Global Hardware 1 June 2019

[EricHiggin]

Bofferbrauer2 said:

EricHiggin said:

Would you prefer the PS2 instead? Are we going to assume it would have turned out more like that?

PS wanted to have cross play with the 360 and MS told them to get bent. I wonder why when PS was willing to hand XB exactly what they wanted, they rejected it, only to then pay for it with XB1, then implemented cross play, and had to seriously push to get PS to join, in the most minor partial way possible. Maybe just maybe, when MS was selling enough consoles, they were going to remain headed in that direction, until they got stomped by PS4. Then just by chance, they decided they would take another direction with much less solidified competition where they could more easily get their foot in the door. Now they want to put their first party games on the largest solidified console platform? Sounds a lot like someone doesn't think they can sell enough consoles to make it worth their while, like another ghost of console past.

So because MS saw the potential downside to selling consoles in the future, partially because of what has happened to other consoles in the past, they changed their direction, and that makes it completely different than Sega? I agree it won't be identical to how things ended for DC, but it would certainly have similarities. It's not like Sega could have done what XB is doing to change direction, and it's not like MS is looking to offer games on other platforms like Sega does.

WTF? I never said that! I said that their plan was to sell software from the get-go. They just found out, that they don't need their own console to do so effectively, and the original plan of pushing DirectX didn't work this gen at all, just look how many new AAA PC releases are not DirectX 12 titles even though it's mandated on their own console.

About your first paragraph: Again, it's just because they want to sell software. They are the opposite of Nintendo in that regard: Microsoft produces hardware to sell software, while Nintendo produces games to sell hardware.

Microsoft could have sold quite a bit better if they kept all their IP for themselves. Just imagine how well the XBO could have sold in Japan if they just kept Minecraft exclusive for them. Hellblade and Cuphead are on the Switch already for some time now, and Crash Bandicoot is coming to Smash. They are also opening up to other platforms on PC, not just on consoles. You no longer have to buy the games in Microsofts store, you can get them on Steam and GOG (not using Epic, so not sure about there), too.

In short, they want to make their games accessible to absolutely everyone and not just those with an Xbox live account (you need one to shop in their store on PC). Why? Because they are in the business to sell software, and being on all platforms guarantees, that more people could buy their games.

Nin, who makes high quality games that are sold at high prices, that remain at high prices, use that to sell expensive hardware? What? Nin may make some money on the hardware, but it's definitely the hardware that's selling the software. Just look at Wii U vs Switch as well as the ports.

MS, who always wanted to just sell games, only sold consoles until they had to, then will quit selling hardware? What? Just look at Steam. Why would MS keep pushing hardware like they did if they only wanted to sell games? Did they really need to, or maybe not? Does PS really want to sell consoles?

MS also would have sold much better if they didn't try and sell everyone a cable box and force them to accept Kinect along with it, all for $500, Not to mention the other hardware related issue's that couldn't be changed apparently, yet were with software since that was the case all along.

If you want to be on as many platforms as possible, then why compete directly against the biggest player in consoles when you didn't need to? Did they change their minds maybe when the initial plans weren't working as intended? Did Sega change their minds when their hardware wasn't selling well enough?