Dory16
Banned
Also news flash, Itakagi doesn't make games anymore
-
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.
I'm starting to think that Microsoft has already done too much to "lose" the next generation of gaming
Dory16
Banned
You're asking some pertinent questions. I am not concerned enough about who wins or loses to get that much into the semantics of what definition of success is the most legitimate. Also who am I to define it for everyone on this forum? I therefore decided to highlight the conventional way of defining it in the console market and also the more "evolved" definition that MS is embracing in a rapidly changing market . I literally heard Phil Spencer in an interview this year say "I don't make money based on how many boxes I sell and I don't mind where you play" (or something along those lines). It made me realize that it comes down to a company's business model what "winning" means. And we could be wrong to assume that all gaming companies hold themselves to the same success criteria. I'm sure a high number of boxes sold is fantastic news for any company but I'm strongly suspecting that in the case of Microsoft, this is just a relatively small part of the equation.
More generally I think that "winning " in the gaming market will start to become defined by who enjoyed the widest ecosystem adoption by gamers, including subscriptions services, streaming and hardware. Yes it's less quantifiable but it seems to be the natural course of gaming history with Stadia already out there operating entirely without hardware.
Shangounchained
Banned
Halo simply has a huge fanbase but the studio behind it doesnt know how to make it spectacular and look as creatively beautiful as ps exclusives! They are just sitting on a gold mine and dont knpw how to sell the gold
Klayzer
Member
I would take the low-key approach, over the Trump tweet style of advertising. In my opinion, I think Microsoft PR has been way to talkative these last few years.
diffusionx
Gold Member
I know this is hard for hardcore gamers to wrap their head around, because gaming has always been this one thing, discrete generations of hardware that come out at the same time that people pick between, with the winner being declared a couple of years in based on who has sold more. But is that really the right way to look at it? Do people look at smartphone sales every year and declare Samsung the winner and Apple the loser, because Samsung sold more phones? Maybe some do, but considering how successful Apple is, saying they "lost the year" or whatever doesn't tell the story.
The fact is that MS doesn't have to sell more consoles to be successful. The question is if they can be successful or have to shut it down like they did Windows Phone.
Yoboman
Member
Streaming has been a flop and nobody has mitigated the distance between the console and mobile markets. They are seperate experiences. Nobody is looking to chew up their data to play Hellblade on a tiny screen
If they actually do it then they can stamp their feet and cry success. Right now claiming their strategy is a success is like claiming their TV strategy of 2012 is a success at reveal
And changing their messaging from refusing to talk about the console sales they are losing at definitely isn’t a sign of success
If they actually do it then they can stamp their feet and cry success. Right now claiming their strategy is a success is like claiming their TV strategy of 2012 is a success at reveal
And changing their messaging from refusing to talk about the console sales they are losing at definitely isn’t a sign of success
Agreed, they don't have to sell plastic but at the end of the day they have to sell something.
I think the issue is, there really is no reason for Microsoft to be a middleman.... they should have competed with Steam and not abandoned their customers during the Game for Windows Live days, imo. Going to rental model or streaming model to me is kind of hard to sustain all this - eventually money has to be made.
I'm all for Microsoft developing and publishing games, I personally have no need for them as a middleman anymore - they have a ton to do to make any of these subscription models work.
Last edited:
Shangounchained
Banned
Its not about sales and ive never looked at it on tge sales perspective its more about tge gaming experience and sony and nintendo are above xbox, playstation has the best exclusives in the business and ps4 was simply the best place to play multiplats as well compared to xbone only the xbox one x is better interms of quality and nintendo are good because they stick to their casual games and they have a big library of exclusives on that, microsoft on the other hand need to find where they fit in they have slim options either they deliver same quality or better exclusives pr they stick to making series x more powerful than the ps5 to produce the best quality of multiplat gaming!
diffusionx
Gold Member
I said above what I think MS' pitch is for next gen. It is buy the console, subscribe to GamePass for $10 a month, play 100+ games at any time, including all the first party stuff, which they are putting a lot of resources into. I think it's a good pitch myself. I think GamePass is a great value that can outweigh the lack of TLOU3 or whatever for some. Ultimately people will decide what's best for them. But I think that's the direction they are going. GamePass and Xbox are hand-in-hand going forward.
Kokoloko85
Member
Well at the end of the 360 they had probably one of the biggest mindshare in gaming history. (Wii grandmas dont count)
I dont see them getting it back ever.
Even if they do another 360 and Sony makes all the wrong decisions, Playstation 3 still outsold 360 by the end of the generation or equaled it after an awful start.
Games will rule the next console
I dont see them getting it back ever.
Even if they do another 360 and Sony makes all the wrong decisions, Playstation 3 still outsold 360 by the end of the generation or equaled it after an awful start.
Games will rule the next console
Shangounchained
Banned
Its a good idea But gamepass is simply a subscription model its a software thing playstation and nintendo can copy and do the same as gamepass and if they do then what? Whats microsoft going to say next? Sony could simply do a gamepass with backward compatible games since ps1 and how is microsoft supposed to compete with that?
I think whoever is chosing companies to make exclusives for microsoft is the one whos really killing the xbox department!
They are chosing companies that make sissy stuff people who just wake up use ms money to fulfill their silly fantasies of games and in such microsoft lacks blockbuster games,
Im happy for age of empires coming back n i hope halo infinite is series xs killzone,. They could bring back motorcross madness plus monster truck madness plus midtown madness as one next gen game and find serious studios to make them proper blockbuster games cause uts useless to have a 12 teraflop next gen console that just sits around without special games to use that power.
Dory16
Banned
I consider myself a hardcore gamer and I don't like any of the games that you have mentioned. The bottom line is tastes are extremely diverse and dynamic. What do you call Death stranding? It doesn't fit the description of what you are saying the Xbox lacks and it's damn near been the only subject in gaming recently until MS silenced it with the Series X. I'm not even sure Death Stranding would have had the same success as an Xbox exclusive. Bottom line is blockbusters are hits and miss. Xbox's best chance of having more of them is to get a diverse lineup of capable studios, give them money and time and hope for the best. It seems to me they're doing just that.
Shangounchained
Banned
No mate death stranding is a blockbuster game doesnt have to be a shooter to be one, simply put kojima knows what hes doing, its the shitty dieverse talk that ruins xbox diverse diverse diverse shit. Amd its turned it into a rainbow console, u cant compare anything on xbox against god of war uncharted ghost of tsushima, all xbox has to offer is forza every year, the good old gears and sea of thieves lame crap! Im suggesting they should go bk to age of empires and motorcross madness and turn them into next gen gold since theu cant make better exclusives!
Bryank75
Banned
I am amazed by how satisfied and excited the Xbox community is by a bit of flashy advertising and good PR. Xbox have still to release a good game that is original and not just another sequel to Gears.
They key problems at Xbox are the same, low quality or unoriginal exclusives that are also available on PC. No matter how much they undercut the sale price of games with Gamepass, it cannot compensate for the lack of high quality exclusives in the eyes of potential buyers.
They key problems at Xbox are the same, low quality or unoriginal exclusives that are also available on PC. No matter how much they undercut the sale price of games with Gamepass, it cannot compensate for the lack of high quality exclusives in the eyes of potential buyers.
Keihart
Member
Did xbox started to actually earn money already? i was under the impression that the division was still bleeding (considering the total investment since it started) more money than what they bring in, but their projections is what keeps them alive.
Gavon West
Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
I said, GOT DAMN! Being called a shill from one of Sony's ultimate shillsters! LOL! How in the actual fuck???
Gavin Stevens
Formerly 'o'dium'
I have no idea to tell you the truth, but the brand and everything that goes with it, does. Its the same as Sony, I imagine the PS4 still doesn't make them money, but everything that goes with it, does. If it didn't, they none of them would bother would they
Dory16
Banned
Help is on its way.
Out of 15 studios all cooking 2 games at a time, a few gems are bound to come out.
Keihart
Member
Well, i did some google, and it seems that 2017 was the first year of xbox getting some profits it seems. PS division it's been profitable since forever FYI.I have no idea to tell you the truth, but the brand and everything that goes with it, does. Its the same as Sony, I imagine the PS4 still doesn't make them money, but everything that goes with it, does. If it didn't, they none of them would bother would they
Xbox had it rough because it basically bought their way in the industry, the first xbox was far of being a success but MS had the money so they just pushed on.
Dory16
Banned
You don't say. I wonder why they bought all those game studios recently. They must need more man power for Forza.
Tomeru
Member
Newer and better games.
Dory16
Banned
I think you mean Sony couldn't asphyxiate the original Xbox like they did the beautiful Dreamcast by buying all the publishers off them. I still remember Capcom saying "We will keep this console alive, even if we have to do it alone" while releasing Power Stone. Xbox had the oxygen tanks to stay alive in face of that unlike Sega and that's why they're still around.
Last edited:
DeltaPolarBear
Member
They CAN lose. Because making and selling consoles has low margin, and by making multiple SKUs they lower the economy of scale. And by spreading the game over every market the console sales will decrease, thus the 30% rent that third party games pay Muicrosoft to be on Consoles will also decrease. This lead to making and selling consoles becoming a bigger and bigger drain of the business, leading to a death spiral where it made no economic sense to keep supporting ANY Xbox console. And at that point Xbox just becomes SEGA.
Last edited:
Humdinger
Member
We'll probably have lots of discussions as the years go by about these different ways to measure success. I think that hardware sales will continue to be the primary metric, at least in forums like these.
On the other hand, I can understand why people like Phil would have different criteria for "winning." He's a corporate executive. His priority is corporate profit -- if not now, then at least in the long-term. It's also in Phil's interest to downplay hardware sales, for obvious reasons.
In any event, Phil's definition of winning is not mine. I'm a gamer, so I care about games -- number, variety, quality, risk-taking, creativity/artistry, etc. All other things being equal, hardware numbers will usually follow those criteria. That is, gamers go where the games are. And hardware sales reflect that.
Anyhow, I agree that there is not "one right definition of success." I have mine, Phil has his, and other people have theirs.
Last edited:
Keihart
Member
That's PS2 era, Playstation was already stablished.
Dreamcast is full of classics as well and i owned that console before the PS2, the xbox was a door stopper at the time, the only incentive to own it was to play custom music lists while playing Tony Hawk.
Dory16
Banned
If selling as many consoles as possible was the bread and butter of their business model like you seem to imply, they wouldn't be releasing their first party games simultaneously on the PC. They could never sell another console and still make massive gaming revenues through infrastructure, services and streaming. I explain it well enough in my OP. It's surely advantageous to be in the consumer's living room but there are other ways to make money and MS is circling all of them.
DeltaPolarBear
Member
I already said in an earlier post that Microsoft is undercutting their console exactly as you described. John Carmack once showed Nintendo he could port Super Mario Brothers to PC, but Nintendo want no part of it. And that is still true today.
Your argument is "Microsoft is doing it, and since they are right they couldn't be wrong". That's a circular argument.
Microsoft IS abandoning console selling, that is what it means to sell games on PC. That is what will lead to sales of the console to weaken, thus lowering the profitability of designing and selling consoles. Multiple SKUs of different powers would just make the profitability go down even further.
Yes, you can make money by just selling games. But at that point you are no longer able to support being a console manufacturer. At that point it no longer makes sense to design Xboxes anymore.
"There are other ways" is not new or exciting; it is just "becoming a third party game developer". SEGA and Atari exist, you know.
Last edited:
TheGreatYosh
Banned
Microsoft lost their best gen ever. What would make anyone think they will win based off so little information?
Dory16
Banned
May be because they're redefining winning. They will probably still lose by your metrics.
Dory16
Banned
Let me get this right. Microsoft is investing itself out of the console market is pretty much your opinion. I only know what they aim to do. Competing for every gaming dollar wherever it is. I think they want to do it while remaining in the console market. I don't see a reason to doubt that they will keep producing consoles, since they are setting up the "Series" name. Finally I believe they can count and know how much they have in the bank. That's all.
Last edited:
DeltaPolarBear
Member
Google is rich too. But just because you are rich doesn't mean you can count. And that's why Stadia exists.,
There is absolutely no basis to suggest that major corporations are somehow supernaturally intelligent. We have seen all three console platforms make major blunders in our gaming lifetimes. There is no factual basis that any of us should believe ANY of them could actually count.
jshackles
Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.
I'm so late to this thread that I feel like the goalposts have been moved outside of the stadium
And the city.
Perhaps the country.
Possibly even to another planet.
And the city.
Perhaps the country.
Possibly even to another planet.
Burrito Bandito
Banned
i 100% disagree.
The only thing that MS did that caused them to lose users was their launch strategy and messaging. That and the sole fact Sony launched 2 months prior. Thats it. Thats the cause of this generations results.
Since launch, MS has done nothing but gamer and consumer friendly things. Much more than Sony as well.
So it is my opinion that MS has done everything to gain users. Its only problem is getting that reputation out. If they launch before or on the same day as Sony, match or beat Sonys pricing, and be similar in power then they have a good fighting chance of making a comeback. They have the goods as a more consumer friendly brand as well as potential hits such as xcloud. They have a shot
The only thing that MS did that caused them to lose users was their launch strategy and messaging. That and the sole fact Sony launched 2 months prior. Thats it. Thats the cause of this generations results.
Since launch, MS has done nothing but gamer and consumer friendly things. Much more than Sony as well.
So it is my opinion that MS has done everything to gain users. Its only problem is getting that reputation out. If they launch before or on the same day as Sony, match or beat Sonys pricing, and be similar in power then they have a good fighting chance of making a comeback. They have the goods as a more consumer friendly brand as well as potential hits such as xcloud. They have a shot
DeltaPolarBear
Member
It is hard to have goalposts when it is unclear what Microsoft's true intent is with Scarlet. (I am sticking with Scarlet, no way I would use the official name.)
Scarlet was designed many years ago, and thus it had to be the way it is. But the current Xbox buisness plan appear to be moving away from Scarlet hardware. That is what makes it so difficult to agree with what Microsoft actually wants.
No doubt Scarlet is going to be released. The question is, how much resources is going to be dedicated towards it specifically? And how much gets diverted to Xbox being multiplatform?
Dory16
Banned
Oh don't get me wrong success is never guaranteed. I think they are getting all the market segments cornered and are therefore unlikely to "fail" (which is used in a relative sense here since they sold minimum 45 M this gen, far from a failure in the strict sense)
FranXico
Member
You got that backwards.
spawn
Member
Software wins next gen. Playstation fans are going to Playstation because they know that is where I get god of war, uncharted, last of us, spiderman. In order for xbox to win they need to have the games and they need new exciting ip's. They can't rely on halo, gears, and forza every generation.
Rossco EZ
Member
i see they have acquired more studios and stuff and hope they can pump out more games but the thing that confuses me about game pass in the long run is say they have 100+ games but i only want to play 1, 2 or 3 of them and i pay 5$ and complete those games in the month.. i understand it’s a good deal for me but isn’t it a bad deal for xbox? like have they made enough money from me only paying 5$? cause i could get game pass and play through a ton of content and never come back..
DeltaPolarBear
Member
In theory, if the games you play encourage you to spend moe money on microtransactions, that could justify the expense. Remember that currently the number one most profitable game is Fate Grand Order, a free to play mobile game.
But of course, micro-transactions have a tendency to destroy any game genre that isn't initially designed for it. For example, Command and Conquer.
That is their incentive to keep making good content to keep people subscribed. It can be a great deal if you do it that way that is why I giggle at the gamepass whiners its great for the consumer as you said.
Rossco EZ
Member
yeah i mean i hope it works out and yes it’s very good for consumer if we did it like i said but for xbox it’s not and that’s one thing i sceptical about the whole game pass thing but i’m not shitting on it.
Kagey K
Banned
That is false. The PS3 lost all the money they made on Ps2 and ended up having to restructure. That included selling buildings and other assets as well as leaning heavily on their insurance and financial division to keep them afloat.
The Sony Hardware Reciprocal: PS3 losses surpass PS2 profits
According to DFC intelligence figures cited by Dave Perry, Sony has lost more money on the PlayStation 3 hardware than it made on the PlayStation 2 during its five most popular years. In pure numbers speak it's lost $3 billion on the PS3, which is about equivalent to everything it made selling...
www.engadget.com
Last edited:
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
Game Pass isn't going anywhere. So I tend to agree.
DeltaPolarBear
Member
Just because it would still be called Gamepass doesn't mean its internals could stay intact. For example, any kind of Gamepass that run on Playstation would by default, not contain any third party games. And if Microsoft ever drop out of hardware entirely then third parties would have no reason to be in Gamepass anymore, anywhere. A Gamepass that contain only Microsoft games would be a different beast.
It will be around for many years MS is really invested into it. That was the driving force with the studio acquisitions content ever quarter eventually. They sold it to the suits with the xcloud leveraged azure part of the business. They will get time to grow it. Gamespass is also 10 on console so if it catches on it is a big revenue driver. Now they have ultimate smartly on console it is a risk but big enough reward they will get time to make it work.
Last edited:
goldenpp72
Member
The Switch has outsold the Xbox one in less than half the time of its existence, and it has been outsold by more than double its nearest competitor. Xbox has it in the bag baby.
Keihart
Member
I had no idea that that was due to ps3, I though it was a Sony thing since everything liquidated was non playstation related.That is false. The PS3 lost all the money they made on Ps2 and ended up having to restructure. That included selling buildings and other assets as well as leaning heavily on their insurance and financial division to keep them afloat.
The Sony Hardware Reciprocal: PS3 losses surpass PS2 profits
According to DFC intelligence figures cited by Dave Perry, Sony has lost more money on the PlayStation 3 hardware than it made on the PlayStation 2 during its five most popular years. In pure numbers speak it's lost $3 billion on the PS3, which is about equivalent to everything it made selling...
Similar threads
- Locked