Business Approach Comparison Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox

[betan]

At least it seems with Gold now you'll be getting dedicated servers, where Sony will just pocket your PSN plus $?

I mean the double standards in play here are mind-boggling

PS+ is already a great value (for consumers) even without online gaming for which we don't know the details.

Sony are providing 'free' games and network infrastructure for that PSN fee. That's their official line on why they have made PSN+ necessary for online gaming, anyhow.
http://www.vg247.com/2013/06/17/ps4-gara-explains-new-ps-plus-subs-cross-game-chat-more/ee on PS Plus," Provinciano said. "If players come to expect that every game from a developer will be eventually made available for free, it will eat into day one purchases. I'd determine it on a case-by-case basis."
So part subsidising hardware, part online network (part profits )

Gamasutra has an interesting article about profitability of PSN+. Well it's from the dev's point of view, but in the big picture it affects Sony as well.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/191966/playstation_plus_good_for_.php

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I expect PSN+ os very like Kindle's free app giveaways. It's probably down to the developer to make it work.

 

[Kb-Smoker]

At least it seems with Gold now you'll be getting dedicated servers, where Sony will just pocket your PSN plus $?

I mean the double standards in play here are mind-boggling

You dont get dedicated server. That is what we are talking about. You only getdedicated server if the devrlopers pay fir it on both platforms.

 

[zupallinere]

You dont get dedicated server. That is what we are talking about. You only getdedicated server if the devrlopers pay fir it on both platforms.

Not only were we paying for the privilege of a peer to peer multiplayer with Live but we were also paying for the privilege of watching things like Netflix which supposedly we already payed enough for already. Guess MS thought we got off too easy

 

[joker454]

Even if the majority to those questions are answered by a yes - how long does it take to set up? And at that point, you're still left with a rather big noisy box in your livingroom and without the consistant experience. Some of us actually value these things.

So you care about noise yet the ps2 was extremely noisy, you want a consistent experience which the xbox 360 was yet the ps3 wasn't (especially regarding online, match making, achievements, etc), you care about the process of maintaining the machine yet game and os patching on ps3 was a painful experience compared to the 360, yet you are touting Playstation as where you want to be. The way you talk I'd have to presume you never owned a ps2 and that you picked a 360 over a ps3 but I'm guessing that's not the case. I'm going to let this drop now as your actions don't match your words, it doesn't make any sense. Sorry there's no way one can tout ps2 when talking about noise, or picking ps3 over 360 when talking about consistent and pleasant experience.

The PC killed off PC gaming.

Lots of stuff was wrong on pc back in the era I think Phil is remembering many years ago, but it's actually fairly simple to pc game now. Piracy is still a big issue sure, but at least this gen with xb1 and ps4 basically being fixed low spec pc's there really isn't much reason to not release console games on pc at least at a later date to reduce the financial loss from piracy.

 

[Phil]

So you care about noise yet the ps2 was extremely noisy, you want a consistent experience which the xbox 360 was yet the ps3 wasn't (especially regarding online, match making, achievements, etc), yet you are touting Playstation as where you want to be. The way you talk I'd have to presume you never owned a ps2 and that you picked a 360 over a ps3 but I'm guessing that's not the case. I'm going to let this drop now as your actions don't match your words, it doesn't make any sense.

Of course it doesn't if you isolate a simple point. It's the whole package - the sum of all the reasons that add up to form the conclusion why gaming on the PC does nothing for me. Which is why I've clearly always spoke of the experience.

BTW; I did in fact own a PS2. Not sure what you're getting at - it wasn't THAT bad - not as far as I remember anyway. Besides, back in the PS2 days, noise perhaps wasn't such an issue it is now (back then, I gamed in a room on an old CRT, now I game in the livingroom where different constraints apply). Now, I know full well that you can throw a nearly unlimited amount of money at the problem and make any PC completely noise-less, but at that point, you still have all the other points that add up - in this case being, having a big ugly (don't take offence - and yes, I know you can pretty much buy anything outthere) computer case. If PC gaming was possible on a hardware that is rather small and practical without the Windows OS and all the other points I mentioned, then yes, I would perhaps consider - but then we already have it, it's just called a console...

BTW: Perhaps so that you can relate to my situation and why I'm rather strict on my livingroom, here's a picture. As you can see, there's no room to accomondate any such setup. And yes, that is XBMC running and yes, it is running on a PC (asus eeebox eb1501p)...

 

[joker454]

Of course it doesn't if you isolate a simple point. It's the whole package - the sum of all the reasons that add up to form the conclusion why gaming on the PC does nothing for me. Which is why I've clearly always spoke of the experience.

BTW; I did in fact own a PS2. Not sure what you're getting at - it wasn't THAT bad - not as far as I remember anyway. Besides, back in the PS2 days, noise perhaps wasn't such an issue it is now (back then, I gamed in a room on an old CRT, now I game in the livingroom where different constraints apply). Now, I know full well that you can throw a nearly unlimited amount of money at the problem and make any PC completely noise-less, but at that point, you still have all the other points that add up - in this case being, having a big ugly (don't take offence - and yes, I know you can pretty much buy anything outthere) computer case. If PC gaming was possible on a hardware that is rather small and practical without the Windows OS and all the other points I mentioned, then yes, I would perhaps consider - but then we already have it, it's just called a console...

BTW: Perhaps so that you can relate to my situation and why I'm rather strict on my livingroom, here's a picture. As you can see, there's no room to accomondate any such setup. And yes, that is XBMC running and yes, it is running on a PC (asus eeebox eb1501p)...

I still don't get it. There's tons of pc cases that would look totally at home on your rack there as they wouldn't look like a pc at all, they would sound less annoying than the ps2 did with it's high pitched whine, and it would be a fully 10 foot all controller based never see Windows consistent experience with Steam. Now you see why I still don't understand, the stuff you mention all sounds like throwbacks to a different era of gaming pc, they don't apply today and they certainly don't reflect how I pc game. If it was as you say it is then I wouldn't bother either, I have no patience for setup, configuration, mess, and anything that doesn't work perfectly from the couch with my 360 controller. But anyways I don't want to keep diverting this thread, and I'm out of things to say anyways. Suffice to say our experiences of what a gaming pc is today are polar opposites.

 

[dobwal]

Don't both platform charges pub for online related features? Did Sony stop charging a "bandwidth fee" to pubs when it launched PSN+?

 

[arijoytunir]

can sony or microsoft introduce a new subscription plan like cable tvs where the every new game - be it AAA or indie , each new title on psn or xbox live be available for free to download (just like ps plus's instant game collection but not only with old games but new also ) and play the game till the subscription ends? is it possible ?

 

[Xalion]

can sony or microsoft introduce a new subscription plan like cable tvs where the every new game - be it AAA or indie , each new title on psn or xbox live be available for free to download and play the game till the subscription ends? is it possible ?

Technically, this would be possible. PS+ is a bit like this now for some of their games - where when the subscription ends the game stops working.

On the other hand, there are so many different publishers you would have to get to go along with this that I think it would be something like herding cats (who have been playing in catnip all night through a canyon filled with moving yarn balls and running mice). It isn't a bad idea, just a hard sell to publishers.

 

[dobwal]

Technically, this would be possible. PS+ is a bit like this now for some of their games - where when the subscription ends the game stops working.

On the other hand, there are so many different publishers you would have to get to go along with this that I think it would be something like herding cats (who have been playing in catnip all night through a canyon filled with moving yarn balls and running mice). It isn't a bad idea, just a hard sell to publishers.

Going digital should encourage the introduction of a Netflix like service. Because lets face it, platform providers and pubs do a horrible job at extracting the value from a console's library. All while most gamers are terribly under exposed to what most console libraries offer. Take away the inflexibility of physical distribution and there is an opportunity to realize greater profits for MS/Sony/pubs while providing a greater experience for gamers.

 

[rockaman]

PS Plus is also a good way to get players to pay for "something" rather than nothing.

Look at EU for which players are getting BF3 and PS Plus. BF3 is a relatively new game, but not truly new. It's been out for a year or so right?

But by providing BF3 now is good for EA. Sales are obviously not what they were originally, but now if a larger number of people can play BF3 the game, they can catch players who are willing to spend $10 on DLC now and maybe $10 later and maybe another $10 another time in the future, rather than $30 or $40 for the whole game.

PS Plus can incentivize players not only to keep paying for PS Plus by providing quality titles, but it can also incentivize players to invest in the games they get using the service via DLC. It's a double whammy and honestly an extremely, extremely good business decision by Sony.

That the great business decision also provides a great service is just weirdly fortunate for subscribers too.

I'm too smart to be roped in by the DLC plans, I hope

 

[Bigduo209]

Spoiler

Going digital should encourage the introduction of a Netflix like service. Because lets face it, platform providers and pubs do a horrible job at extracting the value from a console's library. All while most gamers are terribly under exposed to what most console libraries offer. Take away the inflexibility of physical distribution and there is an opportunity to realize greater profits for MS/Sony/pubs while providing a greater experience for gamers.

But that's pretty much what PS+ is, a Netflix for games (w/ some minor differences).

We have some new details on PS Plus for the PS4. It will be required to play online but not for free-to-play games or MMOs. One subscription will grant access to all accounts on that system.

Cross game chat and other media functions won’t require the subscription. This includes services like Netflix.

Games will be added and removed just like the current subscription on PS3 and you will be getting one new PS4 game every month. It’s not clear whether it would be a PS Plus edition like DriveClub which has altered content.

The subscription isn’t required for automatic updates. It will cost $50 or $5 per month. It’s something you pay for PS Plus already on PS3 so it really isn’t a surprise.

http://www.gamechup.com/ps4-playstation-plus-details-cross-game-chat-doesnt-require-the-service/


I don't see the need for an all digital service when there's no globally standard/affordable internet services to support it. With data caps and restrictions being enforced also, that would put a damper on distribution overall. Going all DD should an optional incentive at best, and the same thing goes for the cloud as well. Consoles should support every use case within reason, and I don't see that changing with the size of PS4/Xbox-One games getting bigger.

 

[Brad Grenz]

At least it seems with Gold now you'll be getting dedicated servers, where Sony will just pocket your PSN plus $?

I mean the double standards in play here are mind-boggling

Yeah. Unless you count the hundreds of millions they're already spending delivering 60 odd games a year to PS Plus members. Or you recognize that dedicated servers are no more likely on Xbox One than PS4 since devs and/or publishers still have to foot the bill for them either way. Or you think about all the server driven F2P games you can play on PS4 without a PS+ membership.

But enough about double standards, let's talk about your platform myopia.

 

[Rangers]

Yeah. Unless you count the hundreds of millions they're already spending delivering 60 odd games a year to PS Plus members. Or you recognize that dedicated servers are no more likely on Xbox One than PS4 since devs and/or publishers still have to foot the bill for them either way. Or you think about all the server driven F2P games you can play on PS4 without a PS+ membership.

But enough about double standards, let's talk about your platform myopia.

100's of millions? Source?

Anyways of course I knew somebody would bring that up, but you get free games on Gold now too (and you actually get to keep them forever unlike glorified renting aka PSN+).

I'm not that familiar with it though. More games to play is not really a big issue for me LOL. I dont play that much and only the latest/best gets my time. If I needed lots to play I'd subscribe to gamefly. Or just rent the latest and greatest for 2 bucks from Redbox. Or start playing an MMORPG, a F2P, a Fallout game, or any of the other genres you can invest a million hours in with ease.

Dedicated servers were touted as this amazing thing a few years back when a couple Sony exclusives randomly had them (even remember a youtube comments debate with some fanboy who stridently (incorrectly of course) asserted all Sony exclusives had dedicated servers, natch) and now it kind of seems like they're being ignored.

 

[patsu]

At least it seems with Gold now you'll be getting dedicated servers, where Sony will just pocket your PSN plus $?

I mean the double standards in play here are mind-boggling

100's of millions? Source?

Anyways of course I knew somebody would bring that up, but you get free games on Gold now too (and you actually get to keep them forever unlike glorified renting aka PSN+).

I'm not that familiar with it though. More games to play is not really a big issue for me LOL. I dont play that much and only the latest/best gets my time. If I needed lots to play I'd subscribe to gamefly. Or just rent the latest and greatest for 2 bucks from Redbox. Or start playing an MMORPG, a F2P, a Fallout game, or any of the other genres you can invest a million hours in with ease.

Dedicated servers were touted as this amazing thing a few years back when a couple Sony exclusives randomly had them (even remember a youtube comments debate with some fanboy who stridently (incorrectly of course) asserted all Sony exclusives had dedicated servers, natch) and now it kind of seems like they're being ignored.

Hmm... MS only started to give out free games recently. They also don't have dedicated server in XBL yet. By your logic, Microsoft has been pocketing your money for the past 8 or so years for doing nothing. And you willingly hand it to them anyway. There is nothing wrong with the scheme. It's your money afterall.

I don't think Sony need to spend 100s of millions on the free PS+ games though.


IMHO, dedicated server scheme is indeed more worthwhile if we are going to pay for it. Fast forward to today, the industry has evolved further. There are free-to-play dedicated server games, there are subscription-based MMO server games. I do think we will see more server games next gen. In fact, they are not restricted to PS4 and Xbox One only. Casual games and PC/Mac games can also be server based.

 

[specwarGP2]

MS free games are Halo 3 and Assassins Creed 2, both 5+ years old.

PS+ IGC for June: Deus Ex, Saints Row 3, XCOM, Uncharted 3, LBP Karting.

 

[Brad Grenz]

Dedicated servers were touted as this amazing thing a few years back when a couple Sony exclusives randomly had them (even remember a youtube comments debate with some fanboy who stridently (incorrectly of course) asserted all Sony exclusives had dedicated servers, natch) and now it kind of seems like they're being ignored.

No, we're just ignoring your equally incorrect claims that they will be universal on Xbox One and absent on PS4. But congratulations on achieving YouTube comment level participation in this thread.

 

[GuestLV]

Its a shame Sony has chosen to not include PS EYE in standard complectation
http://youtu.be/CewinNc_hSI


A missed opportunity to bring a new gameplay possibilities
Big mistake I think

 

[Arwin]

I recently saw how tiny the new Eye really is ... it's much, much smaller than I've thought, and especially thinner. I mean, 186mm X 27mm X 27mm ... that's a really thin bit of kit, and certainly makes it easier to pack in with a game, and make it likely to become relatively low-cost soon(ish).

If Sony or someone else manages to find a good gameplay possibility, they can still convince people to buy it, and depending on how things go, they can still start shipping it with the box at a later date. It's all up to Sony to decide how they feel about the device in the future, and how clever they are with their SDKs - e.g. in the UI video, you actually see a user type some text using the DS4 as a pointer, which may or may not require the PS Eye 2.0 tracking the device (the gyro being sensitive enough, this isn't actually necessary - many Move pointer interfaces in games also just used the gyro for controlling a cursor)

Conversely, having Kinect 2.0 as a pack in with the Xbox One doesn't also guarantee success. But it is providing such a tight user interface integration for it that it makes a lot of sense to include it, whereas for the PS Eye 2.0 I am not yet convinced it will be as suitable or necessary as a UI enhancement - the basic features of the DS4 are so expansive that it has enough interfaces by itself, and the PS Eye 2.0 is far less likely to be a reliable input device all on its own than Kinect 2.0 is.

Like Shifty says though, let's wait and see for the companies to provide some actual games that make you want to own it.