I'm somewhat surprised that here in Finland Microsoft's business approach for this holiday season was so straightforward: No advertising at all. Where previously every sales magazine contained ads for PS3 and Xbox360, now they only contain ads for PS3. Heck, even Wii U is advertised more. If I go into a store I can see that there's good offers available for Xbox360. But still, no ads.
Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
There has been a decent amount of TV coverage for XB1 in the UK. Not sure about PS4. I had seen some but I don't come across them as often as XB1, but that's probably due to channels watched (tend to only watch conventional broadcasts either recorded so ads are skipped, or playing a film while I do something else).
MS has a lot invested in Kinect, including quite likely a LOT of things we haven't even heard about yet. There's definitely not been enough time to draw any conclusions about their strategy and so it would be very obviously stupid to back out now.
I'd say at least three years will pass before they'd even consider changing anything, especially if we calculate with a ~10 years life span for the console. And even at that point, MS would have a lot of sensitive data we'd never hear about, like, you know, actual usage statistics instead of anecdotal stuff.
I'd say at least three years will pass before they'd even consider changing anything, especially if we calculate with a ~10 years life span for the console. And even at that point, MS would have a lot of sensitive data we'd never hear about, like, you know, actual usage statistics instead of anecdotal stuff.
I see what you're getting at, but I don't think many on this forum here would meet the criteria to be called a troll. IMO - a troll are those that spend hours on public forums blindly bashing one system over another, most likely because they bought one of them and can't afford the other. Usually, they seem to be kids below 20. On here, I tend to believe that most members are well above 20 and have enough money (if priorities allow) to actually own multiple systems.
I could buy a Xbox if I wanted one. I haven't, not because I'm a troll or anti-Microsoft, but because there's simply no need for me to get one. I have a nice tidy livingroom and I don't really want to clutter it with multiple gaming systems. In fact, I'm already in somewhat of an unsatisfying position since I still have my PS3 hooked up (because there are still a few games I like to play) next to my PS4 and because they are both not compatible with each other, I am also forced to have my different controllers sitting by closely. It's kind of a short term problem, until PS4 will get more games or until I've finally decided to send my PS3 into retirement. But the point is, if I would get an Xbox, I would have to make room - room that I don't have. So it comes down to me having to decide which one I prefer, the X or PS4. And from this angle, it's a pretty clear win for me, since Sony has stuck to the natural progression, offering a console that pretty much caters to the interests of those that bought their former consoles. Easy choice for me. So, for me, it doesn't matter if Xbox is $100, $200, or $399.
This is just from my perspective. The sad truth is, if Sony went the route MS is going by going all camera/voice tech and MS stuck to a purist gaming experience, I'd probably be on the other side of the pond right now.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
Titanfall, Halo and a price drop will be enough to take up any slack in demand.
Bigus Dickus
Regular
I agree Phil, most fanboys aren't trolls.
Current XboxOne UI is as you said somewhat hampered experience without Kinect. Been using at friend's house enough to have a sidekick opinion. Sure there must be a way design smooth controller oriented UI (without Kinect) for XboxOne but its not in Microsoft's radar today. Maybe someday. My friend do have Kinect attached but its a dead weight.
No finnish lang pack, X360 never had finnish localisation so his hopes are low. He has talked about removing it minimizing clutter in AV rack. Maybe its our accent we failed so horribly on giving english commands. Kinect english with finnish tv channel names would be funny. Do they must be said as an english man or mixed pronounciation. That remains to be seen if/when finnish lang pack and localised EPG Guide is finalized. Most likely englishUI+finnishKinect cannot be chosen anyway. Today XboxOne is like having two universes, one with full Kinect version and another hampered version.
XboxOne is not published in Finland so no point massive commercial runs for non-existing device. Wait for summer 2014. Few web stores do sell it but they handle whatever distribution channels they get access to. Stores must take all broken boxes and handle replacements without Microsoft Finland support.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
I don't think the ceiling is much if any higher than that. If Sony can take NA, the rest of the world will push the number down and reaching 33% will be a challenge.
What Rangers is saying is that if Sony piles on the pressure, MS will push back at any cost to ensure a 33% minimum market share. Let's say, hypothetically, PS4 sales start to outstrip XB1 sales 3:1 over 2014. Rangers' Theorem postulates that MS will introduce something like a price drop or marketing push to get XB1 sales up to a 2:1 minimum sales deficit. If Sony introduce a price cut in 2015 that leads to 5:1 sales and the natural death of XB1 should that be the threshold at which developers abandon the platform, Rangers' Theorem would lead to a price cut or whatever (Kinect free core console, free XB1 with 10 Mountain Dew tokens) to get that back to 2:1.
The theory here is that MS cannot afford the sales difference to slip below one third of the market and will do whatever it takes to ensure that doesn't happen.
Matters for discussion are whether the 1/3 market share is the threshold point and whether MS really are willing to secure that threshold regardless of cost.
33%?
gloomy predictions here. :smile:
66% of Sony sales ww is the worst I can see. they quite possibly will own NA again albeit by a slim margin, or worst, 80% compared to Sony in NA...
if we are making market predictions.
edit... oh total market share?.... my total numbers above are in relation to Sony sales.
so total market share, would be 35-40% prediction world wide, 45-60% NA and agree with Rangers Ms will never let it fall below 33%
DuckThor Evil
Legend
I just don't have the belief that MS will go Kamikaze if needed. I think they are very unwilling to lose money on it. It is still not their core business. I also think that sometimes when the bad seed is planted, no realistic amount of pushing will let you escape from the iceberg. 33% is still very significant amount of units. For example if Sony gets 100M, Xbox would have 50M. I can't say I'm more confident in MS hitting 50M than Sony 100M at the moment. I think PS4 has a major momentum advantage and I'm sceptical whether it can be reversed, I think it's the sort of thing that can just as if not more easily escalate. It's early, but I think the trajectories are starting to emerge. IF MS can only get 40% in NA, then reaching 33% in the world is impossible, but if they can get 50-60%, they have more chance, but Sony is looking strong...
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, so it's not an option to have MS keep dominion on the US market and Sony in Europe? There's only discussion about how bad the worst case scenario is?
You misunderstand. It wasn't a statement about what could be discussed in this thread, but what are the range of matters for discussing Rangers' theory.
Rangers Theorem
Code:
IF (sales < 33%){
REPEAT{
policy.increase(investment, moar_money);
bankBalance -= moar_money;
}UNTIL(sales >= 33%);
}It's perfectly acceptable to apply Rangers Theorem to other products too. There may be a threshold value for Sony to invest in PS4 if sales start to drop below a desired market-share. If we take 33% to be the threshold at which developers will start to ignore a platform, then the theorem is effectively valid for any console, and Rangers focus is only really on XB1 due to it currently selling the slowest.
With all the noise from investors and others about ditching the Xbox business to focus on core services, I think a billion dollar write off would be the death knell. It's not just the competition, and consumer choice they are fighting this time.
Even in the worst case scenario of a 5:1 advantage for the PS4, the xb1 should be very resilient in terms of loss of third party support. The Sony, MS and AMD have basically formed a gaming hardware triumvirate. You have three separate platforms (PC, XB1 and PS4) but the hardware is all AMD. Cross porting should be easy peasy.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Yeah I was about to post the same. Most developers will already have invested in the fundamental frameworks to approach development on each console, it's got to be easier than ever to leverage code and assets across PS4 and Xbox One this generation.
I agree. Middleware almost makes targeting a second or third platform 'free'. With only, say, 20 million consoles against 100 million PS4s, that's still a 20% increase in potential revenue for little work when creating a port. But that all depends on the middleware. If there's any noteworthy faff or red-tape, devs will consider dropping a platform. If you're the market leader by a noteworthy margin, you can get away with a more troublesome platform.
