Are you a minor league baseball player who’s just come into a big-ass fortune courtesy of a deceased relative? Does said fortune contain some whacky clause where you have to throw away all the cash in a month in order to receive an even more astronomical amount of dosh? Congratulations: you’re clearly Montgomery Brewster. Now, may we suggest blowing your first wad of cash on Prototype, a two year old game, which has just been released on PSN for a wallet-crippling £31.99.
Former Xbox executive Ed Fries comments on the early days of Xbox, the opinion of Japanese game companies, and more.
Replies(2)I dont think that'll ever happen. But i must say back in the day, they were definitely trying because they were more cash rich than their competitors.
I think MS were and still are the richer company. They tried to acquire Sega back in the day (and considered doing so again more recently), they obviously bought exclusivity to Halo which was originally shown as a Mac title. I don’t think as a company MS can claim the moral high ground here. It’s a wilful lack of self awareness.
Of course Sony would try exactly the same if they had the resources, but when the PS2 dominated the industry was in a much healthier place with an abundance of great third parties.
This has been a depressing generation as far as first party decisions are concerned. The fact we are debating business plans rather than which game is better is a sad reflection of the state of things.
There was Nintendo as well, Sony wouldn't have had a monopoly. In fact, the world would be better today if Xbox never existed in the first place. They pretty much brought all bad practices we have today. We might have gotten all of it either way, but not this early. In term of franchises, I don't think there is anything Microsoft released that would actually be missed if it didn't exist. Even Halo the world wouldn't notice if Halo didn't exist.
I think almost everyone will agree that a monopoly is not good for the industry. But that being said, the competition needs to be smart and strategic with their business. Simply buying up publishers and traditional third-party studios just to keep them out of the other companies reach is not a sustainable practice. That goes for all parties so don't think I'm just referring to Xbox.
I'm no business guru by any stretch of the imagination but I firmly believe that the best way to drive consumers to your software and hardware is to invest smart in your first-party studios. Give them full support and guidance in making unique, fun games that are only available to play in your ecosystem and the gamers will come.
But first party studios aren't enough. They only make up a small portion of the industry. Without 3rd party there would be no industry for Microsoft or sony.Developing games take time and money and sometimes you gotta make moves to stay competitive.
Nah, I never said first-party was enough. I said it’s the ‘best way’ to drive gamers to your platform. 3rd-party is a free-for-all and there’s no guarantee that gamers will use your hardware to play the game. If you want to push your own software and/or hardware you need first-party, or at least exclusive deals with third-party studios.
Then why be so emotional and continue to talk about it. Xbox will never die be ause it stays in so many people's head.
How can you even see him being "emotional" in that comment?
If anything, you're the emotional one, constantly trying to go at anyone that says anything against Microsoft. So when you call him emotional, it comes off as deflection
Replies(2)Sony uploaded gameplay footage of Crimson Desert on a base PS5 running in what appears to be Quality Mode at a stable 30fps at 4K.
Sony announced its financial results for the third quarter of fiscal year 2025, alongside the traditional update on PS5 shipments.
Replies(5)
Sony and Nintendo are both thriving and I'm happy, thank goodness for them or otherwise the whole gaming industry would be in shambles if they only had PC to rely on!
• Total G&NS revenue: 10.5 billion USD
• Operating profit: 900 million USD
• Hardware sales: 8M units shipped
• Software sales: 97M units
• PSN MAU: 132M
vs. Xbox:
• Total gaming revenue: 5.96 billion USD
• nothing else gets reported
Xbox operating costs are without a doubt eye wateringly high, way way way higher than Sony. GP is costing them an absolute fortune to operate.
That is a very solid operating profit. It's not net, obviously, but still a very healthy amount of cash you make after cost of debt and taxes (+ other expenses), and can invest into R&D and future endeavours. And give back to your shareholders or buy back shares.
It would be in Sony's beat interest to not rush next generation. Let 2029 or 2030 be the start of next generation. There is clearly plenty of demand for the PS5 and gamers are not asking for more at this time.
Yup especially with the price of tech going up. They already have the PRO to hold them over.
Exactly this. Let Xbox wither on the vine for a couple more years and there will be nothing left.
I fully agree for 2 reasons:
1. Microsoft seems to be in a hurry to release the new Xbox, if they do at all... AMD speculates a 2027 release. This will hurt them in the long run, because:
2. Datacenters are buying up ALL the RAM, and some RAM manufacturers have stopped making RAM for consumer products entirely, while the other remaining ones are scared to ramp up their production capacity to make more RAM because they're worried this whole AI thing is a bubble that is about to pop, and they don't want to be caught holding the bag when it does pop. So, for now, it costs $300-400 for 32GB of DDR5. That's the MSRP for some entire consoles.
If Microsoft drops the new Xbox now, it's going to cost them a fortune. If Sony holds their cards a moment and lets PS5 cook for a while, as it's showing no signs whatsoever of slowing down in sales, then by the time PS6 is ready to drop, RAM prices should have stabilized, allowing Sony to devote much more of their budget towards making PS6's CPU and GPU more powerful, in addition to the tech itself maturing and the available CPU and GPU parts being much more powerful for the same price point than they would be if released today. So, we'd get a super powerful PS6 in say, 2029, that won't have to cost $700-800. They speculate, based on the current specs, that the new Xbox will cost north of $1,000, and that was before the RAM shortage came into the picture. It's definitely going to be even higher now that RAM costs so much.
MS will be shooting themselves in the foot (again) if they try to drop a new Xbox now, and Sony would be wise to capitalize on that mistake by holding their cards a while longer, raking in more of those PS5 profits, and then dropping a new console as soon as the hardware market stabilizes from this AI datacenter BS.
7 years is a hurry...? Its the same amount of time between XBO and series. The same amount of time between PS3 to PS4 and PS4 to PS5. The 360 was 8 years between it and XBO.
If they do release first, and then Sony a year or two later... is it not possible for prices to come down in that time?
I think Switch 2 beat PS5 during December 2025 that is why the gap decrease to 1m units. Because during black friday, I know PS5 sales is 2:1 against the Switch 2.
And I just want to add that the PlayStation 5 is currently 1.94 million units BEHIND the PlayStation 4 when you align launches. While Switch 2 is 10M ahead against the Switch 1 when you aligned covering it's first 7 months.
No one wants the Switch 2 to do badly.
PS5 being less than 2m behind PS4 is not a big deal; PS5 had to deal with COVID and ongoing supply and pricing struggles that clearly still exist today. Sales of software are incredibly strong, and the size of the community is bigger than its ever been.
PS5 is well on pace to exceed its early (2021) estimates of 110m by end of life even if that's 2027. PS5 will hit 100m before November and then sell another 6-8M in November + December.
PS5 is doing great, and so is Switch 2, it's good for everyone that they succeed, pitting the two against each other is more damaging than anything related to the sales of the two consoles individually.
@repsahj
Yup because they’ve been the anti consumer they are for so long and needs to be humbled 😆
I'd be lying if I said I didn't regret my purchase a bit. I mainly bought it for Mario Kart World, but I find it pales in comparison to 8. I'm annoyed that Nintendo charged money for a super barebones 'upgrade' to Jamboree, no new minigames? No new boards? Just some gimmicky low res camera mode. Oh and Midtroid Prime 4 let me down as well, yet to go back and finish it.
I don't want the Switch 2 to fail, it's contributing to a healthier console market with the death of xbox consoles. I'll get use out of mine long term, but some of Nintendo's decisions like the ones above just annoy me lol.
@respahj the only thing I want Nintendo to badly is the 80$ games so they lower the price.
Thats not even that bad when compared to the outrageous prices for the psp titles...
I want Killzone liberation and resistance but I seriousely cant pay $20 and $40 for them!
Im tired ill probably just go to gamestop*shudder* and buy the used copies.
Digital download prices always amaze me. I'll stick to Amazon and occasionally going to a retail store.
Isn't Activision the one who determines pricing?
So, the complaint is that Activision is selling their game for more via digital service and therefore it's Sony's fault? Let alone the fact that no one is forcing anyone to buy the game digitally over any other means?
Damn, when will Sony lower the price of new games from $60. I mean, everyone sets that price, but we all know that it's Sony who makes these decisions. /s
Where has this guy been? Everyone who's looked knows that PSN prices don't match retail for some moronic reason.