(Business Perspective) Does MS really need Xbox Hardware?

[Pemalite]

Azzanation said:

Yes, Duopolies are what the major tech industries are running currently. 

Sega lasted 4 generations before they left, Xbox is in their 4th generation now.

I dont disagree that MS make better hardware than Sony, 3/4 gens they have accomplished this. But Hardware isn't necessary for the business to strive anymore.

Hardware absolutely is necessary for a console business venture to be successful in the current climate.

Microsoft is trying to be vertically integrated here and emulating the Apple business models, where despite being outsold by Samsung, they still make more profit.

Whenever there is a duopoly, the market tends to be less innovative.

Graphics processors for example were making it's greatest jumps in technology when we had 3dfx, Matrox, S3, Rendition, PowerVR, Trident, SiS/XGI and more.

Just recently we have had a 3rd player re-enter the PC GPU market (Intel) which will bring back the 3-way competition after S3 couldn't keep up with it's Chrome GPU's.

In terms of x86 CPU's we actually have Via, Intel and AMD. - Via was very big on small-form factor/ITX/Netbooks with Nano before that market blew up and Intel and AMD released Atom and Bobcat.
Before that you had IBM, NEC and Cyrix (Which got bought by Via) and more.

We also have Zhaoxin making big strides overseas in the x86 market, typically borrowed heavily on Via's x86 designs, but now building their own architectures for low-cost markets.

Obviously x86 doesn't exist in a vacuum and we have ARM encroaching on every x86 market providing competition, but also MIPS.

Even in Ram we have Samsung, Hynix, Elpida, Transcend, Powerchip, Infenion, Kingston, Micron and more.

In the OS market you obviously have Windows, Linux, MacOS, Android, Chrome OS.

So I honestly don't know where you have gotten the false idea that tech is driven by duopolies.

Machiavellian said:

Even the One X was not that much more powerful than the PS4 pro.  The thing is, the margin above what Sony was shipping was not near enough of a lead in hardware to even make the most jaded PS owner blink.  It's the same today, on paper the Series X is considered the more powerful of the 2 this gen consoles but when it comes to games, we are not seeing enough of a headway from the Series X over the PS5 to make any real difference.

The Xbox One X was substantially more powerful than the Playstation 4 Pro, the games have absolutely proven that.

But it's also an irrelevant point to make, the extent of how much more powerful a console is doesn't change the fact a console is more powerful.

The amount of consoles being sold is the other irrelevant point to make, because the discussion isn't about sales or market-share.

Machiavellian said:

What I am saying is that MS can never let Sony get the lead on hardware as the 3rd place system because being the market leader and having the better hardware just makes any kind of run for marketshare that much harder for MS.  Unless MS could differentiate their hardware enough from Sony to carve out its own space like Nintendo, then it's always going to be a war for better faster hardware which MS either needs to win significantly or at least be on par but being on par really doesn't help.

Agreed.
It also helps if Microsoft doesn't make stupid hardware choices as well. I.E. eSRAM+DDR3 vs GDDR5.

Machiavellian said:

I really only believe MS ever had the most powerful system was the first Xbox, after that its been pretty much Sony all the way.

That is false.
You even stated as such in your previous paragraph where you stated the "Even the One X was not that much more powerful than the PS4 pro."

Machiavellian said:

I totally agree that there is immense pressure to release a game and we have seen it countless times especially on the PC with really subpar performance.  A delay of Redfall would have been a bitch for MS no matter what but the game really was not in a shippable state.  Even Phil knows this because he personally had to come out and apologize.  It could be that the information he was given was not correct, because I doubt, he has time to review every game coming out personally but in this instance with how bad 2022 was for output, the damage is huge with your first AAA game release.  I guess the expectation for Redfall were way to high but now every game will be given a bigger critical eye which will make it even worse to hit above weight for their remaining games this year.

I honestly had zero expectation in regards to Redfall as I personally wasn't interested in the title.

It's just a shame that it didn't do well technically or critically as I would like to see every competent developer do well.