The X1 has lost Microsoft 400 million

[Riff Moonraker]

Did anyone read the articles? Or at least understand them? Computing and Gaming Hardware revenue increased $3.2 billion or 49%. Even if the Xbox One hardware is making a loss, the department isn't. Seeing as the focus is in process of shifting almost entirely to X1 from other platforms, the so called $400 Million loss is totally immaterial. There are bound to be losses when launching a new platform.

Or, to put simply, the xbone costs a ton to make, but once you've got one in your home, Microsoft will continue to sell you games and subscriptions with a much better profit margin, and you'll be committed to buying their crap because you bought the console. They still shifted well over 11 million consoles

Yep, people seem to keep glazing over this. Sony has lost an assload more than Microsoft has, and you dont see the pundits in here wishing gloom and doom on them, but I guess that is to be expected, by now. Xbox isnt going anywhere, folks, so I am SO sorry to disappoint you. (Please note the sarcasm) Get off this horse, and focus on something more productive.... or keep wasting your time with this, because ultimately, thats all you are really doing.

Also, to the ones seriously desiring the end of the Xbox, do you REALLY think that the Playstation will benefit from that? Do you think YOU as a consumer will benefit from that? Sure, there will be some people that will just say the heck with it, and go over to the PS4, but in all honesty I think most people will do what I would do, and that would be to go back to the PC. I switched over to the xbox, and havent looked back, but if the xbox DID go under (which it wont) then I would quit gaming before I would purchase a playstation anything. I would go back to my roots, the PC, and I bet alot of people would do the same, and the scales would seriously tip in the favor of the PC, over the PS4, and you guys could ultimately see the playstation brand go bye bye, too. When the dust settled, you would see the PC and Nintendo, and thats about it.

 

[A Weakgeek]

snip

Just so it doesn't become a misunderstanding down the line: I'm a PC guy, and I agree with you that it's the best platform for core gaming.

However where we disagree is the amount of influence core gamers have on the market. The large majority of gamers are casuals, people who, in the current age of seemingly infinte easy to consume entertainment, would not have the patience to go to forums (Provided they know any to begin with, which if they don't, another step of inconvinience is added to the process) to ask how to get their game working. Sure compared to the 90's computers have become vastly easier to handle, but so has the expectations of the consumer regarding ease of use.

I am by no means saying PC isn't a "viable" platform in that it cannot compete functionally. It's just that function isn't what drives consumers, just look at Apple. PC gaming could be media sexy, however it would need some serious rebranding and some added accessibility. Kinda what the Steambox is trying to achieve.

As for the "WiiU cheaper to develop" thing, If they saw it financially beneficial, they could just as easily develop with last gen tier graphics. And it would look better since stuff like texture resolution and framerate would be higher with little to no extra work. I mean I understand why you think they'd be unwilling to do so, however its like arguing that WiiU devs would never make a game that doesn't utilize the tablet in a meanigful way.

snip

Well if what you're suggesting does really come to pass, then you'd be right that it's not a monopoly, but that would merely be because the industry would be completely changed. If indies became the bulk of the industry, we'd go towards the mobile way of things. Small, cheaper games designed to run on as many different type of devices as possible, relying on different online stores for coverage.

Actually, all of that is already around, both on steam and facebook games. Perhaps we don't disagree at all, its just I see them as a seperate thing in their own right.

 

[Something Amyss]

No, I despise steam, partly because it's well on the way to becoming a monopoly.
If MS bowed out and stopped supporting their console, then Sony's console would be the only AAA-console available, right?
If people had no choice but to use their console for most big games, what's to stop Sony from becoming lazy, complacent and anti-consumer?

Steam already is a monopoly.

Meanwhile, Nintendo is still a "AAA" console company. It's also, if you may notice, the only constant of the three console makers on the market right now. People may complain it's not the same, or that they just don't like Nintendo consoles, but they're still "AAA" consoles.

I suppose at best you could argue that Sony would have a console monopoly on modern military shooters featuring grizzled white men shooting brown people.

 

[Something Amyss]

And Nintendo is running a little low on funds too, and making consoles ain't cheap.

One has to be incredibly loose with "a little low" to make that true.

 

[Something Amyss]

Consoles take loads of money to make. An absolute absurd amount.

Its like saying Capcom has 50 million in the bank. That may seem like success to an average person but the costs of doing business means that is 1 AAA game.

Its all about context,and in context of the industry Nintendo doesn't have all that much money.

How much money do you think they have, then?

 

[gigastar]

What how is this news?

Well, to the uninformed with a vauge idea of how buisness works, if Xbox was consistently losing money year on year then MS would have cut it by now.

But they havent cut Xbox, therefore as far as theese people care, nothing is wrong.

 

[Strazdas]

I hope that Microsoft can turn the Xbox division around and these numbers are just from the X1 development. Although I'm not sure if if the Xbox division has made a profit. I liked the 360, I hope the X1 eventually mimic's the good experiences I enjoyed with my 360.

http://www.neowin.net/news/report-microsofts-xbox-division-has-lost-nearly-3-billion-in-10-years

The xbox division is the most unprofitable part of Microsoft. Doesn't help their other divisions are making so many billions. In fact, the xbox division hasn't broken even.

Well, to be fair, most of that loss was coming from the original Xbox and the 360 was turning in profit for last few years. But yes, the whole Xbox project so far is a 10 year failure. and since XboxDone does not seem like its going to be a magical money maker the project will remain a toxic money sink.

Now, I'm not really into consoles, but are you guys actually encouraging a situation where Sony has the monopoly on Big Console Games?
Do you not know where monopolies lead?
Surely some competition is good to keep the companies on their toes.

First of all, Nintendo exists, so Sony would not have a monopoly. Secondly, there is no such thing as "big console games". Both PC and mobile market outdoes console market in both profits and revenue, so even if console market collapsed right now gaming as a whole would not crumble.

ALso, competition is good only if that competition offers equal or better service. if the competition is offering worse service it is not worth keeping it around.

In total seriousness, this is nothing, Microsoft will keep the Xbone around for the long haul.

they would be suicidal to do so. It was underpowered when it launched. its lack of power will show even greater with time. Heck, mobile phones are coming out with 120hz displays now, Mobile GPUs have beat last gen consoles last year and are quickly catching up. if they plan to keep XboxDone for 8 years like 360 your going to see mobile phones being faster than consoles and thats not going to end up well for consoles.

That's largely because it's an American console, and most of the games you're suggesting are likely Japanese. The Japanese are nationalistic and xenophobic. Microsoft would gladly have them put all their games on the Xbox.

Anything that is not a chest high wall shooter is Japanese. you hear it here first!

If MS bowed out and stopped supporting their console, then Sony's console would be the only AAA-console available, right?
If people had no choice but to use their console for most big games, what's to stop Sony from becoming lazy, complacent and anti-consumer?

you do know that Nintendo games sell more than Xbox and PS games combined most of the time right? as in, when you can release a game with 10 million sales and you dont call it AAA what do you call AAA?

ALso whats to stop Sony from becoming anticonsumer? how about the rest of gaming market?

1) Triple A gaming on PC is not a thing for the vast majority of population. PC has never had the branding and media attention that the consoles have had. That the very possibility is foreign to most people, is a vast hurdle among with the price and the accessibility issues.

Just because there is a lot of misconceptions does not make it unacessible. PC gaming is cheaper and in many cases easier. Tripe A gaming on PC is very much a "Thing". in fact is a much bigger "Thing" than on consoles. just a few days there was an online international competition for just such a game with prize pool of over 4 million dollars. there were over a hundred million live viewers - more than most sporting events.

Did anyone read the articles? Or at least understand them? Computing and Gaming Hardware revenue increased $3.2 billion or 49%. Even if the Xbox One hardware is making a loss, the department isn't.

Did you understand them? revenue =/= profit.

 

[Something Amyss]

Well they are said to have 10 billion in assets, with an estimated 4.7 billion in the bank.

Radically different than what's been previously estimated, but okay.

Consoles cost billions to make. Microsoft said they invested at least 1 billion into the xbone itself with another billion for exclusives. tech ain't cheap, especially if you do something like the kinect or a tablet.

Thankfully, Nintendo isn't Microsoft. Also, you really think that the cost to design wasn't, you know, already paid?

2 billion for a basic package to be designed and planned, not counting the maintenance of support once it releases. Not counting the manufacture cost.

Yes, and this one guy made a 30,000 dollar PC build, PCs must cost tens of thousands to build. I mean, surely that's how trends work.

...I'm sure that's different, somehow. Because ponies.

For a company with no actual outside income

You mean, aside from the TV shows and the plushies and all that, right?

 

[Verlander]

Did you understand them? revenue =/= profit.

No shit. However, if you go through the 10-k it shows that the individual hardware is loss making - the machine costs more than they're selling it for. This is why it says "Xbox Platform cost of revenue increased $2.1 billion or 72%, due mainly to higher volumes of consoles sold and higher costs associated with Xbox One." If revenue is increasing, it's because more people are buying the machine. It will take a while for the profitable goods - games, subscriptions etc - to start covering the loss.

Simply put, if you're selling for $1 what costs $2, a loss of $10 represents a sale of 5 products, as represented in the top article posted:

Paradoxically, in this period a high volume of sales can actually contribute to push the numbers further in the red.

Perhaps my initial post wasn't clear, it was badly worded. The department is making sales, and so that loss really isn't a problem.

 

[Savagezion]

I am by no means saying PC isn't a "viable" platform in that it cannot compete functionally. It's just that function isn't what drives consumers, just look at Apple.

This quote made me laugh. It a good example, brings up a good point, and funny to boot.

People love brands, and PC isn't a brand. (Although it could be argued it is the "Windows box" lol) It is just an open platform. Even though Microsoft consistently pisses on consumers, there are many who want them to stick around because its familiar and recognizable. That's kinda sad.

I do find it sad that PC would need a 'brand' for people to even acknowledge its existence. I hate this term but talk about "sheeple". It's not a thing unless its a brand. (read: marketed) For we MUST judge the brand. Yet branding kills the idea of the PC. Coke and Pepsi brands don't work in PC (HP, Dell, Alienware, etc.) They get succesful at first then take a nosedive as they try to close the system with proprietary measures. It all turns to garbage. It's better for parts to brand as that is where the hardware competition is. (AMD, Intel, Nvidea, etc.) To rebrand it as a magic box kills it as it is no longer as open. Yet I think you are right that's what makes people more comfortable.

I will say I get a little happy when I see threads that say "Help me build my first gaming PC" even if all they do is list a budget and games they would like to play. Just seeing someone honestly looking at the at the peak of the hobby is pretty cool for me. It's even cooler when you go in the thread and see what advice people offer.I love when I click one of those and I have no advice that hasn't already been covered sometimes even better than I planned to offer. I offer a silent bow to my fellow PC gamers for being so awesome helping someone get started and maybe showing me some cool stuff. I am no expert by any means and my research dwindles every year but building and maintaining requires minimal effort and has a very easy accessibility if you are willing to talk about computers with others.

I suspect much of the accessibility issues are self imposed. When tech bable pops up, it can intimidate. DoPo here at escapist will sometimes make me feel computer illiterate. But I love reading his posts on stuff like this. Sometimes I have to google wtf he is talking about if I have the time.

PC gaming could be media sexy, however it would need some serious rebranding and some added accessibility. Kinda what the Steambox is trying to achieve.

I am seriously curious as to how the steambox will perform. I really don't understand its goal. I think it could easily ruin itself by having too many versions out for it and confusing consumers. I would love to attempt marketing it as I have a few ideas I think might work, but that thing is such a gamble. It's like its 'everything good' and 'everything bad' about both consoles and PC balled into one that targets no one specifically. I don't blame gamers for scratching their heads and couldn't blame casual consumers either. Consoles just got complicated.

As for the "WiiU cheaper to develop" thing, If they saw it financially beneficial, they could just as easily develop with last gen tier graphics. And it would look better since stuff like texture resolution and framerate would be higher with little to no extra work. I mean I understand why you think they'd be unwilling to do so, however its like arguing that WiiU devs would never make a game that doesn't utilize the tablet in a meanigful way.

Actually I encourage Nintendo to not worry about graphical fidelity as the system was designed to take a backseat in that regard this gen. Last gen's graphics were fine and I think embracing last gen's graphics for another generation is a smart play for them. Sony and Xbone already bit off their foot in regards to competing against that advantage. For them to try to pull that, would hurt them both at this point. Their graphics need to show a large leap from the Wii-U or people are gonna get a bit of buyers remorse. They've made promises.

My point was actually that I see the lower graphic power as the Wii-U's greatest strength this generation. With the industry crying out that graphical horsepower is getting too expensive to maintain, I think it was a smarty play to back off and work with "good enough" instead of try to cater to "moar shinier".

EDIT:
P.S. Your avatar always cracks me up.

 

[Siege_TF]

The Xbox could be compared to Israel. Necessary in the greater scope of things, it's just a damn shame the people in charge feel the need to make it a necessary evil.

 

[LaochEire]

I tried getting back into PC gaming just this week. My PC died and I needed a new one. It was an absolute hassle and a nightmare to buy. Buying one was expensive, building one on sites that do custom PC's was expensive. I didn't know what represented good value. Eventually, I moved to eBay to just buy one. Again, so annoying. Had 30 PC's to choose from and every time I googled the specs I'd get conflicting reports.

Took me 2 weeks of research to pick one I felt was right for me at the right price. In the mean time I could just simply play games on my consoles. Hassle free. I would assume the vast majority of the general population feel the same.

 

[joest01]

They had 10 billion in 2012 and now they only have 4.7 billion.

That's bad.

Actually, your link says they had 16bn in assets and now have 13.

Back on topic though, I don't think the CoD and Madden crowd has reason to be worried. If MSFT really did pull out, I am sure somebody will pick up the slack. In that I think the situation is different from N and Sony...

 

[kilenem]

To people saying it's not a "monopoly", because of PC and Nintendo:

1) Triple A gaming on PC is not a thing for the vast majority of population. PC has never had the branding and media attention that the consoles have had. That the very possibility is foreign to most people, is a vast hurdle among with the price and the accessibility issues. ( Yes I'm well aware, building a PC, or especially buying prebuilt is simple, but its not something the vast majority of people are capable or wanting to do.) We, core gamers will always be the minority, and a small demographic when discussing as big of an industry as gaming has become.

2) Nintendo consoles have, and for the forseeable future will continue to have a vastly different demographic. The consoles have been carried by 1st party titles, excluding the massive explosion of the Wiimote titles in the last generation. (Something that the WiiU isn't even close to matching) It just currently seems unlikely that the 3rd party franchises that make up the backbone of the industry (GTA, Call of duty, Battlefield, Fifa, Madden, Need for speed, Forza, Gran turismo, Assasin's creed, to name a few) would suddenly find themselves successfully ported onto the WiiU, especially since unlike the Wii the install base is smaller than the PS4.

Actually AAA gaming is on its way out. Even Ubisoft admitted that they can't afford to keep spending 50 million on a basic AAA that has no guarantee of it selling.

Lots of devs died because of a AAA game not selling, and others are hurting.

And they copy paste everything in all their games. I can't imagine how much others spend who make the game entirely from scratch.

So in the near future AAA games will be foreign to an industry that is downshifting to a smaller scale. Like it was back in the 90s.

Fair enough. However, don't you think this will just further push Sony in the lead? It's not like the casual market will suddenly become more interested in the indie scene which can't afford to market their game to large demographics. It's not like developing for the WiiU is cheaper or easier (I'd imagine its the opposite, with the tablet and all), or that it has a better online store/community for smaller games to thrive on.

I'd imagine in that situation, continuing to milk old franchises (Like ones mentioned in my previous post) would be even more attractive to publishers, since the possibility of rehashing assets and less need for marketing. I'd also imagine that in this case it'd be less likely to try and port to the WiiU aswell.

Sony coasted off indies before with the PS2. It will happen again. Xbox is now a dinosaur who can't see the world around it.

Its like someone driving a hummer in 2050. That level of excess has been dead for so long its actually offensive.

Microsoft can't see the little guy as being important, and that's why it fails. That's why the WII U didn't get its high sales for years.

If you don't have the support of indie devs, your console is dead on arrival. Big devs have been dropping like flies since the 7th gen started.

Check it:

Midway is dead.
THQ is dead.
Sierra Entertianment was bought out by Activision in 2008.
Square Enix is circling the drain if it can't stop spending huge amounts of money.
Capcom is on its last legs and will be bankrupt soon too or go indie. Barely enough for one last AAA game.
SEGA? Also on its last legs since 2012. Relies on PC now.
Atari? In 2013, they went bankrupt. Now they are a casino game company for mobile.
Namco Bandai? Not a mainstream heavy hitter.
Take Two? They don't pump out major games every year. GTA ain't a yearly franchise.
Kalypso? They are a PC company trying to make it big by porting PC games to consoles. Failing at it too.
Deep Silver? They made 2 big games on consoles. The rest is niche.

Who is left to make the bulk of games on consoles? Only the big 3: EA, Activision, and Ubisoft. And even they can't pump out sequels in big enough numbers to be competitive with the daily dump of games on PC.

An elephant will never beat 1,000 cheetahs. No matter how bad ass that elephant is.

Sony said the ps4 is the new PS2 for a reason. And that's going back to basics.

Sega Sammy just bought Atlus and I think Atlus is doing well. Sega just haven't made hit games. Moderately good games. Take 2 still has their sports genres and 2k is doing a lot better then Live. Namco is making the next Smash brothers. I don't think it get more mainstream then that.

Edit: Also Deep silver is probably the THQ replacement

 

[kilenem]

The Xbox could be compared to Israel. Necessary in the greater scope of things, it's just a damn shame the people in charge feel the need to make it a necessary evil.

lets not bring politics in this please. Although I think Israel has something to do with the creation the first Kinect

 

[kilenem]

dont get me wrong, I like the original Xbox, I still use my 360 [because when the big guys from Microsoft say we had best keep out 360's if we want offline games, you laugh at them and call them retarded], and I still love both of them.

I wont get a Xbone ever though, too much bullshit, too much smug assholes that only deserve to never work in the industry again [Major Neilson included, that retarded son of a *****]. My internet isn't the best, so Microsoft themselves said they dont want me as a customer, that's fine.

I'm only regretting not getting a Ps3 when I had the chance, though I might change that soon. Sadly the Ps4 doesn't exactly have that many games that interest me at the moment either.

so I guess I will stick to the last generation of consoles.

Still makes me feel good to hear that the Xbone has lost microsoft 4 Million though.

This actually makes me want to start another Forum Post could this be longest double Generation. Last generation I didn't see this many high profile releases towards the end of the Xbox, gamecube and PS2 life cycle. I can only think of Zelda, need for speed and Marvel Ultimate Alliance. The rest were just sports games.

 

[BaronVH]

It is interesting to see all the viewpoints that seem to have an interest in a company failing. Some discuss how Sony is going under, others how Microsoft is losing money on sales and games in general, etc., etc. The fact is, the gaming industry has gone from being a kid's toy to the dominant form of entertainment. It is not in anybody's interest for any of these three to fail unless all you care about is Candy Crush. Imagine one movie studio. If you enjoy movies, that would be a horrible thing to happen. Look at how far the music industry has sunk. All of these people who feel like they were betrayed by this or that decision, just lighten up and go play a good game.