Topic: The everything Xbox thread

@Grumblevolcano If retailers do their jobs and know what to sell when people ask them for the new Xbox,
then I think they'll be just fine...

P.S.

The new Xbox can also be put on its side, so the size or form factor isn't really a problem either.

@NEStalgia No, just no. I've explained it three times now already, and it IS as simple as that when I, you or anyone else here understands it, then that's all that matters, because we are the potential buyers, so if we understand it, regardless of questioning the sanity of the name-giving, then who cares what other people, that we've got nothing to do with, will think or understand?

My Ford example was a perfect one, and you nicely circumvented that one. And need I remind you, I've got a marketing mindset, not just due to my professional experience. I understand that mine is not the average mindset, but still. I don't think that people are that dumb or dimwitted, that they're not going to get this.

Oh, and another crucial difference with the whole Wii U situation: contrary to Nintendo, Microsoft WILL spend enough money and campaigns on making the difference clear enough for all to understand...

And the Xbox team may be a part of Microsoft, but it's still it's own entity, and seeing as Phil Spencer is at the helm, I think they'll be more than alright. They really started getting into their own again with the One X,
and I don't think that they're now going to stray from that path, so they'll be more than fine.

@Heavyarms55 It's marketing genius, trust me. Phil Spencer knows EXACTLY what he's doing...

@Ralizah Weaker specs? On the regular One and One S only ever so marginally so, but the X was/is obviously the most powerful console of this generation, so it all depends on which model you'd buy or own.

And you can say whatever else you want about Xbox, but their online service, Live Gold and Game Pass included, is second to none, and combined with a far more complete and better working backwards compatibility program, something Sony could only dream of, they've built a VERY strong foundation over the years, which they'll more than likely build upon with the upcoming generation.

And the most obvious one: Sony's currently in the lead, so they run the bigger risk this time, because the only way they can go, is down, so they better bring their A game, or team Xbox will finally kick them off their little pedestal...

@ThanosReXXX Let's take these points one by one.

Now, sure. But for more than half the generation, Sony maintained a decent advantage in the power department. And, for the first couple of years or so, it also cost about 20% less. As a result, pretty much everything in built to run well on Sony's platform.

Timing is everything. I got an Xbox 360 last gen because it had a better selection of games and was decently cheaper. This generation, I got a PS4 for the exact same reason. Microsoft lost tons of sales puttering around at the start, which is why Sony is leading with... what, over 100 million consoles? Whereas, if it hasn't already happened, Switch is probably going to outsell the Xbone soon. It lost momentum big time and, besides holiday sales where Microsoft practically gives the base model away, it never regained its mojo.

Besides, the vast majority of people own the base consoles.

Sure, Xbox's online is more stable and provides more incentives than PSN. No argument there. Which might be important to people.

You know what else is important?

Install base. If you're playing an online game, you have an unquestionably larger pool of people to play with. Everybody is on PSN.

Library. Sony's first-party titles now rival Nintendo's in terms of how well they sell and how critically acclaimed they are. Sony has put out a LOT of hits this generation. Microsoft, for some reason, has only really put out a small handful of worthwhile exclusive games this gen, and almost all of them aren't even exclusive to the platform at this point. And, putting aside first party efforts, you have massively better third party support from Japanese developers. Now, that's improving a little bit, with Sega finally putting more of its games, like Yakuza Zero and Kiwami, on the Xbox One. But, in general, aside from the big companies like Capcom that almost always go multiplat with their games, it's a crapshoot as to whether some exciting looking Japanese game will even release on Microsoft's system.

Backwards compatibility is cool, but, imo, robust current gen support is far better.

Take this trend and extend it over time, and you have the difference between a system that gets everything and has some of the best first-party games and exclusives in the industry, and a system almost bereft of exclusives with major holes in its library.

Nah. People keep saying this, and I used to believe this logic, but here's the truth. Of the four generations where Sony has been a player in the industry, it has explicitly trampled the competition three out of four times with the PS1, PS2, and PS4. Brutally trampled in terms of sales AND library.

People make a lot of noise about how weak the PS3 was at the start of the last generation, and it was, but here's the thing: Sony still ended up practically winning that gen. It outsold the initially much stronger 360 (something Microsoft came nowhere close to managing with the One, despite it being in something of a similar position as the PS3 was last gen). It ended with a larger number of highly acclaimed exclusive games. Sony clawed their way back from the mouth of hell and managed to become king again.

They had to.

Sony literally wouldn't be a thing right now if it wasn't for Playstation. Their gaming sector is, by far, their most profitable. As such, the Playstation brand HAS to be successful. They have no alternative. So they're always going to make the best consoles with the best software support, because it's life or death for the company as a whole if Playstation goes down.

The Xbox brand is a hobby for Microsoft. They could probably sell zero units of their new Series X console and it wouldn't really matter, because the company's computer business is ubiquitous. There's no incentive for Microsoft to struggle to succeed, because literally nothing rides on their triumph or defeat. So they're free to keep giving their consoles weird names that confuse customers, giving up their exclusives, etc.

Sony is entering the next generation in a position of strength again, with a stable of amazing first-party properties that rival Nintendo's output (and decimate anything Microsoft will likely be putting out in the next few years), with so many PSN customers that just their online store took in more money last year than Nintendo did in its entirety, and with, imo, a more coherent vision for the next-generation. I have no idea what Microsoft will do with its oddly named console going forward, but I do know that, with the PS5, Sony wants to gain the lead early again, is developing some sort of 3D audio technology to work with its games, wants games to load almost instantly, and will continue with VR.

I'd love for Microsoft to knock the Playstation brand "off its pedestal," but I don't see that happening. And history suggests that, even if they screw up, they'll come surging back and pretty much reverse whatever damage was caused to them early on. So, if I had to bet on either company as a safe bet for having the best support going forward, Sony would easily be my choice.

Oh, that reminds me. Sony is also ahead in VR and game streaming as well. I don't know if those will become big factors next gen, but if they do, Sony will be leading the charge on them.

Oh geez here we go lol....

@Ralizah It's easy to be ahead in something, if you're the only one doing it...

All joking aside, though: Sony's VR is still in it's infancy. Like all other efforts, it's cool in its specific way, but ultimately, it doesn't even remotely come close to VR on a gaming PC.

Sony's supposed "win" with the PS3 only came after that generation was already fading out, so that's really nothing to brag about. They also recently outsold the Wii, but who the hell is still counting that generation, and the games featured on it? It's a win many years after all the other contestants have already finished and received their gold and silver awards, so it's a bronze medal at best.

And Microsoft, with the Xbox 360, had THE best multi-plat versions of that generation, something no amount of "sold more consoles in total" could ever fix, so there's that as well...

One rather big misconception is that Sony's PS4 was cheaper than the Xbox One: it definitely wasn't. What people either never realized, or simply (or for Sony fanboys: conveniently) forgot, is that Sony actually also wanted to offer a starting package with an online subscription and a camera, but because Microsoft flopped SO hard with that, they pretty much botched the entire launch, which Sony quite heavily capitalized on, by instantly removing their version of the pack-in motion camera, and their mandatory online subscription BEFORE they ever launched the PS4, so it only appeared that they had the better deal, and this is how they ACTUALLY got their head start this generation, NOT because they ACTUALLY had a better deal. Being $100 cheaper if you remove a motion camera and other stuff really isn't that difficult, after all...

So, what it basically was, is just smart and strategic marketing, which is the only real compliment they'll ever get from me, by the way.

Oh, and another VERY big misconception is that Sony would be nowhere without its PlayStation brand. Seriously, go look it up, and you'll find that what's ACTUALLY Sony's biggest revenue, is their insurance brand, but few Western people know this, because it's only active in Asia, so it's not common knowledge over here. So, PlayStation being their end all and be all, is categorically untrue.

And you REALLY shouldn't underestimate the power of a vast library of backwards compatible titles. It may not be something you're personally interested in, but Phil Spencer is DEFINITELY onto something, telling people they can, from now on, continuously keep migrating their ENTIRE game collection, built up until now, to each new console or platform that Microsoft will now release, and it definitely is something that the majority of Xbox owners/users are interested in, as witnessed by the effort that Spencer and his team have put into making it a reality, otherwise they'd just be pumping money into something nobody wants...

Sony has nothing comparable. From what is known right now, only PS4 titles will be natively supported, and anything older will only be offered through streaming services, whereas Microsoft offers the entirety of its Xbox One catalog, almost 70% of its Xbox 360 catalog AND a decent number of original Xbox titles all supported physically and/or digitally installed AND locally, so no streaming necessary, which is a FAR superior service. Then again: any and all of Microsoft's online services are superior, and always will be, because Sony will NEVER be able to equal Microsoft's online network capacity, let alone surpass it.

Instant loading is also a thing on Series X, so that's nothing new from Sony's side either. Both are actually just doing basically the same thing this time around, so it'll come down to the games, the support and the options, not so much down to the hardware.

And finally, I've said this plenty of times before, but in case I've never said it to you, or you forgot: I'm a marketing and sales professional myself, so I simply KNOW how that game works, and the ONLY simple truth is what I said earlier: if you're in the lead, then all you can do is fall down, because there is no more up, so it's only a matter of when, not a matter of if, so they WILL ultimately fail, mark my words. Maybe not entirely, but they will most definitely screw something up, or several things. Being in the lead makes you nervous, makes you look in the rear view mirror etc. etc.

None of which is conducive to actually staying in the lead, and besides that, Phil Spencer has done a LOT of good work these last couple of years, establishing the Xbox brand as THE go to platform for premium gaming with the One X, and he'll probably not be too keen on relinquishing that position to Sony, so that's just not gonna happen.

@redd214 I'd say sorry in advance, but now I've already posted my text wall...

Trivia things but it affected me for decision between PS4 & Xbox One.
1. PS4 uses Blue box for game packaging while Xbox One still uses Green box for game packaging. I prefer Blue color over Green color (PS4 win)
2. PS4 have Dragon Quest Builders 2, the BEST game on PS4 for me while Xbox One doesn't have DQB 2. (PS4 win again)
3. PS4 doesn't need Online checking to play games by Offline. Xbox One did. (PS4 win again)
4. PS4 default U/I is more beautiful and simpler than Xbox One. (PS4 win again)
5. PS4 has a lot of Limited edition games from digital to physic by LRG / SRG / etc while Xbox One doesn't even have one. (PS4 win again)

@ThanosReXXX lol all good man I knew it was coming.

All I'll say is both have strengths and weaknesses and both PlayStation and Xbox are FANTASTIC platforms. It's like IOS and Android, they're so similar and great in most regards that it really just comes down to preference.

Though I will almost certainly be skipping the Xbox family moving forward, some of the moves they made this gen are remarkable and I how others catch on!

@redd214 I'd sooner say that Sony is a good platform than I'll ever say that Apple or iOS is a good one, and people who know me here or in real life, know how I feel about Sony, so that oughta tell you something...

So, just out of curiosity, why will you be skipping Xbox from now on?

@ThanosReXXX Xcloud. It's exactly what I hoped it would be, a way to play the handful of Xbox exclusives I'm interested in without needing an actual Xbox and being able to use what I already have. Playing Forza Horizon and Gears 5 on my phone/tablet either standalone or connected to the TV is awesome!

It's really hard to know when you're trolling

@redd214 Ah, okay. Thought you were abandoning the brand altogether.

@Dezzy No, he's just being his usual moronic, tunnel-visioned self...
Except for point 2 (and even that isn't a real point, because it's just personal preference), any and all of his other points are completely useless and non-valid in an ACTUAL platform comparison.

@ThanosReXXX

Sony's VR is, of course inferior to similar technology on the PC, which is no real surprise. PC is always the best solution when it comes to being on the cutting edge.

With that said, PSVR is very well-supported by Sony and is the first VR solution that's accessible to the general consumer as opposed to the hobbyist. Of course, time will tell if Sony takes steps to make even bigger pushes in the VR space to truly make it mainstream, but it's undoubtedly the company best positioned to lead VR into a profitable future.

I... was actually unaware the PS3 has now outsold the Nintendo Wii. That's an absolutely incredible achievement, especially considering how far in the dirt Sony was for most of last gen.

Imagine if the Xbox One somehow surged to the point where it outsold the PS4 by 2020. That'd be an incredible come back.

Regardless of whether or not that "counts" for you, though, my observation was to make a point: even when Sony loses, they come back stronger than ever. The same is not true of Nintendo or Microsoft (Nintendo came back hard with the Switch, but it built on the foundation of the Wii U's failure; still impressive, but not the same sort of thing). Even IF Sony loses market dominance this gen, history suggests it'll come roaring back and still end up having the best console by the end of the generation regardless.

If I'm a single-platform gamer, that matters to me.

Also, yes, games generally ran better on Xbox 360 than on PS3. But PS3 still had overall better Japanese support, despite being in a position of weakness, AND ended its gen with quite a few more high-quality exclusives.

I actually am interested in it. It's one reason why I maintain a gaming PC alongside my consoles. And my general interest in retro gaming is why I have an emulation frontend set up on my PC and have a bunch of old consoles still connected to TVs throughout the house. With that said, it's nowhere near as important as current gen support, and the majority of people will only play a couple of backwards compatible games before going back to the latest AAA release. It's a nice thing to have, especially early in the generation, but it won't save a console or even give it much of a competitive edge over its competition. For example, the Wii U is fully BC with the Wii and, via its robust VC library on both platforms, is inarguably Nintendo's best console for legacy support. The Switch is BC with absolutely nothing.

Besides, when it comes to BC, the previous gen is, by far, the most important, because it's what people are most immediately invested in, and PS5 is apparently BC with the PS4, so the only thing Microsoft really has over Sony on that front is some decades old games. Nothing to sneer at, but also nowhere close to being as important as the more robust current gen support the PS5 will almost certainly receive.

PS4 didn't APPEAR to be a better value at the beginning of the gen. It WAS. You seem to be confusing intent with result, plans with action, etc. It's entirely irrelevant what Sony planned on doing. What matters is what ended up happening.

And what ended up happening is Sony had a stronger console that was $100 cheaper, and it gained momentum to the point where it consistently outsold the Xbox One by a huge margin, even when Microsoft took steps to be competitive in terms of pricing.

Might things have been different if Sony had launched their system first, or if Microsoft hadn't flubbed the launch of their console? Maybe. Probably. But unless you have the ability to hop into another dimension, it's entirely irrelevant.

Fair enough. I retract that statement. But it's still true that the Playstation brand is one of the most successful and profitable parts of Sony, and it's still true that Sony has a lot more to lose by failing than Microsoft does.

Well, not really. PC is THE platform for premium gaming. It has the best possible performance, the best VR technology, etc. I don't really expect that to change.

Anyway, I'm not questioning your qualifications, but I'll trust historical precedent over everything else. And historical precedent is firmly on Sony's side. Even if they lose market share from this gen (which, come on, they kind of have to: Switch is successful, and Microsoft probably won't flub the Series X launch as badly as they did with the Xbone's), it's still likely they'll maintain the lead next generation when it comes to power consoles (no idea what'll happen with Nintendo, but their success or failure is entirely independent from what happens with other companies). PS5 will almost certainly have (far) better exclusives, better Japanese third party support, better marketing, etc.

I'm not a betting person, but if I was, I'd go with the company that has brutally dominated three out of the four gens it has participated in, and still somehow ended up "winning" the one gen where it was behind.

I'm an equal opportunity cynic, so I'll tear into both sides

@Heavyarms55 Well, it got you, Ralizah, and Anti into the XBox thread, so maybe it's marketing genius after all From my own experience, the problem XBox has, perception-wise, yours included, is that where it differentiates from the competition is in the little things, not the big advertisable things. If you own neither and evaluate on paper, you're entirely right, there's little reason to buy an XBox when Playstation offers a lot more up front. However, owning both, I've found the actual experience of using the XBox, at least with X1X, and particularly if in an all or mostly digital ecosystem is vastly superior to using the PS4. There's no VR or exclusives level selling point, but actually living with the console on a daily basis is actually a nicer, smoother, friendlier experience all the way around, again, particularly with digital. Enough so that I re-bought a multitude of digital games I'd bought on PS4 on X1 to try to consolidate all non-exclusive non-Switch gaming onto the XBox alone. It's not a direct comparison, but as far as a TV-tethered console can be, I liken the experience of booting up X1X, browsing and playing to being more "Switch-like" in its pick up and play convenience than the PS4 that feels like stepping back into 2003 somehow. At least with current gen...

That's a pain point for them. They don't have anything to sell in an obvious way, at least so far, to sway potential customers, but they can instill very high customer satisfaction and loyalty to existing owners. Converting new customers into owners is their difficult challenge.

@Grumblevolcano True, but if the history of PS is any guide, if the PS5 is a normal size device like the PS4 (and Japan hates "large" anything, so there's a fair reason to believe that unless they've gone SO western...) then the thing will be small, have a leaf blower for a fan, and run hot enough to fry bacon. Whether or not that's considered a selling feature or not, though, is unknown.

@Ralizah With the OG XBone I agree. But when the S and X models came out, the equation definitely changed (I say this as a PS4 launch day buyer, an XBone ridiculer, PS4 Pro buyer, PSVR fan, and, eventually, an X1X convert.)

@ThanosReXXX If creating news by creating arguments was the plan, I'll cede to you it's marketing genius. Otherwise the name is a disaster and a joke, and while I'm happy it will hold XBox back, thus keeping it an underdog, and thus keeping it awesome, my palm shall remain glued to my face for the remainder of the 9th gen. It's a terrible set of names with very obvious problems, and maybe it is valuable as a viral argument and controversy generator, but if that wasn't the intent....it's just awful naming, no excuses. You really don't get American big box retail, including online

Even in the boutiques, I was in GameStop the day after Switch reveal announce, behind the guy asking to buy "the new Wii." I'm glad you're in B2B sales. If you were in B2C you'd be bankrupt!

@redd214 Thanos and Ralizah going at it. This is the one rare occasion I'll just grab a big bucket of popcorn and join you over in the bleachers

@Ralizah Obviously, I was talking premium CONSOLE gaming, not PC vs console gaming, so the One X is still that, and not Sony's effort in that specific field.

And I don't know how you manage to perceive an actual truth in an entirely different light, but the PS4 was never of better value at launch, other than maybe for their library, although I honestly can't remember anymore how many games exactly each of the two parties offered at launch.

The ONLY reason they were cheaper at launch is because of the EXACT reasons I mentioned, so they were not actually cheaper, they simply removed the components that were similar to what Microsoft offered, which caused such a negative blowback for them, and as such they only APPEARED to be the better deal, but what REALLY happened is that a console with less components could obviously also be sold for less money. Had Microsoft not incorporated the mandatory Kinect camera at first, then they would actually have been the better offer, because that camera initially cost $150, making it even cheaper than the PS4 without camera, so there's that to consider.

There's facts, and then there's perception, the latter of which is obviously only in the eye of the beholder, but which, more often than not, has nothing whatsoever to do with how things actually go or are.

Any and all things you mentioned concerning Sony's continuing success, are assumptions, based upon past performances. Anyone in sales would know that past performances are NEVER a guarantee for the future. Nothing is set in stone. Sony is at number one, and they've already shown complacency multiple times, over the last couple of years, so the actual expectation and/or risk is, that they WILL screw up. Just wait and see...

And while Sony was confidently/smugly, or whatever, sitting in their number one position, Phil Spencer and his team have been building, expanding, and improving time and again, and he's just not going to let that fall apart anymore, so there's more incentive for him to win or even just improve and gain market percentage, than there is for Sony.

But you know what? We can keep going back and forth on this, but I think we should just wait and see what happens, seeing as even after Microsoft's reveal, nothing is completely set in stone yet, and Sony hasn't even revealed anything, so all we can do now is make guesses. Some based on what little info we have, some based on the past which, as mentioned, is never a guarantee in the first place, so I suppose at least for my part, I've basically said all that I can say about this, because there simply isn't any more information to go by.

@NEStalgia There's no "going at" here, just polite conversation. Doesn't always have to be in agreement.
As for the rest: no, man. Just no. Your perception vs a not yet proven reality. Here as well, let's just wait and see how it goes, and how it sells. If it becomes a total disaster, then I'll be the first one to tag you and tell you that you had a valid point after all.

But until then, Phil Spencer, and by extension yours truly, are right on the money.

The PS4 was released a week before the Xbox One, so how could the Xbox One have ''flopped hard'' and influenced Sony if it wasn't even out yet?

@ThanosReXXX That depends on how you define "total disaster" - it doesn't have to hit WiiU depths to count, in my book

@Ralizah One thing you highlight is the Japanese support. That does matter to a niche segment of gamers, and to you and I personally, but when talking generally about the platforms, I don't think that's a terribly significant difference to the overall gaming market. Heck, even in Japan, these days where niche Japanese games have been selling even worse than in the US and Western games are ever-rising in popularity. And with Sony going full Seattle, a lot of Japanese devs have been really putting some effort behind XBox too, especially Square, with some notable exceptions, especially Falcom and Atlus.

The rest, though, this past gen, PS4 was built on top of MS's launch failures. Everything you say was true at the start of the gen, for sure. The whole "mid-gen" reboot of both platforms changed the dynamics, though, significantly, and those earlier arguments became somewhat obsolete, and I think the momentum of that is going to carry into what happens next gen. IMO, Sony got complacent and abusive during PS4, and going into PS3 we saw how that played out after PS2. I'm not as "bullish" on PS5 as I was on PS4 at the same point in time. I'm counting on Sony displaying the same arrogance they did at the PS3 launch, and the same arrogance MS displayed at X1 launch. Especially with the new management.

XBox, right now, is Phil Spencer in the same way Nintendo was Iwata in the 3DS/Wii era. The old rules don't apply, but, similarly, everything good falls apart if he's ever out.

I've heard that the PS5 is going to be a square donut, and you can fit the Xbox in it.

@Octane E3 & the reveal. The Spielberg, Fantasy Football, DVR, online "deal with it", disaster that was the XBox reveal, followed by the E3 presentations, price, Kinect, DRM etc and Sony's "this is how you share games" video, by the end of E3 Monday, Sony won, hands down, the hearts & minds, and MS had blown it. They started back-tracking that very night, but it was too late, the damage was done. After that, XBone was the weaker hardware for 3rd party games, running lower resolutions, for the same price even in pre-launch/previews. There wasn't a hope of recovering at that point.

PS4 was off to record sales, and Yoshida even mentioned that the majority of those sales were to X360 owners, not PS3 owners upgrading.

@NEStalgia Makes me wonder why MS just didn't ditch the camera from the start.