• 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.

IIFloodyII

Member
Oct 26, 2017
23,953
Ms was expected to win this gen and they would have if they had made a XBox 360 2.0.
The competition was a complete joke this gen, there is no denying that.
By who? They've literally never come close to "winning" a gen, as their platform just isn't close to the others worldwide. People probably expected it to be a lot closer, but anyone who expected Xbox to definitely win was just clueless about the wider market.
 

Jaypah

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,866
By who? They've literally never come close to "winning" a gen, as their platform just isn't close to the others worldwide. People probably expected it to be a lot closer, but anyone who expected Xbox to definitely win was just clueless about the wider market.

I honestly can't see MS getting close to winning a gen. At this point with (assuming) BC going forward for PS5 I can't even see them having a tie. PS brand is just stronger worldwide and now people are way more invested into the ecosystems. This gen was the gen to fight for the future and they blew it. Never say never, but MS selling anywhere close to Sony would be completely shocking.
 

E.T.

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,035
Best platform holder since they stepped into the game. Shu is a legend too, super likable and that E3 Bosman skit still is amazing to this day.
Great interview which really show how much of a visionary Crazy Ken really was.
Glad they know their strengths and concentrate on them for the future.
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,039
Hopefully Sony learned to get their heads out of their asses and won't repeat the PS3 ever again.

Yes, Sony get very luck this gen with the major backlash to the Xbox One, and the abysmal WiiU. They pretty much had free reign for like 4 years, lol. Plus the PS4 being an absolute great console.

We'll see what happens with the PS5.
 

AmFreak

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,506
By who? They've literally never come close to "winning" a gen, as their platform just isn't close to the others worldwide.
You mean out of the incredible data basis of 3 where 1 (the first) was impossible to win?
Just like their platform wasn't close to Sony in the US/UK before the 360?
That they never came close also doesn't reflect their standing last gen. The Wii won last gen, but that was due to a now vanished audience. In the audience they battle over with Sony they already sold the same as Sony.
Without counting Japan that continued/continues to loose relevance they were even ahead.

This is including the PS4?

If so that's an odd take.
Not to the same extent, but yes.
They launched a low-mid-end pc w/o subsidizing it's hardware and introduced pay2play online.
What would they have done if Ms came out with a 360 2.0?
A more powerful ~$500 console sold for $300-400?
 
Last edited:

RivalGT

Member
Dec 13, 2017
6,393
By who? They've literally never come close to "winning" a gen, as their platform just isn't close to the others worldwide. People probably expected it to be a lot closer, but anyone who expected Xbox to definitely win was just clueless about the wider market.
Yeah the PS3 outsold the 360 since day 1 worldwide. The only reason why it was close, was because MS outsold them badly in NA... 25 million to 45 million. All sony had to do this gen is be competitive in NA again, and they would easily outsell xbox worldwide again.
 

AlexxKidd

Banned
May 23, 2018
520
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...oing-so-well-we-dont-forget-why-were-here-now

Shu Yoshida reflects on 25 years at PlayStation, and the difficulty of hardware transitions.














Full article here

I think before its all said and done, the PS4 will go down as my favorite console of all time, as of right now it only has the PS1 to beat, and if all four of those games shown at E3 deliver - and if CP2077 and FFVIIR are current gen - (big ifs) itll do so handidly. Lets hope the he doesnt forget the reason they are where they are, GAMES. In particular, incredible games that can only be played on PlayStation. Thats whats sets it apart.
 

Ricky_R

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
3,997
Ms was expected to win this gen and they would have if they had made a XBox 360 2.0.
The competition was a complete joke this gen, there is no denying that.

Nah. MS would've possibly been tied or on top in the US and UK, and the world wide gap wouldn't be as huge, but the PS4 would still be comfortably ahead.

Unless, MS would've released a console as powerful as the PS4 at $300, which is some nice wishful thinking.
 

Ricky_R

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
3,997
What do you mean not the same?
A 360 2.0 would be a >PS4 for $300.

How so? The most desireable 360 at release was priced at $400. It was Sony who were out of touch and sent their system to die at an absurd price.

Not sure how's that the same as Sony pricing their PS4 at $400 and MS theirs at $300.

A 360 2.0 for MS would've been a system as powerful as the PS4 at $400. That PS3 price was an outlier.
 

Hawk269

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,043
I honestly can't see MS getting close to winning a gen. At this point with (assuming) BC going forward for PS5 I can't even see them having a tie. PS brand is just stronger worldwide and now people are way more invested into the ecosystems. This gen was the gen to fight for the future and they blew it. Never say never, but MS selling anywhere close to Sony would be completely shocking.

Why is winning a gen so important to you? Who gives a shit really other than console fan boys? Just because a platform is #2 or #3 does not mean they have no games or they don't offer some value. I think too many people are caught up in the if you are not #1 then anything else is worthless.
 

Wandu

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,162
He says that but the truth is Online multiplayer should be free. i'm already giving Sony money when i buy my games. Don't lock multiplayer behind an arbitrary subscription! If Sony wants to have a $10/month subscription service like moviepass or something that lets you play games you don't own, that's fair. But no charging for multiplayer...

You can thank MS for that one. They got people accustomed to paying for the ability to play online. That was lost money for Sony in PS3 gen since they did it for free. PS4 came along and they could get away with the charge with minimal damage as they provided an improved experience compared to PS3.
 
Oct 26, 2017
5,114
Tbh after owning all Sony hardware except the PSP, they've almost completely lost me as a consumer. So maybe they ought to look back a little harder. But then, as acknowledged in the article, part of what got them where they are was moneyhatting 3rd parties away from the competition. I'm glad to see that being less prevalent. Also weird to see praise given to the PS3 development process when they had to pivot away from it. Also weird to see praise for the new way when they even acknowledge the Vita being part of it. Eh. Guess we'll see what happens
 

legend166

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,113
Console transitions are incredibly tricky. One of the advantages Sony have over Microsoft and to a lesser extent Nintendo is the truly world wide presence they built up during the PS1 and PS2 eras which helped cushion the blow when the PS3 was such a disaster in the first two-three years. The original Xbox was basically a non-entity in non-English speaking markets so it was harder for them to capitalise when the PS3 stumbled out of the gate. Obviously the Xbox still took some market share, but I think if it was a more established brand in non-English speaking countries it could have been a lot worse for Sony than it ended up being. I think it's basically the difference between what the PS3 ended up doing (what was it in the end, 85 million-ish or so?) and what the Xbox One is going to do (probably top out at 50 million). Because even though it looks like the Xbox One is having a similar second half renaissance like the PS3, it's still mainly concentrated in the English speaking world. But when you look the whole Xbox One unveiling, it was so US focused with the whole cable integration and being able to watch NFL, etc. Heck I even forgot about the 'Tier One/Tier Two' country debacle. What terrible messaging.

Nintendo has gotten better on that front now and I think it's paying off dividends now with the Switch which is seeing a lot of success in France, Spain, Germany, etc, etc. The next step for them is more of a prescence in the MEA part of EMEA.

But back to console transitions - I do think the age of GaaS and online subscriptions should theoretically make it easier. Even that I think helped cushion the blow for the Xbox One because a lot of people were invested in the Xbox Live ecosystem, and you can see them leveraging that with the backwards compatibility , Game Pass, etc.
 

Jaypah

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,866
Why is winning a gen so important to you? Who gives a shit really other than console fan boys? Just because a platform is #2 or #3 does not mean they have no games or they don't offer some value. I think too many people are caught up in the if you are not #1 then anything else is worthless.

Uh, what? I have said on this site and the other one that being number one is nice but not the end all be all. I have no idea why you brought up games and value as I think all the platforms have value to them and games worth owning. My post was a reply to someone speaking about MS winning a gen. Calm down. MS can be number 3 for the rest of its life and be fine as long as they're making money. As a consumer I just want them all to be healthy enough to continue investing in more games.

You can thank MS for that one. They got people accustomed to paying for the ability to play online. That was lost money for Sony in PS3 gen since they did it for free. PS4 came along and they could get away with the charge with minimal damage as they provided an improved experience compared to PS3.

I thank MS, Sony and consumers. Myself included because I've paid for Gold and PS+ in the past. Probably never again though.
 

Linkeds2

Member
Nov 15, 2017
453
North Bay, CA
Am I the only who sees winning generations as:

- who increases market share from the previous gen

And not

- raw count of units sold.

Because it doesn't look as good when you a situation like "Company A sold 110m units vs Company B selling 30m units" and then next gen "Company A sells 120m units vs Company B sold 105m units". Of course Company A still wins. But, C'mon.
 

Ricky_R

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
3,997
It would be a console as powerful (actually more powerful) as the PS4, but for $300.
That's exactly what i said.

Still doesn't explain how that would be a 360 2.0.

It's not like the 360 was underpriced. It was priced fairly at the time. The PS3 was priced too high, regardless of its value at release.

If the Xbone was as powerful as the PS4 and priced at $300, the PS4 would still be priced at $400 which is a fair price and would be able to compete despite the $100 difference. Both scenarios are different, which is why I don't get the 2.0 thing.

Either way, it's all wishful thinking.
 

AmFreak

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,506
Still doesn't explain how that would be a 360 2.0.
The 360 was a heavily subsidized console with power as it's priority to combat Sony.
It had a BoM of ~$500, but sold for $300-400.
A console >=PS4, but sold for $300 would have the same mentality as the 360.
 
Last edited:

Melchiah

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,190
Helsinki, Finland
Am I the only who sees winning generations as:

- who increases market share from the previous gen

And not

- raw count of units sold.

Because it doesn't look as good when you a situation like "Company A sold 110m units vs Company B selling 30m units" and then next gen "Company A sells 120m units vs Company B sold 105m units". Of course Company A still wins. But, C'mon.

Well, Microsoft certainly hasn't increased their market share from the previous generation.
 

score01

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,699
MS were out of their damn minds at the start of this gen. Like, were they literally taking crazy pills there or just what happened?

They thought they had all the major bases covered to entice casuals - tv, sports, nfl, cod, motion controls/Kinect. All their data points were telling them that this was what everyone wanted. If it had caught on in the same way as the wii I could see where they got that high number from.
 

Electro

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,899
Vienna
Why is winning a gen so important to you? Who gives a shit really other than console fan boys? Just because a platform is #2 or #3 does not mean they have no games or they don't offer some value. I think too many people are caught up in the if you are not #1 then anything else is worthless.

For me it is important because Sony made a console with focus on gaming and no gimmicks.

It is great to see that a classic console can be so succesful.
 

Melchiah

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,190
Helsinki, Finland
Why is winning a gen so important to you? Who gives a shit really other than console fan boys? Just because a platform is #2 or #3 does not mean they have no games or they don't offer some value. I think too many people are caught up in the if you are not #1 then anything else is worthless.

Well, having the top platform ensures you get most of the 3rd party games, and decreases the possibility of timed exclusives on rival platforms, unlike it was last gen on the PS3. I don't have to wait to be able to play the games I want anymore. Not to mention, that Microsoft can't enforce the parity clause anymore either, which gave them timed exclusives from smaller studios by default.
 

Jagernaut

Member
Oct 27, 2017
758
The 360 was a heavily subsidized console with power as it's priority to combat Sony.
It had a BoM of ~$500, but sold for $300-400.
A console >=PS4, but sold for $300 would have the same mentality as the 360.

The PS3 was also subsidized. The $600 version cost $800 to make (if I recall correctly). Anyway, those big subsidies are a thing of the past. No one wants to lose hundreds of dollars per unit on hardware anymore.
 

Eolz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,601
FR
Not really the same. Still, Sony ended up surpassing the 360 at the very end and that's after releasing a year later at $600.

That's where global brand power comes into play.
The PS3 didn't sell much more after the gen ended, and it was mainly due to selling 10M consoles in Japan Vs the 1M 360 consoles there.
Let's be clear there.
Edit: both sold less than the Wii anyway, despite its terrible final years.
 

pswii60

Member
Oct 27, 2017
26,665
The Milky Way
Nah. MS would've possibly been tied or on top in the US and UK, and the world wide gap wouldn't be as huge, but the PS4 would still be comfortably ahead.

Unless, MS would've released a console as powerful as the PS4 at $300, which is some nice wishful thinking.
But in this parallel universe, MS might have had the best first party lineup in history and finally broken in to Japan with their Xbox portable.
 

Deleted member 13155

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,604
I like my PS4 but I feel Microsoft is doing a better job on the hardware and service front atm.

When I see Game Pass, BC, EA Access and those features like freesync, Dolby Vision, 4K playback I think Sony did rest on their laurels a bit much.
 

Ricky_R

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
3,997
The PS3 didn't sell much more after the gen ended, and it was mainly due to selling 10M consoles in Japan Vs the 1M 360 consoles there.
Let's be clear there.
Edit: both sold less than the Wii anyway, despite its terrible final years.

I didn't say the PS3 sold much after the gen ended, I just said that it surpassed the 360 at the end of their cycles, even after releasing a year later at $200 more. That speaks highly of their brand strength and world wide appeal.

Not sure what the Wii has to do with anything btw.
 

xolsec

Member
Feb 18, 2018
1,685
Hopefully Sony learned to get their heads out of their asses and won't repeat the PS3 ever again.

Yes, Sony get very luck this gen with the major backlash to the Xbox One, and the abysmal WiiU. They pretty much had free reign for like 4 years, lol. Plus the PS4 being an absolute great console.

We'll see what happens with the PS5.

How was Sony lucky this gen? Was Sony Lucky with the PS1, PS2 or PS3?
 

xolsec

Member
Feb 18, 2018
1,685
I like my PS4 but I feel Microsoft is doing a better job on the hardware and service front atm.

When I see Game Pass, BC, EA Access and those features like freesync, Dolby Vision, 4K playback I think Sony did rest on their laurels a bit much.

That sums up MS's strategy, have the best hardware...

I'll rather have the best games, but that's just me.
 

Sonicfan059

Member
Mar 4, 2018
3,024
Why is winning a gen so important to you? Who gives a shit really other than console fan boys? Just because a platform is #2 or #3 does not mean they have no games or they don't offer some value. I think too many people are caught up in the if you are not #1 then anything else is worthless.
Nah it's just that MS at #1 is bad for everyone. I have no confidence they won't go back to their usual tricks after being on top. This gen has been nice without Major Nelson and Greenburg constantly bragging. No one wants that.
 

Soneji

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
1,454
How was Sony lucky this gen? Was Sony Lucky with the PS1, PS2 or PS3?
In a sense yeah their entire existence in the market is lucky, mainly due to Nintendo's mistakes as a company allowing them to grab a larger market share than should have been possible. Sony deserves a large deal of credit on their own end as a whole and especially for specific moves like DVD player and BC on PS2 and funding projects like Ico/SotC but you don't topple titans without some hubris on their part.

Sony has only actually been part of a console war once, during the PS3 era. Every other gen their opponents took themselves out or were newcomers with a limited focus(OG Xbox). They have rarely had to go outside the box to differentiate themselves from the competition like Nintendo does constantly or lay the groundwork for the next big thing like Microsoft with Xbox Live.

They're free to be the PC-lite of the consoles.
 

Eolz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,601
FR
I didn't say the PS3 sold much after the gen ended, I just said that it surpassed the 360 at the end of their cycles, even after releasing a year later at $200 more. That speaks highly of their brand strength and world wide appeal.

Not sure what the Wii has to do with anything btw.
Wii is the same gen.
PS3 kept selling mostly due to the gen transition not happening in Japan like in the west. Just saying that the difference with the 360 last gen wasn't due to brand strength, but regional differences.
 

Sonicfan059

Member
Mar 4, 2018
3,024
Wii is the same gen.
PS3 kept selling mostly due to the gen transition not happening in Japan like in the west. Just saying that the difference with the 360 last gen wasn't due to brand strength, but regional differences.
Brand strength is why they did better in regions such as Europe and Asia though.
 

Ricky_R

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
3,997
Wii is the same gen.
PS3 kept selling mostly due to the gen transition not happening in Japan like in the west. Just saying that the difference with the 360 last gen wasn't due to brand strength, but regional differences.

Of course it had to do with brand strenght world wide. They were able to recover mostly due to how well they did outside of the US and UK (EU being key). That wasn't the only factor of course, but it helped significantly.

And the exchange was about the Xbox and PS. Wii had nothing to do with it.