Consoles are edging towards the edge of their economic viability: their price/performance is overlapping with "last year's" gaming PCs.
This is often ignored in the media because they always focus on the latest and greatest (most expensive) hardware.
The real world, as STEAM's annual survey reveals, does not live at the bleeding edge. And that means that an $800 console, with its locked-in store, console exclusives and mandatory subscriptions, may end up pricier than a lower end gaming PC without the monthly fees and with access to most of the hyped console games.
This is reflected in the popularity of handheld gaming PC and the pining for a STEAM OS living room box. And if the XBOX does indeed evolve Windows compatibility it will definitely remain relevant even if indeed STEAM or somebody else produces a living room console. Otherwise...
As to Sony, well, as I've said before; they zigged when they should've zagged and invested their funds in "less than optimal" ways. Which is leaving them, for the next 3-4 years, with one first party exclusive a year and forcing them to hype third party games they pretend aren't multiplatform to feed their fanboys' delusions. (yesterday's dog and pony show had exactly *one* first party, a remake that is also coming to PC).
Back during the FTC trial, among the leaked goodies there was one particularly amusing email where one XBOX exec, obviously irritated by Sony's anticompetitive practices, wondered why MS didn't just spend Sony out of the market. The obvious answer being that in addition to being anticompetitive and anticonsumer it would bring in unwanted regulatory trouble. Plus, it was and is bad business. 4% profit margin versus 12% says it all.
And yet, MS is in fact spending Sony out of the business--the software and services side, where the money is. Instead of money hatting games away from Sony, MS simply put its money to work *creating games*. 100 studios that are only now starting to flood the market and GAME PASS, in particular with cost-controlled AA games, chasing engagement (and money) rather than pandering to the aging game media still clinging to the no longer workable economics of the old days.
Every day, more and more data comes out and it is becoming clear that high end, pixel pimping games are no longer viable on a single platform no matter how big. 70% of the spending might be on PC but PC alone is not enough for the highest end projects to subsist on, to say nothing of the living room consoles. And even then, it took ALAN WAKE 2 18 months to reach breakeven. At least they are still alive. Almost daily now we hear of studios shutting down, trimming staff, cancelling or delaying projects.
XBOX on the other hand is prospering. They went to PC 10 years ago.
They went LIVE SERVICE even earlier, depending on how you look at their online games. They spent big but they not only bought future games, they bought *current* cash cows and tons of IP. Just yesterday, I realized MS now owns PROJECT GOTHAM and the other IP from BIZZARE CREATIONS. Makes me wonder what Playground Games might do with PROJECT GOTHAM. Or maybe METROPOLIS STREET RACER (not sure if MS or Sega owns the ip.) MS now has a horde of ip and the studios to monetize them.
And to top it all, MS is turning their competitor platforms into farm teams feeding cash to keep their 100 studios fully funded and producing.
"What's mine is mine, what's yours is...also mine."
(Negotiation is over.)