Xbox One; was it a successful console?

[EricHiggin]

Azzanation said:

RolStoppable said:

Your confidence isn't based on sound reasoning. You post a link about the Xbox One being allegedly sold at a profit, but that article is from right around its launch, so of course it doesn't account for all the price drops of the Xbox One that had to come way quicker than planned.

Another thing that Microsoft did, besides hiding their console's shipments number, is a change to their reporting method for online interaction. Whereas they previously spoke about growing Xbox Live Gold subscriptions, they ended up with monthly active user stats to paint a picture of continued success. That makes it highly likely that Gold subscriptions were decreasing due to the Xbox One; after all, the console sold far fewer units than the Xbox 360. Also related to hardware sales is the number of software sales which dropped significantly for the Xbox One, including first party software sales.

The moment Xbox changed its lead is not equal to the metrics of success changing in a significant way for the Xbox One. Phil's task with the Xbox One was all about damage control, but none of that could be able to turn the Xbox One into a success. As for Phil removing the childish nature of the industry, that's a very delusional statement to make. Spencer has repeatedly made hypocritical comments and if he truly believed that hardware aren't important, then he would have been fired a long time ago. There's an obvious link between hardware sales, software sales, DLC sales, the volume of microtransactions and online subscriptions; the higher the hardware sales are, the higher everything else gets.

But thanks for answering my question. I expected that kind of answer.

You need to look at this the way the businessmen look at things. They don't care about fanboys or console wars, they look at money. If Xbox wanted to compete head on with Playstation than the XB1 would have been the same as the PS4 from the very start, like the 360 was to the PS3. Not come out the gates with an always online, Kinect Bundle, DRM machine. Xbox was always heading towards a full digital future which was delayed due to criticism across the board of marketing.

The question to you is why does MS want to disclose console figures when its not solely about the console anymore? The 360 was in a different era, it was all about the console hardware. The 360 was all about exclusive content on one platform. The 360 was the same as the Wii and Playstation 3, much like the WiiU and PS4 was to its predecessors.

The XB1 is in another era, the brand went though a transition to get people onboard an always online digital future with cloud based gaming, much what we have now with GP and XCloud. Disclosing hardware sales when customers don't even need to buy the hardware to be a customer is pointless and only flames console wars which breeds bad marketing. When Xbox competed with the PS3, they proved they can match them in sales when the systems were similar, however they tried to change to quickly the following gen and moved the brand into in a bigger ocean which didn't benefit them at the time. Until now.

Azzanation said:

EricHiggin said:

Well yes, once they finally officially announced XBSS, they clearly had decided to sell both. The article title below even shows that Lockhart hitting the market was in question. Also, if MS doesn't care like Apple about how different the products are, why market XBSS as 1440p when it's really a 1080p console? There's nothing wrong with 1080p, considering the next gen hardware is totally worth the $300 price tag for those who are ok with that resolution, which many still are. I would've bought one myself as a secondary console by now if it had a disc drive.

Sounds like Phil really cares/cared about the hardware and wants/wanted it to be successful, in which case if Phil and MS don't care about HW sales and have moved on, why are they saying hardware success is/was a goal?

If MS doesn't want to show the numbers, even if they're combined, that's fine, but the public wanting to know the numbers, especially the more hardcore who want complete breakdowns, isn't surprising. If MS isn't willing to show the numbers after saying what they've said, then the public is entirely free to guess and have an opinion of what the reasons may be.

It seems to me as well, that you're taking these posts as hardcore shots against MS. I don't think anyone part of these 'branch posts' is or was trying to say MS sucks right now, in fact, I believe it's been clearly suggested they've been improving and are on a better path, since the topic is about XB1 and how well it did or didn't do. It's pretty hard to say that the new consoles aren't doing better in comparison as of now.

You do understand that the XSS was years in the making way before we even heard about it right? They didn't just make the Series S yesterday and wanted to hide it so the X can sell, the S was to support low income customers and it was meant to do well for them from the very beginning.

Hardware is still a part of Xbox, it doesn't have to be the main focus of the brand for them to still care to move units. Its that they don't want to disclose sales figures for fanboys to compare when one company focuses heavily on hardware while the other doesn't. 

And don't worry i am not taking these posts as jabs to Xbox, i am just justifying misinterpretations, which happens a lot on this site.  

"You need to look at this the way the businessmen look at things. They don't care about fanboys or console wars, they look at money."

"Its that they don't want to disclose sales figures for fanboys to compare when one company focuses heavily on hardware while the other doesn't."

Who cares though, right? If MS don't care about the fanboys, because they had moved on to the distant future with XB1, which didn't work out anywhere near as well as the competition who hopped instead of leaped, then why not just show the numbers, since you're not competing with anyone anyway. Everything points to the fact that they do care, and think the fanboys have God like influence which won't work in their favor. Which would imply either the numbers aren't so great, or the fanboys are truly marketing magicians, or both. Especially since that leap hasn't put MS in a position to show numbers yet, with two new console tiers, since they're still behind to the competition who is 'lagging behind', even though it's ahead of it's predecessor.

Is your overall point that XB1 wasn't really part of the 8th gen, but more like 10th gen? In that case MS would have like 6-8 more years to release the numbers. In upsidedownbackwards world, this does make sense actually.

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 22 September 2021