The X1 has lost Microsoft 400 million

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

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.

This I find amusing because as I was growing up, in the 80s and 90s computers were shoved down the throats of kids because "computers are the future". They were right, computers are now the present. Now is a great time to encourage people to get in to computers. They are plug and play and very simplified. No one is asking people to solder on capacitors. It's more like square peg, square hole. Even if you don't know about computers you are still expected to know how to navigate one as part of a high school education. You don't have to be a hacker to learn how to check system requirements, install through a wizard, open a program, and post on forums if you run into a problem. PC gamers aren't like "Hah, figure it out noob". That is the console audience. PC gamers are more likely to get in a pissing match as to who can solve your problem faster. Sometimes it might become a pissing match over who has the better solution.

The core audience should be aware the platform to end all platforms is already here. Free online play (subscriptions are all but dead), virtually full backwards compatibility, make your own game on the system, plus illegal stuff as it is a truly open platform. (Not advocating, just stating fact.)

However, overall the PC is basically mandatory in the home. For the middle class, the largest demographic, avoiding learning basic computer skills is just choosing to be ignorant. Choosing to be ignorant doesn't make the PC no longer a viable alternative. That's like saying Playstation is already a monopoly because I am not interested in Nintendo (platformers) and Xbox (shooters) game libraries. That's just selective vision.

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.

The only point I will make here is that Nintendo has claimed it is open to M rated games. It's hardware is different for sure, however it is cheaper hardware to develop for which offers a competitive edge in that regard. I will gladly step down in graphical quality if Nintendo suddenly has some good M rated games as well as the usual kid friendly stuff. With risk being cheaper to develop for on the console this could spawn innovation in game design. Not saying it will but it holds potential. Then add in the "seeing what you want to see" bit I mentioned above. These are both viable competitors.

EDIT:

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.

This actually depends on the dev kit. With lower greaphic capabilities, it may be cheaper. A touch screen tablet shouldn't really effect that. Game development cost will lower and speed up as the devs get more familiar with it on both sides. PS4 devs will always be trying to get more horsepower out of it though. Wii-U horsepower can be gauged by last gen hardware, only slightly better.

A Weakgeek:

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.

Sony coasted off indies before with the PS2. It will happen again. Xbox is now a dinosaur who can't see the world around it.

Its like someone driving a hummer in 2050. That level of excess has been dead for so long its actually offensive.

Microsoft can't see the little guy as being important, and that's why it fails. That's why the WII U didn't get its high sales for years.

If you don't have the support of indie devs, your console is dead on arrival. Big devs have been dropping like flies since the 7th gen started.

Check it:

Midway is dead.
THQ is dead.
Sierra Entertianment was bought out by Activision in 2008.
Square Enix is circling the drain if it can't stop spending huge amounts of money.
Capcom is on its last legs and will be bankrupt soon too or go indie. Barely enough for one last AAA game.
SEGA? Also on its last legs since 2012. Relies on PC now.
Atari? In 2013, they went bankrupt. Now they are a casino game company for mobile.
Namco Bandai? Not a mainstream heavy hitter.
Take Two? They don't pump out major games every year. GTA ain't a yearly franchise.
Kalypso? They are a PC company trying to make it big by porting PC games to consoles. Failing at it too.
Deep Silver? They made 2 big games on consoles. The rest is niche.

Who is left to make the bulk of games on consoles? Only the big 3: EA, Activision, and Ubisoft. And even they can't pump out sequels in big enough numbers to be competitive with the daily dump of games on PC.

An elephant will never beat 1,000 cheetahs. No matter how bad ass that elephant is.

Sony said the ps4 is the new PS2 for a reason. And that's going back to basics.

I don't see the Xbox One making any big comeback like the PS3 last gen.

The big selling point of the Xbox 360 was price and it released first, nobody wanted to spend $800 on a PS3 so the X360 got a huge head start.

PS3 sales ended up over taking X360 sales eventually when prices were dropped and that was because they essentially offered the same things except the PS3 also began to get the monopoly on JRPGs and other niche titles (and a blu ray player).

This time around though the PS4 was cheaper and shot out of the gate, it is also more powerful so it basically offers everything the Xbox One does but in most cases it offers them slightly better, and not only that, but how long do you think it will take for those same JRPG and specialty titles to flock to the PS4?

The X360 right now is essentially dead, it has a few AAA releases that are coming out on every other console, the PS3 on the other hand has 20+ exclusives coming out between now and Q2 next year.

There is no specialty market Microsoft can go for to boost Xbox One sales, they have all but abandoned the Kinect, which wasn't a big selling point (or very popular) to begin with.

The Xbox One has nothing to offer over the PS4 besides a very select few exclusives that look fairly generic, the only exclusive I'd want to play on X1 is Sunset Overdrive. I suspect most of it's initial sales were X360 owners who just went with the same thing.

Meanwhile Sony will start streaming games to their TV sets soon. Smell the coffee peoples :)

And yet, while these forums are full of Nintendo doomspeak and now, I guess, MSFT, it is Sony that we should all be worried about!

Absurd!

joest01:
Meanwhile Sony will start streaming games to their TV sets soon. Smell the coffee peoples :)

And yet, while these forums are full of Nintendo doomspeak and now, I guess, MSFT, it is Sony that we should all be worried about!

Absurd!

Sony could go down too. They are a huge company, and the only good thing they have is gaming.

And that ain't enough to pay its huge bills. Right now its downsizing the hell out of the company, and now it seems the downsizing is more costly than letting it stay.

So to recap:

Sony is losing blood other than the gaming industry, may bleed out from taking too many hits from Samsung in their other hardware markets.
Microsoft fucked over xbox for the next 10 years since no one wants to make games for it.
And Nintendo is running a little low on funds too, and making consoles ain't cheap.

Its a cluster fuck.

Verlander:
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

Yep, people seem to keep glazing over this. Sony has lost an assload more than Microsoft has, and you dont see the pundits in here wishing gloom and doom on them, but I guess that is to be expected, by now. Xbox isnt going anywhere, folks, so I am SO sorry to disappoint you. (Please note the sarcasm) Get off this horse, and focus on something more productive.... or keep wasting your time with this, because ultimately, thats all you are really doing.

Also, to the ones seriously desiring the end of the Xbox, do you REALLY think that the Playstation will benefit from that? Do you think YOU as a consumer will benefit from that? Sure, there will be some people that will just say the heck with it, and go over to the PS4, but in all honesty I think most people will do what I would do, and that would be to go back to the PC. I switched over to the xbox, and havent looked back, but if the xbox DID go under (which it wont) then I would quit gaming before I would purchase a playstation anything. I would go back to my roots, the PC, and I bet alot of people would do the same, and the scales would seriously tip in the favor of the PC, over the PS4, and you guys could ultimately see the playstation brand go bye bye, too. When the dust settled, you would see the PC and Nintendo, and thats about it.

Savagezion:
snip

Just so it doesn't become a misunderstanding down the line: I'm a PC guy, and I agree with you that it's the best platform for core gaming.

However where we disagree is the amount of influence core gamers have on the market. The large majority of gamers are casuals, people who, in the current age of seemingly infinte easy to consume entertainment, would not have the patience to go to forums (Provided they know any to begin with, which if they don't, another step of inconvinience is added to the process) to ask how to get their game working. Sure compared to the 90's computers have become vastly easier to handle, but so has the expectations of the consumer regarding ease of use.

I am by no means saying PC isn't a "viable" platform in that it cannot compete functionally. It's just that function isn't what drives consumers, just look at Apple. PC gaming could be media sexy, however it would need some serious rebranding and some added accessibility. Kinda what the Steambox is trying to achieve.

As for the "WiiU cheaper to develop" thing, If they saw it financially beneficial, they could just as easily develop with last gen tier graphics. And it would look better since stuff like texture resolution and framerate would be higher with little to no extra work. I mean I understand why you think they'd be unwilling to do so, however its like arguing that WiiU devs would never make a game that doesn't utilize the tablet in a meanigful way.

Ultratwinkie:
snip

Well if what you're suggesting does really come to pass, then you'd be right that it's not a monopoly, but that would merely be because the industry would be completely changed. If indies became the bulk of the industry, we'd go towards the mobile way of things. Small, cheaper games designed to run on as many different type of devices as possible, relying on different online stores for coverage.

Actually, all of that is already around, both on steam and facebook games. Perhaps we don't disagree at all, its just I see them as a seperate thing in their own right.

Tayh:

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?

Steam already is a monopoly.

Meanwhile, Nintendo is still a "AAA" console company. It's also, if you may notice, the only constant of the three console makers on the market right now. People may complain it's not the same, or that they just don't like Nintendo consoles, but they're still "AAA" consoles.

I suppose at best you could argue that Sony would have a console monopoly on modern military shooters featuring grizzled white men shooting brown people.

Ultratwinkie:

And Nintendo is running a little low on funds too, and making consoles ain't cheap.

One has to be incredibly loose with "a little low" to make that true.

Zachary Amaranth:

Ultratwinkie:

And Nintendo is running a little low on funds too, and making consoles ain't cheap.

One has to be incredibly loose with "a little low" to make that true.

Consoles take loads of money to make. An absolute absurd amount.

Its like saying Capcom has 50 million in the bank. That may seem like success to an average person but the costs of doing business means that is 1 AAA game.

Its all about context,and in context of the industry Nintendo doesn't have all that much money.

Ultratwinkie:

Consoles take loads of money to make. An absolute absurd amount.

Its like saying Capcom has 50 million in the bank. That may seem like success to an average person but the costs of doing business means that is 1 AAA game.

Its all about context,and in context of the industry Nintendo doesn't have all that much money.

How much money do you think they have, then?

Zachary Amaranth:

Ultratwinkie:

Consoles take loads of money to make. An absolute absurd amount.

Its like saying Capcom has 50 million in the bank. That may seem like success to an average person but the costs of doing business means that is 1 AAA game.

Its all about context,and in context of the industry Nintendo doesn't have all that much money.

How much money do you think they have, then?

http://www.gengame.net/2014/06/nintendo-has-around-4-7-billion-in-the-bank-3-billion-in-short-term-investments-10-billion-in-current-assets/

Well they are said to have 10 billion in assets, with an estimated 4.7 billion in the bank.

Consoles cost billions to make. Microsoft said they invested at least 1 billion into the xbone itself with another billion for exclusives. tech ain't cheap, especially if you do something like the kinect or a tablet.

2 billion for a basic package to be designed and planned, not counting the maintenance of support once it releases. Not counting the manufacture cost.

For a company with no actual outside income, a bad console gen is disastrous. They had 10 billion in 2012 and now they only have 4.7 billion.

That's bad.

Maximum Bert:
What how is this news?

Well, to the uninformed with a vauge idea of how buisness works, if Xbox was consistently losing money year on year then MS would have cut it by now.

But they havent cut Xbox, therefore as far as theese people care, nothing is wrong.

Ultratwinkie:

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.

Well, to be fair, most of that loss was coming from the original Xbox and the 360 was turning in profit for last few years. But yes, the whole Xbox project so far is a 10 year failure. and since XboxDone does not seem like its going to be a magical money maker the project will remain a toxic money sink.

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.

First of all, Nintendo exists, so Sony would not have a monopoly. Secondly, there is no such thing as "big console games". Both PC and mobile market outdoes console market in both profits and revenue, so even if console market collapsed right now gaming as a whole would not crumble.

ALso, competition is good only if that competition offers equal or better service. if the competition is offering worse service it is not worth keeping it around.

fix-the-spade:

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

they would be suicidal to do so. It was underpowered when it launched. its lack of power will show even greater with time. Heck, mobile phones are coming out with 120hz displays now, Mobile GPUs have beat last gen consoles last year and are quickly catching up. if they plan to keep XboxDone for 8 years like 360 your going to see mobile phones being faster than consoles and thats not going to end up well for consoles.

Stabinbac:
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.

Anything that is not a chest high wall shooter is Japanese. you hear it here first!

Tayh:

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?

you do know that Nintendo games sell more than Xbox and PS games combined most of the time right? as in, when you can release a game with 10 million sales and you dont call it AAA what do you call AAA?

ALso whats to stop Sony from becoming anticonsumer? how about the rest of gaming market?

A Weakgeek:

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.

Just because there is a lot of misconceptions does not make it unacessible. PC gaming is cheaper and in many cases easier. Tripe A gaming on PC is very much a "Thing". in fact is a much bigger "Thing" than on consoles. just a few days there was an online international competition for just such a game with prize pool of over 4 million dollars. there were over a hundred million live viewers - more than most sporting events.

Verlander:
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.

Did you understand them? revenue =/= profit.

Ultratwinkie:

Well they are said to have 10 billion in assets, with an estimated 4.7 billion in the bank.

Radically different than what's been previously estimated, but okay.

Consoles cost billions to make. Microsoft said they invested at least 1 billion into the xbone itself with another billion for exclusives. tech ain't cheap, especially if you do something like the kinect or a tablet.

Thankfully, Nintendo isn't Microsoft. Also, you really think that the cost to design wasn't, you know, already paid?

2 billion for a basic package to be designed and planned, not counting the maintenance of support once it releases. Not counting the manufacture cost.

Yes, and this one guy made a 30,000 dollar PC build, PCs must cost tens of thousands to build. I mean, surely that's how trends work.

...I'm sure that's different, somehow. Because ponies.

For a company with no actual outside income

You mean, aside from the TV shows and the plushies and all that, right?

Strazdas:

Did you understand them? revenue =/= profit.

No shit. However, if you go through the 10-k it shows that the individual hardware is loss making - the machine costs more than they're selling it for. This is why it says "Xbox Platform cost of revenue increased $2.1 billion or 72%, due mainly to higher volumes of consoles sold and higher costs associated with Xbox One." If revenue is increasing, it's because more people are buying the machine. It will take a while for the profitable goods - games, subscriptions etc - to start covering the loss.

Simply put, if you're selling for $1 what costs $2, a loss of $10 represents a sale of 5 products, as represented in the top article posted:

Paradoxically, in this period a high volume of sales can actually contribute to push the numbers further in the red.

Perhaps my initial post wasn't clear, it was badly worded. The department is making sales, and so that loss really isn't a problem.

A Weakgeek:
I am by no means saying PC isn't a "viable" platform in that it cannot compete functionally. It's just that function isn't what drives consumers, just look at Apple.

This quote made me laugh. It a good example, brings up a good point, and funny to boot.

People love brands, and PC isn't a brand. (Although it could be argued it is the "Windows box" lol) It is just an open platform. Even though Microsoft consistently pisses on consumers, there are many who want them to stick around because its familiar and recognizable. That's kinda sad.

I do find it sad that PC would need a 'brand' for people to even acknowledge its existence. I hate this term but talk about "sheeple". It's not a thing unless its a brand. (read: marketed) For we MUST judge the brand. Yet branding kills the idea of the PC. Coke and Pepsi brands don't work in PC (HP, Dell, Alienware, etc.) They get succesful at first then take a nosedive as they try to close the system with proprietary measures. It all turns to garbage. It's better for parts to brand as that is where the hardware competition is. (AMD, Intel, Nvidea, etc.) To rebrand it as a magic box kills it as it is no longer as open. Yet I think you are right that's what makes people more comfortable.

I will say I get a little happy when I see threads that say "Help me build my first gaming PC" even if all they do is list a budget and games they would like to play. Just seeing someone honestly looking at the at the peak of the hobby is pretty cool for me. It's even cooler when you go in the thread and see what advice people offer.I love when I click one of those and I have no advice that hasn't already been covered sometimes even better than I planned to offer. I offer a silent bow to my fellow PC gamers for being so awesome helping someone get started and maybe showing me some cool stuff. I am no expert by any means and my research dwindles every year but building and maintaining requires minimal effort and has a very easy accessibility if you are willing to talk about computers with others.

I suspect much of the accessibility issues are self imposed. When tech bable pops up, it can intimidate. DoPo here at escapist will sometimes make me feel computer illiterate. But I love reading his posts on stuff like this. Sometimes I have to google wtf he is talking about if I have the time.

PC gaming could be media sexy, however it would need some serious rebranding and some added accessibility. Kinda what the Steambox is trying to achieve.

I am seriously curious as to how the steambox will perform. I really don't understand its goal. I think it could easily ruin itself by having too many versions out for it and confusing consumers. I would love to attempt marketing it as I have a few ideas I think might work, but that thing is such a gamble. It's like its 'everything good' and 'everything bad' about both consoles and PC balled into one that targets no one specifically. I don't blame gamers for scratching their heads and couldn't blame casual consumers either. Consoles just got complicated.

As for the "WiiU cheaper to develop" thing, If they saw it financially beneficial, they could just as easily develop with last gen tier graphics. And it would look better since stuff like texture resolution and framerate would be higher with little to no extra work. I mean I understand why you think they'd be unwilling to do so, however its like arguing that WiiU devs would never make a game that doesn't utilize the tablet in a meanigful way.

Actually I encourage Nintendo to not worry about graphical fidelity as the system was designed to take a backseat in that regard this gen. Last gen's graphics were fine and I think embracing last gen's graphics for another generation is a smart play for them. Sony and Xbone already bit off their foot in regards to competing against that advantage. For them to try to pull that, would hurt them both at this point. Their graphics need to show a large leap from the Wii-U or people are gonna get a bit of buyers remorse. They've made promises.

My point was actually that I see the lower graphic power as the Wii-U's greatest strength this generation. With the industry crying out that graphical horsepower is getting too expensive to maintain, I think it was a smarty play to back off and work with "good enough" instead of try to cater to "moar shinier".

EDIT:
P.S. Your avatar always cracks me up.

dont get me wrong, I like the original Xbox, I still use my 360 [because when the big guys from Microsoft say we had best keep out 360's if we want offline games, you laugh at them and call them retarded], and I still love both of them.

I wont get a Xbone ever though, too much bullshit, too much smug assholes that only deserve to never work in the industry again [Major Neilson included, that retarded son of a bitch]. My internet isn't the best, so Microsoft themselves said they dont want me as a customer, that's fine.

I'm only regretting not getting a Ps3 when I had the chance, though I might change that soon. Sadly the Ps4 doesn't exactly have that many games that interest me at the moment either.

so I guess I will stick to the last generation of consoles.

Still makes me feel good to hear that the Xbone has lost microsoft 4 Million though.

The Xbox could be compared to Israel. Necessary in the greater scope of things, it's just a damn shame the people in charge feel the need to make it a necessary evil.

I tried getting back into PC gaming just this week. My PC died and I needed a new one. It was an absolute hassle and a nightmare to buy. Buying one was expensive, building one on sites that do custom PC's was expensive. I didn't know what represented good value. Eventually, I moved to eBay to just buy one. Again, so annoying. Had 30 PC's to choose from and every time I googled the specs I'd get conflicting reports.

Took me 2 weeks of research to pick one I felt was right for me at the right price. In the mean time I could just simply play games on my consoles. Hassle free. I would assume the vast majority of the general population feel the same.

Ultratwinkie:

They had 10 billion in 2012 and now they only have 4.7 billion.

That's bad.

Actually, your link says they had 16bn in assets and now have 13.

Back on topic though, I don't think the CoD and Madden crowd has reason to be worried. If MSFT really did pull out, I am sure somebody will pick up the slack. In that I think the situation is different from N and Sony...

Ultratwinkie:

A Weakgeek:

Ultratwinkie:

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.

Sony coasted off indies before with the PS2. It will happen again. Xbox is now a dinosaur who can't see the world around it.

Its like someone driving a hummer in 2050. That level of excess has been dead for so long its actually offensive.

Microsoft can't see the little guy as being important, and that's why it fails. That's why the WII U didn't get its high sales for years.

If you don't have the support of indie devs, your console is dead on arrival. Big devs have been dropping like flies since the 7th gen started.

Check it:

Midway is dead.
THQ is dead.
Sierra Entertianment was bought out by Activision in 2008.
Square Enix is circling the drain if it can't stop spending huge amounts of money.
Capcom is on its last legs and will be bankrupt soon too or go indie. Barely enough for one last AAA game.
SEGA? Also on its last legs since 2012. Relies on PC now.
Atari? In 2013, they went bankrupt. Now they are a casino game company for mobile.
Namco Bandai? Not a mainstream heavy hitter.
Take Two? They don't pump out major games every year. GTA ain't a yearly franchise.
Kalypso? They are a PC company trying to make it big by porting PC games to consoles. Failing at it too.
Deep Silver? They made 2 big games on consoles. The rest is niche.

Who is left to make the bulk of games on consoles? Only the big 3: EA, Activision, and Ubisoft. And even they can't pump out sequels in big enough numbers to be competitive with the daily dump of games on PC.

An elephant will never beat 1,000 cheetahs. No matter how bad ass that elephant is.

Sony said the ps4 is the new PS2 for a reason. And that's going back to basics.

Sega Sammy just bought Atlus and I think Atlus is doing well. Sega just haven't made hit games. Moderately good games. Take 2 still has their sports genres and 2k is doing a lot better then Live. Namco is making the next Smash brothers. I don't think it get more mainstream then that.

Edit: Also Deep silver is probably the THQ replacement

Siege_TF:
The Xbox could be compared to Israel. Necessary in the greater scope of things, it's just a damn shame the people in charge feel the need to make it a necessary evil.

lets not bring politics in this please. Although I think Israel has something to do with the creation the first Kinect

Kalezian:
dont get me wrong, I like the original Xbox, I still use my 360 [because when the big guys from Microsoft say we had best keep out 360's if we want offline games, you laugh at them and call them retarded], and I still love both of them.

I wont get a Xbone ever though, too much bullshit, too much smug assholes that only deserve to never work in the industry again [Major Neilson included, that retarded son of a bitch]. My internet isn't the best, so Microsoft themselves said they dont want me as a customer, that's fine.

I'm only regretting not getting a Ps3 when I had the chance, though I might change that soon. Sadly the Ps4 doesn't exactly have that many games that interest me at the moment either.

so I guess I will stick to the last generation of consoles.

Still makes me feel good to hear that the Xbone has lost microsoft 4 Million though.

This actually makes me want to start another Forum Post could this be longest double Generation. Last generation I didn't see this many high profile releases towards the end of the Xbox, gamecube and PS2 life cycle. I can only think of Zelda, need for speed and Marvel Ultimate Alliance. The rest were just sports games.

It is interesting to see all the viewpoints that seem to have an interest in a company failing. Some discuss how Sony is going under, others how Microsoft is losing money on sales and games in general, etc., etc. The fact is, the gaming industry has gone from being a kid's toy to the dominant form of entertainment. It is not in anybody's interest for any of these three to fail unless all you care about is Candy Crush. Imagine one movie studio. If you enjoy movies, that would be a horrible thing to happen. Look at how far the music industry has sunk. All of these people who feel like they were betrayed by this or that decision, just lighten up and go play a good game.

gigastar:

Maximum Bert:
What how is this news?

Well, to the uninformed with a vauge idea of how buisness works, if Xbox was consistently losing money year on year then MS would have cut it by now.

But they havent cut Xbox, therefore as far as theese people care, nothing is wrong.

No it has consistently been losing money hence why shareholders have wanted to cut it for quite a while. They basically wanted to buy their way in corner the market and then start milking people for the money sort of like they have done with the PC except it hasnt panned out that way for them and with that enormous mess they made of the Xbox One launch it dosent look like it will happen anytime soon basically they tipped their hand to early.

Also MS as a company are making a load of cash so the Xbox losing money consistently can easily be offset by the massive profits on their other divisions hence why Xbox hasnt been cut the are still hoping that they can outlast their competitors and establish a near monopoly on consoles as well as PC. Its just shareholders would see more profits if Xbox was gone hence the increasing push to get rid of it.

Business doesnt always cut things that are losing them money as long as they think it will make them money in the end either directly or indirectly it happens all the time especially if they have money to burn like MS.

Strazdas:

fix-the-spade:

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

they would be suicidal to do so. It was underpowered when it launched. its lack of power will show even greater with time. Heck, mobile phones are coming out with 120hz displays now, Mobile GPUs have beat last gen consoles last year and are quickly catching up. if they plan to keep XboxDone for 8 years like 360 your going to see mobile phones being faster than consoles and thats not going to end up well for consoles.

No.

Mobile GPUs caught up with some aspects of consoles last year, they still rely on internal batteries and playing a 'real' video game on a touch screen is still horrible and will remain horrible until controller add-ons for tablets become standardised in their layout.

No one is going to play Halo on a touch screen with an expected battery life under an hour, just like consoles didn't kill PC, mobile won't kill consoles. If tablets get standardised layout controls, massively improved batteries and the ability to project an image in real time to the TV and be responsive then yeah, consoles doomed, but we're nowhere near that yet.

Regards the Xbone's processing power, doesn't matter if Microsoft can make the games. PSone was less powerful than the N64, PS2 less than the Xbox and the Cube, but hardware sells on price and the products available on it. Microsoft has sorted the price, now they need some essential games and the Xbone will be fine, it's unlikely to match the PS4, but Microsoft will make money easy.

Strazdas:

they would be suicidal to do so. It was underpowered when it launched. its lack of power will show even greater with time. Heck, mobile phones are coming out with 120hz displays now, Mobile GPUs have beat last gen consoles last year and are quickly catching up. if they plan to keep XboxDone for 8 years like 360 your going to see mobile phones being faster than consoles and thats not going to end up well for consoles.

An important distinction to make with console vs tablets as that seems to have come up in the debate.

Tablets have to run a fairly robust operating system while consoles can dedicate far more of their run time to games and a far more minimal system.

As yet I don't see many Tablets providing even PS2 level game quality regularly.

There are some tablets that allow pro gaming and some specific games but those Tablets are pretty damn expensive and there's not a huge market catering to them.

If I'm entirely wrong I'd love to know where these high end games are as I have two tablets (not an Ipad) but with two different market places and neither has any really high end games.

At best I'm seeing maybe SNES level stuff or maybe Nintendo DS and that's quite rare and mostly simplistic games.

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.

And Nintendo will be there for competition. People do realize they aren't dead yet right and also they have a pretty stellar line up from fall to 2015.

KazeAizen:

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.

And Nintendo will be there for competition. People do realize they aren't dead yet right and also they have a pretty stellar line up from fall to 2015.

Also This is the first Nintendo console to sell at a loss. Literally Nintendo need to sell 1 game after the console itself and they're in profit on the console.

Which is pretty important as until later in the lifespan most other consoles are money sinks. They cost large amounts to develop and then have to be sold at a considerable loss until parts costs and better sourcing etc bring costs down. Most other companies sell at a quite a big loss per console just to gain the install base initially.

That's the weird thing, from a financial perspective Nintendo won last generation and for all we know is winning this one already because they're not being screwed over hard per console sold.

Nintendo might seem like it's losing but unlike the others it can kick back and rest far more because it doesn't need to compete of the same level as them to turn a profit. It isn't having to make up for such huge running costs as much because it's deliberately letting the other consoles push the curve while it stays neatly behind able to do things far cheaper. It's strange but Nintendo doesn't have the costs to deal with so much as the others and as such it's far more sustainable.

While other companies are spending what 50,Million or so on games Nintendo can sit there and laugh and spend 5 million and their games and need to sell far less to make it back.

Nintendo doesn't need as much money as the others to operate and can do far more with their money because of it.

Also look at the amount of designing and redesigning they've done as of late.
The DS, DS lite, DS XL, 3Ds, 3DS xl, 2DS and the Wii U so Nitendo will be paying a bit out to design all that hardware and don't need to sell much to be in profit on it.

The_Kodu:

KazeAizen:

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.

And Nintendo will be there for competition. People do realize they aren't dead yet right and also they have a pretty stellar line up from fall to 2015.

Also This is the first Nintendo console to sell at a loss. Literally Nintendo need to sell 1 game after the console itself and they're in profit on the console.

Which is pretty important as until later in the lifespan most other consoles are money sinks. They cost large amounts to develop and then have to be sold at a considerable loss until parts costs and better sourcing etc bring costs down. Most other companies sell at a quite a big loss per console just to gain the install base initially.

That's the weird thing, from a financial perspective Nintendo won last generation and for all we know is winning this one already because they're not being screwed over hard per console sold.

Nintendo might seem like it's losing but unlike the others it can kick back and rest far more because it doesn't need to compete of the same level as them to turn a profit. It isn't having to make up for such huge running costs as much because it's deliberately letting the other consoles push the curve while it stays neatly behind able to do things far cheaper. It's strange but Nintendo doesn't have the costs to deal with so much as the others and as such it's far more sustainable.

While other companies are spending what 50,Million or so on games Nintendo can sit there and laugh and spend 5 million and their games and need to sell far less to make it back.

Nintendo doesn't need as much money as the others to operate and can do far more with their money because of it.

Also look at the amount of designing and redesigning they've done as of late.
The DS, DS lite, DS XL, 3Ds, 3DS xl, 2DS and the Wii U so Nitendo will be paying a bit out to design all that hardware and don't need to sell much to be in profit on it.

I'm sure people will accuse us of being on the NDF but its not wrong. Since Nintendo is essentially sitting at 7th gen hardware the cost for the tech is considerably cheaper. Not only that with the line of games coming out and their console being the cheapest they can turn their loss around much easier than Microsoft can at this point.

KazeAizen:

I'm sure people will accuse us of being on the NDF but its not wrong. Since Nintendo is essentially sitting at 7th gen hardware the cost for the tech is considerably cheaper. Not only that with the line of games coming out and their console being the cheapest they can turn their loss around much easier than Microsoft can at this point.

The only people being called the NDF are the ones who treat it as if Nintendo has never done any wrong, are always the best at everything, and everyone else makes nothing but crap. Those are the people I can't stand, because it reminds me of the people who told me I had no childhood because I didn't have a Nintendo console when growing up, to which I usually proceed to tell those people to fuck off because it's annoying for that. Nintendo's not going anywhere, and there are more people how shout about "Nintendo haters" then there are actual ones. Hell I get told I hate Nintendo and want them to fail, despite buying a Wii U at launch before the first price drop, and owning every Nintendo home console and handheld (not ever model handheld mind you, just the ones that let me play the games). Has Nintendo made a lot of mistakes on company policies, damn straight, especially with the whole LP thing which is still a problem, their digital prices are terrible at times, and localization for them is still a major problem. Game wise though, they still make quality games.

What's sad is that people want any one of the three console manufacturers to fail, thinking that won't have any bad consequences at all, when in reality it will. To compare it to the automotive industry, it'd be like Chevy, Ford, and Toyota competing, and suddenly Toyota dropped out of the market. It'd have a huge effect on everything. Now when SEGA dropped out, it wasn't as bad for a few reasons, one of them being that Microsoft managed to actually fill in the gap SEGA had left with the original Xbox.

joest01:

Ultratwinkie:

They had 10 billion in 2012 and now they only have 4.7 billion.

That's bad.

Actually, your link says they had 16bn in assets and now have 13.

Back on topic though, I don't think the CoD and Madden crowd has reason to be worried. If MSFT really did pull out, I am sure somebody will pick up the slack. In that I think the situation is different from N and Sony...

Assets mean property. I own 10 billion in ferarris, but that doesn't translate to 10 billion in my bank account. A drop that big ain't good no matter how you cut it.

kilenem:

Ultratwinkie:

A Weakgeek:

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.

Sony coasted off indies before with the PS2. It will happen again. Xbox is now a dinosaur who can't see the world around it.

Its like someone driving a hummer in 2050. That level of excess has been dead for so long its actually offensive.

Microsoft can't see the little guy as being important, and that's why it fails. That's why the WII U didn't get its high sales for years.

If you don't have the support of indie devs, your console is dead on arrival. Big devs have been dropping like flies since the 7th gen started.

Check it:

Midway is dead.
THQ is dead.
Sierra Entertianment was bought out by Activision in 2008.
Square Enix is circling the drain if it can't stop spending huge amounts of money.
Capcom is on its last legs and will be bankrupt soon too or go indie. Barely enough for one last AAA game.
SEGA? Also on its last legs since 2012. Relies on PC now.
Atari? In 2013, they went bankrupt. Now they are a casino game company for mobile.
Namco Bandai? Not a mainstream heavy hitter.
Take Two? They don't pump out major games every year. GTA ain't a yearly franchise.
Kalypso? They are a PC company trying to make it big by porting PC games to consoles. Failing at it too.
Deep Silver? They made 2 big games on consoles. The rest is niche.

Who is left to make the bulk of games on consoles? Only the big 3: EA, Activision, and Ubisoft. And even they can't pump out sequels in big enough numbers to be competitive with the daily dump of games on PC.

An elephant will never beat 1,000 cheetahs. No matter how bad ass that elephant is.

Sony said the ps4 is the new PS2 for a reason. And that's going back to basics.

Sega Sammy just bought Atlus and I think Atlus is doing well. Sega just haven't made hit games. Moderately good games. Take 2 still has their sports genres and 2k is doing a lot better then Live. Namco is making the next Smash brothers. I don't think it get more mainstream then that.

Edit: Also Deep silver is probably the THQ replacement

Atlus doesn't translate to SEGA doing well. Their biggest hits were total war games and they seriously are milking that franchise dry.

Not to mention that sports games don't count because its the same rehashed every year. A console can't survive on sports games alone.

2K doesn't produce enough to to keep up with the rest of the market.

Namco is making one of the few games for the wii.

Publishers can't compete with indies anymore. They are either dead, near bankruptcy, or can't produce enough games to keep people interested like it was back in the 7th gen.

Neronium:

The only people being called the NDF are the ones who treat it as if Nintendo has never done any wrong, are always the best at everything, and everyone else makes nothing but crap. Those are the people I can't stand, because it reminds me of the people who told me I had no childhood because I didn't have a Nintendo console when growing up, to which I usually proceed to tell those people to fuck off because it's annoying for that. Nintendo's not going anywhere, and there are more people how shout about "Nintendo haters" then there are actual ones. Hell I get told I hate Nintendo and want them to fail, despite buying a Wii U at launch before the first price drop, and owning every Nintendo home console and handheld (not ever model handheld mind you, just the ones that let me play the games). Has Nintendo made a lot of mistakes on company policies, damn straight, especially with the whole LP thing which is still a problem, their digital prices are terrible at times, and localization for them is still a major problem. Game wise though, they still make quality games.

What's sad is that people want any one of the three console manufacturers to fail, thinking that won't have any bad consequences at all, when in reality it will. To compare it to the automotive industry, it'd be like Chevy, Ford, and Toyota competing, and suddenly Toyota dropped out of the market. It'd have a huge effect on everything. Now when SEGA dropped out, it wasn't as bad for a few reasons, one of them being that Microsoft managed to actually fill in the gap SEGA had left with the original Xbox.

Also to be fair the market wasn't quite as big back then as it is now so while still major the impact wasn't quite what it would be like if one of them went belly up now. Personally Nintendo is my favorite company because while I acknowledge they screw up the good far out weighs the bad. I mean the bad is still pretty bad. Weren't they notorious for region locking stuff, which I never import but I understand the issue, also the LP and Youtube thing but compared to say shipping incomplete games, having subscription fees out the wazoo, and just general money extortionist tactics they are not as bad as most.

Heck they win to me alone for CONSISTENTLY putting out actual finished games and rarely having DLC which when they do it actually is legit. Though the Hyrule Warriors DLC is I think the first time I've seen the bad side of the DLC market rear its ugly head on a first party Nintendo title which considering how long it took for that to happen that's damn impressive. Would be more impressive if its just a one off thing until we get a Super Princess Peach U. expansion for Mario U. Which I would actually buy that.

After how MS marketed the X1, I hope it causes them nothing but problems. I loved the 360. I didn't love MS taking a dump in my mouth with all the things they wanted me to accept in the X1. It's like they took all my goodwill out back and shot it in the head.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked