Do you think there will be a mid gen refresh console from Sony and Microsoft?

[Charlietus]

PS3 was underperforming, then Playstation started releasing a bunch of good 1st party games and it turned the platform around.

Sounds like it's very much about the games.

It would be a mistake for Xbox to admit defeat simply because of digital libraries. People WILL buy a console for some must-play exclusives. This has literally been the main selling point of every successful console so far and there's little reason to think it will change. Xbox may have no chance of 'winning' the generation, but they can definitely put themselves in a better position going forward compared to where they are now, to where they dont have to resort to any desperation moves like trying to cut this gen short and releasing new hardware in 2026.

Anyway, I just don't think it really is about the games anymore.
Maybe during the ps360 gen it was the selling point, but maybe now it's about price, brand power and digital libraries.
Something that Microsoft can do is having better hardware at a lower price than Sony, the series x just isn't that much more powerful than the PS5, and isn't discounted nearly as aggressively.
Use those billions to undercut Sony on price, and maybe they can sell more consoles.

 

[rntongo]

MS had 5 studios 3 years before the Series launched into a pandemic. Now they have 40 studios 3 years before their rumored next console. That's a world of difference. You might even say it's "meaningful."

Yes its meaningful, the great deals they've made to bring games onto Gamepass are meaningful but all that doesn't mean anything unless you can consistently make great games.

I think Xbox are appropriately focused on games nowadays. It's just execution they're lacking with. Both in strategy and just general game quality. The purposefully long cross-gen period they went with was a big mistake in my opinion. Having literally zero actual next gen titles at all for years is just a bad look and instantly makes the box lose a fair bit of appeal. And then even with all the studios they had, they basically had NOTHING for all of 2022. It's probably the worst year for 1st party titles for any major console ever.

Then some bigger games like Forza Motorsport which was in the works for six years instead of the usual two finally comes out and it simply came and went cuz it felt little more than an iterative FM in too many ways and even a step back in some others. It made no splash at all. Then the biggest downer for Xbox was Starfield which they really needed to be a megahit and it just wasn't. I still think they got a great deal buying Bethesda, but Xbox itself really needed that game to rejuvenate how gamers perceive the brand and make Xbox Series X/S a console people needed to have. Obviously Starfield isn't all Xbox's fault, but they should have known what they were buying at the same time.

If Microsoft think they can bypass all these problems by simply by hitting some 'reset' button by releasing new hardware in 2026, which will be highly premature in both technical advancements and what developers are actually ready for, it will be a death spiral desperation move for the Xbox division as a whole.

Literally the only thing they need to do from now until like late 2027 or 2028 is just focus on releasing a moderately steady stream of great exclusive games. That's it.

100% agree with you. I think when the head of Xbox comes out and says great games arent going to turn things around, that gives you hint as to why the games havent been executed well. Redfall, Starfield, Forza Motorsport were all good in concept but the execution was horrendous. Imagine the latest FM is missing key features after 6 years. The focus has been on making deals not building software!! You've highlighted things as they are, I'm just going ahead to say the execution is because leadership is focused on other things.

You can defend those games all you like and they could be your favorite games of the year and it wouldn't change that the general perception of them is not terribly positive, much less the big critical hits that Xbox needed them to be. I'm also not even mentioning that Redfall, their only other big exclusive this year, was pretty much universally panned. Hi-Fi Rush was probably their only convincing 'win' at all, but this sort of mid-tier game also doesn't garner the prestige that full scale AAA games do in the gaming market.

The fact that this disappointing slate of releases(from a critical perspective) followed the worst year in 1st party history, really just adds insult to injury for Xbox, its brand perception, and importantly its momentum for this Series X/S generation as a whole. I wasn't suggesting that those two games alone were all that Xbox needed and would ever need.

Momentum has to be sparked again from somewhere though.

100% Spot on, the context matters. Lets not forgot the part after Redfall released and Phil said that great games are not going to sell more consoles or something along those lines. Problem is Phil doesnt think he can turn it around with great games. He said it himself this year. He thinks he can do it by simply making more deals and releasing more hw, and bringing the cloud. For a former software developer I'm quite surprised by his talking points at times. The deals have brought good games to gamepass and they've added studios but their output is still terrible and the quality of the games they release is broadly terrible. They make good cover art though.

Also, the fact Halo Infinite got an 87 yet it was through and through a mid game and a last gen game, nothing new, decent multiplayer, dull campaign, graphically unimpressive, set the precedent for the subsequent releases of Redfall and Starfield. They thought they could build up hype around another mid game(Redfall), keep it under their subscription service (so its not judged by sales) and get perfect review scores from brand affiliated influencers and reviewers. But thats when they hit the brick wall. Then Phil tries selling the idea that great games arent all the hype. Then they release Starfield which is obviously not as bad as redfall, but its a mid game, cant bring new consumers into the ecosystem, hw sales are dropping, subscriptions are stagnant. Despite all the positive reinforcement they've built around themselves through their hardcore fans, consumers see through it all and just want great games. No matter how much they rebrand bad graphics as memes of Craig.

They need to change their attitude towards games.

 

[rntongo]

Anyway, I just don't think it really is about the games anymore.
Maybe during the ps360 gen it was the selling point, but maybe now it's about price, brand power and digital libraries.
Something that Microsoft can do is having better hardware at a lower price than Sony, the series x just isn't that much more powerful than the PS5, and isn't discounted nearly as aggressively.
Use those billions to undercut Sony on price, and maybe they can sell more consoles.

digital libraries of what? Not cookies, not sandwiches but of great games. It has always been about games. Whether you're buying a hw console or subscribing to stadia, its primarily about the games.

 

[Charlietus]

digital libraries of what? Not cookies, not sandwiches but of great games. It has always been about games. Whether you're buying a hw console or subscribing to stadia, its primarily about the games.

Do you think that if Xbox started releasing three 90+ banger games every year until the end of the gen it would reach ps5 levels of sales or even reverse the recent negative trend?

Let me be clear, I think some of Microsoft games are great, hi-fi rush is the second best game of the year for me, but I can't imagine anyone saying :
"I'll sell my console for a Xbox because of x game". Especially since you can either play it on PC if you have the hardware or stream it (even if xcloud quality in my experience has been terrible)

 

[rntongo]

Do you think that if Xbox started releasing three 90+ banger games every year until the end of the gen it would reach ps5 levels of sales or even reverse the recent negative trend?

Yes! They'd be selling as well as the PS5 or much better than they are now and not suffering from incessantly stagnant Gamepass subscriber figures. They dont even need 3, since they're doing so badly they should start with 2 well done universally acclaimed AAA titles a year. And also cut out the noise from their affiliated influencers who praise them for anything even when they're wrong and soiling themselves(like with Redfall). Imagine their people were trying to convince the public that Redfall was great and a next gen title, the first of a long line of consistent AAA titles. If they're honest with themselves they'll start pushing out quality. But calling mid games good or decent or full of potential, isnt helping them. How did Redfall get a 56? Have you played it? How did someone look at it before launch and say this last gen looking terrible playing game is going to usher in the new gen. It was marketed as the first game truly built for the Series consoles and it looked and played terrible.

Remember when the PS3 salvaged the gen by releasing AAA bangers? Yes thats what Xbox needs to do. Not the half baked AAA games they've been pushing out recently after 2 years of nothing.

Let me be clear, I think some of Microsoft games are great, hi-fi rush is the second best game of the year for me, but I can't imagine anyone saying :
"I'll sell my console for a Xbox because of x game". Especially since you can either play it on PC if you have the hardware or stream it (even if xcloud quality in my experience has been terrible)

The idea that someone needs to sell their PS5 to get into the Xbox ecosystem is wrong, and Phil helped propagate this lie as well. People buy the Switch and the PS5, the Switch and Xbox, the PS5 and Xbox, an iphone an android phone, a PS5 and PC and Xbox, the switch, PS5 and Xbox. The market is large enough for 3 or more players. There used to be Sega as well for those that are too young. And if Xbox isnt careful, another company may replace them if they dont focus on making great games. No one cares about how many subscribers you have thats for us hardcore gamers who spend time on forums. What games does your ecosystem provide? I can play Spiderman and God of War as soon as they launch out on the PS5, do you have any timed exclusives, do you have any AAA titles that are multiplatform but take advantage of your custom hw? AA niche games are a dime a dozen. But they dont move people like the AAA titles do. Remember the Xbox was created to remedy the problem of different PC configs, there's a reason consoles exist and will always exist as long as there exists AAA games at least.

The aim shouldnt be to make consumers leave your competitor? Its to make consumers join your ecosystem!!! Its not a zero sum game as Phil would like people to believe. Thats his red herring argument to hide the fact he's done poorly at delivering high quality AAA titles which actually matter and drive consumer growth. Think of it this way:
"I'll buy an Xbox because they have X game. I dont need to sell my PS5 because they have X game. I'll have both machines or cloud gaming subscriptions"

 

[Charlietus]

The idea that someone needs to sell their PS5 to get into the Xbox ecosystem is wrong, and Phil helped propagate this lie as well. People buy the Switch and the PS5, the Switch and Xbox, the PS5 and Xbox, an iphone an android phone, a PS5 and PC and Xbox, the switch, PS5 and Xbox. The market is large enough for 3 or more players. There used to be Sega as well for those that are too young. And if Xbox isnt careful, another company may replace them if they dont focus on making great games. No one cares about how many subscribers you have thats for us hardcore gamers who spend time on forums. What games does your ecosystem provide? I can play Spiderman and God of War as soon as they launch out on the PS5, do you have any timed exclusives, do you have any AAA titles that are multiplatform but take advantage of your custom hw? AA niche games are a dime a dozen. But they dont move people like the AAA titles do. Remember the Xbox was created to remedy the problem of different PC configs, there's a reason consoles exist and will always exist as long as there exists AAA games at least.

The aim shouldnt be to make consumers leave your competitor? Its to make consumers join your ecosystem!!! Its not a zero sum game as Phil would like people to believe. Thats his red herring argument to hide the fact he's done poorly at delivering high quality AAA titles which actually matter and drive consumer growth. Think of it this way:
"I'll buy an Xbox because they have X game. I dont need to sell my PS5 because they have X game. I'll have both machines or cloud gaming subscriptions"

They are not reaching they're goals by being a sideline console that consumers use when they want to play one or two games that come out.
And most people really don't have the money to have two consoles, since they are so expensive, so it's one or the other.
I wouldn't want to be in Phil Spencer shoes right now, I mean starfield is probably the biggest exclusive game that will come out in years for them, and apparently that was a "minor bump" in console sales.
They have to change strategy, starting with the series s, make it more powerful, maybe half of the big console, and add a disc drive to drive retail sales in Europe. Xbox discs have disappeared from most game sections in electronic stores in my city, and they were pretty small already years ago.
If they really make the "adorably all Digital" series x, they are done.

 

[rntongo]

They are not reaching they're goals by being a sideline console that consumers use when they want to play one or two games that come out.
And most people really don't have the money to have two consoles, since they are so expensive, so it's one or the other.
I wouldn't want to be in Phil Spencer shoes right now, I mean starfield is probably the biggest exclusive game that will come out in years for them, and apparently that was a "minor bump" in console sales.
They have to change strategy, starting with the series s, make it more powerful, maybe half of the big console, and add a disc drive to drive retail sales in Europe. Xbox discs have disappeared from most game sections in electronic stores in my city, and they were pretty small already years ago.
If they really make the "adorably all Digital" series x, they are done.

The thing is the point of consoles is to make software development of games easier. And playing these games easier for the consumer. Remember Series S is the bottleneck mainly due to its RAM so why make a more powerful Series S when the Series X exists and has enough memory? And what specs would the more powerful Series S have? Maybe you can elaborate on this because I dont understand. Its too late to upgrade the S. The only chance they had was when they sent out devkits and devs complained about it. So they had a chance to put more ram into it before they launched it but now its too late. I dont see how an upgraded Series S would work from a software development stand point. It would be a nightmare.

The Series X though is going to become much cheaper next year(As well as the PS5) or 2025. I agree they need to have an option for a disc drive for the new all digital Series X. There's still a lot of consumers that buy physical games.

They are not reaching they're goals by being a sideline console that consumers use when they want to play one or two games that come out.

The whole reason why they havent reached their goals is they prioritized deals over making great software that sells consoles/subscriptions and brings people into their ecosystem. Xbox Series consoles had the worst launch line up in history!! And in hindsight Phil didn't care or realize how bad things were from the start.

What MSFT should do is ensure Rockstar's GTA 6 takes full advantage of the Series X. The cost and price of the PS5 and Series X are going to drop significantly in 2024 and 2025 and GTA 6 will likely be console only at first. So this is their chance to get some respite. As well, start an initiative to release at least 2 well made current gen AAA titles a year. Another year of half baked last gen AAA games disguised as current gen titles is going to sink the ship. So Hell blade and whatever other title they're releasing next year should help increase sales. I also think because of the lower hw sales they should make all their current gen games timed exclusives in order to make more money. They havent sold well enough to make their games exclusive.

 

[Charlietus]

Yeah, they can't upgrade the series s now. What I should have said instead is to make it more powerful at launch, with something like 6 teraflops and 12 gb of ram. I feel like costumers don't consider the series s to be a premium next gen console, unlike the other two.
Anyway, I feel like we are off topic, so let's stop talking about current gen

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Just so you know Johnny Awesome I was amused by your comment because you seemed to suggest Xbox have a new generation lasting 3 years between 2026-2029. Now I see it's possible you are suggesting Xbox should launch a new generation in 2026 and a mid-gen refresh in 2029. I think you don't know/realize Sony plans to launch a new generation in 2028. So that proposed 2029 mid-gen upgrade would be worthless if Sony gen starts in 2028 and a 2029 console has to accommodate a 2026 generation. It would be a terrible strategy all around and that's even before we talk about developer adoption, which isn't insignificant and won't be favorable at all for team green.

I don't think that's true at all. Generations don't have to exist anymore. People around here might label 2026 as "new" and 2029 as "mid", but that's not relevant really when MS 1st party devs/publishing start churning out 6 AAA releases and 6 AA releases every year. Besides, anything 3rd parties release on Sony's 2028 console will just look as good or better on MS's 2029 machine. If devs can support 10 year old PC hardware, why not 9 year old S & X? More practically, they'll just support the last 3 most powerful machines with most releases and many other releases will also support S & M (if it comes out). In fact, if MS were to make the M play all S titles, then by default all M titles could work on the S.

Work it backwards: in 2029 ES VI, Doom Next, and Forza Next all support 2026 and 2029 hardware, but almost everything else also supports X as well (which is probably < $200 by then). S users are expected to upgrade after 9 years.

PS: There's no logic to the idea that Sony can release in 2020, 2024 and 2028 and MS can't release in 2020, 2026 and 2029. (Though I'd prefer 2020, 2025 and 2029.) With 5 year game dev cycles and cross-gen realities, a year or two isn't the critical difference it might have been before.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Another note: I realize a few people around here hate the Xbox lineup this generation, but I think it's better than the PS lineup. None of that matters though, it's just our personal opinions. The pro reviewers in the aggregate believe that MS has more good 8.5 games than Sony, but Sony has more home run 9s than MS. Working within that reality is the only honest way to have this discussion. People should probably stop calling Halo, Starfield and Forza "disappointing". If 8.5 is disappointing to you then why isn't Spider-Man Miles Morales disappointing? Why isn't Horizon FW disappointing because it didn't score 9s from critics? It's not honest. It wasn't all doom and gloom for Sony when all they could put out was remakes and cross-gen titles for 2 years after launch. The brand was powerful enough that they couldn't do any wrong in some peoples eyes. MS owned 5 studios in 2017 and now they have 40. As AAA games take 5 years to make we're only now going to see the fruits of MS pre-gen acquisitions, not yet the 30 studios that have since been acquired. Be honest about the potential here. It's more than "meaningful" in my opinion.

Xbox fans, myself included, expected too much. 25 million units vs. 50 million PS5s isn't a terrible start given the challenges. Outside of Japan that's probably 25 million to 45 million, + making ground on PC. If 2023 sales ratio of 3:1 continues, then Sony will sell 75 million units and MS will sell another 25 million. Thus 120:50, which is on the low end of MS's predictions. Not good, but MS can probably live with it until they get the studios churning out consistently.

 

[Seanspeed]

I don't think that's true at all. Generations don't have to exist anymore.

They dont have to, but it is still the best and most successful strategy. Playstation is still dominating the 'console war' through the traditional generational model and Nintendo likewise keeps to the same thing with great success.

There's no reason to think that we've entered some period where any other strategy will prove more lucrative or popular.

 

[rntongo]

I dont think it is the meta score that makes people think these games are disappointing. There seems to be a discrepancy between the official scores and people's experiences or expectations compared to what they were waiting from these titles.

This. Review scores are no longer dependable.

Another note: I realize a few people around here hate the Xbox lineup this generation, but I think it's better than the PS lineup. None of that matters though, it's just our personal opinions. The pro reviewers in the aggregate believe that MS has more good 8.5 games than Sony, but Sony has more home run 9s than MS. Working within that reality is the only honest way to have this discussion. People should probably stop calling Halo, Starfield and Forza "disappointing". If 8.5 is disappointing to you then why isn't Spider-Man Miles Morales disappointing? Why isn't Horizon FW disappointing because it didn't score 9s from critics? It's not honest. It wasn't all doom and gloom for Sony when all they could put out was remakes and cross-gen titles for 2 years after launch. The brand was powerful enough that they couldn't do any wrong in some peoples eyes. MS owned 5 studios in 2017 and now they have 40. As AAA games take 5 years to make we're only now going to see the fruits of MS pre-gen acquisitions, not yet the 30 studios that have since been acquired. Be honest about the potential here. It's more than "meaningful" in my opinion.

Xbox fans, myself included, expected too much. 25 million units vs. 50 million PS5s isn't a terrible start given the challenges. Outside of Japan that's probably 25 million to 45 million, + making ground on PC. If 2023 sales ratio of 3:1 continues, then Sony will sell 75 million units and MS will sell another 25 million. Thus 120:50, which is on the low end of MS's predictions. Not good, but MS can probably live with it until they get the studios churning out consistently.

Good luck

I don't think that's true at all. Generations don't have to exist anymore. People around here might label 2026 as "new" and 2029 as "mid", but that's not relevant really when MS 1st party devs/publishing start churning out 6 AAA releases and 6 AA releases every year. Besides, anything 3rd parties release on Sony's 2028 console will just look as good or better on MS's 2029 machine. If devs can support 10 year old PC hardware, why not 9 year old S & X? More practically, they'll just support the last 3 most powerful machines with most releases and many other releases will also support S & M (if it comes out). In fact, if MS were to make the M play all S titles, then by default all M titles could work on the S.

Work it backwards: in 2029 ES VI, Doom Next, and Forza Next all support 2026 and 2029 hardware, but almost everything else also supports X as well (which is probably < $200 by then). S users are expected to upgrade after 9 years.

PS: There's no logic to the idea that Sony can release in 2020, 2024 and 2028 and MS can't release in 2020, 2026 and 2029. (Though I'd prefer 2020, 2025 and 2029.) With 5 year game dev cycles and cross-gen realities, a year or two isn't the critical difference it might have been before.

You realize the whole reason why MSFT entered the console business was the realization its much smarter and easier to build software to a specific configuration of hw? Thats how the Xbox came to be after Seamus Blackely convinced Bill Gates that Direct X alone wasnt going to work. This is axiomatic. Generations are always going to exist because its much much smarter to build games around specific hw, be at a certain amount of RAM, compute, or breakthrough in hw etc. Without that you'll face so many issues in terms of the compatibility, long terms support, etc. That MSFT faced in the 90s.

Another thing you seem to overlook is that devs build games to be played by millions of people. Ed Fries who was one of the heads of the OG Xbox said that one of the challenges they faced is they didn't have enough Xbox users to get their games profitable and in hindsight, they should have made some of their exclusives available on the PS2 as well. This doesn't mean they wouldnt have eventually made them exclusive, but they would have needed to do that as they built out their fan base.

With Ed Fries comments in mind, if they release a next gen console in 2026, they'll be making these games at a loss because there wont be enough consumers with the new console. If they make cross gen games, they wont be good enough to warrant users buying a new console in 2026 because most of the industry and Software tools are still meant for this current gen. In fact its this time devs will be fully utilizing the PS5 and Series X and with minimal effort the PS5 pro!!.

The issue with your analysis is you're not considering Software tools, Software development life cycles. The consoles you see today(Besides the Series S, which was a marketing driven decision) were built using software developer input since 2014!!! So even if MSFT woke up and told all their devs to start developing the next gen of software for their 2026 next gen machine they would have to be prepared to take losses on the titles in order to deliver a something different or simply create cross gen games(Keep in mind Ed Fries comments earlier on).

Now this is the other thing. Because games are more expensive and take longer to make, cross gen games being the predominant titles of a new gen make more sense these days (Unless Xbox expects to sell over 10 million machines of its next gen machine in its first year 2026/2027).

So your whole idea that Xbox is going to release a next gen console in 2026 and it will just churn out AAAs is simplistic at best. There are so many issues with such an idea because of where the industry is at the moment. A pro console would have made more sense if they didnt have 2 consoles out already.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

They dont have to, but it is still the best and most successful strategy. Playstation is still dominating the 'console war' through the traditional generational model and Nintendo likewise keeps to the same thing with great success.

There's no reason to think that we've entered some period where any other strategy will prove more lucrative or popular.

Sony abandoned that strategy a long time ago when they went cross-gen with remakes and they're doing just fine. Generations are over. Jim Ryan said otherwise, but then confirmed it with his actions.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

You realize the whole reason why MSFT entered the console business was the realization its much smarter and easier to build software to a specific configuration of hw? Thats how the Xbox came to be after Seamus Blackely convinced Bill Gates that Direct X alone wasnt going to work. This is axiomatic. Generations are always going to exist because its much much smarter to build games around specific hw, be at a certain amount of RAM, compute, or breakthrough in hw etc. Without that you'll face so many issues in terms of the compatibility, long terms support, etc. That MSFT faced in the 90s.

This isn't really true anymore. Sony abandoned generations in 2020 with all the cross gen games and remakes, unless you consider the PS5 to be the mid-mid-gen PS4 and the PS5 Pro to be the actual next-gen unit. LOL.

Another thing you seem to overlook is that devs build games to be played by millions of people. Ed Fries who was one of the heads of the OG Xbox said that one of the challenges they faced is they didn't have enough Xbox users to get their games profitable and in hindsight, they should have made some of their exclusives available on the PS2 as well. This doesn't mean they wouldnt have eventually made them exclusive, but they would have needed to do that as they built out their fan base.

With Ed Fries comments in mind, if they release a next gen console in 2026, they'll be making these games at a loss because there wont be enough consumers with the new console. If they make cross gen games, they wont be good enough to warrant users buying a new console in 2026 because most of the industry and Software tools are still meant for this current gen. In fact its this time devs will be fully utilizing the PS5 and Series X and with minimal effort the PS5 pro!!.

Ed Fries was wrong about a lot of things. He also didn't have 40 studios with games in mid-development to work with.

The issue with your analysis is you're not considering Software tools, Software development life cycles. The consoles you see today(Besides the Series S, which was a marketing driven decision) were built using software developer input since 2014!!! So even if MSFT woke up and told all their devs to start developing the next gen of software for their 2026 next gen machine they would have to be prepared to take losses on the titles in order to deliver a something different or simply create cross gen games(Keep in mind Ed Fries comments earlier on).

Nah. Just more RT, 60 fps, 4k etc.... on titles in development with maybe a couple titles that aren't possible on Series X. That'll be enough for the 8 million Xbox fans that will want to upgrade in the 1st year of a new console's life. Heck, even a better GTA VI would be enough, really.

Now this is the other thing. Because games are more expensive and take longer to make, cross gen games being the predominant titles of a new gen make more sense these days (Unless Xbox expects to sell over 10 million machines of its next gen machine in its first year 2026/2027).

So your whole idea that Xbox is going to release a next gen console in 2026 and it will just churn out AAAs is simplistic at best. There are so many issues with such an idea because of where the industry is at the moment. A pro console would have made more sense if they didn't have 2 consoles out already.

I think that's limited thinking. Of course they can't put all 40 studios to work on X26 (my term) titles, but just have a few showcase titles and the rest cross-gen with Series X and S. PC devs have been supporting 100 configs since the dawn of PC gaming. 3 is not that many. Also remember that PC devs like Rockstar will be taking advantage of PCs that are higher end than PS5 Pro and Series X. It's not much for them to support X26 with said features. The days of set configurations for game devs for 7 years are over.

Btw, MS could approach publishers and internal studios and say: "We have the S, the X and the X26. You must support at least two of these." At the beginning because of userbase almost all publishers/studios would pick S and X, with just a few extra bumps like fps for X26 users. Over time that evolves into X and X26. They of course put The Coalition, Playground and one other really technically proficient team like Infinity Ward on making titles that really showcase the X26, but that still work on the S and X.

 

[rntongo]

This isn't really true anymore. Sony abandoned generations in 2020 with all the cross gen games and remakes, unless you consider the PS5 to be the mid-mid-gen PS4 and the PS5 Pro to be the actual next-gen unit. LOL.

Ed Fries was wrong about a lot of things. He also didn't have 40 studios with games in mid-development to work with.

Nah. Just more RT, 60 fps, 4k etc.... on titles in development with maybe a couple titles that aren't possible on Series X. That'll be enough for the 8 million Xbox fans that will want to upgrade in the 1st year of a new console's life. Heck, even a better GTA VI would be enough, really.

I think that's limited thinking. Of course they can't put all 40 studios to work on X26 (my term) titles, but just have a few showcase titles and the rest cross-gen with Series X and S. PC devs have been supporting 100 configs since the dawn of PC gaming. 3 is not that many. Also remember that PC devs like Rockstar will be taking advantage of PCs that are higher end than PS5 Pro and Series X. It's not much for them to support X26 with said features. The days of set configurations for game devs for 7 years are over.

Btw, MS could approach publishers and internal studios and say: "We have the S, the X and the X26. You must support at least two of these." At the beginning because of userbase almost all publishers/studios would pick S and X, with just a few extra bumps like fps for X26 users. Over time that evolves into X and X26. They of course put The Coalition, Playground and one other really technically proficient team like Infinity Ward on making titles that really showcase the X26, but that still work on the S and X.

There's a lot to dissect in respond to in your comment but time reveals everything. In any case Rockstar is initially releasing only on consoles because they understand how important it is to build to specific hardware. We can go back and forth but lets wait and see how things pan out.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

I can live with that. Happy New Year!

 

[SedentaryJourney]

Sony abandoned that strategy a long time ago when they went cross-gen with remakes and they're doing just fine. Generations are over. Jim Ryan said otherwise, but then confirmed it with his actions.

There are quite a few PS5 exclusives. Sony even published two within the first 7 months of the console's lifespan. I think "Generations are over" is quite the leap given most of the cross-gen stuff can be explained by pandemic delays for titles that were always supposed to come out on PS4 and supply constrained PS5 growth causing studios to release last gen ports of games.

Also console generations allow gaming brands to reset and grab marketshare, which is why people are speculating about next-gen Xbox since the Series consoles have failed to achieve this. Hopefully there is a generational distinction with the next Xbox otherwise what's the point?

 

[Nesh]

You mean like The Last of Us II has a user score 25 points lower than the critic score? Review bombing happens all the time. Unless you're telling me that critics are right when they score a Sony game high, but wrong when they score an MS game high... Btw, Starfield's user score is only 13 points lower than critic score, just like God of War Ragnarok. Halo Infinite is only 8 points difference. I guess that means GoWR is overated compared to Halo Infinite. Please give up the false narrative that Xbox doesn't have good exclusives. They're just not to your tastes and that's ok.

TLOU 2 came ages ago and yes, like XBOX games it had it's fair share of critique, in this case due to it's story, not due to the gameplay or graphics, but I am not talking about troll review bombing. I m talking about honest impressions by people outside of the reviews who didn't like aspects of the gameplay and features since they under delivered compared to expectations and promises

 

[RDGoodla]

A mobile Series S is way more important than a new high-performance console. Because Series S mobile can expand potential market a lot. It can compete with next Switch and Steam Deck. Is it technically possible in next 2 years?

 

[Johnny Awesome]

A mobile Series S is way more important than a new high-performance console. Because Series S mobile can expand potential market a lot. It can compete with next Switch and Steam Deck. Is it technically possible in next 2 years?

Possibly true. It's worth a shot as soon as they can try it. Not likely possible before 2026.

Other issues:

Anyone here claiming that Sony made a clean break from last gen with the PS5 is clearly delusional. They've released maybe 3 next gen only titles in 3 years.

If Sony can justify a new PS in 2024 when they can't even produce many PS5 only games, then surely MS can bring out a new box in 2026 when they have 40 studios at work.