110°

Why the next Xbox won't be always online or block used games

OXM's editor Jon Hicks shoots down today's big next gen rumour. "There's a germ of truth in it, which I'll get to, but releasing a console with those two requirements would be totally counter to what Microsoft needs from the next console."

bicfitness4090d ago

A lot of these "they can't", "they simply wouldn't" wishful thinking sort of stories popping up. First Sterling's, now this. MS are a corporation, they aren't making consoles for charity, but for money. And they came from the PC space first, which has serial codes bundled with every game or games locked to service accounts. This is nothing new for them. Or for PC gamers. Someone argued to the contrary about this in another thread, but they simply don't know what they're talking about. PC games, not just online ones come bundled with serial codes, with very exceptions. You enter the serial code when you install the game.

So no, it wouldn't be outside of the realm of possibility for MS to do this. They won't care about throwing one segment of consumers under the bus in favour of constant, dependable Live subscriptions and DLC buyers. Now it remains to be seen if A.) this rumour is true. Though as we get closer to console announcements, the weight of truth > BS has been shifting and more 'rumours' are seeming credible - you just can't hide this stuff from a console set to launch in 6ish months. B.) If Sony will follow suit.

Jam_sponge4090d ago

As the article points out, the industry's efforts to lock out pre-owned PC gamers are far from a success, and a console armed with a unilateral pre-owned block would face a huge, huge disadvantage at launch.

You're right, Microsoft exists to make money. This would be a terrible way of going about that.

Belking4090d ago

"You're right, Microsoft exists to make money. "

Just like any other business.I can assure not only MS exists to make money.

bicfitness4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

Except PCs are OPEN, whereas consoles are CLOSED systems. So hacking, circumventing always-on DRM is par for the course with PC gaming. Its hardly so for consoles, at least no where on the same scale with regards to user concentration. That would actually be appealing to certain publishers, the idea of "locked in" games on a "locked" system. Can't get more DRMish than that.

MS come from a PC heritage, this is actually a natural move for them - people keep avoiding that fact. While I personally think that this is a bad move, I don't think that its one that would impact their paying consumer base all that much. People drum up all sorts of ire and negativity online, but that rarely translates into consumer apathy in the real world. The 40 million or whatever who readily hand over $60/ year just for the privilege of playing online have already been conditioned for this sort of move and will eat their lumps and carry on.

theBAWSE4090d ago

Official Xbox magazine.....they know nothing just like edge its all speculation of corse oxm are wishing praying the stories from edge ain't true

just wait for the official word from ms

decrypt4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

@Bicfiness

Dont get the PC into this, clearly its the Console gamers getting hosed again. PC games cost darn cheap, meanwhile console gamers will be paying 60usd+ per game.

PC games are on discount few weeks after launch, hell many can even be had for insane discounts pre launch, i personally purchased Tombraider for 34usd few weeks back.

Even when a PC game does come infested with always on DRM, the PC is an open platform, the game gets hacked to shreds within a few days.

Meanwhile consoles are locked down platforms, you wont be seeing games getting cracked on those platforms.

I wouldnt be surprised if Sony and MS join hands on this one. Eventually console gamers will take it up the hind just like usual.

No BC
High price games
over priced accessories
locked down old hardware
Pay to go online
Day one DLC
the list goes on

dirigiblebill4090d ago

"So hacking, circumventing always-on DRM is par for the course with PC gaming."

But this isn't about hacking - it's about damaging your profile via needlessly draconian preventative measures and deterring potential customers. Attempts to control how players make use of their purchases via online have, provably, hit the likes of Ubisoft square in the publicity glands. Do you really think Microsoft is going to risk that kind of fallout - which would absolutely extend to the enthusiasts who account for a high proportion of launch purchases - when they're trying to sell a new console? Do you really think they want the stigma of being the only anti-pre-owned next gen outfit in town?

Microsoft's big gameplan is to turn everybody into online customers, true - that way they don't have to deal with the retailers - but doing it this way means crippling the next Xbox straight out the door.

SilentNegotiator4090d ago

Neither MS or Sony will go always online or block used. They would have to have rocks for brains. Areas with bad internet are still a big chunk of console sales. Wii U already allows used games, so PS4/720 coming out and saying "Hey! We won't let you do what the currently released systems do!" would be a major disadvantage.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4090d ago
Outside_ofthe_Box4090d ago (Edited 4090d ago )

It won't happen and isn't wishful thinking to think so. MS would NOT sell as many hardware AND software as they did this gen if they were to along with the absurd idea of requiring the 720 to be online in order to function and block used games on top of that. MS has sold 70+ million consoles this gen and the numbers will continue to grow. So why drastically change things?

I don't see how implementing the idiotic crap in rumors into the 720 will guarantee them more revenue. If they truly want money they wouldn't do that B.S.

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney4090d ago

"Ascend: New Gods Beta Coming, Requires Online Connection"
http://www.ign.com/articles...

InMyOpinion4090d ago

Most online betas require an online connection lol.

Try playing the Crysis 3 beta online. Or Dust 541. Don't get what point you are trying to make.

user39158004090d ago

Its rumour and I will treated as such, but if they did, then executive are looking at it with the prospect of earn income. Problem is 360 has 40 million online while the other35 million is not, thats a huge amount to loose and make or not, what keeps you alive are gamers. I only see the model working if MS gives it out nearly free in some kind of sunscription were gamers pay an amount for lets say 2 year connection. 99 dollars to start services and a monthly fee. They will have so much sales even if they block used game, but allow dowloads to be register. Im thinking, if MS could strike a deal with comcast/time warner/ and all major internet providers to suply the box with their cable, they will have a seious break through. Cable plan 2 years and charges maintenance fee, while ms charge subscrition, lol... Rachet I tell you. Anyways, it will be a missed if they do block used games, cause you will have a backlashed of contempt gamers in the millions.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4090d ago
Jazz41084090d ago

Finally a article that makes sense. All edge is doing is trying to get ms to talk and make a reveal and there hurting the industry doing this. I hope this comes back and bites them in the butt. Isnt edge owned by best buy?

Knight_Crawler4090d ago

This why I belive that N4G is one of the most bias gaming sites in the world.

Hip Hop Gamer got banned becasue people reported him for having over the top headlines and over the top rumors on his articles but edge gets a free pass for doing the same thing -__-

NastyLeftHook04090d ago

LMAO! this shit is hilarious!

why "this"

why this will,

why this wont

lmao!

come on people wait for feb 20th.

Jek_Porkins4090d ago

Anyone who believes Microsoft will block used games and always require you to be online is foolish. Yes they are a corporation and want to make money, but XBL more than makes up any money they lose on used games.

Microsoft would alienate themselves from roughly half their market share if they did these things. Around 80 million Xbox 360's are out there, only a little over 40 million are Xbox Live members. That isn't losing a little money, that is losing half your money! Think and use your head before believing every single little rumor.

Microsoft wouldn't risk being the only console this generation to cut out used games, we know Nintendo allowed used games with the Wii U. Microsoft and Sony aren't going to talk and say one way or the other if they'd do that, it'd be suicide to be the only company to block used games.

Let's not panic and say "I'm not buying it!", because we haven't heard a single confirmed piece of information from Microsoft, anything right now is speculation.

rainslacker4089d ago (Edited 4089d ago )

I can see them automatically signing in people for whatever reason, much like the PS3 and 360 already do. It's a no brainer that if your going to do online stuff it would require an online connection. That however has nothing to do with locking out games, just like it doesn't now.

Forcing game lockout because someone isn't connected is just bad business. SimCity itself is losing a sale from me because of this, and there was quite a commotion over Diablo because of it. In the end they served no purpose but to alienate customers, and cause some problems for the honest consumers. The flimsy argument of piracy, or in this case 2nd hand games also, just didn't hold up, and it's something even Ubisoft re-evaluated because it just wasn't working and was causing more problems than it was worth.

Anti used game tech doesn't require an online connection, based on Sony's recent patent at least. But that doesn't mean that they will do it either. That tech could be used for a variety of purposes both in gaming and out.

I know we've seen remarks from publishers who want to push this issue, and I even understand why they want to push it. But that doesn't mean that what they want is what is good for the industry or the console manufacturers. That is the difference between publishers and console manufacturers. The publisher wants to maximize revenue by cutting out consumer choice, whereas the console manufacturers have to look at what people are willing to accept and what they can sell. Console makers have to be very tuned in to market trends and consumer spending habits because they have a lot more at stake than just video games publishing.

Soldierone4090d ago

I'm not so much scared of it being there, but the possibility of it being there. If they say it "can" do it, but launch without doing it, then whats stopping them from getting an install base and then going "oh btw, discs are locked now and you need to be online at least once an hour of gametime"

Now you are stuck with a console, and probably can't sell it since no one wants that DRM crap. I wanted DC Universe badly until they pulled the "code locked to account" stuff, then I passed on it.

rainslacker4089d ago (Edited 4089d ago )

They could possibly be sued for that. Introducing it later in the consoles life would cut off lifetime sales in a big way. Those that already have it, namely the hardcore, would not tolerated it. Even Steam is getting heat for that very thing, and it started with these premises in place for the most part. The casuals may not even realize that's the case, but it wouldn't take long for something so anti-consumer to make it's way to the mainstream media. MS isn't well loved by Americans, and their past anti-consumer practices have always made the mainstream press.

The only way I can see this happening is if the console makers leave it up to the publisher to decide, much like region locking on the PS3 is. If that's the case, at least we as consumers can avoid those games that decide to favor profits over consumers. The hate for the idea is strong on all sides of the fence, and I can't see this being something big publishers wouldn't try more than once or twice. The immediate and long term backlash would be a PR disaster.

I think if they do decide to do it, console makers should require big lettering or logo's somewhere on the box to indicate it is the case with that product. If publishers are so sure it will be accepted there is no reason for them to hide it in the small print on the back of the box like they do with online passes. Own your choices I say.

Show all comments (37)
280°

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

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

purple1015d ago

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

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

Nice one ☝️

Zeref5d ago

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

DarXyde5d ago

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

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

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

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

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

PhillyDonJawn5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

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

Einhander19725d ago

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

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

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

MrBaskerville5d ago

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

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

shinoff21834d ago

Zeref

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

Profchaos4d ago

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

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

Is that why Hellblade 2 is digital only?

Zeref5d ago

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

MrNinosan5d ago

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

mkis0074d ago (Edited 4d ago )

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

Einhander19725d ago

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

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

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

5d ago Replies(3)
Einhander19725d ago

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

5d ago
5d ago
Zeref5d ago

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

DarXyde5d ago

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

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

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

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

Einhander19725d ago

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

Einhander19725d ago

Anyone remember games for windows live.

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

BehindTheRows5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

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

Zeref5d ago (Edited 5d 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.

Chevalier5d ago

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

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

Tacoboto5d ago

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

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

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

shinoff21834d ago

Yay steam

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

Tacoboto4d ago

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

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

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

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

crazyCoconuts5d ago

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

Xeofate4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

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

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

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

crazyCoconuts4d ago

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

FinalFantasyFanatic4d ago

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

Show all comments (43)
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.

darthv7217d ago

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

Cacabunga16d ago

Darth

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

88316d ago

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

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

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

fr0sty17d ago (Edited 17d ago )

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

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

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

shinoff218317d ago

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

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

Babadook716d ago

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

ifinitygamer17d ago

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

fr0sty17d ago (Edited 17d ago )

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

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

ifinitygamer16d ago

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

fr0sty16d ago

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

16d ago
JBlaze22616d ago

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

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

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

isarai17d ago

Nah, sega actually makes good games

Becuzisaid17d ago

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

Profchaos17d ago

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

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

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

Becuzisaid17d ago

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

FinalFantasyFanatic17d ago

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

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

Profchaos17d ago

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

Show all comments (72)
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