UK Sales - PS5 leads for September with sales increase and "all three consoles saw a jump in sales"

How did the PS4 lead after the PS3 vs 360? There was nothing inherently wrong with Xbox One. They just didn't build a solid first party library during the gen and just went the gamepass route. That's working for them in terms of new Series S sales but you make it seem like xbox one could not have been turned around like PS3 was to PS4.

Are you serious ? :messenger_tears_of_joy::messenger_tears_of_joy::messenger_tears_of_joy:
 

Skifi28

Member
Yes, what was wrong with xbox one for example vs a Series S?

It had lower res in a lot of games vs PS4 but so did the PS3 vs 360. Yet the PS4 did fine.
Being more expensive while being weaker, a forced kinect nobody wanted, used game and online only controversy. What more do you need?
 

Skifi28

Member
So just like the PS3 at $599? How did it and the PS4 do well after it?

Those were all reversed and the price decreased. There was nothing inherently wrong with the XB1.
The PS3 was a direct follow-up from the huge success of the PS2 and all the talk about teh Cell lead to people thinking it was much stronger rather than weaker somewhat justifying the price. It also didn't do too well, it was only in its latest year that it really came into its own and surpassed the 360 which was ahead for most of the generation. The XB1 stuff were reversed far too late and by that time it lacked the game appeal while the PS4 which had a weak library initially was getting all the bangers out completely overshadowing whatever MS did at the time.

You can't just take one individual aspect like the price or hardware specs and conclude that this is all that matters about a console succeeding or failing, it was a combination of multiple things and they all worked against the XB1. There was nothing inherently wrong with the Dreamcast either, decent hardware with great software yet it failed completely. You need much more context about the game industry and technology at the time and things happening around the console to make any sense of it.
 
Last edited:
The PS3 was a direct follow-up from the huge success of the PS2 and all the talk about teh Cell lead to people thinking it was much stronger rather than weaker somewhat justifying the price. It also didn't do too well, it was only in its latest year that it really came into its own and surpassed the 360 which was ahead for most of the generation. The XB1 stuff were reversed far too late and by that time it lacked the game appeal while the PS4 which had a weak library initially was getting all the bangers out completely overshadowing whatever MS did at the time.


You can't just take one individual aspect like the price or hardware specs and conclude that this is all that matters about a console succeeding or failing, it was a combination of multiple things and they all worked against the XB1.
But T Three 's point still remains valid: how did the PS4 made such a splash after PS3, which is considered a failure by many? And if PS4 could succeed right from the get-go after a mediocre previous gen, why couldn't XSX|S succeed after a poor Xbox One generation?
 

Skifi28

Member
But T Three 's point still remains valid: how did the PS4 made such a splash after PS3, which is considered a failure by many? And if PS4 could succeed right from the get-go after a mediocre previous gen, why couldn't XSX|S succeed after a poor Xbox One generation?
The PS3 that was doing poorly at first was getting better and better mindshare by the end of the generation leading to the PS4. That along with all the negative press XB1 was generating led to everybody and their mother going for a PS4 despite its initial lack of games. It wasn't PS4 doing things right as as much as it was MS completely screwing up everything and handing the victory to a Sony that just provided a decent platform and kept the status quo.

For the XB series to do a 180 and completely dominate like the PS4 did, Sony would need to fail very badly with the PS5 which they haven't. Having said that, MS is pulling most of the right moves and they're slowly getting back mindshare and increasing their userbase. I don't know what your definition of "succeeding" is, but to me they already are. If you mean completely dominate their competition, it could happen but it would take years of doing everything right while Sony starts failing which doesn't seem too likely right now but you never know.
 
Last edited:

Three

Member
The PS3 was a direct follow-up from the huge success of the PS2
And the xbox one was a direct follow up from the hugely successful xbox 360.
and all the talk about teh Cell lead to people thinking it was much stronger rather than weaker somewhat justifying the price. It also didn't do too well,
There was a lot of PR bullshit then too about Azure dedicated servers, power of the cloud making it more powerful, and a faster CPU. I'm sure the power of the Cell had little bearing on anything once games came out for it much like xbox ones PR didn't.

it was only in its latest year that it really came into its own and surpassed the 360 which was ahead for most of the generation.
Because they lowered the price and started pumping out amazing games tell the very end of the generation. That's my point. Sony turned it around during the PS3 and released a successful PS4. Somebody was suggesting Xbox Series can't lead in a market because of XB1 but there was nothing inherently wrong with XB1.
The XB1 stuff were reversed far too late and by that time it lacked the game appeal while the PS4 which had a weak library initially was getting all the bangers out completely overshadowing whatever MS did at the time.
They were reversed before it even launched. Even the price was decreased sooner than most consoles with it decreasing the first March after Christmas release.
You can't just take one individual aspect like the price or hardware specs and conclude that this is all that matters about a console succeeding or failing, it was a combination of multiple things and they all worked against the XB1.
I'm not. I'm just saying MS could have done the same transition from PS3 to PS4 because there wasn't anything inherently wrong with XB1 (there was more stuff inherently wrong with PS3) but they haven't. They concentrated on gamepass and have seen some success with it and XSS but not enough to lead console sales in any market.
 
Last edited:

Skifi28

Member
And the xbox one was a direct follow up from the hugely successful xbox 360.
Which was already getting tons of criticism towards the end of its lifetime about the lack of games and focus on kinect as well as all the dead RROD consoles people were getting tired of (yeah, that was fixed too but after being on your third console you kinda give up). Many people were already switching towards a PS3 by the end of the generation (me included).

There was a lot of PR bullshit then too about Azure dedicated servers, power of the cloud making it more powerful, and a faster CPU. I'm sure the power of the Cell had little bearing on anything once games came out for it much like xbox ones PR didn't.
We can agree to disagree on this. Exotic hardware that could do great things in the future was much more of an interesting and realistic thing people wanted to invest in rather than the cloud in an age the cloud was not really a thing.

Because they lowered the price and started pumping out amazing games tell the very end of the generation. That's my point. Sony turned it around during the PS3 and released a successful PS4. Somebody was suggesting Xbox Series can't lead in a market because of XB1 but there was nothing inherently wrong with XB1.
Depends what you mean by "inherently wrong". If your definition is playing games and not having any serious hardware defects, sure. Like I said above, if MS keeps doing everything right and Sony stumbles, they could totally take the lead at some point in the future.

 
Last edited:

Three

Member
Depends what you mean by "inherently wrong". If your definition is playing games and not having any serious hardware defects, sure. Like I said above, if MS keeps doing everything right and Sony stumbles, they could totally take the lead at some point in the future.
Inherently means things it's stuck with or is inseparable from, price, prelaunch nonsense, and even power (especially with the X1X) is not something that was inherently wrong with XB1.

The point is that people are using the xbox one woes to not only excuse the lack of effort or success during the xbox one itself but to suggest its woes extend to the Xbox Series as to why it isn't leading anywhere. If that is the case how did the PS4 sales lead in markets with all the woes PS3 had too.
 

Skifi28

Member
If that is the case how did the PS4 sales lead in markets with all the woes PS3 had too.
I believe I've explained multiple times the combination of things that led to that and I refuse to write yet another essay on it. If despite that I still haven't answered your question, I really don't know what else to tell you.
 

Three

Member
I believe I've explained multiple times the combination of things that led to that and I refuse to write yet another essay on it. If despite that I still haven't answered your question, I really don't know what else to tell you.
Just pointing out that "inherently wrong" doesn't mean hardware defects while playing a game. If anything the 360 had hardware defects and still did well.

The point is that I don't agree with the idea that the Xbox Series is not leading because of Xbox Ones legacy, a legacy that could have even been corrected during the Xbox one itself too like PS3 but wasn't. They had poor content output and went a different route.
 
Top Bottom