@wahsobe: I'm sure both companies could have done things differently in many cases and come out on top of the competition because of it, but we are talking about games here. Sony has a lot more to offer; it's undeniable. Their games have gained massive praise and popularity because of their quality, both among critics and the public. In fact, their games are the main reason why Sony are always ahead of MS in terms of sales despite not having a service as valuable as gamespass (I don't think PS Now is on par). Adding something similiar will only widen the gap, even if they don't release first party titles on day one, which they likely won't.
@m4a5: The download option was implemented a long time ago with PS Now. Moreover, MS are the ones lagging behind, like every gen, in terms of sales, popularity, quality of games, etc.
"Yeah. I mean, you could do the math on Game Pass. I guess you don't know how many subscribers or how much each subscriber is paying," he added. "But you can make some fairly informed decisions and literally just do the math on what we think Game Pass could eventually be--you could do that on any part of the business. But absolutely, Game Pass is sustainable."
@Archaicc: I came to the article with the intention of reading the review (which I did), and couldn't help but notice that the Xbox fanboys gang kept mentioning "Sony" or "PS" instead of focusing on the review or the game, so obviously I had to make fun of the fact.
By the way, based on the definition of "irony" you posted, I can tell you have absolutely no clue what irony means when people say "oh, the irony", and neither does the guy who posted that comment. Just pointing that out.
AhReQueNoMori's comments