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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - The Fall of Xbox - Video by Videogamedunkey

Azzanation on 21 September 2019
Ganoncrotch said:

My point about Kinect was that once it appeared MS focused a ton of their work and attention on the device, Rare was pretty much just assigned as a Kinect minigame producer for the latter years of the X360 and while Sony did create the move and the PSeye which do work with the ps4 as well as 3 (as in the PS3 move works with the PS4) they didn't completely stop their work on some amazing ps3 titles towards the end of the systems life (the last of us) or hamper the PS4 by packing it with Move 2.0 as Microsoft did with the Kinect, that's why I'm saying the Kinect was the catalyst in the failing end of the X360 and the start of the rough road the X1 began on.

Also saying that Xbox360 subs was incoming from nothing? Say what? Outside of the obvious costs of running and maintaining the service from June 2013 until now that sub gives 2-4 games per month to the subscribers, are you suggesting that it no cash passes to the third parties who's games are added to that service? for the million or so licenses of them which are gotten by subscribers you think there is no cost for MS involved in that transaction, on top of the bandwidth of people downloading tons of games they might never play just because they're now "free" to them, X360 games in particular since those could be used even after your live sub expires. Point being, that isn't money from nothing.

Kinect's fate with the XB1 does not affect the 360s success and the money that was made from it. Xbox followed on with Kinect 2.0 while Sony followed on with Move 2.0. They did the exact same thing, only thing is Xbox bundled it at launch instead of separately.

Also I am little confused as to why you mention June 2013 onwards for subs.. that's the XB1 service. The 360 had Gold Live Memberships which was a $60 yearly service which opened Online Multiplayer. From my memory the 360 did not give away free games monthly so it didn't have to mend any royalties to 3rd parties from give-aways. XB1 added free monthly games not the 360 era. The Live Store would give royalties obviously from digital sales however that's a different feature.

PS3 did not have any profits from memberships for majority of the generation hence why the Multiplayer was free back than. Xbox made billions from Live Subs through-out the 7 year 360 lifecycle.



Around the Network
d21lewis on 21 September 2019
Azzanation said:
Ganoncrotch said:

My point about Kinect was that once it appeared MS focused a ton of their work and attention on the device, Rare was pretty much just assigned as a Kinect minigame producer for the latter years of the X360 and while Sony did create the move and the PSeye which do work with the ps4 as well as 3 (as in the PS3 move works with the PS4) they didn't completely stop their work on some amazing ps3 titles towards the end of the systems life (the last of us) or hamper the PS4 by packing it with Move 2.0 as Microsoft did with the Kinect, that's why I'm saying the Kinect was the catalyst in the failing end of the X360 and the start of the rough road the X1 began on.

Also saying that Xbox360 subs was incoming from nothing? Say what? Outside of the obvious costs of running and maintaining the service from June 2013 until now that sub gives 2-4 games per month to the subscribers, are you suggesting that it no cash passes to the third parties who's games are added to that service? for the million or so licenses of them which are gotten by subscribers you think there is no cost for MS involved in that transaction, on top of the bandwidth of people downloading tons of games they might never play just because they're now "free" to them, X360 games in particular since those could be used even after your live sub expires. Point being, that isn't money from nothing.

Kinect's fate with the XB1 does not affect the 360s success and the money that was made from it. Xbox followed on with Kinect 2.0 while Sony followed on with Move 2.0. They did the exact same thing, only thing is Xbox bundled it at launch instead of separately.

Also I am little confused as to why you mention June 2013 onwards for subs.. that's the XB1 service. The 360 had Gold Live Memberships which was a $60 yearly service which opened Online Multiplayer. From my memory the 360 did not give away free games monthly so it didn't have to mend any royalties to 3rd parties from give-aways. XB1 added free monthly games not the 360 era. The Live Store would give royalties obviously from digital sales however that's a different feature.

PS3 did not have any profits from memberships for majority of the generation hence why the Multiplayer was free back than. Xbox made billions from Live Subs through-out the 7 year 360 lifecycle.

Move 2.0?



Snoopy on 21 September 2019

Microsoft is doing fine regarding profit. Their focus going forward is streaming and not just Xbox. Soon consoles are going to be less relevant and Subscription services will be the future.



d21lewis on 21 September 2019

In a lot of ways the PS4 has caught up with and even surpassed the Xbox One in my home but the Xbox One is still my preferred gaming platform. As I often mention, there's one under every TV. Why?

-Better browser and apps so I can pretty much watch movies from torrent sites without any issues (download the Monument Browser app and you won't get pop ups!)
-Control my TV with voice commands. 3/4 of my TVs aren't really that smart. It's easy for me to just say "Turn to CNN" or "Volume up".
- Better cloud saves. It's common for me to start a game in my game room and then continue it in bed. I just turn the system off in one room, turn it on in another room and pick up right where I left off.
-Game Pass Ultimate. Tons of games I was definitely going to buy or I was on the fence about are right there to download. I was waiting on Bloodstained to get fixed for the Switch. Now it's virtually mine for the taking. Wasn't too fond of the new Devil May Cry 5 but I can play the whole game right now if I want.
-Better performance on lots of games. I'm not a "performance guy" but owning both consoles I always wanted the best version I could. The PS4 was my console for exclusives and 3rd party games. The Xbox was for whatever wasn't on PS4 (I'm not a PC gamer). Now the PS4 is for exclusives and the Xbox One X is for everything else.
-better media player. Pretty much anything I download from my PC to an external HDD will run on my Xbox One. Not so with the PS4 last time I checked. Imagine my disgust when I couldn't watch VR porn!

I know it's all about the games and if I only owned one PS4 and one Xbox One most of these factors wouldn't even matter. Most won't matter to most gamers. Hell the Switch doesn't do much besides play games and that's perfectly fine. But , in my home, every console has its worth and the Xbox One definitely has earned its place.

Everything connected in my game room right now:

-PC: browsing the web. Downloading shit.
-Switch: gaming on the go
-PS4: PlayStation exclusives. VR.
-Xbox One: Microsoft shit. Game Pass. 3rd party stuff.
-Wii U: Porn viewer.
-Oculus Go: VR porn viewer.
-PS3 and Xbox 360: My hundreds of 7th gen games.

A place for everything and everything in its place...



SwitchUP on 21 September 2019
Sarkar said:

This coming year will be a crucial time. Everyone who loves videogaming needs to do their part in making sure MS never rises from the ashes of XB1.
MS is a blight on this industry and the artistic integrity of videogames and the sooner they leave it the better it is for all of us.

User was banned for this post among others -cycycychris

The 2 people that agreed with this stupid ass garbage should be equally banned.

PM sent ~ CGI

Last edited by CGI-Quality - on 22 September 2019

Around the Network
Ganoncrotch on 21 September 2019
d21lewis said:
Azzanation said:

Kinect's fate with the XB1 does not affect the 360s success and the money that was made from it. Xbox followed on with Kinect 2.0 while Sony followed on with Move 2.0. They did the exact same thing, only thing is Xbox bundled it at launch instead of separately.

Also I am little confused as to why you mention June 2013 onwards for subs.. that's the XB1 service. The 360 had Gold Live Memberships which was a $60 yearly service which opened Online Multiplayer. From my memory the 360 did not give away free games monthly so it didn't have to mend any royalties to 3rd parties from give-aways. XB1 added free monthly games not the 360 era. The Live Store would give royalties obviously from digital sales however that's a different feature.

PS3 did not have any profits from memberships for majority of the generation hence why the Multiplayer was free back than. Xbox made billions from Live Subs through-out the 7 year 360 lifecycle.

Move 2.0?

Move 2 isn't the only thing wrong with this post!

@Azzanation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Games_with_Gold_games Games with Gold started during the X360 Era and has given out 155 titles including Tekken Tag Tourny 2 and EDF2025 which were Sept 2019 games with gold for the X360.

As for the 7 year 360 lifespan

Release date
Lifespan 2005–2016
Discontinued
  • WW: April 20, 2016[6]

It's 11 years from Launch to Discontinuation and yeah like I said they're still doing monthly 2 games for that system unlike the PS3/Vita which no longer get PSN+ titles on a monthly basis now.

As for the last paragraph about "Xbox" [sic] making billions from subs while Sony made nothing from PSN... I mean, PSN+ started during the PS3 era and had a fee so, I'm confused by loads of your post if I'm honest, no idea where you get your numbers or ideas from. Fairly common theme throughout the post there.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Azzanation on 21 September 2019
Ganoncrotch said:
d21lewis said:

Move 2.0?

Move 2 isn't the only thing wrong with this post!

@Azzanation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Games_with_Gold_games Games with Gold started during the X360 Era and has given out 155 titles including Tekken Tag Tourny 2 and EDF2025 which were Sept 2019 games with gold for the X360.

As for the 7 year 360 lifespan

Release date
Lifespan 2005–2016
Discontinued
  • WW: April 20, 2016[6]

It's 11 years from Launch to Discontinuation and yeah like I said they're still doing monthly 2 games for that system unlike the PS3/Vita which no longer get PSN+ titles on a monthly basis now.

As for the last paragraph about "Xbox" [sic] making billions from subs while Sony made nothing from PSN... I mean, PSN+ started during the PS3 era and had a fee so, I'm confused by loads of your post if I'm honest, no idea where you get your numbers or ideas from. Fairly common theme throughout the post there.

Move 2.0 is a figure of speech for basically Move on the PS4. I know its the exact same Move controller. The logic is both companies went into this gen carrying over there Blue Ocean experiments just like Kinect for the XB1. 

Umm I think you are confused with what I am trying to say here. I am not referring to the give away 360 games that current Live members get post 2013. I am referring to the service as it launch on the 360. 360 Gold had game sales which is another entire topic. I am referring to the Subscription model that the 360 had. Basically pay $60 a year to play MP which it did for the entire portion of the 360s lifespan. If you read my post, I said PS3 didn't have a pay model for majority of its life span not at launch. PS+ came later in its life. To make it simple for you, I am referring to the 360 era not the XB1 era of the service.

You are just making my point even easier to say how successful the 360 was. I did say 7 years but we can say 11 years if we prefer. That just pushes the point that the 360 made even more money off Subs. 

Either way, however technical we get, we cannot denie the success the 360 made and the amount of money it made last gen especially compared to the PS3. Its not rocket science. 2m more PS3 units sold does not make up the difference Live Gold was racking in for its 11 years on the 360 and it also doesn't make up the difference in software sales the 360 had over the PS3 and the most important figure which is the market share lost by the PS3 and gained by the 360. Any one says the PS3 won over the 360 last gen really needs to have a look at what success really is.

Last edited by Azzanation - on 22 September 2019

Snoopy on 22 September 2019
Azzanation said:
Ganoncrotch said:

Move 2 isn't the only thing wrong with this post!

@Azzanation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Games_with_Gold_games Games with Gold started during the X360 Era and has given out 155 titles including Tekken Tag Tourny 2 and EDF2025 which were Sept 2019 games with gold for the X360.

As for the 7 year 360 lifespan

Release date
Lifespan 2005–2016
Discontinued
  • WW: April 20, 2016[6]

It's 11 years from Launch to Discontinuation and yeah like I said they're still doing monthly 2 games for that system unlike the PS3/Vita which no longer get PSN+ titles on a monthly basis now.

As for the last paragraph about "Xbox" [sic] making billions from subs while Sony made nothing from PSN... I mean, PSN+ started during the PS3 era and had a fee so, I'm confused by loads of your post if I'm honest, no idea where you get your numbers or ideas from. Fairly common theme throughout the post there.

Move 2.0 is a figure of speech for basically Move on the PS4. I know its the exact same Move controller. The logic is both companies went into this gen carrying over there Blue Ocean experiments just like Kinect for the XB1. 

Umm I think you are confused with what I am trying to say here. I am not referring to the give away 360 games that current Live members get post 2013. I am referring to the service as it launch on the 360. 360 Gold had game sales which is another entire topic. I am referring to the Subscription model that the 360 had. Basically pay $60 a year to play MP which it did for the entire portion of the 360s lifespan. If you read my post, I said PS3 didn't have a pay model for majority of its life span not at launch. PS+ came later in its life. To make it simple for you, I am referring to the 360 era not the XB1 era of the service.

You are just making my point even easier to say how successful the 360 was. I did say 7 years but we can say 11 years if we prefer. That just pushes the point that the 360 made even more money off Subs. 

Either way, however technical we get, we cannot denie the success the 360 made and the amount of money it made last gen especially compared to the PS3. Its not rocket science. 2m more PS3 units sold does not make up the difference Live Gold was racking in for its 11 years on the 360 and it also doesn't make up the difference in software sales the 360 had over the PS3 and the most important figure which is the market share lost by the PS3 and gained by the 360. Any one says the PS3 won over the 360 last gen really needs to have a look at what success really is.

I think people tend to forget the PS3 was a huge financial failure for Sony.  There was an article that I read not too long ago that speculated that PS3 lost all of the profits PS1 and PS2 made. Not to mention the failure of their portable consoles. PS1, PS2, and PS4 are the only gaming devices that Sony saw any success with. PSP GO, Vita, PS3, PS move/Eye camera, PSVR, and PSTV all didn't do too well for Sony.

Nintendo also faced similar issues as well as Microsoft. Moral of the story? Every company is prone to mistakes and no company is invincible. 

Last edited by Snoopy - on 22 September 2019

Ganoncrotch on 22 September 2019

Not gonna quote that block of text but you're cherry picking and focusing areas where the x360 did good and ignoring like I said the fact that every unit sold without a hdmi (and loads with) are in a landfill at a cost of over a billion to ms

Also Xbox live didn't launch on the x360, charging 60 for online was the brainchild of the og Xbox it was the 360 which offered digital discounts for the service and eventually free games to counter Sony's psn+ subscription. Again though that 60 per year isn't money from nothing, services cost money to maintain its not like every 60 handed over the counter in GameStop appeared as net income on Microsoft's accounts



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

d21lewis on 22 September 2019
Ganoncrotch said:
Not gonna quote that block of text but you're cherry picking and focusing areas where the x360 did good and ignoring like I said the fact that every unit sold without a hdmi (and loads with) are in a landfill at a cost of over a billion to ms

Also Xbox live didn't launch on the x360, charging 60 for online was the brainchild of the og Xbox it was the 360 which offered digital discounts for the service and eventually free games to counter Sony's psn+ subscription. Again though that 60 per year isn't money from nothing, services cost money to maintain its not like every 60 handed over the counter in GameStop appeared as net income on Microsoft's accounts

Just a couple of things.

-Dreamcast was (in the US) the first to officially charge for online. A whopping $20 a month!

-Original Xbox charged $50 a year. Xbox 360 didn't charge $60 until 2010. 

-PlayStation Plus didn't kick off until 2010. Up until then, their online service was totally free. Up until the 2013 launch of the PS4, online play was still free on all Sony consoles.

Basically, if Microsoft wasn't making a decent profit charging $50 or $60, Sony was doing worse because they were giving it away for free! But I saw it as a calculated loss since, at the time, the PS3 needed every bullet point it could against the surprise popularity of the 360. Before the two went head to head in 2006, many (including myself!) thought it was just another Dreamcast.