It's not. It's actually priced very nicely and it's very pro consumer. I just said that to exhasterbate the point that they make a killing on hardware sales

Ah I see now. Sorry for my bad comprehension skills lol

No.... xbox is still strong in the US... outselling their first gen console is already a good statement they will not leave next gen.

probably do a nintendo route of ... fuck generations and make our own timeline

Not until they can figure out how to charge for xbox live on PC.

Aside from software and OS sales, they never would make as much money as they do on consoles.  Once you say "aside from software and OS sales" you are excluding everything but sales of console hardware. It would be like asking an ice cream shop owner how they plan on making money aside from selling ice cream. The short answer is they don't plan on making money outside of ice cream. Ice cream is their main bussiness.

MS wants OS and Software sales (or subscriptions) to be their main bussiness. Maybe they want to slowly move all the MS IPs to a "games as a service" platform on PC. I mean, they don't exactly have to rival steam in order to make easy money. If enough gullible consumers buy into the "games as a service" subsciption they can rake in the money. For all we know Valve will go public as a company, have a change of management, and pull the same "games as a service" nonsense. In other words Valve could get new people running it, and those new people could wind up being scumbags. Or maybe publishers will finally grow tired of trying to coax money out of us with DLC, and microtransactions. Publishers might throw their hands up in the air, and sell games at $60 while requiring an online connection to a subscription service owned by the publisher of said game. That's basically what PSN and XBlive are right now anyway. The multiplayer aspect of your game is locked behind a subscription service. Why not take it a step further and make the entire game that way? 

Or maybe MS is going to play the good guy, and sell AAA games digitally *without* taking a massive 30% publishing fee out of a $60 game sale. That would be good compitition to Steam, who currently *does* take a 30% cut for little more than publishing a game. PC games could and should be $30 to $45 for a digital version on release day for most AAA games. The reason why it isn't is because Valve, and developers don't want to pass the savings of publishing digitally on to the consumer. I mean, for every $60 game sale from a brick and mortar store, it costs $5 to ship a physical game, and $10 to pay the brick and mortar store to sell the game. There's plenty of room there for MS to go ahead and sell a 3rd party PC game, and say "Hey gamers! We are gonna be nice and pass the savings on to you. This game that just launched only costs $45 on our storefront, but it costs $60 on steam. Switch to us and save!"

This, they would also need a way to get people to buy third party games on windows store instead of steam.

This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. My point was that they already make money off selling windows and games on their PC store, so cancelling the Xbox division would literally just decrease the amount of revenue Microsoft could make. If Microsoft left the console market and published Halo exclusively on PC, I honestly have a hard time buy that they would make as much profit as they would on consoles, since it would take 160$ (Windows 10 + Halo copy) to buy it on PC, versus what we have now which is either a PC gamer stays in his home and buys it for 60$, or a console gamer goes out and spends 260-350$(or up to 460-560$ for a new console). That is not something you can make up by selling Windows keys or software, because that's just an alternative to allow you to play a game.

The rest of what you said is ok I guess. I don't know why those ideas would be exclusive to a PC though ... 

That comment was sarcastic. 

No. But I hope they never win a gen.