Protect your tech:Get an Upsie warranty & save up to 70%
  1. the_moesiah's Avatar
    I really don't see any reason to keep spending money on R&D when all they're doing is making Xbox as PC-like as possible. Microsoft can succeed where Valve failed -- bring PC gaming to the living room. Just sell small PC's with a specialized version of W10 that can be controlled with a game controller (just like Steam Machines), get rid of the proprietary Xbox format and call it a day. Hell they can still that Xbox. This way they don't need to make two versions of the same game and they don't have to worry about any missing apps. And they could [theoretically] have PlayStation games on their console too with the PC version of PlayStation Now.
    06-09-2019 11:46 PM
  2. Drael646464's Avatar
    They probably will one day. Windows core and cshell etc, gaming will probably eventually be a skin. I think that's the plan. It's just one that's being moved towards slowly, piece by piece.

    Currently, you don't need to make two versions. You can make a UWP using unity engine, and it will run on both. Devs have their preferences for various reasons, but even if they don't do that, xbox and windows 10 are closer than most platforms.

    If someone wanted to use a gaming barebones or mini that way now, they could. Just load bigbox on startup, run all the games from there. It has a kodi plugin, so you could also boot into kodi, and run bigbox from there.
    06-10-2019 06:47 AM
  3. Guest_aotf's Avatar
    You are looking at it MS's point of view, but I'll look at it from a customer's point of view. Most of us aren't MS but consumers and gamers.
    At this stage what's the point of buying a new XB1? A PC can play almost all XB1's games. One of the last AAA that was still exclusive to XB1 recently moved towards PC but not just PC but on Steam.

    So many of the so-called exclusives ended up on other platforms. And let's not forget that on XB1 you still need to pay to play online unlike on PC.

    The only advantage I can see at this stage is physical games available on consoles and the way MS is pushing for digital-ONLY consoles and gaming even that will probably disappear on XB1.

    At this stage I think many people will try to save money and stick to PC instead of getting a new console.
    06-10-2019 08:44 PM
  4. Golfdriver97's Avatar
    Actually, the best way for MS to do this is sell a 'console' like a barebones PC. Where you buy it, and the PSU (possibly), motherboard, CPU are already installed in the case. The end user can then choose the amount of RAM, storage, and finish putting it together. Don't have any proprietary connections for RAM and storage drives, leave everything PC standard.

    At this stage I think many people will try to save money and stick to PC instead of getting a new console.
    While I would love for this to happen, I don't think it will. There are far too many XBox fans who will not venture away from consoles. And to a degree, for good reason. With a console, there is less set up, and you know the box will play your games.
    Drael646464 likes this.
    06-11-2019 07:42 AM
  5. Ryujingt3's Avatar
    Surely it will keep going, purely based on convenience. I just want something where I can play the game at the highest settings the hardware will allow. I don't want to mess around with hardware, drivers and such, or risk not being able to run it at the highest settings possible because I can't afford the latest GPU or whatever.
    06-11-2019 09:17 AM
  6. Drael646464's Avatar
    You are looking at it MS's point of view, but I'll look at it from a customer's point of view. Most of us aren't MS but consumers and gamers.
    At this stage what's the point of buying a new XB1? A PC can play almost all XB1's games. One of the last AAA that was still exclusive to XB1 recently moved towards PC but not just PC but on Steam.

    So many of the so-called exclusives ended up on other platforms. And let's not forget that on XB1 you still need to pay to play online unlike on PC.

    The only advantage I can see at this stage is physical games available on consoles and the way MS is pushing for digital-ONLY consoles and gaming even that will probably disappear on XB1.

    At this stage I think many people will try to save money and stick to PC instead of getting a new console.
    I've never really understood exclusives being a selling point. I'd rather be able to get the games on my platform of choice. Every time I hear exclusive, it annoys me a bit. With xbox and pc being related platforms, being able to take your game between the two, and remember where you were, is kind of a big plus too (play anywhere).

    When I heard MSFT was putting it's own games on steam and other stores, I was like hell yeah. A platform should be able to sell itself on its own merit. If they have to play anticompetitive to draw people in, that's just messing with the consumer experience. What you see as a negative (xbox cross compatibility with PC), I see as a positive.

    Console users, like consoles for their ease of use. You turn it on, dl or put in a game, and you game. Perhaps that experience might come to mini gaming rigs, like intels skull canyon/hades type hardware eventually with windows core and cshell, so that it can come out of the box, with xbox ui, and I think that's eventually where we will land, but there is the issue of minimum specs;

    They will need to make those PCs run on a certain minimum standardized hardware, so that you can still get your plug in, play, experience. Console users won't switch to skinned PC unless the experience is essentially the same.
    06-11-2019 11:13 PM
  7. the_moesiah's Avatar
    I've never really understood exclusives being a selling point. I'd rather be able to get the games on my platform of choice. Every time I hear exclusive, it annoys me a bit. With xbox and pc being related platforms, being able to take your game between the two, and remember where you were, is kind of a big plus too (play anywhere).

    When I heard MSFT was putting it's own games on steam and other stores, I was like hell yeah. A platform should be able to sell itself on its own merit. If they have to play anticompetitive to draw people in, that's just messing with the consumer experience. What you see as a negative (xbox cross compatibility with PC), I see as a positive.

    Console users, like consoles for their ease of use. You turn it on, dl or put in a game, and you game. Perhaps that experience might come to mini gaming rigs, like intels skull canyon/hades type hardware eventually with windows core and cshell, so that it can come out of the box, with xbox ui, and I think that's eventually where we will land, but there is the issue of minimum specs;

    They will need to make those PCs run on a certain minimum standardized hardware, so that you can still get your plug in, play, experience. Console users won't switch to skinned PC unless the experience is essentially the same.
    I really think that exclusives are the only selling point for consoles. Nintendo is obvious. I was all set to buy a XB1 until I looked at Sony's exclusives for this gen -- they simply had more games that I wanted to play. I was actually looking for an excuse to stick with Xbox but then Shemue 3 was announced. That and VR was the tipping point.
    06-13-2019 08:26 PM
  8. the_moesiah's Avatar
    You are looking at it MS's point of view, but I'll look at it from a customer's point of view. Most of us aren't MS but consumers and gamers.
    At this stage what's the point of buying a new XB1? A PC can play almost all XB1's games. One of the last AAA that was still exclusive to XB1 recently moved towards PC but not just PC but on Steam.

    So many of the so-called exclusives ended up on other platforms. And let's not forget that on XB1 you still need to pay to play online unlike on PC.

    The only advantage I can see at this stage is physical games available on consoles and the way MS is pushing for digital-ONLY consoles and gaming even that will probably disappear on XB1.

    At this stage I think many people will try to save money and stick to PC instead of getting a new console.
    I actually was trying to look at it from both points of view. I mentioned MS's POV in my first post, but why should I bother buying Project Scarlett when it's just a dumbed down PC? Instead of spending $400+ on that in a year or two I can build (or buy) a PC now that will play all of those Xbox games, have access to both Xbox and PlayStation subscription services AND can take advantage of an the amazing Steam sales?

    Seriously, what incentive do I have to choose Xbox over that?
    06-13-2019 08:29 PM
  9. Drael646464's Avatar
    I actually was trying to look at it from both points of view. I mentioned MS's POV in my first post, but why should I bother buying Project Scarlett when it's just a dumbed down PC? Instead of spending $400+ on that in a year or two I can build (or buy) a PC now that will play all of those Xbox games, have access to both Xbox and PlayStation subscription services AND can take advantage of an the amazing Steam sales?

    Seriously, what incentive do I have to choose Xbox over that?
    Console makers don't make money selling consoles. They make money selling games and accessories. So I think Microsoft's approach is moving towards, with game pass for xbox, game pass for PC, and xstream (on multiple platforms), is to focus on selling services and games that people can play on their platform of choice.

    Sort of a non-gatekeeping mentality, where you 'play it on a console experience if you like'.

    So I think the answer is from their perspective, as well as yours is 'do it as you like'. I really don't think Microsoft cares if you don't want a new xbox. All that matters to them, is whether you play their games or use their services.

    Consoles continue to exist as 'an easy no fuss approach to the latest games in great graphical detail', in the same way people get tv box's and smart tv's for tv's and movies.

    If one is inclined towards the extra technicality of gaming on PC, there was never any reason to get a console, either now, or in the past, really. Apart from maybe multiplayer games. There's always been a few more of those on a console.
    Last edited by Drael646464; 06-13-2019 at 11:21 PM.
    06-13-2019 11:01 PM
  10. Drael646464's Avatar
    I really think that exclusives are the only selling point for consoles. Nintendo is obvious. I was all set to buy a XB1 until I looked at Sony's exclusives for this gen -- they simply had more games that I wanted to play. I was actually looking for an excuse to stick with Xbox but then Shemue 3 was announced. That and VR was the tipping point.
    Not much of a value proposition buying a whole setup of hardware for a handful of games, that you have to buy ontop of that. That essentially makes those games double price (because you are paying for the console just to play them, and have no actual interest in the console experience itself).

    VR is on PC too. It's arguably much more at home on PC with more titles and more hardware options.

    I think the actual selling point of consoles is that they are 'press play and go', support more multiplayer games, and have an easy 'plug and go' hardware and services ecosystem. built around them.

    The benefit to them, is much like the benefit of smart TV's, they are fiddle free and dedicated to the media. If one wanted to set up a PC similarly though one could. Get all the settings in various games tune, put all the games in bigbox, boot to bigbox. Run it on a mini, so it's portable. Bit more setup involved though.

    Likewise with a smart TV setup; could set up plex and kodi etc, and run your TV with windows 10, boot into kodi and have an easy to use setup. But there's initial setup, and it's not geared to control via remote.

    Something off the shelf, that's ready to go makes sense to people that aren't fiddlers. Fiddlers will buy things specifically so they CAN fine tune and customize.
    Last edited by Drael646464; 06-13-2019 at 11:30 PM.
    06-13-2019 11:04 PM
  11. Guest_aotf's Avatar
    I've never really understood exclusives being a selling point. I'd rather be able to get the games on my platform of choice. Every time I hear exclusive, it annoys me a bit. With xbox and pc being related platforms, being able to take your game between the two, and remember where you were, is kind of a big plus too (play anywhere).
    Well, it's a positive for consumers so I'd rather they continue doing this and even push their games to steam. When I say there is absolutely no need for me and many to ever buy a XB1 or any future XB console it's actually a big plus for us.

    But here you got to look at the bigger picture to understand the importance of exclusives.
    I think games is the priority for a big percentage of gamers.
    When we have a few console makers competing with each other one of the few ways to stand out from the others is to make their own games.

    The reward of investing in making games is more than just getting the profit from games, it's about attracting a whole lot of players so they can keep playing in their ecosystem.

    When you think of exclusives you should think of the amount of money that is invested by these company into gaming. Sony puts a lot of cash into making games. And the priority is more about quality games rather than just make a game that makes huge profits. They can afford to make games like Horizon ZD, GoW or spider-man which are games that don't depend on microtransactions and loot box, but are just there to make the console popular. Same thing with Nintendo and their first party games.

    Do you think these companies would invest so much if they were 3rd party games?
    I would rather see them invest money into making games exclusives for their platform than they not investing at all.
    Exclusives are actually a VERY positive thing. Not timed exclusives though, they are very negative thing.

    Next, why should I buy a XB console if the PC that I already own plays all the games the XB1 can play and I don't need to pay to play online? I'm a gamer who like loads of different type of games including PC games so I would own a PC regardless.
    You say being able to play on both PC and console is a big plus. So you agree that people do game on PC. If that is the case why buy a console in the first place?
    06-15-2019 08:47 AM
  12. Golfdriver97's Avatar
    I personally don't care for exclusives. I am in the camp of let everyone play who wants to play on whatever platform they want. My preference is PC...Sony, Nintendo...if you reading....sell me your emulators on your respective sites. $40 for the emulation software. Then let me buy your games. You have then not lost any money in building a system for a loss and have sold a piece of programming for profit, along with your games.

    Let the consoles sell on their own merit. The Switch has a pretty good selling point of being portable, and yet can be played on a full sized TV. That is a selling point...not the exclusivity.
    Drael646464 likes this.
    06-15-2019 09:07 AM
  13. Drael646464's Avatar
    Well, it's a positive for consumers so I'd rather they continue doing this and even push their games to steam. When I say there is absolutely no need for me and many to ever buy a XB1 or any future XB console it's actually a big plus for us.

    But here you got to look at the bigger picture to understand the importance of exclusives.
    I think games is the priority for a big percentage of gamers.
    When we have a few console makers competing with each other one of the few ways to stand out from the others is to make their own games.

    The reward of investing in making games is more than just getting the profit from games, it's about attracting a whole lot of players so they can keep playing in their ecosystem.

    When you think of exclusives you should think of the amount of money that is invested by these company into gaming. Sony puts a lot of cash into making games. And the priority is more about quality games rather than just make a game that makes huge profits. They can afford to make games like Horizon ZD, GoW or spider-man which are games that don't depend on microtransactions and loot box, but are just there to make the console popular. Same thing with Nintendo and their first party games.

    Do you think these companies would invest so much if they were 3rd party games?
    I would rather see them invest money into making games exclusives for their platform than they not investing at all.
    Exclusives are actually a VERY positive thing. Not timed exclusives though, they are very negative thing.

    Next, why should I buy a XB console if the PC that I already own plays all the games the XB1 can play and I don't need to pay to play online? I'm a gamer who like loads of different type of games including PC games so I would own a PC regardless.
    You say being able to play on both PC and console is a big plus. So you agree that people do game on PC. If that is the case why buy a console in the first place?
    As I said, console makers get nothing from the sale of consoles. They get money (like sony) from licensing of the games, and sale of accessories. If Sony had a store on PC, would you buy a console?

    Everyone I know, that owns a console, doesn't game on PC. They have the console in their lounge, they use it for casual gaming, maybe multiplayer. I think if there was no such thing as an exclusive, there would still be a solid market for consoles.

    I know there are some PC gamers, like yourself that get the console just for exclusives. But I think you are a minority of consumers.

    The main group that would loose, with no exclusives, is sony. Because microsoft can earn money whether you game on xbox, PC, or stream from their upcoming xstream, it doesn't matter to them, whether you are locked into an OS. What matters to them, is whether they make good games, and have those good games available on their services (microsoft store, xbox game studio, xstream). That's why they focus on buying first party game developer houses and gave a litany of games under their brand.

    Likewise Nintendo innovates in hardware. Whether it's DS or switch, or Wii, what they make isn't dependant on exclusives.

    1/3 of MSFTs profits or thereabouts come from games. They are currently valued at 1 trillion, so it's not exactly failing their gaming strategy.

    From a consumer POV, there is an advantage tho. You can play games on both, keep your save data from both, and titles that are exclusive (there are games only on PC or xbox), you can stream them elsewhere. The advantage is that you are not locked in.

    This is like the iOS argument. People will say that Apple is higher quality because it's proprietary, but lots of people actively hate the proprietary nature of apple. Both are valid positions, but they also both exist.

    In terms of AAA games, not that this is my major bag (I find them a bit linear, and samey), there are plenty outside of Horizon Zero Dawn. Tomb Raider, Far Cry, Mass Effect, Fallout, NieR: Automata, Elder Scrolls, Witcher, Red Dead, GTA, Assasins Creed etc etc.

    Lack of exclusivity hasn't prevented any of those titles from delivering quality. If anything it's made a large consumer base, that has enabled far more of those titles to exist than would if they were dependant on first party funding from console manufacturers.

    In fact, I would argue that because selling an exclusive requires in house funding, and makes less profit because it's a more limited audience, that exclusivity is harming those games.

    You can actually see that if you look at history. Take something like Baldurs gate dark alliance. They didn't survive a single generation of the console despite being popular. If it had been on xbox, and pc, I bet there would be a sequel either out, or in the works.

    A lot of console exclusives just die. AAA games that are cross-platform survive. Think there will be a horizon zero dawn on PlayStation 6? Maybe, but I wouldn't bet money on it. I would, however, bet money there will be a red dead 3.
    Last edited by Drael646464; 06-15-2019 at 10:38 PM.
    06-15-2019 09:46 PM
  14. Guest_aotf's Avatar
    As I said, console makers get nothing from the sale of consoles. They get money (like sony) from licensing of the games, and sale of accessories. If Sony had a store on PC, would you buy a console?
    They aren't making their profit out of console sales but the goal is to get people into their ecosystem and once they are in they are likely to spend more on games from their platform. It's really that simple.

    And if Sony puts out all it's game on PC then no I wouldn't buy their console. I would stick to PC.
    So yes they would get my money for the game but that doesn't mean that I'll keep buying games from them.

    The "everyone I know argument" cannot really be a valid argument because you cannot make a generality based on personal experience.

    I know there are some PC gamers, like yourself that get the console just for exclusives. But I think you are a minority of consumers.
    I don't consider myself a PC or a console gamer. I'm just a gamer. I'm not sure there are more people who are only on consoles or don't have a PC.
    Now, if we exclude the people who don't own or play a PC and who would buy a console regardless, you got to consider all others are potential gamers who won't be regulars on your ecosystem. And these are more often than not actual gamers who spend a lot more money than casuals who will often just buy few games here and there.

    Also we got to consider the image of the console with more games. In a direct competition between two consoles, the reasons why people will buy one console over the other are the differences between them and exclusives and game library are the differences not 3rd party games that are present on both.

    What matters to them, is whether they make good games, and have those good games available on their services
    Actually no. I don't agree. Sony has just about as many services as MS. Sony has PS+ and PSNow. The difference is that MS are focusing way more on these services than Sony.
    And what is the focus with something like Game pass?
    It's about quantity of games. Looks at the ads and how they are promoting it. It's all about quantity of games. So push games through the service. Quality reality doesn't seem to be the priority. We've seen it with 3 of the last 4 major games that they released. The unfinished, flawed or buggy games with missing basic features. Games like SoT, SoD2 or Crackdown 3.

    Nintendo doesn't depend on exclusives? Then why don't you think they put their games on other platforms?

    1/3 of MSFTs profits or thereabouts come from games. They are currently valued at 1 trillion, so it's not exactly failing their gaming strategy.
    Do you have a link for that? Can you show me when gaming actually ever made a profit for MS?
    Personally I don't think the XB division ever made a profit for MS but if you have proof showing the opposite please post it. (And we are talking about profit not revenue)

    From a consumer POV, there is an advantage tho. You can play games on both, keep your save data from both, and titles that are exclusive (there are games only on PC or xbox), you can stream them elsewhere. The advantage is that you are not locked in.
    One moment you talk about people who only play consoles and now here you are talking about people who are also on PC? So if they are on PC, why do they need to buy a XB1 already?
    Almost all XB1 games are on PC. It's been years since there was a real XB1 exclusive.

    In terms of AAA games, not that this is my major bag (I find them a bit linear, and samey), there are plenty outside of Horizon Zero Dawn. Tomb Raider, Far Cry, Mass Effect, Fallout, NieR: Automata, Elder Scrolls, Witcher, Red Dead, GTA, Assasins Creed etc etc.
    Sorry what? Can you tell me how Horizon ZD, The Witcher, Fallout or even Red Dead or GTA are linear and the same?? Have you played and finished these games?

    In fact, I would argue that because selling an exclusive requires in house funding, and makes less profit because it's a more limited audience, that exclusivity is harming those games.
    The whole point is that exclusives provide a lot more indirect money because they get more and more people into their ecosystem. A console-only gamer who will want to buy a console will often look at game library and move toward the console which offers the most games. Some will go towards the one which is more popular, and throughout console history the consoles that sold the best are the ones with the more number of games and exclusives. That's just facts through history.

    By your logic, why wouldn't MS release their games on PS4 or switch? Why are they going with these timed exclusives? Why aren't Nintendo or every company put their games only on their console?
    Why does MS fans talk about exclusives when it comes to comparison vs Stadia but don't want to talk about it when it comes on consoles?

    A lot of console exclusives just die. AAA games that are cross-platform survive. Think there will be a horizon zero dawn on PlayStation 6? Maybe, but I wouldn't bet money on it. I would, however, bet money there will be a red dead 3.
    Err, Halo, Forza, Gears, Uncharted, Mario Kart, Last of us, GT, Mario, Zelda, MLB The Show, God of War...
    Horizon Zero Dawn is an example of a studio given creative freedom and being allowed to make the game they want to make. It's not going to be sequels after sequels.
    06-16-2019 08:32 AM
  15. Guest_aotf's Avatar
    I personally don't care for exclusives. I am in the camp of let everyone play who wants to play on whatever platform they want. My preference is PC...Sony, Nintendo...if you reading....sell me your emulators on your respective sites. $40 for the emulation software. Then let me buy your games. You have then not lost any money in building a system for a loss and have sold a piece of programming for profit, along with your games.

    Let the consoles sell on their own merit. The Switch has a pretty good selling point of being portable, and yet can be played on a full sized TV. That is a selling point...not the exclusivity.
    Right. So you wouldn't buy a XB1 since all their games are on PC?

    What you're saying is a bit like saying don't invest in consoles and just make games.
    You say Switch sells on it's own merit but you still tell Nintendo to put their games on PC.

    You got to look at exclusives as part of the console or platform. If exclusives are not used to make their platforms attractive, they become a lot less valuable to these companies.

    I think if these are not used to get people into their platforms then they wouldn't exist. If Sony or Nintendo don't make exclusives for their platforms they might as well stop making consoles. And these games will probably not be profitable without pushing for anti-gaming stuff like microtransactions and loot box...
    06-16-2019 03:20 PM
  16. Golfdriver97's Avatar
    So you wouldn't buy a XB1 since all their games are on PC?
    Well, I do have an XB1. However, that console is older than my gaming PC. If I was at the point where the position was reversed, no...I wouldn't buy an XB1.

    What you're saying is a bit like saying don't invest in consoles and just make games.
    You say Switch sells on it's own merit but you still tell Nintendo to put their games on PC.
    Actually, what I was saying is I would like the choice of playing a game on whatever platform I would like. I'm not saying that those companies shouldn't make consoles; however, barring the option to sell to another platform, like PC, is limiting the possible income that those companies can make.
    Drael646464 likes this.
    06-16-2019 06:05 PM
  17. Golfdriver97's Avatar
    I think if there was no such thing as an exclusive, there would still be a solid market for consoles.
    I'm somewhat inclined to agree. You will have groups of friends who all only have one or the other sticking to it to play online together.
    Drael646464 likes this.
    06-16-2019 06:20 PM
  18. Drael646464's Avatar
    And if Sony puts out all it's game on PC then no I wouldn't buy their console. I would stick to PC.
    So yes they would get my money for the game but that doesn't mean that I'll keep buying games from them.
    Well your argument was that if they are exclusive, you'll buy them, but if they are on PC, you'll just buy them on PC. So if they had a store with exclusives, the effect would be basically the same, no?

    Sony is said to be leasing xstream from microsoft, so probably you'll be able to play all those games with a subscription and good internet via PC. So this isn't just theoretical, if playing those exclusives is your sole reason for having the console, that may be redundant soon.

    Now, if we exclude the people who don't own or play a PC and who would buy a console regardless, you got to consider all others are potential gamers who won't be regulars on your ecosystem. And these are more often than not actual gamers who spend a lot more money than casuals who will often just buy few games here and there.
    Maybe. It's hard to say who buys the most games, but this could be a factor. However, if you have two competing systems to buy games on, you might buy less games on the one platform.

    Also we got to consider the image of the console with more games. In a direct competition between two consoles, the reasons why people will buy one console over the other are the differences between them and exclusives and game library are the differences not 3rd party games that are present on both.
    IDK if this is entirely true. There are differences in the sales methods/services, the controllers and third-party accessories, and the graphics power/hardware itself. More of things you don't actually want isn't useful either, nor do all games on PC, end up on playstation (being easier to port to xbox). What matters to the gamer at the end of the day, is if their platform has the games they WANT, in the format they like to use (hardware, software interface, service model)

    Actually no. I don't agree. Sony has just about as many services as MS. Sony has PS+ and PSNow. The difference is that MS are focusing way more on these services than Sony.
    And what is the focus with something like Game pass?
    It's about quantity of games. Looks at the ads and how they are promoting it. It's all about quantity of games. So push games through the service. Quality reality doesn't seem to be the priority. We've seen it with 3 of the last 4 major games that they released. The unfinished, flawed or buggy games with missing basic features. Games like SoT, SoD2 or Crackdown 3.
    Can't say I've played any of those. I think though Xbox studios, and all it's subsidary studios have released more games than that recently.

    You literally just said above, that the consumer wants the platform with more games. Why does this suddenly not apply to a subscription service? And why does it impact quality, in your mind? Surely, having BETTER games in a subscription service, that people want to play, is more important than simply having LOTS. MSFT doesn't just push how many, it pushes it's best titles.

    Game pass is a solid reason for choosing xbox, if you want a console.

    Nintendo doesn't depend on exclusives? Then why don't you think they put their games on other platforms?
    Well, you might be right, in that nintendo, because some of their releases (unlike say, switch) haven't had as many crossplatform releases. Possibly streaming will kill some of their moat in terms of portable gaming too. But generally they are relied quite a bit on hardware innovation.

    If nintendo wasn't playing third player, and had a history of crossplatform support, I doubt they'd rely as heavily on their own IP.

    Do you have a link for that? Can you show me when gaming actually ever made a profit for MS?
    Personally I don't think the XB division ever made a profit for MS but if you have proof showing the opposite please post it. (And we are talking about profit not revenue)
    I can see your angle here. They buy quite a few studios every year. Perhaps it's a loss investment scenario like netflix. They had 10b revenue last year, but maybe they are spending all of that to grow the business. Still it's a solid business, and if they needed to, they could stop doing that.

    You can't say netflix is failing because it's borrowing money. Everyone still generally sees them as succeeding, but they are investing so that their competitors can't beat them.

    Same deal with MSFT. If their revenue continues to grow at recent rates, and MSFT continues to reinvest in gaming houses, they'll be well ahead of the competition in terms of profits later on.

    https://www.geekwire.com/2018/micros...sony-nintendo/

    One moment you talk about people who only play consoles and now here you are talking about people who are also on PC? So if they are on PC, why do they need to buy a XB1 already?
    Almost all XB1 games are on PC. It's been years since there was a real XB1 exclusive.
    Well there are some exclusives. Xbox has never been soaked in exclusives TBH, even going back to the original xbox. But the selling point here isn't just playing on PC, xbox games. It's playing on any device, xbox game pass games. Not just stream from your device, or stream to specific devices ala playstation. It's unbound, or at least will be.

    I think eventually playstation will go a similar way, with their sub service if game streaming is successful.

    Sorry what? Can you tell me how Horizon ZD, The Witcher, Fallout or even Red Dead or GTA are linear and the same?? Have you played and finished these games?
    I didn't say those games specifically are the same. There is a lot of overlap between console style AAA's tho. Special vision/ability button. Cutscenes leading down a linear plot on a central arc.

    It's not like these sorts of games have several wildly different endings, generally speaking (not talking about specific examples). The production values and investment tend to lead away from significant player choice. Open world is a little different, but the main story beat arcs in say GTA V, are the same regardless of what side stuff you do. This is different from say pillars of eternity 2, or dragon age origins, where the main story has multiple endings, despite some linearity.

    One might argue that's illusory, but I like the illusion. I think you could say red dead is a bit different in this regard, but often AAA's are primarily cinematic, and use similar mechanisms and gameplay style mix (elements of RPG, third person, lots of cutscenes, action driven etc).

    This certainly doesn't apply every AAA, but look at the recent dragon age; it's more like other AAA console games, and less like it's former self. There's a certain convergence on what sells, as with say, blockbuster movies, a certain mix of popular ingredients, and this makes them FAR less varied, than AA's, or indies.

    A console-only gamer who will want to buy a console will often look at game library and move toward the console which offers the most games. Some will go towards the one which is more popular, and throughout console history the consoles that sold the best are the ones with the more number of games and exclusives. That's just facts through history.
    IDK if that's sound logic. I think console buyers will be attracted to numerous factors. In terms of games, they might prefer the console which has the most titles of their particular genre liking. And in particular, for the best price. If one liked say, rpgs of a non-japanese flare, xbox might be a solid choice. Likewise if they preferred japanese style rpgs, playstation might be a solid choice. Remember, of cross platform titles, not everything hits both consoles. There is more cross compatibility between xbox and pc, and so it's cheaper to develop an xbox title in addition to your PC title, than to do a playstation port as well.

    For a huge game, this might not matter, but for indies and AA's, it does.

    The other reason people buy consoles, is as a media centre. An xbox makes a rather handy media center, with the bonus of more storage than smart tv's typically have, and gaming. So does a PS pro.

    Almost no one is going to use a PC as a media centre, and TV native offerings are fairy anaemic. If you have even a passing interest in gaming, it's a worthy investment, particularly because the consoles themselves are sold with no real margin, and often on special.

    There's also the issue of WHICH exclusives if you were to factor that. The offerings are not identical in play style, and most players have preferences. Simply having 'more' exclusives, is useless if you don't like any of them, or most of them. One reason Nintendo has never appealed to me; less crossplatform, and the exclusives are barely interesting to me.

    For me, PS is a similar deal. There are about maybe two game IPs I'd actually play that are exclusive. And there are similar titles elsewhere anyway. PS is loaded with jrpg style games which is great for some, but never tickled my fancy. I played like one final fantasy, and they have gotten pretty generic since (not that these are exclusive any more).

    By your logic, why wouldn't MS release their games on PS4 or switch? Why are they going with these timed exclusives? Why aren't Nintendo or every company put their games only on their console?
    They are, they are releasing minecraft games on switch. More coming I suspect. PS, I doubt. But MSFT is leasing them xstream, so they are hardly playing anticompetitive.

    Why does MS fans talk about exclusives when it comes to comparison vs Stadia but don't want to talk about it when it comes on consoles?
    IDK. I don't think that'll be the primary POD. I think the sales model and streaming quality will be, as well as the in built audience for xbox, and the difference in hardware costs (afaik, xbox only needs a controller, whereas stadia requires a controller with inbuilt SoC). How either do remains to be seen, and will probably be mostly down to marketing.

    Err, Halo, Forza, Gears, Uncharted, Mario Kart, Last of us, GT, Mario, Zelda, MLB The Show, God of War...
    Horizon Zero Dawn is an example of a studio given creative freedom and being allowed to make the game they want to make. It's not going to be sequels after sequels.
    All the studios under xbox studios have significant creative freedom. I don't think 'Outer worlds' or 'wasteland 3' are going to be hampered or altered in any way, nor any future titles from inxile or obsidian.

    What I am saying though, is that cross-platform IPs are very strong. It's capitalism really, if you have a game that 100% of sit down gamers can buy, as opposed to 40% of sitdown gamers can buy, that's more sales. If exclusives were the most robust, economically, then all games would be exclusive, as opposed to the majority of AAA, AA being cross-platform to some degree.

    It might make sense to the console makers, in terms of giving their platform 'flavour' versus the competition consoles, but I think saying it offers developers the most freedom is misleading. Crossplatform developers have a lot of freedom, including those under the xbox studios brand.

    IDK about sony, or their contracts, but first party distributors often have fairly restrictive contracts. If the makers of horizon zero dawn wanted to make say, a RTS strategy game, and then a complicated tactical top down RPG, and leave off another true sucessor for 5 years, they probably couldn't.

    If obsidian wanted to do the same, or inxile, I bet they could, at least to a greater degree. I don't think that's freedom the exclusive thing, I think it comes with a tonne of expectations. There are distinct expectations with such a contract. Whereas xbox studios contracts are often fairly open, so long as money is made, they have a lot of license. To me, as an outsider (i'm not a dev), this appears to be more freedom.
    Last edited by Drael646464; 06-17-2019 at 01:39 AM.
    Golfdriver97 likes this.
    06-16-2019 11:20 PM
  19. Drael646464's Avatar
    If I were to summarize all that, it would be like this:

    For YOU, the number of exclusives are the sole determinant in buying a console over another (baring VR, which as a PC user, you have good access to anyway). For others, it may not be.

    They might choose xbox for game pass, or for it's list of Xbox enhanced games that play better graphically. They might choose Xbox for the exclusives or timed exclusives available on there (as opposed to simply the number).

    They might even choose based on something like 4k Bluray capability, or HDD swapability, or ability to play their already purchased games. There are lots of reasons consumers do things, and not all consumers or even a significant number of consumers necessarily think like you.

    There was an argument on south park seasons ago about which platform had the best controller. I think a lot of consumers care about this, and it's quite subjective.
    Golfdriver97 likes this.
    06-17-2019 01:48 AM
  20. Golfdriver97's Avatar
    If I were to summarize all that, it would be like this:

    For YOU, the number of exclusives are the sole determinant in buying a console over another (baring VR, which as a PC user, you have good access to anyway). For others, it may not be.

    They might choose xbox for game pass, or for it's list of Xbox enhanced games that play better graphically. They might choose Xbox for the exclusives or timed exclusives available on there (as opposed to simply the number).

    They might even choose based on something like 4k Bluray capability, or HDD swapability, or ability to play their already purchased games. There are lots of reasons consumers do things, and not all consumers or even a significant number of consumers necessarily think like you.

    There was an argument on south park seasons ago about which platform had the best controller. I think a lot of consumers care about this, and it's quite subjective.
    I'm inclined to think that there isn't just one reason that people buy one console over another. If I was forced to choose a new one now, I'm honestly not sure which I would pick. By comparison, both newly announced ones are poor options for me. The biggest reason I chose the XB1 was because I have a couple friends in real life that have them.

    However, we have diverged away from the OP's original question....is there still a point to them? We are starting to blur the differences between a PC and a console.
    Drael646464 likes this.
    06-17-2019 07:52 AM
  21. Drael646464's Avatar
    I'm inclined to think that there isn't just one reason that people buy one console over another. If I was forced to choose a new one now, I'm honestly not sure which I would pick. By comparison, both newly announced ones are poor options for me. The biggest reason I chose the XB1 was because I have a couple friends in real life that have them.

    However, we have diverged away from the OP's original question....is there still a point to them? We are starting to blur the differences between a PC and a console.
    I'm not sure I understand that second sentence that well. Xbox has been running on windows core, for some time. It's always used similar software/codebase for games, apart from the UWP stuff, and the UWP stuff has been around for some time also. When MSFT made the xbox originally, it was closer to a PC than the playstation was. It was, apart from some hardware oddities over the generations, somewhat rooted in the PC.

    So at a software level, I don't get how that blur is 'starting to happen', I'd say it does way back now.

    PlayStation, in terms of hardware, with the PS Pro, is substantially more similar to PC hardware than it's previous iterations. So in terms of hardware, PlayStation is making the exact same moves.

    So you might say hardware similarity is 'starting to blur' with PC's accross consoles, but that applies to both PS and xbox.

    For game exclusives themselves, xbox is, and always has had some, similarity with PC, There are about 30 exclusives and 70 timed exclusives at this time, and that's about the number xbox has always had. Going back to the xbox one, there weren't a vast number of exclusives.

    PS has about 110+?" total exclusives (timed and exclusive)

    It's a bit more, but that's always been about the level of difference, PS has always focused on more exclusives than anyone else, xbox more on timed exclusives that respect developer desires to reach broader audiences (as most devs do). The level of exclusives on xbox are about the same as the level on the switch.

    I don't really see what's new about THAT either. I mean, what's really changed? Anything? Could we substantiate the game that something has changed, whether a comparative number of exclusives or intra-windows compatibility in some new way?

    Am I imagining that xbox, the original, didn't have that many exclusives either?

    Because going on raw numbers I see floated around, and going back the the original xbox, and 360, I'm not seeing a sudden change. It's more just than an xbox can do more of what a PC can do (run UWP apps, slightly better game codebase portability), and that's about all that's changed.

    Am I wrong?

    Is anything, apart from the xbox's ability to more easily get ported to from Windows, either games or UWP apps, is anything else really changed at all?
    06-17-2019 11:20 AM
  22. Golfdriver97's Avatar
    I'm not sure I understand that second sentence that well. Xbox has been running on windows core, for some time. It's always used similar software/codebase for games, apart from the UWP stuff, and the UWP stuff has been around for some time also. When MSFT made the xbox originally, it was closer to a PC than the playstation was. It was, apart from some hardware oddities over the generations, somewhat rooted in the PC.

    So at a software level, I don't get how that blur is 'starting to happen', I'd say it does way back now.

    PlayStation, in terms of hardware, with the PS Pro, is substantially more similar to PC hardware than it's previous iterations. So in terms of hardware, PlayStation is making the exact same moves.

    So you might say hardware similarity is 'starting to blur' with PC's accross consoles, but that applies to both PS and xbox.

    For game exclusives themselves, xbox is, and always has had some, similarity with PC, There are about 30 exclusives and 70 timed exclusives at this time, and that's about the number xbox has always had. Going back to the xbox one, there weren't a vast number of exclusives.

    PS has about 110+?" total exclusives (timed and exclusive)

    It's a bit more, but that's always been about the level of difference, PS has always focused on more exclusives than anyone else, xbox more on timed exclusives that respect developer desires to reach broader audiences (as most devs do). The level of exclusives on xbox are about the same as the level on the switch.

    I don't really see what's new about THAT either. I mean, what's really changed? Anything? Could we substantiate the game that something has changed, whether a comparative number of exclusives or intra-windows compatibility in some new way?

    Am I imagining that xbox, the original, didn't have that many exclusives either?

    Because going on raw numbers I see floated around, and going back the the original xbox, and 360, I'm not seeing a sudden change. It's more just than an xbox can do more of what a PC can do (run UWP apps, slightly better game codebase portability), and that's about all that's changed.

    Am I wrong?

    Is anything, apart from the xbox's ability to more easily get ported to from Windows, either games or UWP apps, is anything else really changed at all?
    It was a hardware point of view that I was thinking of when I made the comment of the lines being blurred. Some of the diehard fans on either side of the console debate need to start realizing that they are essentially PCs, now, with a semi specific task in mind.
    06-17-2019 01:42 PM
  23. Guest_aotf's Avatar
    Well your argument was that if they are exclusive, you'll buy them, but if they are on PC, you'll just buy them on PC. So if they had a store with exclusives, the effect would be basically the same, no?

    Sony is said to be leasing xstream from microsoft, so probably you'll be able to play all those games with a subscription and good internet via PC. So this isn't just theoretical, if playing those exclusives is your sole reason for having the console, that may be redundant soon.
    Well, Sony already have a streaming service where you can rent some of it's games on PC. It's called PS Now and they have been doing for years now.
    But you know what? Renting has never been a thing for me. I buy my games. Unlike some people renting games isn't something I suddenly become crazy about. I mean if all cared about was play the game and that's it i could rent the console and the game for 1-2 weeks and play a game but that's not how I play.

    Can't say I've played any of those. I think though Xbox studios, and all it's subsidary studios have released more games than that recently.
    I'm talking about major first party games released since January 2018.
    Just 4 games. SoT, SoD2, FH4 and Crackdown 3. Do you have others?

    You literally just said above, that the consumer wants the platform with more games. Why does this suddenly not apply to a subscription service?
    Because a renting service that mostly have old arcade multiplats cannot be compared to a console having more games argument.

    And why does it impact quality, in your mind? Surely, having BETTER games in a subscription service, that people want to play, is more important than simply having LOTS.
    I already told you why. Looks at game pass ads. The slogan "more is better".


    I've already mentioned 3/4 recent major MS games. When these games do badly MS fans tells us "it's ok, it's only 10 bucks on game pass". Since game sales is no longer the priority, the number of people playing the game is. (see MS's recent announcement). Reviews and launching a quality game doesn't seem to be the priority compared to when you only sell games.

    Game pass is a solid reason for choosing xbox, if you want a console.
    Is it really? I just wonder how renting mostly old arcade games is that important. Games that again all on PC.
    When I buy a new gen console. It's to play new gen games. I wonder how many buy a new gen console to play moslty old arcade games.

    I can see your angle here. They buy quite a few studios every year. Perhaps it's a loss investment scenario like netflix. They had 10b revenue last year, but maybe they are spending all of that to grow the business. Still it's a solid business, and if they needed to, they could stop doing that.

    You can't say netflix is failing because it's borrowing money. Everyone still generally sees them as succeeding, but they are investing so that their competitors can't beat them.

    Same deal with MSFT. If their revenue continues to grow at recent rates, and MSFT continues to reinvest in gaming houses, they'll be well ahead of the competition in terms of profits later on.

    https://www.geekwire.com/2018/micros...sony-nintendo/
    I told you not revenue. You initially talked about profit but then you show me a link that talks about revenue. These are not the same thing.
    MS will never comment on whether the Xbox divsion is profitable or not.
    It is likely that it never ever was profitable.
    MS insiders believe this:
    https://www.cgmagonline.com/2017/08/...ording-report/

    You want to compare the XB division to Netflix?
    But the problem with this is that XB hardly has the same market share.
    It's far from being the market leader. Always outperformed by Playstation and even now the Switch is actually doing a lot better than the XB1.
    And even in the PC market, it's WAY behind the competition.

    Sorry, but your comparison doesn't make sense to me.

    Well there are some exclusives. Xbox has never been soaked in exclusives TBH, even going back to the original xbox. But the selling point here isn't just playing on PC, xbox games. It's playing on any device, xbox game pass games. Not just stream from your device, or stream to specific devices ala playstation. It's unbound, or at least will be.

    I think eventually playstation will go a similar way, with their sub service if game streaming is successful.
    I'm sorry but what are you talking about? PS already has streaming service, renting service, remote play, cross play, cross buy...
    Can you name all these service that the XB has that the PS doesn't?

    It's not like these sorts of games have several wildly different endings, generally speaking (not talking about specific examples).
    But you did take examples when you named games. I mean Witcher or Fallout have mostly different endings depending on choices. Same for few you mentioned. And even if it has only one ending what's wrong with that? Story driven games is a genre.
    If you want some games with quite a few different endings depending on player choice, try the Quantic dream or supermassive games...


    IDK if that's sound logic. I think console buyers will be attracted to numerous factors. In terms of games, they might prefer the console which has the most titles of their particular genre liking. And in particular, for the best price. If one liked say, rpgs of a non-japanese flare, xbox might be a solid choice. Likewise if they preferred japanese style rpgs, playstation might be a solid choice.
    The problem with a statement like this is because of the big difference between the two. You cannot say that the XB has more non-Japanese RPG. That's not true. The PS4 has more in almost every genre. Whether it's single player or games that has multiplayer.
    The only one genre where XB may be ahead is the racing genre, where MS just keep releasing Forza every year.
    You are trying to make the PS sound like a console that is packed with Japanese oriented games and only have that. But that is totally misleading. While it does have Japanese games, it also have WAY more western exclusives that the XB1.

    You started talking about the various reasons people buy a new console.
    Media center? Ok but we are talking about future XB console. Isn't the XB1 or PS4 that you already have enough? You seriously think a lot of people will buy a new gen console for that?

    Also when I say the consoles that sold the most every generation is the one with the biggest library and number of exclusives. That's a fact. It's not an opinion.
    You can look it up.

    They are, they are releasing minecraft games on switch. More coming I suspect. PS, I doubt. But MSFT is leasing them xstream, so they are hardly playing anticompetitive.
    So you're going to talk about Minecraft as an example. A game that was created and released on all platforms before MS bought it. They are releasing it on Switch and then add the number of switch players on minecraft in their active live users when they present the numbers...
    Oh and for your info, Since you like to name one game, Sony released Journey on PC so there.


    afaik, xbox only needs a controller, whereas stadia requires a controller with inbuilt SoC
    What is inbuilt SoC? And do you have a link for that?

    IDK about sony, or their contracts, but first party distributors often have fairly restrictive contracts. If the makers of horizon zero dawn wanted to make say, a RTS strategy game, and then a complicated tactical top down RPG, and leave off another true sucessor for 5 years, they probably couldn't.
    That's literally what they did. Moving from an FPS like Killzone to an action RPG.
    Look at Sucker Punch moving from inFamous to Ghost of Tsushima.

    In the meantime, 343i is making their Nth Halo, Coalition makes more gears and turn10 makes yet another forza...
    06-17-2019 05:57 PM
  24. Guest_aotf's Avatar
    I replied to your other post, but I guess it's too long. It's waiting for moderation approval.

    If I were to summarize all that, it would be like this:

    For YOU, the number of exclusives are the sole determinant in buying a console over another (baring VR, which as a PC user, you have good access to anyway). For others, it may not be.

    They might choose xbox for game pass, or for it's list of Xbox enhanced games that play better graphically. They might choose Xbox for the exclusives or timed exclusives available on there (as opposed to simply the number).

    They might even choose based on something like 4k Bluray capability, or HDD swapability, or ability to play their already purchased games. There are lots of reasons consumers do things, and not all consumers or even a significant number of consumers necessarily think like you.

    There was an argument on south park seasons ago about which platform had the best controller. I think a lot of consumers care about this, and it's quite subjective.
    Your reasons:
    1) game pass = also on PC (and no need to pay for online)
    2) Old games play better? Well, there is a lot more games available on PC and usually games runs better on PC anyway. If your priority is graphics and power why get a console???
    3) Xbox exclusives or timed exclusive are on PC so argument is invalid. (But the opposite is not true. the PC has many games that are not on XB1)
    4) Buy a new gen console to have a bluray player? Really? It's not like Blu ray player is exclusive to XB1.
    5) HDD Swapability? Wait what? You can change your HDD on XB1? Do you have a link for that?
    6) Ability to play a purshased game? Sorry what? I can play games I purchased on PC.

    Yes, it's subjective. And I can see that a lot will buy the next XB because of brand loyalty. But I think a waste majority of people who already owns a PC won't buy a new XB console. I mean I won't buy another platform just to be able to play the same games that I can play on a platform I already own. That would be insane for me.
    06-17-2019 06:02 PM
  25. Drael646464's Avatar
    I replied to your other post, but I guess it's too long. It's waiting for moderation approval.



    Your reasons:
    1) game pass = also on PC (and no need to pay for online)
    2) Old games play better? Well, there is a lot more games available on PC and usually games runs better on PC anyway. If your priority is graphics and power why get a console???
    3) Xbox exclusives or timed exclusive are on PC so argument is invalid. (But the opposite is not true. the PC has many games that are not on XB1)
    4) Buy a new gen console to have a bluray player? Really? It's not like Blu ray player is exclusive to XB1.
    5) HDD Swapability? Wait what? You can change your HDD on XB1? Do you have a link for that?
    6) Ability to play a purshased game? Sorry what? I can play games I purchased on PC.

    Yes, it's subjective. And I can see that a lot will buy the next XB because of brand loyalty. But I think a waste majority of people who already owns a PC won't buy a new XB console. I mean I won't buy another platform just to be able to play the same games that I can play on a platform I already own. That would be insane for me.
    I was comparing PS pro to xbox one x (ie xbox one has 4k bluray, PS pro doesn't for eg, PS pro has a swappable HDD, xbox doesn't). You seem to be comparing PC to xbox. A lot of misunderstanding here in this post.

    If you want to get into the argument of PCs versus consoles, that's another discussion but we can do that too.

    Most people don't have PC's in their lounge. Smart TV's are anemic, and consoles make good media boxes. A console is low fuss, and a lot of consumers prefer them for ease of use.

    If you are the sort of person who is heavily invested in PC gaming, technically saavy, you might still have a console in the lounge for the ease of use, and the strong catalogue of couch multiplayer titles (which exist on PC, but are a tad less common). Consoles are a good social experience because of their strength in local multiplayer and ease of use.

    Or not, but there are reasons to choose a console, and they have nothing to do with whether PC has a strong catalogue of games (which it does, far more than any console).
    Yesterday 01:28 AM
30 12

Similar Threads

  1. I tried Project xCloud at Xbox's E3 2019 show. It is real. It is insane.
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-09-2019, 11:42 PM
  2. Doom Eternal: Collector’s Edition goes up for preorder, features helmet
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-09-2019, 11:23 PM
  3. Everything Microsoft announced at the Xbox E3 2019 conference
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-09-2019, 11:02 PM
  4. The Outer Worlds runs at 4K resolution on Xbox One X
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-09-2019, 09:20 PM
  5. Doom Eternal gets release date, hectic new trailers at E3 2019
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-09-2019, 09:00 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD