Xbox One Could Be Microsoft's Last Console

[Agayek]

It?s not THAT complicated, you make X and sell software to it. You're over thinking things.

SO? You are still looking at a base price range and new formats every 5-10 years. With a single format you wind up with wider usage of the console due there only being one unit made by a ton of competitors and price drops more so than what you see with the flawed console war model. Don't want a bum unit don't buy the sanyo. Don?t want a console get a PC, don?t want a PC get an apple or android device. There are more platforms for gaming than consoles.

You realize this is irrelevant to my point right? You are responding to my point that "games require hardware to operate" with a rant about how single format is a superior model.

This is not how a debate works. Address the damn point at least.

As I've already said, from a consumer perspective, a standardized platform on which to play games across all manufacturers would be superior. I agree with you on that. Nothing I've said has had anything to do with that. I've been bringing up the point that there's no business incentive to do so, and you continually refuse to address that single point.

And this changes how from the current model? You?re making mountains out of mole hills.
The base hardware is the same but cabinet design,heat sinks,fans, power distribution,chip placement,ect,ect,ect. About the only thing set in stone are what chips to use, with some software effort you can even allow for new faster chipsets to be used in lue of the old. Same instruction set just faster processing of it. It?s not that complicated.

You want to know what changes from the current model? It removes the ability for Sony's console to perform noticeably differently from Microsoft's (or whoever else's). Literally every console will perform exactly the same way in every situation. Meaning there is no difference between any two consoles, save whatever features they add that will, by sheer virtue of the physical impossibility of not being so, have absolutely nothing to do with actually playing games.

Also, I should point out that the various things you are supporting (different chipsets, etc) is one of the things you prohibited earlier. If the hardware changes, at all, it introduces complexity and different behaviors between systems, which will incentivize developers specializing in a specific system (read: exactly what we have now).

No you shouldn?t you are doing it wrong.
It?s no more toxin than the current situation IMO.
And an amazing thing happened people complained and most issues went away. The launch issues are mainly supply issues coming about from competition and MS pushing for a Xmas release. If you had one system you?d have a worldwide launch in most major markets at once.

Yes. They shifted their advertising away from emphasizing all the non-game features.

What happens when they don't have anything but non-game features to advertise?

I?m leaning more to this but it creates some issues, you?d have 3 variants lite, premium and elite. Then the vendors make them using those titles it offers more competition and locks in the quasi PC software to 3 main variations the games just have a couple things different than a PC game a security system, limit driver data and automated optimization to lite, premium and elite(and yes I know I am using 360 SKU trems it?s just an example). It might be better than using more specialized hardware/drivers.

This is slightly better than your original proposal, but, as I said, it's just the PC development problem in a different skin. Developers would pick a target platform, ensure the software works there, then do just enough to make it functional on the others. The most dedicated dev houses would go the extra mile and ensure it works on every platform (because it's a much easier task here than on PC), but most would be content with good enough.

Looking at the video hardware market you?d get half of much competitor?s viaing to find their niche, which is more than 5 plus 2 or 3 out of left field. And it?s hard to have dominance when you are just a vendor, as for those in the forum they all get a piece of licensing depending on who brought what to the table. If they fail so be it. Sustaining a dinosaur business model is more illogical.

YOU CAN'T USE THE DVD PLAYER MARKET AS A MODEL FOR THE GAME CONSOLE MARKET.

As I explained earlier, they are fundamentally different. Superficially, from a consumer perspective, they appear quite similar (put disk in, enjoy media), but they are quite fundamentally different. Game consoles require their hardware to operate, while DVD players can function with just about any hardware. A standardized codec is much, much, much, much, much less complex to handle than a video game. DVDs contain mpeg/whatever-codec files that are essentially a long string of images. There is very little processing involved and absolutely no rendering. All you need to do for your DVD player to meet the standard is to read a codec and display the images involved.

A game console has to accept and execute very specific sets of hardware instructions that simply cannot be easily changed between systems. There's simply too much low-level coding required for acceptable performance in high-fidelity games to make a system-agnostic platform (like, say, Java) the standard. The vast majority of games are written in C++, and the ones with the fancy graphics and shit, the ones that actually make use of all that fancy hardware, need to be written in C++ in order to function to an acceptable degree. Minecraft is about as visually complex as a higher-level-language game can get and still perform at a reasonable level.

What that means is that the specific hardware used is very, very important to whether or not a game functions correctly with minimal issues. That's why PC games are so much more likely to have strange bugs or be unplayable or have driver issues. The game expects a certain set of hardware functions to be available (or certain amounts of memory or whatever), and if they return strange values or simply aren't available, the game cannot function properly.

That's where the beauty of consoles come in. They introduce a simple, standardized set of hardware for games to run on (just like you want).

The problem is that if you try to make every console use the same standard, then there's nothing left to differentiate one console from the next within the realm of being able to play games.

It?s called competition whatever sells, sells.

Yes. And when the customer can't tell the difference between your product and your competitors, there's no incentive for the customer to buy your product save for brand recognition. What that means is that you need to differentiate your product, or you need to be the market leader.

Thus, we'll have the market leader's console, which plays games, and everyone else's, which is a cable/internet/whatever box that just happens to also play games, or everyone else will go out of business and you'll have one choice.

Neither of those are terribly good futures.

Base price of what can be built, compact customized variants should cost less due to mass production so unit prices would be a max of 300-400(selling at a profit, because you have a much larger industry building the damn thing) at first then drop 50$ a year then stabilize at half the launch price.

You?re not seeing the forest for the trees.

Hahahahahahahahahaha. No.

They already manufacture consoles in bulk, and the fixed cost per unit is still stupidly high for the first few years of release. It doesn't matter how many you can mass produce if it still costs you $350-400 just to buy the parts for a single unit.

The variable cost per unit would go down, absolutely, but seeing as consoles are already being mass produced, it won't be by nearly as much as you seem to think.

Prices would stay about the same. They might drop a bit, but that would be more from the increased competition (since the schematics and standard would have to be public) than any reduction in the cost of production.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

snip

BLah blah blah excuse excuse excuse THE SKY IS FALLING.

Nope completely disagree.

NEXT!

 

[Gunner 51]

Given how Microsoft's new console has been a completely unmitigated disaster so far, I won't be shocked if they threw in the towel when it comes to gaming. But given how they started to listen and are working on placating gamers with their U-turns: this is a step in the right direction.

I think I understand what Microsoft are doing by chasing the casual gamer, but they fail to understand that most gamers the world over do not have the same level of disposable income as their American cousins and don't wish to pay 500 quid on a console and another sum of money on a subscription just to play the thing.

As far as I know, most people don't want all this motion control in their consoles as they view it to be little more than an overpriced boondoggle. (Love that word!)

Furthermore, Microsoft's other error is to be too cosy with large developers with their overkill DRM. People don't want to be treated like they are pirates or that they have to be tied down. While I shall acknowledge that Microsoft figured this out and removed most of the DRM - the damage to their reputation had been done.

But after all this, I won't write them off just yet. I'll certainly grant Microsoft that they've made a great big balls-up this far, but they have proven that they CAN bounce back after making a mess.

 

[Agayek]

BLah blah blah excuse excuse excuse THE SKY IS FALLING.

Nope completely disagree.

NEXT!

That's fine, but you still haven't addressed the point. Just answer the one question:

What reason do the console manufacturers have to implement such a system?

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

BLah blah blah excuse excuse excuse THE SKY IS FALLING.

Nope completely disagree.

NEXT!

That's fine, but you still haven't addressed the point. Just answer the one question:

What reason do the console manufacturers have to implement such a system?

Ah sorry I am irritated and frustrated at things right now. No need to take out here.

Still the reiteration was getting to be a bit much.

To make it cheaper to get all the good games, right now you have 3 systems all with good titles most of which are console specific.

Remove all exclusivity and I do not mind the console war format.

 

[Agayek]

Ah sorry I am irritated and frustrated at things right now. No need to take out here.

Still the reiteration was getting to be a bit much.

To make it cheaper to get all the good games, right now you have 3 systems all with good titles most of which are console specific.

Remove all exclusivity and I do not mind the console war format.

You're missing my point.

I agree with you that a single, standardized form is the best possible outcome for the consumer. I have never said otherwise.

But there's no reason for any of the manufacturers to do so.

"Hey, we could charge less money for our product!" is not an incentive for a company to do something.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Ah sorry I am irritated and frustrated at things right now. No need to take out here.

Still the reiteration was getting to be a bit much.

To make it cheaper to get all the good games, right now you have 3 systems all with good titles most of which are console specific.

Remove all exclusivity and I do not mind the console war format.

You're missing my point.

I agree with you that a single, standardized form is the best possible outcome for the consumer. I have never said otherwise.

But there's no reason for any of the manufacturers to do so.

"Hey, we could charge less money for our product!" is not an incentive for a company to do something.

Hey I do not see any *runs into a tree* ...... LOL

The trouble is you need to put ALOT of money up front. Its far more easy to license it out or just sell software. You might not have as much profit but you do not have the overhead the console war format has to hit a point where its not cost effective anymore and we are closer to it by the generation.

One problem is they will not work together to lower their costs another is they are making just enough to make it to a new generation so we've not had a shake up that would force them to change any.

But ya your right.

They wont change they will just go under.

 

[William Ossiss]

Good the sooner we get to a universal gaming hardware environment the better....

Yeah! Cause monopolies always work out in the end right guys?

If you got all the companies working together to make just one console (Nintendo excluded, because they will never join in) we could, as a gaming whole, have some very interesting prospects on our hands. Micro$oft and $ony will be fighting for our purchases on the games that they make. It would create a few new jobs in the market; specifically the one where M$ hires people to work with other hired people from $ony to make the console. Then it becomes an arms race to see who can make what game that will top the charts, with the winner rubbing it in the face of the loser. As a society, gaming culture would benefit and prosper as a whole.

Of course, this is wishful thinking. We have as much of a chance of that happening as we do the people of the world uniting under the Earth flag.

 

[Strazdas]

You still will have a cheaper unit price with more profit generation going with a single console model produced by various vendors.

Also you will have cheaper games, less licensing costs, less porting costs, less over head,ect,ect. Not that they would pass it on to consumers but still.

They offered some filtering and such for the PSX on the PS2 and PS3. So its possible but they do not do it because console games are built for specific hardware. If you have more mailable hardware with software built for that in mind and you keep concurrent generations of hardware within the same type of architecture just expand its capabilities each generation you could easily have passed games working on a new console unit.


The Win 8 DRM is highly over rated and the only the mobile version is "unalterable".

Im sorry what?
last two consoles microsoft had resulted in them being the least selling console with exception of the console that killed sega that sold even less. they only started making profit in the last couple years and the whole "xbox" project is still around 10 billion in the red. so far there was a huge loss from the project, and even the xbox prject alone is still a loss, though not as big one. if this console wont be a MASSIVE sucess then there is very high chance they will drop it. the idea pushers are both out of MS, and it does not make them any profit in the long run.

Just an FYI MS has been making a profit on the Xbox for its last year or so I forget but the 360 finally made a profit for MS 3 or 4 years ago and that includes anything left over from the Xbox.

The Xbox project has been out of the red for awhile now, sure they put 25+ million into it and lost 5-10 on the RROD but they've managed to still make a profit at this point and time.

And its not like Sony is making much profit off the PS3 either.

Im not denying that such optino would be more economical thatn current situation. but would it actually be better? money is not everything.
Also your "advancing hardware with similar notions" is basically PC hardware save for a few architectural jumps like the i-3/5/7 processors beings differently designed thus much more powerful. Also with PC you would write games for software and not hardware, thus circumwenting the whole problem. with consoles you have to write for specific hardware since there is no suport drivers. writing for hwardware may allow you to do more with it, but also removes pretty much any compatability.
Win 8 DRM is overrated since it isnt there. Microsoft took it out at users outrage in last months before release. It was suppsoed to be even worse than what Xbox was originally announced. Want to intall program and microsfot doesnt approve? tough.
its alterable, sure, but you needm uch mroe knowledge for that with win 8 since it is locked up system.
--------
I know 360 had profits for couple years. however if you take the period since 360 launch till now, its still in a heavy loss. and original xbox was loss during its whole run. the whole xbox project form launch till now is around 10b dollars in minus still though.
but yes sony did made a loss with PS3, but thats after a very sucesfull console and only 1 cycle, while mycrosfot seems to be going into 3rd cycle for loss. after all judging by preorders un US sony wins by 50% in software and 67% in top 5 software. and thats loosing on your own turf, imagine coutnries where Xbox doesnt launch.

 

[gorfias]

I've been saying this for a while. Coming in last for console sales in 2 generations in a row can't be good for investors. Neither is making very little profit of the 360 after losing billions on the original Xbox.

The Escapist reported a marketer last generation saying, no matter who wins this (7th) generation, there will not be another. And now, since the Wii U, there has in fact been an 8th.

The question is, can they improve graphics enough to get people on board for another generation? Hard to tell. PS3 is 7 year old tech. My PC has an HD7970. After the Humble Origin Bundle, I now have Battlefield 3 on both systems. You have to be pretty discerning to pick up a difference. (I watched a youtube comparison. The commentator picked up on things like the texture of some barbed wire. Terrific.)

I have heard that console tech has held back what they can develop for PC, that PS4 will be like a rising tide, bringing everyone up. I look forward to having my eyes knocked out. But if it doesn't happen, why should there be a 9th (or even 8th) gen? I'm pretty happy with what I have.

And the 360, from what I've read was making money. They should stick with a winner.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

You still will have a cheaper unit price with more profit generation going with a single console model produced by various vendors.

Also you will have cheaper games, less licensing costs, less porting costs, less over head,ect,ect. Not that they would pass it on to consumers but still.

They offered some filtering and such for the PSX on the PS2 and PS3. So its possible but they do not do it because console games are built for specific hardware. If you have more mailable hardware with software built for that in mind and you keep concurrent generations of hardware within the same type of architecture just expand its capabilities each generation you could easily have passed games working on a new console unit.


The Win 8 DRM is highly over rated and the only the mobile version is "unalterable".

Im sorry what?
last two consoles microsoft had resulted in them being the least selling console with exception of the console that killed sega that sold even less. they only started making profit in the last couple years and the whole "xbox" project is still around 10 billion in the red. so far there was a huge loss from the project, and even the xbox prject alone is still a loss, though not as big one. if this console wont be a MASSIVE sucess then there is very high chance they will drop it. the idea pushers are both out of MS, and it does not make them any profit in the long run.

Just an FYI MS has been making a profit on the Xbox for its last year or so I forget but the 360 finally made a profit for MS 3 or 4 years ago and that includes anything left over from the Xbox.

The Xbox project has been out of the red for awhile now, sure they put 25+ million into it and lost 5-10 on the RROD but they've managed to still make a profit at this point and time.

And its not like Sony is making much profit off the PS3 either.

Im not denying that such optino would be more economical thatn current situation. but would it actually be better? money is not everything.
Also your "advancing hardware with similar notions" is basically PC hardware save for a few architectural jumps like the i-3/5/7 processors beings differently designed thus much more powerful. Also with PC you would write games for software and not hardware, thus circumwenting the whole problem. with consoles you have to write for specific hardware since there is no suport drivers. writing for hwardware may allow you to do more with it, but also removes pretty much any compatability.
Win 8 DRM is overrated since it isnt there. Microsoft took it out at users outrage in last months before release. It was suppsoed to be even worse than what Xbox was originally announced. Want to intall program and microsfot doesnt approve? tough.
its alterable, sure, but you needm uch mroe knowledge for that with win 8 since it is locked up system.
--------
I know 360 had profits for couple years. however if you take the period since 360 launch till now, its still in a heavy loss. and original xbox was loss during its whole run. the whole xbox project form launch till now is around 10b dollars in minus still though.
but yes sony did made a loss with PS3, but thats after a very sucesfull console and only 1 cycle, while mycrosfot seems to be going into 3rd cycle for loss. after all judging by preorders un US sony wins by 50% in software and 67% in top 5 software. and thats loosing on your own turf, imagine coutnries where Xbox doesnt launch.

I think it offers more good than bad but its more wishful thinking. I could see MS doing the OS/software dev kits, Sony would do the hardware and Nintendo could do the peripherals. But there again they wont work together because there is no need as of yet.

I dunno about the Xbox because they had to build a console empire and build their own net services so that would create a scenario where you will take forever to get a profit from it.

Now the 360 was a joke, bad hardware design creating the whole RROD fiasco that's all on them because someone just had to launch it when it was not ready. MS has a bad time with thinking their crap don't stink.

The PS3 could have went much more smoothly, if they went with a X86 architecture they would have spent half as much up front(includes not making the CELL processor mind you) and probably make a profit off it sooner not to mention the programming issues at the start. Now the texture issues I dunno if they went cheap on the ramm the X86 architecture would not help with the bottle necking.

As for the Xbone and PS4 we got 2 systems that are close in spec with the PS4 having a bit more raw power that should translate into real world numbers this time around. I love the fact they went with 8GB even if the OS takes up 30-50% of it its a start that they see their damn weak spot. Tho With the quality of games I am pretty much out of next gen gaming, I'm putting 600 into my PC and not worry about anything for 5 years. Between 3DS,PS2 and WII emulation and a decent PC gaming rig I will have enough to play.

 

[Kittyhawk]

Xbox One will be MS last console, when Hell freezes over or thaws out. They've invested too much into gaining a valuable foothold in the console business to back out. Many devs and pubs also have invested in their 360 a lot. They've also helped raise Sony indirectly to improve and do better so competition is indeed a good (just a shame Nintendo haven't listened and learned this fact and look where they are now).

This coming next gen is going to be a special one. Don't forget, 360 was a little under PS3's spec but gained from being easier to program for. With both PS4 and Xbox One now easy to program for, gamers can focus on the cool games again, and hopefully more gamers will buy both PS4 and 360 so we can eliminate silly fanboyistic brand loyalty.

Some might poo poo MS, but they've done more positive things for gaming this gen than not. This was once Nintendo's stable, but they only care about themselves and their money bin these days, not really what gamers want or need. Without MS, it'd be a Sony show again, which wouldn't be nearly as fun as the industry status we currently have.

Also, stuff like what happened at E3 2013 was the stuff of gaming legends, as we all love a good smack down contest for our gaming money. Roll on E3 2014 and may both PS4 and Xbox One do well.

 

[Brotha Desmond]

I know the perfect way for Microsoft to turn a profit with the One. Every 50 or so boxes are set to die after the first month, and each system will come with a 29 day warranty. People will just go out and buy a new Xbox one, just like they did with the 360. Even people did use the warranty services, a lot of people also just went out and bought new boxes; which contributed to sales.

 

[K12]

To sum up:

Well if you don't play the game the way that I want then I'm going to take my ball and go home!

 

[Dragonbums]

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.

Even though the original Xbox beat the Gamecube by 2 million units(which isn't very stellar considering how that's still around 26 million sold in total) note how Nintendo didn't once post a financial loss on the Gamecube despite being third place in that generation, and Xbox original still had a humongous loss.

That generation in and of itself should of given Microsoft a clear warning of what is to come if they don't fix this right now.

If you can still come in second place (barely but still second.) and have humongous losses while third place is posting profits in the black then something needs to change down the development line.

Looking at the Xbox One however, it seems that 3 cycles of this and they still don't fucking get it.

 

[Dragonbums]

Mmmmm the thing is , the gaming industry won't get any benefit this, I'm hoping to see nintendo throw the towel since the crappy n64 now that would help the industry and our pockets, why ? I won't have to buy any of those the crappy Nintendo consoles with crappy gadgets to play: Mario/Zelda/Metroid/Smash brothers/ ect...

and people still continue to hope Nintendo goes dead in the water. Too bad that won't happen in the next 50 years.
In fact, I would say Sony is more closer to dropping, then Microsoft.
Sony is starting to become like Nintendo in the sense that the only division still keeping them alive right now is their console hard ware division.
Their other hardware like televisions and such have increasingly become trash and nobody is willing to buy them anymore.
They had to sell their US headquarters building just to turn a profit, and are now just recovering from the 2 billion dollar loss of the initial release of the PS3. A loss so big that it basically ate up all of their earnings from the PS1 and PS2.
Microsoft is still making good business in their other sectors. The possible end of their console division seems more like a trim the fat kind of deal as opposed to a corporation in a dire situation.

Also, Nintendo hardware may not be the most technologically advanced, but to say they are crap is an insult. Every Nintendo system I have owned thus far all the way back from the N64 still works like it was brand new. That's not really something I would label as "crap".

On that note, if any of the three fail the gaming industry loses something. Nintendo is in it's own little world half the time. To the point that they aren't even really competing with the other two except maybe in sales.

 

[Drauger]

Also, Nintendo hardware may not be the most technologically advanced, but to say they are crap is an insult. Every Nintendo system I have owned thus far all the way back from the N64 still works like it was brand new. That's not really something I would label as "crap".

So according to your logic since the CD-I still works fine then it's not a piece of crap ? who's talking about manufacturing quality ? I thought it was implied that I meant the awful N64 game lineup, I bought this piece of crap because hey ! it was a Nintendo and ended up buying a PSX cause well there was mostly crap on N64 sooo crappy game line up = crappy system imo

On that note, if any of the three fail the gaming industry loses something.

A matter of tastes I guess, if M$ folded from the console race for me there's no loss, is there any M$ game made exclusive for the x360? no pc port or anything?, I'm asking cause honestly I don't know, however if Nintendo did fold they would gain a lot, having their games in multi platform would be great for them and for us, the fact people buy Nintendo consoles to play Nintendo games which are amazing ( almost always), there's almost nothing else that you can hope to play in a Nintendo home console, however I do think their handheld are worth to keep on, but hey it's just my opinion.

 

[Dragonbums]

So according to your logic since the CD-I still works fine then it's not a piece of crap ? who's talking about manufacturing quality ? I thought it was implied that I meant the awful N64 game lineup, I bought this piece of crap because hey ! it was a Nintendo and ended up buying a PSX cause well there was mostly crap on N64 sooo crappy game line up = crappy system imo

Yes. if a CD-I still works today, then it stands to reason that at the very least, the system hardware was made of some quality stuff and wasn't just shat out in three minutes.
The software however was garbage. However it was the best thing to happen to gaming, because now I can have hours of entertainment of Youtube Poop videos.
I just love how your trying to make it seem like what I'm saying was somehow illogical.

You dislike the N64 game library lineup. Fine.
Just as many people thought the N64 had some of the greatest game line ups in game history.

That doesn't make the N64 "crap" it just means that it didn't meet your expectations.
Which is perfectly fine. Different tastes for different people.

 

[punipunipyo]

why making Xbone at all? just call it quits now, so sega can have a reason to come back... I want "Dream Catch" (dream cast2)

 

[Darkness665]

The xbox and a significant portion of the gaming sub-division is just a toy project. Commonly called a pride project. The first xbox lost $7.5B and MS hides the current results in the MS entertainment division so no actual costs/revenues/profits/losses or most things that would let stockholders know WTF is going on is buried and not available to be reviewed nor published.

Since the Xbone is not much different than a cheap PC running a chopped down version of W8 the need for a console as a separate device is ... missing. The possibility would be highest that they make something on the line of the Surface Pro, aka Surface Gamer or such. They would gain greater price reductions through volume discounts with suppliers and could shift parts to the box that has the most need (actual customers). That does make a small case for a Xbone to continue. A very small one admittedly as the Xbone will get long in the tooth very quickly. Think of using a five year old laptop for your gaming needs. Which is what the Xbone will be in five years. At $150 it might have a market, but the Kinect is always going to be forced down the gamer's gullet and cost an extra $100.

Time will tell and I doubt we will have to wait much past five years to know. In five years it will be tough to buy a $500 laptop that won't outperform the xbone.