The X1 has lost Microsoft 400 million

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

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

Might help to post some articles to back it up, and fix your title, it is Microsoft that lost the money.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/08/08/xbox-one-lost-microsoft-400000000-during-last-fiscal-year/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2456906/as-hardware-kills-microsoft-profits-ceo-nadella-seeks-comfort-in-software.html
http://n4g.com/news/1563679/xbox-one-lost-about-400-000-000-in-gross-margins-for-microsoft-during-latest-fiscal-year

Had a feeling they would be the first to bow out of consoles, who am I kidding, I couldn't wait for it. Though I didn't think we would start seeing the major signs this fast.

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

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

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

Microsoft went into consoles back in the 90s when ballmer thought he could buy out the market entirely and lock down consoles for big money. He thought he could out spend Nintendo and Sony in such high numbers that they couldn't compete.

Fast forward 20 years, and Ballmer has nothing to show for all his billions he sunk. In fact, I think it was mentioned somewhere that if this generation doesn't pan out, Microsoft will finally axe xbox out of investor outrage. They can't deal with 3 generations of failure.

Not to mention that now with the advent of mobile and PC, they missed out on 2 markets while trying to outspend others in a locked market.

I don't see how it makes sense for Microsoft to continue if the Xbone proves to be a failure after the rest of their failures, which some would say it is already but they have years to turn it around.

Honestly nothing would be lost if they went to me, Microsoft just do not (to me) provide the number, quality, or variance in exclusives that Sony and Nintendo do (especially as whenever they actually have anything interesting like say Last Remnant it releases on PC also).

Could harm the market if a WCW type deal goes on where people's interest fades with there no longer their being this "big war" urging everything forward. Though I suppose with their exit another party could try to muscle in, but I'm sure after Microsoft's attempts a lot of companies may not want to spend billions fighting a pointless "war" with Sony/Nintendo.

They goofed and now they're taking a financial beating for it.

Isn't that how it's supposed to work? Surely it's better than them goofing and getting rewarded for it.

I certainly wouldn't shed any tears if Microsoft dropped out altogether. That leaves the Playstation and Nintendo offerings. One console to buy so I can play the games I want and one to safely ignore because it doesn't have any games I want. Sounds good to me.

Although I suppose such an event could have unforeseen consequences. For example, it might adversely affect the PC, since Xbox games tend to get released on PC as a matter of course. Possibly? Eh, I dunno, I'm neither an economist nor even an industry watcher.

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

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

*Points at PS2, widely considered to be the best console of all time that obliterated all competition*
*Further points at Nintendo's handhelds as relevant examples of dominance not being the bad thing people think it always is*

Besides Nintendo will still exist, and Sony would be fools to suddenly stop pumping out exclusives or any such things they do now. They do not have a product that people can't go elsewhere for after all.

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

I was thinking the same thing. After all, (I hope) we all remember the 'deal with it' shenanigans Sony tried to pull with the PS3 launch. Not quite as bad as the X1, sure, but still pretty bad. And aside from the monopoly, the X1 bombing would definitely be felt for a while. It would be like if the Avengers bombed; the superhero movie business would've been shattered. No idea how exactly Sony and Nintendo would react to Microsoft pulling out, but I'm willing to bet they'd play it safe and boring for a while.

Microsoft has also been REALLY stupid when it comes to game variety. While every other platform diversified their game portfolios, MS remained (and still remains) focused on dull military shooters. The 360 turned into the most horrible choice of platform if you're not a fan of CoD and all of its knockoffs.

I had the original Xbox and also the 360, but never owned a PS2 or PS3. In the last 13 years, the Xbox went from having a bunch of enjoyable titles to being little more than a U.S.-military-school primer. I eventually became downright jealous of PS3 owners who got to play games that had depth, flair, and artistic merit. Since the Xbone appears to be following in the footsteps of its predecessor's lack of variety, my next console will definitely be the PS4. If Microsoft wants the Xbox brand to survive, they really need to start courting gamers who aren't sugar-rushed 13-year-olds who won't play any game with more complexity than "if it moves, kill it."

Ultratwinkie:

Not to mention that now with the advent of mobile and PC, they missed out on 2 markets while trying to outspend others in a locked market.

I still have Windows at home on my PCs but as soon as gaming companies make it so that I can play state of the art games, well, on other platforms (Ubunto) Windows is history. Ubunto has the apps I need, mostly for free! But as long as that isn't the case, I'll stick with Windows.

This may happen sooner rather than later. Steam has come out with some games for Linux. Example, Metro 2033 Last Light. And Windows 8 is a nightmare. Windows 2007 is old now, believe it or not and Windows 8 a disaster. What happens when they stop supporting 7?

They also hopelessly botched it on Games for Live. I had Bioshock 2 for Windows live. Without explanation or warning, it just stopped working. No longer supported on their flagship OS Win 7 64 bit.

I've since repurchased almost all I had on Windows Live and am avoiding it like the plague.

Too bad. I like competition. Keeps Sony and Nintendo honest. Example: the PS4 is better in having to contend with XB1.

Ten Foot Bunny:
Microsoft has also been REALLY stupid when it comes to game diversity. While every other platform diversified their game portfolios, MS remained (and still remains) focused on dull military shooters. The 360 turned into the most horrible choice of platform if you're not a fan of CoD and all of its knockoffs.

I had the original Xbox and also the 360, but never owned a PS2 or PS3. In the last 13 years, the Xbox went from having a bunch of enjoyable titles to being little more than a U.S. military school primer. I eventually became downright jealous of PS3-owners who got to play games that had depth, flair, and artistic merit. Since the Xbone appears to be following in the footsteps of its predecessor's lack of variety, my next console will definitely be the PS4. If Microsoft wants the Xbox brand to survive, they really need to start courting gamers who aren't sugar-rushed 13-year-olds who won't play any game if it has more of a scope than "if it moves, kill it."

Had the Xbox and 360 as well. I will write, the XB1 tempts me in that Forza 5 is likely the best console racer there is. The Alan Wake games are good too and can't be played on the Sony platforms. Still, my 360 died after 6 years (April 2006 to December 2012, RIP) and I didn't replace it. To date, I have 2 PS3s, 2 PS2s, a PS4 and Vita which does, among other things, remote play (and a family with which I have to share, hence the duplicates). For $50 a year, I get to do the live stuff on PS4 that you get on the XB1, but also, a ton of great games. I can't keep up. If anything, the danger to gaming in the next 5 years is the glut.

If you haven't played PS3, I recommend getting one, even used, cheap with warranty and play some of what you missed last gen. It is still on par with the gen 8 experience (which threatens the viability of the new systems as it is still that good). But so far, the PS4 is a great, solid, whisper quiet, powerful machine. If developers can push the envelope with it, I expect great things.

The Xbox division has always lost MS money. The Original Xbox lost them 1 billion USD. The 360 profited for a couple years then proceeded to lose MS money. Now this.

Between the lack of variety when it comes to titles, the forcing of an unneeded Kinect, and the fact that lately most of their major X1 exclusives are being ported to the PC so quickly I don't know how anyone at this point could justify being an early adopter for the console.

Apl_J:

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

I was thinking the same thing. After all, (I hope) we all remember the 'deal with it' shenanigans Sony tried to pull with the PS3 launch. Not quite as bad as the X1, sure, but still pretty bad. And aside from the monopoly, the X1 bombing would definitely be felt for a while. It would be like if the Avengers bombed; the superhero movie business would've been shattered. No idea how exactly Sony and Nintendo would react to Microsoft pulling out, but I'm willing to bet they'd play it safe and boring for a while.

Guys, there is no monopoly. Nintendo is still sitting there and PC being a modern home device makes it every bit a contender. If you spend $800 on a junk PC that is your business, but seriously gaming rigs can be built for that or less and are multi-functional in the home.

As for the PS3 release, it was way better than 'not quite as bad' as Xbox One's launch. Basically, it was just expensive and had no games but did offer backwards compatibility for being able to play games. I am not saying that makes it great, but it was nowhere near as bad as people made it out to be. I called that PS3 would overtake 360 when they launched and it did. (And for all the shit I had to take for it, you bet I will spout that out when I can. "Called it" I didn't guess, I felt vindicated because I understood their strategy the minute they said "we're doing away with B/C for a price cut." That was the minute I knew they would take last gen and I bought the 80GB fatboy model with B/C which is still alive and well today.) We all know PS4 will overtake Xbox One this time, because it isn't even close.

I think the patch that removed OS's hurt them more as it also lead to the hacking of PSN which hurt. That was a messy blunder.

I am not rooting for Microsoft on this one. I am done with them. I haven't liked anything they did since the original Xbox and they pissed me off with it when the 360 launched and they gave me the middle finger and said "no support for you". They have consistently shit on consumers in the gaming industry and favored publishers since they stepped in the game. Good riddance. Their business practices don't even offer competition to me, they offer another box for publishers. Let's not forget the Steambox (I know) is still yet to make an entrance. If it is marketed right, it could easily fill that gap for all those crazy people out there afraid gaming on a PC will mutate them into a neckbeard or whatever jacked up logic they use. Sorry, but I hate Microsoft. (But I can't quit using Windows, speaking of monopolies.)

As for the games, devs compete - not consoles. (Another benefit to PCs if this happened)

EDIT:

Gorfias:

Ultratwinkie:

Not to mention that now with the advent of mobile and PC, they missed out on 2 markets while trying to outspend others in a locked market.

I still have Windows at home on my PCs but as soon as gaming companies make it so that I can play state of the art games, well, on other platforms (Ubunto) Windows is history. Ubunto has the apps I need, mostly for free! But as long as that isn't the case, I'll stick with Windows.

True dat.

What how is this news? I dont think the xbox division has ever been profitable maybe they made some money in places but overall it has never proved profitable which is why the shareholders are by and large so anxious to be rid of it. Microsoft literally bought themselves into the market there are not many companies who could have done what they did if Sony or Nintendo tried their strategy (strategy = throw money at it until it sticks) they would have bowed out ages ago.

Google could do what MS did but theres not many others and ultimately it hasnt payed off for them both Nintendo and Sony have had success in the market and then gone and messed up but MS never has. I personally bought an Xbox and 360 but after the frankly ridiculous failure rate of the 360 and the bs they tried to pull with the Xbox One I am out on their latest console unless they pull a miracle like FFVII remake exclusive then I will get the console and that one game.

Then again I dont want it to just be Sony and Nintendo I despise MS because of Windows and the way they try and lock everything down but Sony and Nintendo need competition and atm Nintendo have distanced themselves in such a way that many do not see them as competition for Sony or MS so if MS went that would leave Sony with a huge chunk of the market which is never good. All three of them have shown they cant be trusted when they think they have the market by the balls and thankfully all three so far have been forced to eat humble pie for their arrogance.

Zhukov:
For example, it might adversely affect the PC, since Xbox games tend to get released on PC as a matter of course. Possibly? Eh, I dunno, I'm neither an economist nor even an industry watcher.

These days the majority of games tend to be multi-platform, and it seems an equal number of Xbox and Playstation games will be exclusive because the companies need some reason to get people to jump on board with the new systems.

It's a fair assumption, since for the longest time the only real worthwhile exclusives on the Xbox brand were Halo and Gears of War, because Microsoft knew fuck-all what to do with the other games they had like Crackdown or Fable, but the multiplayer shooter craze brought on by Call of Duty: Modern Warfare was strongest on Xbox as well. And it does strike me as a bit silly that things like Dead Rising 3 are being brought over to PC now.

I wonder where the console market would go if it returned to being a two-team showdown, like the Sega v. Nintendo rivalry of olde. I can't really hope to predict that either, though.

I don't own or want an Xbone...but I want to want one and unlike the Vita I want to LIKE them too (the Vita I want-to-want and already look at somewhat favorably).

Say what you will about the age we live in but when it comes to the gaming industry everybody SHOULD be a winner. To a degree anyway. The original Xbox has games that have been dormant last gen that Microsoft could be using like High Road to Revenge (the Crimson Skies game) and, Otogi. Not to mention Rare probably being freed up now that the Kinect-2.0 flopped as hard as it did. The Xbone can't Nintendo as hard as Nintendo but if they were to come out and say, "Alright, exclusive to Xbox One and Nothing else we're going to give you a new Viva Pinata, Banjo-Threeie, Conker's Even Worse Fur Day and, a remake of Break Down," My attention would be grabbed. Crackdown, Sunset Overdrive and, Dead Rising 3 have my eyebrows a bit more elevated than they usually are...but of course the big issue is how Microsoft made it clear that, even though they've turned more heels than some kind of dancer, they can (at any time and for any reason), go back to the more bass-ackward way the Xbone was meant to be what with its always on, ID check, etc...

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

theres still nintendo and theres still PC, no monopoly

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

It's the beginning of the end of consoles, no one is encouraging anything. A monopoly on a sinking ship is not a monopoly at all, and not just because when the doomed ship lists the board will tilt and all the pieces fly off.

Wow. How much would they lose if they didn't change all those horrible policies, I wonder.

Tayh:
Now, I'm not really into consoles, but are you guys actually encouraging a situation where Sony has the monopoly on Big Console Games?
Do you not know where monopolies lead?

Another PS2? Sign me up.

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

Sure, I don't want a monopoly, that would be bad. But I still want the Xbone to fail to some extent. Maybe not Dreamcast-fail, but at least Gamecube-fail. Microsoft's backpedalling on the most egregious "features" of the Xbone (used game policy, 24h online check-in, mandatory Kinect...) doesn't mean I've forgotten how morally bankrupt and anti-consumer Microsoft has been, and they still need to pay for that.

Strelok:
Had a feeling they would be the first to bow out of consoles, who am I kidding, I couldn't wait for it. Though I didn't think we would start seeing the major signs this fast.

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

Microsoft had to write off almost $1billion on unsold Surface tablets last year, blew $7billion buying Nokia then immediately lost another $700million in operating losses since then.

Once all the subscription, licensing fees and game/accessory sales are added together it's usually touted that each games console sold generates about $1000 of income for the manufacturer over it's lifespan (except Nintendo). Since the Xbone has shifted 5 million and rising units I doubt Microsoft are losing too much sleep over $400million when they're expecting $5billion and rising in income over the next five years (although that's gross income not profit).

By way of comparison, Sony are rumoured to have lost as much as $5 billion on the PS3 in it's first three years (at one point PS3's were being sold at a loss of $300 each), whilst Microsoft lost around $3billion on hardware development of the 360, plus an unspecified but possibly even larger amount thanks to the RRoD and replacing roughly half to two thirds of all the 360s made in the first three years.

The hilarious costs of last gen is a big reason why this gen are basically laptops with the screen cut off, compared to six years ago $400 million on a new hardware launch is nothing.

Ten Foot Bunny:
Microsoft has also been REALLY stupid when it comes to game variety. While every other platform diversified their game portfolios, MS remained (and still remains) focused on dull military shooters. The 360 turned into the most horrible choice of platform if you're not a fan of CoD and all of its knockoffs.

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

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

Are you a Steam fan?

That question aside, you do understand that we're yet to have a single company bowing out lead to a monopoly, and it's unlikely to start here, right?

DirgeNovak:
Sure, I don't want a monopoly, that would be bad. But I still want the Xbone to fail to some extent. Maybe not Dreamcast-fail, but at least Gamecube-fail.

The two are almost the same thing really. The Dreamcast actually sold half the number of consoles that the Gamecube did in it's short life span. The only reason Sega was really forced to abandon it was because releasing a few failed peripherals and a failed console all in a row is a good way to put yourself in an untenable financial situation requiring nothing less than hitting it out of the park.

Ironically, they did hit it out of the park, but most people were too busy waiting for the successor to the wildly popular PSX to notice.

Vivi22:

DirgeNovak:
Sure, I don't want a monopoly, that would be bad. But I still want the Xbone to fail to some extent. Maybe not Dreamcast-fail, but at least Gamecube-fail.

The two are almost the same thing really. The Dreamcast actually sold half the number of consoles that the Gamecube did in it's short life span. The only reason Sega was really forced to abandon it was because releasing a few failed peripherals and a failed console all in a row is a good way to put yourself in an untenable financial situation requiring nothing less than hitting it out of the park.

Ironically, they did hit it out of the park, but most people were too busy waiting for the successor to the wildly popular PSX to notice.

What I meant was I want Microsoft to get a good kick in the balls like Nintendo did with the GameCube, but not kill them as a console manufacturer like the Dremacast did to Sega.

Adam Jensen:
Wow. How much would they lose if they didn't change all those horrible policies, I wonder.

I'm guessing that the 'Xbox Division' would have been renamed the 'Dish Washing Division'. The Kinect would be just as useless to them.

I have a 360 and won't be getting a Xbone because:

1) Even at the same price it's less powerful

2) The games variety isn't there because

3) They killed off almost every link they made to indie studios by simply being disgusting and vile and or the complete Axing of the XNA (More on this lower down)

4) The XB1 uses a divided Ram system similar to the PS4 which means while being less powerful it's also harder to program for

5) You need new IP, MS coasted on Halo and Gears for so long it's boring now.

6) They showed just how bad they'd like to take it when they thought they had almost a monopoly and could roll back any moment.

The 360 started off far different to the present. Ms changed it over time and the most recent metro dashboard actually removed a good amount of functionality and tried to force Kinect in with the adverts.

Only reasons I'd buy a PS3 at present:
Heavy Rain
Beyond Two Souls
Journey

No really, the PS3 had plenty of good games but not many that interested me other than those three, which if they ever make work on a PS4 then I will buy one instantly.

OK now onto the Indie game thing that needs to be said and is the main reason I'm dodging Xbone like the plague.
Recently (as in the past few months) XNA membership has stopped being offered. XNA was essentially Microsoft allowing Home Brew games which they'd distribute for a portion of the sales revenue and a flat members fee to use the system. MS stopped support for this and have messed the system about for a long while.

So now some history behind XNA and the creators club and Microsoft relationship to indie games studios.

For a number of months MS has been late paying indie developers who use XNA part of the liscence agreement information says they reserve the right to refuse to answer questions as to why a payment of overdue for 60 days after the payment date. The system only pays out once every 4 months as it is.

The system has missed payment regularly enough that at one point there was nearly as mass walk out of the developers and class action suit against MS.

Even when they do pay out there have been people having to check sales records for their game and finding days or whole weeks of sales data missing and then having to wait for that money in the next lot of payments.

One developer changed his payment address and wasn't paid for two cycles because MS claimed they hadn't had the required information which said developer had sent 4 times to them each cycle but they'd "Lost it".

XNA games people may or may not know of since their move from Xbox 360

DLC Quest

Tec 3001

Mount Your Friends

1 finger death punch

Dead Pixels

Terraria

Jelly Car

Super Amazing Wagon Adventure

Cthulhu saves the world

Breath of Death

Penny Arcade episode 3 & 4

Ok so the new policy is that to have an indie game on Xbone you need to do the following.

Get in touch with Ms and figure out which department you need to talk to.

Pitch the game to them and have them give you a developer pass (some select people are being approached with these without needing to ask by MS)

Have at least release parity, which means you release the Xbone version at the same time as any other and that includes PC version.

Having spoken to some developers they'd said the following to me about the MS system at present

"I have no idea who you talk to, I mean who do you talk to there ? Where as with Sony you call [insert name here] and he's the Sony Indie game guy for the UK. You arrange a meeting, I literally had mine in a coffee shop, and talk over the ideas and basic detail. They then send over the information and documents you need and will help you if you call them. I've even been given a Dev kit by them."

I should Note Nintendo are also quite easy to deal with apparently but they're weird in that you have to buy a dev kit and take a programming exam but then that gives greater autonomy and it's very much like Steam in terms of "Once you've made one game and released it with us then the next time you don't have to do much to be admitted for another title beyond make it." Oh and Nintendo lets the developers control when their games go on sale and waterfall prices themselves.

MS don't get it. They tried to gain monopoly control on Vista with games for windows live (which had a subscription fee initially, no really the XB Live cost was on windows too for a brief while) they backed off with 7 and now with 8 they tried again by approaching developers to get their games in the windows 8 store. They even payed for some indie developers to make windows 8 exclusive games (I say payed, they were so late on payment they failed to pay the company the workers salary until 2 months before the games release and by that time the company head had re-mortgaged his house to pay his staff's salary)

Microsoft don't get it and windows 8 shows just how much they don't get it now.

If people want I could say more on how bad MS have been to indie developers as believe me this is the tip of the iceberg that I've said, one which further in includes lies, manipulation and downright middle fingers to developers.

Sony and Nintendo know how to keep going and how to at least fill time with indie game releases before the next exclusive AAA. Microsoft killed most of their indie games division off.

Oh also entering the console market soon in some form or another (maybe just casual games not high end yet)

Google (they're up to something and we all know it especially with their game streaming service for HTML 5 which apparently lets you play high end games in a browser almost)

Amazon - they bought a game studio themselves to make games

Valve - The Steam box is going to do something, quite what who knows but it'll do something.

Strelok:
Might help to post some articles to back it up, and fix your title, it is Microsoft that lost the money.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/08/08/xbox-one-lost-microsoft-400000000-during-last-fiscal-year/
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2456906/as-hardware-kills-microsoft-profits-ceo-nadella-seeks-comfort-in-software.html
http://n4g.com/news/1563679/xbox-one-lost-about-400-000-000-in-gross-margins-for-microsoft-during-latest-fiscal-year

Had a feeling they would be the first to bow out of consoles, who am I kidding, I couldn't wait for it. Though I didn't think we would start seeing the major signs this fast.

Ten Foot Bunny:
Microsoft has also been REALLY stupid when it comes to game variety. While every other platform diversified their game portfolios, MS remained (and still remains) focused on dull military shooters. The 360 turned into the most horrible choice of platform if you're not a fan of CoD and all of its knockoffs.

I had the original Xbox and also the 360, but never owned a PS2 or PS3. In the last 13 years, the Xbox went from having a bunch of enjoyable titles to being little more than a U.S.-military-school primer. I eventually became downright jealous of PS3 owners who got to play games that had depth, flair, and artistic merit. Since the Xbone appears to be following in the footsteps of its predecessor's lack of variety, my next console will definitely be the PS4. If Microsoft wants the Xbox brand to survive, they really need to start courting gamers who aren't sugar-rushed 13-year-olds who won't play any game with more complexity than "if it moves, kill it."

I think it depends when you got the 360. Towards the end it became mostly military shooters but they did do a banjo, Kameo was a launch title. Mass Effect was a exlcusive. Plus Xbox live had a ton of different games. Once people finally figured out the playstation hardware, they started to port or make a ton games for the PS3.

kilenem:

I think it depends when you got the 360. Towards the end it became mostly military shooters but hey did do a banjo, Kameo was a launch title. Mass Effect was a exlcusive. Plus Xbox live had a ton of different games. Once people finnaly figured out the playstation hardware and started to port or make a ton games for the PS3.

That's pretty much what happened to me. I started off with a 360 in 2007, and I loved it along with the game variety. Sure mine RRoD'd once, but I got it repaired for free and kept it until I upgraded to an Elite last year. Game wise, there was a plethora of things I loved with so many different genre, and I would get Live Gold time for Christmas and my birthday since I couldn't get a job since I was too young. But then around 2009 to 2010 I started to notice that the PS3 started to get more of the games that interested me, along with the Wii which I had gotten at launch and had since simply become my second GameCube. Over time I started see less and less variety in the 360, and I stopped with Live after it went up in price. Eventually got a PS3, region broke my Wii for those lovely imports that never came out of Japan, and now my 360 is my least played system.

Will I still play my 360? Yeah, maybe once or twice a year, but compared to my other consoles it's my least played now. For me it goes: PS2, PS3, Wii U/Wii (I use my Wii U more now), GameCube, 360.

Zachary Amaranth:
Are you a Steam fan?

That question aside, you do understand that we're yet to have a single company bowing out lead to a monopoly, and it's unlikely to start here, right?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I hope they lose more until the console is deem total failure, anti-consumeristic greed had got to be punished and the only punishment these greedy bastard knows is losing their money.

Americans almost killed the gaming industry during the atari era, when will they learn? Just stop being so fucking greedy! and stop hiring CEO that doesn't even PLAY games.

Ultratwinkie:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked