Support NeoGAF

[SHA]

Wccftech write s articles and when you comment at the same level of s it'd take hours before your comment get approved, it's like they know what they're doing is risky and think no one would notice that from them.

 

[ComputerBlue]

Competition?
Jesus, some people….

You’re acting like Microsoft is the only one, get a grip, they don’t compete either, buying up everything is not competition, it’s not innovation, it’s not providing anything healthy to the industry.

Let’s see them create studios and a new IP’s from the ground up, let’s see them get rid of paying for online play, let’s see something beneficial to gamers to compete.

 

[Bojanglez]

Actually episodic games were already tried. And guess what? It didn't work.

Huge fall off (each episode gets less sales not everyone stuck around for 4 years) and gamers waiting for the complete bundle.
I myself just a month ago finally played through Telltale walking dead.

Yeah I remember the PS3 era it was tried quite a lot and even with simple things like Telltale games they couldn;t release on schedule. The only way to do it is to build it all up from and release it in chunks. But I think gamers will be to wise and just wait until it is done. I mean even in the AAA space you are better waiting 6 months until after launch to play the finished version of a game for half the price. With this in mind day 1 on Gamepass just means you are beta testing for me at this point. Only a handful of studios I'll trust to pay day 1 knowing it will be a quality experience and as it stands none are MS owned.

 

[Lucie Goosey]

Valve? My brother in christ they already fucked up with Steam machines, they already went all-digital (which has people pissing and moaning at the mere suggestion).

There's nothing wrong with digital.

Steam will outlast any of the older discs and gaming systems I bought.

There's no ownership in a non functioning relic.

But I'll give you that, Steam Machines was a fail.

They should be working on honing that OS.

 

[fart town usa]

There's nothing wrong with digital.

Steam will outlast any of the older discs and gaming systems I bought.

There's no ownership in a non functioning relic.

But I'll give you that, Steam Machines was a fail.

They should be working on honing that OS.

That's how I feel. If moving forward it goes all digital I really won't care much as long as you can access and play the games you've specifically purchased. I like the PS5 route with support for PSVR and PS4 games. I also keep old consoles so all digital is something I don't lose sleep over.

 

[yurinka]

He doesn't say he wants 100M subs from consoles though. He says

"I can fairly safely say that if we do not make more progress than this off of console, we would exit the gaming business. If this were the outcome, we would -- I don't believe we'd still be in the business."

A majority of our customers are found off of our own hardware, I would hope by earlier than 2030..."

The best option for MS would be to stop giving away games day one on GP and become a full multiplatform 3P releasing their games day one not only on PC and Xbox, but also on PS and Switch.

And forget the idea of releasing more consoles, support instead PC handhelds like Steam and release a gaming focused Steam-OS like lightweight Windows version with a Xbox console like UI to allow other brands use it in their PC consoles, PC handhelds, smartphones, tablets in a Steam Machines fashion.

 

[Doctor Hades]

Microsoft were very much the underdogs when they introduced the Xbox back in 2001 but I loved that system and thought it was very innovative for the time even though the system was basically just a PC in a box. They didn't achieve major success because they came in too late to make an impact but, despite the red ring of death fiasco, I thought they made real headway with the Xbox 360 and could have had huge success with the Xbox One if they hadn't been so focused on TV! TV! TV! and the gimmicky and poorly conceived (IMO) Kinect device at the expense of games that people wanted to play.

The Xbox One was when Microsoft started to become complacent and the exclusive games, other than Forza/Gears/Halo, started to dry up. They lost a lot of ground to the PS4 having a more expensive and less powerful console with weaker and fewer exclusives. Four generations on and they are still in third place behind Sony and Nintendo so they're consistent if nothing else.

Microsoft need to commit to three or four great exclusive games per year on Xbox to have any hope of beating Sony or Nintendo. GamePass is just not enough. All it is a subscription for mostly third-party and indie games. Nice and all that but not something you would want to own a console for. That is the problem. If you can play those games on other systems, albeit at a cost, then why would you need an Xbox? No-one plays every single game (not even me!).

 

[Dorfdad]

Largely agree accept for the last part. While there is a world where MS makes good money eating Sony's tablescraps and sits comfortably in third place cashing checks, shareholders demand growth. Just my opinion, but I believe Xbox had to change the paradigm if they wanted MS to continue to allow them to compete in the gaming hardware space.

Gamepass is all they have left for better or worse. If they even have a shot at making it work, they have to go all in. It could fail for sure, but I'll enjoy the benefits in the meantime. Again, just my take.

Don’t believe that’s the only options. Microsoft can grow their business in other ways and also attract the best developers if you reduce their cost to developers for their platform, they could also take a small but larger loss on hardware To sell the consoles much cheaper. I know all of this would result in lost revenue but if they want to be bigger they have to suffer some to get it.

They also just need the games. Sony had been very good at getting their core audience engaged with their big name titles where as Microsoft has very few mainstream AAA games that push hardware sales.

 

[Dorfdad]

The best option for MS would be to stop giving away games day one on GP and become a full multiplatform 3P releasing their games day one not only on PC and Xbox, but also on PS and Switch.

And forget the idea of releasing more consoles, support instead PC handhelds like Steam and release a gaming focused Steam-OS like lightweight Windows version with a Xbox console like UI to allow other brands use it in their PC consoles, PC handhelds, smartphones, tablets in a Steam Machines

Another interesting option Is to just give up on consumer hardware.

Just work on xcloud gaming as it’s the future and just become Netflix for gaming in any console.

So Microsoft’s “console” would be the cloud platform. Than work with Sony/Apple and Nintendo on getting game pass on their devices.

If they are truly all in on game pass than this is the way. Prices for game pass will go to 19.99 a month which is fair for the value you get. This lets them cover the cost for having services on those platforms and gives them a much further reach. Wanna game only on xcloud than it’s on 15.00 a month for our cloud services.

And for those who that say that game pass, an X cloud is not really growing I would counter that by stating X cloud is a bare-bones cloud service at this time they’re running on Xbox hardware they would have to significantly improve their infrastructure and quality of video and stream to make this a reality They need something like Nvidia GeForce now which is an awesome cloud gaming service.

 

[Forth]

I'm really surprised this statement isn't getting more coverage in the media.
When you build a digital library you need confidence that it's going to be around for a long time.
This statement has me questioning whether I want to purchase any more games for my Series X.
I might actually return it as I only got one when Starfield released.

 

[Gambit2483]

Just make some fucking good games. It's not hard.

Apparently it's "not that simple".

 

[NickFire]

I'm really surprised this statement isn't getting more coverage in the media.
When you build a digital library you need confidence that it's going to be around for a long time.
This statement has me questioning whether I want to purchase any more games for my Series X.
I might actually return it as I only got one when Starfield released.

Trust the secret plans. And I see you aren't sure if you want to buy more games. So, have you heard about Gamepass?

On a more serious note, how often have you seen newspapers run articles suggesting you don't buy the product being advertised by said newspapers?

 

[Pelta88]

In certain spaces the discourse around the date (2027) and GP target (100 Million subs) as somewhat random. Like an random number Microsoft execs pulled out of thin air. They forget that XBOX is a division that needs basic fundamentals of profit and growth to sustain its relevancy as a business.

They don't seem to understand that GP is a gargantuan money sink. Or that in order to get content MS is paying 100's of millions per ip as revealed in their recently leaked documents and submissions to the court. These player count celebrations are literally just PR smoke. On the corporate side the question is "Is this content driving subs and profit" And the answer has consistently been "Nope."

The basic math here shows XBOX is losing money hand over fist. A 100 Million sub target means that GP has to find and sustain growth by 18 million year-on-year. But given the current sales data and lack of relevancy outside the US, I just don't see that happening. On the bright side, I believe that come 2027 XBOX will simply change how they define success.

I mean, they've pivoted from console sales during the 360 era to... Monthly active users > A target of 2 Billion > Game Pass subscribers > right through to engagement. Which means there's hope.

 

[thismeinteil]

In certain spaces the discourse around the date (2027) and GP target (100 Million subs) as somewhat random. Like an random number Microsoft execs pulled out of thin air. They forget that XBOX is a division that needs basic fundamentals of profit and growth to sustain its relevancy as a business.

They don't seem to understand that GP is a gargantuan money sink. Or that in order to get content MS is paying 100's of millions per ip as revealed in their recently leaked documents and submissions to the court. These player count celebrations are literally just PR smoke. On the corporate side the question is "Is this content driving subs and profit" And the answer has consistently been "Nope."

The basic math here shows XBOX is losing money hand over fist. A 100 Million sub target means that GP has to find and sustain growth by 18 million year-on-year. But given the current sales data and lack of relevancy outside the US, I just don't see that happening. On the bright side, I believe that come 2027 XBOX will simply change how they define success.

I mean, they've pivoted from console sales during the 360 era to... Monthly active users > A target of 2 Billion > Game Pass subscribers > right through to engagement. Which means there's hope.

I don't think they'll exit completely. If anything, they'll go 3rd party. Hopefully, with new management.

 

[bigdad2007]

So they basically over invested in cloud infrastructure. And all the mergers were more or less the Disney strategy, just spend untold billions on sucking in a much IP as possible for a streaming service. All while ignoring the fact that basically every person with an electronic device would have to subscribe in order to break even.

 

[Justin9mm]

No, they don't.

So if MS goes, who's to stop Sony from holding monopoly on AAA console and game space? Prices go up, quality of subscription goes down. Where are the gamers going to go if they don't want to go into the PC space? Nintendo? Nope, they don't have a console for that. Valve? Nope, they have never had a leading home console, no track record, suicide going against PlayStation's behemoth brand that is already well established. How do you think consumer competition works? You think a company is going to magically waltz in and try their luck. It doesn't quite work like that.

 

[NikuNashi]

So if MS goes, who's to stop Sony from holding monopoly on AAA console and game space? Prices go up, quality of subscription goes down. Where are the gamers going to go if they don't want to go into the PC space? Nintendo? Nope, they don't have a console for that. Valve? Nope, they have never had a leading home console, no track record, suicide going against PlayStation's behemoth brand that is already well established. How do you think consumer competition works? You think a company is going to magically waltz in and try their luck. It doesn't quite work like that.

Someone else will raise up, perhaps better.

 

[HeWhoWalks]

So if MS goes, who's to stop Sony from holding monopoly on AAA console and game space? Prices go up, quality of subscription goes down. Where are the gamers going to go if they don't want to go into the PC space? Nintendo? Nope, they don't have a console for that. Valve? Nope, they have never had a leading home console, no track record, suicide going against PlayStation's behemoth brand that is already well established. How do you think consumer competition works? You think a company is going to magically waltz in and try their luck. It doesn't quite work like that.

It doesn't have to be Xbox. Also, the "consumer competition" nonsense — I'm well aware how it works. And guess what? It still doesn't have to be Xbox. Yes, another company could "waltz in and try their luck". That's exactly how we ended up with a PlayStation and Xbox in the first place.

Best part about that? Sony didn't win generations with magic.

 

[Nvzman]

As much of a bullshitter as Phil is, I do really think you have to be some kind of daft to not realize this was the outcome for a while now.

Microsoft has yet to truly have a profitable Xbox console after 22 years, and the One flopped so hard it took Phil making some pretty crazy promises to get the Series consoles made. Despite how much money Microsoft has, any business would not enjoy pissing away so much money on something that has failed to pay back for them. I have said it on GAF before too that if the Series consoles (and I guess GP too) don't do very well, this is probably the end of the road for Xbox. I don't want to see PlayStation rule supreme with Nintendo playing second fiddle, but with how much slimy bullshit MS has been doing recently (both officially and unofficially), I kind of don't care either way.
I could definitely see Valve trying to make a play with SteamOS for a Valve console (like Steam Machine 2 but actually good, now that SteamOS doesn't suck), but I don't think this enables Apple or Google either.

 

[BlackTron]

I don't think they'll exit completely. If anything, they'll go 3rd party. Hopefully, with new management.

You mean MS might become a software company?

 

[SRTtoZ]

... they get sold? to a likely far better company.

Just keep it out of Embracer/Tencent hands and we'd be all good.

I cancelled.

 

[Justin9mm]

It doesn't have to be Xbox. Also, the "consumer competition" nonsense — I'm well aware how it works. And guess what? It still doesn't have to be Xbox. Yes, another company could "waltz in and try their luck". That's exactly how we ended up with a PlayStation and Xbox in the first place.

Best part about that? Sony didn't win generations with magic.

Sony and Xbox entering the market was a completely different time. There was no well established industry back then in that tech space. It was a new home console/concept.

I'm over 40 years of age. Been gaming since like 6, I come from a corporate finance and analytics background and currently hold senior position in analytic/marketing forecasting. I have an idea on the cost and implementation to bring a new brand to market in competition with Sony. There are years and years and years of established relationships and development to get where Sony and MS are today. Believe me when I say you are wrong. It's not impossible but not probable in any near future.

 

[Beechos]

There's no way they'll exit. Right now ms business model is based off the cloud and subscriptions. Ending making xbox consoles I can def see as gamepass and xcloud will be avail on everything in the future.

 

[Syphon Filter]

So there's a risk they could push through an all digital future, then exit gaming and a few years after shutdown the service and you lose access to your fake digital games library forever.

Yet the digital lovers still rejoice at the death of physical games.

digital can be done right, gog for example lets you backup your games anywhere you want and as much as you want.

 

[Syphon Filter]

So if MS goes, who's to stop Sony from holding monopoly on AAA console and game space? Prices go up, quality of subscription goes down. Where are the gamers going to go if they don't want to go into the PC space? Nintendo? Nope, they don't have a console for that. Valve? Nope, they have never had a leading home console, no track record, suicide going against PlayStation's behemoth brand that is already well established. How do you think consumer competition works? You think a company is going to magically waltz in and try their luck. It doesn't quite work like that.

xbox is pointless and brings nothing to gamers. its better if they leave. they are not as relevant as valve,sony or nintendo.

 

[Roronoa Zoro]

If that were to happen what happens to the gaming IP they now own? Would the companies go back to independent? Would they be bought up by others?

 

[Justin9mm]

xbox is pointless and brings nothing to gamers. its better if they leave. they are not as relevant as valve,sony or nintendo.

Well I'm not arguing that. In many ways you are right. But Valve and Nintendo don't have competing current gen consoles or hold monopoly on AAA games on console. I doubt either one would be stepping into that realm if Xbox left.

 

[Crayon]

So if MS goes, who's to stop Sony from holding monopoly on AAA console and game space? Prices go up, quality of subscription goes down. Where are the gamers going to go if they don't want to go into the PC space? Nintendo? Nope, they don't have a console for that. Valve? Nope, they have never had a leading home console, no track record, suicide going against PlayStation's behemoth brand that is already well established. How do you think consumer competition works? You think a company is going to magically waltz in and try their luck. It doesn't quite work like that.

It removes a particular choice. One that has been there for a long time. Two consoles that are mostly the same but with a preponderance of small differences. This would have started in the ps360 era. Last gen they were extremely similar, same as this one. The os and the controller are the biggest differences between them from the shopper's point of view, and neither of those is really up there among other factors guiding the purchase.

So I get that. The dynamic of pressure on sony changes. Sony and Nintendo would rapidly re-orient themselves. Valve would if they weren't like 20 steps ahead in 4d chess. Nintendo will start looking at those gradually displaced exbox users. In fact, if the switch 2 is really built to run contemporary games as the rumors suggest, then nintendo is apparently not waiting for xbox to go anywhere. A weak xbox is enough. Remember, it's nintendo. Expect the unexpected.

PS wouldn't have that tit-for-tat relationship with xb that is pushing them to respond to specific things in specific ways. Those little differences that I was talking about. But sony is not going to grow users dangerously larger than nintendo and valve unless they keep going hard. They can't just chill and overcharge for shitty products and keep growing.

As far as king sony fucking up the industry? They would literally need a trillion dollars to be a problem like microsoft so the whole thing is moot.

 

[Superayate]

Seems a lots of people did not remembered or has not played during the PS3/360 area, where Sony after the PS2 was in VERY strong situation and started to make some stupied choices etc... The second part of PS3 life, the PS4 and now the PS5 environment are due to competition against Xbox, it was needed for Sony to evolve and improve their own studios developpement, invest more and create this strong portfolio of games/licences they have now. Do you really think Sony will keep investing and innovating at same level without competition, without Xbox ?? Don't tell me that others can replace MS, when you see what Google and Amazon are/were proposing, dat joke seriously...

 

[Mibu no ookami]

There's no way they'll exit. Right now ms business model is based off the cloud and subscriptions. Ending making xbox consoles I can def see as gamepass and xcloud will be avail on everything in the future.

You end Xbox and GamePass won't survive. You immediately lose more than half your subscriber base, so you'd immediately have to cut back on content.

There's a reason why Steam hasn't replicated GamePass on PC, even though it easily offer something within their platform as a subscription base. It's definitely not a model that is going to work on just PC and Mobile.

I just think people don't realize the constant pressure involved in keeping the numbers up on a subscription platform and the downward pressure on costs to increase the profitability of revenue...

Every major streaming service is going through this right now, but for some reason people think GamePass is unique.

Microsoft wants to build a future where they don't have to buy 3rd party content because they have enough content from studios they own. That was Phil's sell to the board and to the SLT at Microsoft in order to become the Netflix of gaming.

A future where the vast majority of content would be made by Microsoft and because they're still selling B2P games on Xbox and PC and in some cases PS5 and Switch, that they'd still make money there and not devalue their assets.

Imagine a scenario where you have 100 million subscribers all paying say 20 dollars a month for games. That's 2 billion in revenue per month and 24 billion in revenue per year.

Now you own all the studios so if you can limit the production cost across the board to say 1-2 billion a year... You're talking about 22 billion dollars in profit per year... You don't get to that level of cost control by spending 350 million dollars on access to a 3rd party game. Note Microsoft said Jedi Survivor (which is a pretty mid game) would have cost 300 million. 250 million for Mortal Kombat... This adds up quickly.

So you ask yourself how do you get to 100 million subscribers. You need to sell A LOT more consoles frankly.

Right now they have a low subscriber base, low subscription price, and high content price because they can't build enough of their own content.

They spent 7.5 billion for Zenimax and if they tried selling Zenimax today, I don't know that they'd be able to sell them for more than 3 billion.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Seems a lots of people did not remembered or has not played during the PS3/360 area, where Sony after the PS2 was in VERY strong situation and started to make some stupied choices etc... The second part of PS3 life, the PS4 and now the PS5 environment are due to competition against Xbox, it was needed for Sony to evolve and improve their own studios developpement, invest more and create this strong portfolio of games/licences they have now. Do you really think Sony will keep investing and innovating at same level without competition, without Xbox ?? Don't tell me that others can replace MS, when you see what Google and Amazon are/were proposing, dat joke seriously...

I don't disagree with you, but I think it is fundamental to recognize how gaming has changed in general since then.

Console gaming is seeing diminished margins. Even if Sony was able to incorporate all of Microsoft's gaming revenue (which they wouldn't) the prize is no longer console gaming.

Who won the arcade war? Sega? Namco? No one knows or remembers because arcade gaming is dead. That's not to suggest console gaming is dead or even dying, but the future is largely platform-agnostic or at least not tied to a box.

With that said, there is still Nintendo, Tencent, and Apple, who are all serious companies in the space.

 

[alucard0712_rus]

Sell it to Nintendo

 

[Mibu no ookami]

It removes a particular choice. One that has been there for a long time. Two consoles that are mostly the same but with a preponderance of small differences. This would have started in the ps360 era. Last gen they were extremely similar, same as this one. The os and the controller are the biggest differences between them from the shopper's point of view, and neither of those is really up there among other factors guiding the purchase.

So I get that. The dynamic of pressure on sony changes. Sony and Nintendo would rapidly re-orient themselves. Valve would if they weren't like 20 steps ahead in 4d chess. Nintendo will start looking at those gradually displaced exbox users. In fact, if the switch 2 is really built to run contemporary games as the rumors suggest, then nintendo is apparently not waiting for xbox to go anywhere. A weak xbox is enough. Remember, it's nintendo. Expect the unexpected.

PS wouldn't have that tit-for-tat relationship with xb that is pushing them to respond to specific things in specific ways. Those little differences that I was talking about. But sony is not going to grow users dangerously larger than nintendo and valve unless they keep going hard. They can't just chill and overcharge for shitty products and keep growing.

As far as king sony fucking up the industry? They would literally need a trillion dollars to be a problem like microsoft so the whole thing is moot.

I have significant questions about Switch 2.

First off let's say it's performance is in line with the PS4/X1. I'm not sure you're getting contemporary games as a result of that. You're also potentially looking at a much higher price point than the Switch. Maybe 400/500 dollars. At this price point, I think you lose a lot of duplicity among families owning multiple switches, which I think was the main reason for the Switch Lite.

I think you may also run into serious battery concerns as you see with the ROG and Steamdeck. The Switch honestly already isn't great battery life.

Then you run into the main issue of convincing people to upgrade just for graphics. That's never really worked out well for Nintendo. There's a reason why games like Mario Kart 8 keep selling. People are happy with it. Not sure Mario Kart 9 is enough for them to buy a Switch 2 just for a graphics boost.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Sell it to Nintendo

Honestly, if I was Nintendo and Microsoft left the industry, I'd split my console and handheld entirely (perhaps the console could play the handheld games but not vice versa).

 

[Crayon]

I have significant questions about Switch 2.

First off let's say it's performance is in line with the PS4/X1. I'm not sure you're getting contemporary games as a result of that. You're also potentially looking at a much higher price point than the Switch. Maybe 400/500 dollars. At this price point, I think you lose a lot of duplicity among families owning multiple switches, which I think was the main reason for the Switch Lite.

I think you may also run into serious battery concerns as you see with the ROG and Steamdeck. The Switch honestly already isn't great battery life.

Then you run into the main issue of convincing people to upgrade just for graphics. That's never really worked out well for Nintendo. There's a reason why games like Mario Kart 8 keep selling. People are happy with it. Not sure Mario Kart 9 is enough for them to buy a Switch 2 just for a graphics boost.

Idk if they can get the hardware over that line, either. Rumors sound to me like it could go either way. But I'm thinking if the matrix demo story is true, they at least got away with it well enough that the comments were saying that the settings were all dumped and it looked bad. Most major publishers are willing to deal with the series s for a potential 50 million userbase. They might be able to dig a little deeper for 100+ million.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Idk if they can get the hardware over that line, either. Rumors sound to me like it could go either way. But I'm thinking if the matrix demo story is true, they at least got away with it well enough that the comments were saying that the settings were all dumped and it looked bad. Most major publishers are willing to deal with the series s for a potential 50 million userbase. They might be able to dig a little deeper for 100+ million.

I would be STUNNED if the XS sells 50 million units.

It's already in decline in year 3 and year 4 looks like it will be worse not better... Then you factor in the PS5 Pro?

 

[Crayon]

I would be STUNNED if the XS sells 50 million units.

It's already in decline in year 3 and year 4 looks like it will be worse not better... Then you factor in the PS5 Pro?

Well I dunno. Big number vs small number lol. I'm no Mickey Pachter.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Well I dunno. Big number vs small number lol. I'm no Mickey Pachter.

Momentum is really important in market share and mindshare.

PS5 will probably outsell XS 2:1 between October and December.

We open up the year with FF7 Rebirth which will probably be bigger than FF16.

If Wolverine releases next year it could be one of the biggest games of the year, Microsoft doesn't have anything on that level for next year.

As the PS5 distances itself from the XS, exclusivity deals will get more difficult and more expensive for Microsoft and thus rarer.

The PS5 Pro, PS5, and PS5 digital create price entry points and technology levels that Microsoft will struggle to compete with.

Right now in North America, it is probably 60/40, 65/35. If GTA6 comes out next year and plays the best on PS5 Pro... you'll never catch up to that sizable difference in market share. If Sony has a 70-30 market share split in the US after 2024, what will that look like globally? 80/85-20/15? Those are game over numbers.

 

[pasterpl]

Hey OP you conveniently forgot to include this part of the linked article

Now, there is reason to believe Spencer may have exaggerated a bit. Microsoft stressed throughout the whole FTC investigation and later in federal court that the acquisition of Activision Blizzard was critical to its plan to grow in mobile and cloud markets. Otherwise, it might as well exit the gaming business.


As such, Xbox fans need not despair yet, especially since today's other big leakshows Microsoft readying an Xbox Series mid-generation refresh and a next-generation Xbox console coming in 2028. Microsoft has invested heavily in the gaming market between the acquisition of ZeniMax and the attempted deal to buy Activision Blizzard, and it is unlikely it would just quit before having a chance to see those investments come to fruition, especially if it can overcome the last hurdles with regulators when it comes to acquiring Activision Blizzard. Still, Spencer's words remark how important it is for Microsoft to grow beyond consoles through Game Pass.

 

[GHG]

digital can be done right, gog for example lets you backup your games anywhere you want and as much as you want.

Yeh but the biggest issue is that consoles (and by extension the Microsoft Store/Xbox app on PC) are the complete opposite of this.

 

[Ultra Donny]

The hate in this thread is surely a great foundation for a constructive discussion when it comes to the game buissness.

 

[CGNoire]

I hope this isnt true.

With how arrogant Sony's been acting lately we need the pressure of competition to keep them in line otherwise we will end up in a truly shitty place.

 

[mckmas8808]

Hey OP you conveniently forgot to include this part of the linked article

That seems to go hand in hand with the OP's point. Microsoft really needs ABK and GamePass to work 100% or they are toast.

 

[SHA]

You’re acting like Microsoft is the only one, get a grip, they don’t compete either, buying up everything is not competition, it’s not innovation, it’s not providing anything healthy to the industry.

Let’s see them create studios and a new IP’s from the ground up, let’s see them get rid of paying for online play, let’s see something beneficial to gamers to compete.

Seeing Amazon and Google threatening the console business is common sense, those are the same guys who don't give a s if it disappeared.

 

[Ozriel]

That seems to go hand in hand with the OP's point. Microsoft really needs ABK and GamePass to work 100% or they are toast.

Well, it’s hard to argue they’re going to be ‘toast’ post the ABK acquisition and the projected significant increase in revenue and profits.

They’ve since revised their key success criteria anyway. I’m not sure where you’re getting your ‘Activision and Gamepass’ theory from.

 

[Gamer79]

I would love for them to explain this to the shareholders.

We payed out nearly $10billion dollars to buy out some gaming companies but after a few years it did not work out so we are done with the experiment?

 

[dotnotbot]

I would love for them to explain this to the shareholders.

We payed out nearly $10billion dollars to buy out some gaming companies but after a few years it did not work out so we are done with the experiment?

From what I remember shareholders don't care about gaming and weren't impressed with that 70 billion deal. Now it's all about miliking AI, rest is peanuts in Microsoft's scale.

 

[FullMetalx117]

Good points being brought up on what would they do with digital libraries should Xbox shutter. Good question for all digital marketplaces. Might be a good learning lesson for society actually on why physical should be kept around

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Sure makes sense to me.

Buy Activision and close up shop in 2027.

 

[Katatonic]

Yeah right. They ain’t exiting shit or they would’ve already done so 1000 fuck ups ago.