OK, I'm glad you brought that point up. So I ask, if Sony still had a portable offering on the market, do you think that would create less of a dependence on any need to increase porting efforts on PC outside of where it makes sense (Day for GaaS/live-service titles, for example)?
Because in light of the console shortages they were having with PS5 (which might be clearing up with the new fiscal year), one of the more noted ideas for them from fans has been to come out with a new portable. Personally I think that would make sense; would not need to cost very much to sell or produce, aim for PS4 base equivalent performance, same featureset support as PS5, scale resolution down to something good for a 720p mobile screen. Maybe pull forward some hardware-based image upscaling ability with HDMI-out passthrough to upres games on a television for those who want that option.
As a business it sounds like it'd make more sense because they can control the vertical integration better that way, and maximize profits on their revenue streams while synergizing features and services with PS5. Only potential issue might be memory capacity; I think they'd still need 16 GB even if going for PS4-level performance TF-wise. But I'm not sure if that is the case.
Would've made a lot of sense for Microsoft to compliment the Xbox product line with a portable device too, before really going headfirst into Day 1 with PC and especially now more or less leveraging Steam Deck as a GamePass machine for all intents and purposes. They've already offered support for other options and once you do that it's very hard to try moving things back into any option that can gate access exclusively back into your ecosystem, either in actuality or in perception. It's not too late for Sony to bring back a portable option to complement their consoles, though. It would just serve as a complement to the console however, not something they are targeting specific 1P output for exclusively the way they did with PSP and Vita.
Yeah like I was saying with
DeepEnigma
earlier, consoles do have the advantage of convenience through perception, even if actuality for some users that advantage isn't as much as it may be compared to lower-end laptops or such in a few years from now, with a bit of looking on the customer's part. So there's that, and also consoles having the image of being gaming devices, which I suppose PCs or laptops, tablets etc. would not have, which adds to the convenience factor of consoles as well.
Maybe, but in Microsoft's case they conveniently stopped reporting console sales numbers around the time they did PC Day-and-Date, almost as if there was some correlation at the very least. To this day they don't report console sales numbers, even though this is a new generation. So we can either argue that they made the shift to PC Day 1 due to poor software sales and limited console install base growth, or they did it in order to push increase in revenue off 1P titles, but given the timing of the shift which of those sound more plausible?
According to Statistica, XBO sold roughly 19.63 million between 2013 and end of 2015. MS enacted their Day 1 PC policy with Quantum Break in 2015. Between 2016 and 2020 XBO reached total LTD sales of around 45 million. That's another 25.37 million in 5 years, compared to 19.64 million in 3 years. To what amount of that can be put on them doing Day 1 on PC for all games, driving down the need to buy their console, we don't know. But it at least had some effect.
Again, I do think there's an innate perception of convenience with consoles that plays into their ability to sell regardless. That works into their brand image, and goes from there. I get that part. And that's a big reason why Xbox is able to move what they move even while doing PC Day 1. However, I don't think Microsoft are a company where having tight vertical integration of their gaming offerings is that big of a requirement, that's why they're very liberal with decentralizing their gaming ecosystem from hardware and storefronts they 100% own. Their software DNA is also not intrinsically tied to pushing innovative hardware designs (not necessarily) in order to drive creative innovations with their 1P studios, historically.
Sony and especially Nintendo are much different in that regard. PlayStation is way more integral to Sony than Xbox or even GamePass are to Microsoft, and we've seen multiple times how Sony 1P have pushed the architecture of their systems, systems that in many cases were wildly different than anything on PC. Nintendo is literally dependent on gaming to survive, they have no other major sectors of the tech market or entertainment markets they're in like Sony, much less Microsoft. And they've designed games that literally put certain genres on the map or standardized things like 3D analog controls (Mario 64). Same can be said with things like the DS, Wii etc.
Companies like those benefit more from centralization of the hardware and software, where as much of it is in their control as possible. Not just for maximizing profits but also to guarantee a baseline of quality. A while back Sony said they were paying close attention to Nintendo's Switch OLED; I think their "multiplatform" is really about PS5, PC, PSVR2 and probably some new portable device. And since out of those four, the PC provides the least control on their end as a provider (dependency on Microsoft for the OS, dependency on Epic and Valve for the storefronts, etc.), I think that's going to rule out things like Day 1 releases or significantly shorter release windows to PC for anything that's not specifically a live-service, GaaS type of game.