Sharpryno said:
How are the "creative offerings" not there? Because they do not come out with games of unpopular genres? PC and console focus are both achievable especially considering gaming is a multi billion $ business right next to the film industry. Focus on PC gaming isn't a bad thing...its hugely profitable unlike consoles. But some games just play better on consoles. People are forgetting the 360 is still doing okay as it sold the most copies of CoD:AW over the holidays. If you think MS console sales are bad and think they will exit the console scene because of it then shouldn't Nintendo do the same thing? Generation is still young and even if MS doesn't catch up to Sony they can still be successful. Besides, if this gen last another five years PC tech will be light years ahead moreso than last gen. |
Erm, I never said the first part. I meant the creative aspects of the system. The cool stuff like xbox fitness and snap and stuff like that. It's all there but it doesn't seem to be pushing all that much into the market. I mean, it should, but it isn't.
Here's the thing about PC and console. Microsoft is primarily a software maker. That is their forte. They have never made money on their consoles, in fact, they are still in the red over it, and its only growing. What they DO make money on however, is software. So the really natural, absolutely simple question is, why make consoles (which are red) when they can simply put software on the systems and platforms that DO exist. The one facet of their console that inherently generates money by itself is XBL Gold. And it's what, 1b in revenue a year....for a company that does 26b in a quarter? I'd say, if you can find a way to re-monetize and make the same money another way, do it.
Do you know why pc gaming is so profitable? Easy to code, massive install base, don't have to sell consoles, cheaper to make. People like consoles because they're easy to play, are generally simple pick up and play, use a different input, and can be played from your couch. But tell me, could MS be making the same money on software if they didn't have xb1? I think the answer there is yes, and I think throwing money at a console that can't keep up, is in essence taking away from a project that COULD be the next big thing....like hololens.
The difference between ms and nintendo is that nintendo is a toy company. They always have been. They generally make money on their consoles. It is an overreach on their part that they went with extremely costly screens for both the 3ds and the wiiU. However, nintendo is very good at making money as efficiently as possible, because they are a streamlined company. This is both good and bad. For consumers, we don't get all the games we want. For nintendo, it's good, because it helps give their games those godly legs. People KNOW there isn't going to be another metroid or smash within the next 5 years, so they buy the one that's available. This helps increase sales for each game, while cutting out the production costs of having to make succesive installments.
You could disagree about nintendo if you like, but there's one thing Nintendo has done that neither sony nor ms have been able to do. And that's make profit on every console generation no matter the success of the console. Nintendo is happy where they are, and they should be. They know what they're doing, because they are focusing on what they do best. Microsoft is taking their lead and focussing on what THEY do best. Software.
In the end, I can't prove it to you. I can't prove anything they are going to do, but the moves they are making, specifically putting all xb1 games onto pc, should really be a red flag to anyone who has been involved on this site. Do you know any other company that puts their games on pc? Sony doesn't. Nintendo doesn't. Sega did.
