Gameware Stops Selling Xbox Systems in Reaction to Recent Game Pass Announcement

[VideoGameAccountant]

Mr Puggsly said:

VideoGameAccountant said:

Fair point. Let me put it this way. The Wii U flopped and its games are definitely to blame, but Nintendo has been good about keeping a loyal fanbase. There were games on the Wii U that the Nintendo fan liked, even if it couldn't appeal to a wider market. This is also why Switch can succeed because Nintendo's games do attract people when the company has their shit together. Nintendo held on to their core, but Microsoft doesn't seem to be doing that. The base seems to be gone. 

And to answer your second question, it depends. Strong games always drive system sales and one game can change everything. The problem Microsoft has is they didn't create another hit after Halo or Gears. Rare never released a major success on XBox and their other studios didn't do much besides Fabel. The Kinect experiment may have also hurt them because their studios were focused on making Kinect games rather than the next big series. So when Microsoft tries to go away from Kinect, there's nothing to go back to. Sony's line-up isn't great, but at least its something and at least the company has a long history in games. With Microsoft, the rats all fled the sinking ship. The Wii U kept Nintendo diehards, but I can't say XBox One kept the Microsoft diehards. That's why I think this project won't work. 

As an aside, this looks like experimentation. It seems Microsoft is more looking into alternatives rather than trying to save the XBox One or try to relaunch with a new system. 

"Fair point, now here's my convoluted argument."

You say Nintendo's games are to blame for Wii U's failure, is that typo? The problem wasn't the games, the problem was the hardware/controller. Wii U was expensive and the tablet control was dumb as a primary controller. If they stuck with Wiimotes it would have been cheaper and sold better.

I've had this discussion with people, its often argued the problem with X1 is it lacks a huge new IP. N64 had Goldeneye. Xbox had Halo and Fable. Xbox 360 had Gears of War. Wii U had Splatoon. However, X1's 35 million sales and growing means it has crushed N64, OG Xbox, and WIi U in spite of lacking a huge IP. As for Xbox 360, that console thrived thanks to the failure of PS3 and that lead to a plethora of support.

The reason X1 struggling today is because mistakes at launch, that shifted the momentum back to PlayStation. Bascially, Sony regained it momentum that was lost from PS3. Regardless what MS does and regardless if they get a great selling new IP, they still have to compete with the momentum of PS4. Even if 10 or 20 million people buy a X1 to play some HUGE NEW IP, it would still be way behind PS4. This is why your argument holds no water.

You basically praise Wii U for maintaining die hard fans, meanwhile the X1 crushed it in sales. That tells me the die hard fans don't matter as much as the masses. People buy X1 because it has large library of notable games AND notable exclusives.

What is your perception of saving Xbox? If its profitable and has a viable userbase, it doesn't need saving per se. Efforts are clearly being made to grow the userbase as well. The X1X just released, the Xbox One S is generally competitively priced, numerous exclusives are coming this year, and numerous more are planned. Realistically, what more do you expect?

You are right about Microsoft (momentum is what makes a success vs a failure), but what I'm getting at is that Microsoft hasn't maintained Microsoft fans. Sony has this and Nintendo has this, but Microsoft doesn't. You can see this. Discussion about XBox is either negative or nonexistent. It's pretty much dried up with the XBox One, and that's the problem. It speaks more that the 360 existed moreso as a substitute to the PS3. The reverse could be said about the PS4 and XBox One, but Sony also buckled down and gave consumers a reason to stick with Playstation. Microsoft really hasn't as they've been canceling projects, delaying games, and focusing more on services and other experiments. 

What you are missing is I'm talking about future generations, not the current one. Sony was able to bounce back from the PS3. Nintendo bounced back from the Wii U. But I don't see Microsoft bouncing back. It also doesn't help that Microsoft has only had one success in the video game industry where Sony and Nintendo have had several. Even during the tail-end of the PS3 and Wii U, consumers were still talking about those games and the companies supported them to the best of their abilities. Microsoft doesn't have that. Discussion of XBox is slim and there aren't many titles keeping people around. Sure, it's done better than the Wii U, but is Microsoft positioned for a strong Gen 9. My answer is no.

Lastly, the Wii U was an issue of games. Nintendo Land didn't set the world on fire like Wii Sports. New Super Mario Bros U helped to push systems, but there was clear franchise fatigue. Games like Pikmin 3 and Game & Wario didn't really help despite taking months to come out (by the by, ever wonder why you haven't seen another WarioWare and why Pikmin 4 is basically vaporware, this is why). You probably also don't remember that there was a Wii Fit U or a Wii Party U. The Wii U's line-up was lackluster in 2013 and although it improved later on, there wasn't enough in 2014 or 2015. But Nintendo kept their loyalist which kept Nintendo in the public discussion and made people interested in Nintendo Switch.  The same could be said for PS3 with Uncharted and the Last of Us. The base doesn't make the system a success but it can help when launching a new one.

CGI-Quality said:

VideoGameAccountant said:

Not exactly sure what you are talking about specifically. If it helps, think of it as a portfolio. Nintendo has a lot of series to draw from and they have shown they can push units when done right (the Wii U is an example of when its done wrong). Microsoft really only had Halo and Gears. When both of them struggled, they had nothing left to keep consumers. It would be like placing 80% of your portfolio in a single company and that company goes bankrupt. Microsoft hasn't been able to make a hit since those games, so once they started to decline, so did the XBox brand. 

You said Sony's line-up wasn't "great". Like Nintendo, they have plenty of properties to draw in their crowds (in fact, I'd wager that they have more, despite, on average, Nintendo's properties selling higher). That's all I was getting at. Otherwise, I agree with most of what you're saying, especially in Microsoft's case.

Ahhh, I see. Your assessment of Sony is correct. The reason I say their line-up isn't great is that it's not strong enough to push consoles on its own and Sony still relies heavily on third parties. Where they are better than Microsoft is they have more than Halo and Gears and they at least come up with moderate hits each generation; the issue is they may not stick around for very long (Killzone is one such example).