• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Financial Times: Sony and Nintendo left to battle in console wars as Microsoft signals exit

zedinen

Member
"Gibson said Sony’s problems are very different: its PS5 machine, now four years old, is popular but its games business is now guided by “accountants”, rather than people primed to manage a creative business."

G&NS is now run by japanese money shufflers, executives in their 60S with zero management experience.

Yoshida (CEO) and Totoki (COO and CFO) made the decision to lay off 900 PlayStation employees (and shift responsibility to Ryan and Hulst) after wasting 59 billion yen on failed attempts to lift the stock price through buybacks during February. Sony's stock had lost $10 billion in value as a result of Totoki's incendiary comments.



74JZrmW.jpeg


nx6FSqr.jpeg



Sony's C-Suite compensation is linked strongly to the stock market.

Nasdaq: Why Layoffs Can Actually Lift a Company’s Stock Price

4OnL1OK.jpeg



Buybacks
are a way for companies to return excess cash to shareholders. It makes sense for Apple, Microsoft or Toyota; it doesn't make sense for Sony.


The use of stock-based compensation and certain key performance indicators can motivate the leadership to manipulate earnings per share and share prices through buybacks and paying excessive dividends.

Japanese money shufflers have wasted 221 billion yen on buybacks and dividends in FY23, money they could be plowing into R&D and innovation, in order to maximize their own pay.


bgkzeEB.jpeg



eDqqXEw.jpeg




Yoshida and Totoki need cash ASAP.
Their priorities: Buybacks and dividends, M&A in India (Pictures) and major catalog acquisitions (Music)

8Pl7d0q.jpeg


xZYGb2X.jpeg


CKwr3xE.jpeg




They intend to achieve a new profit record in the PS5 generation. Nothing is off the table:

-First-party games on PC and other platforms

-Price hikes

-Loss of market share

-Mass layoffs

-Cuts to R&D

-Anemic investment

Dz8szpG.jpeg


9D4cLLd.jpeg


5PnLG5X.jpeg


7rl1CKi.jpeg


h1w4BGd.jpeg


T55RRYT.jpeg


WeHjvOO.jpeg

UaVbETC.jpeg



Having said that, there is nothing wrong with PlayStation margins because:


1) SIE has an incredible asset turnover
(how much revenue a company can generate with each dollar of assets)

clL45Zt.jpeg


qlO3qCD.jpeg



2) Ryan and Hulst keep profits artificially low by investing money right back into their business in the form of R&D and CapEx

R&D: FY22 ¥271B / FY16 ¥95B

D&A: FY22 ¥87B / FY16 ¥25B



3) SIE profits double about every seven years

FY23 ¥270B / FY16 ¥135B



Companies that prioritize only short-term profits may sabotage their ability to innovate; experience market share loss, decreased customer loyalty and brain drain.

Yoshida and Totoki are in their 60s and PlayStation means nothing to them. They will retire rich.
 
The gaming industry has become so bloated and the need for massive profits is killing traditional console gaming, I would really like these massive corporations to leave the gaming industry, smaller companies like sega, can maybe make a comeback, Dreamcast 2 anyone?
Genesis was really strong in the west. The other Sega systems were goofy. I owned all of them, but they were still goofy.
 

DonkeyPunchJr

World’s Biggest Weeb
The PC market isn't dependent on any any corporation's profit margin. Even if Valve were to fold, PC gaming is based on an open platform where literally anyone could take their place. So, in my mind, the PC gaming market is, by far, the most sustainable of them all.
And PC doesn’t need to justify its existence by continually producing bigger and more expensive AAA games to drive a generational upgrade cycle the way consoles do.

So many of the top PC games can run on ancient hardware. If you want to drop $1000 a year upgrading to the latest everything, you can do it. If you want to game on some ghetto 15 year old laptop, you still have tons of games to pick from and Valve/devs have plenty of profits to be made from catering to that market.
 

solidus12

Member
But Xbox influencers said that Xbox was the true market leader ??

I don’t know man. Should these shills be held accountable for Xbox failures and lack of success?

All they do is lie and post misinformation about the competition; what’s worse is that they have quite a following.

That shit is crazy.

Yes there are PlayStation and Nintendo fanboys, but Xbox fanboys are the worst, especially those with connections to Xbox execs.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
And PC doesn’t need to justify its existence by continually producing bigger and more expensive AAA games to drive a generational upgrade cycle the way consoles do.

So many of the top PC games can run on ancient hardware. If you want to drop $1000 a year upgrading to the latest everything, you can do it. If you want to game on some ghetto 15 year old laptop, you still have tons of games to pick from and Valve/devs have plenty of profits to be made from catering to that market.

Exactly. Completely open to do pretty much whatever you want to do. Actually, the word "sustainable" doesn't even apply to PC gaming, now that I think about it. Either people game there or they don't. There is no executive who decides "nah....this ain't sustainable. shut it down". Thank God for that.
 
And PC doesn’t need to justify its existence by continually producing bigger and more expensive AAA games to drive a generational upgrade cycle the way consoles do.

So many of the top PC games can run on ancient hardware. If you want to drop $1000 a year upgrading to the latest everything, you can do it. If you want to game on some ghetto 15 year old laptop, you still have tons of games to pick from and Valve/devs have plenty of profits to be made from catering to that market.

PC gaming IS justified by all the third party support it receives, i.e., bigger and more expensive AAA games.

If the console cycle fades out, as a result of AAA gaming being unsustainable, PC by default suffers.

Unless you're into PC games that aren't part of that genre or simply very old games.

The truth is, new games/content and ambitious games/content drives the entire industry. PC isn't immune. We would all be better off if Valve actually made games again rather than collecting fee transactions all day for a basic storefront
 

Astray

Member
The thing about plans is they remain plans and could change at the drop of a dime.

Spencer and co might be developing a $600 super console and a $400 portable for next gen, but at any time they could just get an email from Nadella or Hood telling them to fuck off and cancel it.

I think both MS gaming and Sony are gonna go through some interesting times tbh.

It’s clear they never quite viewed Sony as a competitor insofar as Sony could limit MS ability in the gaming space to position against Apple.
Sony was literally the reason Xbox even started.
 

Omnipunctual Godot

Gold Member
Yeah this is very true.

The interim SIE CEO Totoki is a bean counter in every sense of the word.

Guys like that are a cancer to lead a creative division like playstation.

Although his worries anyone can understand, for a company that makes almost as much revenue as xbox and nintendo they have some seriously low profit margins.
To me, PlayStation (especially first-party) was never really the same after Jack Tretton left. Shawn Layden seemed to give it a decent try, but it really went downhill from there.

All the passion seems gone, the higher-ups don't seem to have the same enthusiasm about what they're creating as they used to, and so many of the games just come across as soulless and cookie-cutter now (third-person action-adventure game #874, anyone?). It's like they've taken their status as a gaming leader for granted.

Where's my Resistance? Where's my Killzone? Where's my DriveClub? Where's the delightfully weird medium-to-lower-budget shit I've never played before like Tokyo Jungle, Ico, Puppeteer, Echochrome, PixelJunk Eden, and NobyNoby Boy?

It's just a shell of what it used to be to me.
 
Last edited:

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Not sure Layden and Totoki agree on the solution to the same problem though.

Layden's take....

"So how can we look at that and say: Is there another answer? Instead of spending five years making an 80 hour game, what does three years and a 15 hour game look like? What would be the cost around that? Is that a full-throated experience?

"Personally, as an older gamer... I would welcome a return to the 12 to 15 hour [AAA] game. I would finish more games, first of all, and just like a well edited piece of literature or a movie, looking at the discipline around that could give us tighter, more compelling content.

"It's something I'd like to see a return to in this business."


I agree with Layden here.

Don't think so. Pc, cloud and Nintendo will be the only thing going forward. With sony and ms basically being third party pubs. Not today but they will end up like this

Sony is doing leaps and bounds better than Xbox in the console space. Not sure why you are lumping them together at all.

Why is that?

Very easy to explain. I'll answer you and Topher Topher below.

The PC market isn't dependent on any any corporation's profit margin. Even if Valve were to fold, PC gaming is based on an open platform where literally anyone could take their place. So, in my mind, the PC gaming market is, by far, the most sustainable of them all.

PC gaming depends ALOT on console gaming. To a HIGH degree mind you. If console gaming is "unsustainable" then there's no way PC gaming wouldn't be hurt by this too. It's just pure logic.

Now I for one don't think console gaming nor PC gaming is unsustainable at all. I think only Pro-Xbox gamers are thinking this because GP didn't work for Xbox.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
To me, PlayStation (especially first-party) was never really the same after Jack Tretton left. Shawn Layden seemed to give it a decent try, but it really went downhill from there.

All the passion seems gone, the higher-ups don't seem to have the same enthusiasm about what they're creating as they used to, and so many of the games just come across as soulless and cookie-cutter now (third-person action-adventure game #874, anyone?). It's like they've taken their status as a gaming leader for granted.

Where's my Resistance? Where's my Killzone? Where's my DriveClub? Where's the delightfully weird medium-to-lower-budget shit I've never played before like Tokyo Jungle, Ico, Puppeteer, Echochrome, PixelJunk Eden, and NobyNoby Boy?

It's just a shell of what it used to be to me.

Every first party game sells more now, than those PS3 days though. I love the fun PS used to have back then. The new execs have taken the fun out of being an owner of a PS console.

But we can't sit here and lie that they aren't more successful now. Even with the more boring leaders. Facts are facts.
 

Omnipunctual Godot

Gold Member
Every first party game sells more now, than those PS3 days though. I love the fun PS used to have back then. The new execs have taken the fun out of being an owner of a PS console.

But we can't sit here and lie that they aren't more successful now. Even with the more boring leaders. Facts are facts.
I wasn't talking about numbers, I was talking about personal enjoyment from projects made by passionate individuals vs. projects made by committee. The latter part of the PS3's lifespan and the majority of the PS4's brought such a wide range of entertainment that there really was something for everyone, and 90% of their output wasn't banking on blockbuster AAA games. You had room for lots of smaller weird stuff that didn't need to set the sales world on fire.

But, transitioning to the sales side, I think this shift is something people will slowly and subconsciously begin to pick up on. I think it's also one of the reasons why PS5 sales seem to be slowing down at this stage. Sony missed PS5 sales targets last year, which is one of the reasons why they had to describe the PS5 as being in the latter stages of its lifecycle, even though it feels like the PS5 gen has barely begun. I think the reason why it feels that way to customers is likely due to the fact that there are no smaller-to-medium-sized projects filling in the gaps between sparse blockbuster AAA releases. I think this will become especially apparent in 2024 with no new first-party releases for the rest of the year.
 
So when is everyone going to realize this isn't about selling hardware anymore? Microsoft set out to do what they initially intended. Take over the living room. Since they're going multiplat with a lot of their games, they've done it. Now, making a console is just another avenue for people to play their games. And now since they have a ton of revenue from owning some major developers, they can have a lot more room to make a really powerful console and take a bigger loss than Sony or Nintendo on the hardware. Sony relies very heavily on the Playstation brand for their revenue, and Nintendo is almost entirely dependent on their hardware. If Sony stays on this same track of exclusivity and relying on console sales much longer, they'll be the ones to bow out. Sony's games aren't Nintendo caliber.
 

The Stig

Member
I saw the death of Sega first-hand.

And SNK.

Didn't think I'd see death the likes of this again.

True console vet. here.
 
Last edited:
G&NS is now run by japanese money shufflers, executives in their 60S with zero management experience.

Yoshida (CEO) and Totoki (COO and CFO) made the decision to lay off 900 PlayStation employees (and shift responsibility to Ryan and Hulst) after wasting 59 billion yen on failed attempts to lift the stock price through buybacks during February. Sony's stock had lost $10 billion in value as a result of Totoki's incendiary comments.



74JZrmW.jpeg


nx6FSqr.jpeg



Sony's C-Suite compensation is linked strongly to the stock market.

Nasdaq: Why Layoffs Can Actually Lift a Company’s Stock Price

4OnL1OK.jpeg



Buybacks
are a way for companies to return excess cash to shareholders. It makes sense for Apple, Microsoft or Toyota; it doesn't make sense for Sony.


The use of stock-based compensation and certain key performance indicators can motivate the leadership to manipulate earnings per share and share prices through buybacks and paying excessive dividends.

Japanese money shufflers have wasted 221 billion yen on buybacks and dividends in FY23, money they could be plowing into R&D and innovation, in order to maximize their own pay.


bgkzeEB.jpeg



eDqqXEw.jpeg




Yoshida and Totoki need cash ASAP.
Their priorities: Buybacks and dividends, M&A in India (Pictures) and major catalog acquisitions (Music)

8Pl7d0q.jpeg


xZYGb2X.jpeg


CKwr3xE.jpeg




They intend to achieve a new profit record in the PS5 generation. Nothing is off the table:

-First-party games on PC and other platforms

-Price hikes

-Loss of market share

-Mass layoffs

-Cuts to R&D

-Anemic investment

Dz8szpG.jpeg


9D4cLLd.jpeg


5PnLG5X.jpeg


7rl1CKi.jpeg


h1w4BGd.jpeg


T55RRYT.jpeg


WeHjvOO.jpeg

UaVbETC.jpeg



Having said that, there is nothing wrong with PlayStation margins because:


1) SIE has an incredible asset turnover
(how much revenue a company can generate with each dollar of assets)

clL45Zt.jpeg


qlO3qCD.jpeg



2) Ryan and Hulst keep profits artificially low by investing money right back into their business in the form of R&D and CapEx

R&D: FY22 ¥271B / FY16 ¥95B

D&A: FY22 ¥87B / FY16 ¥25B



3) SIE profits double about every seven years

FY23 ¥270B / FY16 ¥135B



Companies that prioritize only short-term profits may sabotage their ability to innovate; experience market share loss, decreased customer loyalty and brain drain.

Yoshida and Totoki are in their 60s and PlayStation means nothing to them. They will retire rich.

But they're japanese and I was told by this forum that that means better.
 

drganon

Gold Member
So when is everyone going to realize this isn't about selling hardware anymore? Microsoft set out to do what they initially intended. Take over the living room. Since they're going multiplat with a lot of their games, they've done it. Now, making a console is just another avenue for people to play their games. And now since they have a ton of revenue from owning some major developers, they can have a lot more room to make a really powerful console and take a bigger loss than Sony or Nintendo on the hardware. Sony relies very heavily on the Playstation brand for their revenue, and Nintendo is almost entirely dependent on their hardware. If Sony stays on this same track of exclusivity and relying on console sales much longer, they'll be the ones to bow out. Sony's games aren't Nintendo caliber.
giphy.gif
 

DonkeyPunchJr

World’s Biggest Weeb
PC gaming depends ALOT on console gaming. To a HIGH degree mind you. If console gaming is "unsustainable" then there's no way PC gaming wouldn't be hurt by this too. It's just pure logic.

Now I for one don't think console gaming nor PC gaming is unsustainable at all. I think only Pro-Xbox gamers are thinking this because GP didn't work for Xbox.
The thing that’s unsustainable about PlayStation/Xbox is that their business model is based on funding big AAA games, with their ever increasing budgets/timelines, in order to justify their existence and convince gamers to buy into a new generation. To the point they’re now spending billions of $ buying up bloated gaming studios so they can keep their games from becoming available on the competitor’s platform.


What about that sounds sustainable to you? How many more console generations you really think that business model can sustain? And what makes you think that PC gaming has that problem?
 

Topher

Gold Member
PC gaming depends ALOT on console gaming. To a HIGH degree mind you. If console gaming is "unsustainable" then there's no way PC gaming wouldn't be hurt by this too. It's just pure logic.

Now I for one don't think console gaming nor PC gaming is unsustainable at all. I think only Pro-Xbox gamers are thinking this because GP didn't work for Xbox.

Console are really just a baseline for a lot of game devs as consoles are based almost entirely on PC tech these days. I wouldn't call that a dependency for PC, but yes, consoles and PCs do have some interdependence based on the fact that they share a great many games. I agree with you that I don't think there is anything unsustainable about PC or consoles. The future of consoles has been debated for years as far as whether they will last and yet we are going to get yet anothe console generation in three or four years. We have folks pointing to the lack of growth in the number of consoles sold and I say "so what?" Are we really going to pretend that a base of 180 million or so gamers isn't worth while? Think that's pretty silly. Consoles ain't going anywhere
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
I wasn't talking about numbers, I was talking about personal enjoyment from projects made by passionate individuals vs. projects made by committee. The latter part of the PS3's lifespan and the majority of the PS4's brought such a wide range of entertainment that there really was something for everyone, and 90% of their output wasn't banking on blockbuster AAA games. You had room for lots of smaller weird stuff that didn't need to set the sales world on fire.

But, transitioning to the sales side, I think this shift is something people will slowly and subconsciously begin to pick up on. I think it's also one of the reasons why PS5 sales seem to be slowing down at this stage. Sony missed PS5 sales targets last year, which is one of the reasons why they had to describe the PS5 as being in the latter stages of its lifecycle, even though it feels like the PS5 gen has barely begun. I think the reason why it feels that way to customers is likely due to the fact that there are no smaller-to-medium-sized projects filling in the gaps between sparse blockbuster AAA releases. I think this will become especially apparent in 2024 with no new first-party releases for the rest of the year.

PS5 sales aren't slowing down as much as the sales target was stupidly too high. But don't forget that not only has the PS5 "NOT" have a price drop, but it actually has had multiple price INCREASES! It's insane that it sold over 22 million in 2023 with actual price increases.

The thing that’s unsustainable about PlayStation/Xbox is that their business model is based on funding big AAA games, with their ever increasing budgets/timelines, in order to justify their existence and convince gamers to buy into a new generation. To the point they’re now spending billions of $ buying up bloated gaming studios so they can keep their games from becoming available on the competitor’s platform.


What about that sounds sustainable to you? How many more console generations you really think that business model can sustain? And what makes you think that PC gaming has that problem?

It's all purely sustainable by the bases that during these "hard times" Sony's Gaming division made a 6% profit in their latest quarter while also making record revenues. They just finished paying off the Bungie purchase so that's not going to show up on the Financials anymore. As soon as their 1st party games hit in 2025.....along with GTA6, profits will probably be over 10% again.

And with close to 10 million sold, who knows how much profit Helldivers 2 is going to bring in Sony in this Q4. There's zero percent chance the saw HD2 selling 10 million in it's first month.

Console are really just a baseline for a lot of game devs as consoles are based almost entirely on PC tech these days. I wouldn't call that a dependency for PC, but yes, consoles and PCs do have some interdependence based on the fact that they share a great many games. I agree with you that I don't think there is anything unsustainable about PC or consoles. The future of consoles has been debated for years as far as whether they will last and yet we are going to get yet anothe console generation in three or four years. We have folks pointing to the lack of growth in the number of consoles sold and I say "so what?" Are we really going to pretend that a base of 180 million or so gamers isn't worth while? Think that's pretty silly. Consoles ain't going anywhere

I wish I could like your post 400 times! The truth in the bolded is as pure as Columbian cocaine.
 
Last edited:
I think the console market, as it exists now, is unsustainable. It’s based around launching a new high-end piece of hardware, then funding some big AAA showpiece exclusives to justify the hardware’s existence.

Now we’ve reached the point where those AAA games are taking insanely long + expensive to create, and most of them are cross gen. How many more generations can that formula even survive?


Nintendo is in a somewhat better position as they have a huge library of beloved IPs that they can crank out at a fraction of the cost. But even then, it’s no guarantee. Just look at Wii U, even having Mario Kart, Smash Bros, 2D Mario, 3D Mario, and Zelda wasn’t enough.
Gaming is a momentum business. Wii U had a lot of different hardware issues at launch that I don't feel like repeating, but keep in mind the software release schedule. Many people today say GameCube had a great library, and was underrated, but they live to talk about it today, not back when it released and "droughts" was a popular word around Nintendo releases. Wii came out the gate hitting with Wii Sports, a highly demanded realistic Zelda after Wind Waker, and both Metroid Prime and 3D Mario were there for year 1. Momentum was sustained with Wii Fit, and Smash Bros. later.

Wii U launched with a 2D Mario game that looked exactly like the Wii game from just a few short years before it, and just a mere few months after New Super Mario Bros. 2 launched on 3DS. When Reggie Fils-Ame went on Jimmy Fallon's late night show to showcase New Super Mario Bros. U, the guy was like "this is HD Mario?" (trying so hard to sound excited)


The next big Wii U title was Pikmin 3, well past a half year later, and that title had niche appeal. Mario 3D World finally came a full year later, just in time for the PS4/Xbox One launch. There were no big indie games releasing at the kind of pace that you see today with Switch where there is never a drought on the e-shop.

Wii U was dead by the time Mario Kart arrived (a series that thrives on system sales), but the machine was briefly revived by the surprise new IP, Splatoon, in Japan. Smash came late, had two versions, and actually sold better on 3DS. Wii U never got a Zelda of its own. Breath of Wild did all its work on Switch. XenoX doesn't appeal on the out skirts. It needs a player base to give it a try first. (Hopefully that series returns on Switch 2 as rumored. I want me some more Sawano games :). )

Nintendo is in a better position with consoles today, because they make unique proposals and understand the 'game' better. It's not just about IP. As you said, IP couldn't save N64, GCN, or WiiU. Wii Sports blew up on Wii, showcasing a new and easy way to play virtual sports, and was the real machine seller (doing something only a Wii could do, and nothing else), while a highly demanded Zelda was there on day 1 as well.

Switch launched with an appealing concept that was flexible to a busy users needs, plus launched with a Zelda that took the series back to its exploration roots, while riding on the winds of the open world/Skyrim train. The Wii U breakout IP, Splatoon, got its quick sequel that summer to both ride and continue to drive momentum, and Mario Odyssey was there for the fall. Indie games (Nindies) were pushed much harder this time around on the e-shop, and games like Shovel Knight, Stardew Valley, and Hollow Knight capitalized big with their first handheld mobile debuts which they were very suitable for. Mario Kart remains a go to for all Nintendo hardware owners ( and was there on month 2 lol), which helped Mario Kart 8 go well beyond its Wii U audience, and through the stratosphere.

I think the Switch direction will continue strong for the next few years, and you'll be seeing copycats show up more often. PS5 is struggling to sell software in Japan right now (for various reasons, one being Sony having given Japan a fat middle finger for the last few years). Nintendo is readying to hit the market with new hardware soon, eyeing to shift the Switch users over to what's next. If a powerful enough Switch 2 succeeds, I think you'll start seeing serious Japanese third party jumps from the Playstation environment to a Nintendo one. Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Tekken, Tales of, Monster Hunter, launching on Nintendo machines alongside the Steams and PlayStations.
 
Man this is so Joever. The door is open. There is going to be leaks and rumors about day 1 and previous games coming all the time ect. MS’s buyouts didn’t move the needle even one little bit and i think satya is making them put stuff on playstation
 

Unknown?

Member
Exactly. Completely open to do pretty much whatever you want to do. Actually, the word "sustainable" doesn't even apply to PC gaming, now that I think about it. Either people game there or they don't. There is no executive who decides "nah....this ain't sustainable. shut it down". Thank God for that.
That's only true if your PC doesn't use Windows.
 
MS already said they are making another Xbox and some games will remain exclusive, but that they expect all console exclusivity (PS and MS) to slowly die off as dev costs increase.

Did Sony GAF write this article? They’ve been pissing themselves for weeks, making threads left and right, thinking MS is leaving the business, when everything we know from MS says directly the opposite.
 

Topher

Gold Member
MS already said they are making another Xbox and some games will remain exclusive, but that they expect all console exclusivity (PS and MS) to slowly die off as dev costs increase.

Did Sony GAF write this article? They’ve been pissing themselves for weeks, making threads left and right, thinking MS is leaving the business, when everything we know from MS says directly the opposite.

Right......"Sony GAF" writes for the Financial Times now.

Sylvester Stallone Facepalm GIF


Suffice to say that this whole idea of Microsoft going third party has become a mainstream narrative. You can point fingers at Sony-whatever if it makes you feel better, but every single bit of this comes from exactly one source: Microsoft.
 
Last edited:
Right......"Sony GAF" writes for the Financial Times now.

Sylvester Stallone Facepalm GIF


Suffice to say that this whole idea of Microsoft going third party has become a mainstream narrative. You can point fingers at Sony-whatever if it makes you feel better, but every single bit of this comes from exactly one source: MicrosoftsAsian editor and a Japan based reporter really have a strong
Right......"Sony GAF" writes for the Financial Times now.

Sylvester Stallone Facepalm GIF


Suffice to say that this whole idea of Microsoft going third party has become a mainstream narrative. You can point fingers at Sony-whatever if it makes you feel better, but

Right......"Sony GAF" writes for the Financial Times now.

Sylvester Stallone Facepalm GIF


Suffice to say that this whole idea of Microsoft going third party has become a mainstream narrative. You can point fingers at Sony-whatever if it makes you feel better, but every single bit of this comes from exactly one source: Microsoft.
Yea, a reporter based in Japan (and the editor for Asia). He has no reason at all to write a pro-Japanese company article and ignore everything MS has directly said about this issue. I’m sure he’ll get more clicks saying Microsoft is staying strong.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Yea, a reporter based in Japan (and the editor for Asia). He has no reason at all to write a pro-Japanese company article and ignore everything MS has directly said about this issue. I’m sure he’ll get more clicks saying Microsoft is staying strong.

lol.....this isn't an editorial like shit we get from Forbes. It is an article quoting analysts in the industry. You just don't like what they have to say.
 

ProtoByte

Gold Member
And PC doesn’t need to justify its existence by continually producing bigger and more expensive AAA games to drive a generational upgrade cycle the way consoles do.

So many of the top PC games can run on ancient hardware. If you want to drop $1000 a year upgrading to the latest everything, you can do it. If you want to game on some ghetto 15 year old laptop, you still have tons of games to pick from and Valve/devs have plenty of profits to be made from catering to that market.
So what youre saying is that getting the most competitive games and pushing technology requires consoles, and that PCs alone do not provide the incentive structure for either of those things?

I agree with that. And that's why consoles are important.
 

Kerotan

Member
Sony and nintendo did do battle.

And nintendo got their asses handed to them, left and right.

Now both are in a place they can coexist.
Basically. They went from primary competitors to secondary competitors. Anyway MS won't be missed.
 

Thavash

Member
Some thoughts :
1) Console exclusives give a console a "soul" - when you think PS1 you think FF7, when you think SNES you think Super Metroid etc
2) The competition between consoles is what creates innovation and drives the industry forward. A bunch of "soulless" consoles will inevitably be a race to the bottom.
3) It makes absolutely no sense that MS spent all that money for those studios and are now thinking about making all games multi-platform (to presumably rake in some extra cash)
4) It shows a clear lack of planning, there are a lot of people there that have NO IDEA what they're doing, and I expect heads to roll
5) This is the PERFECT opportunity for SEGA to make a comeback in this situation. I hope some VCs in Japan are eyeing this drama and raising capital as we speak.
 
Last edited:

Raonak

Banned
It's not just AAA games that is unsustainable.

The complete oversaturation of games is making game development difficult on all levels.

And we havent even started talking about the upcoming flood of AI created games.
 
Top Bottom