I can't imagine many who would not eventually get a PS5 for the great first party games. The slim is a great time to get into the Sony exclusives. There should be plenty out by then hopefully including naughty dog. Until then i just can't pass up the value of gamepass it will save me a ton of money. I don't see anything that is truely next generation until horizon 2 and hell blade 2 anyways except flight simulator depending how it runs on the series x. If anything last generation taught me the first 1-2 years is meh. Resogun was cool but not 399.99 cool. That and Microsoft has 3 RPG studios my favorite type of game.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Phil Spencer feels it's counter productive to lock people away from games by making them device exclusive, prefers to scale games across ecosystem
- Thread starter Evilms
- Start date
Klayzer
Member
Tell me there aren't gamers saying Sony should have withheld PS4 exclusives for the launch of the PS5. Man, some of you Xbox fans arguments are truly something to behold. I get liking a brand (Xbox fan myself) but the constant parokeeting of whatever Phil's current marketing plan is as some brilliant Makavellian plan is ridiculous.
oldergamer
Member
Scalability isn't a buzzword. its been around for years in 3d engine development. Nobody is trying to make a leap from GTA 5 to 2D super nintendo games. That's not a valid comparison.
Last edited:
Yeah they’re interesting to look at, the cross gen PS3/4 360/One games, they’re absolutely terrible.
FacelessSamurai
..but cry so much I wish I had some
PS5 and Switch are definitely not target consumers for xCloud, it would be pointless for them to make it available on those platforms. Even on PC it becomes only interesting on lower end hardware (which is most laptops sold and a much bigger market than PS4 and Switch BTW) as well as stuff like Chromebooks.Sure, sure... throwing the Xcloud bone to non MS Windows PC’s and Xbox consoles and forgetting about PlayStation and Nintendo... how interestingly pro consumer... will be sure to check out Xcloud and GamePass in PS4/PS5 and Switch... you know, would not want to cut a few hundreds million devices and gamers from it too.
And why bring up Pro consumer, did you see me put that in my reply? It's not about being pro consumer, it's about expanding your market share but they are also smart about it by putting it on non competing devices. Why isn't Sony making PSNow available on Xbox or Switch yet they put it on PC? Wouldn't they get a lot more people who will never buy a Playstation anyway, thus expanding their market share and making more money?
MS ain't doing that, and neither is Sony, just like Geforce Now as well as Stadia. You don't make your games available on competing platforms that might take away market share, you do it on non competing platforms that will expand your reach. When Nintendo was releasing games for cellphones trying to get people to buy Nintendo consoles they were doing exactly that as well.
PS4 and Switch are a drop in the bucket, much better avenues for MS to pursue.
As for this thread, scalability again means that the transition period will not leave Xbox One owners and mid range PC owners in the dust, those that might still bite and get Gamepass for upcoming big first party games (like Halo), that would be counter productive and slow down Gamepass adoption, which goes against MS' current strategy as that is how they will lock people in their ecosystem and make the most money. It's super easy to comprehend and the arguing in this thread against this is very dumb and a waste of time as MS has laid out their strategy a while ago, there is nothing confusing about it, and the only reason why this thread is still alive is because of fanboy outbursts trying to justify in their heads that Miles Morales will feel more next gen than anything MS is coming out with this holiday.
It's not
FacelessSamurai
..but cry so much I wish I had some
What about that Spider-man game on PS5 or Gran Turismo 7 or even R&C? You are going to tell me they were all made with next gen in mind lol?
You are right about games like Psychonauts 2 for example, but Halo? There is nothing proving that Halo was built for current gen and shined up, except for your wish for it to be.
Grinchy
Banned
Gone in circles already, but Halo is the one example where MS is most likely to be going all out on making people care about getting an expensive new generation console. It'll be nice finally getting to see that in a couple weeks. But what else will they give that kind of budget/treatment to? Almost everything else from their own first party output will be shined-up current gen games. That's how they will "leave no Xbox gamer behind." It's PR fluff on the reality that they are all just current gen games anyway.
The Spiderman game on PS5 doesn't look very good to me, but I'm not the biggest fan of the PS4 game either. Insomniac are not really hiding the fact that it's an enhancement on their last-gen efforts, in the style of Lost Legacy, while they work on their real next-gen Ratchet game. Ratchet is clearly utilizing the PS5's strengths. If you haven't watched that footage on a good 4K HDR TV, then I can understand you not realizing it.
longdi
Banned
Imo Phil is talking sense here, or at least from someone with in depth insider knowledge
You look at even PS4, the big break from past generations happened from when, 2017 imo? Games development these days are not as clear cut as before, with longer devtime, more complex tools, time consuming assets, and higher costs.
You look at even PS4, the big break from past generations happened from when, 2017 imo? Games development these days are not as clear cut as before, with longer devtime, more complex tools, time consuming assets, and higher costs.
FacelessSamurai
..but cry so much I wish I had some
You keep saying it's PR fluff but you have no proof, just your bias. Hellblade 2 looked next gen, Flight Sim looks more next gen than anything out there and we know it's coming to consoles, Forza 8 most likely will be as well since the dev is taking their time and is known for showcasing next gen graphics.
Where are those cross gen shined up games you are talking about, can you show them to me?
Explosive Zombie
Banned
You're acting like buzz words are always invented words or something. The extreme example I made was to make the point it isn't infinite.
Gavon West
Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
If you can deliver games optimized for Series X and still deliver a quality game on older Xbox consoles in addition to pc and steam, why not?
No one has answered that question yet.
Psykodad
Banned
Nobody is against crossgen titles. People call out Phil Spencer because they just won't have any 1st party next-gen exclusives ready and Sony will and now they're spreading a pro-consumer narrative to make the competition seem like the bad guy.
Just like how Spencer kept bragging throughout the first half of 2019 about how open and supportive they were regarding crossplay, unlike Sony, yet they didn’t manage to work out a deal with Square-Enix to get FF XIV on Xbox until october 2019 because their crossplay policies prevented crossplay on Xbox.
Last edited:
Explosive Zombie
Banned
I don't care for cross-gen titles, some of the best launch titles this gen weren't cross-gen because they were beyond the capabilities of that gen.
Gavon West
Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
They will have next gen titles though. Its a forward and backward compatible machine. I personally dont think hes trying to make Sony look bad. They just have different ideals of what next gen means. Microsoft and Sony are approaching the next generation wholly different, if that werent apparent already.
FriedCarbonyte
Member
If Nintendo or Sony will approve it, you will see game pass on those systems ASAP. I highly doubt that will happen, because the value of the eShop and PS Store go down dramatically with GP on the system.
Microsoft wants GP availability anywhere and everywhere and it will be a huge part of xCloud.
Last edited:
Psykodad
Banned
It was a figure of speech.
Downplaying your competitors strenghts while promoting your own is just standard PR.
And I know they will have next-gen titles. They just won't have their 1st party titles ready in time. That's kind of the point for this whole discussion.
And I'm indifferent. Just saying that I don't think people truly care at the end of the day if their launch-games are crossgen, as long as there is a noticeable difference.
But saying you support crossgen out of the goodness of your heart, while just not having games ready, is something else.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Posted this in the next gen speculation thread, but I guess this actually applies to this thread more.
DeltaPolarBear
Member
You are terribly confused. Ms can't open a store in Playstation without paying the rent. And because they can't afford the rent, they can't run Gamepass on it. I asked this before, but perhaps are you assuming you expect Sony to let MS onboard for free?
Shmunter
Member
Would just sell their games like any other 3rd party. No diff to selling on Steam.
Gamepass wouldn’t fly unless fees are paid through Sony store.
Knitted Knight
Banned
Same folks who were making a big deal out of EA Access now say Xbox Gamepass can't go to PS because "royalties"....
Cmon man... this is just too much now. The mental gymnastics....
Phil be having these kids extra fit.
Cmon man... this is just too much now. The mental gymnastics....
Phil be having these kids extra fit.
Last edited:
Psykodad
Banned
Sony and Nintendo will definitely not allow it as long as MS is still a direct competitor.
If they decide to pull the plug on Xbox consoles, the entire console landscape will change.
Shmunter
Member
Difference between EA Access and Microsoft is that Microsoft provides 3rd party published titles. It is essentially an Xbox. No platform holder would invest in a console eco system and have such free for all competition without coming out on top.Same folks who were making a big deal out of EA Access now say Xbox Gamepass can't go to PS because "royalties"....
Cmon man... this is just too much now. The mental gymnastics....
All the games on ea access they own so they don't have extra overhead. Microsoft has 150 games they pay that overhead on. Gamespass is not sustainable if they have to pay first party, third party, azure servers plus 30% to Sony or Nintendo. It is pretty simple.Same folks who were making a big deal out of EA Access now say Xbox Gamepass can't go to PS because "royalties"....
Cmon man... this is just too much now. The mental gymnastics....
Phil be having these kids extra fit.
Knitted Knight
Banned
You're telling me if you reduce the offering of the service to only include Xbox Studio exclusives that then it would be comparable to EA Access and that as such MS should release this pro-consumer and scalable Gamepass offering on Sony's platform?
Moreover that no third party publisher would be willing to put their games on Gamepass because it wouldn't be profitable? or whatever the excuse? But isn't Microsoft merely a middleman collecting a cut in all of this? The calculus doesn't change... it's money MS pays for games that have lost their shine to, in return, keep people hooked for a subscription price. If MS puts gamepass on a platform like PC (where these publishers already sell that very same software) why would it be a problem if MS puts Gamepass on Sony's platform?
Sony will want a cut obviously, a middleman on top of another middleman. It's what it's. What is not pro-consumer is to deny that choice to $110-120 million PS gamers for the sake of MS profit margin getting smaller - so the logic goes. Assuming Gamepass is a success and not a heavily subsidized bait and switch waiting to happen - merely a lifeline project to keep a division alive for as long as it can last.
Of course we're assuming all that gibberish mental gymnastics ever made any sense . But we know it's BS trying to justify more BS.
Moreover that no third party publisher would be willing to put their games on Gamepass because it wouldn't be profitable? or whatever the excuse? But isn't Microsoft merely a middleman collecting a cut in all of this? The calculus doesn't change... it's money MS pays for games that have lost their shine to, in return, keep people hooked for a subscription price. If MS puts gamepass on a platform like PC (where these publishers already sell that very same software) why would it be a problem if MS puts Gamepass on Sony's platform?
Sony will want a cut obviously, a middleman on top of another middleman. It's what it's. What is not pro-consumer is to deny that choice to $110-120 million PS gamers for the sake of MS profit margin getting smaller - so the logic goes. Assuming Gamepass is a success and not a heavily subsidized bait and switch waiting to happen - merely a lifeline project to keep a division alive for as long as it can last.
Of course we're assuming all that gibberish mental gymnastics ever made any sense . But we know it's BS trying to justify more BS.
Last edited:
Psykodad
Banned
That's MS' predicament.
Last edited:
DeltaPolarBear
Member
Yes, but the point is that Gamepass would have to give Sony 30% revenue (not profit). This fee is the norm. The fact that Microsoft can't afford this with Gamepass is not Sony's concern, and thus Sony is not blocking Gamepass.
The difference with Gamepass is that MS has to give the third party developers money. And that if Sony takes 30% revenue to start with then the third parties either take a cut or Ms has to cut their own share.
This reveals the true difficulty of having Gamepass survive as a multidevice service. And in general there is a massive denial about how unworkable it is.
GHG
Member
Yep, that's why EA access on PC and console are two entirely different beasts. On PC there are a ton of third party games available on the service but on consoles it's just the EA games and nothing else.
Knitted Knight
Banned
Do not fall into the 30% royalty trap being set up by the evolution of the next mental gymnastic that followed the previous one to avoid dealing with the evident truth. That Phill is full of shit.
No one knows what what margins Sony seeks or what arrangement Sony agreed with EA for EA Access. It's more probable to say it's nowhere near 30% for every user subscribed to the service. It's a different model. The fact is we don't know and that the numbers worked out are confidential. But we do know that EA Access is on PS, and Xbox and making money on both.
What we also know is that Microsoft hasn't approached Sony to release Gamepass on Sony's platform, and that Sony has not denied Gamepass being released on the PS platform. Were it be otherwise we would have known about it long ago. We also know that the onus is on Microsoft to reach out to Sony to release Gamepass on Sony's platform - if they're as pro-consumer as they say they're. And if MS is as pro-consumer as Phil wants you to believe then MS would gladly take a cut on their margins for the sake of million of new gamers enjoying the smashing success that is Gamepass on Sony's plaform. After all, even if the margins for MS were to be smaller (say even significantly smaller), the larger user base (110 million + untapped) would more than make up for it?
As for the "Sony would deny" comeback. Why would Sony deny MS when this literally means the competition is committing suicide and begging you for the final blow? What would be the reason to own Xbox hardware anymore? In this theoretical you would get all of the value the Xbox hardware has to offer and much more on PS5?
As long as Sony is fed, and as long as Sony deems the business model not disruptive to their core business they will most certainly allow it. They're not stupid. Even IF third-party tittles were to be a source of concern; MS would gladly only offer the service with MS Studio exclusives right? Why wouldn't they? As long as people subscribe and MS makes money (and Sony gets their cut)? To channel a Phil Spencer.... we don't care if you buy the hardware, as long as you buy into our service.... (except they care - very much).
So you can not say that Xbox's Gamepass will not work or be profitable on Sony's console - there is no basis for that conclusion. This is merely a false premise from an easy frame job full of guesses trying to justify the apparent BS.
No one knows what what margins Sony seeks or what arrangement Sony agreed with EA for EA Access. It's more probable to say it's nowhere near 30% for every user subscribed to the service. It's a different model. The fact is we don't know and that the numbers worked out are confidential. But we do know that EA Access is on PS, and Xbox and making money on both.
What we also know is that Microsoft hasn't approached Sony to release Gamepass on Sony's platform, and that Sony has not denied Gamepass being released on the PS platform. Were it be otherwise we would have known about it long ago. We also know that the onus is on Microsoft to reach out to Sony to release Gamepass on Sony's platform - if they're as pro-consumer as they say they're. And if MS is as pro-consumer as Phil wants you to believe then MS would gladly take a cut on their margins for the sake of million of new gamers enjoying the smashing success that is Gamepass on Sony's plaform. After all, even if the margins for MS were to be smaller (say even significantly smaller), the larger user base (110 million + untapped) would more than make up for it?
As for the "Sony would deny" comeback. Why would Sony deny MS when this literally means the competition is committing suicide and begging you for the final blow? What would be the reason to own Xbox hardware anymore? In this theoretical you would get all of the value the Xbox hardware has to offer and much more on PS5?
As long as Sony is fed, and as long as Sony deems the business model not disruptive to their core business they will most certainly allow it. They're not stupid. Even IF third-party tittles were to be a source of concern; MS would gladly only offer the service with MS Studio exclusives right? Why wouldn't they? As long as people subscribe and MS makes money (and Sony gets their cut)? To channel a Phil Spencer.... we don't care if you buy the hardware, as long as you buy into our service.... (except they care - very much).
So you can not say that Xbox's Gamepass will not work or be profitable on Sony's console - there is no basis for that conclusion. This is merely a false premise from an easy frame job full of guesses trying to justify the apparent BS.
Last edited:
Tulipanzo
Member
Thing is, they were. These projects are decided years in advance, to work with internal scheduling.
Polyphony has been working on next-gen assets for a really long time, Spider-Man is meant to be a sizeable one-off available by launch based on a popular franchise, and a larger sequel to R&C (2016, which was originally a movie tie-in) would obviously be scheduled for next-gen (as seen by portals being a big part of it).
You can clearly see Sony line-up doesn't have visible holes this year.
You can get exceptions: BotW was a WiiU game, but its longer dev-time and the WiiU's untimely death made it a cross-gen title. People believed it to be the case for Infinite as well, and complaints were minimal.
As recent information as shown though, it seems Infinite is on schedule, and that MS's plan was always to have it, and all of its line-up, tied up to the X1.
Given the great generational jump, this is infinitely disappointing (pardon the pun).
Your problem here is that you're expecting next-gen games to be completely and wholly impossible on current-gen to be exclusive. This is not only an unreasonable standard for devs, but also ignores that those late-gen astounding games are built off the work done earlier in the generation. Having to be forced to support last-gen just delays that essential work and tech advancements.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
You're right, on top of that, who is the market Gamepass is targetting?
I'd rather buy one quality game of my choosing every few months and play it to death rather than be given a choice of 10-20 free games to choose from a month. This is why Gamepass' value is almost totally lost on me. Because I work full time and have a family so I only get maximum an hour a night to game. I have access to free games on Epic store that I haven't played yet and a couple emulators with access to thousands of free games of my choosing but I'm not currently playing any of it as I don't have any time!
I actually find being given lots of free stuff to choose from overwhelming and stressful, the same way I have about 20 things I'm mildly interested in watching across Netflix, NowTV and Amazon Prime but can't bring myself round to doing it cos I'm tired or value my time with something else. Quality over quantity is absolutely my preference.
So who is Gamepass targeting? Who gets the maximum value out of all that content - college students or kids at school with hours of free time?
Last edited:
DeltaPolarBear
Member
Keep in mind that using exclusives to sell consoles isn't something randomly done; it is done because after so many console generations, we know what worked.
Do you know what Xbox risks losing out? Market share. Current gen Xbox is about 50% of Playstation. How much do you think Xbox can afford to lose in two years? If the market share difference gets too large, there might not be time for "catching up". All well and good for enthusiasts who buy both machines, but the majority of console games have little need to have two next gen home hardware with heavily overlapped offerings.
Xbox is already starting out with a handicap. You are saying two years of extra disadvantage wouldn't harm it further? I find that really optimistic.
hyperbertha
Member
What new diversion trick is this? Whoever said anything about loading screens or SSDs? Are you trying to divert the argument after failing epically?
vdopey
Member
Look its quite simple.
Lets go back to the xbox 360 / PS3 era which of the consoles allowed cross platform play ? https://www.fudzilla.com/news/gaming/21587-ps3-portal-2-has-cross-platform-play
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2007...play-between-the-ps3-and-pcs-through-gamespy/
How many did microsoft allow in the 360 era ? As far as I know a big fat 0.
They screwed up with the xb1, they lost huge market share and all of a sudden cross platform play becomes important for them.
With PS3 multiplayer wasn't behind a paywall everything was free, xbox360 everything was behind a paywall. Sony got slaughtered in the media for the ps vita custom memory cards, but what about the custom 360 hdd port ? The ps3 and ps4 you were free to put in any off the shelf laptop hdd, even this generation f2p games are behind the xbl gold pay wall, not so with Sony ps plus, although I still wish they kept normal mp outside of the ps plus pay wall.
Sony with the ps4 did some seriously innovative stuff like game sharing a share button etc, all of this stuff microsoft is adding this gen.
Now coming to the topic at hand, there is a significant shift between how the PS5 handles the I/O and by extension the SSD and how Microsoft are handling it, rapid asset streaming should make porting new gen games to previous gen a contentious issue - Its obvious why Microsoft are making "device exclusivity" a big deal, its because they have been caught with their pants down, all they have seen and/or cared about is peak TF performance, this is what they thought would be the winner for this gen, but its not. Sony threw a curve ball which caught most of us completely off guard as most of us were thinking the same thing about higher tf numbers being king, Sony has gone entirely with efficiency all the way from SSD to GPU making sure that the GPU is handling load as efficiently as possible, not about the peak performance but sustained performance and rapid I/O.
When Sony's strategy is properly utilised and it will be straight away as the majority of it is handled autonomously using custom silicon then porting games between generations becomes difficult. The custom silicon doesn't exist in previous gen, nether do the SSDs, what is possible with their current gen hardware should not be possible with previous gen hardware. The problem is existing game engines, this is why Sony approached Epic to make sure that UE5 can properly handle what Sony can offer - its an engine used by many indie devs and AAA devs, Epic has sorted out the headaches / issues for 3rd party devs that use unreal engine to be able to switch between current gen ways of doing things and next gen hopefully seamlessly as for Sony internal engines, its something none of the devs have to worry about, Sony typically cuts support for the previous gen and encourages its internal studios to only target the latest current generation, allowing them to create games possible for the newest hardware.
What I am trying to get at is that Sony will allow Naughty Dog / Kojima / Guerrilla / Santa Monica / Japan Studios / Insomniac etc.. To make truly new experiences where they can create game worlds that literally jump between completely different worlds in a second or fractions of a second that properly utilises the I/O streaming etc.. Microsoft didn't even think about this approach, their console is very similar to the previous gen, this is what happens when your lead architect is a games developer with many years experience writing games and utilising hardware (a true games engineer) vs a sales man at the helm, I bet Phil Spencer has never once written or worked on a game.
Time will tell, but I honestly think this is just a repeat of last gen, Microsoft have been caught with their pants down yet again, have gone for numbers that on paper look good thinking this is the strategy to guarantee victory and Sony have instead gone a completely different much braver route trying to change whats possible. All of this stuff about velocity architecture / 100 G ssd being dedicated to act like RAM etc is nothing but an admittance that they got caught with their pants down, they didn't anticipate this strategy and this is why they are so heavily trying to change narrative and make it about scaling across ecosystems and any other thing they can throw around - I am so glad they are not market leaders as its obvious Microsoft have absolutely no vision, they are copy cats through and through.
Lets go back to the xbox 360 / PS3 era which of the consoles allowed cross platform play ? https://www.fudzilla.com/news/gaming/21587-ps3-portal-2-has-cross-platform-play
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2007...play-between-the-ps3-and-pcs-through-gamespy/
How many did microsoft allow in the 360 era ? As far as I know a big fat 0.
They screwed up with the xb1, they lost huge market share and all of a sudden cross platform play becomes important for them.
With PS3 multiplayer wasn't behind a paywall everything was free, xbox360 everything was behind a paywall. Sony got slaughtered in the media for the ps vita custom memory cards, but what about the custom 360 hdd port ? The ps3 and ps4 you were free to put in any off the shelf laptop hdd, even this generation f2p games are behind the xbl gold pay wall, not so with Sony ps plus, although I still wish they kept normal mp outside of the ps plus pay wall.
Sony with the ps4 did some seriously innovative stuff like game sharing a share button etc, all of this stuff microsoft is adding this gen.
Now coming to the topic at hand, there is a significant shift between how the PS5 handles the I/O and by extension the SSD and how Microsoft are handling it, rapid asset streaming should make porting new gen games to previous gen a contentious issue - Its obvious why Microsoft are making "device exclusivity" a big deal, its because they have been caught with their pants down, all they have seen and/or cared about is peak TF performance, this is what they thought would be the winner for this gen, but its not. Sony threw a curve ball which caught most of us completely off guard as most of us were thinking the same thing about higher tf numbers being king, Sony has gone entirely with efficiency all the way from SSD to GPU making sure that the GPU is handling load as efficiently as possible, not about the peak performance but sustained performance and rapid I/O.
When Sony's strategy is properly utilised and it will be straight away as the majority of it is handled autonomously using custom silicon then porting games between generations becomes difficult. The custom silicon doesn't exist in previous gen, nether do the SSDs, what is possible with their current gen hardware should not be possible with previous gen hardware. The problem is existing game engines, this is why Sony approached Epic to make sure that UE5 can properly handle what Sony can offer - its an engine used by many indie devs and AAA devs, Epic has sorted out the headaches / issues for 3rd party devs that use unreal engine to be able to switch between current gen ways of doing things and next gen hopefully seamlessly as for Sony internal engines, its something none of the devs have to worry about, Sony typically cuts support for the previous gen and encourages its internal studios to only target the latest current generation, allowing them to create games possible for the newest hardware.
What I am trying to get at is that Sony will allow Naughty Dog / Kojima / Guerrilla / Santa Monica / Japan Studios / Insomniac etc.. To make truly new experiences where they can create game worlds that literally jump between completely different worlds in a second or fractions of a second that properly utilises the I/O streaming etc.. Microsoft didn't even think about this approach, their console is very similar to the previous gen, this is what happens when your lead architect is a games developer with many years experience writing games and utilising hardware (a true games engineer) vs a sales man at the helm, I bet Phil Spencer has never once written or worked on a game.
Time will tell, but I honestly think this is just a repeat of last gen, Microsoft have been caught with their pants down yet again, have gone for numbers that on paper look good thinking this is the strategy to guarantee victory and Sony have instead gone a completely different much braver route trying to change whats possible. All of this stuff about velocity architecture / 100 G ssd being dedicated to act like RAM etc is nothing but an admittance that they got caught with their pants down, they didn't anticipate this strategy and this is why they are so heavily trying to change narrative and make it about scaling across ecosystems and any other thing they can throw around - I am so glad they are not market leaders as its obvious Microsoft have absolutely no vision, they are copy cats through and through.
FacelessSamurai
..but cry so much I wish I had some
I’m 35 and I work full time, go to the gym and have 2 kids and Game Pass is the best thing to have happened to me as it saves me so much money and you can always get it half off if you wait for the right time before buying. Don’t know how you can only have 1 hour per day to play to be honest, I get 3-4 per day; you gotta learn to cut down on your sleep. I rarely play games to 100% though unless I really feel like it’s worth it as most of the times I find it pointless, repetitive and would rather be playing something new.
FacelessSamurai
..but cry so much I wish I had some
All this wall of text to basically reiterate you are a Sony fanboy and say nothing of value as it was all made up info, as in, tales from your ass.
GG no re
FacelessSamurai
..but cry so much I wish I had some
It’s 1 year at most, not 2 years. And what handicap are you talking about???
Do you really think all 100 million PS4 owners right now are waiting to spend 500$ this year to switch over to PS5? The reality is the hardcores are the early adopters and on both sides it’ll sell well initially. Hardcore gamers will pay to get the best version of their games, the one with the highest fidelity.
Do you see people onPC still playing at 720p with old cards because they don’t need to upgrade that way and be like “lol nvidia done fucked up”, no they don’t! People upgrade for better graphics and higher res and games there have been technically cross gen forever.
The promise of next gen, as has always been, is higher fidelity, not next gen exclusives. And I have some news for you, the 2 highest selling next gen games last time around in the launch window and for quite a little whilethe following year were COD Ghost and BF4, 2 games available on Xbox 360 and PS3. Why would people have been upgrading then to play games they didn’t even need to upgrade for?
DeltaPolarBear
Member
Once again another person trying to pretend to know PC gaming.
You can believe what you want, but belief isn't going to change market share. It would not be long until reality re-asserts itself, like it always does. Marketing can only do so much.
geordiemp
Member
Because its not optimised for pushing Zen2 if a version can run on Jaguar.
It will be optimsied for GPU, you can always use up or scale down GPU, the Likely problem is the enemy intelligence and numbers / animations and behavior will be stuck at Jaguar level (we shall see).
I guess doubling the frame rate will be one use of the untapped next gen CPU power, but still leaves allot of zen2 on the table.
Unles of course you play Halo on XSX and there are double the enemies, more variety, better animations and they move and act more intellgiently than the Xbox 1 versions - do you think that will happen ?
We shall find out soon enough, if the demo shows 6 enemies spawning in and moving similar in animations, the jaguar curse shall remain for a while longer.
Got to admit, all the enemies in Valhalla looked cursed by Jaguar (stupid).
Last edited:
Fortuneelsewhere
Member
There is a reason this hasn't been done before.. this model will not work in console space.. the majority of people that buy consoles do it once, maybe twice in a period of 7 years.. consoles are made for enthusiasts but also, they need to have legs in order to cater for the casuals in the long run.. so they need to have a good balance between specs, games and of course very important the right price..
so for you to win generations you need to come strong in the start so you build momentum.. that’s why is so important to have a strong message, good specs and games, because people that will dive in the launch window are not casuals are real gamers that know that they will made a purchase for at least 7 years.. and they are eager to experience new games impossible to be made in previous gens.. so, this gamers are looking for value within a specific price bracket, not the cheapest but the most value..
Trying to muddy the waters with this cross gen talk and we love all gamers and inclusion.. just doesn’t work.. you’ll see.. new generations is for new hardware.. is for generational leaps not incremental steps..
Incremental steps works for pc because is a different marked for enthusiasts that want the very best and upgrade every other year.. even so they are always shackled by consoles as they are always the base line.. that’s why we need the most powerful consoles at beginning of any generation because they will be the baseline for at least 7 years... right now third party baseline for games is at 1.3 TF, week cpu and prehistoric HDD storage drives.. so is easy for any developer scale up their games because the baseline is so low... they just up resolution and trow some effects and voila.. they have the premium versions of their games running..
With current gen developers don’t need to scale back anything... they just scale up which is a much easier thing to do..
With the new generation discounting Lockhart that we don’t know for sure when or if it will come out the baseline starting 2021 should transition to 10/12 TF machines with super fast SSDs that are incomparable more powerful than what we have now..
What ms is doing is trying as hard as they can turning what should be a generational leap into a mid gen upgrade by “forcing” the baseline to remain the same... 1.3 tf, week cpu and hdd storage..
With this, they are, not only artificially sabotaging the market but also hurting their customers that will buy a excellent peace of hardware (Xbox series x) but will never see it reach is full potential...
Last edited:
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
.Fortuneelsewhere
Member
According to Phil you don’t need to..
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
They could be two completely different versions each fully optimised to each platform and both sold together for a single $59 purchase price... this would be massively increasing costs and I cannot see how it would not impact the focus and depth of improvements in each version and. It certainly something scalable.
Hence why on mobile and PC you see the minimum common denominator normalisation instead of what people are suggesting that “for sure” would happen this time.
Remember how “for sure” downloadable games from digital stores would have MS, Nintendo, and Sony pass the savings from cutting the middle man out to customers? Remember how people were selling the pro consumer angle vs luddites attached to physical sales? Now corporate apologists are attempting the same tactics or falling for the same empty promises...
Last edited:
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
Good guy Phil Spencer releasing Halo Infinite on PS5. This guy's alright in my book.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Their flip on cross play standard and then all the issues about allowing FF XIV to launch and implement crossplay showed how “easy” it really was and how much they were trying to take a debatably minor issue (for some) and amplify/weaponise it against Sony.
Nothing illegal albeit a bit dirty... btw, you made me think about the DRM issue again. DRM was something they tried so so hard to shove it down the customers’ throat with even sympathetic journalists going with the “it is the gamers’ fault for not understanding how good it would have been for them” angle and MS going with a disingenuous “we did not have perhaps the time to properly explain how good it was to people”.
Last edited:
JCK75
Member
It's insane that people are shitting on this position while I find it awesome and refreshing.. The reason I primarily game on PC is that I'm backwards compatible all the way back to the SNES Era (not even talking about Emulation just in PC games that are THAT old). The idea that I buy games now and can play them when I upgrade is EVERYTHING to me.. If you paid money for any PS3 game that was "Remastered" and re-released on PS4 with such a label, please just sit down and STFU.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Draught? Is this the same console with Spider-man (which was a massive release for Sony), Horizon expansion, God of War, TLoU II, GoT, Death Stranding al in the last two years or so before PS4’s launch?! I do not think you can honestly compare PS4’s first party output with the equivalent from MS...
Similar threads
- Locked