-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
"PlayStation 5 Will Be Dead on Arrival with Sony's 'Hardcore Gamer' Strategy"
- Thread starter Neat
- Start date
You don't think Xbox will be the only console for these games?
Always nice when someone outs themselves as being clueless about videogames.
Imagine getting paid to come out with such drivel.
Imagine getting paid to come out with such drivel.
Last edited:
Yep :) Only on the Xbox console (console-exclusive) and on PC. That's MS strategy now.
It's "ccn" and not CNN ;)
dat 1% :)
If PS VR is a failure, how you would describe Labo VR then?
i mean, it worked for ps4, really no reason why it shouldn't work again...this is not a wii>wii u situation where that kind of market strategy was obviously dead for anyone but the guys in charge.
cloud gaming seems the next hot thing, but much like the last next big thing, vr, it will have to deal with hardware limitations
cloud gaming seems the next hot thing, but much like the last next big thing, vr, it will have to deal with hardware limitations
Having an unofficial emulator that you run on a PC is completely different than having an official emulator on your flagship hardware, running games that people actually paid for, and by people who might not even know what emulation is. It's just a whole other ball game.
And they would be crazy to make the hardware $800 even if they got full BC with it. The fact is, the hardware comes first, and then they're going to look at features they can implement with it, including the extent of the BC.
Yup...and with digital it's a big opportunity to get new gamers in emerging markets. This is where Switch is taking some of Sony's lunch with regards to indies, but it's still potentially good business to push a $150 PS4 into developing gaming markets.
Last time some dude writing for the verge was saying similar shit about the PS4 but because Sony wasn't going all in on mobile. Why even have these takes when no where near enough of the pieces of the puzzle have been placed down yet?? Sony literally has to fuck up in some way to lose their market position, as they simply are too ingrained in peoples minds to have them walk away from the product, even if it is lacking some respects. They have to release another $599 machine again to fuck up. They could literally do nothing but release a more powerful machine with BC and be fine.
Worked just fine for Sony this generation.
Heck, this strategy is a big part of why Switch was so successful out of the gate. Nintendo figured it out too.
If you aren't focusing on the hardcore userbase at launch when your system is at its most expensive, you're doing it wrong.
Heck, this strategy is a big part of why Switch was so successful out of the gate. Nintendo figured it out too.
If you aren't focusing on the hardcore userbase at launch when your system is at its most expensive, you're doing it wrong.
Maybe I should check my alerts more often and not let them pile up >.>
I'm not sure on any specific posts I've made outside of maybe some stuff in NPD threads, but exclusives matter, to a point.
Halo sells consoles, Spider-Man sells consoles, Switch is selling incredibly well right now because of strong exclusives.
But most importantly, a system needs to be desirable. Switch has that X factor Wii U didn't. Xbox with Halo CE and 2 and Xbox Live could only muster 24M Xbox consoles. GameCube had RE4 but no one cared until the PS2 port.
Strong exclusives can be the difference between a Dreamcast and a Jaguar.
Strong messaging and desirability can be the difference between a Switch and a Wii U.
That's why this op-ed is actually dumb. PS4 was marketed as "4thegamers". Who were those gamers? The ones that mainly wanted a games device, no focus on cloud or TV. Pretty hardcore for 2013.
What did Xbox message? A living room all in one media device to play COD, watch NFL, and exercise the Doritos away with Kinect. A pretty casual market, even today.
Which console is on track to sell +120M units while the other will barely crack 50M after ditching its initial marketing push, floundered on the ground for 4 years, and could damn well have killed a division if not for black magic and massive amounts of goodwill accumulated from 2001-2012?
Killzone 2 is 91 rated. Horizon is 89 rated.
Not really sure that's the best example.
You have to admit that simply by looking at those things and defining them as "subplatforms" means that you're reaching to find weaknesses when we're talking about mainline stuff which is Sony's bread and butter. Even PSP sold 70m which is a great number for a debut handheld. PSVR is selling I think as well as Pro and X, is the best selling high-end VR device and something Sony will continue to support for the next generation as a long term venture. Even the success of PSVR was built upon EyeToy and PS Move, so it's hard to consider those failures in the long term when VR is a big part of PlayStation's future.
Last edited:
PC architecture is the same as PS4 they should be able to do it. I think its completely possible especially since Xbox can do it. The Vita had a PSP emulator Sony could do that or build one from scratch that would be hard to hack. But I think its 100% possible if they truly wanted to. Do you know how many PS3 and PS2 games I have lying around collecting dust? Thats a massive selling point to bring those game in use.
I'm not really sure your Nintendo comparison works there. I mean if we take Wii U as example, yes it still had an incredible 1st party software commitment (like 3DS, like PS3, unlike Vita) but no Nintendo wasn't willing to invest the marketing or enact the structural changes needed to turn the platform around (unlike 3DS, unlike PS3, exactly like Vita). Wii U and Vita were both platforms that their makers essentially let die, which is pretty unlike what we tend to see from the Nintendo handheld or PS home console line, no matter the losses.
The cellphone comparison seems off too. Phones really broke out when they moved past being phones and became handheld computers. You're speaking about VR like it's an industry inevitability but that seems so remote from and at odds with the commercial reality I'm not really sure how to even address it?
Okay it's going somewhere so slowly it appears to be standing still I guess. 4.2m in 2.5 years isn't exactly showing us real momentum.
I'd describe Labo VR as a singular game and not a promoted platform. I guess you could make the argument Labo overall could be a subplatform but I think that might be stretching it too, there's no sdk support or 3rd party program for Labo even.
I also didn't say PSVR was a failure.
I wonder what gave them a hard time on PS4 though. Found it so odd that not only did they take so long for the PS2 games but they were also not performing optimally. They soon just gave up on it all and really dropped the ball with the low effort.
Ps3 is something else entirely so how they're gonna manage that is going to be interesting.
That doesn't really refute my central point which is when Sony put their A team to work they have positive results.
There is a progression to have a mainstream adoption device. You don't just get there overnight. There may be no Switch without WiiU. There may be no iPhone without the bulk, big mobile phone first. It's shortsighted to see the sales today and judge the sales tomorrow. I think an open-minded person would be realistic about VR now, but excited about the potential in the future, not treat it as a fad like waggle and realize all parties involved including gamers and developers are not delusional as to think this will become a success overnight.
Here's the RPCS3 compat list.
Do you really think Sony would want to bring that to PS5? Of the tested games, 44% can't be finished, have serious glitches or have insufficient performance. And then there are the games that don't even work at all.
The problem Sony has is that PS2 and PS3 were pretty exotic hardware, while the Xboxes used more off the shelf parts and an architecture that's easier to emulate. That's why it's easier for MS to offer Xbox BC. There are also less Xbox games to implement support for, and even less games that people are demanding for.
Sony might go for "PS3 Classics" the same way they did PS2 Classics, but full PS3 BC is basically out of the picture. For full PS2 BC there's actually a much bigger chance of it happening.
It doesn't have to be an new emulator it could be the exact PS3 built into the PS5 like how the Vita had PSP built in. Of course Sony would have to do some tweaks to get it secure but they can do that. The PS3 classics route is giving XBox a win becaue they can do it and build out the compatability as time goes on. If sony doesn't learn that with the ps5 it'll be a shit show with PS5 and trying to profit from games players already have twice.
Why the hell would Sony build a PS3 inside the PS5? That would be the craziest mistake they could make hardware wise.
Sony did learn from the mistakes from PS3, that's why PS4 is the way it is, and why they won't ruin the PS5 with something as crazy as that.
I can't see Sony bothering to add BC past PS4, there's not enough of a reward to incentivize it.
Its something they did for BC it could be layered. Once a PS3 game is played it goes to that. It seems like a simple route. As long as the games work I wouldn't care what method they use. People would buy it because they still have their old games.
Sony has Europe in the bag, almost all territories leaned heavily towards the PlayStation.
US is a tight ship between all three, Japan is easily Nintendo.
You're absolutely incorrect with your statement, even your follow-up does not help your case - UK is pretty weak for Nintendo but they are warming to it, Rest of Europe they do well but PlayStation still dominates there.
The US is neck and neck I'd agree. I don't think MS will get a clear edge, it will be the same as this generation.
PS2 BC is feasible and would allow them to offer something new and genuinely desired at relatively low cost instead of the "PS2 Classics" approach which clearly isn't really working.
Other than PS4 BC, PS2 BC has the best cost/reward ratio.
Talking about cost/reward, PS3 BC in this manner would ruin the entire PS5 platform. Cost would be ridiculously bigger than with PS2 BC, but the reward wouldn't be.
No one can sit there and tell me that the God damn playstation 4 can't run ps1 games.
Why the shit can't we play ANY ps1 games. Nevermind discs, how about my digital ps1 games?
Why the fuck is that not possible?
Why the shit can't we play ANY ps1 games. Nevermind discs, how about my digital ps1 games?
Why the fuck is that not possible?
There is nothing stoping Sony from offering digital BC with the ps2 or the ps1, they just need to put the effort in creating the emulator.
Cant believe that a multi bilion dollar company cant just create a emulator for a 25 and a 20 year old hardware.
Cant believe that a multi bilion dollar company cant just create a emulator for a 25 and a 20 year old hardware.
Yes because the hardcore gamers aren't the ones to go adopt new consoles like crazy. Do these people just write whatever?
Ignoring PS1 for obvious reasons, 2/3 of Sony home consoles had BC at launch. And we know why PS4 didn't have PS3 BC, because it wasn't economically possible.
I think Sony have already adopted BC. It was always in their DNA.
They could bundle an official disc based ps1&ps2 emulator (copy to hdd then play), only available with a ps+ subscritpion and make bank.
The only thing they need is a way for right holders to ask for the exclusion of specific disks if so they wish, so that the emulator would refuse to run them, as the licensing aspects in many games that were not licenced to run on future hardware is the very big and very real legal problem they have.
The only thing they need is a way for right holders to ask for the exclusion of specific disks if so they wish, so that the emulator would refuse to run them, as the licensing aspects in many games that were not licenced to run on future hardware is the very big and very real legal problem they have.
I hate to be Mr. Pessimistic but one of the main points of ps now is the "backwards compatibility." I simply can't see them putting anything but ps4 BC in the ps5 because of this. Why give away BC for ps3 or 2 for free when you can monetize it via PS NOW. ?
I believe the emulators in the PS3/Vita were the routes to certain forms of hacking/homebrew/piracy.
Sure, bugs happen everywere, they just need to fix were the hacking was coming from. They did in 2011, im sure they can find them in 2019.
There is no excuse, nothing. If they dont deleiver they need to be call for it.
On top of that, from a money prespective, the emulator will save them a ton of money on the psnow servers.
I remember an old interview, at the start of this gen, were someone from Sony explained about the bandwidth used to streaming ps3 games.
It was something related to the amount of data taken. He compared the size of ps1 games, saying that since they were relatively small it wasn't good for streaming.
I would give a kiss if someone find this interview.
It was something related to the amount of data taken. He compared the size of ps1 games, saying that since they were relatively small it wasn't good for streaming.
I would give a kiss if someone find this interview.
Some of these takes are absolutely laughably insane. Sony is going to hit hard with bc and exclusives. Power wont mean jack next gen for the most part.
Lol u crazy? Cell processor was always an exclusive part. Putting that into ps5 would needlessly make it more expensive
That's gonna really depend on a number of factors. We know Sony isn't invincible, the PS3 crashing and burning at launch (and only recovering as prices dropped and the actual system became easier to develop for due to better documentation and such) is probably something Sony has no interest in repeating, and I'd be surprised if they suddenly became arrogant enough to forget that lesson so soon.
But also... Both Sony and MS seem to be going all-in on uber-premium consoles, which is a bizarre strategy, because the hyped details indicate consoles that can't possibly be $399.99 or less, which was the price point the PS4 nailed (whereas the Xbox One launched at $499 and suffered for it). The oft-mentioned SSDs alone are gonna drive up the price like crazy. Either Sony and MS are not overhyping the fuck out of their next-gen systems, or they're not overpricing themselves out of the market, they can't have it both ways.
Problem is, they're gonna themselves look like liars for not delivering on their promises, or idiots for repeating the mistake Sony made with the PS3. I can't see them avoiding either outcome.
But also... Both Sony and MS seem to be going all-in on uber-premium consoles, which is a bizarre strategy, because the hyped details indicate consoles that can't possibly be $399.99 or less, which was the price point the PS4 nailed (whereas the Xbox One launched at $499 and suffered for it). The oft-mentioned SSDs alone are gonna drive up the price like crazy. Either Sony and MS are not overhyping the fuck out of their next-gen systems, or they're not overpricing themselves out of the market, they can't have it both ways.
Problem is, they're gonna themselves look like liars for not delivering on their promises, or idiots for repeating the mistake Sony made with the PS3. I can't see them avoiding either outcome.
I believe that if Sony brings a compelling first party launch title (pulling a Nintendo Switch or what seems like next gen Xbox's move), they will do just fine
PS5 is doomed! Focusing on exclusive games and great software? Who wants that??? Its not as if that has been something that has brought them success or anything, now it wont...because....i need an article out by 5 and its a slow news day
I think that's a fair point, but it's possible that they will pivot PSNOW into a broader game streaming service targeting devices beyond PS consoles, at which point its functionality as pseudo-BC would no longer be its most important feature.