6 Reasons Why Xbox Live is Failing 10 Years Later

[sales2099]

TC_Squared said:

sales2099 said:

TC_Squared said:

sales2099 said:

TC_Squared said:
Microsoft's goal upon developing Xbox Live was to more or less monopolize the video game industry via online gaming. Despite how many are sticking with Xbox Live, the fact that so many others choose PSN over Xbox Live indicates that Xbox Live is failing to achieve its goal. I own both, and I by far choose to play my games on PSN for free, or watch Netflix without having to pay additional fees.

The title of this article is "6 Reasons Why Xbox Live is Failing 10 Years Later", not "6 Reasons Why Xbox Live is Going Under 10 Years Later". You wrote it well, spurgeonryan.

Companies strive to lead. With Europe and Japan out of MS full grasp....to say Live was intended to be a monopoly is absurd.

Failing implies a lack of success. Live is the most lucrative console network in the world.

In fact, the guy with the best deals is usually the one who needs a boost or to expand their position. PS Plus is basically a desperation move. Sure, as gamers you won't see it that way and call it fan service, but its only done because PS3 wasn't this generations leader like Sony planned.

Do you even know why MS got into the video game industry?

http://beepdf.com/doc/62901/why_the_xbox_brand_failed_and_continues_to_fail_in_japan.html

As long as Sony is winning in Asia, and Europe for that matter, MS is failing. MS and Sony have two different goals, and MS's is far more complex. It reminds me of how the Confederacy simply needed The Union to back off in order to win the Civil War, but The Union needed the Confederacy to actually surender in order to win. Not only is Sony not surendering--if you will--they are selling more per year than MS, which results in Sony continuing to gain ground over MS (although slowly).

Doesnt change my two points that MS can't have a monopoly on the planet, just strive to be a leader, and that failing implies a lack of success, and Live is anything but that. 

Going by corporate measures, Live generates a ton more money then PSN. So PSN is failing really.

But MS didn't get into the video game industry for direct profit. Video game industry profit is nothing compared to MS Windows software, which is what they've been losing ground on the passed 20 years. Japan is even replacing them. That's why MS got into the video game industry, to gain back ground worldwide in the average home. But not only has MS failed to regain Japan, they even lost more ground in Europe. The money they make from Xbox Live in America is little compared to the losses of Windows software they are suffering in Japan, which was why they got into the video game business in the first place.

You're viewing MS success directly. I'm referring to indirectly. They're winning the battle, but losing the war (as I said earlier, their goal is far more difficult). That doesn't neccessarily mean that Sony is winning, as they could both be failing due to having different goals. As for PSN, I can't say whether they're winning or losing or in a  stalemate, because I don't know what their 10 year plan it. I also don't know if their goal is to become large and profitable, or simply draw people away from Xbox Live. Besides, that's somewhat beside the point. This page isn't claiming that PSN is succeeding, it's simply pointing out that Xbox Live is failing. If console sales are down in Japan and Europe, then Xbox Live subscriptions are as well, meaning their overall goal upon entering the video game industry is still failing. Also, multiplatform owners are deciding to play free on PSN over continuing to pay for Xbox Live.

Above all else, I think you and I are simply basing our points on different definitions of the word "Fail".

1) to fall short of success or achievement in something expected, attempted, desired, or approved

2) to dwindle, pass, or die away

MS is certainly nowhere close to 2), but they are currently suffering 1).

MS makes 5 billion in profits every 3 months. Your first paragraph citing doom and gloom is better suited describing a certain other "big 3" company here.

But they have adopted a pay for online model.......the only one in gaming. Yet it thrives. Despite criticism of this model, Live thrives.