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

How is it nickel and diming you.  I always wonder about a statement like this because nothing makes you or require you to get Gamepass.  Its a service you either see value in paying a monthly sub or not.  If the base standard service does not have enough value for your money then by all means its not worth your money. If Ultimate is priced to much for what it gives you then by all means its not worth your money.

It really doesn't matter if MS sees success or not because they still have competition between Sony and to a certain extent Nintendo and they will probably be 3rd place for a good bit of time because neither of the other 2 companies are having issues selling their games, services or consoles.  I am not sure what tactics you are really complaining about.  Its all just business and trying to find the right price point.  Just because you do not know the finer details in what it takes to make and sustain a successful service that gives you all of their games on both PC and console for a sub price and maintain over about 40 studios does not have a cost then I am not sure what to tell you.  Nothing is ever free in this world and you must always believe that every one of these companies isn't in the business to make you happy as much as they are in the business to make money.

MS, Nintendo nor Sony have ever been a good consumer friendly corporations.  They are only good and friendly when they need to compete with other companies for your money.  So no, MS has nor will they ever be a good and friendly consumer company but as long as they have competition, they will always strive to please customers to a certain extent as long as they can also continue to make money.

Still have competition between Sony? According to who? All Xbox have talked about is wanting to offer people the best value and that everyone should be able to play everything regardless of system, then they go ahead to promote their games on PS consoles while more games are being kept away from Xbox consoles. Sony now feel emboldened enough to price their products as if they can get away with anything, not like someone operating in a competetive market.

Right now their business isn't making people happy nor is it currently positioned to make any sort of worthwhile return on the huge investments they've made, so what exactly are they in the business for? If you're gonna make it out like they have their own rationale behind all these anti-consumer moves, you have to actually show some clear proof that it's actually leading to something positive. Right now all we know for sure is their market share is rapidly declining, Gamepass growth is not where they projected it to be and their brand image has arguably never been worse (up there with the Xbox One reveal/Kinect Overlord days).

No one expects any corporation to be naturally consumer-friendly, although when it comes to Nintendo specifically they've set themselves apart from every other publisher in video games when it comes to their business philosophy. But as you've mentioned it should be common sense for a brand to please customers to a certain extent if they want to actually have some sustainable and long-term success in the market, yet right now Xbox are definitevely doing neither well, so what exactly have they been doing other than emptying out their Microsoft inheritance fund?

Please enlighten me with what you consider anti consumer moves because I have no clue what you are talking about.  The moves may not be popular but anti consumer is something totally different.  If you are talking about moving day one releases to the ultimate price point, that isn't anti consumer because no consumer needs Gamepass.  Instead its a business decision based on the amount MS is spending compared to what they are getting based on the cost of their services.  Just because you do not like the move doesn't make it anti consumer.

The thing is MS needed to scale back their ambition because its not working.  MS current setup is pretty much like Sony setup with the upside that MS still have day one releases of their games but now only for their higher tier.  The expectation that standard will get MS first party games after a year is based on nothing because that doesn't even happen for MS competition so I would believe its going to be a case by case scenario.

Is the problem you have is that MS is putting their games on other platforms.  That really seems to be the case with most of your arguments but to be honest I can only look at such arguments as fanboy type mentality.  I really cannot care that another platform is going to get games from MS since I do not care if another platform gets MS games.  MS bought 2 big 3rd party publishers who have well established IPs on other platforms so I already figured they will not be making the majority of those games exclusive because that will nuke their profit margin.  

I will tell you what MS has been doing which is making themselves the biggest games publishers with the most successful IPs on multiple platforms.  It might not be what you want but its definitely what MS want as a business because just being 3rd place in consoles isn't enough for a huge company like MS and their shareholders.  I wouldn't get my hopes up that MS ever move from that position as that ship has sailed a long time ago.  MS still is all steam ahead on GP and games and while they will still have a console device, its not going to change their marketshare unless either Sony or Nintendo makes some pretty big mistakes.



Around the Network
Shaunodon said:

Still have competition between Sony? According to who? All Xbox have talked about is wanting to offer people the best value and that everyone should be able to play everything regardless of system, then they go ahead to promote their games on PS consoles while more games are being kept away from Xbox consoles. Sony now feel emboldened enough to price their products as if they can get away with anything, not like someone operating in a competetive market.

Right now their business isn't making people happy nor is it currently positioned to make any sort of worthwhile return on the huge investments they've made, so what exactly are they in the business for? If you're gonna make it out like they have their own rationale behind all these anti-consumer moves, you have to actually show some clear proof that it's actually leading to something positive. Right now all we know for sure is their market share is rapidly declining, Gamepass growth is not where they projected it to be and their brand image has arguably never been worse (up there with the Xbox One reveal/Kinect Overlord days).

No one expects any corporation to be naturally consumer-friendly, although when it comes to Nintendo specifically they've set themselves apart from every other publisher in video games when it comes to their business philosophy. But as you've mentioned it should be common sense for a brand to please customers to a certain extent if they want to actually have some sustainable and long-term success in the market, yet right now Xbox are definitevely doing neither well, so what exactly have they been doing other than emptying out their Microsoft inheritance fund?

The competition with Sony is there... People are mixing up console sales versus gaming revenues in general. While Sony is still ahead, Microsoft is definitely in the race and relevant. Fans are complaining about Microsoft spreading their legs (sorry but well, that's what it is); and having those games available on other platforms but this is just the right thing to do for them as they are third in the "console" market.

Their strategy is not about beating Sony in the console area, but to stay relevant and even beat them overall in the gaming industry and they are definitely on the right track for that; everything they are doing is aligned with that. Other than fans being frustrated for some weird reason and being so damn petty about anything Xbox is doing; I do not think there is any problem with Xbox and their strategy moving forward is pretty clear. 

What exactly is Microsoft doing that is anti-consumer? You can play next gen games on the least expensive console out there, you get GamePass that offer more values than anything else out there (even without Day 1 on the lower tiers), you buy a game on PC or Xbox and can play it on the other platform without having to rebuy it (this is the dumbest thing in the gaming industry right now...), they are not forcing you to buy new controllers and shit for the new console pretending that it is required (when in most game you can simply disable the haptic...), etc... I have time understanding why people keeps saying that from Xbox. 

Same for a gamer perspective, I am not sure about the "consumer-friendly" thingy you are talking about. Microsoft is probably the most consumer-friendly of the 3 out there (and I respect Nintendo very much) but Microsoft is really ahead with again, GamePass, true multiplatform (for first parties, with Play Anywhere), prices that makes sense. While Sony is literally milking their fanbases and knowing that most people will have no choice to pay because how much they invested so far if they want to keep going... Which is nuts. 

Last edited by Imaginedvl - 2 days ago





...to avoid getting banned for inactivity, I may have to resort to comments that are of a lower overall quality and or beneath my moral standards.

WAR GAME: THE MAKING OF S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 | OFFICIAL TRAILER



Around the Network

@shikamaru317 there's quite a few quest fixes in these patch notes. Has your day finally come???



@Ryuu96 giving me my crown back damn that grind in training 10,000 Villagers though what an awesome time down memory lane!





...to avoid getting banned for inactivity, I may have to resort to comments that are of a lower overall quality and or beneath my moral standards.



DroidKnight said: