• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Xbox Series X/S consoles continue to sell at a record pace, Microsoft has claimed

On Demand

Member
again, answer it. How important do you think xbox is to MS?

Phil Spencer is always talking about they’re going to keep making hardware and they’re already working on the next one. So pretty damn important.

Regardless, as I said, I don’t really care what the feel about Xbox. The main point is they don’t reveal their hardware sales anymore when before they use to.

My only conclusion from that is they hiding them because they aren’t very good.
 

kingfey

Member
Phil Spencer is always talking about they’re going to keep making hardware and they’re already working on the next one. So pretty damn important.

Regardless, as I said, I don’t really care what the feel about Xbox. The main point is they don’t reveal their hardware sales anymore when before they use to.

My only conclusion from that is they hiding them because they aren’t very good.
Phil isnt the head of MS. Satya is. He is the boss of Phil. That guy is the one who is responsible for the entire company.
 

Edgelord79

Gold Member
I assume they’re nothing to brag about in comparison to the competition.

Sony did exactly this with PS3.
I can assume they aren't doing as well with their hardware sales as Sony as well, but making a judgement comparing them to the far-and-away market leader after they had such a dismal last generation is disingenuous.

It's seems pretty safe to assume (since you've opened the door to assumptions), that they are doing much better than the precious generation. That IS success to build on.
 

On Demand

Member
Phil isnt the head of MS. Satya is. He is the boss of Phil. That guy is the one who is responsible for the entire company.

Great? He’s also one of those that question Xbox and wanted to get rid of it. Phil Spencer gave him the PC and gamepass ultimatum.


Still, none of this has to do with the original argument of MS not showing numbers.
 

On Demand

Member
I can assume they aren't doing as well with their hardware sales as Sony as well, but making a judgement comparing them to the far-and-away market leader after they had such a dismal last generation is disingenuous.

It's seems pretty safe to assume (since you've opened the door to assumptions), that they are doing much better than the precious generation. That IS success to build on.


Better than Xbox One, yes. Apparently still not enough to show how much better.
 

kingfey

Member
Great? He’s also one of those that question Xbox and wanted to get rid of it. Phil Spencer gave him the PC and gamepass ultimatum.


Still, none of this has to do with the original argument of MS not showing numbers.
He is the one who gave them $7b to buy bethesda. Gave them azura to use it for xcloud, and fund gamepass.

Do you think, xbox would build gamepass, xcloud and buy bethesda without his support? The guy supported xbox and phil.
 

Stuart360

Member
How do you know this exactly?
Not giving numbers = Must be doing badly.
Even though this is the 8th year they havent given numbers, and we are in a completely new generation.

Its the fanboy way of looking at it, and leave them to it because no one is going to change how they want to view this. Same way no one is going to change Microsoft mind on giving hardware numbers as they have moved past that measurement of 'success' long ago.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
again, answer it. How important do you think xbox is to MS?
Xbox has been around for 20 years and we're in the 4th generation of it. They've soaked billions into acquisitions to bring content to it. It's obviously important to Microsoft.

It's also obviously doing well enough to support the investment considering it's still here 20 years later. There's no reason to downplay that.
 

kingfey

Member
Xbox has been around for 20 years and we're in the 4th generation of it. They've soaked billions into acquisitions to bring content to it. It's obviously important to Microsoft.

It's also obviously doing well enough to support the investment considering it's still here 20 years later. There's no reason to downplay that.
Its been around for 20 years. and got ignored for 16 years.

MS havent invest in 1st party heavily during the critical moment of xbox. Instead, they went with the tv route. That is how important xbox was to them.

Luckily for Xbox, the new MS ceo had the subscription plan. And with gamepass around, they got huge support.
 

oldergamer

Member
The 16M figure you came up with is so ridiculous that’s all the response that was warranted.
I explained my reasoning. You came back with nothing. Also reading comprehension for the win. I never said 16 million units sold. I said 15 to 16 million shipped
 
Last edited:

Stuart360

Member
Its been around for 20 years. and got ignored for 16 years.

MS havent invest in 1st party heavily during the critical moment of xbox. Instead, they went with the tv route. That is how important xbox was to them.

Luckily for Xbox, the new MS ceo had the subscription plan. And with gamepass around, they got huge support.
I think the key thing with Xbox and Microsoft is Satya's seemingly complete turnaround with Xbox.
When he took over, all we heard were rumours of him being less than positive with the Xbox division, and even rumours of them possible getting rid of it (although how much of that was fanboy nonsense, who knows).
The difference now though is that Satya wouldnt shut up about Xbox over the last couple of years, in fact at times he's talked more about Xbox than Phil himself. And thats after we never heard a peep out of Satya in the XB1 days.

I'd take that as a good sign in regards to the future of Xbox. Plus Phil already confirmed new Xbox consoles in development, whihc itself is another good sign.
 
Last edited:

ManaByte

Gold Member
Xbox has been around for 20 years and we're in the 4th generation of it. They've soaked billions into acquisitions to bring content to it. It's obviously important to Microsoft.

It's also obviously doing well enough to support the investment considering it's still here 20 years later. There's no reason to downplay that.

Are you aware that Nadella added Spencer to the Senior Leadership Team?


The head of Xbox was never part of the SLT until Nadella came along and made Spencer a member of it.
 

oldergamer

Member

Edgelord79

Gold Member
Not giving numbers = Must be doing badly.
Even though this is the 8th year they havent given numbers, and we are in a completely new generation.
Absence of proof doesn't mean proof of absence.

So, because Microsoft doesn't give specifics it must mean they are going poorly.

I agree with you. It's the fanboy way of looking at it. I just wanted to know if you knew something everyone else didn't and that doesn't seem to be the case.

Carry on with your war. I don't see anything of value here.
 

Stuart360

Member
Absence of proof doesn't mean proof of absence.

So, because Microsoft doesn't give specifics it must mean they are going poorly.

I agree with you. It's the fanboy way of looking at it. I just wanted to know if you knew something everyone else didn't and that doesn't seem to be the case.

Carry on with your war. I don't see anything of value here.
Er i think you missunderstood my post. I agree that not giving numbers has nothing to do with doing badly, that was my point. Its just Microsofts policy now not to give numbers out, regardless of how well they are doing. Its been that way since 2014 and people need to accept it and move on.
We already have estimates of the Series consoles in the 10-12mil range, whihc is a fantastic start for them.

EDIT. I assume the second part of your post was meant for 'On Demand', not me lol.
 
Last edited:

Edgelord79

Gold Member
Er i think you missunderstood my post. I agree that not giving numbers has nothing to do with doing badly, that was my point. Its just Microsofts policy now not to give numbers out, regardless of how well they are doing. Its been that way since 2014 and people need to accept it and move on.
We already have estimates of the Series consoles in the 10-12mil range, whihc is a fantastic start for them.

EDIT. I assume the second part of your post was meant for 'On Demand', not me lol.
Yup it was. Sorry about that.
 

kingfey

Member
Er i think you missunderstood my post. I agree that not giving numbers has nothing to do with doing badly, that was my point. Its just Microsofts policy now not to give numbers out, regardless of how well they are doing. Its been that way since 2014 and people need to accept it and move on.
We already have estimates of the Series consoles in the 10-12mil range, whihc is a fantastic start for them.
if a company doesnt share those numbers for this long, it means they really dont care about the numbers.

I am glad MS stopped reporting them. Numbers doesnt do jack shit, and only games do the talk.

We seen what games do for their consoles. Switch is the prime example, of what happens when you let your games do the talk. Thnx to that, they sold 92m without the help of call of duty and battlefield.

All I care about MS is games. Since those are what attracts me to their service. Not how much hardware they sold.
 

Stuart360

Member
if a company doesnt share those numbers for this long, it means they really dont care about the numbers.

I am glad MS stopped reporting them. Numbers doesnt do jack shit, and only games do the talk.

We seen what games do for their consoles. Switch is the prime example, of what happens when you let your games do the talk. Thnx to that, they sold 92m without the help of call of duty and battlefield.

All I care about MS is games. Since those are what attracts me to their service. Not how much hardware they sold.
Well people just need to move on and realize we are not in the 8bit and 16bit days anymore where all the money made came from game sales and extra controllers. With consoles today there are sooo many different avenues of making money that simple ticket price and hardware sales numbers is an amost pointless measurement of success, at least from a financial measurement anyway. In fact that was one of the reasons they gave in 2014 for stopping giving out simple hardware numbers.
Times have moved on.
 
Last edited:

MaulerX

Member
Pretty sure he means ending cross generational first party support outside of xCloud. It's funny because MS never claimed to 'believe in generations' like Sony did yet they are stopping first party cross gen first.
I think he's saying Microsoft doesn't have anymore 1st party cross gen games coming out, while every Sony 1st game in 2022 is cross gen.



Exactly. Let's not forget that MS has had next-gen only games as well. But thsat's not what this is about.

It's about not having any cross-gen games at all going forward. Something that Sony has plenty off.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
Its been around for 20 years. and got ignored for 16 years.

MS havent invest in 1st party heavily during the critical moment of xbox. Instead, they went with the tv route. That is how important xbox was to them.

Luckily for Xbox, the new MS ceo had the subscription plan. And with gamepass around, they got huge support.
Ignored for 16 years? The 360 generation was pure fire and people were invested in it for the 11 years of its life. It didn't decline until Don Mattrick tried to kill Xbox by making it about TV DVR and video chat with Xbox One. I'll give you that Xbox One is something that never should have happened the way it did. But people still bought more than 50 million of them. It's not like it completel gathered dust.
 

kingfey

Member
Ignored for 16 years? The 360 generation was pure fire and people were invested in it for the 11 years of its life. It didn't decline until Don Mattrick tried to kill Xbox by making it about TV DVR and video chat with Xbox One. I'll give you that Xbox One is something that never should have happened the way it did. But people still bought more than 50 million of them. It's not like it completel gathered dust.
Studios. Sony invested on their studios. MS didnt. That is why xbox one games lacked, compared to ps4 games.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
Are you aware that Nadella added Spencer to the Senior Leadership Team?


The head of Xbox was never part of the SLT until Nadella came along and made Spencer a member of it.
Which just reinforces how it's not a side business for Microsoft, at least not any more. It may have been at one time, and honestly I'm surprised that it survived the Xbox One. But gaming, entertainment and the Xbox brand are definitely part of the Microsoft strategy now. It certainly wouldn't kill Microsoft if Xbox went away, but with the billions in annual revenue potential of gaming they're certainly not looking at the brand as a casual side hustle.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
Studios. Sony invested on their studios. MS didnt. That is why xbox one games lacked, compared to ps4 games.
I mentioned how Mattrick tried to kill it. Shedding studios was a huge mistake. That lead to fewer first party games and was the thing that almost killed the brand. But billions of investment in companies like Mojang and Zenimax shows that they at least now acknowledge the importance of having and developing strong core IP to drive revenue.
 

kingfey

Member
I mentioned how Mattrick tried to kill it. Shedding studios was a huge mistake. That lead to fewer first party games and was the thing that almost killed the brand. But billions of investment in companies like Mojang and Zenimax shows that they at least now acknowledge the importance of having and developing strong core IP to drive revenue.
That was the magic of phil spencer. Mohjang minecraft had a true value for MS, and phil convinced them.

Minecraft isnt just for gaming. its also used for schools.

That kind of value made xbox interesting, in the eyes of MS. And the rest is history.

And now we have xcloud, which uses the power of Azura. This helps MS, show the capability of Azura, in the eyes of investors. Now more cloud companies will try to be in the space of Azura. Sony is part of one of those companies.
 
Last edited:

RoadHazard

Member
They're definitely not selling all Ss they can produce, at least not in Europe. X though, yeah, more or less (you can still get one more easily than a PS5 here, but usually at inflated prices).
 

kingfey

Member
They're definitely not selling all Ss they can produce, at least not in Europe. X though, yeah, more or less (you can still get one more easily than a PS5 here, but usually at inflated prices).
Isnt the product being on the store means, someone will buy it? Or do you want the product to be in the storage?
 

DaGwaphics

Member
Studios. Sony invested on their studios. MS didnt. That is why xbox one games lacked, compared to ps4 games.

While I completely agree that first-party should have been priority number one from day one, I think MS supported the 360 well. They even accepted that huge write down to protect the brand and were spending a lot of $$$ on content. The biggest grievance you could have with them then was that they should have re-appropriated some of the funds they were spending on money-hats back then and put that into first-party acquisitions.
 
Last edited:

kingfey

Member
Want? I'm just saying there are Series S consoles sitting unsold on store shelves. Series X and PS5, not so much.
The xss being on the shelf is good for them.
300$ console, is very cheap. If 1 person buys it, they can spread it mouth to mouth. Other people will flock it to buy it.


Remember that MS has less wafers compared to Sony. Playstation can make twice numbers of xbox consoles. Yet, the rate is 1.5 between the 2 consoles. The xss gives advantage for xbox, to have a foot hold with Playstation. Since it requires less wafer to make it.

Which is why, it surpassed x360 numbers. Regular xbox consoles like the ps5/ps5d would have made them sell less numbers.

Xss is the switch console, people sleep on, and underestimate it.
 

kingfey

Member
I haven’t really seen that personally, my brother basically has a shrine to his lord and savior (Phil) pretty sure he starts his day with a morning prayer and, would probably black my eye if I disrespected him.
You basically worship Will Ferrell. You have Ricky Bobby from Talladega Nights The Ballad of Ricky Bobby as your avatar. /s

Mine is Bilbo baggins and Smug by Watson and Sherlock.
 

Stuart360

Member
Of course you do. Stop thinking you represent the majority. I have been speaking in general terms and you keep spewing your personal anecdotes.
He doesnt speak for all obviosly but i would say the majority.
I mean i was PC and console gamer, until towards the end of the 360/ps3 gen, but from my experiance in PC spaces like Steam, Reddit, and other forums, the majority of PC gamers are PC only. I'm certain there are waaay more 'console gamers' that also have a PC, than 'PC Gamers' that also game on console.

In fact i dont know if you have a PC, but do this - take a whole year and buy everything on PC, dont buy anything on console, or even turn it on. When that year is up, see if you want to go back to consoles.
Thats the thing with PC gaming, its not just about better graphics if you have the hardware, or any of that, its the freedom it brings, the choice. Its hard to goback to go consoles after. I have always loved consoles but i could never go back now, they are too restrictive.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom