MS: Sony has failed to deliver on promises

[Ricardo Gil]

Sony have promised things and not delivered, not once has anybody (myself included) said otherwise.

I own a 360, and many, many Microsoft products. I have no issues with them (apart from the 6 360's that have broken on me!). I just don't see why so many people jump onto the 'hate Sony' bandwagon.

Look, the way I see it no one jumped on the "hate Sony" wagon.

The guy raised some valid points, some of us agreed with him, that's it. It just looks like you take it too personally.

[BajiRav]

It's a shame the thread is going down the pan again, I just hope the mods can see everything I've posted is respectful, and everyone who has replied to me, is just having a debate/conversation - I've not felt victimized or hard done at all in here.

I think you are worrying over nothing. The thread is doing just fine.

Well what does 5million mean?

It means 5 million to me, therefore if MS have sold 19, Sony have sold 14.

If it doesn't add up like that, SOMEONE isn't telling the truth.

I said clearly WHY I brought up the 5mil issue, and that is because over the web right now we've seen claims of a 6mil+ gap, sometimes more - MS have now said it's 5, so that is more credible than all the estimates we have on places like VGChartz.

And where did you get those nice round 14 and 19 million? :p

[Smigit]

What happens is Sony have released the next console 5 years into the lifespan, but continued to support the old one for 10 years.

PS2 came out 5 years into PS1's life, PS3 came out 5 years into PS2's life.

It's the perfect setup, it's a fact not everyone jumps ship to the next console right away - I mean there is 127 million PS2 owners just now, taking the Wii, 360 AND PS3, we're not even at 127 million., quite far off infact.

What you don't want is a new console coming out, and support for your old console going right down the pan almost instantly.

I can see no wrong in having a 10 year life cycle, in terms of ambition and actually carrying out the plan.

Well sure no, you don't want it to die. But 10 years is too long and what you instead have happen is have developers look past the newer console at least early in its life in order to hit the larger install base. It's likely alot easier for them to do it technically since they don't have to learna new system either. And as a result AAA titles end up on the previous gen console rather than the current one which doesnt help you get a foot in the door and also results in developers being later to the table at learning how to really utilise the machine.

I mean lets be honest, how many console sellers does the PS3 have out currently, especially exclusive ones? Pretty much Nil although theres good ones still but nothing earth shattering (I realise some titles will sell a console for some ppl, but I'm specifically talking about the big franchises here like MGS, GT, KZ, Final Fantasy). Thats about to change with Metal Gear and Grand Turismo, Killzone ect but these titles are comming 18 - 24 months into the consoles life. Close to two years for the big titles to arrive given a November 06 release of the console. Xbox was getting it's Gears of Wars ect 12 months in.

Really they should have had God Of War and a few other titles on the PS3. I really don't believe in this "support the PS2 for 5 years" strategy what so ever and I do maintain it only serves to hold the newest gen back. Support it, but don't support it for ever and get the big name titles onto the newer console as they are the ones you really need there.

Edited May 9, 2008 by Smigit

[Ricardo Gil]

The article is showing the nitty gritty world of competition these corporations are taking part in, and it also shows why the gaming world right now is a very hostile place.

While things said in these articles hold truths, they way they are usually put across ensures they come across as smack talk to the group/supporters they are pointed at, and to those backing the article, it seems like cold hard truth.

It's a shame the thread is going down the pan again, I just hope the mods can see everything I've posted is respectful, and everyone who has replied to me, is just having a debate/conversation - I've not felt victimized or hard done at all in here.

Well what does 5million mean?

It means 5 million to me, therefore if MS have sold 19, Sony have sold 14.

If it doesn't add up like that, SOMEONE isn't telling the truth.

I said clearly WHY I brought up the 5mil issue, and that is because over the web right now we've seen claims of a 6mil+ gap, sometimes more - MS have now said it's 5, so that is more credible than all the estimates we have on places like VGChartz (Their gap is 6.5 mil).

He said 5m, obviously just an approximated guess. Why the nitpicking? Different sources will have different numbers, so just round it ok.

[spenser.d]

Well what does 5million mean?

It means 5 million to me, therefore if MS have sold 19, Sony have sold 14.

If it doesn't add up like that, SOMEONE isn't telling the truth.

I said clearly WHY I brought up the 5mil issue, and that is because over the web right now we've seen claims of a 6mil+ gap, sometimes more - MS have now said it's 5, so that is more credible than all the estimates we have on places like VGChartz (Their gap is 6.5 mil).

Dude, you can't give numbers in this industry and have them not be an approximation. Sorry man, you're making a bogus argument here.

-Spenser

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

I think you are worrying over nothing. The thread is doing just fine.

And where did you get those nice round 14 and 19 million? :p

Nothing is going to be nice and round as such, but you know what I mean.

I myself was surprised to see MS say 5, as from what the internet was like over the last few months, I did think they gap was 6-7mil.

But anyway, MS said 5, let's stop beating this to death - I was just making an observation due to what I believed prior to this article.

[shakey]

Audio, did this post threaten your stock shares in sony or the ps3? seriously, you defend anything sony to the death. Either you work for them, or have a ton of stock in them. its got to be 1 or the other. Most of your defenses are pretty shallow, and based purely off of speculation. Until this sony future of awesomeness shows up, just stick to facts, and stop nit picking on how many of what a console sold.

In the end, it all comes down to if the console runs, how many games it has, and how many of those games are good. Right now, sony is really only doing well in 1 area, where as the other 2 are really the most important...

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Dude, you can't give numbers in this industry and have them not be an approximation. Sorry man, you're making a bogus argument here.

-Spenser

*Sigh*...

I know it isn't 110% accurate, but you can't make an approx of 5, and it actually be 6-7. If so, MS are not good at their figures.

If anything they are probably 5,248,085 consoles ahead.

There you go :p

Christ, I'm getting hit left right and centre over a mere figure observation :/ Cmon guys.

[popisdead uk]

Audio, did this post threaten your stock shares in sony or the ps3? seriously, you defend anything sony to the death. Either you work for them, or have a ton of stock in them. its got to be 1 or the other. Most of your defenses are pretty shallow, and based purely off of speculation. Until this sony future of awesomeness shows up, just stick to facts, and stop nit picking on how many of what a console sold.

In the end, it all comes down to if the console runs, how many games it has, and how many of those games are good. Right now, sony is really only doing well in 1 area, where as the other 2 are really the most important...

And what area would that be?

As for the 'other' two being more important? Please

[spenser.d]

I dont understand why you're arguing it though - you fight to the death to defend PS3 and now you're arguing they have less sales than MS is giving them credit for? It doesn't make sense :p

-Spenser

[oceanmotion]

Only reason we have enjoyed such long spans with the Playstation consoles is because of market share. The 125 million+ won't happen again for Sony. Competition is in full effect. Getting games like God of War late in consoles lifespans will likely not happen this time, the platform will be catering to the old library and casual games like sports etc. for it's remaining years Big games will be appearing on the next gen consoles 6-7 years after the old console. This generation will be a long one, Microsoft are making money, Playstation needs the time, Wii has it's own corner. I doubt we will see new consoles till Fall 2011.

Anyway, comments from Greenberg are spot on though not sure about the numbers. He is probably just frustrated seeing Sony recover after another round of lies and hype while his console has the biggest game library and just if not more powerful in some areas with the console which is just plodding along losing it's lead ever so slightly. RROD, Jet engine issues aside it's amazing how the 360 hasn't taken off better. Playstation brand is strong, Xbox one was hurt after the first one got canned early and it's guaranteed they won't do that again, now RROD. They screwed up but doing so much better in every other area. I

Edited May 9, 2008 by OceanMotion

[magik]

I don't see a 10 year cycle as a plus and theres other that believe such a strategy only holds Sony back. I think five or six years is fine for a console release, maybe seven tops but look how far systems have come in two decades and I think it's not really that great a move to aim for overly long cycles on a single platform. If they had dampened PS2 sales earlier then perhaps the PS3 would be in a better position now. Not saying it's in a bad position, but given the fact theres few exclusives on there currently it may have been better for some of the better titles such as the God of War sequal or whatever to have come out a bit later but hit the PS3 instead.

Anyway just thinking about that 10 year cycle. Doom 1 isnt even 20 years old so I'd hate to think Sony has plans to realistically support consoles for a full ten years. I know that doesnt mean they will release on every ten years but rather will support them with titles ect into the generation after, but still it's too long in this industry.

I think 10 might be a little too much, but I actually hope this generation does last 10 years. I have spent a ridiculous amount of money on my 360 (and a negligible amount on my Wii) and want that dollar to go for as long as possible.

Perhaps 10 isn't realistic, however, but if I were to pick a number, I think 7 years would be the sweet spot. Where the new console is released at the end of year 7. Any longer than that, and I won't be complaining, but will be looking forward to any new tidbits on a new console.

Look, the way I see it no one jumped on the "hate Sony" wagon.

The guy raised some valid points, some of us agreed with him, that's it. It just looks like you take it too personally.

Nailed it. (Y)

[Sethos]

Audio, did this post threaten your stock shares in sony or the ps3? seriously, you defend anything sony to the death. Either you work for them, or have a ton of stock in them. its got to be 1 or the other. Most of your defenses are pretty shallow, and based purely off of speculation.

There's was need for that :/

[ritsuke Veteran]

Once all the dust has settled, the 360 will still come in third place.

Perhaps consumers should learn that large corporations are run by people who are not the infallible machine we put them up to being.

Sure, they should still be held accountable for mistakes, but this idea of viewing a lack of follow-through as a slap in the face is just ridiculous.

Everyone makes promises they can't keep. Do we really need someone to tell us to trust a large corporate beast, less?

Getting so emotional over such things is just silly. It doesn't make them evil.

Corporations can hardly ever get anything done, ever. They implode on their own internal bureaucracy.

I find these statements very ironic, coming from a Microsoft employee, no matter how factual they are. Sony (and the products listed) are easily interchangeable with any other company.

(Excuse me while I turn on my 360 and pray that I don't get a RROD...)

[popisdead uk]

Anyway, comments from the Greenberg are spot on though not sure about the numbers. He is probably just frustrated seeing Sony recover after another round of lies and hype while his console has the biggest game library and just if not more powerful in some areas with the console is just plodding along losing it's lead ever so slightly. RROD, Jet engine issues aside it's amazing how the 360 hasn't taken off better. Playstation brand is strong, Xbox one was hurt after the first one got canned early and it's guaranteed they won't do that again, now RROD. They screwed up but doing so much better in every other area. I

MS have lied and hyped up as well mate, its not all Sony. People seem to forget that. The 360 is holding its own, its bound to slow down eventually.

More powerful? I don't think that is correct. Nothing has proved this to be true. If anything they equal in power at this point. If dev's can unlock the Cell chip though, things will change.

RROD has been the biggest problem for MS. Are they actually making money now? I thought they were still paying off the extended warranty costs.

[Smigit]

I think 10 might be a little too much, but I actually hope this generation does last 10 years. I have spent a ridiculous amount of money on my 360 (and a negligible amount on my Wii) and want that dollar to go for as long as possible.

Perhaps 10 isn't realistic, however, but if I were to pick a number, I think 7 years would be the sweet spot. Where the new console is released at the end of year 7. Any longer than that, and I won't be complaining, but will be looking forward to any new tidbits on a new console.

I guess it's a very very individual thing this, but I'd rather shorter 6 or so year release cycles. I think $500 in hardware over that period of time is perfectly acceptable for myself and if newer technologys there I'm happy to pay to use it and I'd rather do that than sit on an older console for too overly long. I can keep the old one to play last gen games and hopefully they build some backwards compatibility (especially for titles say on the Xbox arcade). But for me the old hardware and titles dont become useless as the generation ends.

But yeah, I can understand that alot of people would rather save money and go through less hardware iterations. Being primary into PC games it's something I welcome, alot of people don't.

Once all the dust has settled, the 360 will still come in third place.

In terms of what? hardware sales? If so maybe. If you mean in terms of their entire console ecosystem but I think Nintendo run's the risk simply because they seems to be losing by a fair margin when it comes to software sales and attach rates (where MS traditionally has made the bulk of its console money afaik). MS are also using the Xbox to leverage digital downloads and other services which again, provides a revenue stream which will make up for losses in hardware to the other parties (if that does infact happen).

Anyway for MS I'm sure they will be absolutly delighted in that they are competing very solidly in regards to console sales this generation. Even if the PS3 wins out over them it won't have the same lead it had cme the end of the last generation.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

I dont understand why you're arguing it though - you fight to the death to defend PS3 and now you're arguing they have less sales than MS is giving them credit for? It doesn't make sense :p

-Spenser

There is no argument, it was an observation on my behalf that didn't even need a reply.

I, as in ME, as in MYSELF, thought the gap was about 6-7, maybe even near 8mil of a difference from what I was led to believe off the net.

Therefore when I seen 5, I thought, oh not as large as I thought - That is all.

[spenser.d]

RROD has been the biggest problem for MS. Are they actually making money now? I thought they were still paying off the extended warranty costs.

Microsoft has been making money for over a year now. And on top of it, as i stated earlier, month after month, they pull in more revenue than the PS3 and Wii combined in North America.

-Spenser

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Well sure no, you don't want it to die. But 10 years is too long and what you instead have happen is have developers look past the newer console at least early in its life in order to hit the larger install base. It's likely alot easier for them to do it technically since they don't have to learna new system either. And as a result AAA titles end up on the previous gen console rather than the current one which doesnt help you get a foot in the door and also results in developers being later to the table at learning how to really utilise the machine.

I mean lets be honest, how many console sellers does the PS3 have out currently, especially exclusive ones? Pretty much Nil although theres good ones still but nothing earth shattering (I realise some titles will sell a console for some ppl, but I'm specifically talking about the big franchises here like MGS, GT, KZ, Final Fantasy). Thats about to change with Metal Gear and Grand Turismo, Killzone ect but these titles are comming 18 - 24 months into the consoles life. Close to two years for the big titles to arrive given a November 06 release of the console. Xbox was getting it's Gears of Wars ect 12 months in.

Really they should have had God Of War and a few other titles on the PS3. I really don't believe in this "support the PS2 for 5 years" strategy what so ever and I do maintain it only serves to hold the newest gen back. Support it, but don't support it for ever and get the big name titles onto the newer console as they are the ones you really need there.

Um well, the PS2 sales and the fact it's still in shops and being bought makes "10 years" (give or take a bit of flexibility, really as long as your old gen console is supported for a few years more than the new) sensible to me :/

The developers can move off onto the PS4 in 5 years time if they want, but many will still like the option of making a cheaper PS3 title.

I mean, it's good to see FIFA, Madden and other sports games still get a yearly release on the PS2, along with the PS3 and 360 - Not everyone wants to be pushed into a new generation the second it's out.

I even seen today COD5 is suppose to be coming to the PS2 next year :|

[popisdead uk]

Microsoft has been making money for over a year now. And on top of it, as i stated earlier, month after month, they pull in more revenue than the PS3 and Wii combined in North America.

-Spenser

Fair enough, doesn't affect me in the slightest how much money they make, nor should it you unless you have shares?

Hardware sales are what counts for gamers apparently?

[magik]

Hardware sales are what counts for gamers apparently?

Yes. Absolutely they do.

I can spell it out for you as to why if you should require...

[popisdead uk]

Yes. Absolutely they do.

I can spell it out for you as to why if you should require...

No mate, no need. I just don't see the point in arguing about them.

If a console is selling thats good for the production of AAA rated games. It makes sense. I just don't ever remember this huge interest with the last generation sales.

[Smigit]

If a console is selling thats good for the production of AAA rated games. It makes sense. I just don't ever remember this huge interest with the last generation sales.

Neither, but then again the other guys were so far behind it probably wasn't worth it.

Well there was a fair bit of talk but it was more focused on the lack of sales on the GC and XBox side more so than anything else which then lead onto whether the XBox division was really worth the time and resources that had been put into it.

[magik]

No mate, no need. I just don't see the point in arguing about them.

If a console is selling thats good for the production of AAA rated games. It makes sense. I just don't ever remember this huge interest with the last generation sales.

It does seem a little odd if we don't have any real financial incentives to see sales, but that is pretty much the only way to determine the 'winner' in the console war. How else are we supposed to quantify it?

[Zab]

Who cares in the end.

Lets stop arguing, and if someone has on system stfu if you think its crap. The one you got is all that matters!