590°

Sony Buying Xbox 'Simply Ridiculous' - Analyst

NowGamer: A leading industry analyst has slammed claims Sony should buy Xbox as 'simply ridiculous'.

Read Full Story >>
nowgamer.com
NYC_Gamer4106d ago

I believe Forbes wrote similar Sony&Nintendo doom articles too

tehpees34106d ago

Forbes is a joke run by haters.

dcbronco4106d ago

Forbes isn't run by haters. It run by business people. People that realize gamers cam be flamed into giving them hits on their site so that they can say they have a varied and extensive group of people looking at their site. It's all about making money on a dying industry. Articles hits create revenue lost by paper magazines.

Nothing to see here. Just a dinosaur trying to save itself from the tar pits.

blackbeld4105d ago

"Sony Buying Xbox"

No way!

Samsung Buying Xbox is way better.

morganfell4105d ago

And Jesse Divinich said GTA V was coming in 2012. He said that dance games were dying. He also felt Homefront was a good game and investors were wrong to dump THQ stock. The guy has been wrong so many times it is ridiculous. All of these analysts should be dumped into a fire pit and burned. Not because they are wrong but because their predictions, mostly erred, do more harm to the industry than good. It is humorous to note that so many believed MS purchasing Sony was such a realistic possibility but this is now far-fetched when the truth is both ideas were and are quite absurd.

I do not believe Sony or any other company would buy the Xbox division simply because MS wouldn't sell a business. They would kill it off first. I do think MS would be much more likely to strike a partnership with a company like Sony. Again I do not believe that will happen but it is certainly more possible than a sale. And a partnership between Sony and MS would be a juggernaut of gaming.

pixelsword4105d ago

I hope not, Microsoft is keeping Sony on their toes and vice-versa; Sony is keeping Microsoft on their toes as well. They are what Sega and Nintendo were in the 8 and 16-bit era.

AAACE54105d ago

Let's not forget that both companies have to face the portable market because that area is still taking away from traditional gaming.

BattleAxe4105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

"Divnich responded to claims by Forbes contributor Adam Hartung earlier today (Mon) that Microsoft should sell its Xbox Division to ‘someone like Sony’.

Hartung said: “The entertainment division will be spun off, sold to someone like Sony or possibly Barnes & Noble, or dramatically reduced in size.

"Failure is already inevitable. At this stage, not even a new CEO can save Microsoft. Game over. Ballmer loses. And if you keep your money invested in Microsoft it will disappear along with the company.”

I can see where Hartung is coming from. Heres why I think he is saying this:

1.) Surface may or may not take off

2.) the Windows Phone OS hasn't been all that successful

3.) Apple is appealing to more and more people in the Laptop and home computing space

4.) Sony could potentially destroy Microsoft in the next generation of the console war. Sony just surpassed the worldwide sales of the 360 while releasing a year later and with Microsoft having a 7 million console lead. Sony has beat Microsoft two generations in a row now.

5.) Google could potentially come out with a PC operating system in the next few years

6.) The SteamBox could begin to popularize Linux

Microsoft is really getting hit hard on all fronts, and I'm sure there are other areas where they are taking a beating like the competition from free office software such as Open Office.

airforcex4105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

BattleAxe,

1.Sony has not surpassed MS on worldwide sales. The report was a forecast of systems shipped by one company. A forecast is a prediction. In fact, 360 is still ahead by at least 1.5 million systems according to most sites. Notice how Sony has not made such claim.
2. XBOX has always been the underdog. MS shipped the system early precisely to counter Sony's dominance. The strategy worked. MS is ahead with 2 markets (US and Europe).
3. 360 dominates the US market (where the big bucks are made); it will do the same next gen due to XBOX Live.
4. Sony beat XBOX the first time, as expected. At most, it will tie MS this time around which is a lot to say for MS given that PS2 sold 157 million consoles. That's a considerable market loss.
5. They've been predicting the fall of MS and Xbox for years, and they continue to stay on top. At most, MS market share on the PC side will be smaller in terms of %, but in terms of total install base, no one comes close. There are a total of 66-70 million Mac users in the world. MS sold 60 million W8 licenses in a few months. Add W7, Vista, XP...
6. Finally, I own a PS3 and enjoy it! But I also like my 360!

pablo-b4105d ago

@ battleaxe

the thing is, you are a well known fanboy of the sony flavour! what you just wrote was a fanboys wetdream.

time to wake and change your undies i think

Ezz20134105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

@airforcex
1."Sony has not surpassed MS on worldwide sales. The report was a forecast of systems shipped by one company. A forecast is a prediction. In fact, 360 is still ahead by at least 1.5 million systems according to most sites. Notice how Sony has not made such claim."

so you are using vgchartes as your fact lol
you guys love to flip flop when ever it suit you

2. "XBOX has always been the underdog. MS shipped the system early precisely to counter Sony's dominance. The strategy worked. MS is ahead with 2 markets (US and Europe)."

the only place Xbox beat ps3 in it is USA
the rest of the world
ps3 beat it every where
and did you say Europe ??!! lol you can't be more wrong
ps3 beat it there too by alot

3. "360 dominates the US market (where the big bucks are made); it will do the same next gen due to XBOX Live."

again with USA=world lol
they do dominate USA
but guess what ps3 cought up with them and by now it passed them
USA help them but still they lost to ps3 worldwide
(which much more important than one place)
and fun fact ,the lowest selling ps home console still manage to beat xbox360 "at it prime" in sales and games

4. "Sony beat XBOX the first time, as expected. At most, it will tie MS this time around which is a lot to say for MS given that PS2 sold 157 million consoles. That's a considerable market loss."

even if you go by "vgchartes" (which you are using)
they show now that ps3 have 52.7% market share and xbox360 have 32.3% market share
http://www.vgchartz.com/art...

that's your site ...do you still trust it now or what ?!

5. "They've been predicting the fall of MS and Xbox for years, and they continue to stay on top. At most, MS market share on the PC side will be smaller in terms of %, but in terms of total install base, no one comes close. There are a total of 66-70 million Mac users in the world. MS sold 60 million W8 licenses in a few months. Add W7, Vista, XP..."

and if MS keep going with the same games with no new ips and force you to pay for online
they will fall big time
you guys thought exclusives don't matter but it did matter
that's why ps3 beat xbox360 in worldwide

6. "Finally, I own a PS3 and enjoy it! But I also like my 360! "

same
but i don't like my xbox any more
lost any faith i had for it

sikbeta4105d ago

What!? buying XBOX Division!? lol they simply don't have the money rofl...

NotSoSilentBob4105d ago

No Forbes isn't a joke run by haters, they have become a website looking for hits. The more outrageous the Headline the more hits they get thus the more advertising revenue they get.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 4105d ago
Dwalls11714106d ago

Someone was butt hurt and wrote this responce article in recored time lo impressive....

But honestly it makes sence... The only titles microsoft has of value is halo gears and possibly forza... just eliminate the whole war and let sony handle the release and distribution of these titles..and their own...

IAMERROR4106d ago (Edited 4106d ago )

We going by sales? Then I guess the only titles Sony has of value is Uncharted, GOW, and Gran turismo. Let's face it both systems have some great games lets stop all this petty "XBOX GOT NO GAMEZ" argument/point. It only reflects yourself poorly.

gaffyh4106d ago (Edited 4106d ago )

Wait...what?! It "makes sence" as you put it??

It doesn't make sense at all. Microsoft has sold over 60 million consoles this generation, and have raked in loads of royalties from publishers. So it doesn't make sense at all. Why would you join up with a rival, when you are already making money from the business? That only ever happens when a company is struggling very badly, and MS is far from struggling.

And you could say the same thing about Sony, the company may be struggling, but PlayStation is one of their most successful divisions, they wouldn't sell and they wouldn't want to join with a competitor in the field just to eliminate any "war".

Competition is a great thing for gamers. With MS, I seriously doubt we would have great games like Uncharted, LittleBigPlanet and The Last of Us on PS3.

gaffyh4105d ago

I meant to write "without MS" at the end of that last paragraph.

ShinMaster4105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

Not sales. What he meant was exclusive games worth getting an Xbox for. Which IMO were not enough for many people.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4105d ago
DiRtY4106d ago

This was not even a Forbes article. It was a random blogpost on forbes. That is basically as credible as a comment on N4G.

Anon19744106d ago (Edited 4106d ago )

I wish Jesse Divnich had elaborated a bit. The article that Forbes had reprinted this morning went into detail regarding Microsoft's specific challenges, and this isn't the first time we've heard from analysts that Microsoft should consider selling off the EDD division (of which as of 2011, 99% of the revenue was related to the Xbox) due to poor return on investment overall.

The author, a Harvard MBA and former Pepsico and Dupont Exec, didn't say "Oh, they're going to sell it to Sony!" What he said was he expects Microsoft will either sell or dramatically scale back the division.

Rather than submitting a knee-jerk, "That's ridiculous" quote, I would have rather seen Divnich explain his position or offer a counter point, refuting the author's claims. "Sony's not buying and Microsoft's not selling" doesn't address a single point the author made.

You have to wonder if Divnich even read the original article at all, or if he pulled a N4G's and simply read the headline and responded, completely ignoring the article's comments?

Here's a link to the original.
http://www.thephoenixprinci...

Anyone care to offer a counter point as to why this guy's wrong? It's not like we haven't heard these types of rumblings before from analysts. I could see dismissing this if it were a one off article spewed by some random blogger with no business credentials, but that's not what's happening here.

kenshiro1004106d ago

Some people read what they want to hear. Well said darkride.

4106d ago
DiRtY4105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

Well going by your comment history, you will support the author anyway, but here is the main point.

He is lying.

His quote:

"The entertainment division will be spun off, sold to someone like Sony or even Barnes & Noble, or dramatically reduced in size. Unable to make a profit it will increasingly be seen as a distraction to the battle for saving Windows - and Microsoft leadership has long shown they have no idea how to profitably grow this business unit."

Truth: The division made 364 million USD profit in 2012, 1257 million in 2011 and 517 million in 2010.

Source: http://www.microsoft.com/in...

His quote:

"Cash will be burned in what Microsoft will consider an epic struggle to save the core of the company. But failure is already inevitable. At this stage, not even a new CEO can save Microsoft."

Truth:

Microsoft's net income (profit) as a company for the past years:

2008: 17.68 billion USD
2009: 14.56 billion USD
2010: 18.76 billion USD
2011: 23.15 billion USD
2012: 16.98 billion USD

http://www.microsoft.com/in...

His quote:

"Microsoft's monopoly over personal computing has evaporated. From 95% market domination in 2005 share has fallen to just 20% in 2012 (IDC, Goldman Sachs.)"

Truth: This statement is extraordinary stupid, because it compares every device and treats them as one market. So in 2005 MS had 95% market share. This number is for PC only (Windows vs Linux vs Mac). And since then it has gone down to 20%, that is what he implies. In reality, MS sold more copies of Windows than ever before. ( http://www.techspot.com/new... So how did that happen? Well the author decided to mix it all up. So suddenly every cellphone sold counts just as much as a PC sold. So according to this logic, MS lost market share to Symbian big time for example. Oh yeah, what a threat that was for MS... MS still dominates the PC OS market.

In reality Windows market share increased this holiday season from 91.45 % to 91.74%.

http://thenextweb.com/micro...

There you have it. Anyway, you will still support the author's point of view.

Oh and btw. Here is what the very same guy wrote about Sony last year:

http://www.forbes.com/sites...

Anon19744105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

Where the hell do you see me agreeing with the original author? I don't. I think MS has far too much invested in the brand to consider selling the Xbox at this stage. They spent so much getting to this point, why would they bail on their investment? I've never said otherwise.

This isn't the first time an analyst has commented that Microsoft would be better off to spin off the entire EDD and you can see their point if we're comparing the returns of the EDD to the rest of the company. However, check my comment history.

I've always maintained my opinion that Microsoft isn't going to back out now, nor should they. But Divnich didn't even offer that much. "That's ridiculous" isn't a counter point, nor does it convey any understanding in the slightest of what's even being discussed or why. Is it too much to expect a so called industry expert to be knowledgeable enough about that industry to offer a concise counter-point against the various claims made? All you have to do is actually go back to the beginning of the 360's cycle, do the math and realize that, from an "on the surface" business standpoint, they should probably be discussing new strategies moving forward.

The entire industry isn't standing still, it's moving on. That's the point being made here. Is Microsoft evolving or will they be left behind? Sony's in the exact same boat if they can't innovate. They're just both being left behind by different boats, hijacked by Apple/Samsung/Google.

I don't think it's too much to expect an industry expert to be able to intelligently comment on these points instead of dismissing all points with a flippant remark that proves he's not even paying attention to what was said in Forbes this morning.

Ju4105d ago

@DiRtY FYI, from your own link:

Entertainment and Devices Division
(In millions, except percentages)
2012 2011 2010
Revenue $ 9,593 $ 8,915 $ 6,079
Op.income $ 364 $ 1,257 $ 517

While your $364M sounds quite good, you should put this into perspective. For a record revenue of over $9B this is the worst result for the Entertainment Division since 2010 and the second worst in the group.

So, I understand why someone would argue they could simple "save" $9B buy selling this division off.

I don't believe this will ever happen. It's about prestige, too. And the entertainment sector will only grow in the future. MS wasn't very successful in this market - except with the XBox. But phones and tablets tanked; like all other attempts before to expand into this market. MS still makes more money than every. If the shareholders aren't getting nervous nothing will change anytime soon, I guess.

pablo-b4105d ago

@ red-ranger

darkride is indeed the pedlar of xbox doom and gloom blogs

here is the best of darkride

http://n4g.com/news/416137/...

http://n4g.com/news/921809/...

http://n4g.com/news/602869/...

http://n4g.com/news/570158/...

enjoy!! ofcourse he would try and say the xbox is failing lol

nukeitall4105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

What is there to elaborate?

Sony had to sell a building as their bonds are rated junk (by several both moody and s&p) and nobody will loan them money anymore.

Sony were forced to sell a building to finance their company, while Sony's Playstation business is one of their better performing "arms", and you tell me how they are going to buy anything.

Heck even Gakai was bought for almost half a billion, and they weren't exactly a great business.

The Xbox business would be worth far more and Sony simply couldn't afford to buy it. MS could financially buy Sony, but they would never do that, because then they would also get all the baggage that go along with it and they probably would only want the Playstation business.

They could far easier just throw money at the Xbox division and kill Playstation instead of buying Sony. It would be far cheaper, but obviously MS wouldn't do that.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4105d ago
doogiebear4105d ago

Sony doesn't even have enough money to buy Microsoft's Xbox division. I hate Xbox (due to lack of exclusives, lack of Japanese games, and greedy LIVE fee's) but there's no way M$ would sell Xbox as a franchise.

Persistantthug4105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

It needs to be understood that the division that houses Microsoft Games is not doing all that great. Even Microsoft Corp itself is under severe attack and alot of analysts don't see how Microsoft can't stop the slow and consistent market backslide.

Think about this:

Other than PC Windows related products, what else is Microsoft a leader in?

-Microsoft failed with Zune
-Games For Windows Live is a failure to VALVE/STEAM
-GOOGLE, FACEBOOK and others rule the internet
-Apple & GOOGLE are destroying Windows mobile platforms
-XBOX 360 is doing pretty well, but reportedly it's in "last place".
Also over the last 10 years, Microsoft has actually lost more money on XBOX Brand than it has profited.

*Has anyone ever wondered why Microsoft had to close ENSEMBLE, close DIGITAL ANVIL, close ACES, and close FASA studios?

*Has anyone ever wondered why, Instead of Microsoft buying their good buddies BIOWARE, it had to stand by and watch EA snap them up?

Because while it is true Microsoft has virtually limitless $......MICROSOFT GAMES does not.

Believe it or not, even though we all like gaming alot, Microsoft really does have bigger fish to fry (GOOGLE), and if Windows brand continues to slide like it has been, Microsoft could divest the gaming and/or entertainment division.

4105d ago
Cupid_Viper_34105d ago

@ Airforcex

Sorry bud, but the Xbox 360 only has a lead in the US Market, it trails the PS3 in both Japan and Europe.

imdaboss14105d ago

Everyone knows the reason why the xbox360 selling better in the united states is because people here like buying and repurchasing crappy product that breaks on them here..Sony is making a profit in the long run and they did already..I dont know why people keep saying Sony have financial issues when they dont at all..

otherZinc4104d ago

LOL! Glad another analyst checked that blog guy from Forbes.

Forbes shouldn't let fools write like that & attach the Forbes name to it. Most of us business grads see Forbes as credible, things like this will stop that.

M$ is taking its most prize possessions Halo, XBOX Live, & Kinect into the XBOX Next connected with Smart Glass.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 4104d ago
iamnsuperman4106d ago

What is ridiculous is nowgamer. A lot of decent website just decided to ignore the idiocy but nowgamer has released this and thought it was worth finding another annalist to say something else. They should have just ignored it like every other decent publication

Godmars2904106d ago (Edited 4106d ago )

Have to ask: besides Halo, a collection of mismanaged studios and neglected IPs, what does the Xbox brand have to offer Sony?

I mean they have cross chat, just can't use it on the PS3.

jimbobwahey4106d ago

Sony already has cross-game voice chat anyways, it's a feature on the Vita. The only reason they haven't added it to PS3 is due to there not being enough memory dedicated to the XMB to support it. It's pretty much a given that PS4 will have it as a standard feature though.

Zodiac4106d ago

What does the xbox brand have to offer Sony? The brand itself, which is more important than a few games.

zebramocha4106d ago (Edited 4106d ago )

So your saying if cod & gears were not on the xbox?it would have been slam dunk for Ms.

@irsh there is nothing wrong with Ms having a paid service but they are not investing any of that on proper games,(I mean games made for xbox and not peripherals.) I don't want pumping out 10 games a year but they should do more then just gears & halo.

DOMination-4106d ago

MS are investing though. They have 21 first part studios now ready to release games for next gen. In comparison, Sony have been getting rid of studios and only have 12 now. Half of which seem to be making ps3 games and not ps4 games.

Those figures suggest to me that MS are investing more for the future than Sony.

rainslacker4105d ago

I fail to see why Sony would consider the Xbox brand really necessary to own though. They have built up their own brand over the past couple decades...I'm sure you've heard of it. I'm sure Sony would prefer to have their own branded products in peoples home. While Sony makes a lot of products that don't carry their name, they have gone to great lengths to make Sony a household name. Using the Xbox only dilutes that name recognition, which would be particularly bad considering PS is one of their best and most widely recognized products.

Even the IP's that MS owns, while valuable, may not be worth investing in, as when it comes to games very few last the test of the long term. Halo is a great IP, and certainly worth a lot...but so was Doom back in the day...and now think how much that IP is really worth in this day and age. Fable? Well Sony has a lot of games that could compete with that in the back catalog. Forza? Yeah, they have GT. There are some others that MS owns of course, but those are the big ones. Some of the smaller ones may be worth picking up. Alan Wake for instance has a pretty decent following.

TUGA4105d ago

And why would Sony want the Xbox brand? To compete with their own brand? I could see Sony buying IPs or Studios from MS but that is it.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4105d ago
SuperLupe4106d ago (Edited 4106d ago )

Oh they can only hand back to Sony the 50million + customers they took from them this gen.

The Xbox's lifetime sales didnt pass 25 million when with the 360 by the end of this year they will be at at least 80 million. With Xbox out of the picture Sony would be back to the status they had the two last gens.

KMCROC544106d ago

Why is that a good thing & how does it benefit you if such stupidity were to take place.Please explain.

Irishguy954106d ago (Edited 4106d ago )

Are you serious? Besides the Xbox brand you mean??

Jesus;.

Also, Sony couldn't afford Xbox, Cocozero is right. Xbox Live alone brings in a Billion a year. Sony only have 10 Bill and that isn't even money, it's Total assets.

I mean...why in the **** would MS sell something that brings a few billion a year for 1 single payment of just a few billion?(which is all Sony can afford and that's taking a massive risk)

Godmars2904106d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

XBL's yearly billion is based on something MS has made required to have if you own a 360. Unless does the same, which they have though they give you something and make it a choice, its invalid.

No matter how many disagree.

@Red_Ranger:
So Sony's going to either drop GT or support Forza in tandem? More so when when GT sells more. Why even bring that up?

Likewise most of your suggestions are bewildering, if not delusional, because where things like Ratchet and Clank have seen entries this gen which were well regarded, something like Banjo or Perfect Dark weren't.

ArmrdChaos4106d ago

The market share Sony no longer has.

4106d ago
nukeitall4105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

The Xbox brand today is as strong as Playstation.

That alone is more than Sony can afford right now. There is a reason why Sony sold their NYC headquarter, and it ain't because they are sitting on enough cash!

It's to fund Sony's ongoing losses!

TUGA4105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

I disagree. MS managed to sell more consoles than Sony just 1 year out of 6, meaning that Sony sells consoles at a faster pace than MS, despite the fact that their console has constantly been more expensive than the 360. Not only that but even the after MS big push to enter the "casual" market with Kinect, Sony still sells more consoles than MS.

The Xbox brand is stronger than it was last gen while the Playstation brand is weaker, but i doubt that Xbox brand is as strong as the Playstation brand. Not only that but IMO the reason why MS ate a big chunk from Sony's market share this gen has more to do with Sony's mistakes rather than MS successes.

nukeitall4105d ago

@TUGA:

Sales alone does not determine a brands strength. Ferrari has tremendous brand strength, yet they don't sell as many cars as Toyota does in a month all year.

That said, other than Japan, Xbox 360 sells as well as Playstation 3. You claim price as the reason, but it doesn't change that for a long time, the PS3 was riding on the Playstation name, not on the product!

To each their own, but Xbox is no longer the industry joke, and a brand even Sony fears:

http://n4g.com/news/1158634...

We no longer hear from Sony:

"Beating us for a short moment is like accidentally winning a point from a Shihan [karate master], and Microsoft is still not a black belt."

"We do not care." [On competition from MS and Nintendo]

TUGA4105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

You forgot to mention that a single Ferrari has the price of 5 or 6 average Toyota cars, you forgot to mention that a Ferrari isn't at all the most convenient of cars for dayly use and you forgot to mention that Ferrari and Toyota aren't even competing for the same market. A Toyota may even be considered a necessity while a Ferrari is nothing more than a luxury that only a select few can afford. Comparing PS3/360 to Toyota/Ferrari is like comparing oranges to apples.

Sony may respect and even fear Xbox brand but that doesn't mean that the PS3 brand isn't stronger than the Xbox brand.

Godmars2904105d ago

Or denial.

Like I said before; if Nintendo were to go under and had to sell off IP, Mario would be the first thing to go.

But MS? Even though all they've really got is Halo most point to the subscription service they've all but made mandatory. Nothing else they've done comes close yet the best people trying to defend them can come up with is empty rhetoric and poorly presented ridicule.

Lvl_up_gamer4105d ago

With the amount of ignorance you are talking there is no point.

It's been covered time and time again on this site the successful IP and services that MS have it's become a seriously broken record.

You should be researching instead of spreading your pro-sony ignorance. Here I will educate you.

IP's.

Halo - as you know which would end the argument right there as the Halo franchise is a multi-BILLION dollar franchise.

Forza - Highest ranked racing sim on consoles SINCE RELEASE. This gen Forza has generated MORE profits combined then GT5 AND gets a by-yearly release keeping the IP fresh with new content and better gameplay with each iteration.

Dance Central - Since it's release in 2010, Dance central has sold over 5 million copies combined. That's amazing when you consider the amount of Kinect units out there.

All RARE IP's that still belong to MS such as Killer Instinct, Banjo Kazooie, Conker etc. Just because MS doesn't utilize those IP's, it doesn't mean they don't exist. Just like MS's IP's from last gen that they chose not to bring over to this gen like Amped, Blinx and Crimson Sky's.

Then there is Kinect which has broken record sales for peripherals.

Now lets talk about the BIGGEST money making machine MS has under their belt that ANY company would KILL for. Xbox Live. XBL makes BILLIONS on a yearly basis. To even think for a second that PS+ and HOME combined make more anything near what XBL makes just solidifies my comment to your ignorance.

This gen Sony and MS have sold 70+ million units while Sony has lost billions this gen, MS have made billions this gen....so obviously IF Sony could buy out the Xbox brand then it would be Sony that would be making hand over fist BILLIONS a year just on the Xbox brand alone instead of losing billions like Sony has been doing.

SO yes Godmars, I stand by my comment that you are COMPLETELY ignorant and short sighted. Your blind loyalty prevents you from seeing the BIG picture which is MS have been more profitable this gen with their xbox brand alone then Sony has been this gen with their PS3 brand.

StrongMan4105d ago (Edited 4105d ago )

"Forza - Highest ranked racing sim on consoles SINCE RELEASE. This gen Forza has generated MORE profits combined then GT5 AND gets a by-yearly release keeping the IP fresh with new content and better gameplay with each iteration."

The fact that you have to add ALL Forza games to beat the sales of GT5(9 million) says it all. LOL

"Dance Central - Since it's release in 2010, Dance central has sold over 5 million copies combined. That's amazing when you consider the amount of Kinect units out there."

Three Dance Central games ONLY sold 5 million? That's not good. LOL Dance Central 3 isn't selling at all.

"All RARE IP's that still belong to MS such as Killer Instinct, Banjo Kazooie, Conker etc. Just because MS doesn't utilize those IP's, it doesn't mean they don't exist. Just like MS's IP's from last gen that they chose not to bring over to this gen like Amped, Blinx and Crimson Sky's."

LOL, NONE of those games would sell and MS knows it. That's why they won't make any of those games. Blinx.........LOL

"Then there is Kinect which has broken record sales for peripherals."

It's not selling any more. It's been at 20 million for over a year now. All Kinect games flop in sales now too. Check Fable the Journey, Steel Battalion, and Dance Central 3.

MS is in dead last place this gen whether you like it or not and that also says it all. They release a full year ahead of Sony and Nintendo and ended up dead last behind Sony and Nintendo. Your blind allegiance to MS is blatantly obvious, Chunkylover.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 4105d ago
Cocozero4106d ago

Sony couldn't afford the Xbox even if they wanted it.

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney4106d ago (Edited 4106d ago )

They should just buy halo gears & kinect name from them that is the whole xbox. Everything else flops in comparison. no? Take those 2 away and and what else will sell the console besides a better version of Cod? NO reason to buy the whole division.

mr_kubrick4106d ago

Sony is in such a deep financial trouble they couldnt even buy Kinectimals if they wanted to.

WetN00dle694106d ago

^That.
Sony is in a multi billion dollar debt. They cant afford to buy anything. Here is hoping the Ps4 pulls them out of the shit hole they are in.

Ezz20134106d ago (Edited 4106d ago )

@mr_kubrick & @wetn00dle69

yet sony can offord making those amazing ps3 exclusives which are tons like what's coming this year alone
yet they just bought gaiki
yet they can offord making lots of movies
yet they can offord making music
etc. of other sony divisions

EDIT : of course i will get disagrees when i state facts
this is N4G after all

stuna14106d ago

People are killing me with the Sony can't afford the buy this bit! If that was the case then why they still sinking money into things like Giakai or the Vita!

It's simple because Sony understands the concept of how to make money! You have to spend money to make money, this is a undeniable fact that all business majors should know.

Why do countries have stimulus programs? The same reasons businesses have them! To stimulate spending but, more importantly to stimulate growth and ultimately PROFIT!

At some point all businesses go through some kind of rough transition, but that is the purpose of restructuring.

Sure Sony might not be able to afford what Microsoft has to offer, but they are far from being counted out, after all this isn't a sprint, it's a marathon.

rainslacker4105d ago

Regardless of whether they have the ability to buy them, my question to you is why would they buy them? I know they're money makers, but realistically Sony has games that compete with all of those. Why dump lots of money into something when you already have a similar product, particularly if MS was willing to give those up, which would only mean less competition for their own products.

Kinect maybe, but Sony could just invest in it's own device...oh wait...they have.

Name recognition would be all they would be buying...and for the price of those products they could spend half as much and market their own alternative and probably achieve the same thing.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4105d ago
tachy0n4106d ago

microsoft CAN buy playstation. thats what i think its more believable rather than the other way.

SignifiedSix4106d ago

Microsoft could buy sony 100 times and still be in the clear lol.

B1663r4105d ago

Dont exaggerate. With their current cash supply, Microsoft could only buy Sony 5x over.

Show all comments (117)
280°

Xbox's Preservation Step Sets A Much-Needed Example, Especially For Nintendo

Hanzla from eXputer inquires: "If Xbox can care about preserving its games and legacy, what exactly is wrong with Nintendo, trying to kill game preservation single-handedly?"

purple1015d ago

Ahh yes the good old game preservation of saving all your games to a removable hhd on the Xbox 360, taking it round your mates house, setting up multiple tvs to
Be met with “save data corrupted, please re download”

Or how about removing 360 games
From the store
, download them now or else, and, better hope to god that save data doesn’t corrupt, or it’s lost for ever

Nice one ☝️

Zeref5d ago

It's better than what Nintendo and Playstation is doing. It might not be perfect but at least they are TRYING. Unlike the others.

DarXyde5d ago

Trying? Take off the blinders for a moment, mate.

1. A failure to preserve games is just that: a failure to preserve games. Don't try to sugarcoat it: NO ONE is doing it properly. Better than awful is nothing to write home about.

2. At the time of this comment, isn't it the case that you need an internet connection to play Xbox games even if you buy physical discs that are hardly in circulation anymore? I don't have a Series X and I can't verify, but I think that is correct. I'm fairly certain you can at least play PS5 games at version 1.0 (not much of a win really when many games require day one patches). I think Microsoft's all digital, licensing approach is by far more aggressive than anyone else's. They really try to push you to game pass where you lose your entire library by umm.... Skipping a month of payments.

I don't think anyone is doing it right whatsoever. Don't get me started on Nintendo, who goes after anyone looking to preserve their games better than they ever would with extreme litigation.

Don't be a simp for any of these companies. Get it together.

PhillyDonJawn5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

@DarX never speak on Xbox again. You lost all credibility with your internet connection comment. Smh you have 0 clue and misinformed yet speaking on something you don't no squat about.

Einhander19725d ago

What has Sony done exactly? You guys keep deflecting to Sony but I am not actually seeing any results, and ai am certain nothing that you can come up with even comes close to what Microsoft has done and what they have tried and failed to do, like tie all your disks to your account on xbone.

Microsoft removed their whole indie section when they moved to the xbone because they were going to only allow games on the service that came from a publisher, id@xbox started after xbone launched and it only exists because Sony embraced indie and Microsoft was forced to cancel their plans and reverse course.

And every single game that was part of games for windows live including disk games (I have gta 4 on disk that won't work) so hundreds of games that use that DRM no longer work unless the company themselves patched it out which of course very few did.

MrBaskerville4d ago

Not trying. Tried. they killed of the backcomp program years ago. They set something up again, but sounds like it's more of an attempt to save the current library on whatever they are planning next. With luck they save everything and more, but let's see. I could see them killing off parts of the OG xbox and 360 libraries. Can't imagine that they would allow us to play Forza 5-7 in the future.

With that said, I do like what they've done and really wish they could have done more.

shinoff21834d ago

Zeref

So killing off physical media is trying what exactly. Ms don't really give a fk if you think they do your kidding yourself.

Profchaos4d ago

They are not trying this team is established for forward compatability the team is. It interested in preserving Xbox or 360 games.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4d ago
isarai5d ago

Is that why Hellblade 2 is digital only?

Zeref5d ago

Just because it's digital only doesn't mean you can't preserve it. Just put it on an external and you have the exact same functionality of what a disc does.

MrNinosan5d ago

Guess you're trolling, but if you actually think that's how it works, I'd recommend buying some braincells.

mkis0074d ago (Edited 4d ago )

Volitile vs nonvolitile data. A disc will not corrupt either. A drive can be corrupted.

Einhander19725d ago

This is just a scammy PR move to distract from the fact they are going digital only and trying to push streaming and subscriptions only.

No gaming company has pushed harder to remove ownership than Microsoft.

Without discs there is no preservation, preservation can't be done by the rights holders it can only be done by the consumers, anything else is a lie.

5d ago Replies(3)
Einhander19725d ago

Anyone remember xblig which Microsoft removed their whole 360 indie section removing hundreds of games from people?

5d ago
5d ago
Zeref5d ago

Do you know you can put your games on an external and preserve them that way? There are no benefits to discs. ZERO. Idk why some of you are still obsessed with them.

DarXyde5d ago

Because games like Persona 5 exist. It's STILL V1.00. On Playstation, that's a win because 1.00 is installed on the disc—no need to download anything.

If a game does not require any updates, it's all on the disc.

Extremely low bar in the modern era, of course. It's not much of a win by any stretch.

But for now, physical media does have a purpose, at least on Playstation.

Einhander19725d ago

That is factually not how game licensing works, try plugging your hard drive into someone else xbox, It's not going to work, and it won't work if the licensing servers ever go down.

Einhander19725d ago

Anyone remember games for windows live.

I have around a dozen games, some on Steam itself that will not work because Microsoft shut off the licensing servers.

BehindTheRows5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

I do. I STILL have games (Gears of War being the big one) I cannot access because Games for Windows LIVE is total garbage and no one has held Microsoft accountable.

Zeref4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

You don't have an Xbox apparently. Because you can 100 percent plug in your external and play games from it on any Xbox console lol. You just have to be logged in to prove ownership.

Chevalier4d ago

"You don't have an Xbox apparently. Because you can 100 percent plug in your external and play games from it on any Xbox console lol. You just have to be logged in to prove ownership."

Damn how many times do people got to explain your idiocy to you? You can take a copy of Persona 5 like someone used as an example and play that game on ANY console WITHOUT logging in which means I can lend the game to a friend without internet and they can play my game. Can you lend your hard drive to anyone without logging in for them to play? NOPE. That is a huge difference and if you think otherwise then sorry you're an idiot.

Tacoboto5d ago

"No gaming company has pushed harder to remove ownership than Microsoft."

Ubisoft is literally erasing games people bought from their libraries... My PS1-3 discs are useless on modern hardware. Nintendo's re-published and resold almost their entire Wii U library, and the eShop is completely dead with no BC mechanism in the Switch software. Microsoft publishes everything they make today day one on Steam and Xbox/Windows. Sony only brings to PC the titles they think you might want some years later and Nintendo won't even design a functional long-lasting joystick.

You're absolutely trolling and not serious if you think Microsoft today is the worst offender.

shinoff21834d ago

Yay steam

Not everyone fks with computers though. The disc is still the best way as a console player. Period.

Tacoboto4d ago

How do Sony and Nintendo feel about these discs from 2001-2013?

Don't be stupid, you know Xbox is the best at this today.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4d ago
Hofstaderman5d ago

Nobody wants this. Sales or the lack of it in the case of XBOX is very telling. I wonder how the adorably all digital series X will fare. Adorably dismal perhaps?

crazyCoconuts5d ago

Only time will tell, but for from someone like me suspecting that Xbox is trying to gracefully exit the console market, that "forward compatibility" team is trying to get Xbox games playing on Windows PCs. I mean, it's nice that they're not planning on exiting with a "enjoy your games while the hardware still works" message, so that's nice. They still have a brand to protect via Microsoft so probably feel obligated to have a better exit strategy.

Xeofate4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

That is not their plan, their plan is to transfer users accounts to the cloud.

Phil Spencer himself said as much a few months back, plans could have changed but I think people are reading way too much into one statement where Phil said he would allow Epic on xbox because he wants to be able to sell xbox games directly on other platforms. Aka, instead of selling Sea of Thives through PSN he wants to have an xbox store to sell his games on PlayStation without giving PlayStation any money.

Again, it's extremely unlikely that Phil plans to put PC on xbox and licensing would prevent them from just giving out other publishers games purchased on xbox copies of thier games on PC, Microsoft does not own their games.

crazyCoconuts4d ago

The thing that doesn't align with the cloud strategy is the giving up on exclusives. You'd still need strong exclusives for cloud streaming - it's still a "platform" , just with a lower upfront hardware investment. I feel like they've learned what PS learned with PSNow long ago. We're not ready to stream games and it's only gonna lose them money to try at this point

FinalFantasyFanatic4d ago

I would love that, I'd buy up some of the Xbox games if they could run on PC, like the Rare Replay, Lost Odyssey and Dead or Alive Ultimate, probably a pipe dream though.

Show all comments (43)
280°

Sony Taps Bungie's Head of Revenue to Lead Live-Service Games

Sony has recruited Bungie's head of revenue Jaremy Rich to head up its live-service gaming division, Rich has announced on social media.

Read Full Story >>
techraptor.net
ChasterMies14d ago

Please do not put Destiny’s monetization into Sony’s first party games. The monetization is what’s driving players away from Destiny.

just_looken14d ago

The new temp boss is the sony cfo bean counter so i can see this being a thing get every penny.

Cacabunga14d ago

PlayStation officially losing it.. fans will never support gaas games

just_looken14d ago

@car

The new boss did a interview in japan he wants to tap into the mobile market like nintendio so he give 0 fucks about gamers/fans

https://www.pushsquare.com/...

Redemption-6414d ago

@Cacabunga
You only speak for you and those who think like you, but most fans will support what they want. Playstation and PC fans are literally supporting Helldivers 2 and that is a gaas. Maybe you wouldn't, but many more would if they like it.

Huey_My_D_Long14d ago

@Redemption-64
Look, Im not making any judgement calls about this guy, but I will say that Helldivers 2 GaaS model is unique to Helldivers, and legit the only other game I can think of thats similiar was the Avengers game except HD2 pass is still better.
The fact that you can earn in game currency in a way that doesnt make you feel like you have to grind forever, as well you being able work on that pass that you bought...on your own time without a time limit...that right there is fucking huge to me, and I can't name any game other than avengers that avoided trapping players with FOMO logic...I think GaaS on HD2 shouldn't be compared to the rest of the industry...it should be copied.

Einhander197214d ago

Cacabunga

Helldivers 2...

Redemption-64

In Europe it's a 60 40 split favoring PC.
In the US its a 60 40 split favoring PS5.

So PlayStation owners supported the game just fine, it's not getting carried by PC or anything like that.

FinalFantasyFanatic14d ago

@just_looken,
I'm perfectly fine with the way Nintendo entered the mobile market, I never touched their mobile games, meanwhile, the console/handheld stayed the way it is. As for being a bean counter, he's probably going to reel in these massive budgets that Sony's studios have had lately, I haven't played Spiderman 2, but I cannot see how they almost tripled the budget for that game.

@Redemption-64,
That's an exception to the rule, I'm expecting a lot of these GAAS games from Sony to fail, to be fair, they only need a few to succeed, but I would have preferred that they put more of their resources into other types of games.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 14d ago
DivineHand12514d ago

True their monetization is driving players away and at the same time, their decision to chop out content and convoluted systems is keeping new players away from the game.

Joe91314d ago

I don't think that will happen based on how things worked out at Naughty Dog now that we know what we do, seems they had the option to fully commit to live service games or stay making single player experences so they gave up on their live service game. We are not sure how things came about with Bend making a live service game but I hope that was not a forced situation. Sony doesnt seem like they are forcing studios to switch up but we will see, Sony's bread and butter is single player games it is how they dominated the console market.

Obscure_Observer14d ago

Yeah, I though Sony learned something from all their failures in the LS segment under Bungie´s disastrous leadership and supervision which led to games been cancelled, studios closed and all the people laid off.

Looks like Bungie still plays a major role in Sony´s LS initiative and Sony is not backtracking on their GaaS plans.

S2Killinit14d ago (Edited 14d ago )

Are we forgetting that Destiny is also a highly successful franchise? I feel like that definitely deserves mention here.

Besides, there is no reason why a person cant learn from past experiences.

Joe91314d ago

I agree, people act as if Destiny flopped when it came out lol it took 9 to 10 years for the numbers to fall yet people are still playing it add the success of Helldivers 2 no wonder Sony is going forward down this path.

S2Killinit13d ago

Personally, I see no problem with Sony also having service games as long as they make good ones, and more importantly they deliver the AAA story driven games that they are known for. So yeah, I agree 100% with you.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 13d ago
Christopher14d ago

I mean, this person made some pretty bad decisions at Bungie. I hope they've learned from them because I definitely don't see those type of ideas as good for PlaySation in general.

CrimsonWing6914d ago (Edited 14d ago )

Honestly, what’s to learn from? How to make people happily continuously dump money into a single game over its life-time? Buy season passes continuously for several years with a smile on our faces?

GaaS is a design decision that is everything wrong with this industry. The fact that Helldivers 2 did so well and people defend the monetization because it was $40 and is a fun game, scares the sh*t out of me to see that the door is open and all shift will probably be to replicate that in future games. We already know the ROI for traditional game dev cost isn’t doing it for them.

I thought with Jimbo leaving we’d see a change for the better… I’m not so sure now.

S2Killinit13d ago

Service games are being offered by everyone. Sony cannot afford to only create single player AAA games. No one can. They already said they will be doing both.

Abnor_Mal14d ago (Edited 14d ago )

Ps5 gamers in 2023 seemed to play more live service types of games, so regardless to how people feel about them, numbers don’t lie and Sony is going where the money is. I mean look at the excitement around Helldivers2, people are showing that they want live service games.

Christopher14d ago

They play long-time existing live service games like CoD, Fortnite, Apex Legends, Destiny 2, and the like. Mass majority of new live service games are considered failures and aren't moving gamers away from older games.

just_looken14d ago

Yep the huge issue with live service is they need paid players along with a reason to play them.

You forgot mobile market that also taps into that player base as well as the eve online style games there is only a certain amount of krakens/whales blind supporters compared to the amount of live service games we have its not sustainable math wise.

700 restaurants making food for every seat for 1000-3000 eaters just does not work out

Einhander197214d ago (Edited 14d ago )

Christopher

I am not a big live service fan and literally own zero of the games you listed, but that is not true, unless you call games that aren't the top games to be failures.

There are tons of live service games that are profitable.

Games don't have to be the biggest game ever they just need to make more than they cost.

I challenge you to show professionally prepared data that shows that more live service games fail than make enough to keep going.

Because all the data that I have seen shows that live service is less of a gamble than making a big AAA budget game which needs to survive off retail sales.

FinalFantasyFanatic14d ago

I sometimes wonder if we're at saturation point, where it's hard for a new game to join those ranks unless it's particularly exceptional, people only have so much time and money to devote to these types of games.

romulus2314d ago

Correction, they have no issue playing good live service games

shinoff218314d ago

Lol it's not even a quarter of the ps5s sold. Helldivers may have been a hit but let's not say most are enjoying it because truth is most(the real most ) don't care about it.

S2Killinit13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

I play what is fun. If a live service game is good I’ll play it as long as its not a money scheme which Helldivers is not.

And Im a single player gamer.

mastershredder14d ago

How do you kill a franchise that already been killed?
Destiny’s grind, cash-in-on-playbass-cha-Ching, and pop-culture-insertion mainstream-me-too bs totally killed any rep Bungie had. Sony/Bungie, if you are doing this to ward-off players, it’s already working.

crazyCoconuts14d ago

Headline truncated:
"... off a cliff"

Show all comments (43)
370°

Could Xbox Soon Become The Next Dreamcast?

Microsoft's future in the video game space is murky right now, so let's break it all down.

Read Full Story >>
thegamer.com
ApocalypseShadow17d ago (Edited 17d ago )

Not anytime soon. But they're on that path.

One thing not mentioned in the article is Microsoft's money bags. If Sega had Microsoft's money, they would have still been around as a hardware manufacturer. Xbox as a platform only survives because of the money bags. They can continue making consoles for the core and port to PC.

The multiplatform strategy is only the result of arrogance and misguided leadership that blew up in their face. They thought gamers would jump on Xbox in droves if they knew that many of their favorite games would be only on Xbox. But that's not happening at all. Sales didn't increase. They decreased. Why? Because the dumb asses thought giving away these expensively made games in a cheap service would also turn the tide.

Gamers on other platforms are willing to buy quality. They don't need to be handed nearly free games in a service that aren't even finished and sometimes average in their development. Gamers buy Nintendo games. They buy Sony games. Microsoft groomed their base to not buy games. Even the quality ones. It has always been their plan to go digital. But most gamers still like single player gaming. Still like physical releases.

Microsoft's problem has always been that they don't produce high quality games at the same output as Nintendo and Sony. Actually, they should be producing quite a lot more because they're worth over 2 TRILLION. How they don't have more is ridiculous and no excuse. Buying publishers to take away from competition only backfired. Because it still takes millions of dollars to continue to make those games from the publishers they snatched. Their only choice was to crawl back to their competitors to help sustain those developers because Nintendo and Sony platforms were the ones buying games.

Am I sorry for Microsoft? Hell no! They deserved last place for putting in the least effort. They deserved the fallout for buying up the industry and didn't make a single blip on the radar against their competitors where they now need those same gamers they took away games from to support them. Part of it may have been to cash in on their competition. But the result is the slow death of their platform. They may go 3rd party. They may keep making hardware. I don't give a shit about them to worry about it. I only give a shit about the destructive nature of their industry moves that only negatively affect gamers. They could sell and drop out of the industry and I wouldn't blink. Probably laugh. But not blink. They deserve whatever comes to them. At least Sega put in the effort when it came to games. They just had poor leadership. Microsoft has poor leadership and barely makes memorable games. That's a killer combination. And not in a good way.

Cacabunga17d ago

That would be an insult to Dreamcast.. it had a crazy line up of legendary critically acclaimed games.

Crows9017d ago

I was thinking the same. Dreamcast had incredible games in such a short amount of time. It was truly exceptional.

darthv7216d ago

...and yet all those great games were not enough to sway people from the looming release of the PS2 at the time. Sony just has that kind of brand loyalty.

Cacabunga16d ago

Darth

I do not agree.. Sony had even better games thanks to an unprecedented 3rd party support..
DC had amazing lineup but 90% were arcade games..

88316d ago

@darth:
And Sony showed off "The Emotion Engine" and their real time demos that made everyone think they would miss out on REAL next gen 128bit magic if they jumped in before PS2s polygon pushing monster (and early lack of anti-aliasing with a healthy heap of shimmer + DVD playback) stepped up. PS2 was a fantastic system though with amazing games.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 16d ago
blacktiger17d ago

That's not true. Just because Microsoft has the money doesn't mean Microsoft can allow xbox to bleed entire Microsoft money. It doesn't work like they. Also SEC will be watching and investor won't allow it. Lot of reasons why Microsoft can not continue even if they wanted to. SEC regulations is expensive.

fr0sty17d ago (Edited 17d ago )

Exactly this... Microsoft is a publicly traded company, mostly owned by their shareholders (Approximately 59.24% of the company's stock is owned by Institutional Investors, 7.73% is owned by Insiders and 33.03% is owned by Public Companies and Individual Investors.). Their shareholders call the shots on the business decisions, and their shareholders want one thing and one thing only, for their stock price to go up. Losses do not make stock prices go up... so if the division continually posts losses on hardware, but shows profits on software and services (which has been the case with Xbox its entire lifespan, for over 20 years now), the shareholders are going to grow impatient and demand they stop making hardware and focus on the only thing that has ever made them money, software and services.

When Microsoft bought Blizzard and Activision for almost 100 billion, I knew that was the nail in the coffin for Xbox as a console... as the shareholders were going to expect a quick return on that investment, and when it didn't materialize, they were going to be out for blood... out to force Xbox to sell those games on as many consoles as possible, "and while you're at it, sell those first party exclusives that aren't selling well on other consoles as well... hell, just stop making consoles and sell games."

If there is another Xbox console generation, it will definitely be the last, but I doubt there even will be one at this point. I think the Xbox division planning on it just in case, but I don't think the project has been greenlit from Microsoft itself. The rumors that they have not yet even secured the chips needed from the chip fabrication facilities ties into this.

shinoff218317d ago

While I usually agree with you . Alot of what was said can just also be asked before any of that.

How long will the shareholders wait? It doesn't appear long at all

Babadook716d ago

I think I get your point. Like just because MS has money does not mean they are content to throw it away on a dying ecosystem. Xbox has to be profitable or “what’s the point?”

ifinitygamer17d ago

Money bags, yes, but are we ignoring that Xbox actually makes a profit on games and GamePass? Hardware is often a loss leader, and they're probably making profit 4 years into the life cycle, but games and services revenue have been very profitable while other parts of Microsoft's business is struggling. Say what you will about the quality of those games, of course, but this is kind of a reverse Dreamcast situation, where the console was dragging down the company and put it at risk of shuttering entirely. Killing that console saved the business and allowed it to continue to make games on multiple platforms. In this case, the service is very profitable, as are the games, and they're also double-dipping into Multiplatform to extend this further, while their hardware is just sort of what they believe to be the best for gamers and their own titles (whether that is the case or not...)

fr0sty17d ago (Edited 17d ago )

The issue is, they aren't selling enough hardware to make their exclusives profitable, and now that they've bought half the gaming publisher/dev industry, they have no choice but to go third party to make a profit... and that is making their shareholders take a real close look at their hardware division under the microscope... why keep making the hardware if the software is all that is making them money, and they continually, generation after generation come in dead last with hardware sales?

Look at a game like Spiderman 2... if it had been an Xbox exclusive, with the amount it cost to develop, it would have been a huge failure... simply not enough consoles out there to sell it on. They would have been lucky to break even.

ifinitygamer16d ago

@fr0sty agreed completely, which is why they're hedging by releasing other games to multiplatform, plus they have PC to make up for the difference in a lot of ways, which is why their games are not complete money pits. It brings up the question of whether or not those exclusives would drive sales of consoles, though. Let's say Spiderman 2 was an Xbox exclusive, it would certainly have pushed console sales, though who's to say how much is anyone's guess.

fr0sty16d ago

That's why you can't rely on just one exclusive, Sony has always delivered on a wide range of solid exclusives, even this generation (even if they haven't been strong on the first party exclusives, they've made up for it with third party). They don't rely on just one "system seller", they have a portfolio of them.

16d ago
JBlaze22616d ago

ApocalypseShadow To be honest Sony has more of a chance to go 3rd party because like you said Microsoft has money, Sony does not. Sony does not have games, Only games they have come from 3rd party. Sony has been losing money for years and you. Saying Microsoft has been putting the least effort just proves you have no idea what's been going on. All Sony has done is repeat and recycle, never innovating or doing something new. All Sony has is brand loyalty nothing else and it shows.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 16d ago
LG_Fox_Brazil17d ago

Not sure about that. It's been two decades and I still think about Power Stone, Shenmue, Crazy Taxi, Jet Set Radio, Seaman and others, but I'm not sure I'll remember Xbox Series X/S games in a few years from now... Maybe I'll remember about the franchises that the Xbox brand spawned, but I don't believe that the Xbox Series lives up to the late Dreamcast or even to the Xbox name itself. I do have great memories about the 360 with Blue Dragon, Gears 2 and Lost Odyssey though

isarai17d ago

Nah, sega actually makes good games

Becuzisaid17d ago

No, Dreamcast was ahead of it's time and most still have very fond memories of it that had one. It also had some good games on it even in it's short lifespan. Xbox has none of these qualities.

Profchaos17d ago

I remember it coming out at the time in a really bad place they hit the market before the PS2 but it was during this transitional time when Sony was promoting the power of the PS2 and so many of the Dreamcast games were awesome but often third parties simply ported the PS1 version increased resolution and performance but rarely fully utilise the capabilities of the console.

I think in the end bad marketing done it in and like the GameCube so many people are fond of it now but at the time it was looked at in the lense of the day and it didn't stack up.

Personally I miss Sega in hardware they took risks that many companies won't

Becuzisaid17d ago

I never owned it, and got the PS2 right when it launched. But there were certain games it had that I was always jealous of that I didn't have access to - Sonic adventure, crazy taxi, power Stone, code Veronica, shenmue, skies of Arcadia. I always thought it was a really cool machine though. I've never heard a bad thing about it though from those that had it.

FinalFantasyFanatic17d ago

I only ever saw one Dreamcast, and that was one my friend owned, pity I never got to play it, I wonder what games he had for it?

It would be nice if some of those games got ported to modern systems.

Profchaos17d ago

Oh man sonic adventure on the Dreamcast made me so jealous as a huge sonic fan on the mega drive who also moved to PlayStation 2 I never got the chance to play it back in the day either. The Dreamcast in Australia where I am was always relegated to the smallest corner of EB Games it was kind of a strong first indicator that things were not going well at the time.

Show all comments (72)