Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox

[-tkf-]

Maybe I'm the only one who remembers the last console launch and how everybody, this forum included, believed the PS3 would be way more powerful and to the point - that MS wasted a great deal of money and silicon with EDRAM.

As it turns out, that small bit of EDRAM was a huge factor in enabling the 360 to do things and continue to compete at a high level.

selective memory maybe? as I remember it everyone here had no doubt that the cell would destroy anything in the cpu area, and no one really knew the Rsx but expected it to be up to the task. When the RSX started to get exposed the weakness of the Ps3 was clearly acknowledge by most here. And it didn't take long before people realized that the ps3 had not just one weakness but several. Hard to develop for, caused by bad development tools, divided memory pool, complex cpu and weak RSX.

The main difference between then and now is that the details of both machines are very much out in the open so the educated guessing is much better than last time. Afaik as we know neither machine hides a Weak gpu or has a seriously problems with development tools.

I am certain that there will be plenty of examples were the XBOne's hardware will shine but on paper and from what we have seen so far the ps4 is the performance king.

And just like it quickly became general knowledge that 3rd party games ran better on the 360 the same is happening now with the PS4 . People don't have to be able to see it, knowing it is enough to convince them when they have to choose. You don't pick the TV with the known worst picture quality even if you might not be able to notice it yourself, especially not if the other TV costs 25% more.

 

[steveOrino]

I believe it was also due to the fact that MS wasnt anticipating Sony to come up with a more powerful hardware,

Regardless, even though XB1 may continue to have some advantages in the non-gaming features, I expect the gap in non-gaming entertainment and UI design to get narrower between the two consoles. Sony is making its moves to expand the PS4's media features like streaming TV services. MS is also investing in streaming TV services making HDMI In less relevant for TV viewing.

One of the major media advantages an gaming console has over other media devices is, well... its game library.

It is my opinion that MS has a big hill to climb to convince people that the non-gaming features of the X1 are worth the the additional cost. Having a paywall to media services that a vast number of internet media streaming devices have without a paywall is just silly imo. Smart TVs will catch up to the feature set of the Kinect as far as media access is concerned (android based TV OS's for example) not to mention Smart phones, other cheap media boxes including TV provider hardware... there is just soo much competition in the media distribution space.

I felt MS had the right idea last generation, build a dedicated gaming machine then add other media features over time. I dont feel many early adopters (gamers) will see value in the added non gaming capabilities of X1 nor do non gamers want it since cheaper alternative exist.

 

[Rangers]

You agree with it because its pretty well established fact, I honestly don't see how its even being debated. DF served no purpose of graphics didn't matter.

Well, I personally am just one who ascribes MUCH more importance to graphics/power on console sales than most people.

Believe me, I have been in hundreds of debates with people who dispute that fact, who seemed to be the vast majority before PS4 came along. The usual arguments go to the Wii, the PS2, the DS/3DS some will even say the most powerful console has never won, etc etc etc.

Now that the Sony console is the most powerful, there has definitely been a huge resurgence in the power matters crowd, they're probably the majority now, but I've always been there.

 

[Rangers]

I believe it was also due to the fact that MS wasnt anticipating Sony to come up with a more powerful hardware,

Regardless, even though XB1 may continue to have some advantages in the non-gaming features, I expect the gap in non-gaming entertainment and UI design to get narrower between the two consoles. Sony is making its moves to expand the PS4's media features like streaming TV services. MS is also investing in streaming TV services making HDMI In less relevant for TV viewing.

According to bkilian MS expected to have less powerful hardware.

Another thing that strikes me as silly, is you need more power to do more stuff. If Xbox wants to be the do everything box, it's going to be hampered by lack of processing resources. You can do snap and those type of things a whole lot better if you have power to throw at them. Play a video in a snapped window, it will stutter. They should have had more CU's to throw around. 1.3TF may have seemed like a lot to begin, but it's quickly going to become an scarce resource in time, especially when they have to dedicate more and more to games to keep up with PS4, and they will.

In the end, parity won't be achieved because ultimately there is an significant hardware gap between systems. But thats fine for MS because gaming wasn't an absolute priority this time around. DDR3, HDMI pass through, IR emitters, Kinect, VMs, weak GPU, etc are calculated decisions in order to deliver an all in one media box that fits with MS's corporate goals. Their world reveal said as much.

The hardware power issue IMO is an moot point because MS wasn't planning to the have the most powerful system.

I am not so sure because I think the easiest thing to do with multiplatforms is make them the same. I think there's already a lot of evidence of this. It already seems like games that are 1080 on both are becoming the norm (Tomb Raider was really the first post launch and it is, plus NFS, Fifa, NBA 2K, Madden so forth). And even when you have COD/AC/BF showing a resolution difference, the assets are remarkably similar, so that fabled "average joe" probably cannot tell too much difference.

The book hasn't been written on this though. Only time can tell us. I suspect we'll see convergence, not divergence though. I'm eagerly awaiting the next iterations of BF, COD, AC to see.

There should always be small edges for PS4 even if 1080 becomes standard. better AA, a few extra FPS, that kind of thing, for the forum warriors to point at. An example is NBA 2K, 1080 on both, but still supposedly better AA on PS4.

 

[temesgen]

Well, I personally am just one who ascribes MUCH more importance to graphics/power on console sales than most people.

Believe me, I have been in hundreds of debates with people who dispute that fact, who seemed to be the vast majority before PS4 came along. The usual arguments go to the Wii, the PS2, the DS/3DS some will even say the most powerful console has never won, etc etc etc.

Now that the Sony console is the most powerful, there has definitely been a huge resurgence in the power matters crowd, they're probably the majority now, but I've always been there.

I think in earlier generations graphics certainly matter but the relative strength of the IPs was able to offset that and had an impact which isn't easy to replicate in the modern generation.

Nintendo has benefited more than anyone by leveraging their mascots and even been successful reselling fan favorites several times over. I think Sony and MS both have a couple IPs which probably could move hardware regardless of system specs - Halo for sure and perhaps Uncharted could for Playstation but Nintendo until now has been able to do something altogether different for several generations of hardware.

I am not sure that will work anymore for Nintendo though, AAA MP titles are too strong and too important.

This next round will be very interesting, I'm curious to see how open developers are to signing exclusivity deals with platform holders as well as how much investment we'll see from both Sony and MS in new IPs.

I'm kinda expecting Sony to take a bit less risk as many of the projects they backed over past 5 to 7 years have not made a good enough return. MS needs to internally develop or fund the development of titles that take advantage of Kinect but will we see them persist with it this time and will they be able to deliver core and Kinect games simultaneously year after year?

From a business model stand point I think MS might have looked at PS2 and Wii and thought they could pay for timed exclusivity and add Kinect so they are not a commodity. Perhaps they thought those are the lessons from the last 2 generations and they already showed with 360 that timed exclusivity was a way forward wrt to software. In theory it makes a lot of sense but as I mentioned earlier today I think they forgot or miscalculated the importance of graphics to their core customer.

This isn't to say that games or services won't be good on XB1, I'm sure MS will do a very good job with their services and games like Titanfall will help them gain some momentum if demand is truly leveling off now that the holiday is over.

I know there is a big push right now to move customers to subscription models and this has a material impact on how Wall Street values companies, I wonder how much of that is ultimately driving some of these decisions....

 

[dagamer]

According to bkilian MS expected to have less powerful hardware.

Another thing that strikes me as silly, is you need more power to do more stuff. If Xbox wants to be the do everything box, it's going to be hampered by lack of processing resources. You can do snap and those type of things a whole lot better if you have power to throw at them. Play a video in a snapped window, it will stutter. They should have had more CU's to throw around. 1.3TF may have seemed like a lot to begin, but it's quickly going to become an scarce resource in time, especially when they have to dedicate more and more to games to keep up with PS4, and they will.



I am not so sure because I think the easiest thing to do with multiplatforms is make them the same. I think there's already a lot of evidence of this. It already seems like games that are 1080 on both are becoming the norm (Tomb Raider was really the first post launch and it is, plus NFS, Fifa, NBA 2K, Madden so forth). And even when you have COD/AC/BF showing a resolution difference, the assets are remarkably similar, so that fabled "average joe" probably cannot tell too much difference.

The book hasn't been written on this though. Only time can tell us. I suspect we'll see convergence, not divergence though. I'm eagerly awaiting the next iterations of BF, COD, AC to see.

There should always be small edges for PS4 even if 1080 becomes standard. better AA, a few extra FPS, that kind of thing, for the forum warriors to point at. An example is NBA 2K, 1080 on both, but still supposedly better AA on PS4.

I can't believe that at least on the GPU side, there were very accurate specs floating around in May 2012, and I would sincerely hope that Microsoft has better corporate espionage than that. See here: http://www.vgleaks.com/world-exclusive-ps4-in-deep-first-specs/

CPU was accurate up until Steamroller was delayed, GPU is nearly spot on, and memory, except for amount, is also accurate as well. Granted, vgleaks may be just some random website, but if even a shred of this was believable and MS was after building the more powerful machine, they basically did nothing to respond.

 

[Strange]

I can't believe that at least on the GPU side, there were very accurate specs floating around in May 2012, and I would sincerely hope that Microsoft has better corporate espionage than that. See here: http://www.vgleaks.com/world-exclusive-ps4-in-deep-first-specs/

CPU was accurate up until Steamroller was delayed, GPU is nearly spot on, and memory, except for amount, is also accurate as well. Granted, vgleaks may be just some random website, but if even a shred of this was believable and MS was after building the more powerful machine, they basically did nothing to respond.

In retrospect this was really spot on, except for the memory where they apparently pushed up twice from 2GB to 4GB to 8GB

 

[Nesh]

I can't believe that at least on the GPU side, there were very accurate specs floating around in May 2012, and I would sincerely hope that Microsoft has better corporate espionage than that. See here: http://www.vgleaks.com/world-exclusive-ps4-in-deep-first-specs/

CPU was accurate up until Steamroller was delayed, GPU is nearly spot on, and memory, except for amount, is also accurate as well. Granted, vgleaks may be just some random website, but if even a shred of this was believable and MS was after building the more powerful machine, they basically did nothing to respond.

I am sure they didnt respond because they were expecting that Sony wouldnt have as much memory in the PS4 as the XB1 would and neither a custom solution like ESRAM to boost memory which was MS's upper card. They were expecting the PS4 to be bottlenecked by less memory even though it was going to have a faster GPU. 8GB GDDR5 caught everyone by surprise. Including devs and us

 

[dagamer]

I am sure they didnt respond because they were expecting that Sony wouldnt have as much memory in the PS4 as the XB1 would and neither a custom solution like ESRAM to boost memory which was MS's upper card. They were expecting the PS4 to be bottlenecked by less memory even though it was going to have a faster GPU. 8GB GDDR5 caught everyone by surprise. Including devs and us

Eh... A 2GB system would have been so lopsided, it would never fly. But that still doesn't affect the raw GPU silicon they put in there.

 

[Nesh]

But that still doesn't affect the raw GPU silicon they put in there.

I am aware of that.

 

[Shortbread]

I noticed women (not all, some), like my sisters don't quite like the idea of setting up (configuring / calibrating) anything that requires so much time. My oldest sister made a remark and stated "Umm, too much going on, not female friendly". This happened when she was attempting to calibrate and configure my brother-in-law's XB1 system for my nephew K2 based game. This was similar to a woman's comment I overheard in Target the other day. How long does it take to properly calibrate/configure the Kinect 2 to understand commands and varying motions?

You remember when I made this comment?

Note 4: From the small sample between GS/BB it seems more males have purchased XB1, while PS4 has garnered a larger section of younger female buyers.

...and this one

Finally, Bowman and Xbox New Zealand lead Steven Blackburn spoke to how Microsoft expects the demographic for the Xbox One to change over time. Right now, Blackburn said the Xbox One is "absolutely as male and core-skewed as you can imagine," but he anticipates that this will change.

Pretty much what's happening at retail outlets....

The three common complaints that I hear from female buyers, on not purchasing XB1. A) The interface is somewhat confusing. B) Live (especially the males) don't respect females during MP or social interaction play. C) Kinect setup/configuration is to hard and not female friendly.

As of today, females are buying far more PS4s compared to XB1, almost 4:1 ratio from the stores that I communicate with.

So the question becomes; "How does MS approach these issues?".

 

[RudeCurve]

What the hell does female friendly actually mean ?

 

[bkilian]

What the hell does female friendly actually mean ?

I was just about to ask that. That's a pretty sexist comment...

 

[Shortbread]

I was just about to ask that. That's a pretty sexist comment...

The term was devised by women, and used mostly by them when describing a not so "female friendly" product, service, place, etc...

http://www.business2community.com/branding/making-brand-female-friendly-0684154

http://www.fastcompany.com/3001986/end-female-friendly-workplace

Anyhow....

The term varies from female to female. However, the general consensus is; a product or service that doesn't take into account a woman's point of view or opinion (style, functionality, visual aesthetics, time, etc...). In other words, does that product or service equally include a woman's point of view, as a man?

Let's be honest, most women like simplicity when it comes to electronic gadgets... IMHO, anything requiring 5 minutes of fiddling doesn't appeal to them... but I can only speak about the women in my life (wife, mother, sisters, aunts, etc...).

 

[Rangers]

I have a really hard time thinking the PS4 exactly screams "I'm for women!"

It's a black core console. And too be honest, I'd think something like Kinect would appeal to females, especially due to fitness aspects. PS4 on the other hand seems if anything more male oriented, with it's games focus and all about (Tim Allen grunts), horsepower.

Too be fair, one of my sisters actually showed interest in PS4 initially based on the Kingdom Hearts reveal, which was sort of assumed to be PS exclusive I think (which will also come to Xbox, but anyway). So maybe a lot of women thought similarly. In general I would think females are more into Final Fantasy games and the like, which are associated with PS, but this would have applied equally to ps3 as ps4.

I think PS4 is selling better because it's more powerful and less expensive, basically. Not very complicated.

 

[3dilettante]

Let's be honest, most women like simplicity when it comes to electronic gadgets... IMHO, anything requiring 5 minutes of fiddling doesn't appeal to them... but I can only speak about the women in my life (wife, mother, sisters, aunts, etc...).

Some of the traits from your links would point to the Xbox One being a far better woman's console, other facets--like flex time at work--don't seem very relevant to the discussion other than they are talking about women. The PS4 barely does any of that (conversational interaction or flex-time).

I seriously doubt a female gamer is going to have a problem with the Xbox One in some estrogen-linked way, unless we're speculating that Kinect is misogynist.
On the other hand, societal norms and gamer culture are not equal in their inclusion of females in gaming. Are the females you use as examples as into gaming in a similar way as any males you would compare them to?

How would a man who never really got into gaming compare to a woman who never got into gaming when evaluating how man-friendly the Xbox One is?

 

[Shortbread]

I have a really hard time thinking the PS4 exactly screams "I'm for women!"

It's a black core console. And too be honest, I'd think something like Kinect would appeal to females, especially due to fitness aspects. PS4 on the other hand seems if anything more male oriented, with it's games focus and all about (Tim Allen grunts), horsepower.

Too be fair, one of my sisters actually showed interest in PS4 initially based on the Kingdom Hearts reveal, which was sort of assumed to be PS exclusive I think (which will also come to Xbox, but anyway). So maybe a lot of women thought similarly. In general I would think females are more into Final Fantasy games and the like, which are associated with PS, but this would have applied equally to ps3 as ps4.

I think PS4 is selling better because it's more powerful and less expensive, basically. Not very complicated.

Everything you mentioned had nothing to do with their choice... or current opinion on not purchasing XB1.

The three common complaints that I hear from female buyers, on not purchasing XB1. A) The interface is somewhat confusing. B) Live (especially the males) don't respect females during MP or social interaction play. C) Kinect setup/configuration is to hard and not female friendly.

 

[Shortbread]

Some of the traits from your links would point to the Xbox One being a far better woman's console, other facets--like flex time at work--don't seem very relevant to the discussion other than they are talking about women. The PS4 barely does any of that (conversational interaction or flex-time).

I seriously doubt a female gamer is going to have a problem with the Xbox One in some estrogen-linked way, unless we're speculating that Kinect is misogynist.
On the other hand, societal norms and gamer culture are not equal in their inclusion of females in gaming. Are the females you use as examples as into gaming in a similar way as any males you would compare them to?

How would a man who never really got into gaming compare to a woman who never got into gaming when evaluating how man-friendly the Xbox One is?

Guy's I'm only pointing out "WHAT IS BEING SAID" by retailers and their female customers.... don't shoot the messenger.

If your opinions were valid, then it would be reflective in XB1 sales (female purchasers), but it isn't. Something even retailers and MS noticed.........

Finally, Bowman and Xbox New Zealand lead Steven Blackburn spoke to how Microsoft expects the demographic for the Xbox One to change over time. Right now, Blackburn said the Xbox One is "absolutely as male and core-skewed as you can imagine," but he anticipates that this will change.

 

[3dilettante]

Guy's I'm only pointing out "WHAT IS BEING SAID" by retailers and their female customers.... don't shoot the messenger.

There are statements as to the statistics, but which ones gave a reason why?

If your opinions were valid, then it would be reflective in XB1 sales (female purchasers), but it isn't. Something even retailers and MS noticed.........

My response was founded from the links you provided for what makes something female-friendly.
The Xbox One tries at least some of those things, so how does the console that makes the attempt less female-friendly?

This is why I asked how much into gaming your female examples were. A female gamer is female, a female who never owned a console also is female. One is probably going to have more problems with Kinect than the other.

Maybe there's more to the story, or is there an explanation of what female-friendly means that the PS4 does more than the Xbox One?

 

[Shortbread]

There are statements as to the statistics, but which ones gave a reason why?

From the small GameStop and BestBuy sample their reasons were...

Originally Posted by Shortbread
The three common complaints that I hear from female buyers, on not purchasing XB1. A) The interface is somewhat confusing. B) Live (especially the males) don't respect females during MP or social interaction play. C) Kinect setup/configuration is to hard and not female friendly.