DaGwaphics
Member
If you follow the discussion
Crayon
and I were having you'll see where it came in (discussion of a high-end, $1k+ MS console, which is pointless because of PC IMO).
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The truth is ... Xbox ditched generations with the Xbox One.
- Thread starter havoc00
- Start date
If you follow the discussion
Crayon
and I were having you'll see where it came in (discussion of a high-end, $1k+ MS console, which is pointless because of PC IMO).
recursive
Member
How exactly does the series s cpu "smoke" the PS5?
twilo99
Member
If you follow the discussion
They could just do it for the brand name and maybe a bit of subsidy/undercut on price, but I think the main issue there is the software.. can't brand a PC as an xbox if it doesn't act like one. The xbox app and the game bar thing are alright on PC, you can feel like you part of the "Eco system" but it's far from a full fledge xbox "experience" software wise. It will have to be some weird dual boot/VM situation, which is way too jarring..
Last edited:
Topher
Gold Member
That's not what I said at all. I said the profitable sectors of Microsoft should not pay for Xbox console development. The Xbox division should be self-sufficient. You pointing to overall corporate profits is at odds with that.
Last edited:
twilo99
Member
It doesn't, they are both horrible.
DaGwaphics
Member
I doubt we'd see the Windows UI or open environment on any kind of Xbox branded device at all (even if the system is in-fact running windows and the windows versions of games with custom presets). UI and store would be locked down, that's the only way to justify selling the console at cost, which is really the only thing that justifies the existence of the device. The VMs Xbox uses run completely hidden to the user, not really something to be noticed.
Last edited:
twilo99
Member
You really don't think they have it all figured out?
Xbox wouldn't exist if it was loosing enough money to make a real difference.
Microsoft wouldn't be producing consoles if it was loosing too much money to make a difference.
I don't know how they are moving money internally and what pays for what, but I am sure someone very capable that works there does and they seem to be fine with the current situation.
twilo99
Member
Well that's exactly the problem..
Thirty7ven
Banned
Let’s keep pretending MS weren’t seriously considering ending Xbox because of last gen. Gamepass and Cloud promise is the only reason they didn’t.
Last edited:
twilo99
Member
Right? See how quickly things can change in the corporate world.. one day they are shutting it all down and the next they are spending 70 billion USD on it. Some crazy peeps out there.
Apparently just lighting tons of money on fire.....indefinitely..... is good business strategy.
Topher
Gold Member
I'm sure Don Mattrick was considered a "very capable" guy working at Microsoft. Why are you pretending these people are infallible? But if you believe Microsoft has their console business completely "figured out" then I think that bit of faith is badly misplaced.
But yes, someone is making decisions on all this and at some point IF Xbox, as a division, is and continues to be a drain on the overall business then either that someone, or someone higher, is going to have to make a really tough choice about their presence in the hardware business. The fact they have not made that decision at this point doesn't mean all is well with Xbox consoles.
Last edited:
Thirty7ven
Banned
Yet when people say they might start releasing their games everywhere and turn Xbox into a smaller more niche product…
They didn’t spend 70B on Xbox, the console btw. MS was in gaming before the console and nobody expects them to leave gaming.
Last edited:
DaGwaphics
Member
I think you and @
Topher
have forgotten the fact that Xbox has been running with a 8-9% profit margin for years (as a whole unit hardware + software), as proven out in court documents. The gaming division at MS isn't a money sink, that's just nonsensical make believe put forward by the uninformed. People that don't understand how the business behind consoles work at all, took the testimony from the Epic vs. Apple case (about MS not making a profit directly from the hardware sales) and ran with that without ever realizing that while they don't make profit directly from the hardware they do make profit from the software and services that run on the hardware.MS lets them run with a slimmer margin than Nintendo and Sony typically run at, but they don't burn cash.
Last edited:
Topher
Gold Member
I think you and @
MS lets them run with a slimmer margin than Nintendo and Sony typically run at, but they don't burn cash.
Nope. Never said Xbox wasn't making money. I'll take your word on what those documents said, but this is about the Xbox console itself, not the entire division. The question is whether the software/services sold through the console justifies the console itself. It may or may not. My point was that if the Xbox division has to pull money from elsewhere in the company, as was suggested, then the console is living on borrowed time. Again, I wasn't the one suggesting they need injection of funds. I'm just responding to that line of thinking.
Last edited:
Thirty7ven
Banned
The court info wasn’t clear on whether or not it’s profit nor how they calculate it. It’s not like when Sony gives us detailed fiscals.
Just like Bungie, Insomniac and every other purchase cost goes into PlayStation, not some “this is an exchange of assets” like the ABK/Bethesda etc situation.
Then you gotta factor in all the dev cost they incur with all the new studios, and in a land where your console market share is shrinking vs your previous one where you had less games, Gamepass isn’t growing, and Xcloud is going nowhere fast… yeah
But we can keep saying that MS has so much money they don’t care sure. Then they shouldn’t have signed that Sony ten year deal right? Or the Nintendo one? Because they won against the regulator that had a problem with it.
Just like Bungie, Insomniac and every other purchase cost goes into PlayStation, not some “this is an exchange of assets” like the ABK/Bethesda etc situation.
Then you gotta factor in all the dev cost they incur with all the new studios, and in a land where your console market share is shrinking vs your previous one where you had less games, Gamepass isn’t growing, and Xcloud is going nowhere fast… yeah
But we can keep saying that MS has so much money they don’t care sure. Then they shouldn’t have signed that Sony ten year deal right? Or the Nintendo one? Because they won against the regulator that had a problem with it.
Last edited:
ShadowkillXNA
Member
Checked your anus? Isn't that where phil usually gives you your "orders"?
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
So, xbox doesn't believe in generations and we start to feel that xbox doesn't believe in hardware.
I feel Microsoft are completely committed to game pass and whatever that entails. If Sony allow gamepass on PlayStation. Microsoft might stop making hardware. I don't think that's a possibility so the only thing I can imagine is Microsoft looks to start supporting devices. Such as PC and Rog Ally etc. Which they already have. The only issue there is pc gamepass, while decent is not on the same level as console gamepass...so they need to continue selling consoles or creating a console SDK that is possible for third party manufacturers to build them.
Such as, the Asus Rog Xbox. How this works I really don't know. So, ultimately I feel Microsoft are forced into supporting consoles. They are seeing growth in revenues and profits according to their numbers. Somehow they are making this work with even less consoles sold than xbox one.
I am actually stumped as to what they could be thinking....
I feel Microsoft are completely committed to game pass and whatever that entails. If Sony allow gamepass on PlayStation. Microsoft might stop making hardware. I don't think that's a possibility so the only thing I can imagine is Microsoft looks to start supporting devices. Such as PC and Rog Ally etc. Which they already have. The only issue there is pc gamepass, while decent is not on the same level as console gamepass...so they need to continue selling consoles or creating a console SDK that is possible for third party manufacturers to build them.
Such as, the Asus Rog Xbox. How this works I really don't know. So, ultimately I feel Microsoft are forced into supporting consoles. They are seeing growth in revenues and profits according to their numbers. Somehow they are making this work with even less consoles sold than xbox one.
I am actually stumped as to what they could be thinking....
ShadowkillXNA
Member
Yes it does. The point of games consoles is to......play games.
Without games worth playing a games console is a paperweight.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Plenty of great games on xbox series, though.
There are literally too many games on consoles, too many each year but people are still acting like a console doesn't have games lol.
You could survive on gamepass alone very easily. It's been bonkers this year.
ChorizoPicozo
Banned
This is what people don't understand.
it's not about the quantity of games.
It's about how big and mainstream these games are. A big game warrants big marketing, which is how these consoles justify their existence.
Crayon
Member
That's where I think people are overthinking it. I don't think they would necessarily be trying to gain anything specific from the change, it would just be a change in release schedule and positioning.
These are just boxes people pickup to play MS first-party content (and third-party content of course) if they don't have or want to get a gaming PC. Or the users that want a streamlined UI for the living room etc. and want access to the MS content/services from there.
@Thirty7ven , I'm not sure what the point is you were trying to put together there. MS sells their games and services on PC and look at that platform as the high-end experience for users that want to pay for that. They've said as much themselves. Like I said, consoles are for those that want a cheaper option or want something couch ready.
There're people here who would definitely be interested in a $1000 console for the reason you said there. Some people are on consoles for other reasons than affordability. It probably couldn't be the same value as a more traditional release would be but still could be a great performance for the money compared to a pc. Again though this all hinges on the idea of them making the move to publish on playstation (they have no problem doing it everywhere else) and having this thing be a more enthusiast product and thus low volume.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
They can be played on the Xbox One.
Topher
Gold Member
How? Cloud?
Sleepwalker
Member
yes.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Yes and we are told this is the way....
Topher
Gold Member
Varteras
Gold Member
DaGwaphics
Member
If they are publishing everything everywhere I don't see much point in having a hardware platform, the revenue generated from that side of the business would simply be thrown away. I'm not sure how they could ever make that look good on paper, since the Xbox division was already bigger than any third party publisher by revenue, including ABK. But, I guess anything is possible. If they were sun-setting hardware in 27 (I think the line was that they would exit gaming all together, which seems unlikely with the ABK buy anyway), I doubt they would introduce any new hardware at all. They would simply playout the current gen and that would be that.
Everything is conjecture at this point, we'll see how it goes.
Last edited:
Daneel Elijah
Gold Member
And this is were I disagree with you a little. Why change the release schedule? Why change the positioning? Because the previous plan is not good enough, for some reasons. Not a critic, but a observation. Console gaming is not just a weak PC. It is another way for people to play games, and can be used and liked even if you have a monster PC. It is not a poor man's choice, but the preferred way for many. And the console market is known to us since decades. If we follow this "tradition", and "common sense", a 400/600 €/$ console would be a Dreamcast. Dead on arrival. Because the market choose the PS5 this gen. Or at least seems to have. You can't have this early next gen be there and be successful without thinking that either A: the Series was successful too. Or B: it was not but new hardware will make it work. Remember, the Series consoles are sold at a loss. No refresh means that they will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. PS5 and Switch are successful. Next year, new hardware will be available to make it even better for customers. In this environment, making a next gen console will lead to questions. How do you see this next gen box from Xbox? Made for mass market or limited numbers? Sold at a loss or at cost? Made for a 10 year plan or just to eclipse the PS5 Pro? Made for the Xbox hardcore fans, or for the casuals?That's where I think people are overthinking it. I don't think they would necessarily be trying to gain anything specific from the change, it would just be a change in release schedule and positioning.
These are just boxes people pickup to play MS first-party content (and third-party content of course) if they don't have or want to get a gaming PC. Or the users that want a streamlined UI for the living room etc. and want access to the MS content/services from there.
@
twilo99
Member
I think that consoles should have 3 tiers
$700-900
$400-600
$150-300
That way consumers can decide what kind of performance they want and not be stuck with one mediocre option.
Crayon
Member
THOUSAND DOLLAR XBOX
The TDX is the Surface, the playstation is the Dell. Maybe you settled for the Dell but you know what the real shit is. TDX is a halo product and the legacy of the old era. So you see what I'm saying? Everyone is going to use their wares and if they want to use some cheaper stuff to do it, that's completely normal. This way ms fits and the brand can recover from the ruined image. Are you feeling me here?
xrnzaaas
Member
That way new games will never take technological leaps or never release in their planned form, because they're going to be dragged down by the least powerful version. I mean look at BG3, if it wasn't for Phil's "intervention" Larian would still be thinking if it's possible to port the game because of Series S limitations.
MidGenRefresh
*Refreshes biennially
What you want sir, is a PC.
Fredrik
Member
And a PC is a Xbox, kinda. But Xbox isn’t a PC, yet.
The solution is right there. Treating Xbox like an isolated console at this point makes no sense. They need to pop that bubble. Just synchronize the products and make the ecosystem make sense, let the Xbox be a living room PC.
Xbox ecosystem - Play everything on a Windows PC or Xbox console. Choose the performance with your wallet.
And in the future when mobile tech is better, play everything on mobile too.
And further out when cloud computing and internet infrastructure is better, play everything wherever you can start a Xbox launcher, on your computer, console, Chromecast, TV, car, fridge, baby monitor.
Astray
Member
I personally think it already is.
If they are planning on an all-new gen They will have to liquidate all the stock at retailers, which will lead said stock to consumer hands.
How will those new consumers react when you suddenly create an obsolescence time limit on their new hardware?
Senua
Gold Member
PC is just a dirty word to some people for whatever reason, they will list all the things they want from their console.
Graphic options, powerful hardware, high FPS etc. You see many on here dreaming of a $1000 console with all the bells and whistles yet they ignore the solution staring them right in the face.
YOU PC BRO?!
Member
Microsofts biggest problem is strategy. Forever inspiring them to make all the wrong choices.
Simply put, Xbox could be turned around at any time. Unfortunately, that would require a little introspection, a precursor to the acknowledgement of certain truths. The first being that they have squandered untold billions on a series of poor decisions. That they have failed to capitalise upon the advantages they have over their competitors. That they haven’t successfully nurtured a single 1st party studio capable of creating a system selling product. That, after all this time, they still don’t appear to understand the market. That they have lost their identity.
Does anyone remember the time Phil Spencer suggested that great games don’t matter? Or when Microsoft launched a new generation game console without any games? When Microsoft stripped Xbox of its exclusives and wondered why console sales were so abysmal?
Microsoft are now in the business of ‘tell not show’. A company desperately in need of new leadership. When an average Xbox friend group could likely come up with a better direction for the business that’s when you know something is lacking. Apologies for the pessimism but nothing will change. Xbox will continue hobbling on, determined to drag us towards a future no one really wants.
Simply put, Xbox could be turned around at any time. Unfortunately, that would require a little introspection, a precursor to the acknowledgement of certain truths. The first being that they have squandered untold billions on a series of poor decisions. That they have failed to capitalise upon the advantages they have over their competitors. That they haven’t successfully nurtured a single 1st party studio capable of creating a system selling product. That, after all this time, they still don’t appear to understand the market. That they have lost their identity.
Does anyone remember the time Phil Spencer suggested that great games don’t matter? Or when Microsoft launched a new generation game console without any games? When Microsoft stripped Xbox of its exclusives and wondered why console sales were so abysmal?
Microsoft are now in the business of ‘tell not show’. A company desperately in need of new leadership. When an average Xbox friend group could likely come up with a better direction for the business that’s when you know something is lacking. Apologies for the pessimism but nothing will change. Xbox will continue hobbling on, determined to drag us towards a future no one really wants.
Thirty7ven
Banned
Here’s the truth about jez
Smooth brains hold the Xbox online community megaphone. Why?
Smooth brains hold the Xbox online community megaphone. Why?
Last edited:
Skifi28
Gold Member
I've been hearing that phones will kill consoles since 2010 and the ps3 would be the last console ever released. Still waiting.
Tsaki
Member
What would the technical difference of a "mid-gen console" and a "next-gen console" be when released in the same month and price point?
Mibu no ookami
Member
Like I said, think it depends on how it is handled.
If they have a robust trade in program, maybe they can get away with it. Again, this is hail mary territory. You don't find silver bullets in hail mary territory.
Mibu no ookami
Member
There is a reason why we have shifted from a 5 year refresh to a 7.
Diminishing returns on graphics and the price it costs to create a meaningful upgrade has increased as well.
The Super Nintendo launched in the us in 1991 for 200 dollars (447 dollars adjusted for inflation).
The Gameboy was launched in 1989 for 90 dollars (adjusted for inflation that is 222 dollars).
These prices exploded in the age of 3D graphics.
The PS1 launched in 1995 for 300 dollars (adjusted for inflation is 600 dollars). 150 inflation adjusted dollars more than the SNES.
The PSP launched in 2005 for 250 (adjusted for inflation is 400 dollars). Twice the price of the Gameboy.
If Sony launched a base model system today for 600 dollars people would flip their shit. So Sony and Microsoft have to cut corners to get a machine out at 500 and they're still taking a loss on it.
The PS2 launched for the same price as the PS1 and included a dvd player. It's no accident that it sold 150 million units. But Sony tried to course correct with the PS3 at 500 and 600 dollars respectively and people lost their shit. It's no coincidence that the PS4 launched for more money than the PS2. Sony could have released a machine similar to the wii u in terms of tech, and released it for 300 dollars, that machine wouldn't have been marketable though.
We're about to see the future of prices with the PS5 Pro. Will it replace the PS5 at 500 or will they launch it for 600? That's just 4 years after the launch of the PS5, but somehow you think they could release a significantly more powerful machine a year later for the same price?
Mibu no ookami
Member
I think there is an assumption that the mid gen refresh is sold at a great margin rather than a loss, but that isn't the case.