Support NeoGAF

[hinch7]

It's pretty clear the execs have decided it's time for Xbox to be profitable, or be nonexistent. Not looking forward to how Sony is going to respond to this considering how poorly they've treated their fanbase over the past few years. At this rate we are going to be counting on Nintendo and Valve as the major players to keep competition going.

Without competition its going to be horrible. We've seen it in the GPU market with one dominant company (Nvidia). Only, there'll only be one in the high-end console market and nothing stopping Sony if Microsoft backs out completly. And I wouldn't count on Nintendo, they are most anti-consumer of the lot. And do their own thing.

Valve I very much doubt will do anything other than Valve things. Which is PC software and hardware relevent in that sector.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

I don't really think Eurogamer wants the answer to that question, since their main source of clicks are probably derivative of their clickbait articles against Xbox.

But my answer would be:

1) I like a whole bunch of their 1st party games, such as Forza Horizon, Halo and Gears of War;

2) Now that they hold Bethesda IPs, I like to be able to play them on Game Pass;

3) I like Game Pass;

4) I like the Xbox controller;

5) I like the system features such as Quick Resume and Play Anywhere;

6) I like Xcloud and I hope they soon add the possibility of playing the games I bought on the Cloud;

7) I don't really care for most Playstation 1st party games nowadays.

8) Buying a PC for me is just too expensive and too much trouble.

That being said, it's because it just works for me. It's a system that has features I like, with the games I need.

Nobody cares about what works for you, we're talking about the broader market.

 

[Kssio_Aug]

Nobody cares about what works for you, we're talking about the broader market.

And I don't care about what you think either. Xbox has "a point" (or plenty of points) if and while a considerable amount of consumers believe it's worth buying. And right now that's the case.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

And I don't care about what you think either. Xbox has "a point" (or plenty of points) if and while a considerable amount of consumers believe it's worth buying. And right now that's the case.

No it isn't.

 

[Kssio_Aug]

No it isn't.

 

[djjinx2]

No it isn't.

27 million users of Series Consoles(as of Feb) says your wrong.

27,000,000!

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Like Halo 5 and all the BC games not worthy emulating yet?

Don't worry, you'll get that with the next Xbox....

PC

Pretty much just their controller and game pass at this point.

They innovated quite a bit in the 360 generation, but haven't done much for 2 generations now other than being another box like Sony with weaker AAA 1st party output.

Nintendo at least has the unique form factor console and exclusives that diverge so much from other AAA stuff.

The fundamental problem is 2 of these console boxes are closed ecosystem PCs with barely any unique aspects, less exclusives and more big games are coming out unfinished/broken on them which devalues the console "it just works, keep it simple" benefit. I'd rather fuss slightly more on my PC that is more powerful, has more games, more control options, no online fee and cheaper prices because of digital store competition.

PC + Switch (or Switch 2/Super Switch next year) best combo now.

I'd say the problems described here are more endemic to Xbox than PlayStation, but I'd be lying if I said SIE aren't taking PlayStation down a very similar path. They have only a small handful (literally) of 1P exclusives to their console now, and one of those is a dead GAAS no one is playing anymore (Destruction All-Stars).

There's talk they might be doing their own launcher on PC but it'll only gain traction if they're 100% serious about investing into it, which'd also mean making their PC ports exclusive to the launcher and getting big 3P support. They'd also need to have matching or better features than Steam. And even if they manage all of that, they'd still have to find a way to ensure revenue & profit generation comparable to the console without counting on those PC players buying a console (because they won't), AND make sure they try backporting those features to their console if they want to continue giving a reason for people to consider the console as an option.

It's something potentially unnecessary at this point IMHO; there are other ways I feel SIE could reduce console production costs, justify prices to make a profit off the hardware, and make it more appealing to get even more people to buy them, but I guess others at SIE don't feel the same way. Or they just want the assumed cheap & easy solution fix.

It's actually comical that last gen they rolled out an inferior machine, decided they didn't need much in the way of compelling exclusives (until the generation was basically over), and somehow thought they would be competitive with Sony. Unfortunately for them, that coincided with the rise of digital games and people started building libraries that they want to take with them through future gens. It's much harder to get someone to switch to your brand when they already have hundreds of games purchased with your competitor that they would have to leave behind.

With that being said, Microsoft does have the resources to make headway against Sony long-term if they truly want to. Much like they have done with Edge which has finally started gaining some market share from Chrome. That would entail running in the red for a while most likely while they build out their exclusives that are on consistently par with what Sony delivers and also offering better technology. They already laid the ground with the acquisitions. Will they do that? Personally I don't think so as they are hyper focused on short term profit as evidenced by their recent behavior.

Hopefully they stick it out as everyone will suffer if Sony doesn't have a competitor pushing them in the console space.

MS's already been running Xbox in the red for years now, and the losses increased when they started to push Game Pass. At some point, even they are going to call it quits on that approach; ABK just accelerated that decision.

As for PlayStation, they don't need an inefficient direct competitor like Xbox consoles around to get them on track. If anything, indirect competitors like Nintendo and Valve will eat into PlayStation if Sony continue with some of the decisions they've been pushing the past couple of years , and by that point it'd be harder for SIE to implement proper changes & adjustments.

27 million users of Series Consoles(as of Feb) says your wrong.

27,000,000!

It's not 27 million as of February.

It's 26.2 million as of March 31st.

 

[djjinx2]

Don't worry, you'll get that with the next Xbox....

PC



I'd say the problems described here are more endemic to Xbox than PlayStation, but I'd be lying if I said SIE aren't taking PlayStation down a very similar path. They have only a small handful (literally) of 1P exclusives to their console now, and one of those is a dead GAAS no one is playing anymore (Destruction All-Stars).

There's talk they might be doing their own launcher on PC but it'll only gain traction if they're 100% serious about investing into it, which'd also mean making their PC ports exclusive to the launcher and getting big 3P support. They'd also need to have matching or better features than Steam. And even if they manage all of that, they'd still have to find a way to ensure revenue & profit generation comparable to the console without counting on those PC players buying a console (because they won't), AND make sure they try backporting those features to their console if they want to continue giving a reason for people to consider the console as an option.

It's something potentially unnecessary at this point IMHO; there are other ways I feel SIE could reduce console production costs, justify prices to make a profit off the hardware, and make it more appealing to get even more people to buy them, but I guess others at SIE don't feel the same way. Or they just want the assumed cheap & easy solution fix.



MS's already been running Xbox in the red for years now, and the losses increased when they started to push Game Pass. At some point, even they are going to call it quits on that approach; ABK just accelerated that decision.

As for PlayStation, they don't need an inefficient direct competitor like Xbox consoles around to get them on track. If anything, indirect competitors like Nintendo and Valve will eat into PlayStation if Sony continue with some of the decisions they've been pushing the past couple of years , and by that point it'd be harder for SIE to implement proper changes & adjustments.



It's not 27 million as of February.

It's 26.2 million as of March 31st.

Apologies, I was going off this estimation

New Data Suggests That PS5 Has Outsold Xbox Series X/S 2-to-1 - IGN

Sony’s PlayStation 5 has sold around double the number of units as the Xbox Series X | S, according to data shared in a recent Take-Two Interactive earnings report.

www.ign.com

What I said still stands though.

 

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

Totally agree,

The brand is toxic for the industry, I hope it dies quick and that the surviving studios remain unscathed

This is what people should've started understanding last year. MS isn't just toxic to Xbox it's been damaging and rearranging the entire industry, FOR THE WORSE. Subscriptions, cloud, mergers, Halo free to play, shutting down BC program, forcing Cross Play onto console gamers, lying about game performance with misleading trailers, Phil lying about everything

They dug themselves into a hole with the ABK acquisition. I think the gaming division of Microsoft will actually do pretty well in the end, but the Xbox as a console brand is all but dead now.

They won't do well with the same

Xbox was founded on innovation:

1) Halo:CE massively innovated and redefined FPS gameplay and its impact can still be felt today.

2) Halo 2 massively innovated console online multiplayer services by acting as Xbox Live’s killer app.

3) Later on, Gears of War massively innovated TPS gameplay with the notion of the cover shooter.

All three of these titles were huge paradigm shifts that built the brand. Today, there is no such innovation and the Xbox brand is stagnant.

This! Which is why letting the Halo franchise flounder the way they have is pathetic. You keep look8ng for the next Halo or Gears while you keep those evergreen franchises strong.

Phil has failed both while also ruining the once great online multiplayer Halo and Gears had where Xbox owners could play these games without having to worry about mouse and keyboard and PC cheating. When Phil started forcing CrossPlay into every game I knew this was a MS that didn't give a damn about it's players, when they can't even faster a fair playing field.

It's crazy ...look at the reviews on the MS store and see how many people are just thrilled about having to play Crossplay in these games.

Phil is as evil as it comes for an executive. Nobody has told more bold faces lies and made so many anti gamer business moved behind the scenes as him. I'm not saying Sony is a saint as they are anti consumer in many ways, but they're a) more successful b) pro gamer in the sense that they don't lie and alienate their customers and c) always have a steady supply of quality games.

 

[mckmas8808]

Reason:

This article is really good. Xbox just fundamentally doesn't understand the gaming audience. The Microsoft leadership is built on fast deliverable and numbers. They expect a certain product to do x numbers by x time and position it to compete with the top of the line products in that category.
From Microsofts perspective if every game isnt competitive with the most successful games the way that their software competes then its not worth it.

They dont understand organic growth by fostering an audience over time and building it by satisfying their wishes.

The Acti/Blizz aquisition proves it.

They refuse to build as organic audience so they will buy someone elses and expect it to produce earth shattering results.

This is so beautifully said! Chef's kiss.