420°

Meet Microsoft, the world's best kept R&D secret

As far as 99.9 percent of the world population is concerned, Microsoft is a stodgy, old-guard technology company. Its bottom line is fully leveraged against PC operating systems and business software—hardly the building blocks of a future-thinking portfolio, right?

But scratch that cold, conservative, pedestrian surface, and you’ll find a Microsoft that’s a veritable hotbed of cutting-edge innovation. Indeed, the company doesn't just loosen its purse strings when it comes to research and development. No, it practically throws money at really big thinkers to build a more wondrous, fantastical future. In 2011 alone, Microsoft's R&D budget reached a record high of $9.6 billion (yes, with a "B"). That’s a lot of Benjamins, and they’re being spent on some decidedly awesome projects.

aviator1894122d ago

I really dig the tech and ideas the r&d department comes up with, but I just wish that they would do a better job of putting more of them to use in the real world.

vishant1014122d ago

Yea like it takes a very long time for the technology to become affordable and mainstream.

MikeMyers4121d ago (Edited 4121d ago )

Not only that but as the original poster alluded to, having those ideas brought forth in an interesting way. When people saw the Milo demo with Kinect they immediately thought of the possibilities. Only to have years later basically dance games taking advantage of the camera while most others had to be on rails. Then on top of that the guy who brought us the demo left Microsoft.

Technology is great and all but only if it's applied in interesting ways. There are lots of rumors about the next Xbox but I want real games that take advantage of the new hardware and possibly new gameplay elemnets, not demonstrations of what it can do.

chukamachine4121d ago

Tech is held back, so companies can bring it out at a slow rate and make $$$.

KidBroSweets24121d ago

I don't care who you are, that demonstration video was awesome. Just not sure anybody would wear that device on their back in public

CommonSense4121d ago (Edited 4121d ago )

Right..........

So when Sony comes up with a ground breaking concept for televisions that is similar to a ground breaking concept from Samsung, one company goes to the other and says, "hey, do you think you can sit on this for a few years so we can make money on our current TVs?"

I don't think so. Technology is held back by cost. 4k resolution, for example, has been around for a while, it just hasn't come out in the mainstream because the cost of production is so high that there's no profitability in mass-production yet.

Do you honestly think that a company is going to hold back its tech when there's a chance the competitors will outshine them? not a chance. Like Apple is sitting on some amazing cell phone that would destroy the competition and make them a bazillion dollars, but they'd rather give up a large % of the market to competitors so they can hold it back for several years. Lets use some common sense here, people. The only entity that deliberately holds back technology is government.

I hear Ford has a hover car that gets 500 mpg and can be produced for the cost of a Toyota Camry, but they don't want to release it cuz they're still milking the Focus.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4121d ago
BanBrother4122d ago

"...but I just wish that they would do a better job of putting more of them to use in the real world..."

Like sharks with laser-beams attached to their heads?

UnholyLight4121d ago

***Fricken Sharks with Fricken laser beams attached to their fricken heads***

Knight_Crawler4122d ago (Edited 4122d ago )

The truth is that sometimes the USA government is at fault for this.

Did you know that NASA has created a tire that will never get a flat and would last you almost a life time.

Did you know that the government was using color TV's in the 60's and flat PLASMA TV's in the 80's

Someone has a created a machine that will give you electrical power for free but the government has ceased it.

The cure for cancer and other life treating illness were discovered years ago.

The government has to control technology for the economy and sometimes for national security - they control when we get certain tech.

Can you imagine how many tire companies would go out of business if we only needed to buy a tire once and how many jobs would be lost.

Can you imagine if we all had a machine that would give free clean energy - oil would be useless.

Do you know how much money the health industry would lose if they had no more cancer patients or research money.

Moentjers4122d ago

Who killed the electric car ?

TekoIie4122d ago (Edited 4122d ago )

I wouldnt say governments killed off all those. For example! Your everyday Joe creates a tire which doesnt wear out over time. Tire companies all pitch together to buy him out and stop what hes doing.

Why do they do this? Because they lose money BIG time if they dont :/

Same goes for cars which wont run on gas. Cars were invented ages ago which use a different source of fuel and their inventors were bought out by oil companies.

I dont know whether to take you seriously on the cancer part though. In all seriousness a company OR GOVERNMENT going to doctors and saying "Hey guys. You see that cancer thing? Yeh we need it to stay around for the long run so do you mind trashing the cure?" Im sorry but when something like that is publicized you cant hide it after that.

Not to mention what would happen were people to find out you payed someone to prevent saving peoples lives. You would effectively be compared to Hitler for the rest of you life...

FunAndGun4122d ago

Just like the Government protected the textile and petroleum industry from hemp and its uses for fabric, fuel, paper and plastics. The REAL reason marijuana became illegal.

Hemp For War!

profgerbik4121d ago (Edited 4121d ago )

No idea why people disagree with this, my dad worked in the Air Force most of his life. He told me the technology they were keeping from the public and this was what 15 years ago, he said it could change the world for the better as we know it.

That is why he became so depressed, lost his mind practically and eventually ended up leaving the Air Force. He felt it was absolutely disturbing they were keeping these technologies from people.

People also don't understand that free energy has existed for probably almost 50 years. Yes free energy, meaning we would never have to pay for electricity, pay for gas or pay for anything really. No need for dangerous nuclear power plants, no need to rob the earth of every resource it has.. All of that..

What is moronic and sadistic is money is technically meaningless, we create it, it's only paper yet we hold such meaning to it for nothing other than greed and a guaranteed position with power.

As always though people are too stupid to care. They go about their lives never questioning why we still using the same things we always have been without any real improvements to society, only improvements to these companies revenues.

Don't believe me? You can get on youtube and there are people who will teach you how to create your own "Free Energy" Generator that can literally power your entire house forever for free other than the cost it took to build it. You'll be amazed at how simple and easy it is.

I hate the world, what I hate most is that people choose to live this way when they know damn well we don't have to.

Same goes for medicine, most people don't know even if someone did find a cure for cancer, AIDS or diseases in general. It has to be processed through the FDA, it can take literally two years for them just to examine it just to most likely refuse it's existence because they see it making no profit.

Why cure diseases when you can simply keep making money off them? Why use free energy when we can charge people for it? We live in a sick society... It isn't some conspiracy, this is the world we have created for ourselves. I would like to think in my lifetime this would change but I know when I die people will probably be dumber than they are now is the sad reality.

It's gotten even worse.. Companies are allowed to lie to sell products, they are allowed to make up imaginary fee's just to cash in on yet no one seems to care enough.

I do and clearly you do but obviously there aren't enough in the world that do is the problem.

Qrphe4121d ago

@Pekolie

Yes, companies ultimately make these decisions but they're the ones lobbying government to get these ideas working. And the governnment usually goes eith them, do you know why? Because most of the individuals we picked for office get A LOT of donation money from many companies.gy

rpd1234121d ago (Edited 4121d ago )

I guarantee you that if the government had a way to give free clean energy that they wouldn't suppress it. It would end our dependence on foreign oil, create jobs because everything would need to be adapted, and they could have a monopoly over the rest of the world.

The tire that will never go flat is designed for use in space...it's NASA. It's not made for here. It was also developed by Goodyear, so it wouldn't even be the government holding it back, it'd be corporations.

If the cure for cancer was found years ago, I don't think the government would suppress it. They could make a lot of money off of it. It's not as if it would prevent cancer from ever developing in people, it'd still need to be treated. The health industry would also become less expensive because there would be less demand being placed on it, thereby making medical care more affordable for people in the country.

You make it sound as if the government had modern day plasma screens in the 80s. They looked like this

DasTier4121d ago

I hate the world too, full of too many liberals and faggots

Armyntt4121d ago

Im not saying what you say is false but ive heard these lines a million times before. Such as, there was cures for all diseases but its more profitable to sell fixes for the symptoms than a cure for the disease. Its borderline tinfoil hat conspiracy stuff. Wheres the proof these things were created? A reliable link or something. A RELIABLE LINK!

akaakaaka4121d ago

Glad that some of you arr interested on been aware of the truth ..

Check todoslibres dot com for a lot of amazing information and be aware.
also sear for everything is relative on facebook and like the page

ItsTrue4121d ago

To rpd123:

You do realise that Nikola Tesla developed a machine that generated wireless electricity but all the information and technology was suppressed.

Same with electric cars, they're not around because of the oil companies, they've got all the power. They will lose all their money if electric cars take over and so they have to suppress them by buying them out.

You have to realise that not everyone wants to better society. Some just want power and money.

DragonKnight4121d ago

Some of you don't seem to understand.

Why would the government hide a cure for cancer? Simply because the prolonged cost of treating the symptoms of cancer trumps any cost of an outright cure. People paying a one time fee for the cure is not the same as people paying a continuous fee just to feel alright. Then there's the population control agendas. If you don't think each government has plans for population control, you're naive.

Free energy would create temporary jobs, once everything is adapted, all those jobs would be gone and no revenue from energy will be coming in. Charging for energy is a continuous revenue stream.

Everything the government does is about continuous revenue stream and maintaining power. Cellular phones existed before land lines. Nikola Tesla had inventions that would have changed the world, but he was suppressed by Edison and the U.S. government because of his free energy, and wireless energy transfer plans.

There is all kinds of "right in front of you" evidence that proves all this stuff and as we all know, the best way to hide is in plain sight.

rainslacker4121d ago

Unless they found a way to cure all types of cancer it seems silly for them to suppress it. There are 100's of types of cancer, and I don't mean just attacking different parts of the body, but different ways in which they attack the body.

Research of this nature is usually academic. It isn't "pitched" to the pharmaceutical companies for production. It is published in papers, at which time pharmaceutical companies may take an interest in developing it. Any company that came up with a cure for cancer would be rich beyond belief. While they may have to put up with the FDA in the US, the rest of the world may not be so stringent. You think that it would go unnoticed if it were in another country?

The electric car is already in production. It's just expensive because of what it takes to run one. Whether that energy comes from fuel or the electric company, it doesn't change the fact that energy isn't just created out of nowhere.

Instead of telling us to go search youtube how about posting a link so we know what your talking about. I'm sure whatever they propose has drawbacks, and honestly, most people don't have the technical knowledge to wire up anything that generates current to their home. Doing so is dangerous and possibly fatal. If this existed, someone would market it, electric company be damned. There are plenty of people who wouldn't care about the money from a buy-out. If what you say is true however, that it is relatively free and easy, then it would have had a lot more momentum than some guy claiming it's so on the internet.

Many companies have always lied when selling products. That has nothing to do with the government, just peoples blind acceptance of what they are told.

rpd1234121d ago

@itstrue

Yeah I do know that. It's also not safe to use around humans, so there's that.

LackTrue4K4121d ago

i hear what you say, the same thing happen with the car that ran with tap water. there where 2 people that invented it. One was a Mexican, and the other i dont know, point is.
there ideas where held back, and no....they where not bot out. they ended up missing im not saying the government had something to do with it, but big oil company's have enough money to may any one diaper.

rainslacker4120d ago

A few of you would do well for yourselves by looking up a term referred to as "Occam's Razor"

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 4120d ago
shutUpAndTakeMyMoney4121d ago (Edited 4121d ago )

Also makes me wonder what Valve is up to..

" I’ve signed an NDA so I can’t reveal much more. I’ll just say that I really saw the future. (it’s not a small deal to see a virtual but highly realistic alien stand beside a real human in the same room with you, walk around the room and wink at you. And all that without a screen, a projector or even a computer near you"
http://www.kotaku.com.au/20...

O_o

TBONEJF4121d ago

All they doing is suing some other manufactures in the mobile industry with their millions. Haven't seen anything new except their SURFACE tablet

aviator1894121d ago

I'm not going to openly bash you with a list of all of the tech ms's r&d comes out with, but you really should look into it more if all you think that ms does is sue and has the surface.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4120d ago
abzdine4122d ago

as unprecise as kinect! they dont look stupid with a camera on their shoulder

Sp1d3ynut4122d ago

Um..."unprecise" isn't a word.

Sp1d3ynut4122d ago

Yeah...I get the idea that you're immature and/or uneducated.

RandomDude6554122d ago

I don't understand. If MS spends all this money on R&D, why do they usually move last into an already crowded market? Why don't they move first? Apple for example spends 1 to 4 billion in R&D and revolutionized two markets ( http://techcrunch.com/2012/... Also why is this on n4g and not the tech website n4g has?

vishant1014122d ago

microsoft are usually first to do things except they don't do it practical and affordable. i.e they had tablets in 2000 but they were expensive and the os was not engineered for tablets. apple is just good at taking other peoples tech and making it mainstream. i assume that this is on N4G because a lot of the tech will eventually find its way into gaming.

nukeitall4122d ago

@cchum:

Because repackaging other peoples technology in a super spiffy design doesn't cost Apple as much. Almost nothing of what Apple does is tecnical demanding. It's more of a fresh coat of paint on existing technology and unfortunately people love that.

What is innovative about Apple is their marketing and how they can get seemingly simple products to be desireable. I have never seen a device more desireable in almost all parts of the world than the iPhone. It is now the Mercedes/BMW of the phone world.

MS on the other was in the smart phone and tablet business way before Apple, but they are a typical tech company that doesn't know how to design sexy products. I can count on one hand the number of products I thought was sexy, but they are changing their ways.

4122d ago Replies(3)
Neko_Mega4122d ago

Give me a computer that works like the one in the Iron Man movies and I'll be happy.

Elwenil4122d ago

I'd be happy with an operating system that was worth a damn.

Show all comments (52)
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 ☝️

Zeref4d 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.

DarXyde4d 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.

PhillyDonJawn4d ago (Edited 4d 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.

Einhander19724d 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?

Zeref4d 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.

MrNinosan4d 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
Zeref4d 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.

DarXyde4d 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.

Einhander19724d 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.

Einhander19724d 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.

BehindTheRows4d ago (Edited 4d 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.

Tacoboto4d 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?

crazyCoconuts4d 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.

crazyCoconuts3d 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)
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...)

fr0sty16d ago (Edited 16d 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.

FinalFantasyFanatic16d 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)
80°

Microsoft Rewards app on Xbox and weekly streaks to be killed off soon

Microsoft has announced the Microsoft Rewards app on Xbox will be discontinued in April and has confirmed that weekly streaks will also be coming to an end.

Read Full Story >>
trueachievements.com