Titanfall tops chart, but PS4 leads hardware again in March - NPD

[George P Global Moderator]

Some make it sound like titanfall isn't a success now because, what the Xbox one didn't sell more in march? That's silly really, the game is a success I don't think EA thinks otherwise either. There's no way either of these systems are going to sell 700k in the U.S. in one month again, even with a big game release like titanfall or infamous. Anyone who expects that on either side is dreaming.

[theyarecomingforyou]

There's no doom and the sky isn't falling for MS, both Sony and MS were behind the Wii last gen, hardly mattered.    The market is big enough to support 3 systems even though the WiiU is in very bad shape.   To that extent who finishes first or second is just a fanboy argument that leads to nowhere.    If this gen ends with the PS4 having sold 2 million units more than the XB1 I'd hardly call that negative for MS.   The days of Sony running off with the console market like with the PS2 are long gone, it's not going to happen again as much as some might think.

Both Sony and Microsoft lost money with the last generation. Not only that but Sony has been posting massive losses for years and its credit rating is 'junk'. The only winner from the last generation was Nintendo but the disastrous launch of the Wii U has undone all that success. The industry cannot continue as it is. There is need for a sustainable alternative, which is what Valve is promoting with Steam Machines.

 

Microsoft and Sony are each committing billions to consoles in the hope that they can get the edge and force the other out of business. It's not sustainable. Despite Sony's success with the PS4 it is certainly the company in the most precarious position. However, Microsoft needs to make money from the Xbox and if it can't it has other options, as it can optimise the Windows platform for gaming and create an alternative to Steam Machines (like the Xbox was originally intended to be).

 

I don't foresee either company pulling out of the console market?even if Sony goes into bankruptcy it likely wouldn't significantly affect the PS4?but this generation doesn't have the performance to last as long as the last generation and there will likely be competition from other players (in addition to Valve we're likely to see Google, Apple and maybe even Amazon get involved). There is huge potential for a disruptive change in the gaming industry. The current situation cannot continue indefinitely.

[spenser.d]

Some make it sound like titanfall isn't a success now because, what the Xbox one didn't sell more in march? That's silly really, the game is a success I don't think EA thinks otherwise either. There's no way either of these systems are going to sell 700k in the U.S. in one month again, even with a big game release like titanfall or infamous. Anyone who expects that on either side is dreaming.

Dreaming is putting it lightly :P

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Both Sony and Microsoft lost money with the last generation. Not only that but Sony has been posting massive losses for years and its credit rating is 'junk'. The only winner from the last generation was Nintendo but the disastrous launch of the Wii U has undone all that success. The industry cannot continue as it is. There is need for a sustainable alternative, which is what Valve is promoting with Steam Machines.

Microsoft and Sony are each committing billions to consoles in the hope that they can get the edge and force the other out of business. It's not sustainable. Despite Sony's success with the PS4 it is certainly the company in the most precarious position. However, Microsoft needs to make money from the Xbox and if it can't it has other options, as it can optimise the Windows platform for gaming and create an alternative to Steam Machines (like the Xbox was originally intended to be).

I don't foresee either company pulling out of the console market?even if Sony goes into bankruptcy it likely wouldn't significantly affect the PS4?but this generation doesn't have the performance to last as long as the last generation and there will likely be competition from other players (in addition to Valve we're likely to see Google, Apple and maybe even Amazon get involved). There is huge potential for a disruptive change in the gaming industry. The current situation cannot continue indefinitely.

Disruptive change is good, but as a watcher of the Jimquisition each week it really needs to come from the devs and publishers. Hardware isn't as important as scrapping the current idea that only the AAA model can exist when really the "double AA" releases and indies can mop up tons of free money the big pubs keep ignoring in their quests for GTA amounts.

If Sony can keep pushing the PS4 along as essentially a "steam box lite" the generation will do fine length wise. A crash is coming and it will most certainly be the modest budget titles leading the charge from the ashes.

By double AA I'm referring to a title that knows it has a specific audience, knows it has a specific gameplay style and knows roughly how many realistic sales to expect. So it budgets wisely, doesn't spend millions trying to introduce any of the core dudebro gameplay elements and releases to good financial success and delight from its core audience.

It's ludicrous something like TR can sell ~5 million copies and be called unsuccessful. Same with Dead Space being labeled as unsuccessful despite selling millions.

It's also that kind of current mentality that has people looking at Titanfall questioning how can EA be happy? Think of the millions spent in the partnership, all the advertising and the hype generated by the press. I mean cmon, the titles I listed above are published by EA. EAs AAA outlook is one of the core problems right now and you'd be daft to think they won't apply that outlook to Titanfall. Its by the original COD devs, has all the dudebro FPS boxes ticked and is clearly what EA want to grow to get Activisions COD money. InFamous on the other hand knows it has a core audience, sequels have been churned out when the first two sell between 1~2 million. The advertising budget hardly seems massive either to scale with expectations, but it is Sony I guess, they don't always advertise their games lol. That is why there is a different view of these two games when it comes to success though for anyone questioning will Sony be happy with InFamous despite 7m console sales.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Disruptive change is good, but as a watcher of the Jimquisition each week it really needs to come from the devs and publishers. Hardware isn't as important as scrapping the current idea that only the AAA model can exist when really the "double AA" releases and indies can mop up tons of free money the big pubs keep ignoring in their quests for GTA amounts.

Indeed. That's why I like the idea of Steam Machines, as Steam has a wide variety of free games, indie games, mod support, community features and AAA releases. The prices are also a lot more reasonable than those of consoles. In terms of hardware you can have premium models (4K output, massive storage) or budget models (1080p, capable of running basic games) rather than being based around a single price point.

 

If Sony can keep pushing the PS4 along as essentially a "steam box lite" the generation will do fine length wise. A crash is coming and it will most certainly be the modest budget titles leading the charge from the ashes.

Sony has gone out of its way to appeal to indies and it is a sensible move after the criticism directed at Microsoft. It is also working on VR, which could be a game-changer and swing things back in its favour. However, I still believe the fundamental business model is unsustainable - subsidising hardware on such a massive scale is an incredibly risky venture, while the fixed nature of the platform makes it vulnerable towards the end of its lifecycle. It also leads to inflated game prices and, as you say, it is focused too much on AAA games.

[GotBored]

Sony has gone out of its way to appeal to indies and it is a sensible move after the criticism directed at Microsoft. It is also working on VR, which could be a game-changer and swing things back in its favour. However, I still believe the fundamental business model is unsustainable - subsidising hardware on such a massive scale is an incredibly risky venture, while the fixed nature of the platform makes it vulnerable towards the end of its lifecycle. It also leads to inflated game prices and, as you say, it is focused too much on AAA games.

 

Sony already has the console market in its favor, they are taking a chance with VR to gain even more market share but I'm guessing if it becomes a success it will just be copied over to the other consoles.

Their business model for the PS3 (taking losses to subsidize the console cost for customers) worked out in the end and overall was a profitable business model. Microsoft had the RROD fiasco which cost them over a billion dollars so they both probably were losing roughly the same amount of money to either gain a larger user base (subsidized console cost) or hold onto its user base (warranty repairs).

 

This gen they have both learnt from the previous-gen mistakes. Sony isn't building a $1000 console and then subsidizing console costs by a few hundred dollars and Microsoft seems to have a huge box/enclosure with lots of fans and external power brick so its doesn't overheat and RROD.

 

Sony did take a risk with GDDR5 because they were relying on the cost of it to drop significantly before they began manufacturing the PS4 or else they would have had another very expensive console.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Their business model for the PS3 (taking losses to subsidize the console cost for customers) worked out in the end and overall was a profitable business model.

Actually, it wasn't profitable at all. That was the point I was making - Sony and Microsoft are each gambling that the other will fail and that they'll be able to corner the market in order to make a profit. It's not a sustainable business model.

 

This gen they have both learnt from the previous-gen mistakes. Sony isn't building a $1000 console and then subsidizing console costs by a few hundred dollars and Microsoft seems to have a huge box/enclosure with lots of fans and external power brick so its doesn't overheat and RROD.

Both are using mostly off-the-shelf components and have demonstrated major performance shortcomings. That means they're not as expensive to manufacture but they're unlikely to have the same lifecycle. Microsoft and Sony are still selling their consoles at a loss (once you factor in build costs, marketing, distribution, etc) and reliant upon software sales.

 

The XB1 and PS4 are bigger liabilities than they are assets.

[McKay]

Actually, it wasn't profitable at all. That was the point I was making - Sony and Microsoft are each gambling that the other will fail and that they'll be able to corner the market in order to make a profit. It's not a sustainable business model.

 

Both are using mostly off-the-shelf components and have demonstrated major performance shortcomings. That means they're not as expensive to manufacture but they're unlikely to have the same lifecycle. Microsoft and Sony are still selling their consoles at a loss (once you factor in build costs, marketing, distribution, etc) and reliant upon software sales.

 

The XB1 and PS4 are bigger liabilities than they are assets.

 

The consoles are currently sold for a profit, if the distribution of that turns it into a loss, then the prices of the console parts will drop. They're in a much better situation than last gen. They've sold more consoles than last gen did at this point. and those consoles were sold at a loss at the start.

 

The Xbox division was profitable after a few years from the 360's launch. Until the extended warranty fiasco.

[LaP]

Yes, sold to retailers doesn't mean sold to customers, that's obvious. Regardless retail isn't buying if they're not selling, what the difference between the two is, is a guess but business wise I doubt it's a lot, probably 200k to 400k tops.  I think it's safe to say they've sold through 4.5 million at least.

 

For games it's important to understand the difference. Often retailers buy many copies of a games that is supposed to be big but then the game is not selling and the retailers have to clear the stock at a low price. The game ends up selling 2 or 3 millions but since most were sold at around 40$ it's not really good.

 

In case of hardware yeah it doesn't really matter at this point as all those xbox one and PS4 will eventually be sold at the regular price.

 

Would be interesting to know how much the PC version of titanfall sold versus the One version.

[trooper11]

So my question would be to those trying to make light of the results is where is the good news. And I know the answer will be along the lines of "well they're selling more than 360 in the same time". Meaningless. It's promising numbers, but not enough. MS sold 1.1 million consoles since January. Sony have done that in 1 month. Not even bringing up the whole sold to retail vs sold to customers discussion (which is valid no matter how you want to downplay it). I'm not black and white on the results though, I am the gamer that sits between Armageddon and blind faith. I'm offering my opinion how to improve it going forward, even then who knows if it's enough to outsell PS4. I think the price cut is the first step in trying though.

Your right, there is no good news. Hence why I don't believe that even making all the changes you suggest will make a difference. Too much positive mojo for Sony, too little for MS. The community will reject MS going forward. The only people that will support the X1 will be gamers outside of the major community. In fact, the more MS cuts (price and dropping Kinect), the more that the perception will be to avoid it because its a sign that its going away. There won't be a sudden surge of support that shows that MS was right to make changes.

It could be that the first impression will make or break you. Maybe Sony overcame that last gen due to more built in brand loyalty/history with customers or maybe it worked because the consoles did not release at the same time. I'm not sure.

 

And yes both games came out, inFamous was on sale for 11 days and it still managed to get #2 on a single platform. It's hard to argue the numbers for Titanfall because NPD has collected both platforms under 1 number. The reversal on the hype of Titanfall propelling the X1 ahead of PS4 for this month really is bewildering IMO. Now it's like it didn't happen and all just a dream that it was silly to think it could happen. Everything was in its favour (the marketing, the bundles, the special offers), and it still didn't outsell a supply constrained console, with a price increase in Canada, with less launch games and a AAA game at the end of the month which was described as "niche" with significantly less marketing. I mean, you couldn't have asked for an easier month, how do you make it sound good?

I'm not denying that Titanfall had way more hype and the expectation was there, I'm just pointing out the reality. Your a realist right? Well get real here. Let's look at the real numbers after all the hype and bs has passed. Titanfall did not meet expectations and inFamous did well. That resulted in what we are seeing here, console sales that did not result in an X1 lead.

You don't make that sound good, you just take it for what it is: It turns out that an established IP was enough to keep ps4 sales ahead of the X1

Then you can speculate all you want on why that happened and what needs to be done. I'm just saying that we shouldn't gloss over the fact that the ps4 actually had a good release in March.

 

As for inFamous sales numbers being congratulated, I didn't see that, certainly not here on Neowin. The news came and went with barely a whimper. Once a full month figure is announced we'll have a better idea at how it performed.

Are you seriously going to use the thread here as your evidence around inFamous? Come on, your better then that. How about Gaf? What was the reception like there?

Regardless, inFamous was doing well when it launched, so why that is being resisted is beyond me.

 

Kinect/price cut hit, it's no use IMO because you've swapped losing money slowly by not selling enough consoles for losing money even faster by giving it away for free. It's not like there is a software library to reap back that money to justify the kinect. Not unless you expect Kinect Sports Rivals sales to somehow take off unexplained and nothing AFAIK on the horizon which uses it either in a kinect only title or even as a supported feature. Drop the kinect from the box and you don't have the same problem.

 

You are still thinking as though Kinect lives or dies with dedicated gaming content. My point is MS has given no indication that it believes that. In fact, almost every move they have made gives the impression that they consider Kinect to be beyond a dedicated gaming device for motion controlled games. Why else would they heavily downplay Kinect as a gaming device from day one of their announcements all the way through launch.

If MS feels like Kinect is more of a burden then it is a value, then drop it, I agree. If they feel its a long term investment for the platform, something they have plans to tap into over time, then their only choice is to eat the losses.

 

Anyway if Microsoft really want to compete with the PS4 then they need to do a couple things in my opinion. 

1. Get rid of the Kinect. Insta $100.00 price drop. 

2. Update the hardware in the current model. Its all well and good that the 'cloud' will improve performance up to 3x, but what about those customers living in a rural town or here in Australia where our current Internet just sucks balls? A simple GFX card revision and update should fix that. At least make it as powerful as the PS4 or if possible, better. It should be able to handle 1080p@60fps no problem. 

That to me is all thats needed, the Xbone has such a bad name for itself in the community after a embarrassing launch, and it seems that every game released for it is being 'bested' by the PS4 equivalent. So I really think MS need to go back to the drawing board and look at how it can cut costs of the machine and yet, still make it as powerful as the PS4.

Is updating the hardware even feasible though? Is that a realistic option?

Over 5 million X1 consoles are already out there. I would think that pushing out a new hardware revision would only do more harm as it angers the existing owners and just creates yet another storm of hate around the platform.

I can just imagine the storm that would be created by such a move. MS would not only release a new revision, they would also have to replace every single X1 already out if they hope to avoid the storm, and boy would that be costly.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

Your right, there is no good news. Hence why I don't believe that even making all the changes you suggest will make a difference. Too much positive mojo for Sony, too little for MS. The community will reject MS going forward. The only people that will support the X1 will be gamers outside of the major community. In fact, the more MS cuts (price and dropping Kinect), the more that the perception will be to avoid it because its a sign that its going away. There won't be a sudden surge of support that shows that MS was right to make changes.

It could be that the first impression will make or break you. Maybe Sony overcame that last gen due to more built in brand loyalty/history with customers or maybe it worked because the consoles did not release at the same time. I'm not sure.

 

What do you think it would take to increase sales? (either parity or surpass). I mean, I give lots of opinions on ways I think they can do it, but I don't see you making any. Is it not possible in your opinion? Should they go on struggling as they are? (struggling in comparison to "winning" sales each month, not that it's selling more than previous gens).

 

I'm not interested in what the internet hyperbole is and which console has more fans re: "positive mojo". I bought both consoles with absolutely no idea how it would pan out and I do the same every gen. I don't think anyone wants to reject MS at all. I do agree that regardless of what MS do they'll probably be called out on it, but the only people who care are the fanboys for their war. If MS didn't change their DRM I wouldn't even own an X1 today, so that goes to show that I back my actions when they make the correct decisions, not mock or reject them. I think they'll turn it around and hope they do, but it won't happen over night. Once more exclusives are out I'm sure it'll do the talking for them.

 

 

I'm not denying that Titanfall had way more hype and the expectation was there, I'm just pointing out the reality. Your a realist right? Well get real here. Let's look at the real numbers after all the hype and bs has passed. Titanfall did not meet expectations and inFamous did well. That resulted in what we are seeing here, console sales that did not result in an X1 lead.

You don't make that sound good, you just take it for what it is: It turns out that an established IP was enough to keep ps4 sales ahead of the X1

Then you can speculate all you want on why that happened and what needs to be done. I'm just saying that we shouldn't gloss over the fact that the ps4 actually had a good release in March.

 

Like I've said, it's not possible to judge Titanfall's success because they haven't and probably won't ever release a breakdown on the X1 figures. Number 1 in sales was combined, and next month it'll probably include the 360 sales too. If it were broken down you could specualte on if it met expectations or not. And again, inFamous hasn't been out for a month yet, so it's not even a 1:1 ratio in that department either. Is 1 million good? Says who and why? With a console with fewer AAA games and 7 million owners maybe it's not a success at all. I still don't understand how the PS4 outsold the X1, besides that obviously the console is cheaper and Sony ramped up availability to counter Titanfall. I thought inFamous was a system seller but I'm frequently told I'm wrong and that it's a niche game, so I'm at a loss for reasons.

 

 

Are you seriously going to use the thread here as your evidence around inFamous? Come on, your better then that. How about Gaf? What was the reception like there?

Regardless, inFamous was doing well when it launched, so why that is being resisted is beyond me.

 

The news I posted here is all I've read about inFamous sales. I don't visit Gaf very much to even know if they had a sales topic, I only go there for breaking news. If it was a big celebration I'm sure I would have read more about it though.

 

 

You are still thinking as though Kinect lives or dies with dedicated gaming content. My point is MS has given no indication that it believes that. In fact, almost every move they have made gives the impression that they consider Kinect to be beyond a dedicated gaming device for motion controlled games. Why else would they heavily downplay Kinect as a gaming device from day one of their announcements all the way through launch.

If MS feels like Kinect is more of a burden then it is a value, then drop it, I agree. If they feel its a long term investment for the platform, something they have plans to tap into over time, then their only choice is to eat the losses.

 

No I'm not?

 

nothing AFAIK on the horizon which uses it either in a kinect only title or even as a supported feature. Drop the kinect from the box and you don't have the same problem.

 

If you mean I don't acknowledge it as a navigation device for the OS then yeah you're right, because I see time and time again in the GH that it's not enough to justify it for people.

[Elliot B.]

I'm more pleased to see FFX/X-2 HD in the top 10. RPGs selling well is a good thing.

Not really, it just encourages more to be made -_-

[trooper11]

What do you think it would take to increase sales? (either parity or surpass). I mean, I give lots of opinions on ways I think they can do it, but I don't see you making any. Is it not possible in your opinion? Should they go on struggling as they are? (struggling in comparison to "winning" sales each month, not that it's selling more than previous gens).

 

So your going to attack me for discussing your opinions? You say I haven't shared my opinions on it? well I'm sorry, but you have missed some threads then. I guess I should suggest them again.

I think what will increase sales is a stronger game library and price drops. I think those two things have the biggest impact. I think all of the other little stuff that we talk about such as no apps behind a paywall, more free games on GfG, etc are nice, but wouldn't ultimately drive sales. Dropping Kinect is less a priority to me. Most people don't care if they bundle Kinect if pricing improved, so MS can drop it or not depending on what they have planned for it going forward. MS needs to push aggressively forward on marketing the right way. They seem to be doing that now, but its key that they engage with the community and put out the right message.

MS also needs to get the X1 released to many more territories along with regional content where necessary.

Now will this result in surpassing the ps4? Maybe, maybe not. The issue is that Sony isn't sitting still, so both consoles could have a good library of games and be priced similar. There are unknown variables at play here. I can't predict that. My opinion is just to put MS in a good spot to reach parity or surpass Sony in the event that the market starts to sway towards MS (due to issues for Sony or big demand towards MS)

 

Like I've said, it's not possible to judge Titanfall's success because they haven't and probably won't ever release a breakdown on the X1 figures. Number 1 in sales was combined, and next month it'll probably include the 360 sales too. If it were broken down you could specualte on if it met expectations or not. And again, inFamous hasn't been out for a month yet, so it's not even a 1:1 ratio in that department either. Is 1 million good? Says who and why? With a console with fewer AAA games and 7 million owners maybe it's not a success at all. I still don't understand how the PS4 outsold the X1, besides that obviously the console is cheaper and Sony ramped up availability to counter Titanfall. I thought inFamous was a system seller but I'm frequently told I'm wrong and that it's a niche game, so I'm at a loss for reasons.

So wait, you agree that inFamous is a system seller, but because people disagreed with you, you now discount that possibility? I had no idea how it would do this time around considering how much hype was around Titanfall, but then it turned out it did ok.

I guess saying it did well is going too far, but inFamous did ok. I genuinely thought it had a good launch based on the early numbers.

As for Titanfall, until we know breakdown numbers or simply total unit sales, its hard to say how it did on the X1 specifically. I would say there is a good chance it did better on the pc considering the genre. So how did the ps4 outsell the X1? Seems pretty straightforward to me: $100 cheaper and a good game released.

No I'm not?

 

 

If you mean I don't acknowledge it as a navigation device for the OS then yeah you're right, because I see time and time again in the GH that it's not enough to justify it for people.

I don't mean that, but it seems that so often that charge gets thrown out. When I mention this point, the come back focuses on one part of it. I've laid out all of the little things it adds to the platform experience, but it seems as though no one has seen those past posts.

MS has gone to the trouble of integrating Kinect at a deeper level then just a gaming device, imo, in order to try and take the pressure off of it to succeed based on dedicated games. I think they saw that would not be a winner long term and so they looked for other ways to make it useful and then changed how they marketed Kinect.

So I'll repeat what I said before. If MS cannot take the losses, drop Kinect. If they have some sort of long term plan that involves leveraging Kinect, then they have to decide if its worth eating the losses.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

 snip

 

I'm not attacking you, I asked a question :laugh: So often it comes down to my opinions being discussed I want to know what your own thoughts are without mixing them with my own. I ask because you go from the defeatist attitude (quoted below, which I think Spenser is also picking up on?), to posting what you did above. Big contrast IMO, so I just wanted a better idea.

 

How me saying drop the price to your suggestion of dropping the price differs I think only you understand. The little stuff has to change regardless of what happens otherwise they lose the online competition and not just the hardware one. 2 different problems/solutions. Improving hardware sales all comes down to the price and I've always said that. Of course gamers don't care if the kinect is bundled when they didn't have to pay for it. Doesn't dismiss that MS will lose money on every one of them and that digs a deeper hole. You don't make up the money you lost giving it away from OS integration, hence my Kinect future releases comment. Not that I expect to see Kinect only titles to justify it.

 

I don't think they have to worry about games regardless of my own opinion of them or even what Sony release / resolutiongate. The only issue is that MS have released their flagship for 2014 which has the biggest appeal to console games. QB and SO are coming but I don't think they'll do better than Titanfall. Maybe they will purely because the install base is larger and it's the first holiday lineup.

 

Your right, there is no good news. Hence why I don't believe that even making all the changes you suggest will make a difference. Too much positive mojo for Sony, too little for MS. The community will reject MS going forward. The only people that will support the X1 will be gamers outside of the major community. In fact, the more MS cuts (price and dropping Kinect), the more that the perception will be to avoid it because its a sign that its going away. There won't be a sudden surge of support that shows that MS was right to make changes.

It could be that the first impression will make or break you. Maybe Sony overcame that last gen due to more built in brand loyalty/history with customers or maybe it worked because the consoles did not release at the same time. I'm not sure.

[trooper11]

I'm not attacking you, I asked a question :laugh: So often it comes down to my opinions being discussed I want to know what your own thoughts are without mixing them with my own. I ask because you go from the defeatist attitude (quoted below, which I think Spenser is also picking up on?), to posting what you did above. Big contrast IMO, so I just wanted a better idea.

You are the one that said there was no good news. There is nothing to dispute that, so I agreed with you. Its not a defeatist attitude when it reflects reality. Its as if your implying this is some kind of war with sides. I don't feel defeated, I feel like I have a grasp on what's going on.

How me saying drop the price to your suggestion of dropping the price differs I think only you understand. The little stuff has to change regardless of what happens otherwise they lose the online competition and not just the hardware one. 2 different problems/solutions. Improving hardware sales all comes down to the price and I've always said that. Of course gamers don't care if the kinect is bundled when they didn't have to pay for it. Doesn't dismiss that MS will lose money on every one of them and that digs a deeper hole. You don't make up the money you lost giving it away from OS integration, hence my Kinect future releases comment. Not that I expect to see Kinect only titles to justify it.

For some reason you seem to think I was against your point about a price drop. Your mistaken. I have always echoed the point of a price drop, but again, you have never seen that point I guess. I agree adding the little things will be good and must be done, but my point was that they wont sell consoles on their own. They will merely build a strong base of users, users that spread a positive word for the platform to others.

I mean heck, if someone asked you about your experience, how could you suggest they actually get one? Without cool stuff or good stuff to bring up, there isn't much to be excited about. So MS needs to do whatever it can to create the spark.

The only difference has been that you insist Kinect must go and I am not so sure about that.

I don't think they have to worry about games regardless of my own opinion of them or even what Sony release / resolutiongate. The only issue is that MS have released their flagship for 2014 which has the biggest appeal to console games. QB and SO are coming but I don't think they'll do better than Titanfall. Maybe they will purely because the install base is larger and it's the first holiday lineup.

So are you saying that growing the gaming library is not a concern? Or are you saying that if the price was cheaper that Titanfall would have sold better? If that is the case, then sure, that is possible. Yes, Titanfall has not been that Halo-like spark that was hyped, but doesn't that seem to say that getting more quality games out there is essential? I think MS should worry about that.

[Emn1ty]

2. Update the hardware in the current model. Its all well and good that the 'cloud' will improve performance up to 3x, but what about those customers living in a rural town or here in Australia where our current Internet just sucks balls? A simple GFX card revision and update should fix that. At least make it as powerful as the PS4 or if possible, better. It should be able to handle 1080p@60fps no problem. 

 

With DX12 I doubt that's really necessary. Also, it seems everyone consistently forgets that power !=  better in consoles. It's features, user experience and games.

 

We've only had a few months on these consoles, lets stop bickering about who's winning cause at this point there aren't even any real reasons to buy either console unless you happen to be an inFamous fan or enjoy having a media hub.

[Blackhearted]

Not really, it just encourages more to be made -_-

 

You saying we're better off with more CoD and CoD mods like titanfall?

[George P Global Moderator]

You saying we're better off with more CoD and CoD mods like titanfall?

 

We're better off with less HD remakes as well, which is what he meant.  If you think yearly CoD is milking things then what do you call HD remakes if not the same old thing?   I've already played FFX, I don't want to play a RPG over even if it's been updated with HD graphics, I like RPGs for their story first and gameplay second, if I know the story I have close to zero interest of spending another 60hrs playing the game over.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

We're better off with less HD remakes as well, which is what he meant.  If you think yearly CoD is milking things then what do you call HD remakes if not the same old thing?   I've already played FFX, I don't want to play a RPG over even if it's been updated with HD graphics, I like RPGs for their story first and gameplay second, if I know the story I have close to zero interest of spending another 60hrs playing the game over.

 

You're in the minority of RPG players by the sounds of it. I know a lot of people IRL and online who have probably played FFXIII storyline multiple times over never mind something like the ME series, where people obsessed with the different options they could pick in a playthrough and trying them all. Compared to corridor shooters there are a lot of variables to consider, especially compared to something as weak as CoD's storylines.

 

HD remakes are in their own league of milking, but definitely not a 1:1 comparison. The worst offenders are when they don't put the effort in, ala Splinter Cell collection.

[trooper11]

I know a lot of people IRL and online who have probably played FFXIII storyline multiple times over ...

My condolences :laugh:

[George P Global Moderator]

You're in the minority of RPG players by the sounds of it. I know a lot of people IRL and online who have probably played FFXIII storyline multiple times over never mind something like the ME series, where people obsessed with the different options they could pick in a playthrough and trying them all. Compared to corridor shooters there are a lot of variables to consider, especially compared to something as weak as CoD's storylines.

 

HD remakes are in their own league of milking, but definitely not a 1:1 comparison. The worst offenders are when they don't put the effort in, ala Splinter Cell collection.

 

Yeah, we all saw how those playthroughs in ME changed things.... oh wait.   :P

 

If a game has a multiple ending then sure, but not every RPG does, and not any FF does for that matter.   Few JPRGs do actually, the ones I know of anyways, heck their dating sims have more endings.    My point still stands, if it's a game I've already finished (alternate endings I've seen as well) then I have zero interest in a HD remake, I'll spend my money on something new.

[spaceelf]

I've never actually played FFX but I'd rather spend my money on actually new things.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

My condolences :laugh:

LOL

I swear I've tried to play 13 I don't know how many times and quit. Now I have a terrible backlog, let me tell you, but when it comes to JRPGs I've always completed or played the majority of those I enjoy. My boyhood genre.

I even bought 13-2 for peanuts to try and inspire me as I heard it was a better game than 13.

Squares obsession with Lightning will forever be remembered as the downfall of FF if it never recovers.

[McKay]

I still never completed FF7.

[trooper11]

LOL

I swear I've tried to play 13 I don't know how many times and quit. Now I have a terrible backlog, let me tell you, but when it comes to JRPGs I've always completed or played the majority of those I enjoy. My boyhood genre.

I even bought 13-2 for peanuts to try and inspire me as I heard it was a better game than 13.

Squares obsession with Lightning will forever be remembered as the downfall of FF if it never recovers.

Same here. I'm a long time jrpg fan. Even as the genre becomes more niche with the new generation of gamers, I still love to see another title in that range come out and I'm usually pretty excited to play it. Those are the games I will replay to get everything I can out of it.

13 ruined that for me. I still have not completed the first one, it just doesn't work for me and I'm reminded of that as soon as I try to pick it up again. I have thought about picking up 2 and 3 once they are in the bargain bin, but frankly, I have a backlog of games that I WANT to play instead. Plus, I'm ok with skipping those games anyway and getting into new jrpgs. FF15 has been the game I hoped would right the SE ship ever since they showed it off in an early form as 13 VS. I want to forget about the bad experience I had and move on.