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

Forums - Microsoft - MS: 1st party Xbox games will be cross-gen for "next year, two years"

HollyGamer on 12 January 2020
Azzanation said:
HollyGamer said:

you still not answering  my question, if consoles is not important why Microsoft still producing consoles and making next gen console? you make a contradiction in your statement .

And how consoles able to push directX if you already able to play Xbox games/ directX games on PC? 

I did answer your question, did you choose to not read it.

Ill post my reply again.

*To have there toes also in the console market, To support there Direct X, To push subscribers, to gain profit from the console industry as well as other market spaces. Microsoft wont drop Xbox and be replaced by PlayStation because of one little thing, PSN. If PSN didn't exist than that might have been a possibility however PSN is a direct competitor to Live and without a home console to drive Live members, going PS, Sony will push PSN over Live and MS loses control. Having there own platform will support Live, GamePass and Xcloud in the console space.*

They will not  have toes on console market if they don't have console sales 

Directx is PC not console

Subscriber can be obtained outside consoles through PC and cloud 

So consoles sales  is useless for Microsoft isn't ? 

Or perhaps Microsoft are confuse with their own vision? Microsoft cannot focus on two side, they either choose subs model with PC/Cloud or go with consoles 



Around the Network
Azzanation on 12 January 2020
Barkley said:

I don't disagree with your premise that MAU's is limited by just being on consoles compared to being elsewhere as well. What I completely disagree with is the idea that "Console sales and figures are really only for fanboys" or "it remains nothing more than for fanboys to flex there muscles."

That there is a larger userbase outside of consoles doesn't mean that console sales are suddenly not incredibly valuable. It also doesn't meant that a company suddenly doesn't care about selling consoles.

Basically what I am trying to say is console sales isn't the "be all, end all" for the gaming industry. The console market is only a portion of the market and its why MS are focusing more than just consoles. They are still making consoles because they want as much revenue as possibly and they still have quite a huge market share in there, however there focus has changed from worrying about being the console market leader and moving onto being the gaming market leader. If the next Xbox doesn't sell as much as the PS5 or Switch, it doesn't matter as its not there prime focus anymore. They want to grow in all markets and have more avenues. These decisions will hinder Xbox's performance and they know that, and they are happy to sacrifice console sales to do so.

Sony seems to rely heavily on the PS consoles so there direction is to sell as many as possible. I am sure MS want to sell as much as possible as any brand would but again gaming is bigger than Sony and Nintendo and MS know this. Apple make billions and they don't even have a console, so does Steam. MS want that share of the pie, not just Sony's and Nintendo's share.

Last edited by Azzanation - on 12 January 2020

Azzanation on 12 January 2020
HollyGamer said:

They will not  have toes on console market if they don't have console sales 

Directx is PC not console

Subscriber can be obtained outside consoles through PC and cloud 

So consoles sales  is useless for Microsoft isn't ? 

Or perhaps Microsoft are confuse with their own vision? Microsoft cannot focus on two side, they either choose subs model with PC/Cloud or go with consoles 

Xbox uses Direct X.

MS want to compete in all markets. Consoles is only a portion of the market.



HollyGamer on 12 January 2020
Azzanation said:
HollyGamer said:

They will not  have toes on console market if they don't have console sales 

Directx is PC not console

Subscriber can be obtained outside consoles through PC and cloud 

So consoles sales  is useless for Microsoft isn't ? 

Or perhaps Microsoft are confuse with their own vision? Microsoft cannot focus on two side, they either choose subs model with PC/Cloud or go with consoles 

Xbox uses Direct X.

MS want to compete in all markets. Consoles is only a portion of the market.

What's the point of selling direct X on console if only Xbox the one who use direct X on consoles

Also if they want to compete in all market isn't selling a lot of console still relevant??? 



Mr Puggsly on 12 January 2020
PotentHerbs said:
Mr Puggsly said:

That's not necessarily true. There are plenty of 7th gen games that are bigger in scale and more complex than the average 8th gen game. I mean GTAV and Skyrim shouldnt exist on 7th gen if complex games required cutting edge specs.

Look at Crysis 1 on 7th gen. That was supposedly an impossible port but they got it done with much of the complex CPU demands mostly intact.

Is Forza Horizon 2 on 360 as complex as the lead X1 version? Nope, but its still good.

It just depends on the route they go. Your assumption is X1 will always be the lead. But it might be the opposite and X1 ports are scaled back in both graphics and features.

GTAV & Skyrim were still based on PS360 hardware. I wouldn't categorize GTAV/ Skyrim as the average 7th gen game either, since both these projects pushed the hardware to its limits, and the majority of 7th gen games didn't match their scope.

IIRC, The Last Guardian wouldn't be able to run on the PS3 because of its CPU bottlenecks. And this is an average looking game for 7th gen standards.

With all the supposed improvements of the SSD/CPU, the emphasis of no load times, from both Sony/MS, it seems like the complexity of gameplay/ game design are poised to jump dramatically.

But you're right, we'll see what developers prioritize. 

I didnt say GTAV and Skyrim were common for 7th gen. I am stressing ambitious games dont need cutting edge specs. People are speaking as if X1 is too weak for ambitious games, but GTAV and Skyrim are still more ambitious than many modern games.

PS3 had the most amazing CPU ever created. I doubt Last Guardian was suffering from that. I dont buy that argument.

Games didnt really jump to significantly in complexity this gen, I argue it was more visual but thats my opinion. The large scale MP games might be an exception, last gen really struggled with that probably for RAM and CPU reasons.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Around the Network
derpysquirtle64 on 12 January 2020
Barkley said:
Azzanation said:

Console sales and figures are really only for fanboys to fuel the fire on which system is better based off sales.

MS clearly dont care so much for console sales any more, and it was proof this gen they dont. They want software and service sales and the Series X is only there to compete nothing more.

Yep, they switched their strategy from selling consoles when their console didn't sell as well. Services and PC gaming started when their console sales disappointed.

"Console sales and figures are really only for fanboys" - Ridiculous

You can't claim software and service sales matter and then claim that hardware sales are "only for fanboys". Hardware sales are what drive the sales of software and services. MS can't sell Gold to people who don't own an Xbox. MS can't sell gamepass ultimate or console to people who don't own an Xbox. MS can't generate third party revenue from people who don't buy an Xbox. Hell with the release of their games on steam they can't even keep all of the revenue from their 1st party titles.

Console sales create a userbase that drives revenue and profits. There's a reason Playstation's profits are higher then they've ever been. They've got 106m consoles sold, generating money through 1st party and 3rd party software, and have 38.6m people subscribed to PS+.

Consoles sold = Users

Users = Money

Users on a locked system where you get revenue from third parties = even more money

What a brilliant post. Also, no matter what MS has been saying lately, they of course still want to dominate console sales, because it brings more revenue. The fact that they are openly saying that they are not in the business to only sell consoles anymore, doesn't mean that they don't want to sell consoles and be a market leader. Anyone thinking the opposite is not very smart.

HollyGamer said:
Azzanation said:

Xbox uses Direct X.

MS want to compete in all markets. Consoles is only a portion of the market.

What's the point of selling direct X on console if only Xbox the one who use direct X on consoles

Also if they want to compete in all market isn't selling a lot of console still relevant??? 

Well, the statement about DirectX is correct. But only if we look back 20 years ago. MS initially entered console market to have developers locked into using DirectX because there was a threat in the face of PS2 to Windows PC market which was their main cash cow back then. As we see, MS actually succeeded in this - DirectX is still being used for making games for PC and Xbox, Windows is still the dominant force in PC OS market. On the other hand, Windows is not a focus for MS anymore, so there is no reason to force developers into using DirectX anymore.



 

LudicrousSpeed on 12 January 2020
Barkley said:

If this is actually accurate and holds true it would be unusual.

The first 2 years of 1st party XBO:

XBO Exclusive

Forza 5
Killer Instinct
Ryse Son of Rome
Zoo Tycoon
Project Spark
Sunset Overdrive
Halo MCC
Ori and the Blind Forest
State of Decay Year One
Rare Replay
Gears of War Ultimate
Forza 6
Halo 5

360+XBO

Forza Horizon 2

Only one of their games was on both 360 and XBO.

I'm not sure if this is a wise move or not.

He said all the games over the next one or two years. Which leaves open the possibility that it’s just games released this year. Launch games, and anything released on Xbone this year. At “worst” it would mean games in the first year of XSX. Not the first two years. So a lot of your games aren’t valid because of release date, they came more than a year after release. 

But really, looking over that list including all the games and also if you look at the first year or two of PS4 first party, exactly what is there that is mind blowing, hardware pushing stuff? It takes a couple years to start to see that type of stuff. So this idea that cross gen games will hold back the XSX is nonsense. Furthermore as we saw with the cross gen games last gen, devs can and will cut up old gen versions or have them gimped in various ways. It happened this gen across different genres.

The people who buy consoles at launch buy them for the graphics and the new features. Did people buy the PS4 at launch because Killzone 7 and Knack were incredible games technology wise, impossible on PS3? No, they bought them because they can play prettier games and had a load of new features like share, suspending games, party chat etc.

Personally I like the idea that if I buy Ori, Bleeding Edge, Gears Tactics, etc in early/mid 2020, I can play them on my XSX day one apparently. Seems like a win for me as a gamer. The logic behind this strategy and embracing GamePass and Xbox as a games service over emphasizing hardware is open to discussion and debate but I don’t see how this can in any way be a negative for gamers?



HollyGamer on 12 January 2020
HollyGamer said:

What's the point of selling direct X on console if only Xbox the one who use direct X on consoles

Also if they want to compete in all market isn't selling a lot of console still relevant??? 

Well, the statement about DirectX is correct. But only if we look back 20 years ago. MS initially entered console market to have developers locked into using DirectX because there was a threat in the face of PS2 to Windows PC market which was their main cash cow back then. As we see, MS actually succeeded in this - DirectX is still being used for making games for PC and Xbox, Windows is still the dominant force in PC OS market. On the other hand, Windows is not a focus for MS anymore, so there is no reason to force developers into using DirectX anymore.

That's why , my question is pointed toward the current market not at the past. In the past, Microsoft were afraid  how console can threatened PC market. But in reality there is no threat from consoles to PC Market and Windows is still selling like hotcakes. The big threat actually coming from Stadia, Steam and GOG and Epic also mobile phones. 



PotentHerbs on 12 January 2020
LudicrousSpeed said:
ironmanDX said:

That first thread simply isn't even remotely what you are accusing others of. The Op even states that they do/don't agree with the article linked from an outside source.

It creates discussion. On a forum, that really shouldn't be an issue... 

The second isn't related either... It's about money hating 3rd party titles and dlc... Moving on....

Third is about a rumoured spec leak.. What do these have to do with downplaying horizon 2? The thread seemed to be more about pricing between the consoles and again, speculation about the specs.. What do you want people to do? Not talk about the information presented in the thread from an article? 

There is downplaying about cross play finally being a thing. There probably should have been more of a positive reaction there. Mods handled the situation. Not worth bookmarking imo but I'll give it to you nonetheless. 

I don't see any problem with the last thread. It's based on a person's specific tastes in gaming and they're simply sharing that opinion with others. Some known Sony fans are even agreeing in the thread... Specificallyaabout the change in gameplay from uncharted 2 to 4 and GoW's recent evolution.

It's actually well behaved in the thread too. I only did read through the first 50 posts though.

Do you just not want discussion? Is that really what you're saying? Perhaps a shared user base forum isn't for you. 

Yeah I don’t really get this. Are these supposed to prove something relevant to this thread? Imagine if someone bookmarked every thread where someone downplayed MS or trashed their vision or intent or a new policy. “Binders and binders of threads” to paraphrase a former Presidential candidate 😆

I showed how they relate. Of course you don't see it, despite the fact you posted in the threads I linked, downplaying.



PotentHerbs on 12 January 2020
Mr Puggsly said:

I didnt say GTAV and Skyrim were common for 7th gen. I am stressing ambitious games dont need cutting edge specs. People are speaking as if X1 is too weak for ambitious games, but GTAV and Skyrim are still more ambitious than many modern games.

PS3 had the most amazing CPU ever created. I doubt Last Guardian was suffering from that. I dont buy that argument.

Games didnt really jump to significantly in complexity this gen, I argue it was more visual but thats my opinion. The large scale MP games might be an exception, last gen really struggled with that probably for RAM and CPU reasons.

That argument can be used for every generation. Besides, with cutting edge specs, developers can be even more ambitious. I wouldn't say GTAV and Skyrim are more ambitious than modern day games, especially compared to other next gen, open world games like RDR2, Horizon, The Witcher 3. 

PS3 hardware did hold back The Last Guardian, straight from Yoshida: 

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-last-guardian-for-ps3-would-have-been-compromi/1100-6428488/

In 2012, with the knowledge that the PS4 was due to release just a year later, Yoshida said Sony realized that it had to make an important decision regarding the fate of The Last Guardian.

"With the [PS4 development] system available it became apparent for us that we just cannot continue like this in terms of the pace of development," Yoshida said. "We knew that we had to compromise on the design or the scope or the number of characters if we stayed on PS3. So in order to realize the vision we said, 'Let's do PS4.'

-- 

Games are poised to jump in complexity this gen with the SSD/CPU. We already have Sony/MS boasting about no load times. That in of itself is a major development in game/world design.