Support NeoGAF

[Salty Hippo]

Phil Spencer interview with Engadget on the PC/Xbox.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsOTYqDKGUI

Still early so I may have missed/misinterpreted something but here are the main points I picked out.



*I wonder if the redesigned XB1 is going to have those technical improvements. Not a coexisting hardware update ala iPad 1/2 but one that actively replaces the previous iteration like we are used to with console redesigns.

Why does he keep making that stupid distinction between "games that make sense on both platforms and games that don't"? EVERY single console game except for motion/kinect stuff makes sense on a PC. Couch PC gaming has been a thing forever now. My god.

This is why I don't like this guy, he's so full of shit all the time.

 

[gamz]

The main reason I don't game on PCs or smartphones is knowing there will be something newer and better next year. You don't get the feeling you're making a very good investment. If they ever decide to make the Xbox line of product similar to this, they can count me out.

You can still play your games, man.

 

[Breakbeat]

So wait, Phil just doubled down on actual iterative Xbox hardware kept distinct from the rest of the Windows devices?

Yeah, no. That's not gonna fly in the real world. This sounds like it's still early in the planning stages, so we'll see what MS has to say about this.

 

[Nirolak]

The main reason I don't game on PCs or smartphones is knowing there will be something newer and better next year. You don't get the feeling you're making a very good investment. If they ever decide to make the Xbox line of product similar to this, they can count me out.

So, honest question.

If all three dedicated vendors ended up taking this path, what would you do?

 

[Markoman]

The main reason I don't game on PCs or smartphones is knowing there will be something newer and better next year. You don't get the feeling you're making a very good investment. If they ever decide to make the Xbox line of product similar to this, they can count me out.

I don't know how many customers like me and you think the same way, but if there are more than expected things could get pretty ugly for MS.

 

[clem84]

You can still play your games, man.

But you can't play the new ones designed for the more powerful system. Isn't that the point of doing yearly upgrades?

 

[PeterLegend]

Xbox 1.5 running games at 1080p 60fps, that'll be cool.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Which is a natural evolution. They are going that way anyway.

Disagree that it's a "natural evolution", but if people want to use smartphones and tablets as "proof" while completely ignoring the differences in those markets compared to consoles, they can knock themselves out.

If anything, PC/smartphones blending together is the "natural evolution", which is what companies like Apple and Google have been doing for years. Consoles don't play into the equation. They're a different tool for a different purpose for a different audience.

I might as well cite the longevity of refrigerators and stoves and autombiles as "proof" that singular, traditional consoles are the correct business model.

 

[Crayon]

I think it's interesting that people are mostly concerned about Xbox in this proposed merger -- the only thing it would appear to have to lose is uniform hardware. I'm much more concerned about the PC part of the equation.

In my eyes, Microsoft already hijacked it and is long gone. I say let them drive drunk and run pc into a ditch and abandon it so we can start rebuilding.

 

[jelly]

Very insightful point.

If -- and just work with me here -- Microsoft was trying to move away from consoles (due to the cost and misalignment with their overall strategy) while still doing whatever they could to save those lucrative customers and possibly bring them over to their new ecosystem, how do you think they might go about that?

Do you think it might look like what we're seeing now? At a minimum, would you agree that what Microsoft is doing now lays the groundwork for that possibility, even if they don't end up abandoning consoles?

You can't lure console gamers to PC boxes, it's apples and oranges. Xbox consoles, even if they come every 3-4 years or maybe longer in some instances when more powerful hardware is not needed are still very much relevant and still the go to product for the consumer masses. A PC with Xbox games is not a replacement, just an option for more people and helps boost the Windows Store and Microsoft ecosystem just like Windows 10 on Xbox One helps boost the Windows Store and Microsoft ecosystem. They need to cater to everyone, putting all your eggs in a PC box and leaving the Xbox console hardware business is nonsense.

 

[FrozenCell]

when will 32Xbone land?

 

[clem84]

So, honest question.

If all three dedicated vendors ended up taking this path, what would you do?

I'm not sure. I guess it depends on the support they plan on providing for the older models. If they could somehow reassure their userbase that the older models will still be supported and that regardless of which one you get, you'll get at least 4-5 years of game support, then I wouldn't mind getting one.

 

[Bear Force One]

Disagree that it's a "natural evolution", but if people want to use smartphones and tablets as "proof" while completely ignoring the differences in those markets compared to consoles, they can knock themselves out.

If anything, PC/smartphones blending together is the "natural evolution", which is what companies like Apple and Google have been doing for years. Consoles don't play into the equation. They're a different tool for a different purpose for a different audience.

I might as well cite the longevity of refrigerators and stoves and autombiles as "proof" that singular, traditional consoles are the correct business model.

It's too late. Wagons have been circled and the narrative has had a day to be set. The market will determine if this is viable.

 

[jelly]

So, honest question.

If all three dedicated vendors ended up taking this path, what would you do?

Eternally undecided.

 

[Massa]

Why does he keep making that stupid distinction between "games that make sense on both platforms and games that don't"? EVERY single console game except for motion/kinect stuff makes sense on a PC. Couch PC gaming has been a thing forever now. My god.

This is why I don't like this guy. He's so full of shit all the time.

He's a business person. If he's saying something doesn't make sense on PC he's more likely looking at the costs of doing a PC version and the expected return they would get on that version, not your couch.

For example, look at Rock Band. That game doesn't make sense on PC, not because of its controller, but because there's no way they're going to make the 1.5 million that it would cost to bring it over.

 

[darkhunger]

But you can't play the new ones designed for the more powerful system. Isn't that the point of doing yearly upgrades?

No, because those new games will still work in the old system. They will look prettier or be less laggy on the newer systems though, so it's up to you whether to splurge on the upgrade or not. It's all about giving that choice to consumers.

 

[VincentMatts]

You can't lure console gamers to PC boxes, it's apples and oranges. Xbox consoles, even if they come every 3-4 years or maybe longer in some instances when more powerful hardware is not needed are still very much relevant and still the go to product for the consumer masses. A PC with Xbox games is not a replacement, just an option for more people and helps boost the Windows Store and Microsoft ecosystem just like Windows 10 on Xbox One helps boost the Windows Store and Microsoft ecosystem. They need to cater to everyone, putting all your eggs in a PC box and leaving the Xbox console hardware business is nonsense.

Yeah, the appeal to me about consoles is the fact that i dont get those PC headaches, like drivers, settings, etc. If the next console takes away everything that makes it appealing, (its simplicity) then i have to say, ill probably lose interest in gaming.

 

[Breakbeat]

No, because those new games will still work in the old system. They will look prettier or be less laggy on the newer systems though, so it's up to you whether to splurge on it or not. It's all about giving that choice to consumers.

There's such a thing as too much consumer choice that'll result in confusion. Keeping Xbox as a distinct hardware line with biannual released while simultaneously saying "But wait, it's Windows! But wait, it's Xbox! It's both!" is a great way to do that.

MS is REALLY gonna have to coordinate to make this work.

 

[gamz]

But you can't play the new ones designed for the more powerful system. Isn't that the point of doing yearly upgrades?

Yes you can.

 

[gamz]

Yeah, the appeal to me about consoles is the fact that i dont get those PC headaches, like drivers, settings, etc. If the next console takes away everything that makes it appealing, (its simplicity) then i have to say, ill probably lose interest in gaming.

Then it wouldn't be a console.

 

[gelf]

Wait, this could get really interesting!

Remember all the console wars threads 'game x runs 1080p on PS4, and 900p on XboxOne' with the obligatory PC elitists stepping by and putting the fighting console peasants back into place?

With different Xbox models on the market, will we finally see some sort of console-civil-war, where Xbox2.5 owners start shitting on Xbox2 owners?

Just for entertainment purposes, MS pls. do this.

I could see some elitism happening. Someone complains about unacceptable framerate issues in their new game to be met with "what your still on Xbox One? Its 2019! Get the 1.2 already"

 

[garyizraw]

I'm okay with this on one condition, they release this "hardware upgrade" instead of the Xbox Two.

 

[clem84]

No, because those new games will still work in the old system. They will look prettier or be less laggy on the newer systems though, so it's up to you whether to splurge on it or not. It's all about giving that choice to consumers.

If they can somehow standardize the settings options of those games, then yeah it could work. When you boot your game you could decide to use "model 2015 settings", "model 2016 settings" (just an example). Or the game could be programmed to detect what hardware it's running on and set itself accordingly. They have to streamline it and make it easy for devs to include those options. It's all about the dev tools I guess.

edit:

And you know, I'm also wondering how far back they would go. How many years of hardware would they support? If it's at least 5, then it's fine I guess because it wouldn't be that different than the current business model. If it's less than 5, then we could have a problem.

 

[Sydle]

Very insightful point.

If -- and just work with me here -- Microsoft was trying to move away from consoles (due to the cost and misalignment with their overall strategy) while still doing whatever they could to save those lucrative customers and possibly bring them over to their new ecosystem, how do you think they might go about that?

Do you think it might look like what we're seeing now? At a minimum, would you agree that what Microsoft is doing now lays the groundwork for that possibility, even if they don't end up abandoning consoles?

They're moving away from the traditional console business (i.e. one device with a walled garden) to a walled garden (Windows Store) that encompasses all Windows 10 devices. The overall OS strategy is about mobile experiences, where you get to take your experience with you across any screen. The idea of a device under the TV fits perfectly within the overall strategy, but the traditional console business of locking down games to a single device does not. They'll still want an option for people who play games on TV as long as it's a big money making opportunity for the Windows Store.

By offering a single store where your purchases work on a number of devices they can acquire customers on any one screen, perhaps starting with the TV customers they have now, and entice them to pick up a Surface tablet or phone later to keep using and building on their digital library.

Again, they're not going to leave the TV. They're absolutely leaving the traditional console model of locking software down to a single device though.

EDIT: For the record, I think the moment Sony purchased Gakai they laid a foundation to leave the traditional console model as well. I actually think it's funny that Sony is more prepared to go device agnostic than Microsoft is.

 

[mckmas8808]

This. It wasn't exactly power that made the PS4 sold more; It was because of the bad reception among other issues that Xbox One had received while Sony played their cards right.

It was also the fact that Playstation is a more world wide brand than Xbox.

 

[darkhunger]

There's such a thing as too much consumer choice that'll result in confusion. Keeping Xbox as a distinct hardware line with biannual released while simultaneously saying "But wait, it's Windows! But wait, it's Xbox! It's both!" is a great way to do that.

MS is REALLY gonna have to coordinate to make this work.

I really don't see the confusion. If the mass market can eat Apple devices and all their different configurations up with no problem, then I think you're not giving people enough credit.

If they can somehow standardize the settings options of those games, then yeah it could work. When you boot your game you could decide to use "model 2015 settings", "model 2016 settings" (just an example). Or the game could be programmed to detect what hardware it's running on and set itself accordingly. They have to streamline it and make it easy for devs to include those options. It's all about the dev tools I guess.

Not too complicated since it's already been done for mobile devices and been done for ages in PC games, many of which can recommend optimal settings. In fact it's significantly easier to do it here than to do it for the limitless numbers of devices and systems in mobile and pc gaming.

 

[Breakbeat]

A crucial flaw that they're not realizing is that consumers buy new consoles for more than just more horsepower. They buy them for a new feel, a new set of hardware/software features that make the product distinctive, in addition to a noticeable jump in horsepower. It's all about the package. Offering biannual hardware releases undermine all the momentum builders of new console hardware without reaping any real benefits.

If they pursue this model, they are going to be very, very disappointed. It's not rocket science.

I really don't see the confusion. If the mass market can eat Apple devices and all their different configurations up with no problem, then I think you're not giving people enough credit.

Demographics and device expectancy are completely different in these two situations. You can't just expect a console hardware buyer to behave like an Apple devout. They're likely in different age, income, and interest brackets, seeing the purposes of their different devices.

What big tech companies like MS (and Samsung for that matter) and some people on this board do not realize is that tech consumers are NOT all the same. It's an issue of human preference. MS might very well be able to culture their own breed of MS devout who will like this system, but at the cost of completely eroding what's left of their Xbox consumer base. It will not go well for them.

I've made previous estimations on how it COULD go well, but it sounds like Phil has different ideas.

 

[Figments]

They're bothered about Windows 10 primarily, they're not bothered about the home console market that's why they have just announced there will be no successor. If the Xbox One makes any money as a Windows box then sure you will see some updated SKUs, but that's the most you will see out of the Xbox in terms of hardware.

Come on dude you know that they are not really trying to change the console market here, this is not how you announce something like that and not the language you use to describe a campaign like that. This is cutting their losses and it makes perfect sense from the perspective of the wider company situation. It would make no sense in the context of the corporate restructuring, the financial realities (limitations) of the console market, Microsoft's real battles with Apple and Google etc.

Uh. Where the hell are you getting that from?

 

[Old Gimlet Eyes]

Xbox 1.5 running games at 1080p 60fps, that'll be cool.

I'll buy it day one and trade in my ps4 and xbox one towards it. I am really excited about the possibilities this announcement means. I am all for an every 3-4 year hardware upgrade, going 7-8 years with the last generation was ugly.

I really don't see the confusion. If the mass market can eat Apple devices and all their different configurations up with no problem, then I think you're not giving people enough credit.

Exactly. New phones come out every year but the old phones can still play all the same apps/games. If they market/message it right, the confusion will be minimal.

 

[jelly]

when will 32Xbone land?

Not sure, strange that Phil Spencer would spill the beans this early if it wasn't coming soon. Has there been any worthy hardware improvement to get better performance in a small box for a good price this year? That's why I think maybe next year after PC takes a little leap. I think an Xbox One Slim is first on the cards or maybe they skip that entirely and phase out Xbox One to replace with Xbox 1.5 but I would have thought a much cheaper Xbox One Slim would be a good seller rather than keeping the price high with an Xbox 1.5.

 

[samn]

I've sort of given up on figuring out what Microsoft's real strategy is, considering it seems to change every 5 minutes.

Last year we were hearing that they were going to focus on supporting Steam. Now they're releasing PC games exclusively on their own store.

 

[gamz]

A crucial flaw that they're not realizing is that consumers buy new consoles for more than just more horsepower. They buy them for a new feel, a new set of hardware/software features that make the product distinctive, in addition to a noticeable jump in horsepower. It's all about the package. Offering biannual hardware releases undermine all the momentum builders of new console hardware without reaping any real benefits.

If they pursue this model, they are going to be very, very disappointed. It's not rocket science.



Demographics and device expectancy are completely different in these two situations. You can't just expect a console hardware buyer to behave like an Apple devout. They're likely in different age, income, and interest brackets, seeing the purposes of their different devices.

What big tech companies like MS (and Samsung for that matter) and some people on this board do not realize is that tech consumers are NOT all the same. It's an issue of human preference. MS might very well be able to culture their own breed of MS devout who will like this system, but at the cost of completely eroding what's left of their Xbox consumer base. It will not go well for them.

I've made previous estimations on how it COULD go well, but it sounds like Phil has different ideas.

Where are you getting that info?

 

[FrozenCell]

Not sure, strange that Phil Spencer would spill the beans this early if it wasn't coming soon. Has there been any worthy hardware improvement to get better performance in a small box for a good price this year? That's why I think maybe next year after PC takes a little leap. I think an Xbox One Slim is first on the cards or maybe they skip that entirely and phase out Xbox One to replace with Xbox 1.5 but I would have thought a much cheaper Xbox One Slim would be a good seller rather than keeping the price high with an Xbox 1.5.

and PS4K

 

[Markoman]

I could see some elitism happening. Someone complains about unacceptable framerate issues in their new game to be met with "what your still on Xbox One? Its 2019! Get the 1.2 already"

One thing can be said for sure. We are going to need a much more fine-tuned class system. 'Master-race' and 'Peasants' won't cut it anymore.

 

[darkhunger]

A crucial flaw that they're not realizing is that consumers buy new consoles for more than just more horsepower. They buy them for a new feel, a new set of hardware/software features that make the product distinctive, in addition to a noticeable jump in horsepower. It's all about the package. Offering biannual hardware releases undermine all the momentum builders of new console hardware without reaping any real benefits.

If they pursue this model, they are going to be very, very disappointed. It's not rocket science.

A series of incremental updates will add up in terms of feature sets when you do decide to upgrade. The best think about this model is the longer you wait to upgrade the more of an upgrade it'll be.

Quite frankly if you do choose to wait then I don't see how different this would be to the current system of upgrades.

Demographics and device expectancy are completely different in these two situations. You can't just expect a console hardware buyer to behave like an Apple devout. They're likely in different age, income, and interest brackets, seeing the purposes of their different devices.

What big tech companies like MS (and Samsung for that matter) and some people on this board do not realize is that tech consumers are NOT all the same. It's an issue of human preference. MS might very well be able to culture their own breed of MS devout who will like this system, but at the cost of completely eroding what's left of their Xbox consumer base. It will not go well for them.

I've made previous estimations on how it COULD go well, but it sounds like Phil has different ideas.

My experience is that Apple buyers go across a broad spectrum of demographic, not too different than consoles. You have the technophiles who want the latest and best devices, and you have the people new to tech that just want something that you can easily plug and play. So I disagree that one cannot use Apple as a suitable comparison here.

 

[carl32]

It was also the fact that Playstation is a more world wide brand than Xbox.

Is Windows a world wide brand ? I have no idea.

 

[Breakbeat]

Where are you getting that info?

It seems to be the most popular conjecture based on the interview, so I'm rolling with it. There are a million different ways MS could do this, some of which (like my previous prediction of MS folding Xbox wholly into its broader hardware strategy and offering some form of Xbox experience on all of its devices, ranging from an Azure-based cloud streaming solution to real-time graphical performers running on set-top "optimized for Xbox" hardware) would probably go quite well for them. I'm just trying to point out why the biannual hardware release model with a distinctly Xbox hardware line would be an awful idea.

Also, LOL, 32Xbox indeed. History would be repeated in a big way. I'm keeping that one for later use.

 

[Zeta Oni]

Is Windows a world wide brand ? I have no idea.

Yes.

 

[Breakbeat]

A series of incremental updates will add up in terms of feature sets when you do decide to upgrade. The best think about this model is the longer you wait to upgrade the more of an upgrade it'll be.

Quite frankly if you do choose to wait then I don't see how different this would be to the current system of upgrades.

It'll lessen the impact of each subsequent release. If you study console software and hardware sales cycles throughout all of gaming's history, they're largely based on mania/hype and follow a relatively predictable pattern (this is going to be the hype year for the PS4, for instance. That's already in the cards). It's all about maintaining brand momentum with continual excitement on the horizon, and such a release model would actively work against that to the point of it petering out (which is what analysts were afraid of happening with Gen 8, after Gen 7 took so many years to end). Writing the irrational elements of human nature such as hype power and excitement out of the equation is a big mistake.

 

[EGM1966]

I really don't see the confusion. If the mass market can eat Apple devices and all their different configurations up with no problem, then I think you're not giving people enough credit.


Not too complicated since it's already been done for mobile devices and been done for ages in PC games, many of which can recommend optimal settings. In fact it's significantly easier to do it here than to do it for the limitless numbers of devices and systems in mobile and pc gaming.

I don't think there well be any confusion. The question is will the game console market want to invest in regular updates a'la PC gaming core?

Historically the view has been no. If the bulk of the specific game console market turns out to actually want a fixed, single investment they make every 4 to 5 years with games that will always work exactly the same vs other consumers then MS approach won't work.

I have no idea myself but it's not a given regular HW updates a'la iPad would work for this specific market segment which historically has been focused on a very different model.

 

[rokkerkory]

when will 32Xbone land?

Did they say it'll be an add-on for xbox one and games will only work with the add-on?

 

[jelly]

and PS4K

I think Sony could do something similar to take better advantage of VR experiences. I've always thought it was odd that Oculus and HTC Vive require beast PCs but PS4 doesn't for PSVR. Maybe they'll trailblaze for a while then up the quality when the time is right with PS5. VR with the masses might take a while to gather pace that a more powerful PS4 is not needed for better VR experiences so quickly.

 

[Tntnico]

A crucial flaw that they're not realizing is that consumers buy new consoles for more than just more horsepower. They buy them for a new feel, a new set of hardware/software features that make the product distinctive, in addition to a noticeable jump in horsepower. It's all about the package. Offering biannual hardware releases undermine all the momentum builders of new console hardware without reaping any real benefits.

If they pursue this model, they are going to be very, very disappointed. It's not rocket science.

Yeah maybe, that's why they need to do this with a Oculus partnership. "Xbox One Plus is VR ready" is far more engaging than "Xbox One Plus runs games better"

Xbox One Plus - Oculus Edition with Minecraft bundled in ! Do it Microsoft !
--- Yes I know, 999 $ SKU ... :-/ (but still, I really want it MS).

 

[tiredheadcrab]

So Phil Spencer says they will release hardware upgrades and GAF turns around and says "They are leaving the console business!". What is going on the last few days on here?

They aren't leaving consoles. This isn't a Sega situation. The sky is still blue.

 

[darkhunger]

It'll lessen the impact of each subsequent release. If you study console software and hardware sales cycles throughout all of gaming's history, they're largely based on mania/hype and follow a relatively predictable pattern (this is going to be the hype year for the PS4, for instance. That's already in the cards). It's all about maintaining brand momentum with continual excitement on the horizon, and such a release model would actively work against that to the point of it petering out (which is what analysts were afraid of happening with Gen 8, after Gen 7 took so many years to end). Writing the irrational elements of human nature such as hype power and excitement out of the equation is a big mistake.

New product annoucements will generate enough excitement if their features are exciting enough. The iPhone 6 blew up the mobile market for example, and that was like the 10th revision of the iPhone?

I don't think there well be any confusion. The question is will the game console market want to invest in regular updates a'la PC gaming core?

Historically the view has been no. If the bulk of the specific game console market turns out to actually want a fixed, single investment they make every 4 to 5 years with games that will always work exactly the same vs other consumers then MS approach won't work.

I have no idea myself but it's not a given regular HW updates a'la iPad would work for this specific market segment which historically has been focused on a very different model.

I think too much value is placed on the fact that consumers want experiences that's the same as everyone else's. I really don't think that's a priority for many people that they need to have the same exact experience as their friends when playing a game. And it's not like this is not actually already happening these days anyway, since most games are cross-platform and on PC.

Other than that I don't think this approach changes anything else about consoles that you're talking about. You can still choose to buy new hardware every five years since new software will be backward compatible.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

It's too late. Wagons have been circled and the narrative has had a day to be set. The market will determine if this is viable.

That's not a fair statement. I'm having some good conversations in this thread, though I can't speak for others I guess.

"The market will determine if this is viable" is a truism. We can still discuss it and speculate.

You can't lure console gamers to PC boxes, it's apples and oranges. Xbox consoles, even if they come every 3-4 years or maybe longer in some instances when more powerful hardware is not needed are still very much relevant and still the go to product for the consumer masses. A PC with Xbox games is not a replacement, just an option for more people and helps boost the Windows Store and Microsoft ecosystem just like Windows 10 on Xbox One helps boost the Windows Store and Microsoft ecosystem. They need to cater to everyone, putting all your eggs in a PC box and leaving the Xbox console hardware business is nonsense.

I agree you can't lure console gamers to PC boxes. But I think that's exactly what Microsoft wants to attempt. They're definitely the best-suited to do so.

Despite the ongoing PR platitudes of "this is to UNIFY and CROSS-PROMOTE and ECOSYSTEM", at the end of the day this is a very straightforward attempt to lure console gamers into the PC/smartphone/tablet platform. Microsoft's walled-off platform, to be exact.

They're moving away from the traditional console business (i.e. one device with a walled garden) to a walled garden (Windows Store) that encompasses all Windows 10 devices. The overall OS strategy is about mobile experiences, where you get to take your experience with you across any screen. The idea of a device under the TV fits perfectly within the overall strategy, but the traditional console business of locking down games to a single device does not. They'll still want an option for people who play games on TV as long as it's a big money making opportunity for the Windows Store.

By offering a single store where your purchases work on a number of devices they can acquire customers on any one screen, perhaps starting with the TV customers they have now, and entice them to pick up a Surface tablet or phone later to keep using and building on their digital library.

Again, they're not going to leave the TV. They're absolutely leaving the traditional console model of locking software down to a single device though.

EDIT: For the record, I think the moment Sony purchased Gakai they laid a foundation to leave the traditional console model as well. I actually think it's funny that Sony is more prepared to go device agnostic than Microsoft is.

I am aware of Microsoft's PR and their grand strategy. I do not believe they will be successful, and I hardly believe this is all there is to it. By believing the above, you are simply taking PR at face value. There is no critical thinking involved if you believe that Microsoft is doing this to "expand the ecosystem" because that's exactly what they are saying.

A bit of critical thinking and evaluation may still lead us to the same conclusion, but from my perspective there are too many pieces of this puzzle that don't quite fit. Therefore, I do not believe Microsoft's official PR-laden "vision" for this move. It hasn't worked this way in the past so it's natural to speculate if Xbox can buck the trend.

Might they be doing kinda like Sony is doing with PS Now and cross-play/buy and a more unified account system? Sure, maybe. Sony has done a good job of that in my opinion. However, Sony appears to be using their console as the foundation while the other compatible devices are tertiary. Even if Sony announces PS Now for PC (they just announced Remote Play for PC, for what it's worth) I don't think it would necessarily be an equivalent situation.

Microsoft appears to be demoting the Xbox One (for lack of a better term). It is clearly not their priority any more. They've stated as such numerous times. Xbox consoles -- as a console platform that gets exclusive developers and exclusive development -- appear to be on the way out. Instead, the Xbox is simply another device that connects to your centralized Windows account, which Microsoft has said over and over and over and over again is their goal. This is good for some people, but it does not change the fact that Xbox is being de-emphasized in importance, which leads to all other sorts of possibilities (both good and bad). Moving out of the dedicated console hardware market is easier than ever for Microsoft after these decisions, and it certainly isn't a sign of Microsoft's confidence in the stand-alone viability of the XBox console brand.

Even if people are excited about the implications and possibilities for their gaming habits, I don't see how ANYONE could say that the above paragraph is untrue.

 

[Yoday]

Not sure, strange that Phil Spencer would spill the beans this early if it wasn't coming soon. Has there been any worthy hardware improvement to get better performance in a small box for a good price this year? That's why I think maybe next year after PC takes a little leap. I think an Xbox One Slim is first on the cards or maybe they skip that entirely and phase out Xbox One to replace with Xbox 1.5 but I would have thought a much cheaper Xbox One Slim would be a good seller rather than keeping the price high with an Xbox 1.5.

They could manage a pretty big leap if AMD can have a custom Zen APU ready for MS this holiday. Production could be an issue, bit it's not like a full console launch where they would need millions of units all at once. I could absolutely see them launching a cost reduced slim XBO this summer, and a new upgraded XBO this holiday or early next year. I agree that we would not be hearing about this at all if a full announcement wasn't on the horizon. I expect we are going to get a much clearer picture of the hardware and the cross buy system at E3.

 

[vcc]

Why would they? Have iPhone sales nose dived after having a new one every year that essentially does the same thing, only with more power?

People rebuy consoles all the time when re-designs come out, but you're telling me they wouldn't dish out for one but with more power?

Youre kidding right?

Phones actually have declined in sales. The big middle and lower segment of the market is content with what they have and are waiting longer to replace it.

 

[DeepEnigma]

New product annoucements will generate enough excitement if their features are exciting enough. The iPhone 6 blew up the mobile market for example, and that was like the 10th revision of the iPhone?

Yet it was when I personally switched to Android after 6+ years with Apple, because it felt, more of the same.

 

[HighResTomato]

Whatever it is that they are planning, better be honest and transparent about it. Don't think Xbox could survive another consumer outrage like last time.