This whole thing with Phil has been strange. He’s usually all over social media interacting with people. And with all of this he’s been silent. It’s actually very telling. I’m willing to bet that his job is being shrunken down
Last edited:
-
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.
Tiago Rodrigues
Member
I mean...how are they changing the nature of exclusivity? All those words to say they are releasing everywhere...meaning games won't be exclusive.
They are turning into a 3rd party publisher. As simple as that.
They are turning into a 3rd party publisher. As simple as that.
Mephisto40
Member
You really have to wonder how much Microsoft is paying IGN these days, it was only a few weeks ago they were trying to argue that the Xbox series has been the most successful console this gen, it's just getting ridiculous
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
The absolute state of Xbox and it's shills these days. It's truly remarkable.
Team Andromeda
Member
LOL at IGN. I bet IGN can't remember the days when SEGA had some of its games on the PC Engine or NES or when SONY was allowing its games on the Saturn and N64.
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
What Sony games were on the N64?
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
I have been telling people for years here this was their goal
I don't care what people like Phil was saying publicly, that was for the so called Xbots, I know what they were working on behind the scenes
Doctor Hades
Member
Sony now release PlayStation games on PC after a timed-exclusivity period (seems to be 18-24 months for PS5 games) so it makes sense for Microsoft to consider doing the same for Xbox games, especially with triple A games development being so expensive and time-consuming. Releasing your games on as many platforms as possible over a period of time makes perfect business sense.
I own all three current gen consoles (PS5, Xbox Series X and Switch OLED) as well as a gaming PC but barely use my Xbox Series X these days as I'd rather play Xbox games on my PC where they look and run better. I look forward to the day when I can just own a PC and play PlayStation and Xbox games on that instead of having to also own both consoles.
I own all three current gen consoles (PS5, Xbox Series X and Switch OLED) as well as a gaming PC but barely use my Xbox Series X these days as I'd rather play Xbox games on my PC where they look and run better. I look forward to the day when I can just own a PC and play PlayStation and Xbox games on that instead of having to also own both consoles.
Banjo64
cumsessed
If you just put a few more laughing emojis in your post people might not realise that you’re upsetIGN maybe should have asked analytics here. They already know that Microsoft is already preparing PlayStation ports of Hellblade 2 and Indiana Jones
It's almost like Microsoft was already and will be releasing their games on other consoles. Minecraft Legends, Minecraft Dungeons, TESO, Fallout 76, Call of Duty are and will be on PlayStation and Nintendo. I expect Odyssey (Blizzard survival game) and Kestrel (ZOS online game) to be on PlayStation day one and some games (like 6 years old Sea of Thieves which is live service) sprinkled here and there.
But that's about it. People who thinks Microsoft will start porting all their first-party games on PlayStation are just delusional.
Also. Analysts are saying that Game Pass 33,3 million subscribers? Not bad for service that is "not growing"
It's almost like what Spencer was telling was true, and Microsoft is deciding exclusivity of their games on "case-by-case" basis
SkylineRKR
Member
Wipeout was released on N64
And Saturn had a bit more, with 2 Wipeout games and Destruction Derby. Perhaps more games I forgot.
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
Ah. Easy to forget about them. This doesn't seem remotely equivalent to me but I guess we'll see.
//DEVIL//
Member
How is an 800$ console will have the same power of a 500$ console ?
It’s your logic that doesn’t work. Lol
Going by GPU alone, 300 difference gets from less than a 4060 to a 4070 ti super.
That is abit more than 2x of gpu computing power.
To stay in subject. What a sad thing to see from a click bait article at IGN.
MS release one or two games that performed below expectations to other consoles —> Xbox going third party.
Jesus.
Last edited:
SkylineRKR
Member
It was a different situation for sure. I think Sony didn't even really agree with it but Psygnosis went with it. I read about it a long time ago.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
He's comparing one that is sold at cost vs one that is sold at profit
Ar¢tos
Member
That sounds bad.
Saying that MS created a brand new innovative model of exclusivity that will completely change the publishing world and will become the trend for decades, no, centuries to come, sounds much better and it is what the Xbox acolytes will preach.
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Were you following the entire conversation? Otherwise, absolutely facepalm moment for you!
The entire conversation was about Xbox releasing a console to earn profit per unit, and Sony continues to leverage its large userbase to subsidize consoles like they have always done.
Last edited:
Luigi Mario
Member
So there might be some truth to Jeff Grubb saying that Hi-Fi Rush didn't meet Microsoft’s expectations after all.
Last edited:
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
The only way this could be construed as astroturfing is if the ports aren’t actually happening. He’s disagreeing with the initiative.
Edit - my bad i thought this was the jizz article
Last edited:
So if Microsoft goes semi-3rd party who will be the Playstation fanboy's boogie man? I can't imagine that the conversation will actually turn to GAMES cause they don't seems to talk much about those. They've always needed a platform villain as a common enemy that brought the community together. Will it be PC? Interesting times ahead.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
It was absolutely evident that it didn't. And we didn't even need Jeff Grubb for that.
People clung to a statement by Xbox's marketing department as if that'd ever tell the truth. That statement that didn't even share any sales data. lol
HeWhoWalks
Gold Member
The PS2, largely considered their best console, had no "platform villain".
As so many have already said, there's only so much one can get away with. When they took the expensive console route, they were shot down.
//DEVIL//
Member
I did. But when someone say 800 vs 500. It suggests that MS is losing 300$ on a console which is not true.
If I am going to put an 800$ console. Sure as hell it will be much more powerful than a 500$ console without losing money
Last edited:
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
Yeah this fear mongering by Xbox fans that if Sony is by themselves (excluding PC and Nintendo of course) that they would somehow start charging 1000 dollars for a console and 100 dollars for a game is ludicrous.
Team Andromeda
Member
Wipeout
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Phil Spencer confirmed that they lose up to $200 per console unit. That puts their $500 console at $700 for just the break even. Add only a $100 profit per unit, and you get to $800. That doesn't even account for inflation or the console price increase that Phil said is already coming.
Is it really that far fetched?
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
That's they only way they can imagine garnering support from PlayStation and Nintendo fans in all this.
They think that PS and Nintendo fans would push against Xbox going multiplatform and letting go of all the games they'd be getting just because of an imaginary boogeyman. lol.
Jez Cordon went all in in this fearmongering. Excerpt from his latest article:
Last edited:
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
If they design the console right you could see a considerable uplift in performance for 150 dollars on a bom manufacturing cost.
Better cooling is a few dollars, allowing to clock higher. Memory when stabilised would be 10 plus dollars to get an extra 8gb...then theres the apu.
Maybe Microsoft would be happy having everything covered and making like 15 to 30 dollars a box to begin with knowing that costs will come down.
A 799 xbox could be plenty more powerful and offer more specs than a 499 ps5 being sold at a loss.
//DEVIL//
Member
Honestly? yes. Because usually, it's not above 100$. I wonder if Phill was just throwing numbers to justify not lowering prices of a console.
at one point the Xbox Series X was 400$ last year. does that mean they losing 300$ per unit ? zero logic. might as well close the business because you will need like 2 years of game pass just to break even ( not including game pass cost ). if you to include the game pass cost and just count the pure profit ( assuming gamepass cost is half the price of what they are charging. it might need them 3 years from a single user to break even. how is this a logical business model ? ( half a generation to break even lol )
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
If your entire argument boils down to "well, Phil was just throwing random numbers," then you don't have an argument lol.
You'll have to offer something a lot more substantial to prove that the loss isn't up to $200 per unit, as Phil confirmed, and it is less than $100 as you say.
That's exactly what it means.
That's why those are discount offers to increase sales during a particular (short) period, and that's why Microsoft has already bumped up the price back to normal, even though their console sales has been declining.
Again, this is exactly what's happening. The business is in the gutters, and this is one of the big reasons why.
This is exactly how Microsoft has ALWAYS operated. The only difference in previous generations was that they used to sell a lot of first- and third-party games. And those sales have dried down because of Game Pass.
Otherwise, have you forgotten that Microsoft confirmed and submitted it in court that they have NEVER made ANY profit selling ANY Xbox console, EVER!
graywolf323
Member
even then it could probably be argued they didn’t price the PS3 with any real consideration for the 360 but they were still willing to take a massive loss on each unit sold, it wasn’t priced at $600 because they were greedy and trying to make a profit, they just thought there’s no way anyone would be willing to pay more (and they realized that most people weren’t even willing to spend $600 on it)
the actual problem causing it to be so expensive was the technology behind the system was very expensive, they didn’t piecemeal it unlike the 360 (which had Wi-Fi, HD-DVD, and even HDMI as paid add-ons initially with Wi-Fi and HDMI not being built in until the S remodel IIRC)
edit: looks like HDMI was first added with the Elite but Wi-Fi wasn’t included until the S, pretty sure the wi-fi dongle they sold cost something like $100 too
Last edited:
//DEVIL//
Member
not trying to have an argument. just saying its not making any sense lol.
oh well. let them do whatever they want. I like to own my games in digital format. ( physical on consoles so I can resell them as ultimately, any game I own on consoles, if it comes to PC, that console version is sold for the superior version ) I do not use game pass. I like to own my games. so the whole MS model isn't really for me.
IF MS decide to release all their games on other platforms. ill sell my halo infinite edition xbox series X ( still sealed, only reason I bought it because its pretty lol). and ill just keep the PS5 and PC.
if they decide to do that. they are basically killing the xbox format for good. kinda ironic if they do that. to buy a 70 billion company just to go third party and kill the xbox. but whatever lol.
twilo99
Member
I don’t tho.. they are going to release more games on PlayStation? No more Xbox hardware? Both?
Not an issue.
They would just need to figure out the user experience… is this hypothetical machine dual boot, or Xbox os only..
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
That's a very contradictory set of aims. You need either a volume approach or a margins based approach.
Sony cannot and will not allow any third party to replace their system and back-end integration. It would just upend the entire cert process, which demands compliance with their standards as a pre-requisite for platform security and coherence.
The only basic need is for a target specification, be it physical or virtual. Beyond that its primarily a delivery mechanism for software and services.
Frankly, the most logical approach would be to spec according to whatever their primary competitor is offering but at a lower price point. Offer that as a physical product (console) and match or exceed that on their back-end to drive their streaming platform and services. Ideally they'd want to reduce their low end offer to basically a controller and some sort of small bridge device connecting that to the display and the network. Slightly tricky because controllers and similar accessories tend to have decent margins.
Mr.Phoenix
Member
I don't think this is a charade. The math simply just needs to add up.
It wont be an issue.
I am still convinced Microsoft are doing this song and dance to get ABK over the line next month for good, but no one seems to be clocking it.....
If MS is investing heavily in Xbox, then that investment is going to have to be justified by the returns it makes. eg. If you invest $100B in a platform, that only makes you like $5B in "profits" per year, that would mean it takes you like 20 years to break even on that investment? As op[posed to say you invest $10B on a platform that makes you the same $5B in profits each year. Such an investment makes more sense.
So MS is in the former's situation. The amount of money they make from the Xbox division, simply will not and does not add up to the kinda investments they are making. be that directly or indirectly. So the question becomes a simple one, how do you make it add up?
If Xbox had an install base that rivals Sony, then you can say they can make good on sales of software alone. They don't. If they had a subscription base that at the very least matches or exceeds the amount of physical console sales say Sony has, and that sub base is steadily growing each year, then you can say they make good from subscription money over the long term. Again, they don't.
So the only thing they really can do now is make as much money from their IPs as they can. And the quickest fix to that right now is making their games available on P{laystation. What will be the point of having all those studios but literally no one to sell your games to? I am not saying this change will happen overnight, but I sincerely believe that its going to happen. I could even go as far as say they don't really have a choice.
yurinka
Member
All (console ones, obviously not the mobile ones) Minecraft games have been released day one on PS and are available there. Including the first one.Does Minecraft support Xbox Series because they aren’t supporting PS5 ATM?
In the Dreamcast days Sega had aprox. 20-40B Yen in loses per year:
In recent years Sega has aprox. 20-40B Yen in profit per year:
Last edited:
Saber
Member
Sounds so stupid that they really might being paid to spout that non-sense.
No, is not a change of strategy, nor exclusivity out thing. It's basically a "retreat" move, theres nothing at this later point they could do to change the tides. This is probably a last resort to win their money back, since they can't with their "prime" console. That happens when you spend decades damaging your own brand and spouting crap to consumers, like making them naturally used to wait everything to go to Gamepass and don't buy games.
No, is not a change of strategy, nor exclusivity out thing. It's basically a "retreat" move, theres nothing at this later point they could do to change the tides. This is probably a last resort to win their money back, since they can't with their "prime" console. That happens when you spend decades damaging your own brand and spouting crap to consumers, like making them naturally used to wait everything to go to Gamepass and don't buy games.
Last edited:
kruis
Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
It's great PR spin though.
Badlucktroll
Member
FunkMiller
Member
In big, bold neon letters:
WE'VE JUST GIVEN UP.
Poor old Series X. The most wasted console in history.
WE'VE JUST GIVEN UP.
Poor old Series X. The most wasted console in history.
diffusionx
Gold Member
I'm going to keep repeating myself, it doesn't make sense for this massive software company to have this weird proprietary console as the centerpiece of their software entertainment strategy. It's never made sense and it's also never really worked. Now that the console is not that popular and they just spent $70B to acquire more software properties it definitely doesn't make sense. They should be putting their games on PlayStation and Switch. They should have been doing that for a long time.
Edit: like when the news broke that MS was predicting that they were giving up 10 million software sales of Starfield by making it exclusive, that's exactly what I am talking about. It just doesn't make sense for a software company to do this. It makes sense if you are a hardware company, like Sony, but Microsoft is very different. And I wonder if the soft reception of their 2023 games finally made them see the light.
Edit: like when the news broke that MS was predicting that they were giving up 10 million software sales of Starfield by making it exclusive, that's exactly what I am talking about. It just doesn't make sense for a software company to do this. It makes sense if you are a hardware company, like Sony, but Microsoft is very different. And I wonder if the soft reception of their 2023 games finally made them see the light.
Last edited:
As much as some Xbox fans blame PlayStation timed exclusives for MS being forced to buy Bethesda and ABK....I think you have this backwards.
demigod
Member
Stop saying this every single time. This is not 4D chess you think MS are playing.
It wont be an issue.
I am still convinced Microsoft are doing this song and dance to get ABK over the line next month for good, but no one seems to be clocking it.....
midnightAI
Banned
Also don't forget that the next XBox is rumoured to be releasing a couple of years before the PS6, and as you know hardware over time becomes cheaper (for equivalent hardware that is)
demigod
Member
How did you come to the conclusion of $300 difference when one is being subsidized vs one being sold at a profit?
Lunarorbit
Member
At least it's always interesting with Xbox. Got sick at work today so I guess I'll check out the direct. Very curious how indy Jones turns out.
Jigsaah
Member
Personally, I welcome this change if it happens. It's no different than Playstation eventually putting it's games on PC IMO.
Yes, Playstation views Xbox as its main competition, but Xbox is on record saying something completely different.
For them it's Apple and Amazon. For those two, there's no console that coincides with their brand.
It seems Xbox is trying to be something similar and is being proactive in getting their games out to as many people as possible.
They already acknowledged losing the console war in the FTC case, so this is how they pivot.
I hope they are really successful with this strategy.
For one, don't want Apple or Amazon taking over...secondly I hope it brings Playstation a bit closer to doing something similar due to the fact that they still view Xbox as competition.
Nintendo I have little hope for at this point, they are too efficient and have little need to branch out like this.
In the end I would only have to get whatever Nintendo has and be on PC...somewhat similar to what I do now, cept I own an Series X and hope to get a PS5 Pro this holiday
Yes, Playstation views Xbox as its main competition, but Xbox is on record saying something completely different.
For them it's Apple and Amazon. For those two, there's no console that coincides with their brand.
It seems Xbox is trying to be something similar and is being proactive in getting their games out to as many people as possible.
They already acknowledged losing the console war in the FTC case, so this is how they pivot.
I hope they are really successful with this strategy.
For one, don't want Apple or Amazon taking over...secondly I hope it brings Playstation a bit closer to doing something similar due to the fact that they still view Xbox as competition.
Nintendo I have little hope for at this point, they are too efficient and have little need to branch out like this.
In the end I would only have to get whatever Nintendo has and be on PC...somewhat similar to what I do now, cept I own an Series X and hope to get a PS5 Pro this holiday