Forums - Gaming Discussion - Next gen PS5/XB1SX sales ratio will look the same as this gen's. Huge changes in console marketshare require huge changes in the industry.

By the way, I often hear that MS doesn't care  about the hardware sales.On the other hand, I hear they will sell their next gen console for $400. 
So how much will the Lockhart be ? $200. ?
That doesn't make sense.

Last edited by Oneeee-Chan!!! - on 20 May 2020

Around the Network
Oneeee-Chan!!! said:

By the way, I often hear that MS doesn't care  about the hardware sales.On the other hand, I hear they will sell their next gen console for $400. 
So how much will the Lockhart be ? $200. ?
That doesn't make sense.

Microsoft does care about hardware sales, but they are downplaying their significance for the obvious reason that console sales haven't been looking good for them.

Regardless of how much Microsoft spreads out to the PC, more Xbox consoles sold will always mean more game and subscription sales for them.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

RolStoppable said:
Oneeee-Chan!!! said:

By the way, I often hear that MS doesn't care  about the hardware sales.On the other hand, I hear they will sell their next gen console for $400. 
So how much will the Lockhart be ? $200. ?
That doesn't make sense.

Microsoft does care about hardware sales, but they are downplaying their significance for the obvious reason that console sales haven't been looking good for them.

Regardless of how much Microsoft spreads out to the PC, more Xbox consoles sold will always mean more game and subscription sales for them.

Yes, I know.
I just made fun of their excuses



smroadkill15 said:
eva01beserk said:

No I dont have an Xbox. I have a PlayStation that I barely play anymore. I mainly play on my switch. 

Downplay? Me saying its good for gamers subtle downplay? Or you just asume I hate everything xbox so any complement I gave must have something attached to it? I get thought when you are in defense mode you just have to look at everything like an attack.

But thats great quote. But thats like saying if your a jogger don't worry about there not being a bridge, let the goverment worrie about that just keep runing. What dosent work there is that our actions impact even others futures. So thinking of things that could harm you or others in the future is something all adults should do.

But I'll say it simple and tell you that theres no hidden meaning or anything. Gamepass is a great service for gamers, it's not a great service for MS unless they have a crazzy amount of subs. I worry because if they can't make it work they wont just cancel it, it could have a negative impact on other divisions.

Every complement you give gamepass comes with some sort of dig towards it as well."Gamepass is not a bad offer. But also indicates that they are uneilling to offer quality games. If they do it will be like one a year and a bunch of Indy games or it just would not be worth it." Now you're backtracking by saying it's a great service for gamers. 

Here we go with the analogies again. If the bridge is working fine and is getting proper maintenance, why should someone care? Now if the bridge needed to be repaired and nobody was doing anything about it, then someone should worry. There is nothing wrong with Gamepass and it's a great value, so why should any care how MS handles it? Phil Spencer himself said, don't worry about it. 

Yeah that was a funny backpedal. From "MS doesn't care to offer quality games on GamePass, will maybe be one a year and a bunch of indies or they just won't care at all!!" to "man GamePass is a good value and such a good service". Even now he's still going on about one AAA title per year when we've had plenty of AAA already in 2020 alone.

Most people who shit on GamePass are extremely ignorant to what it actually offers.



LudicrousSpeed said:

Yeah that was a funny backpedal. From "MS doesn't care to offer quality games on GamePass, will maybe be one a year and a bunch of indies or they just won't care at all!!" to "man GamePass is a good value and such a good service". Even now he's still going on about one AAA title per year when we've had plenty of AAA already in 2020 alone.

Most people who shit on GamePass are extremely ignorant to what it actually offers.

Don't be so hard on people who are salty about GP. It's tough, knowing that despite the fact that your favorite platform is completely trouncing the competition in hardware sales, they are getting equally trounced on the service front....despite all those millions and millions of extra consoles sold giving them a vast edge in terms of potential access points for customers to make use of their own service. 

And all that with the GP approach of "quantity over quality." So even with much inferior games, the MS service is leagues more popular than the PS competitor. That's rough man. Imagine how bad it might get if MS ever actually make good games? That's downright scary.



Around the Network
Angelus said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

Yeah that was a funny backpedal. From "MS doesn't care to offer quality games on GamePass, will maybe be one a year and a bunch of indies or they just won't care at all!!" to "man GamePass is a good value and such a good service". Even now he's still going on about one AAA title per year when we've had plenty of AAA already in 2020 alone.

Most people who shit on GamePass are extremely ignorant to what it actually offers.

Don't be so hard on people who are salty about GP. It's tough, knowing that despite the fact that your favorite platform is completely trouncing the competition in hardware sales, they are getting equally trounced on the service front....despite all those millions and millions of extra consoles sold giving them a vast edge in terms of potential access points for customers to make use of their own service. 

And all that with the GP approach of "quantity over quality." So even with much inferior games, the MS service is leagues more popular than the PS competitor. That's rough man. Imagine how bad it might get if MS ever actually make good games? That's downright scary.

If MS studios made games that were pushing 10M sales on average and if they had a console that was pushing 80M+ in sales with the associated spike in software sales that comes with that too?

GamePass wouldn't exist, or at the very least it couldn't be a priority for them. 

Think about it, why would sony make GoT/TLOU2 available on PS now day one when they know each of those games would sell over 6M copies each at $60.



Intrinsic said:
Angelus said:

Don't be so hard on people who are salty about GP. It's tough, knowing that despite the fact that your favorite platform is completely trouncing the competition in hardware sales, they are getting equally trounced on the service front....despite all those millions and millions of extra consoles sold giving them a vast edge in terms of potential access points for customers to make use of their own service. 

And all that with the GP approach of "quantity over quality." So even with much inferior games, the MS service is leagues more popular than the PS competitor. That's rough man. Imagine how bad it might get if MS ever actually make good games? That's downright scary.

If MS studios made games that were pushing 10M sales on average and if they had a console that was pushing 80M+ in sales with the associated spike in software sales that comes with that too?

GamePass wouldn't exist, or at the very least it couldn't be a priority for them. 

Think about it, why would sony make GoT/TLOU2 available on PS now day one when they know each of those games would sell over 6M copies each at $60.

Because getting 60 bucks once or twice a year is less than getting 10-15 bucks per month every year. If you feel your service offers a heightened quality on such a level that this isn't suitable, you can always hike up the price a couple bucks. I hope you don't really expect me to explain to you in detail the math of why long term subscription models are more attractive to every branch of the entertainment industry than one time purchases here and there.

You're incredibly naive if you think GP is going away if/when MS has a stronger market position, or that Sony isn't going to be making a concerted effort to move in the same direction in the future.



Angelus said:
Intrinsic said:

If MS studios made games that were pushing 10M sales on average and if they had a console that was pushing 80M+ in sales with the associated spike in software sales that comes with that too?

GamePass wouldn't exist, or at the very least it couldn't be a priority for them. 

Think about it, why would sony make GoT/TLOU2 available on PS now day one when they know each of those games would sell over 6M copies each at $60.

Because getting 60 bucks once or twice a year is less than getting 10-15 bucks per month every year. If you feel your service offers a heightened quality on such a level that this isn't suitable, you can always hike up the price a couple bucks. I hope you don't really expect me to explain to you in detail the math of why long term subscription models are more attractive to every branch of the entertainment industry than one time purchases here and there.

You're incredibly naive if you think GP is going away if/when MS has a stronger market position, or that Sony isn't going to be making a concerted effort to move in the same direction in the future.

MATHS TIME!

So let's compare a made up AAA game.

Game pass has 10 Million users.  Source: https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/29/21242004/xbox-game-pass-10-million-subscribers-microsoft-q3-2020-earnings

Let's say 70% is paying full price of $10 a month.  Many users are using the service through $1 deals, etc. This is $70,000,000 per month. so $840,000,000 in a year.

Let's say this Sony sells 10 million copies in a year at $60 a copy. That's $600,000,000‬.

So it looks like Microsoft make more money right? Wrong.

Sony make another AAA game in the same year and that's ANOTHER $600,000,000‬. So now we have $1,200,000,000‬.  Microsoft however are still going to earn $840,000,000 in the year as both their AAA games are included in one price.



Sony want to make money by selling art, Nintendo want to make money by selling fun, Microsoft want to make money.

only777 said:
Angelus said:

Because getting 60 bucks once or twice a year is less than getting 10-15 bucks per month every year. If you feel your service offers a heightened quality on such a level that this isn't suitable, you can always hike up the price a couple bucks. I hope you don't really expect me to explain to you in detail the math of why long term subscription models are more attractive to every branch of the entertainment industry than one time purchases here and there.

You're incredibly naive if you think GP is going away if/when MS has a stronger market position, or that Sony isn't going to be making a concerted effort to move in the same direction in the future.

MATHS TIME!

So let's compare a made up AAA game.

Game pass has 10 Million users.  Source: https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/29/21242004/xbox-game-pass-10-million-subscribers-microsoft-q3-2020-earnings

Let's say 70% is paying full price of $10 a month.  Many users are using the service through $1 deals, etc. This is $70,000,000 per month. so $840,000,000 in a year.

Let's say this Sony sells 10 million copies in a year at $60 a copy. That's $600,000,000‬.

So it looks like Microsoft make more money right? Wrong.

Sony make another AAA game in the same year and that's ANOTHER $600,000,000‬. So now we have $1,200,000,000‬.  Microsoft however are still going to earn $840,000,000 in the year as both their AAA games are included in one price.

And he is just ignoring that PSNow have 2.2M subs, so it would make this gap on GP 8M. And if we consider that PS+ have 44M subs versus probably 20-25M of Gold Subs then it is certain that on services Sony makes much more money than MS.

From what I remember there were some years that PS+ made more money than Xbox as a whole.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

only777 said:
Angelus said:

Because getting 60 bucks once or twice a year is less than getting 10-15 bucks per month every year. If you feel your service offers a heightened quality on such a level that this isn't suitable, you can always hike up the price a couple bucks. I hope you don't really expect me to explain to you in detail the math of why long term subscription models are more attractive to every branch of the entertainment industry than one time purchases here and there.

You're incredibly naive if you think GP is going away if/when MS has a stronger market position, or that Sony isn't going to be making a concerted effort to move in the same direction in the future.

MATHS TIME!

So let's compare a made up AAA game.

Game pass has 10 Million users.  Source: https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/29/21242004/xbox-game-pass-10-million-subscribers-microsoft-q3-2020-earnings

Let's say 70% is paying full price of $10 a month.  Many users are using the service through $1 deals, etc. This is $70,000,000 per month. so $840,000,000 in a year.

Let's say this Sony sells 10 million copies in a year at $60 a copy. That's $600,000,000‬.

So it looks like Microsoft make more money right? Wrong.

Sony make another AAA game in the same year and that's ANOTHER $600,000,000‬. So now we have $1,200,000,000‬.  Microsoft however are still going to earn $840,000,000 in the year as both their AAA games are included in one price.

Ohhhh, so publishers get 100% of the money on every purchase now do they. Damn, why I didn't I think of that. And of course all those game sales occur at full price as well...nobody buys those on sale ever. Checks out.