Support NeoGAF

[viveks86]

Lets put this way, if bungie released Destiny 3 I wouldn't champion as some Sony achievement. The buyout of Bungie is as ridiculous as Bethesda and ABK.. is numbers for the sake of numbers.

That's an arbitrary take. What does ownership even mean to you then? Sony owns the IP AND (indirectly) pays the salaries for the people who would make Destiny 3. And yet they get no credit? You are treating ownership based on feeling of ownership instead of simple logic. If it's too big or popular prior to acquisition, then it somehow doesn't roll up the chain? Let's change this thought exercise up a bit:

What if Hermen Hulst cancels Marathon and Bungie proposes that they make Killzone GaaS instead. This gives Hermen the boner of his lifetime and he writes them a blank check. Game earns megabucks, rave reviews and gamers agree that "Bungie is back". Does Sony get any credit?

We are in a place where Sony gets the nod for publishing Death Stranding 2, even though they neither own the IP anymore nor the studio, but they don't get credit for anything Bungie does even in the future? Isn't that weird? I think it's weird.

We can agree that the buyouts are ridiculous and not at all heartwarming to observe. But those are just feelings. Ownership is ownership. Plain and simple.

 

[NickFire]

Do you really believe games like Intergalatic, Death Stranding 2, Ghost of Yotei, and Wolverine can draw in groups of people that haven't already purchased a PS5?

If Wolverine has anywhere near the world of mouth that Deadpool v Wolverine did then yeah, it can draw in some serious people I bet. I'm not sure it will though, sadly. Was supposed to be a 2024 game when first announced yet here we are 1/2 way through 2025 without a release date. But the potential to move systems is there with this IP.

No clue on Death Stranding 2. First one did not interest me enough to play it. No clue how good the game is or how big of an audience it had. If I had to guess I'd say it won't move systems though.

Ghost - I know I want to try it when it's discounted because I loved the first one. No clue how much enthusiasm there is for sequel beyond my personal interest. If I had to guess I'd say this will not move systems.

Intergalactic - absolute wild card imo. The devs track record is that good thanks to Last of Us in particular. Whether they can reach system seller status again I just don't know. Admittedly I'm not very interested myself yet so I'm not hopeful. But LoU was so big I can't count it out just because I'm not feeling it yet.

 

[Sooner]

Price increase the console that plays disc.

Barely print any disc games so those users can't buy them in stores or constantly print and release them for the competition consoles instead.

In fairness, they also significantly raised the price of the hardware that doesn't play discs and has specs closer to last-generation hardware.

 

[Bernardougf]

That's an arbitrary take. What does ownership even mean to you then? Sony owns the IP AND (indirectly) pays the salaries for the people who would make Destiny 3. And yet they get no credit? You are treating ownership based on feeling of ownership instead of simple logic. If it's too big or popular prior to acquisition, then it somehow doesn't roll up the chain? Let's change this thought exercise up a bit:

What if Hermen Hulst cancels Marathon and Bungie proposes that they make Killzone GaaS instead. This gives Hermen the boner of his lifetime and he writes them a blank check. Game earns megabucks, rave reviews and gamers agree that "Bungie is back". Does Sony get any credit?

We are in a place where Sony gets the nod for publishing Death Stranding 2, even though they neither own the IP anymore nor the studio, but they don't get credit for anything Bungie does even in the future? Isn't that weird? I think it's weird.

We can agree that the buyouts are ridiculous and not at all heartwarming to observe. But those are just feelings. Ownership is ownership. Plain and simple.

You're are free to disagree with my take budy ... its not going to change

Edit: and when MS pulls a halo to ID soft move we can go back to this discussion because this is not the case. Im not going to champion bought established third party franchises, much more anual ones as some achievement. Not now. Not ever.

 

[DavidGzz]

Raised the price and you can't even find it in store. MS wants you to buy any of the other hundreds of Xbox(the Sony model had a 3% increase at least) models before the actual Xbox.

 

[mckmas8808]

If Wolverine has anywhere near the world of mouth that Deadpool v Wolverine did then yeah, it can draw in some serious people I bet. I'm not sure it will though, sadly. Was supposed to be a 2024 game when first announced yet here we are 1/2 way through 2025 without a release date. But the potential to move systems is there with this IP.

No clue on Death Stranding 2. First one did not interest me enough to play it. No clue how good the game is or how big of an audience it had. If I had to guess I'd say it won't move systems though.

Ghost - I know I want to try it when it's discounted because I loved the first one. No clue how much enthusiasm there is for sequel beyond my personal interest. If I had to guess I'd say this will not move systems.

Intergalactic - absolute wild card imo. The devs track record is that good thanks to Last of Us in particular. Whether they can reach system seller status again I just don't know. Admittedly I'm not very interested myself yet so I'm not hopeful. But LoU was so big I can't count it out just because I'm not feeling it yet.

And while everything you said is true to you and very understandable. There's others that probably feel the opposite from what you just said. I'm pretty sure there will be some people the first ghost game and will feel like this fall is a great time to upgrade from the PS4 to the PS5 to play the second one.

All you need is one or two games to excite someone to upgrade or purchase the ps5. That much I'm sure of. What I'm not sure of is will Sony raise the price of the PlayStation 5 due to tariffs or other reasons.

If the price increases 50 bucks or $100 then strike everything I said from the record.

 

[ToadMan]

Lost profits are incentived through game pass

And while this is about the hardware, GP is primarily driven by console users.

So if the console isn't selling, then GP subs aren't going to increase...

Which is basically what we're seeing, and of course what has led to the mass layoffs and cancelled projects.

 

[Mattyp]

30% lost on hardware but still up in revenue regardless on the total, shows you how much Xbox gaming software is pumping.

 

[kungfuian]

They are literally hedging their bets by investing in conflicting business models so of course something has to give-
-Cross Platform releases of first Party games weaken the platform and reduce hardware sales
-loss of hardware sales negatively impact Game Pass adoption and sales potential for 3rd parties
-Game Pass cannibalizes both first and third party software sales
-reduced software sales impact investment in making games, because games aren't profitable enough to make, in turn impacting game pass content

The real questions are-
-How long will 3rd parties consider them a viable platform? How long till 3rd parties just skip 'em because of low sales potential on their platform?
-How do they plan on maintaining Game Pass subscriptions if no one buys their hardware?
-How will they maintain sufficient interest in Game Pass content if the games they make have such low sales they can't justify the expense of making them?

 

[ToadMan]

They are literally hedging their bets by investing in conflicting business models so of course something has to give-
-Cross Platform releases of first Party games weaken the platform and reduce hardware sales
-loss of hardware sales negatively impact Game Pass adoption and sales potential for 3rd parties
-Game Pass cannibalizes both first and third party software sales
-reduced software sales impact investment in making games, because games aren't profitable enough to make, in turn impacting game pass content

The real question's are-
-How long will 3rd parties consider them a viable platform? How long till 3rd parties just skip 'em because of low sales potential on their platform?
-How do they plan on maintaining Game Pass subscriptions if no one buys their hardware?
-How will they maintain sufficient interest in Game Pass content if the games they make have such low sales they can't justify the expense of making them?

I think 3rd party support continues because it's relatively easy to port these days.

If the Xsex, PS and PC were significantly different architecture then there'd already have been a nosedive.

I think one of the recent leaks following from the firings at Xbox pointed out that GP budget was a black hole that had been used by MS to pay for ports of games from third parties too. The implication then, is that there were third parties prepared to skip the platform unless MS gave them an incentive to come over.

I'm actually curious about Hell Divers too. At first I thought it was Arrowhead pushing for it, but they said that wasn't the case and then a rumor surfaced that MS approached Sony asking for it.

Which is interesting, because if MS wants to make money, they can encourage Sony to bring HD2 over but of course not put it on GP. That makes MS more money. But did MS fund the port in some way?

If true, I'm also curious what words MS would have used to convince Sony that this was a win in terms of platform positioning. Did they basically open up to Sony on their 3rd party plans and exit from hardware?

As things stand, for MS to make money from Xbox consoles and sales, they need a bunch of popular non GP content, which Sony has available...

 

[drganon]

Stay thinking Sony excluuuusives have people rushing out to buy PS5s.

Not taking your layoff from Xbox well I see. Hopefully you can find someone else that needs a worthless shill such as yourself.

 

[DenchDeckard]

There is a big difference between seeing growth quarter-over-quarter the first year after you raise prices and seeing growth quarter-over-quarter 2+ years after you raise prices. It's been two years since Sony raised prices of PlayStation Plus. If we attribute their growth from two years ago to one year ago as being due to the price hikes, what are we attributing the growth from one year ago until now towards? Did they do additional price hikes that I am not aware of? If not, then your argument means nothing.

You responded to his claim that PlayStation revenue is doing well, and your response was that Game Pass revenue is also doing well based on that article you linked. Except that article says revenue increased by 5% from Q1 2024 until Q1 2025, but Game Pass prices increased by over 17% between Q1 2024 until Q1 2025. Call me crazy, but that doesn't sound great to me. It sounds like they're making more money from the people who are staying with Game Pass, but they have less total subscribers than before their price hikes. And we're only talking revenue here, not profits. At its basest level, this looks bad.

Honestly, your counterargument was what sucked. The actual counterargument is that the article he linked regarding "PlayStation Plus Subscriptions Have Seen Continued Growth Despite Price Hikes" didn't give any numbers about total subscribers at all. The numbers it gave was that more people are opting for higher tiers for PlayStation Plus than they were previously, but that doesn't mean that overall PlayStation Plus subscribers have increased in any meaningful way. In fact, it's technically possible that overall subscribers have decreased since that article didn't talk about total revenue, subscriber count, or any meaningful statistic.

OK, thanks for a more detailed explanation. I agree.

Honestly, with all this stuff. I really don't care I just don't like seeing blatant console warring. It's like Sony guys have had an absolute free pass to shit on ms about every part of the business but if anyone mentions a counter argument or talks positively about ms and xbox, the toys are out the pram and here comes the Sony fans on a rampage.

So, basically, myself and RetroGamingUK points sucked on trying to highlight growth.

To note, I never said playstation wasn't growing, I was trying to come back to the constant posts that every part of xbox business is failing and not seeing growth. Retro likes to often express these thoughts, which are completely incorrect.

I'll finish with, MS deserves shit for the recent layoffs. Go to town but this idea that every part of the business is failing is a stretch in my opinion.

I bet there isn't one third party publisher that wouldn't want 5 out out of the 10 top selling games being games they have published. Yet somehow their business is a failure to these hardcore Sony fans. The evidence is right there, they are releasing a steady clip of games and some, not all are performing well. This is how gaming has always been and it seems healthy to me. Ubisoft might have a couple of games in the charts and then they have games like the lost crown that don't sell as much but do well critically and find an audience with a lower budget.

Anyway. Thanks for the post. I didn't search long or read too much into my rebuttal, it was a quick link to show that these execs can talk positively about their numbers and was more of a response to "one service is seeing growth"

I'd like to think if subscriptions grew by 30 percent in may, that is not just coming from new ps plus subscribers when the hardware only grew by 3 percent. That math ain't mathing imo.

 

[Felessan]

Which is interesting, because if MS wants to make money, they can encourage Sony to bring HD2 over but of course not put it on GP. That makes MS more money. But did MS fund the port in some way?
If true, I'm also curious what words MS would have used to convince Sony that this was a win in terms of platform positioning. Did they basically open up to Sony on their 3rd party plans and exit from hardware?
As things stand, for MS to make money from Xbox consoles and sales, they need a bunch of popular non GP content, which Sony has available...

I think they paid for porting and marketing.
And Sony doesn't lose much as it's a 1.5 years old game (so most hype and sales already accumulated) and as live service game it wants any player it can get.

 

[Kumomeme]

 

[RetroGamingUK]

OK, thanks for a more detailed explanation. I agree.

Honestly, with all this stuff. I really don't care I just don't like seeing blatant console warring. It's like Sony guys have had an absolute free pass to shit on ms about every part of the business but if anyone mentions a counter argument or talks positively about ms and xbox, the toys are out the pram and here comes the Sony fans on a rampage.

So, basically, myself and RetroGamingUK points sucked on trying to highlight growth.

To note, I never said playstation wasn't growing, I was trying to come back to the constant posts that every part of xbox business is failing and not seeing growth. Retro likes to often express these thoughts, which are completely incorrect.

I'll finish with, MS deserves shit for the recent layoffs. Go to town but this idea that every part of the business is failing is a stretch in my opinion.

I bet there isn't one third party publisher that wouldn't want 5 out out of the 10 top selling games being games they have published. Yet somehow their business is a failure to these hardcore Sony fans. The evidence is right there, they are releasing a steady clip of games and some, not all are performing well. This is how gaming has always been and it seems healthy to me. Ubisoft might have a couple of games in the charts and then they have games like the lost crown that don't sell as much but do well critically and find an audience with a lower budget.

Anyway. Thanks for the post. I didn't search long or read too much into my rebuttal, it was a quick link to show that these execs can talk positively about their numbers and was more of a response to "one service is seeing growth"

I'd like to think if subscriptions grew by 30 percent in may, that is not just coming from new ps plus subscribers when the hardware only grew by 3 percent. That math ain't mathing imo.

Appreciate the detailed explaination.

The issue here is that many, including yourself, are unable to separate Xbox from Microsoft Gaming.

Xbox sits under Microsoft gaming, alongside Activision and Bethesda, Activision and Bethesda may be in the same family as Xbox, but they are not part of Xbox.

Simply put…

Microsoft Gaming = healthy
Xbox = dead


It's the same as…

Sega = healthy
Dreamcast = dead

 

[Alan Wake]

 

[DenchDeckard]

Appreciate the detailed explaination.

The issue here is that many, including yourself, are unable to separate Xbox from Microsoft Gaming.

Xbox sits under Microsoft gaming, alongside Activision and Bethesda, Activision and Bethesda may be in the same family as Xbox, but they are not part of Xbox.

Simply put…

Microsoft Gaming = healthy
Xbox = dead


It's the same as…

Sega = healthy
Dreamcast = dead

Completely agree, brother!

I can absolutely separate xbox though. I can not stress enough how dead xbox is. I have absolutely 0 issue with that. Its their fumbles that caused it. No point in spending any of my energy thinking about that. I could have probably done a better job, haha.

To be clear, I view xbox. MS gaming or whatever ms want to call it now as a third party pub, just like ubi or ea.

 

[CitizenKratos]

Best third party output this gen.

FTFY

 

[jm89]

30% lost on hardware but still up in revenue regardless on the total, shows you how much Xbox gaming software is pumping.

Indeed i commend them they will be the biggest contributer to the playstation ecosystem, just another cog in the machine like EA.

While their own platform continues to go down the shitter.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

These are definitely higher numbers than I expected for XBOX all things considered. Not only did they raise their prices being in a distant third place to the competition, but literally all the reasons to own the console can be found elsewhere.

 

[Ronin_7]

Everyone is shocked.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Could be worse, they could have bought IP's like Marathon and Concord and done something there

I don't understand your criticism...
SONY bought Bungie and it came with Marathon mid development, but, IIRC, the only reason MS even has Halo it's because they also bought Bungie that came with it in mid development...
And they haven't done great with the IP lately too...
MCC collection was a broken mess for years and Infinite is a massive turd.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Appreciate the detailed explaination.

The issue here is that many, including yourself, are unable to separate Xbox from Microsoft Gaming.

Xbox sits under Microsoft gaming, alongside Activision and Bethesda, Activision and Bethesda may be in the same family as Xbox, but they are not part of Xbox.

Simply put…

Microsoft Gaming = healthy
Xbox = dead


It's the same as…

Sega = healthy
Dreamcast = dead

Its crazy with how dead the Xbox sales are that MS continues to fund the next Xbox

I have no idea how many game pass subs are active but surely not enough to fund the R&D and all the other costs associated with a next gen machine

 

[Unknown?]

Where's Riky ?

 

[adamsapple]

I don't understand your criticism...
SONY bought Bungie and it came with Marathon mid development, but, IIRC, the only reason MS even has Halo it's because they also bought Bungie that came with it in mid development...
And they haven't done great with the IP lately too...
MCC collection was a broken mess for years and Infinite is a massive turd.

Read the post I'm quoting and decipher my reply.

 

[Mattyp]

Indeed i commend them they will be the biggest contributer to the playstation ecosystem

They already are, Sony make hardware at this point.

 

[Three]

2024 Q1:

• Xbox Game Pass Core - $5.00/month (cheapest option with annual cost of $59.99)
• Xbox Game Pass Ultimate - $16.99/month
• PC Game Pass - $9.99/month

2025 Q1:

• Xbox Game Pass Core - $8.33/month (cheapest option with quarterly cost of $24.99, which comes out to $99.96/year)
• Xbox Game Pass Standard - $14.99/month
• Xbox Game Pass Ultimate - $19.99/month
• PC Game Pass - $11.99/month

To break this down further:

• Xbox Game Pass Core - 66.6% price increase, and stopped including first party titles on release date.
• Xbox Game Pass Standard - New tier priced much higher than the base tier, and anyone who still wanted first-party titles on release date had to move up to this tier. Basically a 199.8% price increase from the previous quarter if you're comparing Xbox Game Pass Core in 2024 to Xbox Game Pass Standard in 2025 (which makes the most sense as these plans are identical in all but name and price).
• Xbox Game Pass Ultimate - 17.66% price increase.
• PC Game Pass - 20.02% price increase

These price changes took effect in September of 2024. Bragging about record Q1 revenue in 2025 (up 5% from Q1 of 2024) after these price increases is a weird flex, but you do you.

Small correction. Neither Gamepass Standard nor Gamepass Core get release date games. People who wanted release date had to move up to the most expensive tier. Gamepass Standard even misses out on most third party games now. Gamepass Core is just xbox live but they stopped trying with "games with gold" and said f*** it here's a very limited collection of old games that doesn't really change month after month.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

Where's Riky ?

Patiently waiting for Xbox Series sales to hit 35 million…

 

[Nonehxc]

Where's Riky ?

You see his profile pic, right?

He's been Cancelled.

 

[Jetpac]

Another ancient account with barely any posts comes out of the woodwork to bestow us with metacommentary on "GAF" in defence of Xbox.

Shocking.

This the same guy who was mad he had to move his mouse an inch to click epic games instead of Steam?

Makes sense now

 

[Three]

This the same guy who was mad he had to move his mouse an inch to click epic games instead of Steam?

Makes sense now

You thinking that the distance between icons is the issue with having different platforms on a platform with a split library tells me you turn a blind eye to every problem and that would explain your support of xbox. That's if you're not a Rare employee.

 

[Badlucktroll]

wonder how long till xbox just goes

then they change it to some bullshit like "microsoft on windows and playstation gaming"

 

[Sooner]

30% lost on hardware but still up in revenue regardless on the total, shows you how much Xbox gaming software is pumping.

You spend 100 billion dollars an increase in revenue isn't going to cut it. That increase needs to be massive to make up for the amount of money you spent plus the additional overhead of the studios you acquired.

The fact they are laying off thousands of developers and shutting down full studios, including their own "AAAA" studio, they do not seem to be doing well.

It's even worse given the fact the software they ARE selling they are now giving 30% of the revenue to Sony, Nintendo and Valve.

 

[Pimpbaa]

Still doing better than than the 3DO, Dreamcast, original xbox and the WiiU (I think). Low bar to set, but at least they beat some consoles!

 

[Jetpac]

You thinking that the distance between icons is the issue with having different platforms on a platform with a split library tells me you turn a blind eye to every problem and that would explain your support of xbox. That's if you're not a Rare employee.

The horror.

I have to click another Icon!!!

 

[Embearded]

You're are free to disagree with my take budy ... its not going to change

Edit: and when MS pulls a halo to ID soft move we can go back to this discussion because this is not the case. Im not going to champion bought established third party franchises, much more anual ones as some achievement. Not now. Not ever.

I'd say that we shouldn't give credits to MS or Sony, for releases that were probably given the green light before the acquisition.
I wouldn't extend it to existing IPs because there is always the possibility they will fuck them up somehow with their influence and internal policies (all games must have an online aslect, mtx, fire people and work mainly with externals etc).
There is always of course the chance that they will improve them...

In any case, Doom and Oblivion were probably already under development or planned by Bethesda and MS just kept on with their plans.

 

[Celine]

30% did but not this.

Why would that warrant a thread? NS1 was getting replaced by NS2 and has already saturated the market (it's the second best selling console of all time in U.S. only behind NDS).

 

[Skifi28]

decipher my reply.

 

[xrnzaaas]

And while this is about the hardware, GP is primarily driven by console users.

So if the console isn't selling, then GP subs aren't going to increase...

Which is basically what we're seeing, and of course what has led to the mass layoffs and cancelled projects.

There's also a finite number of people potentially interested in Game Pass and it definitely doesn't help that it's not available in Sony's and Nintendo's ecosystems.

Expecting the service to keep growing and reach some crazy numbers was dumb thinking. In fact MS may get in trouble in a few years when people who always bought Xbox consoles won't have a clear successor to buy and to keep using Game Pass.

 

[demigod]

There's also a finite number of people potentially interested in Game Pass and it definitely doesn't help that it's not available in Sony's and Nintendo's ecosystems.

Expecting the service to keep growing and reach some crazy numbers was dumb thinking. In fact MS may get in trouble in a few years when people who always bought Xbox consoles won't have a clear successor to buy and to keep using Game Pass.

Don't you worry about that. They already became lifelong pc gamers.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Nah, you just implied that Sony has nothing on its own, so it will be up to Microsoft to help driving engagement on PS5, while in reality, Sony has a game that will do better than every game published by Microsoft for the next 5 months on PlayStation combined (otutside of COD, and I was not the one to make that exception in the first place). And heck, even if Sony didn't have that game or everything else they're publishing (like Lost Soul Aside), other publishers will still have a more appealing lineup than $80 The Outer Worlds 2.

What game is that?

 

[DenchDeckard]

Yes, if you say something ridiculous, people laugh at it. It's.....a feature of the forum. You do the same, so why you're trying to take some fictitious high ground is beyond me.

OT: Now on topic, no amount of "but Sony" can change just how bad things clearly are for the Xbox brand (and point of contention). I'd rather them (Microsoft/Xbox) continue to be called on their shortcomings (this is partially why Nintendo and PlayStation have gotten themselves out of messes). Either salvage what's left or step aside and stick to 3rd party offerings only. Something has to give though.

I find it funny you think sony isn't in a mess just because they are selling hardware each month.

The discourse is happening all over the Internet and it isn't sour ms fans doing it, its sony fans that finally are coming around to the fact that sony has miss managed their studios to an astronomical amount this generation.

Just open your eyes and look at the votes for most disappointing console. Worst sony gen etc.

You lot are quick to put sony with Nintendo but fail to realise ita only Nintendo that are shifting hardware and releasing a steady clip of high quality games each year.

Sony has one game a year and astro bot sold just over 2 million copies.....

 

[Clear]

I find it funny you think sony isn't in a mess just because they are selling hardware each month.

Healthy hardware sales = healthy ecosystem.
And healthy ecosystem means income from all software and ancilliary sales, appreciating value on IP for transmedia enterprises, etc.
Business is good, as evidenced by the figures in their annual report showing record income and profit.

So you immediately disproved your own argument.

The discourse is happening all over the Internet and it isn't sour ms fans doing it, its sony fans that finally are coming around to the fact that sony has miss managed their studios to an astronomical amount this generation.

Internet "discourse" generally isn't worth a damn. Its evidence from a self-selecting group which automatically means the most extreme positions tend to be the most prominent.

Just open your eyes and look at the votes for most disappointing console. Worst sony gen etc.

Classic case in point. If this is the most disappointing PS gen, explain to me how unbelievably terrible a showing Xbox has made when despite having the cheapest platform on the market, access to 90% of the same software, they are struggling to the point of having to place their first-party output on Playstation to cover costs?

Point being: everything is relative. And the horrifically jaded state of the self-proclaimed "gamer" audience is a problem for everyone - PC included.

You lot are quick to put sony with Nintendo but fail to realise ita only Nintendo that are shifting hardware and releasing a steady clip of high quality games each year.

There's zero market expansion though. Its endless iteration of the same blue-chip franchises all of which appeals to the same demographic. Nintendo also have to contend with a decades-long reputation within the industry that third party sales on Nintendo platforms fare far worse than first-party ones, which is a mounting problem as sunken cost rises for developing and publishing for that platform.

Sony has one game a year and astro bot sold just over 2 million copies.....

Again, you fail to understand that first-party output serves very specific purposes where actual volume sales are not the only KPI. Atro-bot may have only sold 2.3 million units but it was GOTY 2024 and drew a lot of favourable attention to the Playstation brand by elevating performance/reception in an area (character mascot platformers) outside of their primary offer.

More to the point though nobody but the fanboy crowd actually cares from where software is sourced. For the majority of the audience its just entertainment, and for the business so long as the return on the balance sheets is solidly in the black - they don't give a damn. Hence the increased prominence of titles sourced in China / Asia-Pacific generally is just as big a win as if it came from a self-owned developer.

This isn't a happy accident also; this is the China Hero project bearing fruit. Which is looking better an smarter as a business strategy as the years go by.

The bottom line is that building new partnerships in growing overseas markets and bringing their product in with full fat "first party" promotion behind it -as with for example Stellar Blade- in order to fill out annual tentpole release cadences is smart business. Its just as impactful because products that break out on a certain platform tend to be associated with that platform for a good long period of time - meaning that its a competitive advantage.

Its all about effective portfolio management.

 

[Steve Holt]

This is a thread about Xbox sales falling 30% year on year.

Why do the usual suspects always turn every thread into a Sony thread.

 

[PeteBull]

Patiently waiting for Xbox Series sales to hit 35 million…

Xbox series had the weakest competition from all the xboxes till now(ps5 with allmost all its exclusives on pc, switch1 old af with 2016 outdated tech, switch2 just launched) and it is still performing so terribly

 

[DenchDeckard]

Healthy hardware sales = healthy ecosystem.
And healthy ecosystem means income from all software and ancilliary sales, appreciating value on IP for transmedia enterprises, etc.
Business is good, as evidenced by the figures in their annual report showing record income and profit.

So you immediately disproved your own argument.



Internet "discourse" generally isn't worth a damn. Its evidence from a self-selecting group which automatically means the most extreme positions tend to be the most prominent.



Classic case in point. If this is the most disappointing PS gen, explain to me how unbelievably terrible a showing Xbox has made when despite having the cheapest platform on the market, access to 90% of the same software, they are struggling to the point of having to place their first-party output on Playstation to cover costs?

Point being: everything is relative. And the horrifically jaded state of the self-proclaimed "gamer" audience is a problem for everyone - PC included.




There's zero market expansion though. Its endless iteration of the same blue-chip franchises all of which appeals to the same demographic. Nintendo also have to contend with a decades-long reputation within the industry that third party sales on Nintendo platforms fare far worse than first-party ones, which is a mounting problem as sunken cost rises for developing and publishing for that platform.




Again, you fail to understand that first-party output serves very specific purposes where actual volume sales are not the only KPI. Atro-bot may have only sold 2.3 million units but it was GOTY 2024 and drew a lot of favourable attention to the Playstation brand by elevating performance/reception in an area (character mascot platformers) outside of their primary offer.

More to the point though nobody but the fanboy crowd actually cares from where software is sourced. For the majority of the audience its just entertainment, and for the business so long as the return on the balance sheets is solidly in the black - they don't give a damn. Hence the increased prominence of titles sourced in China / Asia-Pacific generally is just as big a win as if it came from a self-owned developer.

This isn't a happy accident also; this is the China Hero project bearing fruit. Which is looking better an smarter as a business strategy as the years go by.

The bottom line is that building new partnerships in growing overseas markets and bringing their product in with full fat "first party" promotion behind it -as with for example Stellar Blade- in order to fill out annual tentpole release cadences is smart business. Its just as impactful because products that break out on a certain platform tend to be associated with that platform for a good long period of time - meaning that its a competitive advantage.

Its all about effective portfolio management.

Some great points, but im not talking about xbox. Im highlighting the dissappintment from fans and how this erodes the satisfaction with the console.

Sony have had a great generation thanks to great hardware and a competitor that completely shat the bed. Sony started extremely strong. Good launch software and then foundered the first 5 years with mediocre sequels that received hype and benefitted from the sony lead industry of "journalists" who review sonys titles favouribly.

The evidence is with every poll and the backlash on titles like ghost of yotei. Which i am personally extremely excited about.

Maybe we agree to disagree. I think ypu made amazing points about sony vs xbox but thats not what I was really trying to say.

Nintendo and Sony are not the same. Nintendo manages their studios and output extremely well. I cant say the same for sony or Microsoft this gen.

 

[drganon]

This is a thread about Xbox sales falling 30% year on year.

Why do the usual suspects always turn every thread into a Sony thread.

It helps emotionally unstable nutcases like dench feel better when they play the sonytoo game.

 

[spons]

Patiently waiting for Xbox Series sales to hit 35 million…

The Xbox One was a TV/sports flop, so Microsoft releases an actual console, and then it also flops.
They just can't get a win in. It doesn't help that they don't advertise anything over in here in Europe, but still.

 

[Vaquilla]

Xbox series had the weakest competition from all the xboxes till now(ps5 with allmost all its exclusives on pc, switch1 old af with 2016 outdated tech, switch2 just launched) and it is still performing so terribly

"Weak competition" like (checks notes) a console that sold over 150 million units.

 

[PeteBull]

"Weak competition" like (checks notes) a console that sold over 150 million units.

I said what i said