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

Forums - Sales - The end of Xbox is approaching

Nate4Drake said:
tiffac said:
MS is so rich that they can turn the Xbox into a company hobby. Its not going anywhere and MS will continue to stick it up to Sony and Nintendo just for fun.

It doesn't work like this :)

MS makes XBox to make money, and will continue to do it until it's productive, and X1 is productive.  Nobody nowdays does business just for fun.

You know nothing, Jon Snow!

Oh wait... your name is Nate... d@mnit!!!



Around the Network

Abandon ship fellow Xbox fans, don't you see the writing on the wall? It's all over, sell your Xbox One and go buy a gaming PC and PS4.



I agree. I think they might keep the brand xbox as a windows 10 device hardware from Microsoft.
Will be a full desktop playing windows games but with interface like steamOS when user requests.



SWORDF1SH said:
RolStoppable said:

My thread is probably better and definitely more interesting. I am not even sure if I want to read your thread (and yes, I have the link and already looked at it).

Making gaming entirely service-based only works for companies who use the same controller every time. So because of that aspect alone it's unlikely that Nintendo will go that route. Theoretically, you could release a new type of controller to work with a service, but that wouldn't garner as much consumer and developer interest as a box that comes with said controller.

Besides, this thread isn't about the end of Microsoft consoles, but rather Xbox-branded ones.

Calling it "popular knowledge" would probably be too generous because a lot of gamers don't know about it. Microsoft themselves refered to Xbox as a strategic defensive business move.

You're going to have to link me to get the context of that statement. Personally I don't buy that they made Xbox to protect windows. You're trying to put round pegs in square holes. For me MS saw how the gaming market was expanding and they wanted a peace of the pie. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUODlNffWmU#t=3m21s



RolStoppable said:
SWORDF1SH said:

You aren't really defending your opinions that great. Your first response to justify your opinion;

"It's not tripe. First I explained why Xbox came into existence and then I explained why it should come to an end."

Like that statement justifies your opinion. It doesn't. Your opinions and presumptions are also written as fact, another thing I disagree with.

Then you try and justify your opinion by saying that because kowenicki hasn't pulled you up on it, it must be correct. I'm sorry but it doesn't work like that. Kowenicki actually made some good points on this thread and if he wants to stand your corner for you and explain why I should acknowledge your opinions as plausible, I'll be happy to listen. I'm not against the possibility that your opinions could be right, I'm against opinions that don't make sense or have very little reasoning.

Then you come up with another wild claim, "The original Xbox was a colossal failure (lost around $4 billion over the course of four years), so something much bigger than gaming had to be at stake to justify another Xbox."

Again please explain further, you're looking at things from only one perspective. By your reasoning Sony should of packed up shop and left the console business in 2010 after huge losses. Sometimes you have to look at the long game. How much of that $4B loss is due to Xbox live and being a front runner in online connected consoles? That's just an example of betting big to reap the rewards in the future. MS aren't afraid to take big gambles.

This post of yours is really rubbish, because you wrote it right after responding to mjk45 who pretty much said the same things I did.

SWORDF1SH said:

Thank you. That's a little bit more of an explanation. How true do you think that statement is and how much weight do you that reason truly holds to why they built the Xbox?

mjk45 didn't give you a link either, but you feel inclined to believe him but not me. And if you don't like my tone, then you only have yourself to blame because you called my original post tripe, even though you clearly lacked knowledge on the topic. It's one thing to ask questions, but it's another to call someone else wrong despite not knowing anything or not enough about the subject yourself.

Sony's PS3 was allowed to take such big losses because the company wanted to establish Blu-ray as the successor to DVD. So just like in Microsoft's case, something bigger than gaming was at stake. On the other hand, Sony dropped the Vita pretty much instantly because it had nothing besides gaming going for it. Multimedia functionality was a lost cause because smartphones and tablets already did the same job better. On top of that, the Vita didn't even make big losses; it wasn't profitable and there wasn't anything else at stake, so Sony quickly decided to cut their losses on the device.

Actually no Rol, you were very vague in your OP. Mjk actually explained it more which you failed to do. Do you really have to rely on other people to do that for you?

I still think your whole thread is complete bull. I'm sorry it just feels like you had a thought and instead of thinking it through you put it in a thread. If you want to explain your OP you had multiple chances to do it but failed. So naturally I'm going to call out your dud defence posts. You had your chances but instead somebody else had to do it for you. 

Mjk just seemed more knowledgeable than you and we went on to discuss it further which we could of done instead of saying stuff like 'but kowenicki didn't disagree so FACT CONFIRMED'. It's like you were trying to summon kowenicki to dig you out.

You probably do know more and didn't show it but that's your failings. And maybe I don't know much about this subject but you're the one claiming that they do. If you can't explain your reasons and fold when questioned, expect to be pulled apart. If something doesn't make sense to me I will question it. Accept it and move on.

As for the PS3 Blu Ray comment,  that makes sense. We are getting somewhere. 



Around the Network
Ruler said:
SWORDF1SH said:

You're going to have to link me to get the context of that statement. Personally I don't buy that they made Xbox to protect windows. You're trying to put round pegs in square holes. For me MS saw how the gaming market was expanding and they wanted a peace of the pie. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUODlNffWmU#t=3m21s

That is actually interesting. I will listen to more of it later. Thank you for the link.



Stop making threads roll. Quit this site. Please. Give us a break.



MS give me that mini bone goodness already im waiting



REQUIESCAT IN PACE

I Hate REMASTERS

I Hate PLAYSTATION PLUS

Valid points, but I'm left with trying to grasp how MS would compete on a PC with something as well liked and established as Steam. Valve seemingly has the PC gamer market cornered, and they do it so well that I've gone back to being dominantly a PC gamer from a long run of console gaming.

How will MS lure people away from Steam as a service? The only way I can fathom is a subscriber monthly service that includes unlimited access to games, like a cable subscription where you pay for the overall service but all the stations are available to enjoy without limit. How would that pan out across X amount of developers being paid monthly royalties would be interesting to see.



The Carnival of Shadows - Folk Punk from Asbury Park, New Jersey

http://www.thecarnivalofshadows.com 


NobleTeam360 said:
Abandon ship fellow Xbox fans, don't you see the writing on the wall? It's all over, sell your Xbox One and go buy a gaming PC and PS4.

Not sure why one would need a PS4 though, as 90% of the library is on Steam as well. I guess same would apply to those 1st party nintendo game fans, to have a Wii U or whatnot, for that remaining 10% that isn't covered?



The Carnival of Shadows - Folk Punk from Asbury Park, New Jersey

http://www.thecarnivalofshadows.com