"Today, PlayStation revealed that its PS5 has sold 40 million units. Microsoft doesn’t share hardware numbers typically, but court documents, math, and slides from an ID@Xbox in Brazil seem to suggest the Xbox Series X|S line-up is around 20-23 million units sold globally. That essentially puts the PS5 at a 2:1 advantage against Xbox, but perhaps the split is even worse than that beneath the surface. "

  • Neato@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    > > > Xbox because it doesn’t have exclusives appealing enough to make them pick it over the alternatives. > >

    Soon. Their acquisition of Bethesda and now Activision will push a lot of in-demand titles to Xbox and PC going forward. They’ll be a lot more “competitive” with Sony now.

    • TwilightVulpine@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m skeptical, because they had Halo, Banjo & Kazooie, Conker, Perfect Dark, and they don’t seem to know what to do with those. Killer Instinct 2013 was nice but it’s been a decade we don’t get anything else from that. We are only now getting to see some of the projects from the newer studios they have been acquiring, but Redfall definitely didn’t get my hopes up.

      Are they gonna keep buying publishers whenever their output dries up under them? Is the problem really a lack of studios or is it that they can’t manage them well.

      • ampersandrew@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The problem is that development times exploded upward, so it takes so, so long to get a game out the door, and it appears as if they’ve done nothing. The first game from the Zenimax acquisition that started development under Microsoft leadership likely won’t come out until 2026, for example. Sony already released most of their heavy hitters, and the next big Sony first-party game similar to God of War, Horizon, Uncharted, or The Last of Us is likely several years away still (Wolverine, maybe). The next one after that will probably be a PlayStation 6 game.

        As for Killer Instinct, rumor has it we’ll see another one in the near future, probably from Bandai Namco now that they’re not working on Soul Calibur or Smash.

        • TwilightVulpine@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That is true, but maybe it’s all the more reason to wait and see what they can do with the whole publisher they already have before they buy another.

          • ampersandrew@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If I’ve got money to invest now, I’m going to invest in two things that are likely to make money rather than waiting to see if the first one makes money over a couple of years. Especially when ActiBlizz was on a fire sale.

              • ampersandrew@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Do you think the Bethesda acquisition by itself, before Activision, would have been enough to turn PlayStation’s 2:1 market lead into something far more even? Because I don’t. And I think that’s why the deal didn’t get blocked. There’s also tons and tons of third party competition in the gaming industry worldwide, so I don’t think they’re a threat to competition there either.

                • TwilightVulpine@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I believe this framing is misleading to begin with. Not only Microsoft as a whole is already a much larger company to Sony, so the whole idea that it deserves a boost to catch up is missing the forest for the trees. On top of that, it seems like a remnant of Console War mindset to consider the ideal of the market to be a 50/50 or a 33/33/33 split.

                  It is better for the industry to have more publishers and studios which are beholden to no platform owner. The idea that whoever is below the top 3 is entitled to swallow up everything under them so that they get a chance to reach #1 is a convoluted way to justify consolidation. It’s not fine just because Microsoft is #4 rather than #2. Being #4 is not such an insignificant position in first place, and it’s weird that it’s assumed that Microsoft is owed an even position.

                  And I’m sorry, if freaking Microsoft can’t use the many studios it already has to make their platform they have appealing, the issue is not lack of studios and IPs. I don’t think the “competitiveness” of taking games that already could be available to everyone and locking them to a platform is actually making the market any better (no, not even when Sony does it). It’s a net negative for everyone except the acquiring company itself. If they want to make their platform more appealing, they should make better games for it.

                  • ampersandrew@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    > > > Not only Microsoft as a whole is already a much larger company to Sony > >

                    With regards to this industry, it really doesn’t matter.

                    > > > On top of that, it seems like a remnant of Console War mindset to consider the ideal of the market to be a 50/50 or a 33/33/33 split. > >

                    That is the ideal. It means each one has to try their damnedest to earn the dollar of their consumer. Like you, I’d prefer that it was achieved by any means other than exclusives, but as long as it’s a legal business practice, it will be an effective one.

                    > > > It’s not fine just because Microsoft is #4 rather than #2. Being #4 is not such an insignificant position in first place, and it’s weird that it’s assumed that Microsoft is owed an even position. > >

                    They need to be successful enough that they don’t leave the console market entirely. Otherwise you create a monopoly in that space. There are some industries that are just colossally difficult for a new competitor to enter, and the console market is one of them. If you lose a competitor, it ruins the market for everyone.

                    > > > If they want to make their platform more appealing, they should make better games for it. > >

                    Yeah, they’ve got this game Starfield coming out, plus Hellblade II, Fable, Clockwork Revolution, South of Midnight, etc. But games just take so long to make that it takes forever to make up for a deficit they created last generation. It doesn’t make the market better for the customer, but it’s far worse if Sony’s lead is so immense that a console manufacturer doesn’t profit from making consoles. That is, unless the entire console market disappears, but I don’t think that’ll happen for several decades at the earliest.

      • Neato@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Their management kind of sucks but that isn’t rare in games publishing. Publisher make insane moves all the time. Unfortunately for MS, from your list only Halo is relevant and that has had rocky releases for quite a while. Now that they can sequester Bethesda and Activision games they can probably be hands-off and just wait for exclusive sales to come in.

        • TwilightVulpine@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That definitely doesn’t inspire confidence, especially when, for all of Sony’s sketchy deals, their first-party games are consistently good.