[donny2112]

Microsoft's strength, as a company, is in their software. Always have been. They ride the Windows/Office profit wave by putting their software on other people's hardware. In the video game arena, they have, what is considered by most, to be the top-of-the-line online setup in Xbox Live (*insert grumbling about paying for Gold on top of Hulu/Netflix/etc.*).

If Nintendo/Sony were willing to enter into exclusive contracts with Microsoft as their online provider (and Microsoft somehow magically allowed Steam integration :P), would it make sense for Microsoft to drop out of the hardware business and become a software services company for the other video game manufacturers?

They wouldn't own in the hardware in the Living Room, but they'd own the software that it connects to the world with.

Still make their first-party IPs, just as a third-party?
Kinect as a licensed peripheral/bundle with Live Gold subscription?

Obviously brought up as a thread due to the other threads, but it's something that, I think, could also make sense for Microsoft, as long as the services stayed high quality and they got exclusive contracts (or 90% of the market like with Windows) with the video game manufacturers.

Just wondering what the thoughts would be for this.

[KillerTravis]

This is the equivalent of slow news day for NeoGaf.

[Combichristoffersen]

Why would MS sell their services on Sony's or Nintendo's consoles when they could sell you their services and their own console?

[EmCeeGramr]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

[jaypah]

really? Is this some meme now or something?

[Napalm_Frank]

I'll take free PSN over Live thanks :<

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

Yes

[Grakl]

No, it would make more sense to both have exclusive hardware/software, and then take over the rest of industry. No reason to restrain themselves.

But I agree with the first poster. This is just another "What if X quit the hardware industry" thread.

[Mama Robotnik]

Can I just say that I disagree with the assertion that XBox Live is "the top-of-the-line online setup" in gaming, I personally feel that Steam does a much better job, is more ambitious, constantly evolving and free.

If I were Sony/Nintendo in this hypothetical service-shopping situation, I'd be looking towards Valve.

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

I wouldn't buy a launch hot dog.

[alr1ght]

[IrishNinja]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

i bet they'd sell me the bun separately though

I wouldn't buy a launch hot dog.

damn you and your better jokes

[Alex]

You said Steam, so now I'm just going to say I'd rather have Steam.

I'd rather not pay for basic online functionality though, but at the same time I'd rather not have crippled jank like PSN or ... whatever Nintendo calls their imaginary network. Everyone loses except Steam.

[Vulcano's assistant]

I don't even have the will to read the OP this time.

[KalBalboa]

i bet they'd sell me the bun separately though

:rimshot:

[InsaneZero]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

Does ketchup come pre-installed?

[Dennis]

Stealth attempt at another one of these threads.

[StalkerUKCG]

Can I just say that I disagree with the assertion that XBox Live is "the top-of-the-line online setup" in gaming, I personally feel that Steam does a much better job, is more ambitious, constantly evolving and free. If I were Sony/Nintendo in this hypothetical service-shopping situation, I'd be looking towards Valve.

Steam is toe to toe with Xbox live for me. PSN bringing up the rear and Nintendo are so far behind i cant even see them.

Xbox live does good things so does steam I dont think its right to compare them at this point as they both operate in different spheres if it was direct competition i dont think steam could sustain itself well on a console and i dont think microsoft could manage XBL on PC well.

Give them both a few more years of evolution and they may be able to face off competently in some form.

[LeBrick James]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

No. Because after I took a bite, i'd have to subscribe for the rest :-p

[DUFFMCWALIN]

Are we keeping the mods busy for shits and giggles?

[Kyoufu]

Sonya leaving the console war

[Smashing Drive]

Microsoft needs their own console to go up against the steambox

[sleepykyo]

I think that time ended when the Dreamcast and Windows CE ended.

[Kaako]

If Nintendo was a mermaid, would you let it perform underwater fellatio on you?

[donny2112]

Stealth attempt at another one of these threads.

It's obviously was somewhat thought of due to the other threads (see OP; nothing stealth involved), but Microsoft as a company thrives on their software. While it's unlikely Sony/Nintendo would be willing to just signup Microsoft to be their online services provider, making this entire scenario unlikely as a result, if it were somehow to come about, I think it could fit well with Microsoft's strengths as a company. Steam integration also seems unlikely looking at how Microsoft has handled it so far, but if we can imagine that Sony/Nintendo is willing to signup Microsoft as key online services provider, Steam integration doesn't seem so far-fetched. :)

[bryehn]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

with ketchup.

err...damnit!

[Sophia]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

No, because I don't like overpriced food and I don't even like hotdogs anyhow. D:

[Satchel]

I'd be down with that.

If MS dropped out but their IPs went to another console, and they also took over that consoles online infrastructure, that would be a ok.

[Shalashaska161]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

http://youtu.be/haAhdtDmsOw?t=2m53s

[Grakl]

If Nintendo was a mermaid, would you let it perform underwater fellatio on you?

Do I need its friend code first?

[donny2112]

Why would MS sell their services on Sony's or Nintendo's consoles when they could sell you their services and their own console?

To avoid the losses on the consoles and keep the profits with Live/software. Would've been great for their balance sheet if this could've been done prior to Xbox, but by having their own platform, it's been able to show the worth of the online system to most gamers. If they could keep the historically profitable parts of the whole Xbox business without needing loss-producing hardware, it might be good for Microsoft as a company.

On the flipside, having their own hardware does allow them to have complete control, but for a company built on Windows/Office, having a profitable software-only business doesn't seem unreasonable on its own.

Edit:
Again, probably unlikely for Sony/Nintendo to want to give up control of their own online systems, but if Sony/Nintendo were willing, it may make sense for Microsoft to go this route.

[davepoobond]

thats probably what they would prefer if it came down to it.

the main thing is convincing them to do it. and that's not going to happen.

i think microsoft would ACTUALLY like to license the Xbox hardware tech to other manufacturers and sell their services like that. sort of like cloud gaming, but more with set-top boxes.


essentially it'd be the same as using a cable box or TV set and just having XBOX LIVE on it.

same shit.

[Credo]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

Edit: Beaten by Shalashaska

[Combichristoffersen]

To avoid the losses on the consoles and keep the profits with Live/software. Would've been great for their balance sheet if this could've been done prior to Xbox, but by having their own platform, it's been able to show the worth of the online system to most gamers. If they could keep the historically profitable parts of the whole Xbox business without needing loss-producing hardware, it might be good for Microsoft as a company. On the flipside, having their own hardware does allow them to have complete control, but for a company built on Windows/Office, having a profitable software-only business doesn't seem unreasonable on its own.

The HW would only be unprofitable at launch and maybe a year or two after that before it would turn around. Plus they can sell you overpriced accessories for their hardware, and by having their own HW + their service, they lock you completely into their ecosystem.

MS working as a service provider exclusively could have been a viable option prior to the launch of their Xbox business (and maybe even after the first Xbox), but now that the 360 is printing money for them, I can't really see any reason why they'd go from being a HW manufacturer to becoming a service provider exclusively.

[Neuromancer]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

Absolutely

[Sophia]

Wait, if Microsoft is a Hot Dog, does that make Sony a hamburger and Nintendo a steak? >_>;

[Combichristoffersen]

Wait, if Microsoft is a Hot Dog, does that make Sony a hamburger and Nintendo a steak? >_>;

Nintendo is a Happy Meal and Sony is a döner kebab made by someone who doesn't know what a döner kebab is.

[Carlbeego]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

No ketchup.

[Sophia]

Nintendo is a Happy Meal and Sony is a döner kebab made by someone who doesn't know what a döner kebab is.

Okay so Sony's the steak (Well done games, usually) and Nintendo's the hamburger (every fast food joint has one in an attempt to please all, but they're not always pleasing!)

[radioheadrule83]

I think if they win the initial battle for the living room this is sure to be the endgame. Having the hardware and pushing it hard ensures they're in with a great shout of winning that battle, but if they are having to rely on partnerships with others who have an equal interest in that space, they're not going to do that...

For any of the big three, you are not going to see them willingly go 'third party' soon because they make all of their money, and fund their activities, through royalties paid to them by their third party partners. If however, they no longer have to invest billions in hardware, and can sell their software infrastructure to a wider, broader audience and control a 'content channel' - then that could quite easily change. You don't see Microsoft trying to control the PC / Laptop / Tablet sphere (I mean in terms of the physical hardware) -- although you do occasionally see them trying to guide it (see Surface).

The invention of things like OnLive are going to change how we think of hardware vendors and content providers in the long run... whether OnLive itself, as a company, are involved or not... things are changing. The big boys are going to be thinking up some crazy things to keep us in hardware, and keep them in royalties... but eventually, one or more of them may transition towards a service / content-provider model.

[udivision]

Okay so Sony's the steak (Well done games, usually) and Nintendo's the hamburger (every fast food joint has one in an attempt to please all, but they're not always pleasing!)

Nintendo's more like a pizza. Most people like pizza, but everyone has their own freakin' opinion on the toppings and who cares if they put Geno in Smash 4 or voice acting in the crust of zelda no that doesn't go there pineapple and ham why is that a thing why is that a thing?

[Vilix]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

Only if I could buy horse radish armor as downloadable content.

[davepoobond]

nintendo is like a doughnut -- too much and you just get fat.

microsoft is like an oily calzone -- too much and you just lost all that work you did at the gym (which you pay a subscription for)

sony is like god -- great and all knowing

[Tomat]

GAF, IF MICROSOFT WAS A HOT DOG, WOULD YOU EAT IT!?

No, too much filler, not enough MEAT.

[Silly.Mikey]

If i was MS, i would do it and ask for a cut of everything sold on it. Your brand name is everywhere and you're racking it in on not only your console, but all other consoles as well. Id do it.

[Orca]

Would Live really be profitable enough as a service without the profits from XBLM? They wouldn't be getting the cut they do now.

That's why it doesn't make sense for Steam to be the backbone of the PS3 or Wii U. They make the money to keep that network free by controlling the cash flow through it. With a reduced cut, would it be worth doing?

[Guevara]

www.microsoft-sony.com
www.sony-microsoft.com

[charsace]

Microsoft isn't in any danger so why would they abandon hardware.

[Silly.Mikey]

Microsoft isn't in any danger so why would they abandon hardware.

Who says they'd abandon hardware?

[Yogsam]

Nintendo goes third party.

I wouldn't buy a launch hot dog.

You don't like good ol' red Sarsaparilla, huh?

[Raoh]

Microsoft said they would definitely lease their software and servers to their competitors. (I think it was HHG who asked Major Nelson during an interview)

And I believe them. It's where most of their money comes from. Licenses and patents to their competitors.

MS makes money off of google and apple, why not sony.

I don't want xbox live, sony is doing fine with the track they are on with the vita, but I wouldn't mind sony using microsoft servers. MS servers are solid and I'm not just talking about gaming.

[Radec]

Food methapors are awesome.

OT sucks but saved by these.