• 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.

Phil Spencer: announcement this week

HeisenbergFX4

Gold Member
Arrogance
Tonight Show Comedian GIF by The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon


And I don't trust money hungry suits to not trying to price gouge when people have no other place to turn

And don't give me Nintendo
 

XXL

Member
Still have to see where Microsoft takes their hardware strategy. I'm not convinced Xbox is done. If Microsoft can offer a compelling handheld and an aggressively priced revamped Xbox Series X then I think there still may be a place in the market, albeit a small one.
I was more theorizing on if MS went 3rd fully 3rd party. I should have mentioned that.

I don't think MS making a handheld is a great idea tbh. As much I'd love a VIta 2, I don't think that's a good idea either. Nintendo runs that's shit.
 
Last edited:

DJ12

Member
"Their" who?!

Me? I have two PlayStation consoles (PS4 pro and PS5) and zero XBOX's and yet, I'm the one who wrote it! Just wanted to put it out there that competition is good. I don't like XBOX in the slightest, but I dont want them to fail either
Anyone that thinks Sony are just going to abandon their core user base just because MS probably won't be either making consoles or living in the same price bracket.
 
Last edited:

HeisenbergFX4

Gold Member
Fair enough.

It's hard to find anything optimistic though.
Honestly can't see any possibility for MS to recover in a meaningful way.
I don't think MS is going the way people fear

I still believe they have at least one more generation in them but if the new approach fails all bets are off

Maybe I am reading too much into it but I don't think they waited a week to have a meeting just to say they are going 3rd party

But MS better be very clear and concise with their wording on their future

There better not be any of this case by case wording
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Regarding latest news or rumours, but here's my take on the ones whipped around this week:

- New high end console. Yes! But hoping it has a 4k drive for my movies. I only buy digital games so that part is fine. I just dont want to fork out $300 CDN for a dedicated 4k player. I guess an option is just to keep X instead of selling it

- Some kind of handheld. Dont bother. Let Switch, Steam, smartphones have it

- Games going all digital at some point. Dont care

- Games going multiplatform. Dont care, even it's day one

- Something about Sledeghammer not making COD games or something. Good. Their COD games are usually terrible, though the latest game is decent. They are best being a support studio. Treyarch > IW >>>> Sledge

- Toys 4 Bob closure. Dont care. I dont play Crash games or any IPs they make
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
Tonight Show Comedian GIF by The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon


And I don't trust money hungry suits to not trying to price gouge when people have no other place to turn

And don't give me Nintendo

I don't trust them either. Microsoft and Sony have been letting software sales subsidize hardware for a couple of decades. It is in everyone's best interest, in my opinion, for that to continue. Without competition, I just don't see that happening.

I was more theorizing on if MS went 3rd fully 3rd party. I should have mentioned that.

I don't think MS making a handheld is a great idea tbh. As much I'd love a VIta 2, I don't think that's a good idea either. Nintendo runs that's shit.

I like the handheld idea simply for the fact that they are trying something different. They are not going to get Switch numbers, but at this point, I think Microsoft has adjusted down their hardware expectations a great deal. I think having a presence in the hardware space is important for Microsoft, but they are not going to let it drive their gaming business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: XXL

WoJ

Member
I know I'm late to replying to this, but fuck Phil Spencer and his "we hear you and we're listening."

That's been the response for 10 years and it's year after year of failure by this guy and this company.

I thought when they started acquiring companies we would see a slew of new games that allowed Xbox to compete with Sony first party. But it's just more gamepass and disappointment. How about you make some games Phil instead of telling us you're listening (when you aren't) and give people a reason to buy an Xbox. Too late now though.

What a sad decline from the 360 era. Xbox 360 is my favorite console of all time. So many great memories on that console.

Moat infuriating is Phil will ride off into the sunset to swim in his Scrooge McDuck vault of gold coins despite failing massively.
 
Dude a lot people don't believe that here, Sony is a good guy

They would keep pushing the envelope and still keep prices under $500 because they care

Sassy Red Wine GIF by Married At First Sight
I do want a PS6 that is more than $500 and I'm pretty sure you do to. Let's be straight about it, I hate having a console that will be underpowered at launch and drag on for the next 7 years after.

Fuck this artificial barrier of $500. But that's my take and I understand why some would want a cheaper option
 

Killjoy-NL

Member
I don't think MS is going the way people fear

I still believe they have at least one more generation in them but if the new approach fails all bets are off

Maybe I am reading too much into it but I don't think they waited a week to have a meeting just to say they are going 3rd party

But MS better be very clear and concise with their wording on their future

There better not be any of this case by case wording
I suppose it depends on how generous Nadella is.

Although I believe the end of Xbox as we know it is inevitable, for Xbox fans it would be best if they gave it one final attempt.

Personally, I think this gen was going to be the final attempt.
If I was Nadella, I'd just pull the plug.

Do think MS is waiting too long to address the rumors.
 
Last edited:
I believe Sony can and will increase prices a bit if MS takes a back seat in the console race. I just think it wont be that much and I personally feel it's worth the investment. I enjoy the products they release. In the end you never know but I feel like they would rather just continue to expand on the accessories in the playstation ecosystem to make money.
 

XXL

Member
I like the handheld idea simply for the fact that they are trying something different. They are not going to get Switch numbers, but at this point, I think Microsoft has adjusted down their hardware expectations a great deal. I think having a presence in the hardware space is important for Microsoft, but they are not going to let it drive their gaming business.
Donald Trump Lol GIF by Election 2020
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
We also need to consider that the competition may be kind of over and these are the result for the foreseeable future.

I don't see anyone overcoming Steam on PC.
I don't see anyone overcoming Playstation in consoles.
I don't see anyone overcoming Nintendo in handhelds.

Am I wrong?

The weirdest thing for me is that although the "competition" is always framed as Sony vs MS, with their focus on streaming I'd argue that its Nintendo that MS should have been competing with since they embarked on the Game Pass approach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: XXL
I believe Sony can and will increase prices a bit if MS takes a back seat in the console race. I just think it wont be that much and I personally feel it's worth the investment. I enjoy the products they release. In the end you never know but I feel like they would rather just continue to expand on the accessories in the playstation ecosystem to make money.

I mean, technically they would have be justified in increasing the console price, as people won't need to buy TWO consoles anymore to play all games (except Nintendo exclusives)

PS5 + Series X = $1000 at launch

Let's say PS6 is $650, it's still a pretty good deal
 
Last edited:
I know I'm late to replying to this, but fuck Phil Spencer and his "we hear you and we're listening."

That's been the response for 10 years and it's year after year of failure by this guy and this company.

I thought when they started acquiring companies we would see a slew of new games that allowed Xbox to compete with Sony first party. But it's just more gamepass and disappointment. How about you make some games Phil instead of telling us you're listening (when you aren't) and give people a reason to buy an Xbox. Too late now though.

What a sad decline from the 360 era. Xbox 360 is my favorite console of all time. So many great memories on that console.

Moat infuriating is Phil will ride off into the sunset to swim in his Scrooge McDuck vault of gold coins despite failing massively.

Well said sir. Been gaming since the 80s and I've never seen a gaming exec avoid such scrutiny like he has. It’s farcical.

All I ever wanted them to do was deliver great hardware and features that compliment a steady flow of excellent games that got gamers excited and grew the platform. Like Sony and Nintendo have done over the years particularly with the games.
 
I mean, technically they would have be justified in increasing the console price, as people won't need to buy TWO consoles anymore to play all games (except Nintendo exclusives)

PS5 + Series X = $1000 at launch

Let's say PS6 is $650, it's still a pretty good deal

$650 is a lot but I personally would pay it. I just can't stand PC gaming anymore even though I'm in the IT industry and build PCs all the time. I guess we will see what happens. I personally think there's no way they go over $600. I think that's the max they would ever do.
 

XXL

Member
The weirdest thing for me is that although the "competition" is always framed as Sony vs MS, with their focus on streaming I'd argue that its Nintendo that MS should have been competing with since they embarked on the Game Pass approach.
From a hardware perspective, I think Nintendo has a more dominant hold of the handheld market than Sony does of the console market.

BUT, I've never thought about it from the GamePass perspective at the handheld level, for MS from the cost reduction alone GamePass itself would be much more sustainable.

I don't think they would even have a chance to break through with their own hardware though.
 
XBox PR is a joke and also XBox fans need to grow a pair and just take the banter and the piss takes If you give it you got to take it back, just like it is for me in football.
At worst I'll just game on the PS6 next gen or at best it's the fact that Activision games will be completely multi-platform not on Gamepass, but I still play on the Series Next.

The fact that we haven't even got a day or date for when Phil sets the record straight. Tells me even the staff don't know what to do or say and are working off the cuff, rather than with a truly planned strategy.

All I will say is noone will trust in all digital XBox console's future now after this. A trillion-dollar company with a PR console section that makes the muppet show at SEGA America Saturn PR dept look good.
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Somehow Nintendo copied the cost base for games on the PS5 and Xbox, was that a coincidence?

If they aren't competing with the other 2, why not charge $100? $150? $500 per game? If they are so isolated and with no competition, why price exactly the same as the... "competitors"? :messenger_tears_of_joy:
You guys need to do a little bit of thinking about this stuff before you dive head first into fear porn. Sony cannot price games so high that people can't afford to buy them. These fears of things like an $800 console are a bit absurd. Let's Sony raises the prices of consoles and nobody can afford to buy them. No consoles = no games = no revenue. Console sales need volume and volume has a price limit.

To be clear, I am not going to outright say there are no fears, but it would do far more harm to drastically raise prices than being reasonable.
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
Maybe I am reading too much into it but I don't think they waited a week to have a meeting just to say they are going 3rd party
So I thought a bit more about this and came to the conclusion that they may be announcing lots of big changes to Game Pass in this event.

Think about it: they are in this mess because of Game Pass. And because it has cannibalized their software sales on Xbox, they are looking to port their games on PS5 and Switch so they could sell enough to get a positive ROI.

If they only port their games, it means they recover some of that development costs. But then how will that QoQ growth come?

Porting is for increasing revenue. But what is their path for reducing expenses - which Amy Hood also hinted at last month? Until they fix this Game Pass situation, they'd always be in this vicious loop.

So I think 3 things are coming in this event, which is why it's taking longer:
  1. Multiplatform games announcement on PS and Switch
  2. Big changes to how Game Pass works (day 1 releases, pricing, COD on GP, and/or new tiers, etc.)
  3. Handheld Xbox to promote Game Pass and xCloud
 

foamdino

Member
Then why did they make it?

Scratch that, you got me again pretending to want a real conversation

Bryan Cranston Reaction GIF
PS3 was made to push blu-ray and _incidentally_ to be used as a games machine. It was also an R&D project for heterogenous computing (Cell).

The STI (Sony-Toshiba-IBM) partnership was supposed to act as an alternative to x86. There were papers floating around about self-healing CPUs etc. Lot's of this was fanciful and never came to anything and it was a huge money pit for Sony as they had to have cutting edge fabs to actually fab the processors.
Remember that there was a special version of Linux for PS3s - the whole idea was that this thing was essentially going to be a work station like a silicon graphics box - it was utter madness.

The end result was that x86 remained dominant, Arm took off in mobile and Sony nearly went bankrupt and had to sell-off a load of assets.

The PS4 system architecture was entirely driven by Cerny trying to deliver performance without breaking the bank as Sony had very little powder left.
 

Gambit2483

Member
It's really simple yet MS seem to make things really complicated: Just shut the fuck up, make some great games that you can't experience anywhere else (and PC if you really must) and people will buy your shit.

Release substandard, half finished buggy games and people will buy other shit.

Going third party won't solve the issues.

Apparently this is easier said than done for Xbox. If I had to guess I'd say talent retention plays a HUGE role in producing consistent quality content.

How the hell is a development team supposed to put out AAA quality when half of them just came on board as contracts and the other half are worried about losing their 3-5 year position within the next few months. This is a crap environment to create team synergy, high morale and knowledge transference among a development team.
 

HeisenbergFX4

Gold Member
So I thought a bit more about this and came to the conclusion that they may be announcing lots of big changes to Game Pass in this event.

Think about it: they are in this mess because of Game Pass. And because it has cannibalized their software sales on Xbox, they are looking to port their games on PS5 and Switch so they could sell enough to get a positive ROI.

If they only port their games, it means they recover some of that development costs. But then how will that QoQ growth come?

Porting is for increasing revenue. But what is their path for reducing expenses - which Amy Hood also hinted at last month? Until they fix this Game Pass situation, they'd always be in this vicious loop.

So I think 3 things are coming in this event, which is why it's taking longer:
  1. Multiplatform games announcement on PS and Switch
  2. Big changes to how Game Pass works (day 1 releases, pricing, COD on GP, and/or new tiers, etc.)
  3. Handheld Xbox to promote Game Pass and xCloud
I think this is highly likely what we see

They may mention their commitment to a future console as well with no timeline

They have to be totally clear on their wording
 

HeWhoWalks

Gold Member
The PS4 system architecture was entirely driven by Cerny trying to deliver performance without breaking the bank as Sony had very little powder left.
I don't think it was a matter of a lack of "powder" (as you put it). They were already headed on an upward trajectory and played it safe because it was financially sound to do so and got one of the smartest guys on board to fit the bill. On top of that, they realized the strengths they had, used them in the second half of the PS3's life, and doubled down with the PS4 (which was a major return to form for a PlayStation). Never mind the easy layup after arguably the biggest self-inflicted brand injury in the name of the originally planned Xbox One.
 
Last edited:

Pelta88

Member
Competition keeps the prices in check

Exactly.

However, the current competition hasn't been competing since 2012. For some strange reason, we've designated competition to one specific conglomerate. Apple, Amazon, and even Google (RIP stadia) etc etc would do a better job by having better management and a ceo not focused on pushing meaningless PR sound bites that keep a very specific segment of his instal happy.
 
They have to be totally clear on their wording

This is really the main thing regardless of what they announce next week IMO. The vague statements they've been making have to stop and they need to very clear next week about their plans. I personally think if they are even partially thinking of 3rd party they just need to fully do it. No some games and some not situation.
 
I don't think it was a matter of a lack of "powder" (as you put it). They were already headed on an upward trajectory and played it safe because it was financially sound to do so and got one of the smartest guys on board to fit the bill. On top of that, they realized the strengths they had, used them in the second half of the PS3's life, and doubled down with the PS4 (which was a major return to form for a PlayStation). Never mind the easy layup after arguably the biggest self-inflicted brand injury in the name of the originally planned Xbox One.

The PS3 was just them finding out the hard way that you need to find the right balance between innovation and cost. I doubt we'll ever see them do that again. Regardless of hubris

it's a rule that applies to everyone except apple
 
Last edited:
Whatever Microsoft announces next week, I do not believe that it comes from Spencer.

I believe Spencer’s bosses have made the decisions here as an overall Microsoft strategy.

I also continue to believe that in 10 years Microsoft is going to regret these decisions and Xbox revenue is going to decline year after year and user engagement will decline year after year.

Microsoft better start making games that people want to buy.
 

Topher

Gold Member
PS3 was made to push blu-ray and _incidentally_ to be used as a games machine. It was also an R&D project for heterogenous computing (Cell).

The STI (Sony-Toshiba-IBM) partnership was supposed to act as an alternative to x86. There were papers floating around about self-healing CPUs etc. Lot's of this was fanciful and never came to anything and it was a huge money pit for Sony as they had to have cutting edge fabs to actually fab the processors.
Remember that there was a special version of Linux for PS3s - the whole idea was that this thing was essentially going to be a work station like a silicon graphics box - it was utter madness.

The end result was that x86 remained dominant, Arm took off in mobile and Sony nearly went bankrupt and had to sell-off a load of assets.

The PS4 system architecture was entirely driven by Cerny trying to deliver performance without breaking the bank as Sony had very little powder left.

Pretty much. Sony was trying to make the PS3 the centerpiece of the home living room. They threw everything they could into the initial model which jacked the price up ridiculously and still put Sony in the hole for each unit sold by a few hundred dollars. Thus, their advertising pitch "It only does everything". It was very much Sony's "TV TV TV" moment which led to Kutargi's departure and Kaz had to come in and scale back the thing to make it financially feasible.
 
Last edited:

foamdino

Member
I don't think it was a matter of a lack of "powder" (as you put it). They were already headed on an upward trajectory and played it safe because it was financially sound to do so and got one of the smartest guys on board to fit the bill. On top of that, they realized the strengths they had, used them in the second half of the PS3's life, and doubled down with the PS4 (which was a major return to form for a PlayStation). Never mind the easy layup after arguably the biggest self-inflicted brand injury in the name of the originally planned Xbox One.
PS3 was designed as if the cost to manufacture the thing didn't matter - this followed the "normal" console mode where players buying games would overcome the initial hit taken on the hw. That hit for PS3 was huge and it took a while for them to rejig things to cut costs (hw ps2 emulation was stripped out for EU version etc)

PS4 was designed to be cheap to manufacture and to drive profitability as quickly as possible. It started off costing Sony $50 / unit sold and quickly came down to cost neutral. They even mentioned it was profitable if people bought 2 games? with it at release (not 100% certain on the exact figures).

In terms of mindshare, quality of games, social media buzz etc. yeah they were on an upward trajectory - I don't think they were as financially secure and there was a deep fear in the industry that console gaming was dead and mobile was the only future - so I do think the design was driven by those cost constraints more so than anything else.

Yeah Cerny is the GOAT and did (and has continued to do) a stellar job.
 
Top Bottom