JWeinCom said:
Azzanation said:
Not their problem. JWeinCom said:
The question in the title asks do "we", presumably being gamers, need Microsoft. People respond with the benefits that Microsoft being in the industry has for gamers. Then they are told that Microsoft shouldn't care about any of those things.
You have conflated two questions.
1) Do gamers benefit from Microsoft being in the industry?
2) Should Microsoft, in its own best interest, stay in the gaming industry?
And when people answer the first one, you criticize them for not answering the second. Kind of unfair. And I don't think reading the OP would really help clarify that.
So, to answer them separately.
1) Yes. Competition, generally, is good for the industry. Microsoft funding Halo led to kind of an explosion in first person shooters, with GOW doing the same for third. Microsoft's XBox Live pushed Sony to better their online service, and Gamepass pushed Sony to offer a similar service which I think is a pretty good one.
2) That's really up to Microsoft. I think they see their presence in the console space as a means of getting more people into their services. For instance, get people playing on XBox Live, and even if they don't stick with consoles, they might keep on in that ecosystem. Or get them started on Gamepass and even if they don't continue on console, they will follow the service to where it goes next. For something like Gamepass, a large part of the potential market is on consoles, and I don't think that kind of product can be successful without a console presence, at least for now.
Whatever the case may be, it seems Microsoft thinks it's worth investing in. I would say that their internal teams have more data on this than you or me, so I would generally defer to them. They see a benefit here either because their current level of success is good enough to make profits in the console space, or because it leads to greater profits elsewhere.
So, that's an answer to the two separate questions you are actually asking. |
It was never about the 1st point. This thread isn't about feelings and emotions of gamers. Its about if a Company sees the need to stay in the industry. I am speaking business terms not feelings. The moment people on this site and elsewhere understand that it's not MS's problem to keep a company they don't trust in check, is not up to MS to bleed billions. The quicker we can move on from that narrative the quicker they can understand the real world. No one is saying that's a guarantee, and that's the point. Who will? Why should MS? No one wants to eat the costs of billions on hardware unless you are market leader or Nintendo. If it's not appealing to anyone than its not appealing to MS. You answered your own concerns with your own posts. This isn't about your feelings and trust, this is about weather MS wants to continue losing money on hardware when they can just rely on Sony and Nintendo. If Sony decide to screw up well that's on those who support Sony. Again not MS problem. -
|
You asked "Do WE really need Xbox?" Why on Earth would anyone answer that question by explaining what's in Microsoft's best interest? Am I Microsoft? O_o If basically everyone is misunderstanding you in the exact same way, I think you have to consider that maybe you did a poor job communicating. |
No, you just read the headline.
People are failing to see the buisness side and only see this as an emotional side. Companies dont care about your feelings. I am speaking on behave of buisness sense.
BasilZero said:
JWeinCom said:
You asked "Do WE really need Xbox?" Why on Earth would anyone answer that question by explaining what's in Microsoft's best interest? Am I Microsoft? O_o If basically everyone is misunderstanding you in the exact same way, I think you have to consider that maybe you did a poor job communicating. |
Spot on. I guess this will be the second user on here that I'll make sure to avoid topics from lol. |
You dont have to do me any favors Bazil.
Manlytears said:
| Azzanation said: Completely wrong. MS being a 3rd party publisher means they will benefit from more Nintendo and Sony sales without spending billions on hardware. Games like Starfield and Halo will only sell more. MS has the foundation for the future of cloud, they own their own network, Sony will be the ones struggling when gaming moves onto servers which Sony will have to rely on MS, Amazon, Google and Apple etc. Unless Sony invest $30b+ on creating their own cloud network which is unlikely for a niche market like console gaming. |
Sony doesn't necessarily have to be in the equation, just Playstation or Nintendo. Imagine the possibility of Amazon, Google, or another Big Tech, buying Playstation or Nintendo. Do you think that Xbox would be able to compete with Amazon+Playstation (discard Sony, think about the possibility of Amazon buying Playstation) or Google+Nintendo (same situation). Xbox is a weak brand, they would lose the cloud game war just like the console war. it is necessary to strengthen the Xbox brand so that future rivals do not have a chance to exploit the strength of PlayStation and Nintendo brand, understand?
Xbox needs become strong, and they can't do this as 3º party. imho, they need to continue in the console market and gain mindshare from user, they need generations of users that will think "Gaming = Xbox", just like many think "Gaming = Playstation and Nintendo" |
3rd party Publishers are constantly making record profits via software while MS have to also dedicate losses to the billions lost on hardware.
Xbox can survive just fine as 3rd party. If PS doesnt have Xbox to compete with, they will more likely accept a 1st party GP Sub on PS increasing Xboxes audience.
