Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox

[zed]

Given how poorly PS4 is doing in Japan some are wondering whether MS should bother.

yeah 1.6 million they shouldnt bother,they should scrub NZ, australia, italy, spain, portagal, netherlands, south korea sweden, finland etc as well since apart from oz, they wont sell a million each as well.
Hey before you know the xb360 sold ~65million instead of ~80million
Why theyre at it they shouldnt bother with alaska and all those unpopulated states, we could go further and say bugger small town, only sell it in cities of > million people.

I guess what Im saying is a lot of small numbers = a big number

 

[DrJay24]

Sony's Japan numbers would be the #2 or #3 country sales for the XB1, so ya pretty poor.

 

[MrFox]

....but, I have to ask, why the heck is japan such a small number? Did something happen?

 

[DrJay24]

Comcast is pushing the X1 with voice controls...

 

[HTupolev]

Comcast is pushing the X1 with voice controls...

I burst out laughing when I first saw those commercials.

The internet trolling Microsoft for their XB1 reveal was one thing. But TV TV TV responding?

 

[Pixel]

....but, I have to ask, why the heck is japan such a small number? Did something happen?

Japanese economy is going through an even tougher time than ours is. My guess is that much of the middle class dont want to spend that kind of money on a device other than their phone.

 

[-tkf-]

Last gen it seems like people were evenly split between a box that cost more and offered worse performance and a box that cost less and offered better performance.

The PS3 offered substantial value at the higher price, Blu-Ray payback (yes nobody used it , but it was the only thing this forum users bought a PS3 for), FREE multiplayer and internet services. And as time has shown us, the better performance was slowly but surely reduced to nothing. And lets face it, the difference apart from a few bad apples wasn't anywhere the same as we see now. Lastly, the PS3 wasn't percieved as being weak like the XB1 is now. That is a major point worth remembering. And it had and has some of the best looking games of the last generation as proof...

Games take awhile to develop and while we got some Kinect game and some Kinect enhanced games by the time anything would be ready we would be looking at the start of this generation.

So the Kinect 2 should have launched with all that knowledge in mind, and the games to match.

MS is giving azure time to titan fall which isn't subscription based. An experience like I described can be a mainstream differentiator . Remember when console fps games were horrible and sold poorly and then halo hit and its controls and lan play changed everything ?

Free on the PC? Afaik you need to pay a monthly fee to Play Titanfall on the XB1, and just a note, i see higher pings on Titanfall than i do on BF4. Anecdotal, but real in my world.

From what I've heard before the xbox one at $500 is sold for a profit. Take the profit away and it wont be $500 anymore. That's before removing Kinect.

With the teardowns we have seen, i simply find that unlikely.

But like I said if removing the Kinect only gets them price parity with sony then it wont matter. Listen to everyone in this thread , no one actually cares about the Kinect. They care that the ps4 is more powerful than the xbox one.

I think everyone here does care about Kinect, i think it's a remarkable technology but i like most others here question what the **** it's doing with a games console when games seems to be the least important part of it's inclusion.

Getting down to $400 with no game or $450 with multiple free games and keeping Kinect is the important thing.

IF they can make the Kinect attractive..

A lot of people make fun of tv features of the one , but at some point it will become attractive for cable companies. Make a small little tunner box that hooks up to the one and boom you got one of the best cable boxes ever made for the consumer

It doesn't work everywhere, it doesn't work in my country and in many other european countries, it doesn't work with every cable box, the voice control isn't perfect, it's a XX Watt remote control that isn't superior to the IR control that everyone has, it's a cool solution for those that fit perfectly, for the rest is a waste of development, hardware and time. And.. you know.. streaming... HELLO , they go for TV, while the movement is going to streaming, and that is paywalled.. what?

It's built around the idea that the XB1 is actually the center of your life. WHO would have thought up that idea? it's crazy.. the world is not united into one device anymore, it's the exact other way, everything is spread out on x numbers of devices, services and different platforms..

 

[temesgen]

Last gen it seems like people were evenly split between a box that cost more and offered worse performance and a box that cost less and offered better performance.

This argument about power is pretty subjective and not to mention lacks context, third party games essentially reached parity by the end of the generation and for much of it the visual differences were not that great. Besides one would need to look at each title to determine why the frame rates, textures or resolution would be superior on one platform or another. In many cases it might have actually been due to tools which for much of the last cycle were inferior on PS3 or architecture challenges like non unified memory as much as any objective hardware inefficiencies. We know PS3 had a weaker GPU but it also had a CPU that make some of that shortfall.

Are the differences between XB1 and PS4 > or < what we saw with PS3 and 360? One could even argue that the gaming media seems to do out off its way to minimize the differences in visuals when a few years ago it was categorically a big deal.

Also your argument doesn't take into consideration that for many the 1st party offerings by Sony both in terms of variety and quality were critical. Granted MS did make an investment in certain genres like JRPGs but that died out after a couple years similarly MS basically abandoned the core to focus on Kinect titles which angered some of their consumers.

I'd say that the value proposition of PS3 in 2006 for many was the opportunity to own a Blu Ray player that at the time was testing as one of the most capable and a next gen gaming machine for less than a stand alone Blu Ray player cost. A few years into the generation and PS3 had some really good 1st party IPs and the third parties which in many cases were worse were not too terribly different.

Some probably perceived the hardware as more reliable or felt PS3 was a better value or liked the support of genres that Sony was consistently or should I say faithfully investing regardless of the relative profits year after year. All of that in aggregate helped Sony turn things around.

 

[Arwin]

Japan is moving to mobile gaming platforms at the expense of consoles

 

[Rangers]

yeah 1.6 million they shouldnt bother,they should scrub NZ, australia, italy, spain, portagal, netherlands, south korea sweden, finland etc as well since apart from oz, they wont sell a million each as well.
Hey before you know the xb360 sold ~65million instead of ~80million
Why theyre at it they shouldnt bother with alaska and all those unpopulated states, we could go further and say bugger small town, only sell it in cities of > million people.

I guess what Im saying is a lot of small numbers = a big number

Well, I dont realistically think they shouldn't bother. It's just going to be tough rowing I think, and given the X1's headwinds and the shrinking Japanese console market, it seems unlikely it can even approach 360's lifetime Japanese sales.

But yeah, I'm sure they'll launch in smaller markets.

I guess, 9/4 is nice and early in September. Only 4.5 months away.

One could even argue that the gaming media seems to do out off its way to minimize the differences in visuals when a few years ago it was categorically a big deal.

seems like as big deal as ever or more https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1htWT9eWJ_k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmtWB26aAgo for what I grabbed of 2 seconds youtube search for "IGN 1080P PS4"

 

[Gubbi]

This argument about power is pretty subjective and not to mention lacks context, third party games essentially reached parity by the end of the generation and for much of it the visual differences were not that great.

It is pretty objective. Lower resolution outright, lower alpha buffers in particular, lower average framerate on the bulk of cross platform games.

Cross platform games sort of hit the same performance level, but was that because developers mastered the "awesome power" of CELL or because game were scaled back to hit 30 fps on PS3 because of its market share catching up ?

The one year old Crysis 3 runs at 30% lower aggregate pixelrate on PS3 compared to the 360 (15% lower resolution and 10-15% lower average framerate). GTA4 on the 360 had 2.2 x the fragments of the PS3 version, GTA5 had 20% more on the 360.

Also your argument doesn't take into consideration that for many the 1st party offerings by Sony both in terms of variety and quality were critical.

How does Halo, Gears and Forza stack up to Sony's 1st party titles in quality and sales ?

XB1 is to the PS4 what the PS3 was to the 360; A more expensive, smaller capacity, higher capability machine.

Cheers

 

[Deleted member 86764]

XB1 is to the PS4 what the PS3 was to the 360; A more expensive, smaller capacity, higher capability machine.

Xbox One has higher capability? I don't think an HDMI-in justifies that statement. Maybe I misunderstand you?

 

[Gubbi]

Xbox One has higher capability? I don't think an HDMI-in justifies that statement. Maybe I misunderstand you?

Right now: HDMI-in and Kinect; IMO, Kinect is a bigger deal than Bluray ever was for PS3.

In time, the OS architecture will be leveraged to run all kinds of things (branding prediction: Windows One).

Cheers

 

[Deleted member 86764]

IMO, Kinect is a bigger deal than Bluray

I think you might be standing alone with that statement.

While I think the technology for the device is good, the implementation is very poor. I see no justification for it being in the Xbox One right now. Maybe Microsoft will prove me wrong, only time will tell.

 

[Phil]

IHow does Halo, Gears and Forza stack up to Sony's 1st party titles in quality and sales ?

XB1 is to the PS4 what the PS3 was to the 360; A more expensive, smaller capacity, higher capability machine.

Cheers

I usually look at it from a more mainstream angle. When PS3 came out, it was more expensive yes, but the Bluray and HDMI, also the supplied harddrive brought a lot of value to the console which justified some of its price. It wasn't about it having better graphics - the whole package offered more value. If and how much that value is worth to the individiual is hard to quantify - after all, at the time, we had the HD-DVD / Bluray war and one of the two was going to be the next big thing after the DVD.

Then there is also the free online multiplayer as many pointed out. On the graphics front - yes, it's a wash. Multiplatform titles fared worse on the PS3, but when it did, it made up for a lot of this deficit when 1st, 2nd and some 3rd party exclusives went the extra milestone to deliver something that is arguably hard to find on the Xbox360. Put that down to CELL or to mear developer talent and focus.

On paper, the PS3 and X360 are evenly matched. X360 is efficient and easy, PS3 unbalanced, but with the right dedication (which was rarely the case except for a few titles), they are close to parity.

This time around, it's different. Xbox One is substantially weaker on paper and what its deficit can't be leveled by miraculous developer talent or effort. Some games might distort the picture because they'll be exclusive and there won't be something similar to compare it to on the other platform, but game for game, exclusive for exclusive, I'd expect the PS4 to deliever more simply by having not only the easier hardware but more capable one too.

On all other fronts, except for Kinect and Voice-controls - the two machines are identical. There's no new Bluray format that's only available on one, or a harddisk that's lacking on the other. The only distinguishing point that could make the consumer justify the higher price is.... Kinect and Voice-Controls. And if that vision sits with you, is pretty much dependant on where you are from. It's evidently a lot less attractive if you're not from NA, but from Europe. And as a game console, it's also arguable to what degree Kinect and VC bring value to the table. It's not for everyone, but for it to be something, first, there needs to be adequate software support....

I've said this now for a couple of months already, but I still think the success of the 360 was in large part due to the extreme late launch of the PS3 and the problems it suffered in its execution (blue-laser diods, HDMI etc) that not only made it more expensive but caused delays. I'm pretty sure if PS3 had launched earlier and accoarding to plan, the PS3 would have been substantially more successfull relative to the Xbox360 - to the point where NA might have been a draw.

This is possibly also a reason why, now with PS4 and Xbox One and them going neck by neck, we are seeing this difference. Perhaps even if Xbox One would have turned out just like PS4 - a console dedicated to gaming without the kinect, but similar amount of performance, would we see the PS4 perhaps edge away slightly globaly - but not in NA.

The price, Kinect, the vision and the performance are reasons why it's the PS4 that is edging away in all territories instead.

 

[Deleted member 86764]

Having said that I wonder whether Microsoft have a similar view. Rather than dropping the Kinect from the box, they'll drop the Bluray drive? It'd work out as beneficial for them since they could still kill the secondhand market, or at least take the profits from retailers.

 

[BoardBonobo]

I've said this now for a couple of months already, but I still think the success of the 360 was in large part due to the extreme late launch of the PS3 and the problems it suffered in its execution (blue-laser diods, HDMI etc) that not only made it more expensive but caused delays. I'm pretty sure if PS3 had launched earlier and accoarding to plan, the PS3 would have been substantially more successfull relative to the Xbox360 - to the point where NA might have been a draw.

This is something I have been saying for ages too, the greatest part of the 360's success was down to Sony's failure to deliver the PS3 at the same time and with a clear message as to the difference in price. Out of the box the PS3 offered more than the 360 but as a games machine it was hard to justify.

You could say the same about the XB1 if it wasn't for the fact that the differentiating features remain largely exclusive to NA. They are not universal and do nothing to include or promote future technologies.

This is possibly also a reason why, now with PS4 and Xbox One and them going neck by neck, we are seeing this difference. Perhaps even if Xbox One would have turned out just like PS4 - a console dedicated to gaming without the kinect, but similar amount of performance, would we see the PS4 perhaps edge away slightly globaly - but not in NA.

The price, Kinect, the vision and the performance are reasons why it's the PS4 that is edging away in all territories instead.

I think in part as well is the image that the Playstation has as a games machine. It is still living in the success of the PS2 to some extent, but I don't think MS helped themselves at all towards the end of the 360's life in this regard. They over egged the pudding in terms of none gaming focused media etc. And it's a legacy that they've brought to the XB1 but in spades.

I buy a console for games, extra features are cool and if they are something that is readily available elsewhere (like Bluray in the PS3) then it's a bonus. But ultimately it's about the games. The TV does the TV things and phones and tablets fill in the gaps. But they can't replicate the console experience which is why there is one (or four) under my TV.

 

[London Geezer]

IMO, Kinect is a bigger deal than Bluray ever was for PS3.

Thank god for that IMO!

It's not unfair to say that without PS3, Bluray would probably not be in the same place as it is today as a standard. Bluray playback was a HUGE deal on PS3, and the main reason many people purchased one - at a time when standalone players cost a lot more, while being much worse players than the PS3, which actually turned out to be a very, very good player by itself, thanks to continuous updates by Sony.

Surely we all remember the endless reports of PS3 being just a Bluray player for many people, at least initially?

Kinect is, well, just Kinect.

 

[McHuj]

Having said that I wonder whether Microsoft have a similar view. Rather than dropping the Kinect from the box, they'll drop the Bluray drive? It'd work out as beneficial for them since they could still kill the secondhand market, or at least take the profits from retailers.

It's a console that I would be interested in and provided that both SKU's are on the market I don't see it as an issue.

Perhaps if they remove the bluray drive they can rework the case and cooling system and get rid of the power brick. If the xbox uses less power than the PS4, there's no reason why it couldn't have an internal power supply as well.

 

[DrJay24]

Having said that I wonder whether Microsoft have a similar view. Rather than dropping the Kinect from the box, they'll drop the Bluray drive? It'd work out as beneficial for them since they could still kill the secondhand market, or at least take the profits from retailers.

The BD is not a very large part of the BOM, but missing it would make it a super-gimp SKU. It would be the all-in-one box that can't watch BD movie or play disc games.