Unknown One
Member
Did Shu really posted that four arms would be better than four breast?
I thought the X1 priced at $499 would offer good competition in NA, seeing how big the Xbox brand is in that territory.
But MS only managed to survive by slashing the price by $150 and bundling a lot of games with the hardware.
Yikes, never expected that myself.
The XBOX add which used to advertise the XBONE for $349 plus the Master Chief Collection now advertises for $349 plus "4 free Halo Games." That collection is toxic.
AC Bundle is out of stock until march 25.
The XBOX add which used to advertise the XBONE for $349 plus the Master Chief Collection now advertises for $349 plus "4 free Halo Games." That collection is toxic.
FF Type-0 for the XB1 isn't even on the Amazon monthly charts, unless I missed it.
Bomba.
Is there any promotions like like month with GameStop for the PS4?
They were pretty much neck and neck in Amazon sales for the month of February but XB1 still got outsold by 80k.
Welp...100k+ difference is possible this month.
This is interesting! I've always been under impression that Bloodborne is a very niche game and thus it might not be popular among gamers and its sales won't be notable either. But looks like I am wrong.
They technically dropped the price by $50 -- removing kinect isn't the same as slashing the price since that was obviously a reason for the system being its original price.
But anyway, I knew the Xbox One was going to get a price drop as soon as the $500 price was announced. I would say that history has shown (before this current gen) that $400 is the max acceptable price to mainstream audiences for a console. Knew the Xbox One would do fine during its launch months but drop greatly after that (especially with the PS4 being cheaper) and I assumed that Microsoft would give the system a price drop before the 2014 Holiday Season due to it (which they did).
That's true but I'd argue the market - i.e. the end consumer - sees it as a big price drop.
FF Type-0 for the XB1 isn't even on the Amazon monthly charts, unless I missed it.
Bomba.
It's not in the top 100.
It's 276 if you're interested:
Yep lookin like a double up kinda month for sure.Welp...100k+ difference is possible this month.
It's 276 if you're interested:
Also 9 reviews vs 58 for the PS4 version.
It's not in the top 100.
Yep lookin like a double up kinda month for sure.
I could live with Square keeping Final Fantasy/Kingdom Hearts PS exclusives in the future(prefer if they were still honestly), but just hope they don't use this as an excuse to drop Xbox support.
Why?
I mean, it's definitely obvious that the Xbox userbase doesn't really care about JRPGs... don't see why it would be better if they were Playstation only though (since there's still obviously Xbox gamers who like these games).
I could live with Square keeping Final Fantasy/Kingdom Hearts PS exclusives in the future(prefer if they were still honestly), but just hope they don't use this as an excuse to drop Xbox support.
You don't see why having to focus on only one platform would be better? Look at how bad Konami's Fox Engine runs on Xbox. Eurogamer (was it Eurogamer?) said the FFXV demo on Xbox has the worst performance they've seen on the console to date. Why should they waste their time struggling with what would be a far less selling version. At least PS3 last gen was more popular outside the US.
Why?
I mean, it's definitely obvious that the Xbox userbase doesn't really care about JRPGs... don't see why it would be better if they were Playstation only though (since there's still obviously Xbox gamers who like these games).
Why?
I mean, it's definitely obvious that the Xbox userbase doesn't really care about JRPGs... don't see why it would be better if they were Playstation only though (since there's still obviously Xbox gamers who like these games).
You don't see why having to focus on only one platform would be better? Look at how bad Konami's Fox Engine runs on Xbox. Eurogamer (was it Eurogamer?) said the FFXV demo on Xbox has the worst performance they've seen on the console to date. Why should they waste their time struggling with what would be a far less selling version. At least PS3 last gen was more popular outside the US.
Why?
I mean, it's definitely obvious that the Xbox userbase doesn't really care about JRPGs... don't see why it would be better if they were Playstation only though (since there's still obviously Xbox gamers who like these games).
I can see that happening, with many Japanese developers doing the same. Japanese games just sell that much better on Playstation.
Uh.... the PS3 was indeed slightly more powerful than the 360. The only reason multiplatform games looked worse on PS3 was because of its complicated architecture which was a pain in the ass to work with. But when devs mastered the Cell, look at what they produced.It will result in better games and less cost for the developers, I would hazard to guess there would be very few Japanphiles that don't have a Playstation in addition to being an Xbox One owner, rather than being just owning a Xbox One. Especially now since the Playstation is the more powerful and better performing machine, unlike last gen
This is interesting! I've always been under impression that Bloodborne is a very niche game and thus it might not be popular among gamers and its sales won't be notable either. But looks like I am wrong.
As with any game, resources being spent on taking advantage of a single platform to ensure the best finished product.
This. Would be easily offsetted if the XB1 was equal in power.
Already gives me more of an incentive to get a PS4 ASAP. Wouldn't make sense to buy these games on XB1 over PS4 if you own both consoles.
It will result in better games and less cost for the developers...
Dark Souls sold over 2.5 million, Dark Souls 2 likely will sell more total.This is interesting! I've always been under impression that Bloodborne is a very niche game and thus it might not be popular among gamers and its sales won't be notable either. But looks like I am wrong.
Uh.... the PS3 was indeed slightly more powerful than the 360. The only reason multiplatform games looked worse on PS3 was because of its complicated architecture which was a pain in the ass to work with. But when devs mastered the Cell, look at what they produced.
I agree. That's the main reason why multiplatforms at the beginning of last gen were vastly superior on the 360. But overall the PS3 is undeniably the more powerful console.The GPU was much weaker than the XB360's. The CPU was stronger. it was thanks to CELL being strong enough and unique enough to pick up the slack that PS3 was able to really shine.
But you don't say PS3 is out and out more powerful just because of CELL. If devs arent able to utilize that power at their leisure, its useless.
I agree. That's the main reason why multiplatforms at the beginning of last gen were vastly superior on the 360. But overall the PS3 is undeniably the more powerful console.
The GPU was much weaker than the XB360's.
This is interesting! I've always been under impression that Bloodborne is a very niche game and thus it might not be popular among gamers and its sales won't be notable either. But looks like I am wrong.
There's not much to read here. Daily Amazon list reads mean so little, it's not indicative of anything really. Unless it's a gold box sale, those could move some serious units in a quick amount of time.
Depends on the title of course but you're looking at small fluctuations in like 10% market share of a game
Why?
I mean, it's definitely obvious that the Xbox userbase doesn't really care about JRPGs... don't see why it would be better if they were Playstation only though (since there's still obviously Xbox gamers who like these games).
I definitely see the benefits from a developer's (or game company's) view if a multiplat sells worse on the weaker console to the point in which supporting that console doesn't make business sense but not from the standpoint of a gamer preferring it to happen.
I definitely see the benefits from a developer's (or game company's) view if a multiplat sells worse on the weaker console to the point in which supporting that console doesn't make business sense but not from the standpoint of a gamer preferring it to happen.
I could understand a gamer preferring cross gen to stop since last gen systems are very old but I don't see why a gamer would greatly prefer to see a game go from a XB1/PS4 multiplat to a PS4 exclusive -- The games are still mostly better on the more powerful console (PS4) either way. I never said last gen, "Man... this game on 360 would have been better if they didn't make it for PS3."
I guess some Xbox gamers said something similar when it came to games on PS2 but I don't know; The PS2 was my main console during that time/gen.
There's not much to read here. Daily Amazon list reads mean so little, it's not indicative of anything really. Unless it's a gold box sale, those could move some serious units in a quick amount of time.
Depends on the title of course but you're looking at small fluctuations in like 10% market share of a game
I really don't see it selling a million on Xbone. XIII had trouble crossing 2 million with about 10x as many 360s.SE have no reason at all to drop the XB1 version, it is obviously running so yeah they will get at least a million or so sales from the console at worst, well worth the investment (yeah pulled that number out my arse). The only way SE would ever go back on the game being multiplat would be Sony saying "hey the games gonna sell like shit on XB1 SE, drop it and we will cover your advertising costs" or something like that. That won't happen, Sony could use that money elsewhere and secondly, more importantly, the sales of FF are so skewed towards the PS platform it would be a waste of money trying to make the game exclusive.
For me, personally, it just adds more value proposition for getting a PS4. As of now, not many of the AAA Sony exclusive hold my interest.
Think it's fair to say games like FFXV, MGSV, or KH3 would play better on Sony platforms or would have some type of advantage since they did start off as PlayStation exclusives.
They literally just told you why: More time and more resources dedicated to just one version instead of two may result in better, more polished games.
Apparently you've never visited the Tomb Raider threads...I mean, the value is already there regardless of the Xbox One getting the games or not; The games are already better on the PS4.
Ehh, I don't think it would be anything major really and in terms of games like MGSV, I would imagine that it being cross gen is playing a much bigger role than it being a game coming to XB1.
But (again) the games are already better on the more powerful console, so I don't get it.
Again, I as someone who owned a 360 last gen wouldn't have said that in terms of PS3 games and neither would I have said that if the original Xbox was my primary console for its respective gen. I would never want to see people with a current gen console that isn't the same as mines lose out on games they're interested in.