Next-gen Cross-Platform Strategy [2020]

[iroboto]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1228185267481088002

So more or less the same as MS.
It’s Amazing how everyone arrives to the same conclusion... or expected.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

So more or less the same as MS.
It’s Amazing how everyone arrives to the same conclusion... or expected.

Not yet. This is unconfirmed and doesn't state time period - launch day, or launch year? Nor does it mention if Sony first parties or third parties, the latter of which normally are cross-generational. At the moment, if taken at face value, it means you buy a PS5 day one and you'll have mostly up-ports of PS4 games, but later in the year, 3, 6, 9 months in, you may have some shiny exclusives or not. Unknown. MS OTOH has confirmed in the first year, all their titles will be up-ports and you can be sure when you buy an XBSX, there won't be any platform exclusives from MS maxing the machine. There will, of course, be third-party next-gen titles.

 

[AzBat]

Dsoup didn't forget about ya. Life happens.

This is true, but given the focus of X I'd be surprised if gaming isn't for the foremost feature of XSX and I can't think what software features you could incorporate that is going to sway that large portion who buy a console primarily to game on.

Yeah, I'm having a hard time myself. It will be interesting to see how they target their messaging. Incentives may have nothing to do with the games themselves, but features & services around those games. Things like xCloud, Game Pass & Mixer, better OS/multitasking? Or they may go all-in on the backward compatibility like @see colon mentioned: higher frame rate, higher resolution, better AA, 16x AF on all XB1 titles? What about things that the PC does(game wise) now that consoles don't do? No idea myself as I'm not a PC gamer.

They could. But we are back to the lack of evidence that there is any significant body of console gamers are are willing to spend more for any form improved performance - of any kind. While I would tend to buy the more performant console, TV, car etc, the greater majority are content for "good enough", hence why PS4 outsells Pro and what little numbers we do have suggest the same is true for One X/SAD vs. X. If you give most of these folks a choice to buy a new console, as Microsoft and Sony did mid-gen, the majority were happier with their lower-graphics-settings, lower-load-speed 1.2Tf/1.84Tf launch-spec consoles.

The way to get games to upgrade is cut them off of games, or overwhelmingly incentivise with experiences only possible on new hardware. I for one am very interested in how both companies intend to market the new hardware because I think it's going to be a really tough sell when games like Red Dead Redemption and Spider-Man are being released.

Not cutting off gamers from their games yeah is the normal transition. But as others have suggested I can see how if you start the messaging that generation-less games will bring newer, faster, better experiences every time with newer hardware then you could start a slow build up like on PC or like on phones. Generation-less has to start somewhere, maybe it's now? All new territory for sure.

Tommy McClain

 

[chris1515]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1228185267481088002

So more or less the same as MS.
It’s Amazing how everyone arrives to the same conclusion... or expected.

Because you think third party title will not be cross gen. Sony first party games will be exclusives, other games will be cross gen.

 

[Xbat]

I would be very surprised if Sony doesn't have a PS5 exclusive game in the first 6 months in fact probably multiple games.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

That's obvious. The price offering of XB1X was $500 to play your XB1 games slightly better; just not worth it to most folk. XBSX is $500 (?) to play your XB1 games much better.

I don't doubt that same Xbox One games are only slightly better on X, but plenty are leaps and bounds better according to DigitalFoundry.

 

[iroboto]

Because you think third party title will not be cross gen. Sony first party games will be exclusives, other games will be cross gen.

Which is more or less the same. How many 1P exclusives are you expecting year 1? That will be designed to truly exceed this gen. Just saying. What did PS4 launch with ?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't doubt that same Xbox One games are only slightly better on X, but plenty are leaps and bounds better according to DigitalFoundry.

Proportionally only slightly better. For the price of a next-gen console, you weren't getting a next-gen improvement.

 

[PSman1700]

higher frame rate, higher resolution, better AA, 16x AF on all XB1 titles? What about things that the PC does(game wise) now that consoles don't do? No idea myself as I'm not a PC gamer.

Usually higher settings also (high/ultra).

So more or less the same as MS.
It’s Amazing how everyone arrives to the same conclusion... or expected.

Yeah, it makes sense they do the same as MS basically. In the first months or even year, there won't be that many PS5 owners as opposed to the 100 million plus PS4 owners.

Which is more or less the same. How many 1P exclusives are you expecting year 1? That will be designed to truly exceed this gen. Just saying. What did PS4 launch with ?

Or even PS2, or PS3, ive said it before, but launch lineups rarely are anything amazing, aside from 'tech demos'.

 

[bgroovy]

Yeah, it makes sense they do the same as MS basically. In the first months or even year, there won't be that many PS5 owners as opposed to the 100 million plus PS4 owners.

Early adopters are your most active purchasing base. There's a reason lots of the cross-gen games last time underperformed on the PS3/360 compared to the next gen versions.

 

[PSman1700]

Early adopters are your most active purchasing base. There's a reason lots of the cross-gen games last time underperformed on the PS3/360 compared to the next gen versions.

Yeah makes sense MS and Sony dont go all in with native xsx/ps5 games at launch.

 

[see colon]

Stating the obvious but phones and tablets are not video game consoles hooked up to a TV. For a lot of people they augment or replace the traditional computer or even a TV. This is not a good comparison.

But they are hardware that run software. Expensive hardware that is released annually, that sell tons of units because they run existing, older software better, with essentially no immediate generational exclusives. I think the best example we could come up with would be to compare X vs One or Pro vs 4, but those numbers haven't been made public that I've seen. Though there have been comments by MS and Sony that the enhanced consoles are doing fine, better than expected, etc., but there's no reason for them to come out and say they manufactured a flop. But there have been a long history of people buying better hardware to consume the same content. TVs are another great example of this.

 

[BRiT]

IIRC, last-gen's cross-gen games were not cross-play, so PS3 and X360 players could not play with PS4 and XOne players. Surely that threw a wet towel on their potential sales.

They might do cross-play modes this time around, but then there is the tricky situation of game loading speeds to deal with.

 

[dobwal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1228185267481088002

So more or less the same as MS.
It’s Amazing how everyone arrives to the same conclusion... or expected.

I wondering how true this is. Analysts are predicting DRAM and NAND shortage because manufacturers have implemented production cuts to deal with over supply from last year. But if you are Sony or MS with long term memory needs, I don't see how you can't somewhat avoid having to deal with limited supply.

This isn't some reality where demand is outstripping capacity. This a reality where manufacturers are underutilizing capacity to drive up prices in the short term. Long term high volume customers should be able to lock in supply needs and lower prices more readily than any other customers. Shortages like these should more readily affect low volume buyers or buyers who deal in short term contracts.

 

[BRiT]

Maybe one manufacturer locked in even more capacity for ram and that left the other one to be squeezed out?

 

[AlNom]

Nah, Sony just doubled their retail target to 32GB and 2TB SSD.


/Tzeentch

 

[iroboto]

Long term high volume customers should be able to lock in supply needs and lower prices more readily than any other customers. Shortages like these should more readily affect low volume buyers or buyers who deal in short term contracts.

I guess on this note; since I'm not really sure.

What do you do if you've been locked in with several large clients. You still need to serve your short term clients and you still are up on shortages?
do you:
a) Give everyone a smaller piece of their order
b) clear one entire contract and move onto the next
c) hold everyone up until all the contracts can be delivered all at once?

I'm thinking it's going to be (a)

and if it's (a) short supply, long term contract etc, you're not getting enough chips. What does Sony do when you don't have enough to meet launch requirements? So you planned for 12 million units sold first year, but your long term contracts can only provide 4. you got 8 to make up.
You then have to go into a short term contract to get them.
Both MS and Sony should be equally affected in this way. But their targets could be dramatically different, resulting in different responses.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Proportionally only slightly better. For the price of a next-gen console, you weren't getting a next-gen improvement.

I'm not sure what you mean by "proportionately only slightly better". Assassin's Creed Odyssey on XBO is a 960p sub-30fps inconsistent experience compared to 1656-2160p near consistent frame rate on One X. Witcher 3 not only has vastly better visuals but the load times on One X are under half that on XBO (45 secs vs 1 min, 45 secs). And I do need to mention Red Dead Redemption 2? As I said before, I don't doubt there are games that are only marginally better on X but the games that are pushing the hardware are leaps and bounds ahead.

What games are only "slightly better"?

That's obvious. The price offering of XB1X was $500 to play your XB1 games slightly better; just not worth it to most folk. XBSX is $500 (?) to play your XB1 games much better. The value is far greater in the new console than the mid-gen refresh, so more people will be willing to pay for XBSX to play improved 'XB1 games' than were willing to pay $500 for XB1X.

Revisiting your previous comment, you state this which is the sentiment I am querying in general. For people for whom performance is not a consideration, why does any metric of performance improvement appeal.?Why will people be willing to pay more for XBSX than One X? What do you know about XBSX that I don't? Because the sales pitch has been "twice as powerful" [as One X]. One X was around 4x as powerful as Xbox One. What's changed? Why now? Why is something twice as powerful as the last console be more appealing than the mid-ten entry which are in the region of four-times more powerful than the launch console? Because, HUH!?!

But they are hardware that run software. Expensive hardware that is released annually, that sell tons of units because they run existing, older software better, with essentially no immediate generational exclusives.

Like my watch then. I don't see phones and tablets are being that relevant a comparison. If they are are so close, why do so many more people buy phones and tablets than videogame consoles?. When you've answered that, you have you reason for why it's not a great comparison.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

But they are hardware that run software. Expensive hardware that is released annually, that sell tons of units because they run existing, older software better, with essentially no immediate generational exclusives.

Mobiles aren't a comparable platform. People get new phones for lots of reasons. they may want the better camera, or they may just be on a contract that gives an annual phone upgrade.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm not sure what you mean by "proportionately only slightly better".

XB1X is ~5x faster than XB1. A next-gen console is typically 8+ times faster with a whole load of other features on top of. You are spending the same money as a next-gen console for a mid-gen without getting anything like as much improvement or value for money.

What's changed? Why now? Why is something twice as powerful as the last console be more appealing than the mid-ten entry which are in the region of four-times more powerful than the launch console? Because, HUH!?!

XBSX won't be selling to XB1X owners but XB1 owners.

XB1 > XB1X = 4x improvement; $500, 20% say, "yes, that seems a good upgrade."
XB1 > XBSX = 10x improvement ; $500, 95% say, "yes, that seems a good upgrade."
XB1X > XBSX = 2x improvement ; $500, no idea how many will upgrade. I'm guessing 100% because they represent a level of enthusiast that wants the best console experience.