510°

Kinect is "Irrelevant." Xbox One Will Get Price Cut but Sony Is in Position to Stay Ahead - Pachter

Wedbrush Securities analyst and quintessential crystal ball holder Michael Patcher feels that Kinect was former Interactive Entertainment Business President Don Mattrick’s favorite child, and now Mattrick isn’t at Microsoft anymore. That’s why he thinks that the technologically advanced camera is going to be removed from the box of the Xbox One, and that will allow Microsoft to cut the price, but Sony is in the position to stay ahead like it did with the PS2.

Read Full Story >>
dualshockers.com
Kingthrash3603694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

3 completly obvious things...
that pachter ...the KING OBVIOSO is what i call him now..

-Foxtrot3694d ago

Pachter....obvious....are you just getting this now :)

Kingthrash3603694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

no not at all...but these were more obvious than the other obvious "predictions" and "observations" hes put out...i mean the price cut already happened in EU -.-
you'd think people would change but....

nicksetzer13694d ago Show
Pogmathoin3694d ago

Ktrash, people would change, but?? You forgot to finish?

ITPython3694d ago

@nicksetzer1 - Kinect useful? Why, because it makes traversing the cluttered and unintuitive UI of the XB1 less of a headache?

I mean lets face it, that is the Kiencts only real practical use, everything else it does is a novelty at best.

Talk about adding insult to injury. The only reason the Kinect is useful is because MS did such a poor job designing the UI, and because of that people have to pay $100 more for each console.

nicksetzer13694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

@python again based on what? Dual shock controllers didn't start being utilized (the analog portion that is) by most developers until well after they were introduced because they "weren't necessary" .... yet kinect needs to be a gaming staple within 4 months?

SilentNegotiator3694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

@nicksetzer1

Oh please, trying to find hypocrisy where it doesn't exist. Pachter always says things either obvious or completely stupid.

Rainstorm813694d ago

4 months? KINECT came out years ago on 360....they should've been ready day 1 with new gaming uses for KINECT.

Lets use your analogy with the Dual shock on ps1....when ps2 released the dual shock 2 analogs were fully utilized. With KINECT we dont have anything new beyond the same uses from the 360.

KINECT was a waste andv should've been optional....after e3 the . Tired excuse of if it was optional devs wouldn't utilize it will be void if we dont see anything beyond voice commands and typical motion controls

SilentNegotiator3694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

"Dual shock controllers didn't start being utilized (the analog portion that is) by most developers until well after they were introduced because they "weren't necessary" .... yet kinect needs to be a gaming staple within 4 months?"

Kinect - Launched midway into a generation, now 4 months into its second.

Dualshock - Launched midway into a generation, was instantly a staple of gaming once standardized the next generation because of its extreme usefulness in controlling cameras.

Ironic...Dualshock *DID* become a staple to gaming in the same timeframe.

MysticStrummer3694d ago

"kinect needs to be a gaming staple within 4 months?"

It's been around a lot longer than 4 months.

kreate3693d ago

I thought kinect has been in the market since 2010 ish?

Gazondaily3693d ago (Edited 3693d ago )

Kinect is irrelevant? Look at how many people are rushing to buy the inferior PS camera for the PS4. Kinect sure does a hell of a lot more than that and if the Xbox One is going to get a price reduction to the effect that youre essentially getting that camera for free (like the Titanfall bundle), then you must deluded to think it's irrelevant.

Also, Kinect 2.0 even at this early stage is an impressive piece of tech and a different beast from its predecessor considering the extent of its integration into the console.

UltraNova3693d ago

MS will drop the price to 400 dollars by E3 at the latest with the kinect still bundled.

Whether they can afford to do it is irrelevant at this point (btw yes they can),Sony is crushing them they need to react soon or loose badly. Of course Sony will respond by dropping to 350 but at least they'll be in a more competitive price range.

Plus since their console is and always will be inferior to the competition (power wise)they need to immediately show how the XB1 with its peripheral is different from the competition by showing some actual games that really use it in ways that cannot be done with a controller, thus increasing the appeal(?) for their console.

Only and only then will they have a chance at Sony which btw makes all the right moves the last few years.

Kidmyst3693d ago

One of the rare times I agree with Pachter. I think the sales speak for themselves and I'm willing to bet if MSFT released a Kinect free bundle down $100.00 that sales would really pick up, throw in a free game as well and that'll help. I for one would be more interested in the Xbone since I never plan to ever use Kinect. Or until my kid get older.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 3693d ago
BX813694d ago

Then get on his level and hold his position. Too many people crying about this guy on the net but aren't on his level.

Kingthrash3603694d ago

ps4 will sell alot of infamous ss this month
x1, 360, pc will sell alot of tf this month
done. pay me.

InTheLab3694d ago

People don't know what he does for a living and are just commenting on his gaming analysis.

I'm curious. Where does everyone here work because he works for wedbush and so many call him a fool.

GamingNerd0133694d ago

U c most of the time patcher is really a dumb useless person that I don't care what he's says about gaming news but at times he's right about certain things and with this I agree with him just cause it's true otherwise I wouldn't agree if it doesn't make sense what he says about things.

SilentNegotiator3694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

@InTheLab

Because everyone knows that if you have a job, it's because you're really good at it. /s

kreate3693d ago (Edited 3693d ago )

@inthelab

He explains his job in one of his episodes.

So ppl do know what he does for a living.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3693d ago
FlameHawk3694d ago

Why are you getting so mad? He was asked a question and he answered it. Was he not suppose to answer the question?

Letthewookiewin3694d ago

Because people don't like the answer he gave. Too bad.

Kingthrash3603694d ago

nobody mad bro. lol..well you seem mad. here, have a nutter butter ..that should turn the frown upside down.

FlameHawk3694d ago

It's not they didn't like it, they are saying it's so obvious he doesn't need to say it but guess what, he was asked a question and he answered it.

FlameHawk3694d ago

@king, na you seem mad brosef, if you weren't you wouldn't be calling him names.

Kingthrash3603694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

do i seem mad?...aww dang mabad..gimme half of dat nutter butter.
the nick name was a joke bro. *munch..
if i was mad i'd say pachter is an overpaid cleo wanna be who spews the obvious and often times *crunch..predicts things that end up way off and it hurts me deep...but i dont feel that way about him. he coo...coo enough for me to nick name him...kinda like kobe = black mamba or lbj= king james..n stuff..so pachter= KING OBVIOSO...fits no?...u gunna eat that other half bro?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3694d ago
fermcr3694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

Everybody (or mostly everybody) knows Kinect is irrelevant. Microsoft are just to stubborn to realize that. They are loosing sales by forcing Kinect with every X1. Smartest thing they could do is release a Kinect-less X1.

Radentangr3694d ago

Microsoft have invested a lot into the Kinect. Not just buying the technology but integrating it into the software and 2nd wave games. They cannot drop it as their future plans rely too heavily on it.

There is an estimated 1.4bn dollars invested into content for the Xbox platform. So expect price cuts and cable style monthly contracts but do not expect a Kinectless bundle.

Its easier for MS to take a loss on hardware as their long term vision for in-home advertising makes that loss peanuts.

kreate3693d ago

I kinda forgot the number but didn't MS invest millions just in kinect advertisement?

avengers19783694d ago

I could see XB1 dropping kinect and selling a cheaper sku, but Sony is still going to dominate this gen, they just nailed it from the beginning

DeadMansHand3694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

While I agree with you that the PS4 should maintain a strong 1st place position, I would buy a X1 if it was 299.00 and Kinectless. I'm not one of those people who are so loyal to a brand that they refuse to engage in things that could be fun just because someone else makes them. Halo and Gears arefun franchises IMO. I'm just not dropping 500 plus tax on a system that has a camera I want nothing to do with and hardware that doesn't match up to the direct competitor. 300 though is a fair price for a kinectless SKU.

avengers19783693d ago

I agree if it wasn't for that price tag I might pick one up, DR3, project spark, gears, and the possibility of lost Odeyssey 2, would make it worth the 299.99 price tag you said.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3693d ago
mrpsychoticstalker3694d ago

I wonder what college he went to.

Didnt learn a thing.

Eonjay3694d ago

Actually his assessment seems pretty realistic.

AD7053694d ago

BSU bullshittes university

DigitalRaptor3694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

At this point, to the mass market, Kinect is bordering on irrelevant.

It sustained hype last gen from the fickle casual market who were burned out on the Wiimote hype that ran its course ("oh look you can play games with your body, i've not seen that done before how novel") and Xbox faithful who believed in Peter Molyneux and Milo, and wouldn't shut up about its potential that to this day is still hot air ( http://static.fjcdn.com/pic... )

Xbox One has already received a price cut in the UK and will probably sustain another to attempt to keep up with the competition.

PS4 will be ahead this entire generation.

Pachter might say some stupid things, but here he's just stating the obvious that most sane individuals can accept.

doolin_dalton3693d ago (Edited 3693d ago )

"PS4 will be ahead this entire generation."

That's right, because we all know that console races are sprints, not marathons. I mean, it's not like a more expensive, harder-to-program-for machine has EVER come from behind to catch it's competition. Four months into a ten year cycle and you've already declared a winner. Of course, if Sony was behind, people like you would be saying "just wait, just wait".

It's amazing how many people like you must have just started gaming this past year - you are absolutely clueless about history. Or, do you simply refuse to believe that MS could do exactly what we just saw your precious Sony do last generation?

By your reasoning, we should just award the Stanley Cup right now to the St. Louis Blues. After all, they're in first place right now - there's no reason to believe anyone will ever catch them. Well we're at it, we might as well give the NBA title to the first place San Antonio Spurs today. No need to play the season out until the end. They're ahead now, therefore they'll be ahead the whole season. Pretty simple.

"At this point, to the mass market, Kinect is bordering on irrelevant."

If a gaming camera is irrelevant, as you claim, why is the PS4 camera sold out everywhere? Why is it selling for $100+ on Ebay? Clearly, fans of both consoles are convinced about the future of gaming cameras.

DigitalRaptor3693d ago (Edited 3693d ago )

Do you really think I just say things and hope that they're true? I make informed arguments and statements based on historic trends.

PS4 is re-treading PS2 territory. Sony home consoles have always outsold MS consoles. Even in that generation where Sony struggled against the competition, they still beat out their primary competitor.

1) PS1, PS2 they completely showed the competition.

2) PS3 had a huge array of negatives on its side: a year delay, doom and gloom media attention, hard to program for architecture, $600, barebones online network, inferior multiplats for a good time.

And it STILL outsold the 360 pretty much year-on-year. Dwindled down a close to 10 million lead by the end, and it's still going. PS3 is almost outselling the Xbone monthly. Wii U and Vita are outselling it in Europe.

3) PS4 is now leading the way for this generation of consoles, the tables have turned in a number of ways, people don't trust Microsoft for their scandalous and anti-consumer ways, the non-gaming focus has put a great majority of people off, its an extra $100 for inferior technology, inferior multiplats, inferior value, less games from less genres, from less developers worldwide. Less sales by a large margin.

They WILL be behind this entire generation, because if PS3 outsold the 360 with all the negatives on their side, and PS4 is HUGELY outselling the Xbone when they are on the top of their game, there's no way MS can catch up. Unless they turn the Xbox brand into the more popular and better gaming brand across the globe, and stop being a disgraceful corporation.
------

IF it was the other way around (and that's a rather large "if"), I would be justified in saying "just wait", as Sony has a legacy and history of supporting their consoles for years, with GAMES, GAMES, GAMES, GAMES, not abandoning their audience, treating their consumers with respect, offering them good value, and not trying to screw them over, or being unreasonable with their policies.

Sony has a rich and positive history for gamers. Microsoft has a scandalous and detrimental history in this industry.
-------

And BTW this is business of gaming, it's not sport. Treat your consumers well, offer them the best value, loads of cutting edge next-gen games, TONS of diversity, and DON'T try and screw them, and you will have consumers in your pocket.
-------

Kinect is irrelevant for "games". And the fickle casual market is not going to lump down some for another gimmick. PS4 camera offers nice features for streaming games to people (which is great), and I think that's all people have bought it for. There was and still is a lot of buzz going around regarding Twitch TV.

But where the difference lies, is that Sony aren't claiming a revolution that hasn't had anything to show for itself in the realm of gaming, and Sony fans are buying it cause it's optional and useful for a specific feature. NOT the "Future of gaming as we know it".

"Better with Kinect" was a lie, all we've seen justified with Kinect in the past few months has been for non-gaming, and the only people interested in that stuff are the die-hard Xbox fans who though the TvTvSports idea was a good one.

InTheLab3694d ago

UCLA (management)
University of Florida (law)
Pepperine (law)
CSU

He also works for Wedbush Securities.

It's safe to say that after a decade of college, a few degrees, and a cushy job at a place like Wedbush, it's safe to assume he did learn something and knows a bit more about this industry than you or I.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3693d ago
hello123694d ago

Do you even use the x box 1 Pachter? Removing Kinect wastes all the time and effort Microsoft put in to updating the OS. This guy clearly knows nothing and hasn't even spoken to Microsoft, why Kinect is important.

NeoTribe3694d ago

That's the problem with Kinect, you need Microsoft to tell you why YOU need it. Why is it consumers and bystanders cant seem to find a reason for its expensive, forced existence?

zeuanimals3694d ago

It's funny when people say they should keep Kinect because the OS is hard to use without it... Well then revamp the OS to work better with the controller and that won't be a problem. I don't care about MS's wasted time, they shouldn't have spent so much of it on the damn thing, that goes for their money too. I care about my wallet and I'm sure most people do too.

DeadMansHand3694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

Bingo. Idont hate on Kinect and the price of the X1 because it is cool to do such but because I am a gamer and there are games on the MS platforms I want to play but not with the bloated OS trying to run a damn camera and sync up with all my appliances. I only expect my gaming to console to focus the majority of its resources to playing games. I want to play Halo and Gears and Alan Wake 2. I want my system though, to allocate all power to presenting those games in the highest and most efficient manner.

Once MS learns that there are a lot of gamers who like their exclusives but are turned off to all the flair they tried to push out on everyone, the sooner the SKU price drops and Kinect drops. Win for me.

Now, I know there are people who like kinect and it will suck for them if support for it gets dropped but that's just how these things work. I bought a WiiU week one and now Nintendo is talking about more price drops and maybe even a gamepad-less SKU. Well, sucks for me but if it gets customers on the system and games keep coming I will learn to live with it.

k2d3694d ago

I wonder how xboxone owners will feel about those extra 100 $ they shelled out when the console eventually peters out.

MysticStrummer3694d ago

"Removing Kinect wastes all the time and effort Microsoft put in to updating the OS."

By "updating the OS", do you mean designing it to be harder to use without Kinect so that Kinect will seem more needed than it really is?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3694d ago
chikane3694d ago

i don't follow this guy or read much about him? but wasn't this the same guy that said the ps3 and 360 would get a price cut in February? which never happened

theWB273694d ago

Sony as a company, when the PS2 was around, could afford to do whatever they wanted with prices like Micro now. Plus they held a ridiculous marketshare.

Sony today is already losing money on each PS4 sold before a game or Plus is sold along with it. Sony today can't afford to take losses on the gaming side. Hence why the PS4 was built the way it was. The antithesis of the PS3.

I don't understand why Pachter chooses to look at things in a bubble when he makes his statements and not take in account the business ramification for making certain moves.

BitbyDeath3694d ago

Incorrect.
PS4 costs $381 to make.

Sony makes $19 profit off each console sold.

http://venturebeat.com/2013...

theWB273694d ago (Edited 3694d ago )

Wrong http://www.digitaltrends.co...

Andrew House
“We will not generate anything like the losses we did for the PlayStation 3,” House told investors.

http://www.geek.com/games/s...

Masayasu Ito, Sony Computer Entertainment senior vice president, has admitted that for every PS4 console sold, Sony will be losing money. In other words, the cost of manufacturing and shipping the console costs more than the retail price. However, the loss is not going to be that great, and the company believes it will easily make the money back from the sales of games and PlayStation Plus subscriptions alongside the hardware.

I can link more if you please. You believe a site who looked at the components and guessed the prices. I'll believe the Sony execs who know the facts and stated the facts.

extra link- http://news.cnet.com/8301-1...

vongruetz3694d ago

Sadly these price comparisons only reveal variable costs and completely ignore the fixed costs associated with the consoles.
What are fixed costs, some might ask? Those are the costs that remain fixed regardless if you sell 1 console or a million. All the money spent on R&D for the system, the Kinect, the controller, and the operating system. Those costs are factored into every system sold, and the fewer systems sold, the higher the cost attributed to each one.
So in the end, the total cost of the PS4 is higher than $381, but still may be a lot less than the XB1. Microsoft has bragged about how much they spent developing the new Kinect and the new controller. Those costs all have to be accounted for in the sale of each unit. If Sony spent a lot less on R&D, which is most likely, then the gap between the total cost of each system might prove to be quite significant.

Hicken3693d ago

You, who constantly looks at things in a bubble, can't understand why someone else would do the same? That's unexpected.

theWB273693d ago

That's the only thing you can latch onto...

kenshiro1003693d ago

WB27....did you even READ what you linked him?

The losses will NOT be as great as the PS3s losses. In other words, the PS4 is more likely to make a profit.

Derp, derp, derp.

theWB273693d ago (Edited 3693d ago )

In other words...each PS4 loses money.

Masayasu Ito, Sony Computer Entertainment senior vice president, has admitted that for every PS4 console sold, Sony will be losing money. In other words, the cost of manufacturing and shipping the console costs more than the retail price.

Did you READ what I linked? I'm confused how you got losses NOT being as much as the PS3 meant turning a profit.

Derp, derp, derp...

kenshiro1003692d ago

wB, you STILL didn't read the article properly. They had more loses on the PS3 than the PS4. For the PS4, they expect NOT to incur as much losses as they did for the PS3.

They stand a chance of making a profit either way.

Stop your retarded agenda against Sony. They're not going anywhere.

theWB273692d ago

"Masayasu Ito, Sony Computer Entertainment senior vice president, has admitted that for every PS4 console sold, Sony will be losing money."

How can you make a profit off of losses? Sony doesn't make a profit until a game and PS+ is sold along with every PS4.

Stop your retarded agenda against reading comprehension. It shouldn't be left behind.

kenshiro1003692d ago

I see that you're very delusional so I'll leave you alone.

Hicken3692d ago

... you started off talking about the PS2. Did Sony not lose money on every PS2 they made for a while? With the exception of Nintendo(until the Wii U), hasn't pretty much every console released in the last 20-odd years been sold at a loss, regardless of manufacturer?

This is what I mean by you doing the same thing you're accusing others of. The cost of the PS4 is way down, to the point where one game and/or PS+ sub make the system profitable.

Isn't the PS4's attach rate something over 2? Sounds like a profit, then, even if the hardware DOES cause a small loss.

With the PS3 being sold at $200 less than what it cost just for manufacturing, obviously things were different. It took many years and much hardship for the PS3 to be bringing in more money than it cost, but the PS4 is already at that point. Honestly, whether that's due to software sales or not is irrelevant, because that's actually typical of how the industry works. Which is why I can't understand why you're trying to paint it as some sort of negative. (Aside from your typical trolling, that is.)

You looking at things in a bubble isn't the only thing I could latch onto. But I didn't feel like typing out an essay on why your comment was an exercise in stupidity while I was on my phone.

theWB273692d ago

Ps2 era Sony was mentioned because they could take the losses without it being a big detriment because they were a healthy company. Same as when the PS3 launched. They could afford to do what they wanted when it came to prices and losses because of that. Like Microsoft now before they cheaped out.

Did I not mention they had to sell a game and/or a PS+ in order to make profit. I think I did

Direct quote from my FIRST post "Sony today is already losing money on each PS4 sold before a game or Plus is sold along with it" so I covered my bases with that.

If you've read what I wrote then you'd see that since Sony ISN'T doing well as a company, and it takes a game/or sub to make profit dropping the price of the PS4 would take AWAY that profit.

Sony from yesteryear could afford to miss that profit...Sony now CAN'T afford to miss that profit which is why they wouldn't be so quick to drop the price of the PS4 even though it's as successful as it is.

That's not looking at things in a bubble. That's looking at the health of Sony as a whole which affects their decisions with the PS4.

You still don't know what trolling is obviously. I back up whatever I post with information. I don't tease, I don't berate, I don't make comments to try and get under someone's skin for the fun of it. That's trolling.

I see your back to your stalker ways too...too bad your stuck with that bubble count.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3692d ago
Show all comments (86)
540°

Microsoft Losing to Sony Is a Wrong Perception, Says Pachter; They Want to Win Business, Not Console

Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter believes it's an incorrect gamers' perception that Microsoft has lost to Sony.

Read Full Story >>
wccftech.com
Christopher56d ago

"If we change what our goal is, we're not losing" attitude. Kind of like how Microsoft didn't lose to Valve, they just changed their business model. And they didn't lose to Android and iOS, they just changed their business model. They 100%, after spending 3 generations competing heavily in console hardware, aren't losing to Sony, they're just changing their business model.

You can't ever lose if you just 'change your business model'!

Jin_Sakai56d ago

Pachter is full of crap. Always assume the opposite of what he says.

Cacabunga56d ago

This clown is still around? I cannot remember he ever got one prediction right

Profchaos55d ago

Patcher predicted that take two would be brought out by ea he knows very little about the content of games and is so numbers focused

Petebloodyonion55d ago

Yet I remember that he predicted perfectly that there was no way the acquisition of ABK would not go through and that the FTC and the CMA would fold when all the media had It's basically over kind of news.
He mentioned that MS would outsource COD streaming rights (or deny COD from appearing on GP) in UK.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 55d ago
crazyCoconuts56d ago

What's kinda crazy to me is - if they retreat from consoles they're left with a business model that depends on making great games that people want to buy.
What has been Xbox's biggest issue over the last decade or so?
It's not like they're falling back to a strength...

GamerRN56d ago

They didn't retreat and even promised the biggest generational leap! Where did you get retreat from?

crazyCoconuts55d ago

@Gamer if you don't see it yet, there's nothing i can say to convince you.

FinalFantasyFanatic55d ago

And just think of all those game franchises that are trapped with them, especially those they bought instead of creating.

Charlieboy33355d ago

@Gamer Yeah, just like the One X was a leap. Just like Series X was a leap. What did they bring to the table.....a leap in games? No, they brought sweet f all. Guys like you just never learn or are just dumb, falling for MS' talk talk talk over and over again.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 55d ago
PhillyDonJawn56d ago (Edited 56d ago )

Business is all about money not actual sales. If I sell 1 thing for 1 million and you sell 10000 things for 900k Who really won.

remixx11656d ago

The person who sold 10000 things because he has developed a consumer base and consistent revenue stream while simultaneously showing that he has the capacity to obtain market share.

The person who sold 1 thing for a million hasnt proven much outside of the simple fact that he can get an idiot to pay a copious amount of money for a single product. Holla at me when he has proven he can do it consistently overtime.

This is a nuanced subject matter

The Wood56d ago (Edited 56d ago )

How about the gamers perspective

Xbox as a console business is last in the gamersphere. Pivot after pivot, swerve after swerve. If it wasn't for pc the xbox console would died a while back. Console owners need to choose what's best for them, their experiences or the console owners profits

Christopher56d ago (Edited 56d ago )

Great. Guess who is in third place (just talking the main console market, not even including mobile and PC) both on software sales, hardware sales, and video game revenue?

PhillyDonJawn55d ago

Chris you might wanna do ya research

Christopher55d ago (Edited 55d ago )

***Chris you might wanna do ya research ***

You're right! It's only 2nd place on revenue. Good on you.

"Based on these revenues, we can see that: PlayStation made $11.3 billion more than Xbox, and $14.7 billion more than Nintendo. Xbox made $3.4 billion more than Nintendo."

Now, do you want to find me proof that Xbox isn't in third on hardware and software sales? They've literally cannibalized their own sales via subscription services and their hardware is well known to be last place.

But, hey, Microsoft is okay losing in every category here, why would they get rid of a part of their business that they are in turn (and wasn't accounted for in 2023 numbers totally since it was distributed over 5 years, 2023, 2024, 2025, 2026, and 2027, the cost of their latest purchase) spending more than 7x their annual revenue on.

PhillyDonJawn55d ago (Edited 55d ago )

@Chris I'm glad you did ya research seen you were wrong but you also forgetting this. Revenue isn't everything my friend, remember business is about money
https://www.essentiallyspor...

DarXyde55d ago

Oh my days, this is a terrible analogy...

If it was just about money, Microsoft wouldn't be doing a sub model, would they? They are literally making it cheaper than game purchases to get more uptake from more people. The goal is to have enough recurring subs over time to increase revenue (and eventually profitability), but that doesn't work in your assessment because they literally need to "sell 10000 things".

Good grief...

Christopher55d ago

***Revenue isn't everything my friend***

Yeah, you know what that TweakTown report doesn't include? Any of the cost to buy ABK. That makes it a massive loss. Massive.

FinalFantasyFanatic55d ago

@DarXyde

That analogy still works, they need to consistently sell those subs to maintain/gain revenue, if they can't constantly sell those subs.

Switch "things" with "Subs", and it still works, but they need to constantly convince people to keep buying that subscription, other people will drop their subscription and revenue will decline.

DigitallyAfflicted55d ago

ou can do math... well done.... you win

DarXyde55d ago

FinalFantasyFanatic,

I don't think that quite works:

The argument this guy is making actually sounds supportive of Playstation selling a game over Game Pass subs.

Let's take a practical example, Persona 3 Reload.

If Atlus sells you the game at $70 on Playstation and "gives it away" on Xbox as long as you continue to pay for Game Pass, well... Following their logic, wouldn't it be better if fewer people buy it for a higher price than basing it on engagement via more people on XGP? How many people would you need to play P3R on Game Pass to get the same revenue?

Eventually, the latter *can be better*, but there is the matter of a larger install base on Playstation and XGP subs are a fraction of Xbox gamers.

It's a bit ironic and I think biases are on full display because what Philly boi is saying is, in principle, more supportive of the PlayStation model, but the thing is, PlayStation has both a higher price of access AND a larger pool to pull from.

If we want to talk about the manufacturers themselves and hardware, Xbox can be purchased cheaper than PS5, but it is still getting trounced in number of sales and price of admission.

I don't really see how this argument works.

crazyCoconuts55d ago

The console war we've been watching for the last two decades has been what I find interesting. I don't really care how much profit MS can make by buying King and running Candy Crush any more than I care how much money they make bleeding businesses for MS Office licenses. That's boring. The fun thing to watch has been the work these companies have put in to try to win the console market.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 55d ago
56d ago Replies(4)
Eonjay56d ago

The obvious rebuttal to Pachter's cray cray notion is that you wouldn't have to change your model if you were winning.

senorfartcushion55d ago

Or "those who win get to change their business model."

Fanboyism ends at a brick wall of "big company no care about whether you like or hate them, get a life."

Reaper22_56d ago (Edited 56d ago )

Sony said similar things when their Walkman was beaten by Apple and when Samsung surpassed them in the TV market. I can go on and on but I'm sure you get the picture. Business is business. All companies take a whippen every now and and then. The difference is how you bounce back. Microsoft net worth has grown over the years. Business wise they are very successful and no matter what, sony would love to be where they are financially. Sony isn't the competition microsoft worries about. That been clear for a long time now. Microsoft wants gaming to be a part of their ecosystem. Sony needs it. Big difference there.

Christopher55d ago (Edited 55d ago )

There's a lot wrong here.

First, the attempt to turn this argument into one about other failed businesses. Which, surprisingly, you make the argument I'm making but then...

Second, the attempt to confirm that Microsoft isn't competition when Microsoft admitted in court that they are.

Third, the attempt to act like Microsoft, from a business perspective, doesn't need what they spent over $100b to acquire but Sony does? Laughable.

Businesses are about profits. If you stop earning enough profit in a division, it goes away. Simple as that. Xbox is a division competiting against Valve, Epic, Sony, Nintendo, Android, and iOS. Simple as that. Xbox, to remain 'part of the ecosystem' needs to not cost the company more than it brings in. Simple.

55d ago
Rude-ro55d ago (Edited 55d ago )

They actually won.

The whole point was to force Sony into playing ball so that they could not put “windows” in more jeopardy than it was at the time.
Apple, Google, then Sony innovating while partnered with Linux…

When will people realize it has never been about gaming as to why Microsoft got into gaming?

Trojan horses people.

FinalFantasyFanatic55d ago

With the way Linux and Steam Deck are going, Linux might one day catch up to Windows, it's doing pretty well for gaming these days compared to say, 10 years, or even 5 years ago.

crazyCoconuts55d ago

I don't understand who u r saying won...
But I agree in that I wouldn't be surprised if Windows was part of the calculus for MS supporting Xbox. The OS was based on Windows at first and Xbox One kinda had two Windows instances if you count the hypervisor.
But, like the console space, I think MS is walking back on OS domination. Apple and Google completely ate their lunch because....surprise surprise they innovated. I'm 100% confident the reason Phil talks (and shows) about the Asus ROG Ally more than Steam Deck is because of Windows. The Steam Deck has to sting for them.

senorfartcushion55d ago

Well, yeah, that's the point. They're too big-a-company for fanboy stuff to be at-all relevant.

badz14955d ago

If Pachter said MS is not losing, it means that MS is losing.

Petebloodyonion55d ago (Edited 55d ago )

Well last I checked a company goal is to make more and more money,
Nintendo could be an example of how they stopped trying to compete with Sony (during the Gamecube day) and decided to focus on a different market and reinvented themselves with the WII.
They reinvented themselves with the Switch by bringing 2 markets together when ppl said that portable consoles were doomed thanks to cellphones and tablets.

Sony's business models also changed when they decided to port games to PC something that was never supposed to happen.

crazyCoconuts55d ago

If Xbox exits a market (consoles) to focus on another (games) I guess I don't care anymore. They lost the console market and pretty much the same companies that have been there before making games are still there flying a different flag. If they suck, other companies will eat their lunch by making better games.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 55d ago
shinoff218356d ago

How's this guy still around. According to him consoles were dying after ps2, ps3 Era.

Christopher56d ago

Analysts are never wrong, the market just had a swift change for which no one could account.

shinoff218355d ago (Edited 55d ago )

Aka wrong lol

VenomUK55d ago (Edited 55d ago )

In his Gametrailers past I’ve found Pachter to be friendly and entertaining. However he’s always blindly predicted Xbox success even up to the start of this generation. Now Pachter has adopted and repeated the new terminology of Microsoft, that it hasn’t lost the console war, it just wants more business. This is illuminating because it suggest he, like Tom Warren at the Verge, is inline with Microsoft’s PR strategy.

Tedakin55d ago

He was the only person who completely nailed how the ABK court case would play out. When everyone said the deal was dead, he said no and stood firm and said MS would do exactly what they did.

MrNinosan55d ago

Did everyone say the deal was dead?
Most analytics said it would go through, but be delayed, which actually was the case.

Christopher54d ago

Almost everyone said the deal would go through.

56d ago
stonecold356d ago

michael and his bs view just give me headache wish he would go and retire

senorfartcushion55d ago

Thing is, if fanboys understood business, they wouldn't be wasting their time commenting on gaming websites.

S2Killinit55d ago

And you are here to lecture the rest of us because you understand business and MS is doing great?

neomahi55d ago

senorfartcusion....... So what brings you to the house of Pachter?

FinalFantasyFanatic55d ago

Technically Microsoft is doing great, it's just not in gaming, OS and software (e.g. Microsoft Office) is where they're doing great business. I can't think of many other ventures they've had that has worked out for them, despite resorting to some of the same tactics that made them the dominate OS for computers.

55d ago
senorfartcushion54d ago

Microsoft own things like Microsoft Office and Windows, games are secondary to them. If Xbox shut down the computer company will be ok

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 54d ago
MIDGETonSTILTS1756d ago (Edited 56d ago )

They only way that plan works is if people still want to play in their ecosystem.

Eventually, they’re ecosystem needs more games.

Helldivers 2 could swing Xbots to ps6 if it isn’t countered by the end of the gen.

Abnor_Mal56d ago (Edited 56d ago )

Supposedly some well known Halo modders will be making a mode similar to Helldivers.

https://gamerant.com/halo-i...

MIDGETonSTILTS1755d ago

Without procedurally generated levels, they’ll face the same problem as Destiny: fighting the same enemies in the exact same arenas does get repetitive eventually.

Helldivers succeeds as a GaaS because of its unusually well implemented use of procedural level creation. That, paired with its fun enemies to kill, makes it a GaaS with a long lifespan.

darthv7255d ago

There is a pretty good chance that those with XB also have PS, but not the other way around.

shinoff218355d ago

I do. Always get an xbox just varies on when during that Gen

cooperdnizzle55d ago (Edited 55d ago )

What kind of Jedi mind tricks do you have to come up with to get through your day?

What is the point of always having to lie or make shit up just to win? It's like cheating to win how can you feel like you accomplished something?

FinalFantasyFanatic55d ago

I haven't bought an Xbox since the 360 days, just stuck with PC and PS, sometimes Nintendo.

Show all comments (118)
170°

Could Xbox Game Pass really hit '100 million' subscribers? Here are some thoughts.

Wedbush games industry analyst Michael Pachter weighs in.

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
darthv72616d ago

Oh... well if Patcher weighs in then it has to be a resounding:

NO

Jin_Sakai616d ago

Regardless it’s going to skyrocket when Activision Blizzard games hit Game Pass.

Lightning77615d ago

But to a 100 million? Absolutely not I can realistically see 5 to 6 million within the year.

Pachter gets paid for making terrible predictions. Must be nice lmao.

Jin_Sakai615d ago

Yea that’s unrealistic. Still the subscriber count is going to increase significantly when Activision/Blizzard games hit the service.

garryxcs615d ago

"skyrocket", that's highly doubtful you're not accounting for the fact that the majority of those people who are will download those games on gp already have gp.

shinoff2183614d ago

I feel they will increase but there are people out there like me for instance that didnt really care for the games they made. Especially cod eh pass. Skyrocket though seems to be overstated.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 614d ago
neutralgamer1992614d ago (Edited 614d ago )

It won't hit 100 million unless Ms cam produce high quality exclusives and release one every month

Better question is at what price point and subscription number will it become profitable for Ms because the more profit it makes the more resources Ms will allocate to make it grow

Recurring subscriptions is what most companies with services want. Believe it or not the reason so many of these companies want us to turn on the automatic payment is because they know a lot of people forget to turn it off. It's like gym membership they know only 40% of the people will use it while other 60% will keep paying in hopes of going one day

darthv72

Also you made a comment in the other story I forgot to reply to you but why are you paying $45 to renew when you can pay $26-28

There are always deals

darthv72614d ago

This was the first time it renewed for 45, i will get other deals before it does it again.

mooreneco21615d ago (Edited 615d ago )

Reality of the subscriber business model is regardless of the medium, and as Netflix is currently experiencing, they all have a user base ceiling. Is game pass good value, sure, but will it convert non-gamers into Xbox gamers, nope! Brand awareness and deals only reach so far and ultimately a gamer with the money to subscribe is most likely already a gamer.

roadkillers615d ago

Nintendo has the ability to turn non-gamers into gamers. The only game that has this ability in Microsoft’s arsenal is Minecraft.

Godmars290615d ago (Edited 615d ago )

No. Not even Nintendo can "magically" convert non-gamers. Sure as eff such can't be done by the likes of Uncharted or Halo. The best you're going to get is someone who wants to watch for the graphics and action, but sur as eff isn't paying upwards to a publisher desired $100+ per single game + DLC/MT much less a recurring sub.

And it the Bobby Koticks of the industry that need that drilled into their heads, not us.

shinoff2183614d ago

Nintendo had the wii that brought non gamers. Thats it. Switch isnt bring in non gamers unless your talking about kids having their first system. My kids all have ps4s but we always have bought the newest nintendo console. Mainly for their first party games.

Also i dont feel like minecraft is gonna bring in non gamers. I just dont understand the comment.

myfathersbastard614d ago

Most adult gamers I know still see switch as a “kids” console and don’t own one. I only personally know 2 other adults who use one. So no, Nintendo doesn’t turn non gamers into gamers. They have issues just being seen as a worthwhile system currently with the new generation out.

0hMyGandhi615d ago

I was a gamer, and gamed alot. Haven't lately, and got GamePass about 6 months ago, and I friggin love it. Love seeing some smaller indie games that I can play comfortably without worrying about sinking hundreds of hours into like I did when I was younger.

So yes, "non-gamers" will see incredible appeal in gamepass. So far, GamePass reminds me a bit of the good ol' Xbox Live Arcade days, and that's never a bad thing.

shinoff2183614d ago

Havent lately but you were a gamer. How long is lately. You already admitted you were a gamer so you are not a non gamer even if you took a small break.

0hMyGandhi614d ago

"Lately" is probably a 10-12 year break.

615d ago Replies(1)
purple101615d ago

How many xbone consoles did they sell last gen. Approx 50mill.

That's then the max they could hope to have in subscribers.

If there lucky. Very very lucky. As half Their fans jumped ship I rekon.

Lightning77615d ago

Which means there gonna have over 50 million subscribers. Sony fanboys have a knack for saying MS won't do X, Y, Z only for them to do X, Y, Z. You'd think you'd learn by now.

Zhipp615d ago

Gamepass is also on PC and streaming. Also Series X|S is outselling Xbox one so clearly they didn't lose half their fans.

Show all comments (49)
440°

Pachter: “If Sony was really smart, they’d buy Warner Bros Interactive”

Michael Pachter, everyone's favourite gaming analyst runs through all the rumoured game company acquisitions that Sony should purchase and deems that Warner Bros Interactive makes the most sense as long as it includes one major thing.

Read Full Story >>
playstationing.com
lelo2play720d ago

Well, apparently Sony are trying to buy Warner Bros Interactive...

"Interested parties include EA, Take-Two, Microsoft, Sony, Tencent, Netease, and PUBG Corp"
https://twitter.com/imranzo...

sparky77720d ago

They won't be able to outbid MS or Tencent so I don't see them trying for it.

Thegr81719d ago

I don’t know how you are getting downvoted cause that’s true. I love Sony but they aren’t winning a bidding war. Money talks sadly.

roadkillers719d ago

Sony could definitely outbid Microsoft on the basis that Microsoft needs asset allocation in different sectors and seeing how they are going to spend 70 Billion+ on Activision it might be more difficult. Tencent on the other hand, they have as much money as China allows them.

719d ago
neutralgamer1992719d ago

They won't sell for more than 10 billion and Sony can afford it. Ms paid more than 40% above market value . As far as WB are concerned so much of their work is working on established IP's owned by DC. So someone buying WB doesn't guarantee DC IP's

Also I think many of you don't understand the difference between company being valued higher and having actual cash in hand for acquisitions

Also Sony is a bank in Japan so they can come up with cash and have some of the most valuable assets in music and movies. They outright own the movie rights to the biggest and most sold superhero merchandise Spiderman

As far as patcher is concerned I don't believe anything he says. Whatever he says do the opposite

roadkillers719d ago

My biggest thing, whoever gets them would own one of the most historic gaming franchises: Mortal Kombat!

mkis007719d ago

The fact it would certainly fail to be approved is a factor. Gov't is pushing back on Activision as it is.

ABizzel1719d ago

MS is true, but they’re stuck with the Activision stuff and any new acquisitions would completely derail that. Tencent is debatable, and as capitalistic and greedy as the US and companies are there is a real fear of China becoming to large of a superpower that extra efforts have been going in place to slow down Chinese takeovers.

There’s also the influence of relationships and connections within the industry. Would developers rather go to tencent and be stifled, or go somewhere like Sony and be able to thrive.

Also they’re allegedly selling the developers individually so there’s no need to buy the entire company. If anything Netherealms, Rocksteady, and maybe Avalanche are the 3 Sony should entertain.

myfathersbastard719d ago (Edited 719d ago )

Not only could they not, there’s very little value in it. WBIE are a subsidiary of WB. One of Sony’s biggest competitors. And they own all the property’s/IP, that WBIE has worked on. That wouldn’t go with them to Sony. So all they would be buying is a developer, not a library of new content and IP to work with. WB wouldn’t hand over those licenses.
WBIE is a good developer for sure, but they aren’t worth as much as some people on here are thinking when you remove all the IP they have worked on.

ElvisHuxley719d ago

Don't know why everyone just assumes that Xbox has unlimited access to all of the MS coffers, they don't, and have probably cut back drastically after acquiring the most expensive sinking ship in history.

ShadowWolf712719d ago

You're assuming that MS or Tencent would be WILLING to outspend there.

If Sony is willing to pay a price higher than MS or Tencent is, especially if the IP would only be licensed and not owned, then they very much can outbid others.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 719d ago
porkChop719d ago

Sony are interested, but WBIE would be worth considerably more than Bungie which Sony just spent $3.6B on. Whoever buys them will be dropping a lot of money. Especially with companies like Tencent, Microsoft, etc., looking to buy them, that number is going to go up.

Side note: I'm surprised Take-Two is even interested, they're only worth somewhere around $15B or so if I remember correctly. This would be a massive purchase for them, how are they planning to afford it?

LOGICWINS719d ago

In Sony’s shoes, Embracer Group would have been my first and only priority. Imagine getting 240 new first-party IPs over night. IPs they can use for games, TV shows, AND movies.

I don’t know what the hell Sony’s thinking spending billions of dollars on these smaller lukewarm acquisitions when they could’ve pooled their funds for one significant purchase instead.

DarXyde719d ago

If it is as straightforward as giving money, they could easily be outbid and that's the end of it.

However, they might sell for less if there were other conditions. Bungie and Activision were overvalued, but I think it's not unreasonable to suggest prices are negotiable if it comes with other benefits.

Development costs must be nerve wracking if acquisitions are so in season now.

neutralgamer1992719d ago

Logic

Embracer group would cost upwards of 40+ billion so I don't think that's happening along with the fact embracer group themselves are acquiring talent

zsquaresoff720d ago

'Michael Pachter, everyone's favourite gaming analyst'
I hope this statement was made as a joke.

Fonsecap719d ago

That was going to be my exact comment, lol

Gardenia719d ago

If Sony was really smart, they'd do the exact opposite of what Pachter says.

SullysCigar720d ago

Well, Michael Pachter, if YOU were really smart, you'd be right more often. You're strike rate is awful as far as gaming goes.

JackBNimble719d ago

So show some stats... I'm not a Patcher fan by any means, but at least back up what you're saying.
Or are you just looking for some easy up votes?

tay8701719d ago

dude EVERYONE knows pachter is a hack. is that you michael?

JackBNimble719d ago

I never said he wasn't, but you guy's just regurgitate the same BS and never provide sources to back it all up.

SullysCigar719d ago

Are you new to following gaming news or are you just looking for some easy downvotes?

I'm happy for you to show me I'm wrong. Seeing as you feel so strongly about it, I'm sure you must have the stats I'm missing and can back up your outrage?

calactyte719d ago (Edited 719d ago )

https://segmentnext.com/a-v...

Yes, he's a hack.

Stats on how wrong he's been in the past:

1. Grand Theft Auto V would release 2010 (released Sept 2013)
2. Predicted the price of Kinect would be $50.00 (was over $150)
3. Said Microsoft would double the price of Xbox Live
4. Said Wii was in no shape to compete with Xbox 360 and PS3. (Wii outsold both)
5. Said Assassin's Creed 2 would feature Altair and would be set in the French Revolution.
6. Predicted PS3, Xbox 360 and Wii would be the last generation of consoles.
7. Predicted Xbox One was going to outsell PS4 by 75,000 units. (PS4 tripled Xbox One sales)

That's just the ones in the article.

jznrpg719d ago

Console will be dead . Sony will lose to Xbox last gen just off the top of my head . He’s said a bunch of dumb shit , I don’t need to catalogue it because he does it so often .

Mr_Writer85719d ago

"but you guy's just regurgitate the same BS and never provide sources to back it all up."

Why? It's not a court of law, those of us who have been following gaming news for the past 15-20+ years all know he is a hack.

If YOU don't agree, that's fine, just ignore it, or do some digging yourself and find out for yourself.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 719d ago
Unknown_Gamer5794719d ago

I for one am impressed by one thing Patcher has that most people don’t: the ability to miss the mark, over and over again, and still have a job. Most of us have to consider something called job performance, or in the case of self-employment, public perception is often key. It baffles me to no end that Patcher has somehow transcended that. Is that a perk of being rich and famous?

darthv72719d ago

If Patcher says they should... you know it will be someone else who does.

KingofBandits719d ago

agreed we need to keep the filthy CCP out of gaming at all costs. China owns most of hollywood and influences much of the media with their filth. If gaming goes to the commies it might as well die

sourOG719d ago

The AmCP and EuCP as well.

Show all comments (74)