By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Is the Xbox One a failure?

 

Is XB1 a failure?

Yes! 615 40.51%
 
No! 711 46.84%
 
Gimme dem numbers! 68 4.48%
 
I pity Wii U :( 121 7.97%
 
Total:1,515
DM235 on 20 January 2015
ZarskiSold said:
DM235 said:
ZarskiSold said:
Welfare said:
No it's not. It's tracking ahead of every console besides the Wii, PS2, and PS4. People have to understand the PS4 is the market leader, and is going to have more sales compared to second place.


And that makes it a failure, i dont get why some are so scared of the word. 

If you are not the best #1 you have failed, its just a fact of the matter.  Evry counter argument is just opinion and felling but a fact is a fact.

30 teams try to win the Cup each year in the NHL, 29 fail to do it.  That makes them failures, that it.

I love it that you brought hockey into this argument...

The Toronto Maple Leafs have failed to win the cup in over 40 years.  However, they are league's most valuable team, and second highest in revenue and income.  I would not call them a failure (specifically in the business sense).

Well business wise X1 is a failure, sales wise market wise.  Soemone already made a post that shows in most wasys the X1 is a falirure.

Just like the Leafs are a faliure to do what all NHL teams attempt to do, win the cup.  

Fail is a fail, people need to stop being scared of faliure.  


The purpose of an NHL team is to provide entertainment, and to make money in the process.  The Maple Leafs succeed in doing that.

The point of the XBox is to entertain, and to make money in the process.  It is doing better sales wise than last generation.  Marketshare wise, they were at 31% last generation (80 million out of 280 million consoles sold).  They are 29% now and gaining.  Microsoft appears to have spent lots more (due to R&D and RROD) last generation than this generation, so they should be able to recoup their investment faster.  So in my opinion they are not a failure.

Just because you are not the market leader does not make you a failure.



Around the Network
ZarskiSold on 20 January 2015
DM235 said:


The purpose of an NHL team is to provide entertainment, and to make money in the process.  The Maple Leafs succeed in doing that.

The point of the XBox is to entertain, and to make money in the process.  It is doing better sales wise than last generation.  Marketshare wise, they were at 31% last generation (80 million out of 280 million consoles sold).  They are 29% now and gaining.  Microsoft appears to have spent lots more (due to R&D and RROD) last generation than this generation, so they should be able to recoup their investment faster.  So in my opinion they are not a failure.

Just because you are not the market leader does not make you a failure.

opinion matters not, as partely it does mean just that as MS said them selves they are in it to WIN it, whats so hard to grasp about that ?



DanneSandin on 20 January 2015
IFireflyl said:
DanneSandin said:
IFireflyl said:
DanneSandin said:
IFireflyl said:

I'm not really sure why this topic exists. I'm not trying to be mean, but you already gave the numbers, and the only logical answer is that the Xbox One is not a failure. If it were a failure it wouldn't have moved so many units. That would be like asking if the PS3 was a failure at the end of its first full year of sales. Sony was being destroyed by Microsoft in terms of sales. They ended up catching up, and then surpassing Microsoft. I personally don't see Microsoft surpassing Sony unless they get some major game changers in (e.g. Xbox exclusive titles that people actually want), but Microsoft has too much money, and too much influence to just roll over because Sony is doing better than them at the beginning of the current-gen "console wars". Microsoft knows the gaming market is huge, and they won't back out of it. This discussion is kind of pointless because anyone with half a brain already knows that.

Is that really the only logical answer though? It can't really compete with PS4 and it's probably been costing MS quite a bit, and they had to lose the Kinect. I don't think it's as black and white as you make it out to be


How can't it compete with the PS4? Did you read the first part I said about Microsoft destroying Sony with the last-gen console start, and then Sony making a huge comeback and surpassing Microsoft? Microsoft can compete with Sony. They just need to make some changes (much like Sony had to with the PS3).

Edit: And losing the Kinect means nothing. If the biggest money-maker for Microsoft was the Kinect then that was a huge problem in the first place. The Kinect is a piece of garbage hardware that was implemented as a piss-poor attempt to take over the Wii-U market.

Here: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=151051&page=1#1 It's quite apparent PS3 never were far behind X360 and didn't make a huge comeback. That come back is a myth. Their only good markets are US and UK, you can't compete on those two markets alone. And remember that MS wants to earn money from XB1, and they can't make all that much from it right now

And I think you'll find that Protendo will have quite some interesting things to say about this.


You're obviously not reading the same numbers as I am. The Xbox 360 launched in November 2005. The PS3 launched in November 2006. If you think that there wasn't a huge gap in sales in that year then I can't help you. You're on the VGChartz website. Just look it up. In the first two months alone Xbox 360 sold over 1 million units. I didn't even bother totalling the next 9-10 months of 360's sold, and where PS3 sold 0 consoles.

Obviously I am. Its quite clear that PS3 started to outsell X360 (with aligned launches) from early on. This means it was just a matter of time before PS3 caught up with X360, and I believe that was in... 2011? 2012? Little by little Sony chipped away the lead MS had built up with their head start. Its all there in the charts.

anyways, if you reply again, can you please trim the quote tree? Im on my phone now and cant myself



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

MadCowMan on 20 January 2015

The x1 does not exist in a bubble and comparing it to a supply constrained last gen is dumb, this gen is much more front loaded.... It has lost major market share in it's most important countries and is getting greatly outsold by it's competitor....yes that is a failure..... MAny xbox fans said ps3 was a failure because it lost a lot of market share to MS, funny how that doesn't apply now.

MS did not enter consoles to be a distant second to sony and not even be leader in the US, especially after last gen.



Neodegenerate on 20 January 2015
ZarskiSold said:

opinion matters not, as partely it does mean just that as MS said them selves they are in it to WIN it, whats so hard to grasp about that ?

Marketing speak is not something to be taken as gospel just because it fits with the juvenile idea of "first is the only thing that matters" and backs up your specific argument.

A product can be successful without being number 1.  Are both Gillette and Schick successful razor brands?  Yes.  Are Google and Apple both putting out successful phone operation systems?  Yes.  In both of these scenarios is one in first place and the other not?  Yes.  Does that change their success?  Nope.



Around the Network
MadCowMan on 20 January 2015
Neodegenerate said:
ZarskiSold said:

opinion matters not, as partely it does mean just that as MS said them selves they are in it to WIN it, whats so hard to grasp about that ?

Marketing speak is not something to be taken as gospel just because it fits with the juvenile idea of "first is the only thing that matters" and backs up your specific argument.

A product can be successful without being number 1.  Are both Gillette and Schick successful razor brands?  Yes.  Are Google and Apple both putting out successful phone operation systems?  Yes.  In both of these scenarios is one in first place and the other not?  Yes.  Does that change their success?  Nope.

You are incredibly Naive if you think MS is happy with how this gen has gone and there cuirrent position, MS is not a company that likes losing period.



Neodegenerate on 20 January 2015
MadCowMan said:
Neodegenerate said:
ZarskiSold said:

opinion matters not, as partely it does mean just that as MS said them selves they are in it to WIN it, whats so hard to grasp about that ?

Marketing speak is not something to be taken as gospel just because it fits with the juvenile idea of "first is the only thing that matters" and backs up your specific argument.

A product can be successful without being number 1.  Are both Gillette and Schick successful razor brands?  Yes.  Are Google and Apple both putting out successful phone operation systems?  Yes.  In both of these scenarios is one in first place and the other not?  Yes.  Does that change their success?  Nope.

You are incredibly Naive if you think MS is happy with how this gen has gone and there cuirrent position, MS is not a company that likes losing period.

Where did I say that they are happy with how this gen has gone?



nanarchy on 20 January 2015
ZarskiSold said:
nanarchy said:
Xbox is a business, from a business perspective it is very successful, not as successful as they would have liked but successful none the less. It is faster selling that its predecessor and without the massive losses the predecessor had to take in the early years, has excellent 1st and 3rd party support and a solid future (assuming they can maintain momentum). No it isn't going as well as the PS4 but it doesn't have to in order to be a success.

Seems to MS its beat them or failure.  

Phil Spencer admits both the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One are doing "incredibly well," the new head of Xbox says "that’s good for the business, but we’re in this to win."

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2014/03/31/microsoft-we-are-in-this-to-win-focusing-on-games-at-e3

of course they are in it to win, but that doesn't translate to if they are not first then it is a failure. It is a business, the goal will be to get as much of the market share as possible to allow the highest profit, ideally they would like 100% marketshare and they would keep pushing as long as there is more marketshare to gain, you don't strive to achieve "an acceptable level", you set goals to outperform. They will have baselines, goals and stretch goals in mind and you will never here any of the companies say they have enough marketshare and are content.



Neodegenerate on 20 January 2015
nanarchy said:

of course they are in it to win, but that doesn't translate to if they are not first then it is a failure. It is a business, the goal will be to get as much of the market share as possible to allow the highest profit, ideally they would like 100% marketshare and they would keep pushing as long as there is more marketshare to gain, you don't strive to achieve "an acceptable level", you set goals to outperform. They will have baselines, goals and stretch goals in mind and you will never here any of the companies say they have enough marketshare and are content.


Ahhh, this person gets it.  Thank you.



MadCowMan on 20 January 2015
kowenicki said:
The fact that this question is even asked shows how ridiculous gaming forums have become.

How so??? Many said ps3 was a failure because it lost market share to 360 in some territories..... Forums are ridiculous because some say things you don't like to hear??? I doubt MS saw them losing everywhere to PS4 by this much so soon....and I doubt that is what they want, so I don't think it is that cut and dry.

 

MS did not enter this market to still be in the red and to get dominated by Sony, and comparisons to 360 are laughable at best in a much more front loaded generation.