The console war is over

[DonFerrari]

RolStoppable said:

Azzanation said:

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. 

Your example demonstrates that you don't know what winning is. The PS4 brings in a lot more revenue than Switch, but Switch is more profitable nonetheless.

Winning is first and foremost about selling the most units of hardware. There hasn't been a generation where the best-selling console wasn't also clearly the most profitable console at the same time. It's only among the runner-ups that oddities could be observed, namely the Xbox (24m) being less profitable than the GC (21m), and the PS3 being less profitable than the Xbox 360 despite slightly higher unit sales.

The best-selling console will continue to bring in the most gaming profits for its manufacturer.

sales2099 said:

Well neither could Nintendo. The GameCube was their last attempt to play by traditional rules. Now each hardware they release sacrifices specs for a unique hardware function, usually at the cost of mainstream 3rd party support. For the most part with WiiU being the exception this strategy paid off. 

I see MS hitting that GameCube point and Game Pass/Xcloud/PC day 1 exclusives seems to be their non-traditional pivot. But the difference is that they are still very much competing in the traditional space. Both consoles competing for the lions share of 3rd party content like usual. 

Imo Xbox as a platform can’t win no matter what. But the Xbox ecosystem can. 

Your post is baffling. Your opening sentence alone is so far detached from reality that smacking your head on a desk is just about the last hope to get some sense into you.

Both of you guys try your best to make Microsoft's PR seem sound to yourself, but you aren't going to convince anyone with that faulty logic. How about you are honest with yourselves and see the tweet for what it is: A weak and pre-emptive attempt to distract from console sales. Microsoft isn't going to get more gaming profits than both Sony and Nintendo (individually, not combined) with the strategy they are pursuing.

It is more possible that a given year Sony or Nintendo have revenue (or more likely profit) higher than MS+Sony or Nintendo+MS than MS having higher revenue or profit than either Sony or Nintendo alone. Be it a year like WiiU doing low sales and 3DS on their low profit phase, or a PS3 on the end of life while PS4 still beginning, etc. But we have seem some years that Sony or Nintendo had higher revenue and/or profits than the other two combined. But we are yet to see a balance sheet that Xbox even had profit in a year (it probably had when X1 stopped being sold at a loss and before they bought studios, but MS isn't ever clear on that).

yvanjean said:
Major Nelson knows there are many people that are locked to one ecosystem. Microsoft's strategy is to give gamers as many options to join the Xbox ecosystem even if it's just for a short time. Microsoft wants to break the narrative that you need to own a console to play exclusives. I fear what would happen if the Gamepass grows too much and what would happen to the game industry as a result.

And he do that by not having exclusives anymore right...

RolStoppable said:

sales2099 said:

Excuse me? Care to explain how my Nintendo analogy “baffles” you? Lower spec hardware with unique function. Enter market at lower price point. Con is that specs and hardware design limit mass 3rd party adoption. The GameCube was very much in line with what the PS2 was and therefore was their last “traditional” console. 

Nintendo pivoted since 2006. Why can’t MS? As long as Series X is competing in the spec wars for 3rd party game adoption they are still playing the same game as Sony. 

Sure, I'll explain. Let's look at it again:

sales2099 said:

Well neither could Nintendo. The GameCube was their last attempt to play by traditional rules. Now each hardware they release sacrifices specs for a unique hardware function, usually at the cost of mainstream 3rd party support. For the most part with WiiU being the exception this strategy paid off. 

I see MS hitting that GameCube point and Game Pass/Xcloud/PC day 1 exclusives seems to be their non-traditional pivot. But the difference is that they are still very much competing in the traditional space. Both consoles competing for the lions share of 3rd party content like usual. 

Imo Xbox as a platform can’t win no matter what. But the Xbox ecosystem can. 

You highlighted the final sentence of my post, in the paragraph where I talk about what has changed. You directly respond to this sentence of mine with "Well neither could Nintendo." But Nintendo has come up with ways to win. The Wii sold the most units in its generation and was the most profitable console. Switch is on pace to do the very same thing against its competitors, the PS5 and XSX.

That's why Nintendo has never said anything along the lines of "it's not important how many consoles you sell", because they've been confident enough to believe in their own ability to win in the console business. Microsoft doesn't have that confidence, hence why your analogy doesn't work at all. You try to make it work by suggesting that the console business is about AAA third party games, but it isn't about them.

I think you are mixing up nouns and verbs here, namely the word 'console'. I and others are talking about the noun, but you mean the verb. You find solace in the knowledge that Microsoft is still getting AAA third party games, so that's at least something; enough to console yourself.

Nintendo may have left the direct competition through power and 3rd parties, but it certainly can keep relevancy and profit with alternative strategies through the power of their IP and care for their games.