Support NeoGAF

[zzill3]

So the solution is to keep buying more studios and ips? When they already have more studios then sony, have more money then Sony and Nintendo combined and shit ton of ips.

Not the only solution but most likely the fastest one, yeah.

Sounds like a total failure of the existing leadership if they can't compete with already having more resources then the competition. Maybe it's time to see why the existing leadership can't do their jobs?

They only got to have more studios than Sony recently, and it's still at the point Sony's exclusivity contracts are still in effect for games from those acquired studios. It doesn't matter how many studios MS own when Sony have their games locked away.
MS could have got more third party games locked away from playstation if they wanted, so maybe that is a failure of leadership, but it's a much better use of money to just buy the developers who make them instead. We'll see what turns out to be the better strategy in 10 years.

 

[TheGodfather07]

People kept thinking that series starting faster than 360 meant anything when 360 started off slow as heck. 360 didn't really start taking off until after 3 years in. By the end of 2008, 360 was only at 14.8m shipped worldwide. It launched in November 2005. It started off very slow.

 

[zzill3]

Not true. I feel this is just an excuse by Xbox to acquire studios and take the easy way out.

...

Xbox can produce more and better games than PlayStation using their first-party studios (4 more than PlayStation) and infinite money resources, and take back that share, just like PlayStation did last generation.

They can also buy more developers and publishers and get more games that way.
Any competitor who operates in a way that's fair to the market leader is going to stay behind the market leader. MS are choosing to operate in a different way to shake the market up, that might mean Playstation eventually drop to second place (3rd including Nintendo). It's not the end of the world if that happens.

The mindshare is because of the type of games that were releasing in 2022:

Grounded (available for 2 years, not new), Pentiment, Crossfire X, Deathloop (available on PS since 2021, not new), As Dusk Falls vs. God of War Ragnarok, Gran Turismo 7, Horizon Forbidden West, MLB The Show, The Last of Us.

The games that Xbox released will not be as popular and, therefore, won't capture the mindshare.

They will have to release big blockbuster memorable AAA games that people talk about for years to penetrate the market and capture mindshare.

Yeah, third person action adventure games seem to be more popular than other genres at the moment, and MS's recent acquisitions still have their games locked behind Sony's exclusivity contracts. It doesn't matter how many studios you own when their games are contractually locked to a competitors console. MS could have started the acquisition spree 5 years earlier, but they didn't. That's a misstep that's now being corrected with the Bethesda and ABK purchase. You shouldn't complain that MS need more, better games but then complain about how they go about getting those games.

 

[jm89]

Not the only solution but most likely the fastest one, yeah.

Sure it's the fastest way. But that doesn't address the reason why existing leadership are total failures and failed to compete even with a Bethesda size acquisiton and numerous pre Bethesda ones. It's just hiding the rot behind publishers who actually know what they are doing.

They only got to have more studios than Sony recently, and it's still at the point Sony's exclusivity contracts are still in effect for games from those acquired studios. It doesn't matter how many studios MS own when Sony have their games locked away.
MS could have got more third party games locked away from playstation if they wanted, so maybe that is a failure of leadership, but it's a much better use of money to just buy the developers who make them instead. We'll see what turns out to be the better strategy in 10 years.

Which third party game is locked away this gen that is hurting ms so much? Final fantasy? Cause I can tell you right now final fantasy remake or 16 releasing on Xbox will change nothing.

Maybe in the ps4 gen stuff like sf5 would have hurt Xbox, but this gen it isn't as bad. You are just parroting Microsofts BS that they are serving to the regulators

 

[zzill3]

Sure it's the fastest way. But that doesn't address the reason why existing leadership are total failures and failed to compete even with a Bethesda size acquisiton and numerous pre Bethesda ones. It's just hiding the rot behind publishers who actually know what they are doing.

Which third party game is locked away this gen that is hurting ms so much? Final fantasy? Cause I can tell you right now final fantasy remake or 16 releasing on Xbox will change nothing.

Maybe in the ps4 gen stuff like sf5 would have hurt Xbox, but this gen it isn't as bad. You are just parroting Microsofts BS that they are serving to the regulators

I wasn't on about third party games particularly, I was on about xbox first party. Deathloop was a one year timed exclusive for playstation, Ghostwire Tokyo still isn't on xbox. Those are first party games that were locked to playstation when released.
Starfield would have been PS exclusive as well if MS hadn't bought Bethesda.
It doesn't matter how many studios a company owns when the games those companies make are locked to another console.

Sony have spent a lot of money making sure MS don't have the mindshare or market share for a lot of games over several generations. That doesn't just disappear a year or two after a big acquisition.
MS could have paid more to lock a load more exclusives away from Playstation over the past 3 or 4 generations, but they are choosing instead to buy the developers and publishers where possible. Which strategy will be most successful will only be decided after the acquired studios have had time to release exclusive content, which they haven't really had up to now.

 

[Heisenberg007]

They can also buy more developers and publishers and get more games that way.
Any competitor who operates in a way that's fair to the market leader is going to stay behind the market leader. MS are choosing to operate in a different way to shake the market up, that might mean Playstation eventually drop to second place (3rd including Nintendo). It's not the end of the world if that happens.

Yeah, third person action adventure games seem to be more popular than other genres at the moment, and MS's recent acquisitions still have their games locked behind Sony's exclusivity contracts. It doesn't matter how many studios you own when their games are contractually locked to a competitors console. MS could have started the acquisition spree 5 years earlier, but they didn't. That's a misstep that's now being corrected with the Bethesda and ABK purchase. You shouldn't complain that MS need more, better games but then complain about how they go about getting those games.

If MS can't produce games and compete despite having 4 more studios than PlayStation Studios IP, it doesn't deserve to have more studios.

Do you think ABK's acquisition will solve the problem for Xbox? No.

Did Zenimax's acquisition solve the problem for Xbox? No, it didn't.

Even after Zenimax's acquisition and ~18 studios in the last five years, Xbox is still being outsold 2:1 by PlayStation. This problem won't solve until they start producing high-quality games organically.

And nobody is stopping Microsoft to produce third-person action-adventure games. They need to make those games and release them. But all their games seem to be in limbo, including by studios they acquired, Arkane and Bethesda.

 

[Rykan]

Not worth arguing, they are still pretending PS5 is hard to find and nobody wants an Xbox.

You are aware that a Playstation 5 is still incredibly difficult to find outside the US because a disproportionate amount of consoles are shipped to the US due the high value of the USD right now, right?

 

[DenchDeckard]

The opposite.

Why is Sony running away with it? Ask anyone, and they would say that's because Sony has great first-party games. That's why Xbox needs to do -- make games, not acquire games or studios.

If Sony can compete and be #1 with 19 first-party studios, Xbox can do even better than Sony with the 23 studios they have. Why do they need 30+ studios to compete with PlayStation's 19 studios?

Not true. I feel this is just an excuse by Xbox to acquire studios and take the easy way out.

By the end of the PS3 generation, both Xbox and PS had the exact same level of mindshare and market share. PlayStation became immensely successful in the next generation because they produced quality first-party games using the studios they had.

Xbox can produce more and better games than PlayStation using their first-party studios (4 more than PlayStation) and infinite money resources, and take back that share, just like PlayStation did last generation.

The mindshare is because of the type of games that were releasing in 2022:

Grounded (available for 2 years, not new), Pentiment, Crossfire X, Deathloop (available on PS since 2021, not new), As Dusk Falls vs. God of War Ragnarok, Gran Turismo 7, Horizon Forbidden West, MLB The Show, The Last of Us.

The games that Xbox released will not be as popular and, therefore, won't capture the mindshare.

They will have to release big blockbuster memorable AAA games that people talk about for years to penetrate the market and capture mindshare.

Cmon man. Sony do have the mindshare. Microsoft delivered amazing hardware this generation, excellent services and is also delivering great games yet it hardly moves the needle. Sony use their position to inflate hardware prices, game prices, accessory prices but the fanbase is that entrenched that nothing short of a nuclear bomb drop of business magnitude is going to shift that mindshare.

I don't believe you actually think for a second that Sony doesn't have an iron grip when it comes to mindshare.

They then use that to secure third party content etc. This is just business now and Microsoft are trying something new.

Let's see if it works.

 

[zzill3]

If MS can't produce games and compete despite having 4 more studios than PlayStation Studios IP, it doesn't deserve to have more studios.

The great thing about capitalism is that's not for you to decide. MS have the money, ABK wanted to be bought, the deal doesn't have a negative effect on the industry. Once the FTC fails in court MS are going to have those studios whether you like it or not.

Do you think ABK's acquisition will solve the problem for Xbox? No.

Did Zenimax's acquisition solve the problem for Xbox? No, it didn't.

Even after Zenimax's acquisition and ~18 studios in the last five years, Xbox is still being outsold 2:1 by PlayStation. This problem won't solve until they start producing high-quality games organically.

And nobody is stopping Microsoft to produce third-person action-adventure games. They need to make those games and release them. But all their games seem to be in limbo, including by studios they acquired, Arkane and Bethesda.

Bethesda games released to now have all been locked behind Sony's contracts, they've not yet got around to making a lot of exclusive content for xbox, but when they do we'll see how well buying publishers works in comparison to paying for timed exclusive third party content. You shouldn't judge an acquisition as a failure after only two years.
Both ABK and Bethesda will massively increase xbox game output in the future.

Realistically, there's no different between a game developed 'organically' and one developed by an acquired company. The idea that games only count if made 100% by the platform holder is pretty ridiculous.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

Looks like a cheap model did fuck all. They still getting outsold 2 to 1. Next year could be worse as sony are aiming for atleast 23m. Microsoft really do need to buy these big 3rd party ips. They just can't compete otherwise. How else will they even close the gap with Sony? It actually shows just how strong sony are. You need to shift the entire industry upside down just to compete with them. Not my words. This is essentially what Microsoft are saying too.

Good point Jimbo has that insane shipped target of 23m PS5's for 2023. I would assume MS will ship much less than half that.

I dearly hope they drop dead all cross gen support with that many PS5s in the wild. No excuse for any first party titles with PS4 versions next year.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Good point Jimbo has that insane shipped target of 23m PS5's for 2023. I would assume MS will ship much less than half that.

I dearly hope they drop dead all cross gen support with that many PS5s in the wild. No excuse for any first party titles with PS4 versions next year.

Apart from MLB and, maybe, TLOU Online, all PlayStation games revealed so far are PS5 only. So that's a good sign.

 

[Luminoth-4545]

PS4s may count in this data, too, but Sony only sold 1 million PS4s in 2021. That figure is so minuscule that it wouldn't skew the data at all. According to Microsoft data:

Including PS4s:

• PS5s sold = 16.1 million (includes 1 million PS4s)
• Xbox sold = 7.1 million
• Ratio = 2.26

Excluding PS4s:

• PS5s sold = 15.1 million (minus 1 million PS4s)
• Xbox sold = 7.1 million
• Ratio = 2.12

Either way, the ratio stays roughly the same.

Data compiled from Sony's earnings reports, PS4 shipped 1.9 million in 2021, of course Microsoft could be referring to sell through and not shipped if they have that data.

Calendar Year Hardware Shipments

 

[FritzJ92]

Not true. I feel this is just an excuse by Xbox to acquire studios and take the easy way out.

By the end of the PS3 generation, both Xbox and PS had the exact same level of mindshare and market share. PlayStation became immensely successful in the next generation because they produced quality first-party games using the studios they had.

Xbox can produce more and better games than PlayStation using their first-party studios (4 more than PlayStation) and infinite money resources, and take back that share, just like PlayStation did last generation.

The mindshare is because of the type of games that were releasing in 2022:

Grounded (available for 2 years, not new), Pentiment, Crossfire X, Deathloop (available on PS since 2021, not new), As Dusk Falls vs. God of War Ragnarok, Gran Turismo 7, Horizon Forbidden West, MLB The Show, The Last of Us.

The games that Xbox released will not be as popular and, therefore, won't capture the mindshare.

They will have to release big blockbuster memorable AAA games that people talk about for years to penetrate the market and capture mindshare.

I do agree Microsoft needs a couple of movie cinematic 3rd person games. However years from now people are playing multiple player games and moved on from single player games. Not 1:1

 

[tusharngf]

The most important country.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Cmon man. Sony do have the mindshare. Microsoft delivered amazing hardware this generation, excellent services and is also delivering great games yet it hardly moves the needle. Sony use their position to inflate hardware prices, game prices, accessory prices but the fanbase is that entrenched that nothing short of a nuclear bomb drop of business magnitude is going to shift that mindshare.

I don't believe you actually think for a second that Sony doesn't have an iron grip when it comes to mindshare.

They then use that to secure third party content etc. This is just business now and Microsoft are trying something new.

Let's see if it works.

You are looking at it from the wrong perspective. And Microsoft is also making the same mistake of looking at it the wrong way, which is why they haven't found any success yet.

Remember when Sony's mindshare and market share dropped from 150 million console sales (PS2) to 87 million console sales (PS3)? Which publishers did Xbox acquire back then? None.

They produced good games using the studios they had and, therefore, increased their share.

It happened before, and it can happen again. But the focus should be on games from first-party studios.

Acquiring Zenimax and ABK won't do any good because it does not add to Xbox's game library; it only takes away from PlayStation's library of games. That's the difference. And Xbox won't find success until they keep hammering the wrong nail.

 

[yurinka]

What blows me away the most about this is how everyone seems to think the biggest reason nintendo sells this many units is because of it's software alone. It's not, it's a combination of the mass market price, the fact that it's a hybrid portable, and the software.
This just screams to me that both MS and Sony are crazy not to have a hybrid second skew. (which in todays world would be super easy to support and port great games to with marginal effort)

I agree it's for a combination of these reasons: its exclusives, lower price and that unlike the others it had its portable side. But I'd add that it's (or was when released) the only portable in the market, and also the combination of Nintendo's portable and consoles catalog, which until then was split in two devices.

A new Sony or Xbox portable now would have to compete against Nintendo, Steamdeck and other PC portables and the mobile market it would be another Vita-like failure. They better use Steamdeck and mobile.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Data compiled from Sony's earnings reports, PS4 shipped 1.9 million in 2021, of course Microsoft could be referring to sell through and not shipped if they have that data.

Calendar Year Hardware Shipments

Thanks for sharing this data. The difference could be between shipped vs. sold, but we can take 1.9 million. The difference would then be 7.1M Xbox vs. 14.2M PS5, or a ratio of exactly 2.0.

 

[Woopah]

What blows me away the most about this is how everyone seems to think the biggest reason nintendo sells this many units is because of it's software alone. It's not, it's a combination of the mass market price, the fact that it's a hybrid portable, and the software.
This just screams to me that both MS and Sony are crazy not to have a hybrid second skew. (which in todays world would be super easy to support and port great games to with marginal effort)

MS and Sony have only just managed to produce enough of the current models. I don't think adding another, hybrid SKU is on their radar right now.

Plus a hybrid model would have to be quite weaker than their current models to be a mass market price, since they would have to stay with AMD and so wouldn't be able to use DLSS.

 

[DavidGzz]

Thanks for sharing this data. The difference could be between shipped vs. sold, but we can take 1.9 million. The difference would then be 7.1M Xbox vs. 14.2M PS5, or a ratio of exactly 2.0.

Yep. Do you think that happened this year? There were several reports that MS won NPD many months in a row so I doubt it. Also, I had forgotten about how MS had to upgrade Game Pass servers. Wasn't that in 2021? Anyway, I think 2023 will be interesting.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Not worth arguing, they are still pretending PS5 is hard to find and nobody wants an Xbox.

Pretending?
At least in Portugal, there is a 1 month waiting list for a ps5 bloated by retailers with bundled games to increase price and stop scalpers, but Xbox Series X you can walk in and buy one anywhere for normal retail price.

This is from the online shop of one of the biggest retailers :
Xbox - https://www.worten.pt/gaming/xbox/consolas/consola-xbox-series-x-1-tb-7240976
(delivery in 1 - 3 days)

PS5 - https://www.worten.pt/gaming/playst...5-god-of-war-ragnarok-formato-digital-7656309
(estimated delivery by 31st of January 2023)

A quick search shows Xbox Series X readily available in 14 online stores (https://www.kuantokusta.pt/p/2009169/microsoft-xbox-series-x-1tb-ssd)

Are these stores "pretending" too?
Maybe the entire world is pretending...

 

[Heisenberg007]

Yep. Do you think that happened this year? There were several reports that MS won NPD many months in a row so I doubt it. Also, I had forgotten about how MS had to upgrade Game Pass servers. Wasn't that in 2021? Anyway, I think 2023 will be interesting.

This is 2021 data, shared by Microsoft with the FTC.

 

[Jaybe]

Why do people think that?

Xbox is practically irrelevant outside of US/UK.
Even Spencer keeps saying it (with a nice PR spin).

The gap between will only grow wider and wider, now that Sony stated that supply issues have been resolved.

To answer why we think it Xbox was closer to being outsold 1.5 to 1 vs 2 to 1, I’d say the prior generation was heavily skewed to PlayStation over Xbox and even then it was about 2 to 1. This gen comes around and while we know PlayStation is winning vs Xbox we have these quotes like ‘Xbox Series is selling faster than Xbox 360’, Xbox won the quarter in the largest market, and everyone is supply constrained. so it makes us assume its doing better than 2 to 1. Now there is some potential that this graph includes PS4 and Xbox One gen consoles sold in 2021 as well which would be more in PS4’s favour.

 

[THE DUCK]

Thats what steamdeck is

Also, while the switch is selling like crazy comparing it to two relatively new supply constrained consoles doesn’t really make much sense. The ps5 might very well sell as well as the PS4 while still being more expensive

Steamdeck has all kinds of things going on that make that not true.

- it doesn't hit the magic $299 price
- it doesn't have exclusives like sony / ms
- it's not as easy to use
- it doesn't come with a dock
- it wasn't available at retailers or supported by a massive advertising push
- They didn't build the quantity of units needed to matter

It's not the same at all.

 

[THE DUCK]

I agree it's for a combination of these reasons: its exclusives, lower price and that unlike the others it had its portable side. But I'd add that it's (or was when released) the only portable in the market, and also the combination of Nintendo's portable and consoles catalog, which until then was split in two devices.

A new Sony or Xbox portable now would have to compete against Nintendo, Steamdeck and other PC portables and the mobile market it would be another Vita-like failure. They better use Steamdeck and mobile.

I would contend it wouldn't fail, it would be nothing like the overpriced vita that lacked software support. They could cheaply and easily port every aaa game, past and day and date. Vita also wasn't a hybrid.

As far as steam deck and other pc portables, the price of them and amount being sold makes the largelely irrelevant.

 

[THE DUCK]

MS and Sony have only just managed to produce enough of the current models. I don't think adding another, hybrid SKU is on their radar right now.

Plus a hybrid model would have to be quite weaker than their current models to be a mass market price, since they would have to stay with AMD and so wouldn't be able to use DLSS.

It seems they are caught up now, so this could be the time. Based on current tech, a hybrid could easily be around the same power as a series S, which would be plenty.

 

[yurinka]

It seems they are caught up now, so this could be the time. Based on current tech, a hybrid could easily be around the same power as a series S, which would be plenty.

They barely had enough units. And in the case of Sony, in addition to PS4 and PS5 they now also have to produce PSVR2, the new gamepad and other accesories.

On top of that, there's the catalog. They don't have enough teams to feed a portable with different games. The most similar thing they could do would be to endorse a 3rd party Steamdeck-like PC handheld stamping their logo there and putting there their pc games.

There is not market for another portable console different than the Nintendo one. There is no available teams to make games for them because they are already too busy making games for their consoles, PC and soon mobile (and VR in the case of Sony). There is no available chips for them to build them.

To make a PS or Xbox portable console would be a bigger failure than the Vita and would damage their home consoles games output. So they won't do it.

 

[thismeinteil]

MS themselves were saying this not long ago.

And their diehards were repeating it everytime console sales were brought up. Now, all of a sudden when it might help the deal, console sales matter. It really just shows how desperate MS is. They're throwing everything at the wall and hoping something sticks. Of course, I don't know how many times it has to be reiterated, but the regulatory bodies aren't looking at what the situation was last year. They are looking at what effects the deal will have for the future.

 

[K2D]

Xbox : PlayStation - 1 : 3 2

PlayStation : Nintendo - 1 : 1.5

Respectful numbers right there!

Edit: I obviously can't read OR do math..

 

[Ar¢tos]

They barely had enough units. And in the case of Sony, in addition to PS4 and PS5 they now also have to produce PSVR2, the new gamepad and other accesories.

On top of that, there's the catalog. They don't have enough teams to feed a portable with different games. The most similar thing they could do would be to endorse a 3rd party Steamdeck-like PC handheld stamping their logo there and putting there their pc games.

There is not market for another portable console different than the Nintendo one. There is no available teams to make games for them because they are already too busy making games for their consoles, PC and soon mobile (and VR in the case of Sony). There is no available chips for them to build them.

To make a PS or Xbox portable console would be a bigger failure than the Vita and would damage their home consoles games output. So they won't do it.

I don't think they still make ps4s. On paper they are supposed to, but I think they stopped unofficially. I tried to find a ps4 to replace mine that broke down, and I could only find used ones. I had to get a ps5, 2 week waiting list, but at least it was possible to get one.

 

[DarkMage619]

It's almost like that's what DForce said. MS said they don't consider console sales as the key metric to success and no longer report them. They consider that to be engagement numbers. Your stanning never stops though.

Haha the idea of you of all people accusing others of stanning. You guys lack self reflection. If MS didn't think consoles were important they wouldn't have made TWO of them for this generation and of course an offering every generation from the original Xbox. They could have easily have just dropped out of the hardware race yet here we are. It is hilarious to see people laugh at MS for being third or worse yet now twist and turn trying to show MS being a dominant force in video games. Can't have it both ways.

In order for MS to compete effectively in video games they have to offer products in each market. Just because MS looks at more than just consoles for success doesn't mean they are a market leader in any of the different markets which is what actually matters when it comes to the acquisition.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

You are looking at it from the wrong perspective. And Microsoft is also making the same mistake of looking at it the wrong way, which is why they haven't found any success yet.

Remember when Sony's mindshare and market share dropped from 150 million console sales (PS2) to 87 million console sales (PS3)? Which publishers did Xbox acquire back then? None.

They produced good games using the studios they had and, therefore, increased their share.

It happened before, and it can happen again. But the focus should be on games from first-party studios.

Acquiring Zenimax and ABK won't do any good because it does not add to Xbox's game library; it only takes away from PlayStation's library of games. That's the difference. And Xbox won't find success until they keep hammering the wrong nail.

Comparisons from generations ago are irrelevant because leadership at Xbox and the strategy at Xbox aren’t the same as they were back then.

Also of course Zenimax/ABK acquisitions can add to the Xbox library. Look at Obsidian, we’ve already seen them release two very good games (Grounded, Pentiment) that they themselves claim otherwise would not exist. No reason to just assume no developer at Zeni/ABK will never have the same type of passion project.

And you don’t think console exclusive Starfield, Elder Scrolls, Doom, Diablo, etc etc and adding a gargantuan amount of titles to GamePass helps with mindshare? Please. And even in saying that, it shows Microsoft’s approach is very different. If these were Sony acquisitions the games would all be PS exclusive for a year+ and then would eventually come to PC, maybe. To spur console sales. On Xbox they’re all day and date on PC and some Ps/Switch because MA cares more about engagement.

 

[Woopah]

It seems they are caught up now, so this could be the time. Based on current tech, a hybrid could easily be around the same power as a series S, which would be plenty.

It might very well be possible to do a hybrid with the power of Series S, but it would probably be very very expensive to produce. It's price would be much higher than what the Series S sells for.

 

[yurinka]

I don't think they still make ps4s. On paper they are supposed to, but I think they stopped unofficially. I tried to find a ps4 to replace mine that broke down, and I could only find used ones. I had to get a ps5, 2 week waiting list, but at least it was possible to get one.

We know that they also have been supply constrained, but officially aren't discontinued, in fact Sony debunked publicly a related Bloomberg lie about Sony plans regarding discontinuing it, and looking at the MS numbers seems Sony shipped a few millions of them during 2021.

 

[HTK]

FTC should just approve this deal. Knowing Microsoft they’ll find a way to squander those acquisitions and we’ll be back to square one.

 

[THE DUCK]

They barely had enough units. And in the case of Sony, in addition to PS4 and PS5 they now also have to produce PSVR2, the new gamepad and other accesories.

On top of that, there's the catalog. They don't have enough teams to feed a portable with different games. The most similar thing they could do would be to endorse a 3rd party Steamdeck-like PC handheld stamping their logo there and putting there their pc games.

There is not market for another portable console different than the Nintendo one. There is no available teams to make games for them because they are already too busy making games for their consoles, PC and soon mobile (and VR in the case of Sony). There is no available chips for them to build them.

To make a PS or Xbox portable console would be a bigger failure than the Vita and would damage their home consoles games output. So they won't do it.

Your massively overestimating the time and talent needed to port games on similar architecture. Even if teams aren't available a simple scaling of a game could be farmed out similar to what they are doing with pc ports. You'll be lucky if the build and sell 5 million psvr units, they should have made the hybrid instead.

A second steamdeck would be pointless. It has to be fully endorsed and supported with thier own front end. It would not be "second" vita, price, performance, hybrid nature and game support would all be vastly different.
If a market exists for a hybrid portable that sold 120 million units, I don't understand the statement that there's no room for competition. Even if they only took 33% that market, it would be a success selling 40 million units.

 

[THE DUCK]

It might very well be possible to do a hybrid with the power of Series S, but it would probably be very very expensive to produce. It's price would be much higher than what the Series S sells for.

Would it though? Steam deck is already close and sells for $399 and they aren't buying the same quantity of components as ms or Sony.
If its not possible this second it will be very soon.

 

[Crayon]

You don't need a monopoly to take anticompetitive actions.

 

[yurinka]

Your massively overestimating the time and talent needed to port games on similar architecture. Even if teams aren't available a simple scaling of a game could be farmed out similar to what they are doing with pc ports. You'll be lucky if the build and sell 5 million psvr units, they should have made the hybrid instead.

A second steamdeck would be pointless. It has to be fully endorsed and supported with thier own front end. It would not be "second" vita, price, performance, hybrid nature and game support would all be vastly different.
If a market exists for a hybrid portable that sold 120 million units, I don't understand the statement that there's no room for competition. Even if they only took 33% that market, it would be a success selling 40 million units.

I'm not overestimating it. It's the reason of why most AAA 3rd parties don't release most of their games on Switch, or why they didn't port them to Vita.

PSVR1 did sell more than 5M units and Sony was fine with it. PSVR2 solves several issues PSVR1 had and releases at a cheaper price than the full PSVR1 kit had at launch. Pretty likely will be a better experience with better games that will sell better. But it's still a tech on its infancy, Sony knows it and doesn't expect to sell 100M units because this is not the point.

There is no room for competition because nobody is going to make games for a non-Nintendo portable because it would have very poor sales and they are too busy with the other systems, and with a Nintendo portable and PC handhelds there is no point on making more portable consoles or PC handhelds, because people won't buy them.

What a Sony or MS portable console would be is a more powerful Switch but without Nintendo's exclusives and without the Steam catalog. Something you already have it on Steamdeck, which has the Steam catalog and other stuff (including Nintendo's full catalog, not only the Switch one), something that Sony and MS can't compete against.

 

[DForce]

Cmon man. Sony do have the mindshare. Microsoft delivered amazing hardware this generation, excellent services and is also delivering great games yet it hardly moves the needle. Sony use their position to inflate hardware prices, game prices, accessory prices but the fanbase is that entrenched that nothing short of a nuclear bomb drop of business magnitude is going to shift that mindshare.

I don't believe you actually think for a second that Sony doesn't have an iron grip when it comes to mindshare.

They then use that to secure third party content etc. This is just business now and Microsoft are trying something new.

Let's see if it works.

What has Microsoft released within the past 5 years that's going to reach a bigger audience? Halo and Forza?

That's not enough. Their lack of big titles is the reason why they're not capturing more mindshare.

Gears 5
Forza Horizon 5
Forza Horizon 4
Sea of Thieves
Ori and the Will of the Wisps
Grounded
Flight Simulator
Crackdown 3

I may be forgetting some and they have released a lot of smaller titles, but these are the games that were meant to bring gamers into the Xbox ecosystem.

You're not going to do much if you're barely releasing any big titles

Compare that to Sony.

God of War
God of War Ragnarok
Last of Us Part II
Ghost of Tsushima
Spider-Man
Spider-Man Miles Morales
Ratchet & Rift Apart
Demon's Souls
Horizon Forbidden West
Gran Turismo 7

These games are going to attract a wider audience. This is the reason why Microsoft hasn't captured more mindshare. It's going to start with Starfield with Xbox and then it will continue on from there.

 

[Kagey K]

You don't need a monopoly to take anticompetitive actions.

Sony has already shown us that first hand.

 

[DarkMage619]

You don't need a monopoly to take anticompetitive actions.

No one has taken any anticompetitive actions.

 

[MaxwellParrish]

Yet it’s still used by some on here.

Personally I’m not too surprised, Microsoft’s output has been abysmal in 2022. I think it’ll get better but there’s no denying that they were terrible this year as far as first party games go.

That graphic is for 2021, not '22...personally I think that '22 should look similar, just with a slightly littler slice for Nintendo in rapport to the other 2

 

[THE DUCK]

I'm not overestimating it. It's the reason of why most AAA 3rd parties don't release most of their games on Switch, or why they didn't port them to Vita.

PSVR1 did sell more than 5M units and Sony was fine with it. PSVR2 solves several issues PSVR1 had and releases at a cheaper price than the full PSVR1 kit had at launch. Pretty likely will be a better experience with better games that will sell better. But it's still a tech on its infancy, Sony knows it and doesn't expect to sell 100M units because this is not the point.

There is no room for competition because nobody is going to make games for a non-Nintendo portable because it would have very poor sales and they are too busy with the other systems, and with a Nintendo portable and PC handhelds there is no point on making more portable consoles or PC handhelds, because people won't buy them.

What a Sony or MS portable console would be is a more powerful Switch but without Nintendo's exclusives and without the Steam catalog. Something you already have it on Steamdeck, which has the Steam catalog and other stuff (including Nintendo's full catalog, not only the Switch one), something that Sony and MS can't compete against.

Most AAA parties don't release to the switch because the architecture is a lot different, no simple port. Same went for Vita, huge costs to develop.
My point on PSVR is Sony could be dipping their to in the water in something that could do a lot more sales, instead they are focused on something that at this point has a very low ceiling.

There is plenty of room for competition, the history of game consoles tells you this over and over and over. Should MS not have launched the Xbox since nobody would buy it?
So the massive sales of the switch make you think nobody would buy them? Makes no sense.

A Sony or MS portable would have their own exclusives, Sony could literally launch with every major franchise in their catalog, and they don't need a steam catalog at all. 3rd party developers would jump on board due to the super cheap and easy ports.
They can both compete just fine.

 

[El Pistolero]

Man, it looks like MS needs ABK to restore some balance. Sony running away with it, we need more competition ASAP.

Hopefully Apple or someone does step into the ring that can help make it more interesting for us and drive better deals for us all.

Having a competitive market does not mean that sales figures would be identical, yet the same bizarre point keeps getting mentioned.

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

I mentioned this a few months ago when xbox had 13 million sales and ps5 was around 25 million. Getting outsold 2:1 even after a $299 console, gamepass, billions on zenimax acquisition is proof that Phil has to go. Not that they need more third party studios.

The Problem is Xbox and Microsoft leadership.

Switch straight up killing it. Sony is further away from Nintendo is, even with these outdated stats too. It's hilarious you focus on just the Xbox perspective, yet again.

The problem is taking out of date data and focusing on a specific part of the data to support your claim. Facts are this:

• Start of Nintendo killing it, still 1.75 - 1 on PS and 2-3X Xbox.
• PS start of gen was 2.5 - 1 Xbox, this is the data for 2021 but it was already turning late 2021 for Xbox.
• Nintendo and PS both have historic growth and sales.
• Xbox also has increased their growth rate substantially e.g. PS 2022 is 1.75-1 Xbox and heading to close the gap between Xbox and Nintendo further.
• Xbox have more profit from their user base, pro rata.

I still don't understand this idea that in gaming that it's PS v Xbox and PS is this forever leader, that would be Nintendo, again. Retail/physical, digital sales, subs, MTX, passes, streaming, licensing etc. There is more than just what console platform is doing what exclusive.

It will be interesting if the needle heads back Sony's way post FTC and supplies increasing for PS5. It will be interesting if the needle drops, and Xbox keeps gaining ground overall plus a likeliness of favourable FTC settlement/ruling/federal appeal. I've lost interest in Nintendo over the years. Splatoon and BotW aren't enough to have me back on another gimped console.

 

[zzill3]

Having a competitive market does not mean that sales figures would be identical, yet the same bizarre point keeps getting mentioned.

That’s true, they don’t have to be equal, but it’s also not anti competitive or monopolistic if they are.
If the problem is anti-competitiveness or monopolisation of the market, having a roughly 50/50 split between Sony and Microsoft shouldn’t be raising any alarm bells, neither should Microsoft and Sony swapping places to put Microsoft ahead.

It keeps getting mentioned because the market will still be competitive even with Microsoft level or in the lead, which some people don’t seem to understand.

 

[Hobbygaming]

Releasing some pink bikinis for the xbox controller.

Xbox burgers are next

 

[Benniewise de Clown]

To answer why we think it Xbox was closer to being outsold 1.5 to 1 vs 2 to 1, I’d say the prior generation was heavily skewed to PlayStation over Xbox and even then it was about 2 to 1. This gen comes around and while we know PlayStation is winning vs Xbox we have these quotes like ‘Xbox Series is selling faster than Xbox 360’, Xbox won the quarter in the largest market, and everyone is supply constrained. so it makes us assume its doing better than 2 to 1. Now there is some potential that this graph includes PS4 and Xbox One gen consoles sold in 2021 as well which would be more in PS4’s favour.

There was also the news that PS5 outsold Series S/X during Black Friday, despite PS5 supply issues and Series S deal for $200.

Worldwide sales also already were 24M for PS5 vs 17M Series S/X, according to vgchartz.
Again, despite PS5 supply issues.

I honestly don't see how Xbox fans are so hopeful, just because MS got lucky during the X360-era.

 

[Ogbert]

So, in short, if Sony and MS joined forces, they might have a shot at toppling Nintendo.

It’s hilarious how GAF maintains this narrative about Sony domination when it’s clearly Nintendo.

Absolute mad lads.

 

[El Pistolero]

That’s true, they don’t have to be equal, but it’s also not anti competitive or monopolistic if they are.
If the problem is anti-competitiveness or monopolisation of the market, having a roughly 50/50 split between Sony and Microsoft shouldn’t be raising any alarm bells, neither should Microsoft and Sony swapping places to put Microsoft ahead.

It keeps getting mentioned because the market will still be competitive even with Microsoft level or in the lead, which some people don’t seem to understand.

If the market stays as it is...yes; but if the subscription model takes over, MS will be out of reach for the other players. The reasons for that are pretty obvious.