• 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.

Microsofts openess vs Sony and Nintendos closed door policy. What do you prefer?

Openness… part of the reason I came on Xbox primarily is they’re interaction with fans is better from direct responses on happenings from Phil to better overall customer service. The games are what matters at the end of the day but since 90% of my gaming is third party it comes down to details like what controller I prefer, whose pipeline is more interesting to me, if hogwarts legacy sucks who will give me a refund.
 

GHG

Gold Member
Where was I worshipping Phil? Where's the cult, exactly? Being objective is now considered worshipping? We're talking about styles of fan interaction here, are we not? Can we focus on that? Or would you prefer if I derail the thread and OP, by talking about all the things I think Phil is doing wrong, when that's not the topic? I mean, I have no problem pointing out my issues with Phil, but his level of fan/supporter engagement and interaction isn't one of them. And, it just so happens, that that's the topic.

You're more than welcome to make a thread about what we think Xbox/Phil is doing wrong, or has done wrong, and I'd be more than glad to participate in that one as well - I have a list, if you can believe it.

Until then though, learn the definition of objective and leave well alone.

You literally said you get enjoyment from talking to and playing games with an executive of a multi-trillion dollar business. You are his customer and it's his duty to provide you with the best products possible, not pretend to be your friend.

Sorry, maybe I'm too old for this shit, but I can't relate.
 

Klayzer

Member
EnviousValuableHammerheadbird-max-1mb.gif


Is this just a case of hero worshiping or cult indoctrination?
That fake "he's just like me" actually works on people. Why do you think Phil does it. How you portray your message is almost as important as the message itself.
 

Ev1L AuRoN

Member
Every time I see people praising Phil as such a nice guy etc etc etc, really I can't see it. To me, he is just a PR guy that rarely deliver on his promises, despite being ahead of a brand like Xbox and with the kind of money Microsoft has.
He has deeper pockets, a more powerful console, he can burn money on services like game pass, buyout big publishers and developers, has azure as a backbone to their online services, and yet, have trouble competing with Sony and Nintendo, smaller companies that are handicapped by the need to be profitable.
 

Klayzer

Member
Every time I see people praising Phil as such a nice guy etc etc etc, really I can't see it. To me, he is just a PR guy that rarely deliver on his promises, despite being ahead of a brand like Xbox and with the kind of money Microsoft has.
He has deeper pockets, a more powerful console, he can burn money on services like game pass, buyout big publishers and developers, has azure as a backbone to their online services, and yet, have trouble competing with Sony and Nintendo, smaller companies that are handicapped by the need to be profitable.
With all those advantages, most Xfans still would rather blame everyone else but Phil. It's baffling.
 
Last edited:

reinking

Gold Member
TBH, Xbox marketing makes me cringe. The "influencer" marketing and constant episodes of "Phil Says" is a little too much sometimes. That being said, it isn't that big of a deal. I give Nintendo more credit than the other two in regard to communication with fans. Nintendo gave us Nintendo Direct and now the other two are doing something similar. I prefer that type of communication from a company the most. Less cringe all the way around.
 

SmokedMeat

Gamer™
I’m sure the developers would have liked some advertising for their game.

That shadow drop was not some sort of brilliant plan. It was throwing out a bone to Xbox users with a game they lacked faith in and didn’t want to spend money in advertising it.

I’m sure Tango’s pretty happy with the strong reception their game received on both Game Pass and Steam.

Maybe for some games a bunch of pre-advertising isn’t needed.
 
I’ve been saying for years that Phil Spencer is a master class professional bullshitter, and it seems that it’s working on OP, it’s both painful and hilarious to see someone get suckered so hard, you’re not alone, there are millions of other fools like you.

Dude, actions speak louder than words, right? Microsoft is all talk, Phil is all talk, Sony and Nintendo, they deliver. That’s how they communicate, that’s all you need, as a gamer, is games to actually play.

Let’s pretend this thread is being posted in 2014. Let’s say it’s 2016, 2019, shit, pick any year in the past decade and the same can be applied. All you hear from Microsoft is about the games that are coming, the studios they are buying, the games they are working on, but how many of them actually deliver? and when they do deliver, how often are they high in quality? In the same timeframe there have been countless hugely successful exclusives released from Sony and Nintendo.
 
Last edited:
Playstation has far more exposure than the Xbox brand they also get more views on everything they do on social media/announcements they also bring the games which is important.
 

BbMajor7th

Member
TBH, Xbox marketing makes me cringe. The "influencer" marketing and constant episodes of "Phil Says" is a little too much sometimes. That being said, it isn't that big of a deal. I give Nintendo more credit than the other two in regard to communication with fans. Nintendo gave us Nintendo Direct and now the other two are doing something similar. I prefer that type of communication from a company the most. Less cringe all the way around.
Their marketing approach over the past decade suggests they really do listen to fans and that they pay attention to the kinds of discussions that happen on forums like these. Their heavy marketing focus on function, value for money and technical features has a very obvious intended audience among gaming enthusiasts. It's not surprising that it inspires confidence and approval on boards like these - MS largely talk the same language in their marketing that forum posters do.

Nintendo and Sony are much more interested in pursuing the mainstream corporate model exemplified by brands like Apple and Disney; the messaging is emotive and aspirational, rather than technical and contextual, and the focus is on brand identity, mindshare and accessible mainstream appeal. Looking at the raw numbers, it looks like this is the better formula. MS is way better at responding to user wants and desires, but Sony and Nintendo are better at convincing people to believe in their brands, despite their obvious shortcomings.
 
Last edited:

Bond007

Member
Good games fix problems. Yapping about this or that and mingling with this person or that person really doesnt matter. Good games speak for themselves. As an owner of all consoles- it says something that my first time turning on my XBSX in months has been to fire up Goldeneye.
 
Last edited:

JLB

Banned
I love how easy you kick some haters asses OP. Your question is quite simple and direct: do you prefer a company being more open and provide more details, or be less open and abstract?
They cant give a straight answer because it hurts.
 

gothmog

Gold Member
Their marketing approach over the past decade suggests they really do listen to fans and that they pay attention to the kinds of discussions that happen on forums like these. Their heavy marketing focus on function, value for money and technical features has a very obvious intended audience among gaming enthusiasts. It's not surprising that it inspires confidence and approval on boards like these - MS largely talk the same language in their marketing that forum posters do.

Nintendo and Sony are much more interested in pursuing the mainstream corporate model exemplified by brands like Apple and Disney; the messaging is emotive and aspirational, rather than technical and contextual, and the focus is on brand identity, mindshare and accessible mainstream appeal. Looking at the raw numbers, it looks like this is the better formula. MS is way better at responding to user wants and desires, but Sony and Nintendo are better at convincing people to believe in their brands, despite their obvious shortcomings.
By mainstream corporate model we mean making money by providing goods and services that people want? Versus the rich kid that tries to buy relevance at every turn rather than earn it?
 
I love how everyone just ignores the question and turns this into a "you-can't-have-one-without-the-other", as though they're mutually exclusive. Lol. The silliness of some members in Gaf has no end, huh?

The OP didn't ask if you preferred less game output and more open discussion with users vs more game output and no open discussion with users. The OP asked, do you prefer more open discussion with users or less? It would surprise y'all to know that, you can have both; it just so happens that we don't, at the moment and that might and could change. In other words, let us suppose both Sony and Microsoft had the same game output; which style of fan interactions would you prefer; Phil's and Xbox or Jim and Play Station? Granted, you can believe, just for an instant, that the game output has nothing to do with their ability or lack of ability to interact with their fans... God forbid.

Xbox could change management, Phil can leave... A 100% suit could take the helm, and we end up with a leadership style similar to Jim's. And vice versa; Sony could take a new approach to help bolster positive PR (whether they need it or not isn't the point), by having more open/transparent fan interaction. Who knows; Jim may want to retire soon. What about five years from now, or ten years from now; maybe the new person in charge of Play Station might be an avid gamer like Phil, and might be more open to engaging with and interacting with the gaming community... Who knows?

To answer your question OP; I prefer Xbox's style of fan interaction. In fact, I think if Jim was a gamer himself, or interacted more with the fans/users, it can only be a plus for Play Station, and their supporters. How is that a bad thing, really? Of course, one can argue that if you stay out of the front lines, you don't have to worry about bad publicity, or "saying the wrong things", as Phil is often called-out on. But still, there is some measure of mutual respect and appreciation that gamers may have for a fellow gamer. People wonder why anyone believes Phil, or why people like him, and I'd argue it's because of his personality, and the fact that he's an avid gamer.

I'll prove my point with simply this - imagine if Xbox took the Sony approach to fan engagement/interaction... That perceivable low game output, followed by silence in every realm of gaming news, media and entertainment. Like it or not, Phil's and Xbox's approach helps public perception, at least in terms of making the company seem more...human or humanized. There are people (myself included) that have played matches with/against Phil and even chatted with him briefly online. Imagine being a huge fan of Play Station and being able to get into a match with Jim Ryan, and having a small but personal chat about a game both you guys just finished playing. It can only add to player/user perception of the brand. Or, if not the brand, the leader.

But, I look at all these responses and see so many people not being able to separate the two things, as though they genuinely believe it has to be one or the other: either the leader is sociable and they make zero games, or either they're not sociable at all and make all the games. 🙄

No wonder why I've seen people call this place Sonygaf. Smh
Wall of text for something so simple:

MS needs to talk, because there is very little else.

The other two don't need to, they are doing extremely well, they have a steady release of games and the more MS talks the more they're digging their grave and pushing people towards Sony/Nintendo.

All that talk from Spencer is a bad sign, something you don't want given the current situation in the console space.
 

Topher

Gold Member
I'm not paying for "openness". I'm paying for games. Sony is doing a better job providing those.


It came up in another thread about Phil Spencer being interviewed about the lack of games, and how that he should shut up like Jim Ryan and the head of Nintendo do.

It's an interesting contrast by the three companies.
Microsoft is alot more accessible and open to its customers than either Sony and Nintendo are.
Let's just compare Microsoft and Sony here, as Nintendo is more Japanese.

When both consoles launched, Sony did a couple of wired magazine interviews, and one road to the PS5 video and that was it.
They never spoke about their system again. Mark Cerny never interviewed about it, nor did anyone else from Sony. There was no further information given.

Cerny had an interview with Digital Foundry that was published the very next month.

 
Last edited:

fermcr

Member
Phil Spencer talks too much.
Microsoft should talk a lot less, and release more exclusives. If they don't have 1st party exclusives to release, then they should purchase 3rd party exclusives the way Sony does. That's how you sell more consoles then the competition.
 

Swift_Star

Banned
You literally said you get enjoyment from talking to and playing games with an executive of a multi-trillion dollar business. You are his customer and it's his duty to provide you with the best products possible, not pretend to be your friend.

Sorry, maybe I'm too old for this shit, but I can't relate.
Nah, you're right. Phil is an executive, he's not a pop star like, say, Taylor Swift who interacts with her public and the product is herself.
His job is not to get buddy buddy with his customers but provide the games and services.
You're right.
 

HeisenbergFX4

Gold Member
So basically you want more of this:

EzBerJhXMAEAx9W


Oh and more of this too:

FJ4hqI1WQAQbvSA


Embarrassing.
Yes because coming in 3rd and standing on the podium celebrating you are 3rd best in world at something is embarrassing

Greenburg is in fact very embarrassing but he is nothing more than a hype man

That fake "he's just like me" actually works on people. Why do you think Phil does it. How you portray your message is almost as important as the message itself.
I have gamed with Phil in PUBG and some Warzone and dude likes to play games but he is horrible at shooters anyhow and I don't mean just from not being able to kill someone but you can tell if someone is any good by their movement and his was bad
 

mrmustard

Banned
Hey if we have to deal with the constant persecution complex we might as well have a bit of fun, right?

You don't want digs? Don't post shitty console warrior threads. Simple.
Seems to be an egg chicken situation. I didn`t post any threads and I don't see how this was a console warrior thread. It now is for sure.
 

gothmog

Gold Member
Seems to be an egg chicken situation. I didn`t post any threads and I don't see how this was a console warrior thread. It now is for sure.
Really?
So on top of the hardware side of it we have the difference between Jim Ryan and Phil Spencer as the heads of both companies.
Phil is a gamer. Jim Ryan would know how to turn a Playstation on.
Phil is a developer, Jim is a pencil pusher.
Phil Spencer has made himself available to smaller podcasts like Xboxera for example. Jim Ryan wouldn't think of doing that.

There was another part to the way Xbox heads interact with their fan base.
When Xbox was at its lowest during the Xbox One, there were a number of loyal xbox players who stuck thick like TimDog, Rand Al Thor etc and the heads of xbox mixed with them. They played online with them and to this day they still socialise with a number of them.
There's no way on God earth that Jim Ryan, Mark Cerny or Herman are going to be gaming with their player base or being friends with them.
Yep, just normal questions being asked and not console war bait.
 

Jaybe

Member
I like when people speak with purpose. Jim just launched PSVR2 in Vegas plus an accessibility controller announcement in less than 5 minutes. Nintendo’s communication via directs is always on point. Phil fills space and drops a confusing world salad in NYC, then the annual ‘this is the year’ interview.
 

yurinka

Member
Their marketing approach over the past decade suggests they really do listen to fans and that they pay attention to the kinds of discussions that happen on forums like these. Their heavy marketing focus on function, value for money and technical features has a very obvious intended audience among gaming enthusiasts. It's not surprising that it inspires confidence and approval on boards like these - MS largely talk the same language in their marketing that forum posters do.

Nintendo and Sony are much more interested in pursuing the mainstream corporate model exemplified by brands like Apple and Disney; the messaging is emotive and aspirational, rather than technical and contextual, and the focus is on brand identity, mindshare and accessible mainstream appeal. Looking at the raw numbers, it looks like this is the better formula. MS is way better at responding to user wants and desires, but Sony and Nintendo are better at convincing people to believe in their brands, despite their obvious shortcomings.
Their results over the past decade shows that Sony and Nintendo made a way better approach at listening what their fans wanted, delivering that, marketing it in an optimal way and selling way more as a result.

Nintendo and Sony are breaking several gaming history records, way before they were a decade ago, while MS continues as the last one in the race.
 
Last edited:

BbMajor7th

Member
Their results over the past decade shows that Sony and Nintendo made a way better approach at listening what their fans wanted, delivering that, marketing it in an optimal way and selling way more as a result.

Nintendo and Sony are breaking several gaming history records, way before they were a decade ago, while MS continues as the last one in the race.
Microsoft put resources into areas like backwards compatibility, cross-platform play, Game Pass, Play Anywhere, VRS, VRR, 1440p support, RTX... all the kinds of things that are important in enthusiast circles. Accordingly, they became a prime ammunition in console wars. Nintendo and Sony have been criticised heavily for varying levels of failure in these areas and are often evasive when asked directly about them in interview.

None of this has anything to do with overall performance - in fact, it's pretty clear that Microsoft's approach of playing to the gallery doesn't capture hearts and minds the way Sony and Nintendo's brand-focused approach does, but it remains true. If nothing else, it's reminder of Henry Ford's (probably apocryphal) claim on motor cars that "if I'd have asked people want they wanted, they'd have told me 'a faster horse and cart'." People often think they know what they want, but it's not always true.
 

Dr_Ifto

Member
I like how they are open, but lets not think its for our benefit. Its because they are on the bottom and trying to get customers. Who is to say they dont go closed wall once they are on top?

I like the concept of openness, and I wish the others join in more.
 

Saber

Gold Member
The thread title basically paint Nintendo and Sony as "wrongers". Which is ironic because in the OP it feels like Nintendo is there just to sounds less like its targeting Sony specifically.

But who would guess people play games instead of caring for "openess" or keep chewing for answers.
 
Last edited:

azertydu91

Hard to Kill
Heu guys/gals do you want a girlfriend/boyfriend that constantly talks about sex or one that fucks
Your answer shows that you are a playstation fanatic.
Nowhere did I say one was better than the other, or that one would be more successful.
I asked which one of those models do think is preferable?
Again, just because Phil is a dev and avid gamer does not mean he will have more success as a CEO.
Only a fanboy would automatically become defensive and think it was an attack on PS.
Sony and Microsoft run their PR very differently.
One gives a shit ton of info, the other doesn't.
Only an idiot would think that one or the other will result in better games, or more console sales.
And why the fuck does everything default to console sales for PS fans?
Question something Sony does the reply is "yeah, well Sony is selling more consoles'. Question Jim Ryan and the reply is "well at least Sony is releasing games".

Howabout you just answer which approach you think is better and why?
Yep everyone here is a fanboy but you, instead maybe try to understand that when people call you out on your bullshit, multiple times, in multiples threads, you are always the common factor.Like the ps5 that couldn't do FSR2.0 or all the MS PR terms that you love so much.
By the way aren't close to a perm or at least a temp ban ?I have never been banned instead but I have only been for about 10 years and you just one...One year filled with warring and defending MS in basically all your posts.Grow up or you won't end your second year here.
 

azertydu91

Hard to Kill
Heu guys/gals do you want a girlfriend/boyfriend that constantly talks about sex or one that fucks
Yes because coming in 3rd and standing on the podium celebrating you are 3rd best in world at something is embarrassing

Greenburg is in fact very embarrassing but he is nothing more than a hype man


I have gamed with Phil in PUBG and some Warzone and dude likes to play games but he is horrible at shooters anyhow and I don't mean just from not being able to kill someone but you can tell if someone is any good by their movement and his was bad
I don't know, I feel like if I was the 3rd best in the world at anything I'd brag about it about as often as I could....But being the 3rd over a grand total of 3 people , I'd shut the hell up.

Edit: sorry the first part of my post woudn't delete (the one before the quote) it was not destined to you...Besides you'd get all the grils in the world with a pizza oven, ps: I still hate you for it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CLW
Top Bottom