By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Why Microsoft doesn't reveal hardware numbers.

BraLoD said:
Insidb said:

That's not necessarily true lol.

Dem MILFs...

DON'T get me started...



Around the Network
BraLoD said:
Insidb said:

That's not necessarily true lol.

Dem MILFs...

DEM GILFS... :ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo



The last time Microsoft implement a successful new Franchise was over 10 years ago.

And the old ones are not getting better (Except Forza)

Phil, knows his words, but he doesn't follow up with actions.

You cant say that your fan base is the most important thing and then cancel their most anticipated games.

Besides Fable, The Phatom Dust reboot and Scalebound, the multiplayer beta for Crackdown 3 was also canceled.

How can you get it so wrong even on first party?



BMaker11 said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

But you can by saving them from wasting $60 on a garbage game.

Remember when Sony said they didn't want EA Access on PS4 because they determined that the "value" wasn't there? Then people said "wtf are they talking about? Give me the choice of having EA Access, and I'll determine if it has value"? And, of course, the "lol #4thePlayers" comments?

Now, the shoe is on the other foot, and that "choice" is being taken away from you on the Xbox side of things because apparently MS already assessed Scalebound's "value" and nixed the game, instead of finishing it and letting you, the consumer, to determine its value.....and you're ok with it? 

I certainly ain't ok with it. Considering I've had an XBOne for some time now, and the exclusive lineup is rather thin. It certainly doesn't help to cancel AAA games. It makes the "We focus on the monthly active user base because we know those are gamers making a conscious choice to pick our content, our games, our platform, our service" excuse obsolete for not showing hardware numbers, because I'm less inclined to make the conscious choice to pick up their content, because I can't pick up their content, because it's cancelled.

Would Scalebound have taken revenue/sales away from some other JRPG Microsoft was making, and that's why they canceled it? That's the only way this is comparable to EA Access and Sony's bullshit about "value". Sony deserved to be mocked for not allowing EA Access because it would clash with their own service. That is not something you do for the gamers.

Canceling games happens very often though. Hell, Sony just closed a whole studio, let alone a game. Shit happens. I give you a B for effort.

Go ahead and not be ok with missing out on garbage. Feel free to pick up a copy of Murdered: Soul Suspect to fill the void.



tak13 said:
BraLoD said:

Dem MILFs...

DEM GILFS... :ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

You CANNOT keep this good woman down.  But then again...



Around the Network

This is a good reason. But why can't they release both numbers? Everyone knows this is absolute bullsh!t. Last gen they'd announce every second a 360 sold. Now console sales mean nothing. GTFOH!!!



PC GAMING: BEST GAMES. WORST CONTROLS

A mouse & keyboard are made for sending email and typing internet badassery. Not for playing video games!!!

aLkaLiNE said:
Zkuq said:

I have no idea, I haven't been following the situation because I don't particularly care about the details. I'm sure the numbers are healthy, but they should be far from Sony's.

It just dawned on me that this thread has made it this far with people defending the lack of numbers in favor of MAU and we don't even know the MAU.

 

Phil Spencer's good. He's real fucking good.

 

Wait, they were at 48 million by January of 2016

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mspoweruser.com/microsofts-xbox-live-now-has-48-million-active-users/amp/?client=safari

 

And 47 million by October of 2016. I wonder how it's changed since then.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vg247.com/2016/10/20/microsoft-q1-2017-gaming-revenue-declined-5-xbox-live-down-2m-over-last-quarter/amp/?client=safari

Heh, that's actually a really good point. Too bad the numbers are actually available, like you found. Anyway, those sounds like pretty healthy numbers to me, even though there's been some decline.



Its quite obvious lol.



bananaking21 said:
Or because Sony is dominating the living shit out of them.

Actually what Phil Spencer said was 100% the truth.... from a certain point of view.


And you are absolutely legit from another perspective. Microsoft used to love trouting their numbers last gen every E3 to remind people how big their epeen is to get more gamers to board the hype train.

Zkuq said:
aLkaLiNE said:

It just dawned on me that this thread has made it this far with people defending the lack of numbers in favor of MAU and we don't even know the MAU.

 

Phil Spencer's good. He's real fucking good.

 

Wait, they were at 48 million by January of 2016

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mspoweruser.com/microsofts-xbox-live-now-has-48-million-active-users/amp/?client=safari

 

And 47 million by October of 2016. I wonder how it's changed since then.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vg247.com/2016/10/20/microsoft-q1-2017-gaming-revenue-declined-5-xbox-live-down-2m-over-last-quarter/amp/?client=safari

Heh, that's actually a really good point. Too bad the numbers are actually available, like you found. Anyway, those sounds like pretty healthy numbers to me, even though there's been some decline.

This is very interesting because we can take a rough estimate of how many people have stuck with their Xbox 360. It's actually a really fine case in point to Sony's counter argument of avoiding backwards compatibly to focus on being more forward thinking. Sony got a lot of flack this decision but if we look in retrospect of that amount of resources Microsoft spent in making the Xbox One backwards compatible and how long it's taking them to convert games. We can being to take into perspective that Sony really march on forward with great efficiently and bringing us a more steady stream of games and stuff like PSVR. Sony's forward thinking mentality put them in the lead and they have been very efficient at allocating their resources and observing the needs and desires of the gamer.

I find these numbers really striking in my eyes.




LudicrousSpeed said:

Would Scalebound have taken revenue/sales away from some other JRPG Microsoft was making, and that's why they canceled it? That's the only way this is comparable to EA Access and Sony's bullshit about "value". Sony deserved to be mocked for not allowing EA Access because it would clash with their own service. That is not something you do for the gamers.

Canceling games happens very often though. Hell, Sony just closed a whole studio, let alone a game. Shit happens. I give you a B for effort.

Go ahead and not be ok with missing out on garbage. Feel free to pick up a copy of Murdered: Soul Suspect to fill the void.

That's a whole lot of words to simply say "yea, I'm cool with MS deciding what's going to be valuable for me". You don't know if Scalebound would be garbage. I don't know if it would be either. But now neither of us have the opportunity to see its potential because it was taken away from us. Remember when Arkham Asylum got delayed several months and everyone thought "man, this game must be in bad shape"? Or how Metal Gear: Rising "looked so bad" that it was "canceled" had its studio changed? 

Two gems of games that could have been cancelled because they "looked garbage", but instead the publishers let the developers keep working on the games and released them and then let us determine if the games were good or not. Two games that helped change the mentality about delays. People used to assume that delayed games were bad and the developer was just delaying the inevitable. Now, when games are delayed, people say "Good. If they need a little more time to flesh things out, it'll be better for me as a gamer". 

And yes, cancelling games does happen all the time, but how many of those are big, hyped games that have had lots of money sunk into them, and had been on display for years? How many of them are games that were scheduled to release that same year, and were cancelled? Sony's been showing TLG since 2009, for Christ's sake. If they kept showing TLG up til last year, then cancelled it at the last minute, then that would be comparable. That is not something you do for gamers. And yea, they just closed a studio, but guess what? That studio's (Guerilla Cambridge) game still came out (RIGS) because they were hyping the game for PSVR. Closing a studio isn't a snap decision, it takes months to determine if it's going to happen. But they, at least, let them get their product out that they had gotten customers to anticipate. That situation is in no way comparable to cancelling a game that was near completion.

I give you a D in the damage control and spin department. "Just go buy Murdered: Soul Suspect" as a retort for not getting Scalebound is basically the same as "just subscribe to PS+ and PSNow" for not getting EA Access. You're praising the limitation of choice and justifying it for the same reasons that "Sony should be mocked for their bullshit about value". The irony of that is deafening