What MS, Sony, Nintendo should be or are doing next

[Rikimaru]

Yes I agree that Sony did improve a lot last gen, but MS kept improving the 360 as well despite having the upper hand. The thing with MS is that, regardless of their position, they continue to improve the product as much as possible. They dont think about current sales only. They are always thinking about the future I believe. They implement the steps gradually and constantly. Sony doesnt do that. Despite being a happy PS4 owner I can no longer see the platform as a more valuable offer. It is disappointing from a consumer perspective. Sony considers the strength of the brand is strong only based on current sales, but they should have been improving the image and the value regardless of userbase because it is what sets the groundwork for the future. They are more reactive than proactive.
Some of Sony's offers also feel like a rip off. Like PS Now. Why should someone want to pay for old PS3 games with the inconsistency of streaming and pay extra for games they already own or could own for example?
Why pay for PS2 games which are just emulated when someone might already own or could own these games? Not to mention the slow roll out of PS2 games.
In other occasions it feels like some features have been removed. Why not be able to play my PS1 games on my PS4 when it looks like all it needs is very basic emulation?
Also some conveniences we found in Vita and were expecting to see on PS4 havent moved on. Like the fact that we cant jump seamlessly between all apps and games. For example we can jump from Game to web browser fast, but from game to youtube this is impossible.
MS have thought better the console's multitasking functionality on the other hand.
If MS didnt sacrifice performance and better pricing for Kinect and the console had at least performance parity with the PS4 it could have been a better offer from the start. Sony was partly lucky.

That's a very uneducated message.
Everything we saw this gen were MS reactions to Sony's moves. Reveal one80, RemotePlay, SharePlay (still not on Xbox), PSVR, PS+ games, Cross-Play/Save, internal PSU, background music (not snapped), Scorpio is year away.
With PS4, MS copied almost everything from it. Even early new dashboard was exactly like PS4, but vertical. OS is still garbage it seems though.

Why MS did BC? Because they could and they see it as investment for 360 upgraders. They did not get any money out of it. I think they are losing on it.

Emulation requires a lot of engineering and testing. These are not free. PS1 emulation was not removed, they do not have one for a new PS4 OS and x86 CPU automatically from PSP or PS3.

PS Now is not for BC. It's for new consumers in different market. Bandwidth and servers are not free.

You already own a PS4 though. For consumers without either console, XB1 is more compelling now than at launch with the game delta being less such that it isn't too much worth bothering about.

Games delta is large, but mostly niche and japanese.

 

[Rikimaru]

del

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Yes I agree that Sony did improve a lot last gen, but MS kept improving the 360 as well despite having the upper hand. The thing with MS is that, regardless of their position, they continue to improve the product as much as possible.

Maybe you would be happier with an Xbox? I am - constantly - reminded of Sony's firmware updates and ignoring the 90% that are providing 'stability improvements' they've shoved a extra stuff lot in there. However for me the PS4 is a single function device that I use only for playing games so the only feature that I care about that wasn't in system on day 1 was suspend/resume. I care about nothing else at all.

Some of Sony's offers also feel like a rip off. Like PS Now. Why should someone want to pay for old PS3 games with the inconsistency of streaming and pay extra for games they already own or could own for example?

Sony's purchase of Gakai and investment in PS Now is still a head scratcher for me. There is no obvious visible mass market for game streaming but I don't have Sony's figures, or the figures Gaikai had when Sony bought them. PS Now is poor substitute for built-in backwards compatibility but as for why you should pay for it? Because it costs Sony money to run server farms to provide the service. The same reason you have to subscribe to Netflix and Hulu even though they no doubt include content you already own.

That said, I do travel a lot and many hotels have a PS Now enabled HDTV on the wall. The same hotels that used to have a PlayStation in each room. If PS Now could offer all PS4 games and future PlayStation games then that would make extended stays in dry countries more tolerable or this beer-loving Brit.

Why pay for PS2 games which are just emulated when someone might already own or could own these games? Not to mention the slow roll out of PS2 games. In other occasions it feels like some features have been removed. Why not be able to play my PS1 games on my PS4 when it looks like all it needs is very basic emulation?

Because there is no such thing as "basic emulation". Sony can't just hijack an open source emulator for use in PS4, they'd need to write one and why they have the knowhow and skill, it is really worth the effort for them? If it was profitable I think they would be making more of an effort.

Also some conveniences we found in Vita and were expecting to see on PS4 havent moved on. Like the fact that we cant jump seamlessly between all apps and games. For example we can jump from Game to web browser fast, but from game to youtube this is impossible.

You can't jump seamlessly between all apps and games on the Vita, many of Sony's own Vita apps need you close something else before you can run an app. But I take your point and it's still a mystery as to what the hell the standard PS4 is doing with the gigabytes of RAM not accessible to games.

MS have thought better the console's multitasking functionality on the other hand.

Definitely, but I would expect this. Operating Systems are their thing.

If MS didnt sacrifice performance and better pricing for Kinect and the console had at least performance parity with the PS4 it could have been a better offer from the start. Sony was partly lucky.

I also agree. But likewise if Sony hadn't gone insane with PS3 and been intent to leverage Cell and Blu-ray in the box and instead launching sooner at a more modest price with less challenging hardware then it's unlikely 360 would have gained the traction that it did. But do you really want console manufacturers playing safe? Wouldn't that get a bit boring? The nice thing about the console market is that you have two primary competitors who are trying different things.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Like the fact that we cant jump seamlessly between all apps and games. For example we can jump from Game to web browser fast, but from game to youtube this is impossible. MS have thought better the console's multitasking functionality on the other hand.

That's a point of contention though.Back in the day when we were talking about how much RAM needed to be reserved, many of us said for browsing and YT etc, you already have a tablet for concurrent use. If you want to swap to YT mid game, a bit of a delay to suspend the game isn't unreasonable if it saves a lot of resources for the game to actually use.

If MS didnt sacrifice performance and better pricing for Kinect and the console had at least performance parity with the PS4 it could have been a better offer from the start. Sony was partly lucky.

Successful business is always partway luck as you've no idea what the competition is going to do. However, there's zero denying that Sony landed exactly the right product at the right price for launch. The lack of media niceties seems 'cheap', but we all have multifunction media devices coming out of every orifice as it is, so it's no necessary for PS4 to be the all-in-one machine that PS3 was. I agree it would be nice as value-add for Sony to ramp up the extra-gaming functions, but it's not likely to lose them a lot of sales if the don't.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Why MS did BC? Because they could and they see it as investment for 360 upgraders. They did not get any money out of it. I think they are losing on it.

For Nesh's argument, that's about the best thing for consumers! XB1 is adding value to the point it eats into MS's profits - that proves how much added value the platform has. PS4 offers less value because Sony want to keep profits up.

 

[Globalisateur]

Yes I agree that Sony did improve a lot last gen, but MS kept improving the 360 as well despite having the upper hand. The thing with MS is that, regardless of their position, they continue to improve the product as much as possible. They dont think about current sales only. They are always thinking about the future I believe. They implement the steps gradually and constantly. Sony doesnt do that. Despite being a happy PS4 owner I can no longer see the platform as a more valuable offer. It is disappointing from a consumer perspective. Sony considers the strength of the brand is strong only based on current sales, but they should have been improving the image and the value regardless of userbase because it is what sets the groundwork for the future. They are more reactive than proactive.
Some of Sony's offers also feel like a rip off. Like PS Now. Why should someone want to pay for old PS3 games with the inconsistency of streaming and pay extra for games they already own or could own for example?
Why pay for PS2 games which are just emulated when someone might already own or could own these games? Not to mention the slow roll out of PS2 games.
In other occasions it feels like some features have been removed. Why not be able to play my PS1 games on my PS4 when it looks like all it needs is very basic emulation?
Also some conveniences we found in Vita and were expecting to see on PS4 havent moved on. Like the fact that we cant jump seamlessly between all apps and games. For example we can jump from Game to web browser fast, but from game to youtube this is impossible.
MS have thought better the console's multitasking functionality on the other hand.
If MS didnt sacrifice performance and better pricing for Kinect and the console had at least performance parity with the PS4 it could have been a better offer from the start. Sony was partly lucky.

Did they really ? I read many testimonies saying the multitasking on XB1 brings lots of problems with the games. And also their suspend and resume feature is still broken. I read one guy for DF once saying that the XB1 suspend and resume feature was not reliable (if like him you played games for a living) and that PS4 suspend and resume was on the other hand perfectly working as intended.

And their share functions still is not as good as on PS4.

So Microsoft have checked some boxes, that's all.

And that's not even talking about installing games on XB1. And the fact that there are still not exclusives games of the generation on XB1.

PS4 is not perfect, they are quite 'greedy' compared to MS (I often complain about it here) but only because they don't want (they can't afford) to lose money (probably millions) like Microsoft by giving free BC or not earning money on their last model of hardware in order to give a UHD player or to give one or two free AAA games for each hardware sold every months or so since the release of their machine.

But Sony still get it where it counts for most players: they give us essential games, the features linked to games are perfectly working and we as players (not UHD movie consumers) we know they'll sustain their PS4 ecosystem for at least 3 more years like they did with PS3 with great games still to come (GT7, TLOU2, Horizon, The last guardian etc.). XB1 is a dead gaming system now, where and what are the exciting upcoming games ?

 

[AzBat]

Not sure who is having problems with multitasking & suspend/resume, but I have had 0 issues with either since I've had my system & that was way before getting Preview updates or the Win10 upgrade. XB1 a dead gaming system? LOL A little heavy with the FUD no?

Tommy McClain

 

[function]

Not sure who is having problems with multitasking & suspend/resume, but I have had 0 issues with either since I've had my system & that was way before getting Preview updates or the Win10 upgrade. XB1 a dead gaming system? LOL A little heavy with the FUD no?

A dead gaming system that's seeing year on year growth.

I think BC is a net gain for MS. They'll keep more users, who will continue to generate revenue both on new and old software and hardware. A few of us made the argument before this gen started that consoles games could have a long tail through digital sales, just as they have continued to do on Steam.

It would be interesting to see how the digital sales of 360 games play out in terms of which device they subsequently get played on. I would love to know if Read Dead Redemption saw digital sales kick off again after it became BC. The game doesn't just run on X1, it runs better than on either of the previous machines it was for. A lot of old games now run markedly better on X1.

 

[iroboto]

XB1 is a dead gaming system now, where and what are the exciting upcoming games ?

XBO OS does improve at a steadily rate, perhaps not at the rate most customers want, but to indicate that there hasn't been significant changes since release would be a fairly embellishment of the situation today.
That being said, you're going to have to clarify a bit more on 'XB1 is a dead gaming system now', your messages are usually more moderate, so this one is a bit perplexing for me. I mean it's taking a substantial upswing in growth since the release of the 1S and there are a series of exclusives that have still yet to be released that have been either announced at least E3, or E3s before it.

The game situation is looking pretty good for XBO in the western scene, I do agree it could round out its portfolio more, but these things take time. But H5 and Gears, Forza 5/6, FH3, Scalebound, Sea of Thieves, QB, and others have all been exclusive titles that don't span backwards to X360.

 

[tuna]

• XBOX One shifted focus completely back into gaming,
• .......
  
• They now include 4k Blu Ray and 4K streaming with every new model

"Completely" might be the wrong word.....

 

[BRiT]

XB1 is a dead gaming system now, where and what are the exciting upcoming games ?

There are no exciting and upcoming games for Sony systems or Nintendo systems either. What you said applies to ALL consoles.

And no, we're not going to get into a list war.

 

[Globalisateur]

XBO OS does improve at a steadily rate, perhaps not at the rate most customers want, but to indicate that there hasn't been significant changes since release would be a fairly embellishment of the situation today.
That being said, you're going to have to clarify a bit more on 'XB1 is a dead gaming system now', your messages are usually more moderate, so this one is a bit perplexing for me. I mean it's taking a substantial upswing in growth since the release of the 1S and there are a series of exclusives that have still yet to be released that have been either announced at least E3, or E3s before it.

The game situation is looking pretty good for XBO in the western scene, I do agree it could round out its portfolio more, but these things take time. But H5 and Gears, Forza 5/6, FH3, Scalebound, Sea of Thieves, QB, and others have all been exclusive titles that don't span backwards to X360.

Well this is just my opinion. I believe many people buy it for the cheap UHD player or to replace their OG XB1 with a smaller box containing a slightly upclocked hardware.

And the future of Xbox is Scorpio, not XB1. As you know I think Scorpio is their real next gen disguised as a mid-gen upgrade only because they were forced to announce their next console after the Pro reveal, like they very recently admitted.

But we'll get a better idea about the XB1s sales after the holiday by comparing it to previous years.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

A dead gaming system that's seeing year on year growth.

It's rising like a zombie, before killing those that love it.

I'm very sorry for your loss.

 

[Karamazov]

if anything the XB1 should still live long since Scorpio games will have to also work on XB1.
It won't even be the less powerful console as it should stay above the switch.

 

[iroboto]

Well this is just my opinion. I believe many people buy it for the cheap UHD player or to replace their OG XB1 with a smaller box containing a slightly upclocked hardware.

And the future of Xbox is Scorpio, not XB1. As you know I think Scorpio is their real next gen disguised as a mid-gen upgrade only because they were forced to announce their next console after the Pro reveal, like they very recently admitted.

But we'll get a better idea about the XB1s sales after the holiday by comparing it to previous years.

Those are certain valid assumptions of its sales. It may also just be that x360 owners are coming home. It's a great secondary console for anyone who doesn't have it as a primary gaming rig, especially those that left 360 to go to PS4: upon coming back their previous exclusive franchises are all ready to play, their old backlog ready to go, and with EA Access and XBLG they get a enormous number of games for relatively little investment.

I can't explain the increase in sales, but I just wouldn't be surprised if it's previous 360 owners who are now satisfied enough with the product to buy in.

 

[function]

It's rising like a zombie, before killing those that love it.

I'm very sorry for your loss.

But ... I don't own any variety of X1. Will PC protect me?

Edit: Wait a minute.... does this mean Scorpio is Tyrant? If so, who is Wesker?

 

[mpg1]

I know a lot of people think it's unlikely but I almost feel a $199.99-$224.99 price is crucial at this point. You can buy a Xbox One/PS4 with games for $250. Also $250 seems like it would be the upper limit hardware in the handheld gaming market.

At the very least the base model needs to be $199. Just to have a chance at growing the install base.

 

[Osamar]

... Im not sure what Nvidia could do to make the next Shield tv more desirable , it already has 4K and HDR support, it chews through all games easily.

Make it compatible with Switch games?

 

[orangpelupa]

Anyway I'm coming to the conclusion that Nintendo isn't even competing in the console market anymore...it's competing against mobile. On the bright side game development cost should be lower on Nintendo's platform than Xbox/Playstation.

maybe exclusive games need lower cost, but how about cross platform games? with how far weaker NX is, wont it add porting cost? i mean compared to the usual PC x PS4 x X1

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Make it compatible with Switch games?

And play them with better image quality like enchanced shaders, increased resolution, anti-aliasing etc.