SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
what were the specs?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
All jokes aside, Jim Ryan was mocked when he said this quote but...3 years into this generation, was he right?
- Thread starter Tiago Rodrigues
- Start date
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Who mocked him for saying something that was so obviously right? This was the only way it was gonna go.
bitbydeath
Member
Their next console (that was leaked) literally does away with hardware, costs $99 (or less) and runs off GamePass.
I’m sure you know this.
Banjo64
cumsessed
1/4 of the HDD space, no stand and cradle for the console and game pad respectively. No pack in game (Nintendo Land).
It was literally called the Wii U Basic (compared to the Wii U Deluxe).
Last edited:
ReBurn
Gold Member
This sentiment really doesn't hold up when you look at how long Sony and other developers held onto cross-gen. Having two specs wasn't that big of a deal. Considering the majority of games also release on PC where every game has minimum and recommended specs the majority of developers are already comfortable scaling games. This "weakest platform holds everything back" thing is just console war ammo.
Microsoft's problem wasn't two consoles. It is that more people were already playing on PS4 with their friends, PS5 didn't require that they leave their games or friends behind, and Microsoft did not offer any compelling reason to switch platforms and leave their games and friends behind. Generations don't start at zero any more, plus the top 3 played games in each country are all third party multiplayer games. People want to play with their friends.
The best Microsoft could hope for was to pick up second console status with a lot of people and they haven't been releasing games consistently enough to get traction. Series S makes a lot of sense in that scenario.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
GHG
Member
Great businessmen often aren't likeable people.
But great con-men are always likable people.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
so same as the 360 Arcade and PS3 20 GB models. Reduced HDD space. The CPU, GPU, Vram, ram and all the other crucial specs needed to run the games at the same quality were there.
whereas the Series S has 1/3rd the tflops, 1/3rd vram bandwidth. 60% less ram size and runs most games at really poor resolutions compared to the xsx. This was not the case with the 360, ps3 and wii u which all ran the game at the same resolutions, framerates, and graphics settings.
Banjo64
cumsessed
Yeah, I know. All Jim said was ‘reduced spec’ which includes things like HDD and ports.
Tiago Rodrigues
Member
Ps3 20gb cheaper model flopped. (Or was it 40?) it was the most expensive model that was selling out. That’s why Sony discontinued it.
Mr Moose
Member
It was available forever while X wasn't. I don't think we get splits often, apart from Japan. I think X is the more desirable machine of the two for consumers.
smbu2000
Member
The 20GB ps3 also didn’t include wifi. That was one of the main issues with it. Sony also didn’t sell any solution to add wifi to it, so there wasn’t any way to add it in later. 60GB model included wifi.
MS didn’t include wifi on the original xbox 360 models (20GB/Core), but they did sell an adapter to add it on if you wanted it. (MS included built-in wifi when they released the 360 S model a few years later.)
James Sawyer Ford
Member
Xbox 360 tard pack
I totally disagree here. Most devs are exclusive because of the bigger audience. If MS plan had worked out to be great so people would buy those boxes, more devs would automatically support the consols. The hardware ist not really the problem for years now. Almost everything is possible even on last gen, just with lower graphics settings. Just look at the switch how this works. Hardware itself is just not important.
The difference is also not that important (even if more memory would have made many things mich easier).
The problem for MS is that they just lost the touch with their audience and developers somewhere in the xb360 generation. It's like their try of a software store in Windows. They tried it so many times now and every time people thing "WTF were they thinking?"
MS is really a big company and must deliver tech to many, many industry branches and at the same time predict what the future needs
Funny enough, they were often right with their guesses and were often "ready" before the tech was ready for the market. Like tablets and martphones, they had solutions for that before the tech was small and fast enough. They were correct that this was coming but started to soon. But since Windows XP, their software always struggled to keep with the pace of the markets demands. And so they introduced one incomplete software after the other. And now it always feels like we a alpha testers. Funny enough, they hit the nerve of the current industry with that. Nothing feels complete or ready, everything changes every few weeks. Even the apps on our TVs even though they don't offer more value for years now.
THE DUCK
voted poster of the decade by bots
S hasn't done anything but help MS this generation, so he was very wrong. The average consumer wasn't affect by GAF blaming poor performance on series S (seriously, it had zero affect on them), they bought the console they were most interested in based on games available and price.
ResilientBanana
Member
So why make a PS5 Pro?
The Series S could have been more effectively marketed as a free or significantly discounted product with a two-year GamePass subscription. Launching a less powerful console and presenting it as being $100 cheaper was misleading, especially considering that additional mandatory storage costs an extra $200. This approach not only divided the consumer base but in my opinion it's deceptive and anti-consumer.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Who mocked him for that quote in particular? Most agreed that the S was a bad idea. Except for the strongly Xbox faithful I guess.
Baki
Member
When 90% of the library is shared, there is no chance in gaining meaningful market share as a 2nd console.
Horseganador
Member
Ryan was right on this and many other issues but he should learn from Phil, say what people want to hear and then do the opposite, if Series S was a mistake? Well, even MS deleted the video where they presented it...
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
How often has a company released a lower spec and normal spec system at the same time?
Traditionally, systems that are low priced and low spec (Nintendo consoles and handhelds) have done great most of the time. And when Sony and MS had PS4 Pro and One X launched, their cheaper base systems still outsold them.
HeWhoWalks
Gold Member
Last edited:
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
The problem isn't sales, its the impact to production and marketing when your developers and publishers need to support a two-tier offer.
Its quite a different scenario to simply overlapping support from a previous-generation platform as in that case the "low tier" version is not only a known quantity by the time the upper one comes online, but has an established user-base and ecosystem.
This is pretty problematic when basically the future of the business depends upon the new product(s) reception... Its a lot more work and complication in search of expanding the addressable market.
Its quite a different scenario to simply overlapping support from a previous-generation platform as in that case the "low tier" version is not only a known quantity by the time the upper one comes online, but has an established user-base and ecosystem.
This is pretty problematic when basically the future of the business depends upon the new product(s) reception... Its a lot more work and complication in search of expanding the addressable market.
Lupin25
Member
He’s right… for the most part. But we’ll have to revisit this topic all gen.
Sure, the SS helped keep Xbox afloat with its cheaper tag early on and the performance isn’t optimal with CGO games, but it “works”.
As a 2nd home device though?
In year 4, you’d now have to convince someone it’s a better choice than the 6-7 yr old Switch, given the lack of games that currently take advantage of the SS.
A similar situation akin to BG3’s would also give Xbox another fright.
How many devs will suffer through developing for it, before simply opting for a PS5/PC exclusive knowing they won’t receive many sales on Xb behalf anyways? Hopefully not many, but we still have 4-5 yrs left of this gen.
Sure, the SS helped keep Xbox afloat with its cheaper tag early on and the performance isn’t optimal with CGO games, but it “works”.
As a 2nd home device though?
In year 4, you’d now have to convince someone it’s a better choice than the 6-7 yr old Switch, given the lack of games that currently take advantage of the SS.
A similar situation akin to BG3’s would also give Xbox another fright.
How many devs will suffer through developing for it, before simply opting for a PS5/PC exclusive knowing they won’t receive many sales on Xb behalf anyways? Hopefully not many, but we still have 4-5 yrs left of this gen.
Gamerguy84
Member
Yep looks like he was right. The series X is like the guy that cant go anywhere without his little brother.
Portugeezer
Member
A true prophet, big Jimbo.
twilo99
Member
The real winners of this endeavor are people like this here:
You see, cheap hardware allows people who can't afford expensive things to be part of the club and enjoy gaming, and to me, that's more important than rest of the bs that gets thrown around when it comes to cheaper hardware.
My stance is that there should be 3 tiers of hardware
low
mid
high
so that people can decide how much they want to spend on something like this.
This one price fits all deal is just too outdated... and its all so we can cater to the "industry" or whatever, as if it wasn't like this games will stop being made or something.
So jumbo jimbo can say whatever he wants, and he might be right from a corporate/sales standpoint, but from a consumer one the xss is a win all around
You see, cheap hardware allows people who can't afford expensive things to be part of the club and enjoy gaming, and to me, that's more important than rest of the bs that gets thrown around when it comes to cheaper hardware.
My stance is that there should be 3 tiers of hardware
low
mid
high
so that people can decide how much they want to spend on something like this.
This one price fits all deal is just too outdated... and its all so we can cater to the "industry" or whatever, as if it wasn't like this games will stop being made or something.
So jumbo jimbo can say whatever he wants, and he might be right from a corporate/sales standpoint, but from a consumer one the xss is a win all around
Last edited:
AJUMP23
Gold Member
It just had a smaller internal hdd.
sendit
Member
Serious cope here, but the answer is NO. There is no historical data to back this up. Even Microsoft's own data proves otherwise. Microsoft's most successful console, the Xbox 360 (single performance config) launched at 499. The PS3 launched a year later, also at 499. They competed neck to neck with Sony during that generation.
Last edited:
MikeM
Member
Because I want one.
rhodesianshepard
Member
As a PS5 gamer, there is no way in hell I would ever spend 400-500 on a Series X. 200$ for Series S will eventually get me in their ecosystem though. I'm still waiting for the "must buy" game to actually buy one. I thought Starfield was going to be that game, but nope, no longer interested. Maybe once Fable is released?
Last edited:
Where? In Europe, Series S has been in stock and sitting on store shelves since December 2020, nobody wants it.
Baki
Member
When 90% of the library is shared, there’s no reason to pick it up as a 2nd console. Most people would rather invest the $300 into games, services or accessories for their PS5 or into a very different device like the Quest or Switch.
thismeinteil
Member
Saved it? The Series sales are abysmal. It was outsold 3:1 this year by the PS5. Next year will probably be worse.
Sure, it would have been worse if it weren't for the S, but it's still so bad with it that MS is ready to dump this gen already.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Of course. When is my boo ever wrong?!
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
The comments in this thread, by the way, are indeed hilarious. https://www.neogaf.com/threads/seri...great-results’-says-playstation-boss.1566897/
mansoor1980
Gold Member
stolen from the other thread
Lupin25
Member
True, yet we see things like this being said still:
People want to find a reason to buy one, including myself, but with their lack of a library & already owning a PS5, Switch, mid-spec PC… I just can’t.
My kid can play Fortnite, FC, Minecraft, etc on a Switch, so that makes an SS redundant. What would not, is an exclusive list of system-selling games. They just need more.
It seems people either want one as an affordable box on the side or just something for the kids. When that’s your leading console, that’s not a good thing for your brand & it boils down to a lack of exclusive content.
Which is why the Switch is just as attractive in year 7 even without access to a few CG games. Hopefully, Xbox gets back on track this year & next.
Deputy Moonman
Member
Well the switch is doing horrible . Damn inferior hardware. Nintendo will surely learn their lesson. /s
Last edited:
yurinka
Member
Of course, current gen only games look worse because of Series S.
And when comparing PS5 only games vs Xbox series only games, the PS ones look better because of Series S.
Series S was a mistake, one of the reasons of why PS is increasing their market share this generation.
Lord Malachite
Member
The Series S would be a lot more attractive if the PS5 All Digital console didn't exist. The Series S and PS5 AD launched with only $100 difference between them. But the PS5 AD was by far a much better value. All you really got with the Series S was slightly more internal storage. But the PS5 AD is literally just a standard PS5 without an optical drive. There's no performance difference with its bigger brother, literally nothing sacrificed beyond the optical drive. For $400 you could purchase a top of the line "next gen" console. The Series S would allow you to save $100, but that savings quickly erodes when you remember there's no cheap storage solution on Series, and by going with the S you're taking a significant downgrade over the Series X, whereas you're still getting the full PS5 experience under-the-hood with the PS5 AD.
The Series S isn't the worst solution in the world if you're desperate to play Gamepass games and can't afford either a Series X or a decent gaming PC or even a Steamdeck. But it is absolutely holding back the performance of Xbox as a whole, giving developers a headache because they need to get all their games running on its underpowered hardware in addition to the beefy Series X and PS5. All generation there has been only one baseline for PS5, and even when that changes with the PS5 Pro, it's still largely going to be the same versions of games with the Pro just allowing better effects and framerates.
The Series S isn't the worst solution in the world if you're desperate to play Gamepass games and can't afford either a Series X or a decent gaming PC or even a Steamdeck. But it is absolutely holding back the performance of Xbox as a whole, giving developers a headache because they need to get all their games running on its underpowered hardware in addition to the beefy Series X and PS5. All generation there has been only one baseline for PS5, and even when that changes with the PS5 Pro, it's still largely going to be the same versions of games with the Pro just allowing better effects and framerates.