By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
thismeintiel on 11 June 2020
Edit Thread
trunkswd said:
thismeintiel said:

If anything, history shows that Sony is the one willing to take the loss, not MS.  Even just as recently as this gen, MS wouldn't drop the price of the XBO, even though the $499 price was killing it, until they could get BOM to a point where they were breaking even without the Kinect.  Then, they could have ended this gen with a bang with a $399 XBO X, but chose not to lose money on the HW.  Xbox is just not as important to MS as PS is to Sony.  Sony NEEDS PS5 to succeed, even if it means taking a hit at the beginning.  MS could just drop Xbox HW tomorrow and not bat an eye.

The losses from the PS3 wiped out the profits from the PS1 and PS2. Even at $599 they were still losing money per console sold. Sure this generation Microsoft wasn't willing to lose money per console, but they certainly did for the OG Xbox and Xbox 360. Microsoft was nearly giving up on Xbox this generation until Phil Spencer convinced the current CEO of MS the importance of the brand and he was then given the money to acquire so many studios. 

The current CEO has a background in streaming/online services. He sees the value in streaming games and GAAS. Series X is an attempt to use the Xbox brand to help bring those services, mainly xCloud. Even when buying those studios, MS said it was more about adding content for GamePass and, in the future, xCloud, not to sell Xbox HW.

I wasn't speaking just about the PS3. Sony has always sold at a loss. And they have learned from the PS3. Taking a $50-$100 loss, with a constant stream of PSN money coming in, is not the same as taking a $300 loss with no PSN money.

Your logic is also backwards in your original post. If a company doesn't care as much for a product, they are less likely to take a loss on it. Not more.