. Jesus Christ...

 

[Snake29]

Doesnt matter if Sony has been [barely] using CLoud tech, they arent even almost in competition to Azure or Google or Amazon! WTH is wrong with people???

Because you offer something doesnt automatically mean it's in the same league. That's like saying Miss Piggy is a girl like Sandra Bullock. It's correct in saying they are both of the female species but there's only one that I'd actually sleep with. Give me a break, breh!

Sony isnt in the same league as Microsoft when it comes to Cloud. They've been making investments in their Cloud technology for years and years. They OWN the infrastructure. It's World Wide! Sony simply can't compete in this arena, and if they do, it'll fall way short of what other Cloud services like Azure can do. And do you have proof that Sony uses PS4 blades like Microsoft is doing with Xbox One? I havent heard of it.

Sony is great when it comes to games. They have a near peerless stable of developers that stand out. That cant be disputed. But you're trying WAAAAAY too hard to make them out to be anything else than that. You're spinning a half attempt like PSNow into something it just.......isn't. This is known pretty much throughout the gaming community as a whole. And are you serious when you say Microsoft doesnt have the engineers who work exclusively with their Cloud technology????? Yet, you keep stating how they've been streaming games for years. This is true, but it's a substandard service that hasnt made many advancements in that time frame. And it's more expensive than the competition.

You gotta face facts: Sony is going to struggle with Cloud technology and they'll be up against behemoths next gen when streaming arrives. That's not fanboy shit. Those are facts.

Dude i'm done with you. Like some others in various threads already said "YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE YOUR OWN PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE". It's not only about the infrastructure because other companies use the infrastructure to build their own Cloud tech. Microsoft, Google, Amazon and IBM are not the only IT companies in the world. So you say that other companies in the world can't build cloud tech/gaming if they want? So every other IT companie have to build their own? You really don't understand how it works in IT.

Nothing wrong with people, you just don't understand shit about it. Sony or even Microsoft don't have to be both king in Cloud. If they both have a capable running Cloud gaming infrastructure then it's already great for gaming in general. Maybe you need to search what the word "Infrastructure" means in general. It's not only something Physical, but also software and hardware.

So if Google want to compete with Netflix tomorrow, Google will just shutdown their servers? How do you think Netflix runs...yes Google Cloud (AWS before). Do they have datacenters for themselfs?....noo..

I can't even respond to this post. There's just so much wrong here it's giving me a toothache. You can't even acknowledge facts. Not going to continue this with someone who just ignores reality. Jesus Christ...

I would say the same if i had no more arguments.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Doesnt matter if Sony has been [barely] using CLoud tech, they arent even almost in competition to Azure or Google or Amazon! WTH is wrong with people???

Because you offer something doesnt automatically mean it's in the same league. That's like saying Miss Piggy is a girl like Sandra Bullock. It's correct in saying they are both of the female species but there's only one that I'd actually sleep with. Give me a break, breh!

Sony isnt in the same league as Microsoft when it comes to Cloud. They've been making investments in their Cloud technology for years and years. They OWN the infrastructure. It's World Wide! Sony simply can't compete in this arena, and if they do, it'll fall way short of what other Cloud services like Azure can do. And do you have proof that Sony uses PS4 blades like Microsoft is doing with Xbox One? I havent heard of it.

Sony is great when it comes to games. They have a near peerless stable of developers that stand out. That cant be disputed. But you're trying WAAAAAY too hard to make them out to be anything else than that. You're spinning a half attempt like PSNow into something it just.......isn't. This is known pretty much throughout the gaming community as a whole. And are you serious when you say Microsoft doesnt have the engineers who work exclusively with their Cloud technology????
You keep stating how thebeen streaming games for years. This is true, but it's a substandard service that hasnt made many advancements in that time frame. And it's more expensive than the competition.

You gotta face facts: Sony is going to struggle with Cloud technology and they'll be up against behemoths next gen when streaming arrives. That's not fanboy shit. Those are facts.

You are also trying very very hard to spread FUD in terms of cloud solutions presence, disregarding all the Gaikai and OnLive tech, patents, and experience actually on the field as well as making a point that MS would start abusing Azure screwing over third parties building their business on top of it to promote XCloud or Xbox LIVE. Same thing for AWS.

Amazon Prime has close collaboration with the AWS guys and so does the rest of MS with the Azure guys and thatdoes provide some additional benefit, but Azure and AWS grew as big as they did because they do not fork over third parties that rely on their infrastructure.

Maybe you are right, but dismissing the competition (that may rely on and transform other people’s infrastructure) just because you make OS and services and portables did not help MS in the past either (else Windows Mobile/CE/Phone OS would be where Android is ...).

 

[Panajev2001a]

Dude i'm done with you. Like some others in various threads already said "YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE YOUR OWN INFRASTRUCTURE". It's not only about the infrastructure because other companies use the infrastructure to build their own Cloud tech. Microsoft, Google, Amazon and IBM are not the only IT companies in the world. So you say that other companies in the world can't build cloud tech/gaming if they want? So every other IT companie have to build their own? You really don't understand how it works in IT.

Nothing wrong with people, you just don't understand shit about it. Sony or even Microsoft don't have to be both king in Cloud. If they both have a capable running Cloud gaming infrastructure then it's already great for gaming in general. Maybe you need to search what the word "Infrastructure" means in general. It's not only something Physical, but also software and hardware.

So if Google want to compete with Netflix tomorrow, Google will just shutdown their servers? How do you think Netflix runs...yes Google Cloud (AWS before). Do they have datacenters for themselfs?....noo..



I would say the same if i had no more arguments.

You can put people on ignore, but the point sometimes is not to be read by you or me but be preserved, kept visible, and read by others (aka the platform ).

 

[Demon2blades]

Doesnt matter if Sony has been [barely] using CLoud tech, they arent even almost in competition to Azure or Google or Amazon! WTH is wrong with people???

Because you offer something doesnt automatically mean it's in the same league. That's like saying Miss Piggy is a girl like Sandra Bullock. It's correct in saying they are both of the female species but there's only one that I'd actually sleep with. Give me a break, breh!

Sony isnt in the same league as Microsoft when it comes to Cloud. They've been making investments in their Cloud technology for years and years. They OWN the infrastructure. It's World Wide! Sony simply can't compete in this arena, and if they do, it'll fall way short of what other Cloud services like Azure can do. And do you have proof that Sony uses PS4 blades like Microsoft is doing with Xbox One? I havent heard of it.

Sony is great when it comes to games. They have a near peerless stable of developers that stand out. That cant be disputed. But you're trying WAAAAAY too hard to make them out to be anything else than that. You're spinning a half attempt like PSNow into something it just.......isn't. This is known pretty much throughout the gaming community as a whole. And are you serious when you say Microsoft doesnt have the engineers who work exclusively with their Cloud technology?????

You keep stating how thebeen streaming games for years. This is true, but it's a substandard service that hasnt made many advancements in that time frame. And it's more expensive than the competition.

You gotta face facts: Sony is going to struggle with Cloud technology and they'll be up against behemoths next gen when streaming arrives. That's not fanboy shit. Those are facts.

I think you're the one making something out of nothing with Google /Amazon/ms cloud gaming pedigrees.... I mean none of them even offer a service yet really apart from Sony where streamings concerned so naturally your not going to find many people that see things your way as there unproven at it in this moment . There infrastructures are bigger but they also rent said infrastructures out to company's so yeah Sony could rent from azure the way I see if they wanted to and have the same quality instantly bar some minor differences .

 

[Gavon West]

Dude i'm done with you. Like some others in various threads already said "YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE YOUR OWN PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE". It's not only about the infrastructure because other companies use the infrastructure to build their own Cloud tech. Microsoft, Google, Amazon and IBM are not the only IT companies in the world. So you say that other companies in the world can't build cloud tech/gaming if they want? So every other IT companie have to build their own? You really don't understand how it works in IT.

Nothing wrong with people, you just don't understand shit about it. Sony or even Microsoft don't have to be both king in Cloud. If they both have a capable running Cloud gaming infrastructure then it's already great for gaming in general. Maybe you need to search what the word "Infrastructure" means in general. It's not only something Physical, but also software and hardware.

So if Google want to compete with Netflix tomorrow, Google will just shutdown their servers? How do you think Netflix runs...yes Google Cloud (AWS before). Do they have datacenters for themselfs?....noo..



I would say the same if i had no more arguments.

You're right. I dont understand the intricacies of how Cloud technology works. Do you?

I'm not a Cloud engineer. But are you saying that Sony is just going to suddenly build their own Cloud service? Are you saying Sony will utilize Cloud technology from other services that'll suddenly make PSNow on par with the other major players in CLoud tech? If so, why arent they using it now? Why is the service they currently have sub standard? Why havent they fixed the latency issues with PSNow?

We arent talking about Netflix. We're talking about streaming games to multiple devices while on the go? You keep basing your arguments on hypotheticals.

"Sony could do this if they want."

"Sony could do that if they want."

Why havent they done it? Why are they overcharging for a service that's substandard? We'll agree to disagree. But I will say this; We can revisit this conversation when both services are offered next gen. Then we can talk about which service is the best option for consumers. Which performs better. And which one is struggling, no matter who Sony uses for streaming games on the go.

 

[Gavon West]

I think you're the one making something out of nothing with Google /Amazon/ms cloud gaming pedigrees.... I mean none of them even offer a service yet really apart from Sony where streamings concerned so naturally your not going to find many people that see things your way as there unproven at it in this moment . There infrastructures are bigger but they also rent said infrastructures out to company's so yeah Sony could rent from azure the way I see if they wanted to and have the same quality instantly bar some minor differences .

Another hypothetical. Sony could do alot of things. But will they?

And you're wrong about Google and Amazon. Their services are currently out in the wild. XCloud will be as well - unless you just think Microsoft is lying about this whole game streaming thing.

 

[Demon2blades]

You're right. I dont understand the intricacies of how Cloud technology works. Do you?

I'm not a Cloud engineer. But are you saying that Sony is just going to suddenly build their own Cloud service? Are you saying Sony will utilize Cloud technology from other services that'll suddenly make PSNow on par with the other major players in CLoud tech? If so, why arent they using it now? Why is the service they currently have sub standard? Why havent they fixed the latency issues with PSNow?

We arent talking about Netflix. We're talking about streaming games to multiple devices while on the go? You keep basing your arguments on hypotheticals.

"Sony could do this if they want."

"Sony could do that if they want."

Why havent they done it? Why are they overcharging for a service that's substandard? We'll agree to disagree. But I will say this; We can revisit this conversation when both services are offered next gen. Then we can talk about which service is the best option for consumers. Which performs better. And which one is struggling, no matter who Sony uses for streaming games on the go.

So if you dont know anything about how cloud gaming tech works how come you've been hanging on about how Microsoft are brilliant at it ? You know as much as the next person which is naught it's all speculation at this point you haven't seen any proof how good it's going to be yet you've made your mind up who offers the best service ...CLOUD WILL STILL BE IN ITS INFANCY NEXT GEN THATS A GIVEN IT WON'T BE PROPERLY MAINSTREAM FOR MS OR SONY ...maybe the gen after .

 

[Gavon West]

So if you dont know anything about how cloud gaming tech works how come you've been hanging on about how Microsoft are brilliant at it ? You know as much as the next person which is naught it's all speculation at this point you haven't seen any proof how good it's going to be yet you've made your mind up who offers the best service ...CLOUD WILL STILL BE IN ITS INFANCY NEXT GEN THATS A GIVEN IT WON'T BE PROPERLY MAINSTREAM FOR MS OR SONY ...maybe the gen after .

Well, given the fact that you can stream from your Xbox to your laptop at home, I'd say they have some form of streaming as we speak. And I am confident that Xcloud will put PSNow to shame when it arrives next gen. This is Microsoft in their bag. Again, we'll just revisit this topic again in the future.

And I didnt say I was completely ignorant when it comes to CLoud tech. I research a lot of this stuff as it interests me. And I understand that you dont need to build the infrastructure for Cloud. Maybe you're misunderstanding me.

I'm saying that because Microsoft OWNS their own infrastructure, it gives them an edge that Sony doesnt have. And it's true.

 

[Nemesis Prime]

Serious question, what is it about MS exclusives this generation that just don't seem to click? A lot of the same IP's on the 360 were respected, critically acclaimed, outsold a lot of the PS3 exclusives etc... Now it feels like nothing is going right outside of Forza.

 

[Snake29]

Well, given the fact that you can stream from your Xbox to your laptop at home

PS Remote play says hello, you can stream games from the PS4 from launch back in 2013, and it's not limited as Microsoft remote play, because you can use it anywhere in the world, with your mobile device, Laptop, Vita or PSTV.

But you will ignore the existence about it anyway...

 

[1inthechamber_]

Serious question, what is it about MS exclusives this generation that just don't seem to click? A lot of the same IP's on the 360 were respected, critically acclaimed, outsold a lot of the PS3 exclusives etc... Now it feels like nothing is going right outside of Forza.

Its pretty simple. Both their biggest hitters (Gears and Halo) last gen are made by different developers.

I honestly don't know how people don't get tired of arguing about numbers. Competition is good and needed in this industry. I just want more games.

 

[Nemesis Prime]

Its pretty simple. Both their biggest hitters (Gears and Halo) last gen are made by different developers.

I think that's a very shallow assessment. It's clear they have some talented people at each studio, but there has to be a deeper issue. Could it be MS leadership? Could it be how they designate their work and set tasks?

I could be wrong, but with 343 I found there to be a lot of issues with identity and leadership. There's some site where you can anonymously review your work place and with 343 there was quite a few reccuring comments on how there's a lack of a cohesive vision and leadership at the top. Lots of back and forth. I dont doubt there's passion for the IP there, but I doubt the right decisions are being made when it comes to the identity of the IP

Honestly at this point I'd bet if Naughty Dog gave up on an IP and Sony opened up a brand new company to make new games for it, they'd do well.

 

[1inthechamber_]

I think that's a very shallow assessment. It's clear they have some talented people at each studio, but there has to be a deeper issue. Could it be MS leadership? Could it be how they designate their work and set tasks?

I could be wrong, but with 343 I found there to be a lot of issues with identity and leadership. There's some site where you can anonymously review your work place and with 343 there was quite a few reccuring comments on how there's a lack of a cohesive vision and leadership at the top. Lots of back and forth. I dont doubt there's passion for the IP there, but I doubt the right decisions are being made when it comes to the identity of the IP

Honestly at this point I'd bet if Naughty Dog gave up on an IP and Sony opened up a brand new company to make new games for it, they'd do well.

They have one guy from the original gears team leading the gear development crew and one from the original Halo at 343. But it doesn't mean shit if the games weren't just that one person's vision. Halo 4 and 5 were not bad games but they were shitty Halo games imo.

Gears 4 is just trash besides the campaign mode. So much bullshit with that one. Rod doesn't know what he's doing. The season pass was pointless as fuck and they gave more remakes than new maps. Not to mention the shitty netcode on and hit registration. It was fine at launch and the first patch broke it.

 

[Panajev2001a]

You're right. I dont understand the intricacies of how Cloud technology works. Do you?

I'm not a Cloud engineer. But are you saying that Sony is just going to suddenly build their own Cloud service? Are you saying Sony will utilize Cloud technology from other services that'll suddenly make PSNow on par with the other major players in CLoud tech? If so, why arent they using it now? Why is the service they currently have sub standard? Why havent they fixed the latency issues with PSNow?

We arent talking about Netflix. We're talking about streaming games to multiple devices while on the go? You keep basing your arguments on hypotheticals.

"Sony could do this if they want."

"Sony could do that if they want."

Why havent they done it? Why are they overcharging for a service that's substandard? We'll agree to disagree. But I will say this; We can revisit this conversation when both services are offered next gen. Then we can talk about which service is the best option for consumers. Which performs better. And which one is struggling, no matter who Sony uses for streaming games on the go.

Sony does not need to build their cloud infrastructure anymore than Apple needs to build their own semiconductor fabs. PSNow can run on top of AWS, Google Cloud, or Azure... and it is like the rest of PSN...