• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

With even more developers in tow now, why doesnt ms make a handheld?

AV said:
Again, you are grossly overestimating the number of people who fit in the very small Venn diagram of:
- Want to play non-Nintendo handheld games
- Do not want to stream them on the phones they already own
- Would be okay paying MINIMUM $400 for the capable device
- Wouldn't just buy a Steam deck and play a library infinitely bigger than Game Pass, with games they could have already owned for a decade, which might also get Game Pass at some point, oh and is also a full, open PC

Like, at what point aren't you just describing a laptop...?

The market above is tiny and Microsoft are well aware of that fact, hence they're not entering it and are focusing on mobile, rather than trying to compete with it. I know you might not like mobile gaming but it's absolutely enormous. You can play Halo and Forza on the go. The technology is only going to get better.
Click to expand...

I have no issue with mobile gaming, however it has its own market, and it's not shared with cloud gaming at least right now. The hybrid console / portable is it's own thing, and has been highly successfull for Nintendo, not just because of thier games, but because it's a dedicated device that also doubles as a console.

I have no idea why you think an ms console has to be $299, the switch is 5 years old, pretty sure ms can come up with a modern hybrid for $299. This isn't a laptop.

And as far as steam deck goes, I like it, but if you gave me my xbox library NOT streamed that's much preferable.
 
KungFucius said:
No the switch is it's own thing. It is a Nintendo console many play on their TVs. I do let my kid play it on long car rides, but I wouldn't have purchased something portable otherwise. I certainly wouldn't get my little kids a portable Xbox. ... unless gamepass had enough age appropriate content and could work without having to connect to the server to verify account status too frequently. Maybe in a few years.
Click to expand...

Yes it's does its own thing, and your right in that some people buy it for kids etc.

But an xbox version would also have appeal to some families, and would likely have greater appeal to an older audience as well to make it up. Keeping mind I'm talking about a hybrid here as well, no reason it wouldn't hook to a TV.
 
They already occupy 2 domains: PC and console. Rather unwise to add another one

Just like Sony who tried going into handheld and blew up into their face so much its not funny.
 
It would be insane for MS to launch a handheld when we have Xcloud and the Steam Deck's imminent launch. Cutting Valve in for native Steam integration would be far more lucrative.
 
Microsoft Is putting full on Android Gaming Integration into it's next big Windows Update. If you consider it want's to provide streaming services across all platforms, Microsoft doesn't need to spend any money in this Arena to succeed.
 
microsoft are a software company first and foremost. it's literally in their name.

yes they could make a handheld if they wanted but why bother? everyone has a phone or tablet. if people want portable gaming then use xCloud.

if you buy a PC you don't need to install Windows on it but if you want to play games you will.
 
Most people also, aren't recognizing the Android intergration into the windows OS as what it actually is. A Windows/Android Merger. That is a massive market to take in on it's own and is as large a takeover as the most recent announcements. Funny thing is, Microsoft Exceeding 1.3 Trillion in profit As it does now - Could theoritically do a take over like the ones announced recently - every 3 years.. and still remain fully profitable while recouping that money as Microsoft exceeds 1.3 Trillion in Value!!
 
Surface Duo is great for Xbox gaming on the go.
xboxsurfaceduo_1.0.jpg


Surface-Duo-2-10.jpg
 
A handheld series S would sell ganbusters, even at $400-500; they can call it the series M. They can even add some cellular data capability and sell a cheap data subscription to compliment gamepass. I'd be into something like that. This device would have to be years away to approximate current series S specs in a handheld form factor.
 
Why would they? They don't make their money selling hardware. Their big push is Gamepass, which can be done on anything. Stuff doesn't just run because they load up an OS on some random handheld. The programs have to be developed for it unless it's using an interpretor, like streamed games.

So, they'd create a handheld to run games that have to be redeveloped for it, which is not at all the focus of their current business. It wouldn't make any sense.

Just maybe there's a demand for an ultra portable device that was built just for gamepass streaming. It could have cell service built in and sell for super cheap; like $100. That might be cool, but it'd definitely be streaming games.
 
Last edited:
Handhelds lose money unless you're Nintendo.
 
The assumption that no handheld can compete against Nintendo is wrong. We've never had a single publisher with so many studios before. We've never had the ability to launch so easily with so much easily compatible software. We've never had the hybrid ability before switch. Nobody has ever launched a portable hybrid like what ms could launch, with 20 AAA games easily at launch and exclusive new ones hitting regularly.

The psp and vita where a joke of an effort compared to what ms could launch in the near future.

Secondly, I like xcloud well enough, but its still not at the point of a local game reliably. So you can bla bla bla xcloud till your blue in the face buts it's not a true replacement for a real portable hybrid console.
 
eNT1TY said:
A handheld series S would sell ganbusters, even at $400-500; they can call it the series M. They can even add some cellular data capability and sell a cheap data subscription to compliment gamepass. I'd be into something like that. This device would have to be years away to approximate current series S specs in a handheld form factor.
Click to expand...

Well if they go with a 720p screen it could launch now for $299, it doesn't have to be at series s levels. If valve can hit 399, no doubt in a year ms could hit 299 with volume they buy at. But even $349 woukd work.
 
dvdvideo said:
I mean now more than ever they could easily deliver 720p/1080p versions of games in a handheld with very minimal cost. Why not deliver a hybrid handheld to actually give Nintendo same competition and put thier games in more people's hands?

And let's not start with xcloud, xcloud doesn't have a screen, or a controller, and isn't going to play games as well. Xcloud is complimentary, not a true replacement for a handheld.
Click to expand...
Because only Nintendo can do it with success.
 
Nintendo and Sony couldn't sustain two platforms with games to feed, Microsoft are already doing that (Xbox and Windows), a handheld would be too much.
 
Drew1440 said:
Nintendo and Sony couldn't sustain two platforms with games to feed, Microsoft are already doing that (Xbox and Windows), a handheld would be too much.
Click to expand...
It would be the same library cause its going to be a handheld pc but the issue is more about qa in my opinion which still could be a huge pain.
 
Why would they?

The future of gaming is a subscription and streaming combo, something that you can achieve on your phone. Why make a dedicated handheld?

Also, console gaming is now small time for Microsoft. They're now focused on mobile gaming and the metaverse. No way they would spend money and effort with a handheld console.
 
Why would MS go for even more specialized hardware when they`ve been working to shove "play anywhere" down people`s throat?
 
Microsoft was already in the gaming market with Windows and they made the Xbox, so it's no a completely nonsense to build a portable device.
 
Last edited:
dvdvideo said:
I have no idea why you think an ms console has to be $399, the switch is 5 years old, pretty sure ms can come up with a modern hybrid for $299. This isn't a laptop.

And as far as steam deck goes, I like it, but if you gave me my xbox library NOT streamed that's much preferable.
Click to expand...

Because a Switch is an incredibly weak piece of hardware designed from the ground up to specifically run Nintendo games and not much else. Forza on a Switch would be a bad joke. A portable Xbox would have to be powerful enough to run a good selection of the games on Game Pass which they simply are not going to pull off for $299 without eating absolute shit on the hardware costs. It's not worth it to them whatsoever. They literally came out themselves and said they don't care if people buy Xboxes as long as people are in their ecosystem somehow and phones are the portably method.

I know you won't budge on everyone wanting dedicated portable gaming hardware just because you do, but they don't. People buy Switches because Nintendo offers zero alternatives for playing those games. People already have 3 different ways of playing Xbox games and one of those is the phones they already own whether you and I think game streaming is any good right now or not.

Listen to everyone else in the thread on this, it's not going to happen just like Xbox VR is not going to happen.
 
  1. The end goal is to have everyone and their mother subscribe to GP
  2. In order to achieve this, people need to be able to use GP independent of the kind of devices they own
  3. Some people like dedicated handhelds. Especially in places like Japan
  4. That's why I think there's a real possibility long term for MS to offer such a device, even when they'll want to pull out of the gaming hardware business. All they need is a cheap smartphone with an Xbox logo printed on it
 
AV said:
Because a Switch is an incredibly weak piece of hardware designed from the ground up to specifically run Nintendo games and not much else. Forza on a Switch would be a bad joke. A portable Xbox would have to be powerful enough to run a good selection of the games on Game Pass which they simply are not going to pull off for $299 without eating absolute shit on the hardware costs. It's not worth it to them whatsoever. They literally came out themselves and said they don't care if people buy Xboxes as long as people are in their ecosystem somehow and phones are the portably method.

I know you won't budge on everyone wanting dedicated portable gaming hardware just because you do, but they don't. People buy Switches because Nintendo offers zero alternatives for playing those games. People already have 3 different ways of playing Xbox games and one of those is the phones they already own whether you and I think game streaming is any good right now or not.

Listen to everyone else in the thread on this, it's not going to happen just like Xbox VR is not going to happen.
Click to expand...

Switch was hardly designed from the ground up for Nintendo, the x1 chip was made before Nintendo decided to use it.

I'd nvidia can already build a 2 tf machine that destroys the switch for $399, ms could do it for less in higher volume.

You keep talking about game streaming as the solution, yet it's really not there. So your telling me ms wouldn't want to sell 30 million portables that would have been sold by Nintendo instead? That's silly.

Also I've never actually said I think it will happen, I said it should.
 
SlimeGooGoo said:
I meant focusing on mobile for their cloud platform, so there's no point for them to make a dedicated portable console.

And no, their multiplatform IPs will not become exclusive for now.
Click to expand...

There's plenty of room for both and they offer different experiences - I thought ms said they wanted to get to as many gamers as possible?
This would expand thier sandbox.

As for multiplatform ip, once that deal is finalized Activision will be exclusive, to say otherwise is just denial. Plus they already have a lot of exclusives.
 
Valve did it for them. Steam Deck. Make gamepass natively accessible through steam. Bingo.
 
Last edited:
SlimeGooGoo said:
Yes, mobile with cloud streaming would definitely expand their reach. Not a separate portable console.
Mobile install base is huge.


This contradicts your point above.
Click to expand...

If what you are saying is true, switch would have way, way less sales. There is a huge market for dedicated handhelds seperate from cloud/mobile as of today. Right now ms has zero percent of it and Nintendo has 100%.

In terms of contradicting, not really in that we already know there is a limit to what customers can be reached by what platforms.
We also know ms won't publish games on competing console platforms in most cases.
Therefore there is only one way to reach a dedicated portable audience if that's the case - to launch thier own.
 
dvdvideo said:
If what you are saying is true, switch would have way, way less sales. There is a huge market for dedicated handhelds seperate from cloud/mobile as of today. Right now ms has zero percent of it and Nintendo has 100%.

In terms of contradicting, not really in that we already know there is a limit to what customers can be reached by what platforms.
We also know ms won't publish games on competing console platforms in most cases.
Therefore there is only one way to reach a dedicated portable audience if that's the case - to launch thier own.
Click to expand...
They don't even need a huge slice of that 100% Nintendo enjoys, even like 25-30% market penetration would be quite profitable specially if they are unique handheld only users adding more stand alone gamepass subscriptions rather than just using existing ones.
 
SlimeGooGoo said:
No one will buy a DEDICATED portable console if:

1. There are no exclusive games to that specific platform
2. There is nothing that allows unique games on that platform (e.g. dual screens)

Microsoft is *not* interested in locking their games to a HARDWARE platform.
Their end goal is providing a service that anyone can play Xbox games regardless of which device people are using, be it mobile phones, native applications or web browser (on Linux, Android, Mac, Windows) or Smart TV.

If they ever make a portable, it will be a Windows general purpose machine with a different UI, much like a Steam Deck running Steam OS.
And that would only be a direct competitor to the Steam Deck, *not* the Nintendo Switch which is a dedicated portable gaming device.
Click to expand...

Of course they would, the games would be exclusive to the portable area. Yes there would be some crossover - in fact, the way the xbox eco system works, likely the portable version would be included. But it would keep gamers in the ms eco system, something you are missing completely. It has huge value, and increases the chance of yet another gamepass subscriber.

It doesn't need a second screen or other gimmick, it just needs xbox games.

It wouldn't lock a single person into a hardware platform, it would just be another good option. If what you were saying was true, there would be no series X or S. It would not be like Steam Deck at all as it would run the xbox os, and it would be a direct competitor to switch.

This isn't an either or proposition, it would just add more places to play xbox games.
Xcloud continues, regular consoles, pc, etc.
 
Last edited:
V4skunk said:
Sony tried and failed. MS has zero chance.
Click to expand...

There is about a hundred things different about sony's feeble attempt:

1: Different market
2: Price
3: Overpriced memory
4: Not enough games
5: Architecture much different than main console - it's now much easier to port games
6: Not a hybrid - this is huge since it doubles as a home console

It's massively different.
 
Doesn't Microsoft Now literally own the Number 1 Mobile Game on the Market??!! In fact now I think they own several of the top Mobile Game Franchises!!

As I said before, Microsoft basically threw down the Gauntlet in the handheld arena by paying a hefty amount to incorporate Native Android Support on Windows Platforms moving forward. This
wasn't some free tack on like many may be assuming, this was essentially a partnership and a merger of Sorts.

Sure, Google is still Google, but now Android Games are ubiquitous with both Google Android and Microsoft.

So Microsoft doesn't need to release a handheld console, they could - but this Android Support on Microsoft Platforms... was a sneaky calculated move!!

Expect to see all Android Games come to Xbox Platforms through native Android Support or merely streaming, of which there are tons!!

Now they own the Top Android Mobile Franchises, which Is Mobile Gaming!! And Support Android Natively!! That is something else!!
 
Last edited:
SlimeGooGoo said:
Microsoft would not make games exclusively to a portable console. It's a waste of money and it's too risky.
Much more worth and safe to invest in mobile + streaming, since install base is much bigger (everyone has a phone, lower barrier of entry)


No different than owning a mobile phone and streaming the games from the cloud, which is what Microsoft is focusing on. Again, waste of money to do a dedicated portable gaming machine for just that.


You misread. Microsoft is *not* interested in hardware in the long term. They want to provide a service.
In other words, in 10 years they want to get rid of consoles.


Which is the point of moving everything to the cloud and stream it to any device regardless of the platform.


Steam Deck is a portable GENERAL PURPOSE computer. It runs a GENERAL PURPOSE operating system based on Arch Linux.
It is NOT a DEDICATED portable CONSOLE like the Switch is.
Click to expand...

You misunderstand, ms exclusive games would be exclusive to the portable gaming console world (I.e not on switch) I'm not saying they won't come out on normal non portable machines. Your mistaken if you think gamers won't eat up halo infinite on a true portable. It's something Nintendo doesn't have.

Mobile and streaming is not the same market as a dedicated portable- switch has proven that in spades.

You can go on and on about cloud but there is a very large portion of gamers that either don't want the lag, to drain thier phone battery, or want a larger screen. Plus it doubles as an extra console since it's a hybrid.

I get the appeal of streaming, the ease of platform, the quick loading, etc, but its not for everyone. Can you play it in the car or on a trip with no wifi Just? (No) Does it always have a good experience? (No)
Does it just plug and play and the controllers are attached? (No)

Again these two things can easily co-exist.
 
Last edited:
Because having more game developers doesn't mean they are suddenly good with hardware developments . Microsoft hardware products are more of a miss than hit , and making a gaming portable device that hit the sweet spot between price and performance is not easy . But who knows , they might be coming out with one in the future provided the games are coded and optimized natively for that said portable device .
 
Mobile Market is far larger than the "Portable" market dominated by Nintendo.

What I suppose Nintendo fans may fail to notice is - Mobile Gaming is Handheld Gaming, it has been since the first tablet launched back in 2008 and even before that with smartphone gaming.

The powerful handheld is nothing new, and that industry dwarf's even Nintendo's best efforts towards handheld markets.

Android Tablets and Phones.. are handheld platforms, they are mobile platforms, like it or not they are all Microsoft needs to gain it's share of that very serious Handheld Pie!!

And with the Amount of Money Microsoft payed to Natively Support Android on their own Platform and with this latest purchase that put's their newly owned IP's at the top of the handheld charts - they certainly have a presence in the Mobile Hand Held Arena without having even developed a handheld console.

Don't expect a Mobile Handheld Console From Microsoft, or more Specifically the Xbox Handheld from Microsoft as they have fully cornered the Android Market and with that move comes a remote dominance of the handheld market.

Previously the Android Gaming Markets made all other Handheld Profit Valuations look like small potatoes.

Nintendo hasn't come close to amassing the same profit margins the Android Hand Held Market (Android Market Originally) has - since it's introduction in 2007 when comparing handheld sales performance!!
 
Last edited:
Because you don't literally buy a bunch of the most coveted AAA IPs to make them run on what a good chunk of the intended audience would consider subpar hardware, and you don't spend that kind of money to secure anything less than AAA, which doesn't exactly shine on handhelds. This is an arms race, and MS isn't one to go to war with little guns that go pew pew.

MS are securing the contents. People will have the choice of hardware to run the contents on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

New Steam Deck data now available in beta (for developers)
1
89
Durin replied
Japanese developer says they don't make games for Xbox because the console is 'not even stocked in major retail stores'
2
55
255
skyfinch replied
Why are developers so lazy with dungeon design in RPGs these days?
Opinion  2
56
655
Hudo replied
With the uptake in retro styled 2D games lately which games would you like to see make a return to 2D or even make their 1st entry into 2D?
34
421
Hudo replied
Is PlayStation Portal a real handheld now? ( Eurogamer)
2 3
118
2K
Trunx81 replied
Top Bottom