Sony Touts the Strength of the PS4 Ecosystem

Posted on June 13, 2017 by Paul Thurrott in Games, Xbox One with 62 Comments

Sony Touts the Strength of the PS4 Ecosystem

After weathering Microsoft’s Xbox One X assault, Sony this week spoke to the strength of its own video game platform. And it has some big numbers to back up its claims.

The biggest and most important number, perhaps, is 60.4 million. That’s the number of PlayStation 4 consoles that Sony has sold to consumers worldwide. Interestingly, that’s not much of an improvement from the 60 million figure that Sony revealed in April, however. At that time, a related report suggested that the firm was maintaining a 2-to-1 sales lead over Xbox One, with Microsoft selling approximately 33 million units worldwide.

So Sony wins that one handily, as always. But Sony also announced that the “PlayStation ecosystem has more than 70 million monthly active users worldwide as of the end of March 2017. And we can compare that to Microsoft’s Xbox user base, since the software giant announced in April that “Xbox Live monthly active users grew 13 percent” in the quarter ending in March to 52 million.

And that is interesting, right? Sony may outsell Microsoft by about 2-to-1 in console sales, but the respective user base sizes aren’t as far apart. This is due, no doubt, to the fact that Xbox Live is also available on Windows 10 PCs, which provides a much larger potential audience than any console. So it’s possible that Microsoft could actually surpass Sony in this category in the coming years. But even now, you can see the genius in Microsoft’s strategy of making Xbox more than just a console play.

Sony also announced that its PlayStation Plus service has 26.4 million paid subscribers worldwide as of the end of March 2017. This service is the equivalent of Xbox Live Gold, but Microsoft hasn’t broken down its Xbox Live user base into paid and unpaid groups for many years, so it’s hard to know how this compares.

Finally, Sony revealed that “active PS4 users worldwide spend more than 600 million hours in total per week on the platform as of the end of March 2017.” Microsoft did not use this metric in the comparable quarter, but I believe it has done so in the past. Whatever, we can’t really compare this either.

In any event, Sony puts up big numbers here. But there is a ray of hope for Microsoft: It may never beat the PS4 console directly, but Xbox could very well win out over PlayStation more broadly.

 

Tagged with

Join the discussion!

BECOME A THURROTT MEMBER:

Don't have a login but want to join the conversation? Become a Thurrott Premium or Basic User to participate

Register
Comments (62)

62 responses to “Sony Touts the Strength of the PS4 Ecosystem”

  1. adamcorbally

    Surely the next move is for Microsoft to bring its backwards compatible games/ xbox pass and games with gold to the windows store. I think the key here is the xbox 360 library however as these games would run ok on most laptops

    • Waethorn

      In reply to adamcorbally:

      License agreements with game publishers would prevent that.

      • Narg

        In reply to Waethorn:

        Prevent? Probably just slow it down. Those old games don't sell anymore, so getting a small trickle of income from them is a plus to the publishers. That is if they are around any more...

        I personally would love to see more Indy games update to compatibility.

        • Waethorn

          In reply to Narg:

          If Microsoft broke their license agreement, vendors all over would be down their throats for being hypocritical. The license agreement states that with very few exemptions, Xbox game software runs on Xbox hardware. Xbox services are exempt from that (because they offer XBL logins and achievement tracking on Windows PC's). Game developers put a big investment into the XDK to make sure it plays properly on specific game console hardware, and there are inherent IP protections in place because of targeting specific hardware. If Microsoft walked all over that, it would mean game publisher's investments would go to waste. Microsoft knows this already, which is why companies like Apple had to strike a deal with Microsoft for patent protection, so that Mac's could run Windows.


          If Microsoft decides to offer cross-platform game play-ability, they'd have to completely redo their development contracts with game publishers, and that's A LOT of paperwork and accounting which I just don't see them doing anytime soon. Maybe for the next "console" release (if there is one), but I doubt it. I would figure Microsoft's own hardware investments would not be profitable unless software publishers got a huge break on development costs, like free XDK's. And do you really think that's going to happen??


          No, the game console market is a closed market.


          Also, anti-competition bureaus would be all over them if they tried to leverage their industry-leading Windows brand to prop up their losing brand, Xbox.

  2. Ugur

    Overall both MS and Sony had some great games for their systems. I will finally buy the newest iterations of both consoles this year.

    Just regarding press conferences and which one was more impressive, i'd give it to Ubisoft since i felt like they had the most games i'd get, then MS in second place since they had a well done console unveil and on top a big amount of great games and then third place to Sony, because while their games were very solid, too, i felt like they had very few compared to the huge list MS showed and i also felt like a too large percentage of those were things they already showed in the previous year.

    If they had shown way more games that feeling could have been reduced, but as it is, they didn't show a huge amount of games and well, at least 5 or 6 of those were things they had shown last year.

    At the end i wondered why Sony didn't just do another 15 or 30 minutes and show way more games, the smaller ones just shorter.

    It was also surprising to me that they had so few Indie games shown.

    I know they have so many more games to come out this year, so i don't see it as negative they showed so few, but regarding few Indie games shown i do wonder a bit if that was due to a focus change, since it's known basically the main guys who pushed for Indies there are not at Sony anymore.


    Overall, at the end of the day it's the games that matter most for consoles and i feel like both consoles will have a very solid lineup this year.


    I think the Xbox One will continue to sell worse for a while since the Slim is weaker than the PS4 Pro and the One X will come out late in the year and then also cost 100 more.

    And it'll take a while until more and more people are into spending more for 4k and/or better graphics/higher fps (and then also more and more games will just run way worse on the slim over time).


    Overall MS had a quite solid showing though and i think over time they can catch up nicely in sales numbers, one great exclusive game or way better running/looking cross platform title at a time.


  3. Narg

    Let the chest thumping begin! :)

    Interesting numbers on the user base. Good article Paul.

  4. Bats

    I hate to break this to Paul and all the Xbox fans, but Microsoft will never beat out Sony. 

    Sony is the Google of gaming, where their specialty is entertainment. Their ecosystem is vast and their brand is reknowned. Not only that, but clearly their people are smarter. The only "blip" on their record was designing the all-time ultra supercomputer, aka The Playstation 3, to which they failed to get game developers to invest in. Other than that they are practically unbeatable. Microsoft couldn't even beat Nintendo and their vastly technologically inferior Wii. 


    This is not to "put down" Microsoft in anyway, but to present and layout the facts. Afterall, remember the Paul's phrase last year after he commented on the Xbox One S announcement? He said, "This is what winning looks like!" One year later, Microsoft didn't even make a scratch on Sony's lead. 

    So when Paul says Xbox can broadly beat out the Playstation.... I seriously doubt it. 


    • Stooks

      In reply to Bats:

      "Their ecosystem is vast"


      ?????? What ecosystem are you talking about? Outside of gaming on their hardware how can I use their ecosystem? Can I play PS games on Sony phones or computers.....oh wait to not go bankrupt they sold off those divisions. Do they have some cloud I can store files on so I can access them on a computer or their console? How about photos?


      Sony is shadow of its former self. Microsoft or Google or Apple could dip into petty cash and buy the company today.

      • Waethorn

        In reply to Stooks:

        Sony still runs their phone division. Not sure what you're talking about there.


        Also, Remote Play for PS4 works fine on PC and Mac. Not sure where you've been for the last year or so.


        Ever heard of DLNA? How about YouTube casting? How about Plex? PS4's got them all.

        • Stooks

          In reply to Waethorn:

          You are right I just googled Sony Phone business and got lots of hits about them selling it, massive layoffs etc but they have not sold it....yet. Maybe I just thought they did because I NEVER see anyone with a Sony phone anymore.


          I have used Remote play....on a 1gig wired network. It, like all other remote play schemes pales in comparison to the real deal. Niche feature at best.


          Yeah the PS4 has a youtube app.....so does everything else.


          Eco system would be I use the Onedrive app on my iPhone to Sync photos and then see them on Macbook, Windows PC or Xbox One.

          • Waethorn

            In reply to Stooks:

            I use Remote Play just fine on a Wifi-N connection. Works great on a sh*tty Apollo Lake Celeron system.


            And yes, they still sell phones. They just announced some new models recently, in fact. And no, they haven't sold it. They said they'd be interested in a sale, but as of last year, they're making a profit at it.


            OneDrive sucks for photo sharing. It's garbage.

            • Stooks

              In reply to Waethorn:

              "OneDrive sucks for photo sharing."


              Yeah you are right the Sony offering is so much better?

            • jrickel96

              In reply to Waethorn:

              Sony is always up and down on profitability. Their film assets have done poorly. PS4 has done well, but they are still paying off development on the PS4 Pro and no PS5 is likely until at least 2019.


              Spencer has also indicated that MS will have more first party stuff coming, but they focused on the hardware first. I think had Spencer been in charge of X1 development, Microsoft never would have ceded the technological top dog spot to Sony and they wouldn't have botched the launch.


              Truth is that most of Sony's success has come from Microsoft messing up the launch, but Spencer has been fixing things and got the jump on Sony with the X1X. 22 launch exclusives before next E3 and I expect we'll get a lot more first party stuff shown off by this time next year, including a Halo 6 that is far better in campaign mode than Halo 5.

        • Tallin

          In reply to Waethorn:

          The argument was regarding the Sony ecosystem. Sony no longer has one, outside of PS4. They killed off PS Now for everything but PC and PS4. Their PC division split off, so PC doesn't exist in their ecosystem. Vita and PSTV is dead. From what I can see, remote play doesn't even work on Sony's own Android TVs without sideloading.

          Also: DLNA, Plex and YouTube? Is that the best you've got?

          • Waethorn

            In reply to Tallin:

            DLNA handles all media streaming, just like on an Xbox now. Plex is also extremely popular. Not sure why you think Xbox has anything superior to that. Remember Xbox Media Center Extender? It's dead, Jim.

            • Tallin

              In reply to Waethorn:

              1. DLNA is so 2005.
              2. I was more remarking on the fact that everybody has Plex, YouTube and DLNA. I mean, my home theatre receiver gets DLNA.
              3. I wasn't making this a competition, but Xbox has more options thanks to UWP, like Emby and soon Kodi. It also has Live TV options (native and HD HomeRun app), and DVR through the HD HomeRun app.
              • Waethorn

                In reply to Tallin:

                You don't know what you're talking about. DLNA is the basis for all generic media streamers, sorry to say.


                I don't need a special proprietary branded app to use DLNA, just support by the hardware.

                • Tallin

                  In reply to Waethorn:

                  DLNA as a consumer-facing technology is terrible. Nothing but a folder structure exposing media files. No rich metadata so no way to sort or search from metadata on the fly. It was cool when I got my 360, but there are much better options out there now. If you're talking about the underlying streaming technology, you may as well be telling me PS4 network supports TCP/IP. That's great, but who really cares. Everyone has it and all that really matters to the end user is how it's used, not that it's there.

        • EraseYourself

          In reply to Waethorn:Sony refused to cooperate with co-op for rocket league and Minecraft. VR sold a million units on an install base of 60 million. They are making bad decisions and are not for the gamers.


    • chaad_losan

      In reply to Bats:

      Sony truly is a shell of it's former self. The Insurance and PlayStation and movie divisions are the only ones making actual money. MS has a much larger ecosystem with a 400 million windows 10 installs and a billion computers out there along with XBOX. All windows machines going forward will be tied to the XBOX in a number of ways including play anywhere. MS is making money hand over fist. Sony is still struggling.

    • Waethorn

      In reply to Bats:

      The PS3 required a much different approach to development, favouring methods for multi-threading and divided workloads. First-party stuff, and stuff from Playstation-exclusive brands like Naughty Dog and Ninja Theory really showed off the potential of story-driven, graphics-heavy content for the game console. Lots of independent developers were fine with development, due mainly because the same concepts apply to mobile gaming, which has accelerated by leaps and bounds since the introduction of multi-core ARM chips. AMD saw the writing on the wall, which is why all of their principle APU's are built as quad-cores now with decent graphics options - even their low-power chip option. Intel has only recently picked up on this. I don't know why they persist with low-power chips with dual-core and Hyperthreading. Hyperthreading doesn't show very good gains, and it's really just a cheat. Software needs to be optimized better for x86. You have these content creation programs that do stuff like photo and video editing, but you can do a lot of that on an iPad too. There's gotta be a reason why there is such a price and power gulf between these power-sipping ARM chips and Intel's "heavy" Core i7's that seemingly do a lot of the same stuff, otherwise people will continue to settle for the cheap-and-simple option.

  5. chaad_losan

    The playstation VR segment was a total snooze fest. All the games that were not Skyrim where all mainly move games. Not VR games. And the graphics level is all PS3 on PSVR. The rest of the games were not thrilling. What was that android thing? Yes you are a product, shoot it! Just because they gave Siri a human face does not make her one. The rest of it was almost totally expected. I thought the MS Sbox One X was a much better presentation with lots more meat in it.

  6. bwinow01

    After these E3 presentations - which have been rather lackluster (or unsurprising) by both Sony and Xbox - I wonder the direction we're heading with the whole "console wars." Sony's lead is simply too large to overcome this generation and a $500 premium console from Microsoft won't really help that. So we look to the next generation. We know that Microsoft would love to see the Xbox brand have a bigger presence, not just on consoles, but on PCs. In 3-6 years does Microsoft push a Netflix-type model for "Xbox?" If it is successful, they could provide some competition against Steam on the PC and could even allow "Xbox" to run as a service on other platforms such as Sony's future Playstations. We have seen Microsoft really push the software as a service (saas) model with other products, why not Xbox? Maybe they make the occassional Xbox console as a "signature" console, but since it doesn't really feed into their profits, maybe they drop it? I don't really have an answer, but I don't really get the gut feeling that Microsoft is trying to compete hard against Sony. It seems like they are trying to just do their own thing now ... similar to how Nintendo is doing its own thing and not directly competing anymore.

  7. warpdesign

    Microsoft quite beat Sony for the PS3/360 generation: Microsoft sold around 84 million consoles while Sony sold around 80 million. Plus most multiplatform games were slightly better on the 360, and not mentionning the huge number of indy games that were on 360 first, plus the great exclusive games.


    The Xbox 360 was less expensive (at least on launch), easier to program, and had great games.

    For the current generation, this is completely inversed: not only the PS4 (pro) is less expensive, but it's also easy to program and most games perform a lot better than on the Xbox One. Oh, and the UI of the Xbox is really slow, sluggish and buggy: I had to reboot the console to launch some of my games when I bought it.


    Worse, Sony has lots of very good exclusive titles while Microsoft has very few.

    Much worse, lots of indy games aren't released at all or come later on Xbox One. Later, and slower/more aliasing.

    The Xbox One was also more expensive, and this isn't changing with the Xbox One X that's a more expensive than the PS4 Pro.


    The PS4 is literally killing the competition, and even breaking record: 60 consoles sold after only 4+ years is huge!

    Buyers want to play games, and they want to play with their friends. I don't have a single friend owning an Xbox One here in France. Sony clearly wins. Players want to buy great games, PS4 has it all.


    There's not a single reason I would recommend an Xbox One over a PS4 today. And unfortunately I don't see it changing anytime soon, even with the Xbox One X. Although it's a very nice piece of hardware and I'd love to recommend it...

  8. TechnologyTemperance

    I feel like there is an underestimated "herd mentality" when it comes to console sales. Online gaming is so critical, and my guess is people like to play in groups with the same people (similar to the guilds back in the day). And each guild has a couple of "leaders" that drive the direction of the larger group. The Xbox One X is a play to try to get some of these influencers to switch, and bring the rest of the crew with them. Microsoft clearly lost those folks with performance + drm/always on + Kinect + price at the first launch of the Xbox One, and are using pure performance to try to get them back.

  9. Lars lalaa

    The XOX will be a tough sale for MS. I just don’t see people jumping on it. Sony didn‘t cut the price for their systems. It seems they have no worries at all. Honestly, I think it wasn't a good decision by Microsoft to put so much effort, hype and time into a console refresh. It might even hurt them in a long run. Either when a new generation starts or when the system isn’t successful.


    • bwinow01

      In reply to Lars lalaa:

      I really like the new One X hardware, but I have to agree with you on this. I sort of think that Microsoft should have introduced this (maybe next year) as the console to start the next generation. The machine doesn't really look like a mid-generation upgrade, but it's being marketed as that. This would have really put Sony on the defensive with people asking when Sony would introduce a next gen console. But it is what it is. It's a great time to be a gamer.

  10. Nonmoi

    PS4 at 2017: we have the exclusives, we have all the exclusive, we have all the exclusive you want this year that will come next year, and we also have exclusive you want yesterday but will come in an undetermined date in the future, maybe not even on PS4, but next gen console! SO BUY A PS4 PRO TODAY, so you can play all the exclusives of yesteryear!



    For those who downvote, name one single new game (not DLC or skins) that Sony showcased at E3 that is set to be released this year, not 2018 or TBA.

    • Dryloch

      In reply to Nonmoi:

      Seeing as how Sony already has 5 exclusives that have gotten excellent review this year and Microsoft has Halo Wars 2 that got mediocre reviews I think they are still ahead. Before I get hammered I do own an Xbox 1 S and bought Horizon 3, Gears 4 and all the other MS exclusives. I play everything.

  11. Stooks

    Sony pushed gaming first with the PS4, at a initial lower cost ($399 vs $499) with slightly faster hardware on paper, which became a myth and that was the right sauce to win this round.


    At the same time Microsoft probably made every mistake (initially) with the Xbox One that they could. Higher price, forcing Kinect, slightly less powerful hardware, less focus on games/more focus on media center and bad PR around issues like always connected to the Internet etc.


    All that was 4 years ago. While the PS4 is successful Sony is a shell of a company compared to what they used to be. How many divisions have they sold off since the launch of the PS4? They still have their movie division but they don't have the cloud power that Microsoft has. The PS4 Pro is pretty much a dud for many reasons. Lack of 4K BR, not allowing 1080p games to use the extra hardware, 4k gaming is nothing but a gimmick with dynamic resolutions/checkerboarding, some games at 1080p are actually slower than on the original PS4, etc.


    I just don't see the future play for Sony anymore. The Xbox One X is not only more powerful, but it allows all games to use that power out of the box. So with no patching you will get better performance on current Xbox One games. Those games that used dynamic resolution during busy times, simply wont any more and will hit their max FPS all the time now. Backwards compatibility is only getting better on the Xbox (cant wait to play crimson skies again) and not going to happen on the PS4. Cloud streaming of games just sucks in my experience.

    • Jester

      In reply to Stooks:

      It will be interesting to see how many 3rd party developers will take full advantage of the One X. I bet there will be an lot parity with the PS4 Pro.

      • Stooks

        In reply to Jester:

        Right now as it stands, or as I understand it the Xbox would have the advantage.


        From what I understand Sony is trying to keep the same performance for the PS4 and Pro, specifically on 1080p which is where 98% of console gamers are. Meaning they gimp the Pro in some way on 1080p so as not to give Pro gamers an advantage. If the game is patched for 4k, then at 1080p it gets super sampling which makes it look better but the FPS cap is still there. I am not sure if this has changed from the initial launch but that would irritate me to no end if I bought a pro?


        Where as the Xbox One X does not do that. So an unpatched game will at least get a performance boost right away, as in probably 60fps and no dymanic resolution dropping anymore or just a better overall feel especially when games get really busy with action. A patch could add better graphics and 4k (4k ish) support.

        • Waethorn

          In reply to Stooks:

          "Meaning they gimp the Pro in some way on 1080p so as not to give Pro gamers an advantage."


          Not true. 1080p games can use the extra GPU power for enhanced textures and increased polygon counts. They can even use HDR. Game devs are allowed to use the increased horsepower as they see fit - and there is no mandatory requirement to have a game have increased resolutions, whether it be native 4K or anything higher than 1080p.

          • Stooks

            In reply to Waethorn:

            It needs a patch or it is gimped.


            From what I have read about the Xbox One X that is not true, the game just uses the extra horse power. Patches will enable 4k and better graphics, but current un-patched games that are often FPS challenged will get to use the new horse power.


            From Euro gamer.....


            "Speaking to Eurogamer, PS4 architect and really clever person Mark Cerny explains how the GPU (graphics processor unit) is repeated in the PS4 Pro. “We doubled the GPU size by essentially placing it next to a mirrored version of itself. That gives us an extremely clean way to support the existing 700 [PS4] titles. We just turn off half the GPU and run it at something quite close to the original GPU."


            But, stick a Pro game, in and both chips are activated, doubling the GPU’s power while the CPU runs at the same rate - something Cerny says is important to ensure compatibility with older games."

            • Waethorn

              In reply to Stooks:

              If a game targeting a specific framerate isn't patched, timings are going to be off. Games will need to be patched for them to scale correctly. That's a given. You'll get silent patches for games, just as you do for games targeting a specific console firmware version. That applies to ALL consoles.

              • Stooks

                In reply to Waethorn:

                Sorry you are wrong. Un-patched games on the Xbox One X get the performance boost of the hardware. They said so on stage. Without a patch the graphics will not get better or you will not have 4k but the game will get a boost in terms of overall speed/FPS and loading. The game will get CPU/GPU and RAM boost (9gigs of game RAM) with no patch. It would be like playing a game, call it BF1 on a PC at medium settings. You then swap out the CPU, GPU and add RAM but you keep the game at medium settings. It will run better/smoother. A patch will up the graphics fidelity.


                The PS4 Pro recently did release boost mode in their 4.5 update which will give un-patched games a boot (if you turn on the mode) of the CPU upgrade but not the GPU. To get the GPU upgrade you need a patch. Prior to the boost mode you needed a patch for any kind of performance boost on un-patched games.

                • Waethorn

                  In reply to Stooks:

                  You're wrong.


                  Here's the proof:


                  "There will be some cases where we have to dial down some of those attributes... in some games we potentially have to dial down the number of CUs, for example, to maintain compatibility with that title. But again these are all things that Microsoft does, we've always done, that's true of all 360 titles on Xbox One. We just make sure it runs the best it possibly can on Scorpio and we're very excited that Scorpio really will be the best place to run all your Xbox content"


                  ALL Xbox 360 games need a patch to run on Xbox One. In other words, they'll have to implement compatibility shims in the OS for games to work, or else issue a full patch.

    • Waethorn

      In reply to Stooks:

      PS4 is not "faster on paper". It's faster. Period.


      Framerates prove that, time and time again.


      So do gamers, for that matter.


      "[PS4 Pro] not allowing 1080p games to use the extra hardware"


      #fakenews


      • Stooks

        In reply to Waethorn:

        Yes it was faster in real life. However most of the time it hardly made a NOTICEABLE difference.


        Meaning games on the Xbox One might dip into dynamic resolutions changes dropping the over all res to keep the frame rate up, where the PS4 would not or would do so less because it had more power. To a gamer it was hardly noticeable.


        It took the likes of Digital foundry to analyze it and tell the world what was going on. Often the Xbox One might use dynamic resolution more but it resulted in a more fluid gaming experience overall with fewer dips in FPS compared to the PS4. It really depended upon the game and the developer.

  12. jrickel96

    Hours spent on the platform are deceptive because both are used for more than gaming. Binge watching Netflix on either console will count as time on the platform. Just as MS can be accused for using favorable numbers, Sony can too. Chances are the amount of time gaming is far less, probably less than half that number. Sony knows how much time is spent gaming and how much time is spent using the console passively as does Microsoft.


    There are roughly 52 million active Xbox Live subscribers now, probably a bit more since end of the first quarter. The Gold subscription rate is thought to have grown to about 60-65% of active users (it used to be about 50%), so they probably have between 32 and 35 million paid Live Gold subscribers. Sony has roughly a 30 million unit lead in hardware sales between PS3 and PS4, so the likelihood that Live Gold has more paid subscribers tells a lot about user engagement.


    Both consoles are actually doing quite well. The PS4 attracts more casual gamers along with some hardcore, but it's more likely to be an impulse buy. Frankly, the success of both is impressive. but Xbox One does much better in game sales and paid subscriptions than you'd think for a console that is nearly 2-to-1 behind.


    Will be interesting to see what happens with the Xbox One X. I don't think that'll kill the base PS4, but the PS4 Pro has already had some lagging sales issues after launch. The X1X will attract the enthusiasts and the X1S will be at a lower price. So the Xbox will still sell well.

  13. Waethorn

    Consensus among viewers is that Sony brought the sizzle, while Microsoft just fizzled. That "ecosystem", Paul, is the actual game library. Games people really want to play.


    This "generation", if you want to call it that, looks like a repeat of the PS2/Xbox1 generation: Microsoft, late to the party with their higher-tier game console, overpriced, lacking games, and with fewer players. Fitting that it should be called "Xbox One", after all. (Did Microsoft already foresee this failure and name it accordingly?)

    • jrickel96

      In reply to Waethorn:

      Funny, I've read very little positives about PS and tons about MS. I think you let your bias blind you so much.


      Actually a bunch of PS fanboys have said they were very disappointed in Sony's show. So where are you getting the consensus from?

      • Waethorn

        In reply to jrickel96:

        You're just not paying attention. IGN's rankings showed more people tuning into the live stream of the Sony event. The hosts were more impressed by it too.

        • Stooks

          In reply to Waethorn:

          Or not....


          http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-06-13-sonys-flat-e3-conference-shows-signs-of-a-mid-generation-lull



          • Waethorn

            In reply to Stooks:

            Hmm....let's see....well, let's just say I see lots of Microsoft ads on their site for one thing.


            And let's look another:


            https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2017/06/12/sony-beats-microsoft-at-e3-once-again-by-doing-what-it-does-best/#2c34c3246200


            Huh. How about that.

            • Stooks

              In reply to Waethorn:

              I get it, forbes is the best place to read about the gaming industry, forget a dedicated gaming site with lots of cred. The forbes guy liked the switch the most at the end of the article. I guess I am just clueless.

        • jrickel96

          In reply to Waethorn:


          Most people noticed that Sony had to shift their entire strategy. In the past they always argued that power mattered more than content when the PS4 had the edge and they had to shift.


          Eurogamer and other BIG Sony supporters weren't all that impressed. More exclusives were delayed and while some do look promising, there were also duds. If I recall, No Man's Sky was hugely touted a year ago and fell flat on its face.


          They have some good IP. How much it actually sells isn't all that well known. Most games are cross platform that people play because the big devs don't do full on exclusives.


          Seriously, Call of Duty is the biggest and you can play it anywhere. Battlefront 2 will sell more than any Sony exclusive.


          Sony's major problem is they've spent the past four years touting superior power and telling people that horsepower matters and now they have to change their tune.


          And Xbox has a lot of launch exclusives that cover a whole gamut of genres, from JRPG to platformers to FPS to zombie shooters, etc. They did a very good job of showing they had a diverse lineup.


          Phil Spencer has also said they have several signed games that they have not announced. I think a large part of that is learning from Scalebound, etc and making sure they know a game is going somewhere first. He also said they could have down a 4K Halo demo, but that would have likely delayed the game, which I expect to be a huge showpiece at E3 next year.

          • Waethorn

            In reply to jrickel96:

            Sony execs had said publicly that they didn't like the way Sean Murray conducted himself during interviews. I'm not sure how that's news.


            "Most games are cross platform that people play because the big devs don't do full on exclusives."


            Maybe you haven't heard of this little company called Bungie....


            "Sony's major problem is they've spent the past four years touting superior power and telling people that horsepower matters and now they have to change their tune."


            Nope. Not at all. What they touted is that they LISTENED TO GAMERS - their core market. Microsoft didn't. That's why people are buying the PS4 2-to-1.

    • Stooks

      In reply to Waethorn:

      I simply don't but the exclusive argument. If they tracked, on both consoles, hours of games played I bet it would be 95%+ multi-platform games.


      The biggest money made will be on multi-platform games. Yes because they are on multiple platforms but also because they are top tier games in terms of more people wanting to play them.


      I own both a PS4 and Xbox One. I have played exclusives on both, but exclusives would never way into my choice if I could only own one. I also fine that most of the PS4 exclusives are either really old games like the Ratched and Clank stuff/God of war or IMHO really odd indie like games that never do anything for me. Uncharted was great, so was last of us but I was done with both before I got my PS4. I wanted an updated Skyrim before any exclusive on either console and was happy when it launched.

      • Waethorn

        In reply to Stooks:

        Maybe it's multi-platform, but there are certainly more PS4 players of Destiny than there are on Xbox. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that's true of most of the games that are multi-platform, just even given the console sales figures alone.

    • chaad_losan

      In reply to Waethorn:

      Seriously, why are you here? Why do you bag Microsoft with half truths and innuendo at every opportunity? Why did you purchase a premium Thurrott membership in the first place when all you do is troll?

  14. Jules Wombat

    I don't think Sony has anything to worry about, it is clearly continues to cream Xbox sales.

Leave a Reply