By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Azzanation said:
RolStoppable said:

It's a fitting tweet for a company who hasn't found an answer to a pressing question in the last seven years. Microsoft's defeatist attitude shone through in last week's Xbox event - I haven't watched it, but I know enough - so it's no surprise that one of their guys wants to pretend that the console war is over in order to distract from hardware sales. Microsoft wasn't in a bad position to challenge Sony's PS5, but instead of going on the offensive and being daring, they more or less quietly accepted their role as a distant third in the global console business.

That's not to say that the XSX will sell worse than the XB1. It will do better, because the XSX is merely unspectular and can bank on Game Pass (gaming for cheap matters, just look up how Steam centralized PC game sales for the most part), unlike the XB1 which sucked butt. That's an improvement for sure, but Microsoft didn't want to go any extra miles. If you want to win, you have to show that you want it. Spencer and friends showed none of that.

This stands in stark contrast to the Xbox 360 era where Microsoft seriously aimed to have the best-selling console and celebrated their NPD wins time and time again. Good hardware sales mean good software sales and high subscription rates, so of course it's important to sell as much hardware as possible. This hasn't changed. What has changed is that Microsoft doesn't want to hear about it anymore. That's because they couldn't figure out how to be winners.

That's the problem, the gaming community doesn't know what winning is. What happens when you win, how do you win, what is winning in the console market, what does the trophy look like when you win?.... Its always been about money, how you make that money comes in all different shapes and sizes. 

Lets use an example,

We have two companies.. Company A and Company B. Company A sells more hardware than Company B by a fair margin and made $3b in total revenue.. Company B sells half the hardware as Company A but sells double the Software and Services and its revenue gain was $5b, who won? Company A for selling more hardware or Company B who made more overall revenue/profit? 

MS Giving up to make more money isn't giving up, they are aiming bigger and i am sure Sony are too. 

Use that metric if you want. Sony sell more than double the hardware, more than double the PS+ versus XBL Gold, more than double the 3rd party game royalties and like 5x more first party games sold. So yes Sony completely obliterated MS on revenue and profit this gen.

sales2099 said:
DonFerrari said:

I don't remember you doing it in the forum, but I find it curious that almost no game on the MS show had a release date but we have had some of the Xbox fans saying MS stopped showing games over 1 year before release in this gen and complaining of Sony doing it, now they haven't complained MS done it.

Myself I love that we get early announcements and know what is to come.

Europe with several countries in crysis may be fertile ground for Gamepass and in near future Xcloud.

Let me clarify, it’s more we don’t like Sony doing it because their fans use them in “list wars” for literally years before they are released. Agent, FF Versus 13, GT5, FF7, etc. 

And now ironically, when the shoe is on the other foot, PS fans are complaining we getting games announced years before. It’s literally their own medicine but that seems lost on many of them (shrugs) 

Not really, didn't see Sony fans complaining about they revealing games long before release (I even said before the event that beginning of the gen is the time to show games that will take a long time to release), but the MS fans that complained about this on PS didn't show up. What was pointed is that since they don't have release date, gameplay or enough detail there isn't much to talk about those titles. Same on when I said good guy Phil talking about exclusives is the opposite of what he done. Again for me I would love that Sony gave the title of the game, tentative release date and teaser for each of the teams working on a game and at every E3 gives update on that, but I believe companies avoid doing that to not give to much info to competitors.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."