Sony scored some serious points in many corners of the video-game world tonight — making a series of statements (and jokes) designed to point out where its upcoming PlayStation 4 differs from Microsoft’s Xbox One, coming down on the side of faithful console gamers on many of the issues most important to them.

See the video above, jabbing at Microsoft’s restrictions on game sharing. Also check out the highlight below from Sony’s E3 news conference, poking Microsoft for the ‘always-on’ confusion and controversy surrounding the Xbox One.

And then they announced the price: $399 will get you the PS4, compared to the $499 that you’ll pay for Microsoft’s Xbox One (and the mandatory Kinect).

Here’s what the PS4 looks like.


Meanwhile, Microsoft says Xbox One pre-orders are breaking records at

Related stories

Like what you're reading? Subscribe to GeekWire's free newsletters to catch every headline


  • lubba

    the confusion regarding XB1 stem not from consumer but from tech journalists fags that twist stories around inorder to achieve their agenda.

  • funny

    Did you hear that Microsoft? Why do you always have to shoot yourself in the foot? I will be buying my first Playstation after 2 generations of XBoxes. Which stupid PM came up with this DRM sharing, ‘5 step to qualify’, can’t use in my vacation cabin with no internet system? That is a 2.5 annual review for you (or whatever new review system you may have nowadays).

    • Guest

      It’s almost as if Sony actually thought about the user instead of the c-levels at HQ.

      • Michael Hazell

        Sony always thinks about the user. This time around Microsoft was thinking about the developers of games instead of the actual gamers, the folks who actually buy their consoles.

    • lan

      It’s their classic partners over people business strategy.

  • Guest

    $400 is still too much for a console. $99 or less, please.

    • Ryan Parrish

      Get Onlive then, it’s only $99. But be forwarned, you get what you pay for.

      • Guest

        No. I want a good console, that runs games natively, for $99. (Or less.) These companies selling games at $60 a pop can do it. They will do it. I will buy it.

        • Ryan Parrish

          Even at $399 and $499, the hardware costs more to manufacture than these prices, so either you can have a cheap system with even more expensive games, or stripped down games, or pay more for the system and get cheaper games. You can’t have both a cheap system, and cheap games, unless you like playing casual games which are cheap to make.

          • Guest

            Of course I can. I can buy a top-of-the-line phone, which can run console-quality games, for $99, so I should be able to buy a top-of-the-line console for that much. Make me sign a contract to buy a game a month — I don’t care — but get that sticker price nice and low. Seeing a sticker price of $399 or $499 is enough to eject me from the electronics section. Ridiculous.

          • Ryan Parrish

            That top-of-the-line phone is subsidized by a monthly service contract. By itself most phones would cost more than $499. As for a $99 console with monthly plan, MS already did that, and I’m guessing it didn’t go well since they discontinued it. After all, it was more expensive in the long run. If you don’t have the cash up front, that’s what credit is for anyway.

            Additionally, to say that phones have console quality games is laughable.

          • Guest

            I’ve never paid $499 for a phone and I never will. I pay $99 for a phone and I pay for the service. There is no “subsidization” since the service costs exactly the same after my contract is fulfilled. Likewise, I’ll pay for a console ($99 or less) and I’ll pay for the service (games). Why this is so hard? I watched the videos of the so-called “console quality” games on E3 and there is nothing that my phone can’t already do (it also makes phone calls) in these visuals.

            Sony! Microsoft! $99! (Throws console-quality phone at the podium)

          • Ryan Parrish

            Of course it’s subsidized. You don’t really think Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile and Sprint really only pay $99 for those phones do you? Why do you think it’s so expensive for service? That’s exactly why T-Mobile just changed their service plans so you can decouple the plan from the phone cost. They got tired, and clearly their customers did too, of subsidizing the cost of the phone. If you don’t do a device upgrade or carrier hop every two years you’re leaving money on the table unless you’re on one of these new plans.

            It’s fine by me if you refuse to buy in, tablet and phone gaming will still be around, but the best games will be on the consoles because that’s where the best profits are. Premium experiences come at a premium price. You can’t have best of breed for lowest cost. As the saying goes, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

          • Guest

            No, I pay $99 for the phone. AT&T is just a vendor. T-Mobile lowered its prices to distract from its pitifully poor service coverage. AT&T costs 1.6x as much as T-Mobile per month due to its quality, not due to “subsidies.”

            Furthermore, using a 2-plus-year-old smartphone isn’t “leaving money on the table.” It’s just a bad idea. Why tote around a beaten-up, unsupported device when for just $99 you can get the latest and greatest?

            To bring this back to topic, Ryan, I’d like for you to make some phone calls and lower these monstrous consoles’ prices to $99. I’ll loan you my phone since T-Mobile doesn’t work here.

          • Ryan Parrish

            AT&T is a good service provider, no argument there(I’m a customer), but that isn’t why upgrading your phone is a good idea. Why do you think you have to keep signing up for a new two year contract for the “privilege” of spending $99 for a new phone? It’s because they’re soaking you for $400-$500 in overcharge during that contract period to pay for the price of the phone they pay the manufacturer, plus their profits on the sale of the phone to you. If you don’t renew every two years and continue to pay the same rate it is more than a bad idea, it’s a waste of money pure and simple.
            I stay with AT&T due to a combination of service, device selection, and price. If it was on price alone T-Mobile would be the obvious choice, but I can afford to pay more, which obviously you can, which begs the question of why you’re asking for a lowball gaming console. Also, what company lets you upgrade as a current customer for only $99 to the “latest and greatest”?

            And, since you decided to address me by name in the douchiest way possible, at least I post under my own name, you worthless coward. The fact that you aren’t willing to use your actual identity shows you are a smug small person who can’t confront a rational argument so you hide behind a “Guest” account. I’m not afraid to speak my mind unlike you little man.

  • Mark

    I was disappointed with price and rules, but the more I look at it, it suits me. we have 3 Xbox’s and together we buy several games per year, sometimes even the same one (Halo 4). With XB1 we can share a library, Internet is always on anyway. So taking the narrow view for me, the system is great. Families with kids at uni, or wider family – superb system. Games and exclusives look good too.
    XB1 is growing on me, but really complicated to decide!

  • Jason Farris

    Preorder: Xbox One

    • funny

      haha… yes, One … as in One will ever be bought :) Good luck with a box that tries to do everything, but can’t figure out to do a single thing well.
      Games – well, DRM and online connection with big brother has ended this
      TV – who needs a glorified TV remote that can’t even record TV (where is the DVR capability?)

      I kinda feel bad for Microsoft. They are killing off the ONLY successful HOME consumer product they had. They should just stick to corporate market and die slower, as they will save more money.

  • MichaelJ

    The real difference between the two platforms comes down to games. Is Halo 5 enough to carry the flag for Microsoft? Will it be that good or just MORE of the same that they have done in each version?

    Other than that, they have the same games on both platforms. Foreza is not enough to carry a platform.

    Kinect is amazing technology, but not many games take advantage of it or is that fun compared to how well the WII did. Do you really want to workout in front of your tv. GET OUTSIDE!

    So better technology will always win out. But if you restrict a customer, then you will lose.

    • Jason Farris

      I agree. Discs are too restrictive for me, I’d much rather cloud enable my entire library and share it with ten other people who share their entire libraries with me. Now that sounds next gen!

      Sony would have me buy one disc, be responsible for it’s saftey, pass it around literally by hand when I wanted to loan or sell it? Yikes! When it’s scratched or lost? Buy it again says Sony. No thanks, I’ll take my library persistant and accessible from anywhere.

  • Michael Hazell

    Sony has won the next generation console war.

    • guest

      Congrats on one of the stupidest comments I’ve seen recently.

      • Michael Hazell

        Stupid eh? If I need too I can bring a lot of evidence to back up my statements. The Xbox One includes DRM, a garbage used game policy, costs $100 more, and requires to be on the internet once every 24 hrs so it can authenticate your system, or you can’t play games.

        The PS4 is $100 cheaper, has no DRM, can play used games without question, and doesn’t require an internet connection to play games.

  • funny

    at which point Msft needs to start some damage control? Because this official interview was not it… “if you don’t have internet buy XBOX360…”

    • random

      Don Mattrick, pictured in the video – start packing your office.

    • latest troll idiot

      Knee-jerk haters like you will make mileage off it. But I think he does a decent job of explaining the design choice, acknowledging it’s not going to please everyone and MS understood that, and talking about what MS’s option is for those who can’t have a permanent internet connection: 360. What did you expect him to say: PS4?

  • Dan S.

    I can’t believe how much people are making of this $100 difference (which the XBOX One comes with Kinect included, Sony’s “Eye” is $60). I purchased my XBOX 360 almost 8 years ago, and for the breadth of entertainment it has offered me, and the TCO when you add in games, beating the drum that it’s $100 less has NO bearing on my decision making process. It’s just a stupid argument.when you calculate the costs out over time. Go with the platform that makes the most sense for YOU, weather you are a Sony or a Microsoft fan.

Job Listings on GeekWork