Azzanation said:
Cons 1) Xcloud can be available on everything (TVs etc) 2) The loss of Gold will be recovered with 2 major audiences. 3) You lose the Live revenue and gain it all back plus more with GP growing. 4) They will gain more money with GP subs increasing. 5) Sony don't have to accept GP. If they don't, someone else will and they will create competition for Sony because they give their potential Rival a phenomenal deal over them. 6) MS can easily fill GP with its own games. 20+ studios making games including their history of previous games. 7) MS won't need the 100% cut because they will gain 200m+ more gamers to potentially buy their digital games. The billions they make on relying on hardware also has to recover the billions they spent on creating the hardware. They can cut the loss completely. 8) They won't need to Port if PS is the main platform. XCloud will be on TVs just like GP. So if you cant play on your Xbox, go play on your TV. 9) Time will convert people over to PS. Also GP is a service not a console. GP will be accessible on all major tech products. Its pretty simple.
10. MS will just sell their games separately on PS, they will sell more software than how it is now. 11. They wont care if they have 50m+ subs making them $3b every 6 months. 12. Its all about the subs. |
- Xcloud can already be on every device, no need for MS to abandon the hardware for this, and as pointed out by Ryuu Xcloud does not solve MS RnD for hardware and is even worst now instead of a ~$100 loss on every device and then recouping through software it's now a 100% loss on every device that needs to be recouped by subscription.
- Xbox would still suffer the contraction of its gaming division for many years and lose all third-party revenue for selling software on its proprietary device. Also, one of those major audiences will require extensive work on ports and would probably act as a barrier to title ambitions in the long run.
- You don't know that, You seem to assume GamePass would remain the same and therefore have the same appeal on competing hardware, but as explained by others there's no way they would accept Game Pass on their devices with third-party titles they are themselves selling individually. And given Sony's stance, there's no way they accept day-one releases of even MS proprietary titles. Sony mentioned to the CMA they would likely need to respond to CoD on GamePass with day one release of their own which they don't want to do. If they accept GamePass on PS in its current form Sony would be even more obligated to do so, which again they don't want to do. So there is absolutely 0 chance GamePass gets to keep its current appeal if MS goes third-party.
- GP subs' growth rate is very much tied to Xbox hardware being sold right now and there are 0 indications they can successfully replace this.
- Someone else already has and is using it to compete with PlayStation with this phenomenal deal, it's called Xbox. Why do you think it'll give someone else a better chance than it gives Xbox?
- Many third parties are bigger than MS in studio count and worker count, if this was the case why is it that none can match Xbox revenue? EA has more studios and more than double the manpower, they have their own subscription business model and yet they don't even manage half of Xbox's revenue.
- This overlooks the reasons why MS is willingly absorbing those hardware losses in the first place. MS already reach the largest pool of gamers by caring for PC with all of their titles on day one, so by the same token of this argument, why are Sony and Nintendo not releasing 100% of their titles on PC on day 1, wouldn't they'll reach 200m+ more gamers?
- That's a big if, why would MS not revert to PC for their default configuration? Also, you seem to give Xcloud way too much maturity than it has, way more willingness from gamers to use the cloud, and completely miss that MS would still need to produce the same level of hardware and expand the same amount in RnD if not more, and they would not recoup most of the loss by selling them outright.
- So Xbox will say to MS investors, start the wait yet again and have faith, we'll change our model once again, more than halves our own revenue, thrash our relations with 3rd parties, drop our 'buy once play anywhere proposition', and try to convert our own enthusiast users to PS and maybe profit from it in another 10-15 years.
- They already do this with PC and with select titles on PS and Nintendo. Doing so does not require them to drop their Xbox divisions. If anything this is an argument for Sony and Nintendo to cater more to PC.
- MS is already on track to reach this level and more with their current strategy, why make such a drastic change and jeopardize it?
- Their current strategies are all about subs, the one you propose would have the unavoidable effect of decreasing the service offering and unnecessarily risking its current growth rate, potential, and current sub count.
Essay Pro