"Alternatively, they might not," says other analyst.Exterminas said:
On the plus side, at least they're not making batshit crazy claims like that one guy whose name escapes me right now.
Xbox One Could Be Microsoft's Last Console
- Thread starter roseofbattle
- Start date
On the plus side, at least they're not making batshit crazy claims like that one guy whose name escapes me right now.
There are 2 problems with the PC a high customizable OS which can become unstable, many different types of hardware and various issues with different builds and drivers. You boil all that down to one setup with its own security system.The games are almost identical to the PC but will not work on a PC,ect,ect.Oskuro said:
Given the fact that their video game hardware is still in murky waters and their software division is suffering from trying to beat Apple at its own game (Windows 8, anyone?), Microsoft as a whole is taking water fast. Unless they can make a major 180 in the near future, we may be witnesses to the fall of a once mighty titan of the computer industry.
Pachter, maybe?Zachary Amaranth said:
OT: I could easily see this happening. Hasn't Microsoft only lost money on the original Xbox and the 360?
Came in here pretty much to post this. There's been grumblings for a while that Microsoft needed to go back to focusing on software, because it's what they've always been good at. Even the disaster that is Windows 8 ultimately comes down to them wanting to get into the hardware market -- it's a tablet OS, because Microsoft makes tablets now, and they wanted to unify the tablet and desktop environment. I actually will be kind of sad to see the Xbox go, not because I like the system but because I like competition. But if it means Microsoft will start putting out great software again, I'm game. I'd rather have a functioning Windows based PC and a console made by Sony or Nintendo (or heck, skip the console entirely) than a PC with a crappy OS but a cool console made on the side by Microsoft.j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
Even if they are successful with the X-Box One there is still the question of will the console survive to another cycle when there is so much competition for your gaming and entertainment time? Will game developers evolve the gaming market or will it just be the same things marketed toward a smaller and smaller target demographic as people lose interest?
Yeah, Michael Patcher. For the life of me, I couldn't remember his name.Bleidd Whitefalcon said:
Then again, I hear if you say his name three times he appears, so it may be for the best.
My thoughts exactly. I'll be happy if Microsoft can get the fuck out of the gaming industry so we can finally have some competition from a company that doesn't make shite on a regular basis.Saviordd1 said:
When have they come in last in console sales 2 generations in a row?AzrealMaximillion said:
The original Xbox outsdold the Gamecube worldwide by a small margin, and outsold the Dreamcast by almost 14 million units.
It was however, eclipsed, by the PS2. But everything was that generation. The current gen I think worldwide it has come last though, but I'd have to check the PS3 figures.
This may be a bit off in left field, but what I think we're witnessing is the natural result of a company hitting a glass ceiling. What I mean by that is that to some extent, there are limits on the profit potential of video games, limits on the size of the market, and limits as to what people are willing to buy. While gaming may not be the niche market it used to be, there is only so much room for companies to expand and flourish, and we have two major contenders (Sony and Microsoft) that are finding out that once you've hit that glass ceiling, every effort you make to break through it and increase your profits and market share will backfire.
If you attempt to curb piracy via DRM methods, eventually you will suffer more losses from the backlash than you did the piracy. EA's Simcity debacle is proof enough of that.
If you attempt to broaden the base market by trying to make your machine an "all-in-one", like Sony did with the PS3 (remember all the things it was intended to be able to do?) and Microsoft with the XBone, you risk driving the price so high that sales suffer until you take a huge loss on every machine with price drops.
If you attempt to make a huge, spectacular gaming experience that rivals blockbuster movies in both scope and in cost in an effort to make a "must-play" game, and to do so you have to sell 5 million copies and don't, well, we've all seen what happens then; just ask Jim Sterling.
Eventually, every video game console maker is going to realize that there is only so much money to be made in the industry, and if that's not enough for them, they'll bail on it, leaving the one console maker who has consistently had reasonable expectations and made their consoles and games based on those reasonable expectations: Nintendo.
Nintendo will ultimately win the console wars, because they understand when enough is enough.
If you attempt to curb piracy via DRM methods, eventually you will suffer more losses from the backlash than you did the piracy. EA's Simcity debacle is proof enough of that.
If you attempt to broaden the base market by trying to make your machine an "all-in-one", like Sony did with the PS3 (remember all the things it was intended to be able to do?) and Microsoft with the XBone, you risk driving the price so high that sales suffer until you take a huge loss on every machine with price drops.
If you attempt to make a huge, spectacular gaming experience that rivals blockbuster movies in both scope and in cost in an effort to make a "must-play" game, and to do so you have to sell 5 million copies and don't, well, we've all seen what happens then; just ask Jim Sterling.
Eventually, every video game console maker is going to realize that there is only so much money to be made in the industry, and if that's not enough for them, they'll bail on it, leaving the one console maker who has consistently had reasonable expectations and made their consoles and games based on those reasonable expectations: Nintendo.
Nintendo will ultimately win the console wars, because they understand when enough is enough.
Yes, surely Microsoft's plan during their shift to being a more consumer-electronics oriented company is going to involve ditching their most successful consumer-electronics product (Which has, quite to the contrary of the memes going around, been highly profitable since a couple years into the 360's run).
I mean, sure, the 360 has been great for them, but who wants to hang on to that market with all of the money that their phone and tablet businesses have been making? And why bother with a still-growing gaming market when they've still got a lock on the shrinking PC OS market?
Next up: David Cole predicts Microsoft getting out of the Server business to focus on MP3 players!
I mean, sure, the 360 has been great for them, but who wants to hang on to that market with all of the money that their phone and tablet businesses have been making? And why bother with a still-growing gaming market when they've still got a lock on the shrinking PC OS market?
Next up: David Cole predicts Microsoft getting out of the Server business to focus on MP3 players!
Even if they pulled out I still can't see PC "dominating" or "winning" over everything else since we'd still have Sony and Nintendo like we've had over the past 2 decades.
Though it seems to be a pipe dream many PC only people dream about, god knows why they do when some people just don't want to game on a PC.
Though it seems to be a pipe dream many PC only people dream about, god knows why they do when some people just don't want to game on a PC.
If this does indeed happen, there are several possible outcomes:
A) Sony Monopoly
Sony gains a defacto console market monopoly, having the only machine with capable hardware for gaming.
B) Valve steps in to fill the niche
Valve's SteamBox project takes off and the console becomes commonplace, competing with the PS4/5 for market share. This could lead to always-online systems being implemented by both manufacturers.
C) Nintendo steps in to fill the niche
Nintendo's next console after the WiiU (maybe named the WiiMe or something along those lines) has good hardware and guarantees that every person owning the system has a regular controller. This is a nice outcome, but neither Sony nor Nintendo have been known to be good in the aspect of being friendly to outside devs, leading to a lot of people migrating to PC because of the consoles not having any bloody games on them.
All of these eventually lead up to Linux as a dedicated gaming platform:
A) A Sony Monopoly would drive people away from consoles due to high prices, and drive them away from Microsoft due to (probably) bad OS and GUI design, along with Microsoft having shown to not be that interested in the gaming market.
B) It's already confirmed that the SteamBox will run Linux, so Linux ports for a lot of games would be available.
C) Again, driving people away from the consoles due to higher pricing/licensing fees for devs. Same as A), Microsoft is probably going to fuck up collossaly, leading to widespread deployment of Linux (Kubuntu, Mint, Fedora) in non-business applications.
Now the only thing left is to hope for IBM to finally sell PCs to consumers again, with POWER CPUs[footnote]Power8 CPU: 12 cores, each about 4 times as powerful as contemporary x86 cores; 96MB on-chip cache; several PCIe controllers; all of this makes the thing ideal for gamers, at least to my eyes[/footnote] this time... I can dream, can't I?
A) Sony Monopoly
Sony gains a defacto console market monopoly, having the only machine with capable hardware for gaming.
B) Valve steps in to fill the niche
Valve's SteamBox project takes off and the console becomes commonplace, competing with the PS4/5 for market share. This could lead to always-online systems being implemented by both manufacturers.
C) Nintendo steps in to fill the niche
Nintendo's next console after the WiiU (maybe named the WiiMe or something along those lines) has good hardware and guarantees that every person owning the system has a regular controller. This is a nice outcome, but neither Sony nor Nintendo have been known to be good in the aspect of being friendly to outside devs, leading to a lot of people migrating to PC because of the consoles not having any bloody games on them.
All of these eventually lead up to Linux as a dedicated gaming platform:
A) A Sony Monopoly would drive people away from consoles due to high prices, and drive them away from Microsoft due to (probably) bad OS and GUI design, along with Microsoft having shown to not be that interested in the gaming market.
B) It's already confirmed that the SteamBox will run Linux, so Linux ports for a lot of games would be available.
C) Again, driving people away from the consoles due to higher pricing/licensing fees for devs. Same as A), Microsoft is probably going to fuck up collossaly, leading to widespread deployment of Linux (Kubuntu, Mint, Fedora) in non-business applications.
Now the only thing left is to hope for IBM to finally sell PCs to consumers again, with POWER CPUs[footnote]Power8 CPU: 12 cores, each about 4 times as powerful as contemporary x86 cores; 96MB on-chip cache; several PCIe controllers; all of this makes the thing ideal for gamers, at least to my eyes[/footnote] this time... I can dream, can't I?
My mad about the PS2/GC/Xbox gen. They did outsell the GC by a bit. They still lost about 4 billion on the first Xbox so I wouldn't count that as anything but coming in last for that generation.SkarKrow said:
The 360 cost them billions in the beginning due to the RROD and when they finally made a profit with the 360 it was extremely tiny. Now they're behind even the PS3 in sales, so that's the 360 coming in last there.
So far that's two losing generations in a row.
The Xbox One is looking to lose MS a lot of money this gen. Yes, they've reversed a lot of the bad decisions that were announced at E3, but the Xbox One is still $100 more for no real good reason other than to cover the costs of the unnecessary Kinect. And its line up of games relies on exclusive franchises that have gathered a large amount of fatigue for the most part.
That combined with its extremely limited release compared to the PS4 due to localization of the Kinect (which at this point seems to be what's causing the console so much trouble) and the fact that XBox Gold accounts are still required to basically have the console not be kneecapped in terms of features and we have the Xbox One acting as a US Soldier trying to climb up Hamburger Hill in Vietnam.
There are a few problems with some this analysis.Matthi205 said:
A) A Sony monopoly would be the most likely scenario for those who want a more "core" gaming experience as well as higher fidelity games.
B)The Steam Box as an idea currently does not answer the question of its practicality for those who have a PC already and use Steam's Big Picture feature. The cost of the Steam Box is also going to be more likely higher due to it effectively being a powerful mini PC that's upgradable. Also, all of the problems that initially plagued the Xbone's E3 presentation would most likely be present with the Steam Box (no sharing games with friends and DRM issues).
Also, Steam's library lack titles from Japanese developers and Japanese developers develop games in a completely different way than Western devs do. Japanese games are built on the console for the console. Western games are built on the PC then put onto the console. The Steam Box will be at a major disadvantage by not having those titles as well as not having any exclusive games that wouldn't be on the PC anyways.
Always online implementation also doesn't seem realistic for Sony as the majority of games released on consoles are single player and have no need for always online.
C)I'd have to disagree with the statement that Sony as bad as Nintendo for 3rd party developer support. Ever since the original PlayStation the Sony consoles seem to collect a massive library of games that sell on word of mouth, as well as having niche titles that do well in sales (Shadow of the Colossus, Demon's Souls, Yakuza, Monster Hunter[PSP], Lunar, Tactics Ogre). Nintendo on the other hand had a decent collection of niche cult games but not many, if any, sell very well.
Again, Sony has the unique advantage of being known to have the console that localizes a good portion of Japanese exclusives that Western gamers want, as well as seeing the sales on said games to continue to do so. Looking at how Nintendo's attempts with the Capcom 5 on the Gamecube and Operation Rainfall on the Wii both failed to set off even a respectable number of sales for cult titles, Nintendo is more likely to no localize games than Sony.
Just looking at how ATLUS has had great successes localizing games for games that are generally gears towards "Japanophiles" on the Playstation consoles and how Platinum Games can't seem to sell games on Nintendo consoles with games made for the same crowd, there seems to be an audience of gamers that Nintendo just does not have for the more obscure Japanese titles.
With Western 3rd party games Sony in general has a much more fruitful relationship with Sony than Nintendo as it seems that whenever a Western developer complains about a lack of representation on a console, its usually Nintendo that's the target of the criticism.
I have no idea how a Linux based console would work out in a scenario with no MS console so I can't even and won't comment at the reisk of looking extremely ignorant.
Yes, because if we all went to lets say oh I don't know... PC then AMD and Intel would suddenly stop being competitors and create a hardware monopoly.Saviordd1 said:
Wait a minute...