im quite happy with the free games from origin and buying humble bundles (that usually are less than a months xbl subscription)
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Microsoft explains where the Xbox falls into CEO Satya Nadella's master plan
- Thread starter lighthouse777
- Start date
im quite happy with the free games from origin and buying humble bundles (that usually are less than a months xbl subscription)
...
he asked why it was weird, I told him. I'm not telling anyone what they should like.
BritBloke916
Member
You realise they were selling that at a huge loss, right?
The 8-Bit Raider
Member
You could have used a little more tact in response to his question. Your answer had the undertones of an obnoxious teenager.
Perhaps, but there are those who will supplement their PC gaming with a console just for exclusives. That's paying for a console AND a gold or PS+ membership for access to a hanful of games. The cost of entry would be so much less with a real xbox live account on PC. If the free games are decent I think people would warm up to the idea.
neogaffer1
Banned
I think this is a very smart thing to do. One of the things we saw coming out of the Surface Book announcement was the idea that "Microsoft is cool again." The reason they kept failing over and over to break into already established markets when Apple could just waltz in (sometimes even later than them) and just own those markets is because consumers saw Apple and thought "cool", "awesome", "fashion statement." With Microsoft, all they ever saw was "company behind Windows", which, for a lot of people (especially tech illiterate people who take up most of the mainstream consumers) doesn't seem remotely "cool."
Doctor_Thomas
Member
And the market reacted accordingly.
Fact is, PS1 and PS2 dominance gave us some of the best games and franchises.... and not just on those platforms. The idea that a single, dominant console is bad is completely dismissed on this basis. Too many people are on the "monopoly is bad" idea, but it doesn't pan out like that. Competition is only good if the competition is an alternative. The PS4 and XB1 are, fundamentally, the same.
The 8-Bit Raider
Member
I understand where you are coming from but is the amount of pc users that would like this service enough to justify it's existance from a business stand point?
Yes, if at some point they don't require me to buy a console. That of course would be my first choice. Still waiting on Halo 3 btw.
better than what hare brain schemes does to people who worked on it
don't know why people were mad at a good game. it just needed a campaign
better than what harebrained schemes does to people who worked on it
ShadowRun 2007 was a great game, just a terrible SR game :c
BritBloke916
Member
If Nadella is happy to put the likes of Word and Excel - products that are a real factor in the MS bottom line - on iOS and Android, then I can't see why something as relatively trivial to MS as Halo won't follow (via a subscription-based Xbox app of some sort). It seems to be all about services to him, which is probably smart.
That is the question. If the answer is no it's in MS best interest to sweeten the deal. At this point they need to do something to differenciate themselves from Steam and company if they want to get back into PC gaming.
The 8-Bit Raider
Member
Agreed. That reveal led to me play exclusively on the 360 last gen only to return to Sony this gen with the PS4 reveal...I'm certain I'm not the only one to have gone through this experience.
ALLseeingEYE
Member
To my understanding, this is correct. X1 will essentially be running Windows 10 under the hood after the new update, and it should now be a lot easier to enable cross-play due to this, the new Win10 Xbox app integration, and perhaps other things under-the-hood.
They are referring to these games as the first to use this new system, not necessarily as the first to do cross-play.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Is the console going to raid your fridge and fuck your dog or something? You can buy an Xbox 360 and a copy of Halo 3 for cheap, if you really wanted to experience the game.
I don't get this mentality, as if buying a console to connect to your TV is such a horrible thing.
Exploratory
Banned
There is so much wrong here I don't know where to start so lets go slow one at a time.
First of all what happened 2 or 3 generations ago is completely irrelevant. The gaming industry has changed dramatically since then and nothing that happened back then has any bearing on now. These companies aren't even being run by the same people as back then.
Second the PS3 being sold at a loss as some people point out is again irrelevant. It's missing the point. The point is that Sony put out a 600 dollar console a year late and thought that was OK because it was PlayStation. The same can be said for Microsoft and the Xbox One. They had success and then thought they could do whatever the hell they wanted. This happens in every industry there is when a company becomes dominant they take liberties they otherwise wouldn't that negatively impact the consumer. You can say whatever you want but the history and the precedent is there.
Third the PS4 and Xbox One aren't the same or people wouldn't have gotten up in arms over the Xbox One at launch. Even now the exclusives are different and the software is different. That's like saying the iPhone and Galaxy line are the same because they're both smartphones. There is value in having choice.
The only people who really believe that Xbox dropping out wouldn't hurt gaming are fanboys and people who haven't been paying attention. It's really simple if Sony ever did something you didn't like what's your realistic alternative? There isn't one.
Ricky Ricardo
Member
What the hell is this nonsense? I've read people on this very forum who said that if Sony left the industry, they'd bail. I've seen folk say the same about Nintendo IN REAL LIFE.
SHOCKING NEWS: People have specific preferences
It's going to cost money. It's simply not worth it to buy a console and sign up for paid service to play the handful of games not available on my pc. Not to me. But a gold sub on PC? Yeah I'll do that. It's basically all the benefits of Xbox One without the hardware cost and 1080p/60 for everthing.
I've owned every major console for every generation going back to the original NES. The PSX/PS2 generation wasn't certainly not what I'd consider an ideal scenario. A lot of people seem to believe it was simply because they grew up on PlayStation (that tends to happen when something dominates that heavily). During the PS2 gen especially, online gaming was almost put on hold for an entire generation because the dominant player didn't see the value in it compared with those that had less market sway (Sega, and then Microsoft).
The bolded isn't fact at all, and again is the result of someone viewing the console they bought dominating as being inherently favourable for gamers as a whole. You're claiming that these great games and franchises are a result of PlayStation dominance?.. You want to back that up?
Tomb Raider was happening regardless. Final Fantasy was already a thing, so was Metal Gear. Tekken and Ridge Racer were a result of Namco's rivalry with Sega in the arcades etc. Just because the PlayStation sold well enough to essentially turn multiplats into exclusives, doesn't mean that it provided up with these game. The developers and publishers of these games did, and they were doing this prior to PlayStation's existence, in a previous generation where neither competitor dominated.
Sure, it's good for some people as in they only need to purchase a single console, and can ignore the others if they're not interested in the smaller libraries those console offered... but for those that actually aren't aligned to a single platform, this can cause some very undesirable scenarios. I never got to play Panzer Dragoon Saga. I paid a ridiculous amount to play a proper port of Xmen vs Street Fighter. I saw games designed around their online functionality die on one platform (Dreamcast) and then exist on the more popular platform without the functionality that justified the game's existence, etc... Dominance doesn't lead to a factually better market... it only leads to a better environment for fans of the dominant companies offerings.
The funny thing about this is that they usually only believe this to be the case for MS. If you suggested to them that Sony drop out because they're also redundant, and MS can take over for them.. they'll lose their shit.
Doctor_Thomas
Member
Firstly, we only have history to work on. Both scenarios are as hypothetical as the other, but I'm basing it on previous observations.
Secondly, and again, the market reacted in both cases. Sony worked hard to turn the image of the PS3 round and then got a lot of goodwill with the PS4 reveal. Microsoft made changes to their plans and are working towards getting goodwill. This isn't because either company is altruistic, it's because the consumer ultimately decides which products live or die at retail.
Thirdly, going.from a less hyperbolic point of view, the consoles aren't exactly the same but there's not a massive amount to differentiate them either. A handful of games and how apps look doesn't change that.
Lastly, I saw the death of Sega and Atari in hardware. It happens. There's a temporary void and an alternative shows up.... or they don't..... it doesn't matter. My argument at the moment is that due to smartphones, the market can't support three consoles indefinitely. That's your market change.
I never said they were, I'm making the point that Sony dominating the market never stopped or hurt game development. Games still got made, still got released but not just on those platforms. Pretty sure the N64, Dreamcast, XBox and GameCube all had healthy libraries.
Yep. Last year I played on both systems my one account. Been doing that on and off since 2010. I also loved playing the Lost Planet version that PC users could play with us.
Great PR article, but statements change over time, and as long as MS can generate some revenue, it'll still be around. Also, brands come and go. Don't know no brand that has stayed around forever just because there CEO has said so. Money talks in the end and the day XBL viewership gpes down, then Nadella support will waver. I'd like to see what Nadella says in 2 or 4 years time and see if he's harping the same tune that Phil Spencer keeps preaching.
Yes, absolutely. Corporations have exited the industry before.
Should just become a premiere game service and platform for Windows 10. Xboxes should become prebuilt Windows 10 machines made for gaming. PC developers can then still easily optimize and target Xbox hardware, and they can even release hardware more often, boasting improved performance on existing and future games, and developers still have only a few hardware targets to worry about optimizing.
neogaffer1
Banned
the idea isn't that people want both consoles to sell the same, but rather they don't want ms to leave gaming as some more rabid fanboys might clamor for.
that sounds really complicated and confusing for consumers, and doesn't give them anything over a dedicated console.
I don't mind a console being dominant, the PS4 is dominant right now. But Imagine when the PS3 was released and their was no 360, that would mean console gamers would be stuck with no choice but to go with the PS3. The marketed reacted accordingly because they had another choice.
Well you said that "Playstation dominance gave us those games". Your words imply causation, not simply correlation. Also you'd have absolutely no way to call what games don't exist as a result of that era. At the very least we can assume numerous past and potential Sega IPs don't. If Sony had 95% marketshare today, would Scalebound still exist?... Would it be a PS4 game, or would it simply not get bankrolled because they simply wouldn't need it?.. You can't say for sure what would be better or worse, especially when you're only looking at the history the victor wrote.
Another viable choice as well. If the 360 hadn't come out earlier, and as a result it got all the support of a Windows Phone, doing everything else right would make very little difference, and the market still defaults to the other product, even if it's not a great offering.
Consumers don't even have to know anything has changed.
Just tell them Xboxes will forever have backwards compatibility, their system will be good to play games for the next 6-8 years (but they can upgrade sooner if they wish), and they can plug a mouse and keyboard in and use it as a PC if they want.
Actually, that might lose them sales to Steam if you can just install Steam. Hmm.
There's no way the console offering would be able to install Steam. It'd be functionally very similar to an Xbox of today, just with the porting process removed from other Windows devices (which could lead to some rather random games crossing over). It'd be more like a Surface RT than a Surface Pro.
Pretty much this. Xbox becomes less of a console and more of a platform. Not saying the console would go away, but you wouldn't need it to play the games if you had a pc.this would work well considering hardware doesn't make much money but it would still be there for people that want it.
Ignoring the obvious part which is - of course he has to say that to provide confidence in the current product
How is that any different than any other boss saying stuff?
I don't believe you, Phil
There ain't gonna be a successor to the XB1, at least not a traditional console.
Probably some under-powered bootleg steam machine type of thing, if at all.
statham
Member
2018, full BC, and a beast.I don't believe you, Phil
There ain't gonna be a successor to the XB1, at least not a traditional console.
Probably some under-powered bootleg steam machine type of thing, if at all.
digoutyoursoul
Member
I don't believe you, Phil
There ain't gonna be a successor to the XB1, at least not a traditional console.
Probably some under-powered bootleg steam machine type of thing, if at all.
This isn't a wish list thread....
BC will be important going forward, as console makers no longer have any exotic architecture to use as an excuse to omit that feature in future gens.
2018 seems a bit too soon.
Why would he say something he doesn't even believe when he doesn't even have to respond to some random tweet from someone on the internets.
Uh, yeah, what do you expect him to say?
Phil Harrison said:
Albert Penello said:
statham
Member
I mean, this is becoming so blatant. What the hell is going on? What has Xbox done to people to generate such feelings of discontent?
C'mon, really?
Hasn't Phil proven himself?
He comes out and says there will be and people are still trying to shoot it down, as if they know any better than the head of Xbox. "Oh, he is just saying what you want to hear."
Hilarious.
I'm pretty sure Dreamcast did this 15 years ago. It even featured mouse and keyboard support.
Technical challenge my ass. Microsoft obviously didn't care up until now.
To remind the doubters, Microsoft started hiring for two positions related to next gen Xbox in July 2014.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=852430
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=852430
It's understandable that you would really like to see an Xbox 4.
But, please understand that corporate executives say stuff to promote their own products, and not all of it turns out to be true. See my previous post for a couple of examples.