200°

Xbox LIVE Is A Smoldering Pile Of Thievery

I think it's time that we all sat down and had a little talk about Xbox LIVE.

Until recently, I’d been an avid defender of Xbox LIVE, but the industry has changed so drastically within the last twelve months that I've been forced to admit that LIVE has become a smoldering rip-off.

Read Full Story >>
dispatches.cheatcc.com
Snookies124090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

Well, I would have been okay with them continuing to charge for Live Gold. Even after Plus came into being which had (in my opinion of course) so much more value than Gold did. It was when Microsoft jacked up the price 10 extra dollars that really got me. If anything they needed to lower it, yet they decided they were just going to charge more all of a sudden? That's a really lame move by them... (In my opinion once again.)

At least give everyone the ability to play online games without Gold now... C'mon, holding that feature hostage for money is just... Not cool... Sony manages to do this, and they're having financial issues. They could have stopped at any point and said, "we're going to charge for this now." Yet they didn't. Their conviction was held strong, and it really shows. To me as a customer, I'm happy to stick with them because they stuck it out and didn't gouge their consumers when it honestly (from a business stand-point) would have been good for them to do.

Snookies124090d ago

Disagrees please respond, I'd like to know why you disagree with me. Honestly, I just want to know, not calling you out for it or anything. :]

Gazondaily4090d ago

Comparatively, as a service, I think Xbox Live is unmatched. Purely in terms of value for money however, I do agree that PSN outshines it, especially with how good some of Plus 'offerings are.

I really don't see how Microsoft will be able to justify the annual fee for Xbox Live next gen unless it drastically changes what it offers.

The thing is, for many of us, PSN is just a pain to use when gaming together with mates. Xbox Live is the sum of its parts; voice messages, cross game chat, the intuitiveness of the dashboard and features- going to PSN after using Xbox Live just seems so slow and cumbersome.

However, I expect Sony to get its act together when it comes to how PSN and XMB are designed from the ground up next gen. Couple that with Plus and Microsoft really are in the defensive when it comes to its online infrastructure.

Credt does go to MS though. They were the only ones that really pushed the online element of console gaming since the original Xbox whereas Sony were happy to just sit back and not really be proactive at all. PSN is strong now only because MS forced Sony's hand. Now its MS' turn but really, the service is still superior. Its just the value of its service that needs to be sorted out and that isn't a major thing to sort out.

LOGICWINS4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

I agreed with u btw. Microsoft charges $60 for Live because people are willing to pay. No more no less. In their position, I'd do the same. If people want to give me money, I'd never deny them the opportunity :)

However, this paying to play online thing won't last. Its looking like the PS4 will be announced before the 720, so Sony will set the tone for the next generation. Microsofts gunna have a tough time justifying that yearly Live fee when consumers get wind that you can game online for free on the PS4.

"PSN is strong now only because MS forced Sony's hand."

Right. If it wasn't for XBL, Sony would have never taken the online space seriously. I hope Microsoft provides that same competition this generation.

MasterCornholio4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

@LogicWins

"when consumers get wind that you can game online for free on the PS4."

Consumers already know this with the PS3. But what will change is the fact that the PS4 will have much better social features than the PS3 which is the main advantage that the 360 has over its competitor. In the end when the PS4 offers all the same services for free as the 720 at the same or superior quality level how will 720 owners justify paying for online multiplayer, social features and cross game chat when the PS4 offers all that at no extra cost to the consumer?

If anyone is going to change their online policy its going to be Microsoft unless they know that future 720 owners are still willing to pay for free services.

@aiBreeze

"The features you pay for for gold is nothing short of robbery seeing how you can get a lot of the stuff free off your phone and PC."

Netlflix is one of the best examples of this. Seriously if its free on the PS3 why isnt it free on the 360?

Because the parasite said NO (Bioshock 2).

LOGICWINS4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

^^Ud be surprised. I had a college friend of mine who only gamed on the 360 and when I told him about PSN, he was confused. He had no idea that the PS3 had an online suite like XBL. He said that it probably sucks because he's never heard of it.

Theres a lot of misinformation out there. A lot of people, PS3 owners included, don't understand the value that services like PS Plus offer. Barely 10% of the people on my friendslist have are PS Plus members.

Intentions4090d ago

I didn't disagree, but just for the sake of explaining [my opinion].

For me, the reason why I prefer XBL to PSN, not saying that PSN is bad, it just my personal preferences. I have more friends/cousins on XBL compare to PSN, therefore XBL would be more fun for me.

The way to communicate is a lot better, seeing as it's cross game chat and I find that it is overall easier than PSN, in terms of messaging/voice/chat etc.

Also by the fact that I only pay $12 - $30 a year for XBL. It is really low for me, seeing I hardly/occasionally buy games, I usually borrow games off friends/cousins.

Of course it would be nice for XBL to be free [multiplayer], and just have a premium service for stuff like TV etc.

For me it's a high chance that MS would pay XBL free for next gen, seeing as MS is the only one that charges for online play.
If not, then there is nothing wrong for trying to make a profit. Every business is trying to make profits anyway, in some way/form.
If they don't then yeah, they will have a tough competition. No matter what, there will be people that would suppose any service, regardless of being free or a premium service.

Overall, both online services are awesome, it is just people's own preferences and opinions. Obviously every consumer wants everything for free but in the real world nothing is free, so we all have to live with it.

theBAWSE4090d ago

I honestly don't see how ms will be able to justify next gen charging to play online....Sony have already stated cross game chat like the vita and being more social is what they are pushing on ps4

the looming next gen is going to be fascinating to watch

antok344090d ago

@logicwin

Agree totally that many people are unaware of ps plus and then you witness their shock when they realise what a deal they can get. Sony need to find away to reach the masses about this great feature.

nukeitall4090d ago

What is amazing to me is everyone seems to talk about feature parity, but that alone is not the defining factor.

If it was, Linux would have been just as suitable for the general public as Windows is. Everything doable on Windows is doable in Linux!

My point here are two things:

a) software is not just about features, but ease of use is far more important. Make it easy to schedule and join a game with your friends for instance.

b) the community. Would you like to play with people that tend to care more about single player games? Friend lists with lots of friends that are inactive?

Bottom line, we will see what MS pulls out of their hat, but the same thing was said earlier in this generation. PSN is free, has been for some time now and feature wise they are relatively close. There is still a reason why people *still* choose to buy an Xbox 360 and Xbox Live Gold despite their being another option.

There is no question, a basic Xbox 360 + Gold cost as much as a PS3 to keep it in perspective.

It's not the hardware, it's not all the features, but it is the experience that consumers are buying.

All companies would do well to keep that in mind next generation! It's not about a particular area, because the console is now grown. They all have to keep it well rounded to succeed or else SteamBox will have a chance to succeed.

4090d ago
brich2334090d ago

i hope u dont pay the full 60$ because there always online sales that range between 35 and 40$. check www.dealspl.us for all types of sales from various online retailers.

pixelsword4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

It's just the whole thing about Net Neturality:

I don't have a problem with the quality of XBL,

I have a problem with them charging for it.

The PSN isn't as polished as XBL,

but It doesn't matter because the price is right.

PS Plus doesn't do much to enhance the PSN experience,

But you get games, which is why I bought a console in the first place, not to talk to friends.

I'm not paying $60 for another phone, thank you.

nukeitall4090d ago

@pixelsword:

"But you get games, which is why I bought a console in the first place, not to talk to friends."

No, but some like to play socially and keep in touch with friends. Because you have a phone doesn't make it the ideal way to connect with multiple friends. In fact, I don't tend to give strangers that I just met online my phone number, but to each their own.

I guys on PS3, that is probably necessary. Heck, some of my friends use Skype with the PS3, because there is no party chat.

Redgehammer4090d ago

I love XBL. My family and I are family plan members (99$ for 4), and I am extremely stisfied , as is my family.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 4090d ago
vishant1014090d ago

I get the whole if we are gonna charge for online we will charge everyone for it so the online experience is not fragmented but MS seriously needs to add value to xbl i want features no ther platform offers for free with it. nothing matches xbl in terms of quality and ease of use but its not 60 bux worth of quality im ok with paying for xbl as long as it has as much value as it used to compared to the other online services.

Gamer19824090d ago

IF MS took away online play with gold and gave it free NOBODY would pay for GOLD. That's a fact. So MS will NOT remove it. The fact is this whole thing could come back to bite MS in the proverbial backside once new consoles are launched as Sony reps have confirmed next console is gonna have PS+ already. Why would anybody choose the new Xbox if MS say they are still gonna charge for live?

The 360 got in early and you made that investment and it was too late to change but this time its reset you get that chance..

HeroReborn4090d ago

I see yours and the writers POV. With the way the game market has shift, it's really hard for MS to justify the cost of live. Espically when about 75% of the perks of it as a gamer I don't even use. I think they are trying to compile us "being gamers" to much with the casual market.

Even if that were true its still not warrented to charge for access to stuff like Hulu+ Netflix and other online items we they are freely available on other platforms.

I love Xbox live I really do, playing with my friends hanging in the part chat shooting the shit is to me no different than hanging in the arcade, but MS needs to understand that more has to be done besides giving us 1-2% off of our purchases, and access to services most of us don't even want.

ZombieKiller4090d ago

Why the constant chats about how much Xbox Live Rips people off? Just don't buy it. My XBL just expired actually and guess what? I thought the same thing....and then did NOT renew. Especially because I have a PS3 and the PS+ which smokes XBL.

-Buy PS+ and stop complaining about XBL and the pricing. Honestly, if we got enough people to do this the price point would go away OR the value would increase when they started giving out free games.

DigitalRaptor4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

The constant chats happen and should continue to happen because not everyone is like you and has the strength to say no. You got out, but people just pay because they want to play with their friends.

There are millions and millions of people out there who don't realise XBL Gold for the rip-off it actually is, and will pay for what I already said. Eyes need to be opened, and by ignoring a relevant and important conversation piece, you're doing gamers and the industry itself no favours.

Bigpappy4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

I agree with you "Zombiekiller", not because of the "PS+ which smokes XBL." comment, as that is subjective, and I have no idea why you have that stance. But everything else you said about going with the other service because you have that choice and it will force M$ to follow is spot make complete sense and can not be argued.

The thing though, is that before praising PS+ as the XBL killer, you would have to know why all these people are playing for Xbox live over PSN. You can not assume that be cause you prefer PSN, all XBLA users will have that same opinion. The only way for them to even consider PS+, is for them to experience it and come to that conclusion for themselves. That would mean that they would either have to be sick of paying $40-60 a year or just want to change from or add to 360 gaming selection.
In my case, I stop gaming on consoles after Turbo Grafix and came back when the Xbox was released. That experience has been so great that I have had no reason to move away from Xbox so far. 2 of my nephews who grew up with PS1 and had the 360 for a few years, have bought PS3 because of RRD and no longer use 360. But they also have no interest in paying for PS+ as they don't see how it would make their online experience any better. I and most of my friends on the other hand, have stayed with 360 because it is how he game. we just log on and play, no hassle. I love everything about the Xbox, from the controller to the support, XBL, the interface, Kinect, and the fact that M$ has the resources to keep pushing forward. I trust M$ to keep pushing and leading and keeping things interesting.

After all this chatter, M$ will charge next-gen, and will continue to grow. M$ will no doubt add features to XBL. They always do.

rainslacker4089d ago (Edited 4089d ago )

@Bigpappy

XBL Gold and PS+ are services which charge for entirely different things. Comparing them is not neccesary because they are not meant to be competitors to each other.

PS+ is a value-added service which provides "free" games and good discounts on software, along with a few other perks worth having. PS+ didn't come around to compete with Gold, it came around to offer a subscription based revenue stream that MS was enjoying with Gold.

Gold is a service that is required to get the most out of the games you have already purchased, or required to get the most out of the hardware that you already paid for (ie streaming services).

A better comparison would be between Gold and the free regular out-of-the-box PSN, as it is PSN where most of the features exist that are comparable to Gold.

ZombieKiller4088d ago

I did not say the PSN smokes XBL, just the PS+ due to the free games. What sort of service is it that is better than PSN when you have to pay 2 fees? I already pay for internet, why pay M$ "just because"? XBL has a bit more stable of a connection....but honestly, thats only some games. Games that are PAID to be better on 360. People act like it's that much better of a connection or service but realisticlly, in the internet world you are supposed to pay to get rid of ads, M$ makes you pay the fee, then they advertise to you on the blade...on EVERY blade. HOW IS THAT BETTER THAN FREE GAMES? PS+ smokes XBL. I don't want to see Kanye West's stuck up face on my gaming console....but it's there....yet Sony gives us free gmes every Tuesday. They might not be the games of our choice, but the choice is there to pay the $50...is it not? Call me a fanboy, I don't care. Give me the dissagrees, PLEASE. Remove the bubbles, I don't care. I got my OPINION across and I'll "say" it proudly once more, PS+ SMOKES XBL

ZombieKiller4088d ago

and @ Digital Raptor......yeah because sitting here on n4g discussing it is SO important to Microsofts desicion making. I tell ya, you're really changing things now discussing this like you are. Keep buying into fake things like digital costumes for your avatar and let your money do the talking. I'm sure M$ will listen to your cries. Next XBL will be free...sure.
The generation is about to take another turn, I'm not sticking with the cheaper system per say, I'm going with the one that doesn't charge me for needless shit. Have fun with your digital Dragonfire, I'll go play some PS+ games.
XBL is sooo much better isn't it lol..../s

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4088d ago
+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4088d ago
dazzrazz4090d ago ShowReplies(4)
InMyOpinion4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

I agree that online gaming should be free as it is on PSN.

I love how they constantly add great games to Xbox Live Arcade (one of the best things about Live) but they need to start offering free online play for silver members.

Wouldn't mind some kind of PS+ features for Gold subscribers either.

pompombrum4090d ago

Looking at what Microsoft charges for, I'm really starting to rethink whether or not I want to buy their next gen console. The features you pay for for gold is nothing short of robbery seeing how you can get a lot of the stuff free off your phone and PC.

With Halo taking a change in direction and Gears of War judgement pretty much giving Gears fans the middle finger, Microsoft better have more than a few tricks up it's sleeve if it wants me to buy their next gen console.

Gamer19824090d ago

XBL should give you 1st party exclusives like Halo armor and weapon skins or something. Ms could easily do this to sell it rather than online gaming. they don't have to give away games just DLC for there first party games and make it worth the price. I'm sure free Halo/forza etc.. DLC for the life of your subscription would sell XBL.

Obviously not everybody plays the exclusives and sticks to FIFA/Madden etc.. so they would have to make some 3rd party deals too.

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

I rather buy a next gen console and a game instead of paying $60 for multiplayer and $60 for a game. $120 extra day 1? no thanks.

AngelicIceDiamond4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

Lol the internet hates XBL. I also bet the internet wants do something about it. But you can't its only getting popular. All the trolling and immaturity in the world won't stop the elevation of XBL lol.

Its the net you people can't do nothing about it NOTHING at all others will continue to enjoy it.

Yeah, this is the second piece in a row. Its f**kin old people.

BanBrother4090d ago

I think these articles are good. It can only help the cause in making XBL free, so you should be happy. I don't mind paying for a month here and there to play with friends, as no-one can honestly deny xbl does social better, but come next-gen, when Sony offers all of the 'features xbl does PLUS PS+, how can you justify paying for xbl?

I for one am cash-scrapped atm, with about $15k debt, so I can get but few games day 1. Why would I pay for live *next-gen* when Sony's service will be identical, with the addition of PS+ if I need it (who can say no to ps+)??

I am not going to argue why people pay for xbl *this gen*, as they can't simply abandon their friends and library of games, but next-gen it is a no-brainer for me. I will not be paying for Live next-gen, although I'm still interested in some of the exclusives they have now and then. MS need to adapt or perish. They need to take a look at what everyone else is offering, or else people will surely abandon them.

DigitalRaptor4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

Holy crap dude, give up the defense. This is not and never has been about the service itself which is excellent. The internet doesn't hate XBL. This is not about the fanboys even though it gets brushed off as trolling or fanboyism. It's about the consumers, your rights and what a company is doing that should be illegal in my opinion. The internet hates that Microsoft forces its consumers to pay for basic P2P connectivity and features that are free elsewhere and should be industry wise (Netflix, Facebook etc.) I mean why don't Nintendo, Sony, Valve and any other company charge you for P2P connectivity? Why? Because it would be outrageous to even suggest it, yet Microsoft has been getting away with that for years.

It's important to acknowledge Microsoft's strategies which is to simply make as much money as they can at the detriment of the consumer. It's simply outrageous to force people to pay what is free elsewhere (and rightly so) - basic P2P and free services. It's nothing short of rip-off and only the most dedicated loyalists and the massively ignorant are defending that.

So I'll re-iterate again for those who only focus on a small part of the picture. The internet doesn't hate XBL, because XBL is an excellent service. The internet hates the fact that Microsoft are ripping its consumers off, and robbing them blind of real choice.

Yet, people don't really notice it because of the advanced features that Microsoft and its fans promote, as they mask the real truth behind what it is you're really paying for. There's just no defense for what they do, yet you see it from those who are too heavily invested both emotionally and financially to want to accept the truth.

@ optimus

There aren't 60 million XBL Gold subscribers dude.

Show all comments (81)
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?"

purple1012d 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 ☝️

Zeref2d 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.

DarXyde2d 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.

PhillyDonJawn2d ago (Edited 2d 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.

Einhander19722d 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.

MrBaskerville2d 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.

shinoff21831d 20h 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.

Profchaos1d 19h 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 1d 19h ago
isarai2d ago

Is that why Hellblade 2 is digital only?

Zeref2d 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.

MrNinosan2d ago

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

mkis0071d 11h ago (Edited 1d 11h ago )

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

Einhander19722d 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.

2d ago Replies(3)
Einhander19722d ago

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

2d ago
2d ago
Zeref2d 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.

DarXyde2d 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.

Einhander19722d 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.

Einhander19722d 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.

BehindTheRows2d ago (Edited 2d 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.

Zeref2d ago (Edited 2d 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.

Chevalier2d 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.

Tacoboto2d 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.

shinoff21831d 20h ago

Yay steam

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

Tacoboto1d 18h 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 1d 18h ago
Hofstaderman2d 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?

crazyCoconuts2d 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.

Xeofate2d ago (Edited 2d 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.

crazyCoconuts1d 6h 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

FinalFantasyFanatic1d 14h 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
ApocalypseShadow14d ago (Edited 14d 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.

Cacabunga14d ago

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

Crows9014d ago

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

darthv7214d 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.

Cacabunga14d 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..

88314d 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 14d ago
blacktiger14d 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.

fr0sty14d ago (Edited 14d 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.

shinoff218314d 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

Babadook713d 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?”

ifinitygamer14d 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...)

fr0sty14d ago (Edited 14d 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.

ifinitygamer14d 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.

fr0sty13d 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.

13d ago
JBlaze22613d 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 13d ago
LG_Fox_Brazil14d 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

isarai14d ago

Nah, sega actually makes good games

Becuzisaid14d 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.

Profchaos14d 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

Becuzisaid14d 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.

FinalFantasyFanatic14d 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.

Profchaos14d 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