340°

Microsoft investing $700 million to support cloud

It looks like Microsoft is investing $700 million for a new data center in Des Moines, Iowa, United States. This facility will help meet the growing demand for cloud computing services and Xbox Live.

Read Full Story >>
blogs.desmoinesregister.com
Hatsune-Miku3949d ago

Microsoft said windows vista was amazing

nukeitall3949d ago

@Hatsune-Miku:

"Microsoft said windows vista was amazing"

... and it was! The idiotic sheeps needed a name change to Windows 7 to see the beauty.

:D

humbleopinion3949d ago

Windows 7 is practically a Vista with more relaxed UAC and a cool WinKey+P to switch between multiple screen combinations :)

3-4-53949d ago

Vista was so amazing they immediately abandoned it for Windows 7

CoLD FiRE3949d ago

@3-4-5 Vista was releases in 2006 and Windows 7 was released in 2009. That's a 3 year difference which doesn't seem like "they immediately abandoned it". Vista sucked at first, thanks to hardware manufacturers not releasing good drivers and OEMs shipping laptops with 512MB Ram and also MS for making a heavy OS.

Windows Vista was the foundation at which W7 built upon so if it wasn't for Windows Vista you wouldn't have your precious Windows 7.

CoolBeansRus3949d ago

Hopefully cloud does improve the gaming performance by a lot. If it does then this would be great for improving the size of game maps and multiplayer.

Wigriff3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

Anything accomplished by the cloud in real time will be bottle-necked by the end-user's bandwidth. People acting like the cloud is going to make the XBone exponentially more powerful are disillusioned.

GameSpawn3949d ago

@Cold fire

You do realize the primary reason for Vista's failure is because Microsoft forced the product out the door too early. Microsoft low-balled the true required specs to vendors and they started shipping the OS on systems that weren't truly up to the task of running Vista and should have shipped with XP.

Why did Microsoft low-ball the true specs? Because at the time they were forcing Vista out the door only $2000-3000 systems (high end laptops at the time; shift $1000 down for desktops) could run it remotely well. It's not good if you can't ship your new OS on time if it will only run on the top 10% of systems sold. Microsoft fudged the requirements of Vista so $300-600 systems (low end) would meet the new requirements and manufacturers would buy up the licenses (which they get stuck with once they have them) and start shipping them on what Microsoft has told them it will work on [supposedly].

Windows 7 is built around the same core that Vista was except that it has been optimized and streamlined to work as well (if not better) with less resources, essentially a FINALIZED version of Vista. Vista can barely run on ANY machine with 2GB of RAM, yet Windows 7 has no problems (it's a little slow, but not unbearable like Vista).

Windows 8 is just Windows 7 with Metro skinned over it. The problem with Windows 8 (currently; 8.1 allows 8 to become 7 by turning Metro off and bringing the Start Menu back) is you are FORCED to use Metro regardless of whether or not you have a touch screen to make full use of it. Metro has forced them to move so much of the OS around to accommodate the touch interface that it makes your traditional Windows 98/XP/Vista/7 desktop user want to rip their damn hair out. Microsoft wanted to "unify" the experience between Windows Phone 8, Windows 8 RT (tablets), and Windows 8 (desktops/laptops), but the point is that the touch heavy Metro interface breaks workflow too much in the desktop/laptop environment. You spend too much time going back and forth between the Desktop and Metro (a WHOLE screen changing experience).

Just imagine (if you're a Mac user) having to use launchpad in 10.7 and 10.8 as your primary menu for everything as well as the start point. Seriously, how many people even use launchpad on Mac OS X? I sure the hell don't because it takes over my ENTIRE screen (hint, hint...Metro) and it's a convoluted hunk of crap.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3949d ago
allformats3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

I wrote this elsewhere: Microsoft couldn't get away with its anti-consumer policies by feeding us lies, now they're feeding us "cloud" lies, too.

Remember folks, "cloud" is just a glorified name for "severs". Any company that wants to invest in them can. It's not something exclusive to MS... In fact, wasn't it Sony who first spoke of the cloud for next-gen consoles at the PS Meeting in February? Yes it was... But whatever..

nukeitall3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

@allformats:

"Remember folks, "cloud" is just a glorified name for "severs"."

That is a gross simplification. Since I have a server at home, does that qualify as a cloud?

Point being, it isn't just the servers, it is the software and tools to enable fast access to services.

Depending on what these services are and how automated they are is where the grey zone of cloud is.

Also, MS cloud, Azure, is on it's way to beating Amazon cloud, so it is a lot more to it than just a bunch of servers. Speed and reliability is of utmost importance when there is dependence on latency:

""Not only did Microsoft outperform the competition [google and amazon] significantly during the raw performance tests, it was the only cloud storage platform to post zero errors during 100 million reads and writes. In those categories where Microsoft was not the top performer (uptime and scalability variance), it was a close second," Nasuni notes."

http://www.zdnet.com/micros...

Remember we are talking heavyweights like amazon and google. Who else has the muscle of these guys?

One other benefit MS has is being a cloud computing provider, means all this infrastructure isn't necessarily an addition. If resources aren't used by Xbox Live, it can free them to other Azure customers so the amount of power should far exceed what is just needed for Xbox One.

kneon3949d ago

Actually there are another 5 or 6 companies between Google and Microsoft, they still have a lot of catching up to do before they can take on the top two.

Mystogan3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

A 9 billion dollar lie?

The $700 million is just one datacenter.

Azure has dozens.

So yeah a 9 billion dollar lie.

malokevi3949d ago

"In fact, wasn't it Sony who first spoke of the cloud for next-gen consoles at the PS Meeting in February? Yes it was... But whatever.. "

Jesus, your post sounds like it was written by a jealous child, brimming with angst.

You can't seriously expect that Sony will have the upper hand in every category... particularly on Microsofts home court.

Does it matter who said what first? MS clearly has the money and the infrastructure to support Xbox Live with some serious computing power. How is it that you manage to turn that into a negative?

Instead of sounding all butthurt and depressed, why not wait to see how things play out? This may or may not become one reason to seriously consider investing in an Xbox.

3-4-53949d ago

Is this where their 300,000 servers come from ?

So how many do they have not on cloud ?

3949d ago
joefrost003949d ago

Actually you are
Everything sony said at there meeting even the Gaikai
With the exception of streaming old games
Everything MShad already said two years ago
It was even in there leaked document
You all suck sony balls enough dont start giving them innovations they did not do

ShwankyShpanky3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

"That is a gross simplification. Since I have a server at home, does that qualify as a cloud?"

I'd say, yeah... kinda. Although maybe more like one of those tiny cartoon clouds that follows someone around.

For years I would email files to myself (uploading to the company email server) so I could access them anywhere. Now I'm being told by various companies that I can "access my files from anywhere, thanks to the power of the cloud!"

Edit: From Respawn
( http://n4g.com/news/1289522... )
"Let me explain this simply: when companies talk about their cloud, all they are saying is that they have a huge amount of servers ready to run whatever you need them to run. That’s all."

So while a single server could be classified as a "cloud" is debatable, the functionality is essentially the same, with a multi-server cloud really just having the added element of scalability.

rainslacker3949d ago

MS currently has 9 data centers.

North America
North-central US - Chicago, IL
South-central US - San Antonio, TX
West US - California
East US - Virginia
Asia
East Asia - Hong Kong, China
South East Asia - Singapore
Europe
North Europe - Dublin, Ireland
West Europe - Amsterdam, Netherlands

I guess this will make 10. It has CDN nodes located in 24 countries, although I guess they could up those in the future if demand increases.

Azure, and cloud computing in general, is pretty interesting actually. It does have a lot of benefits to companies and end users for practically every computer application you could dream of, it's highly scalable, and easy to develop for.

For those interested in Azure wikipedia has a good reference for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 3949d ago
dedicatedtogamers3949d ago

Microsoft keeps throwing numbers around. 500 million for Kinect advertisements. 1 billion invested in games. 400 million for NFL partnership. 700 million to support cloud.

Why not throw around screenshots, game announcements, and features?

Oh, wait. We're talking about Microsoft here...

DiRtY3949d ago

You are so 2009.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.a...

MS did a GREAT job at E3 for Games. The DRM talk ruined it, but now that this is out of the way, the games are still there and they look cool.

dedicatedtogamers3949d ago

@ DiRtY

Oh, so NOW exclusives matter all over again (even though Sony said 20 PS4 exclusives in the first year, while Microsoft said 15)?

I thought it was all about multiplats. That's what the Xbox camp has been saying since - ironic - 2009.

The goalpost aren't just moving. They've launched into the stratosphere.

Loki863949d ago

They have the multiplats as well, FFXV, KH3, MG5, pretty much all third parties are either exclusive or developing for MS as well.

DiRtY3949d ago

I don't get your point. You are the one moving goalposts.

1st comment:
"Why not throw around screenshots, game announcements, and features?"

my comment:
"Here are the games"

2nd comment:
"Alright, you never cared about exclusive games at all!"

oO

Crazy logic.

The point is that a lot of Sony fans hyped their exclusives up like they would actually be huge games (Starhawk, Twisted Metal, LBP Karting, MAG) and nobody bought those games at the end of the day. 8 of the exclusive games MS announced at E3 are actually going to sell beyond 1 million copies each.

Anyway, my point was you can't hate on MS for announcing not enough (exclusive) games for the Xbox One. They did a great job.

And excuse me for not being excited about the 20 exclusive games for the PS4 in the first year. I bet most of those will be indie games (nothing bad about it, but rarely anything special either). It is just not my cup of tea.

dedicatedtogamers3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

@ DiRtY

Excuse me for not being excited for the 15 Xbox One exclusives. I bet most of those will be Kinect minigames and late-2014 titles.

See? Two can play at that game.

My comment about the "oh, so NOW exclusives matter" was not a direct response to you, but rather a comment on the general attitude of the Xbox fanbase who has said for years "exclusives are on the decline anyway. The games I want to play are multiplat anyway" and now suddenly we're back to making comparison lists of exclusives now that...Xbox had exclusives?

Lemme guess: are we gonna bring back the Metacritic score comparisons, too? Man, it's like 2005-2008 all over again. Forgive me for being cynical, but I've seen this song-and-dance before, and it gets more annoying each time it repeats itself.

DiRtY3949d ago

"Excuse me for not being excited for the 15 Xbox One exclusives. I bet most of those will be Kinect minigames and late-2014 titles.

See? Two can play at that game."

Except that only 2 of those games are Kinect games so far... Kinect Sports 3 and Fantasia Music evolved. MS lineup is not vague at all - It is filled with big budget core games.

Skips3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

@DiRtY

You seem to be very hypocritical in one of your arguments... MAG has sold over a million, but according to you, only when Xbox exclusives sell over a million does it mean. "People bought it" LMFAO!!!!

"8 of the exclusive games MS announced at E3 are actually going to sell beyond 1 million copies each."

Awesome logic. -_-

Or are you referring to how NOBODY PLAYS it anymore??? Because I got news for you kiddo....

http://www.cinemablend.com/...

*GASP!

Twisted Metal??? LBP Karting??? Starhawk???

Sorta like how Xbox fans hyped up The Witcher 2 as being console exclusive? Oh wait .... but nobody bought it.

Or how Xbox fans hyped up Steel Battalion, saying it would be the hardcore Kinect game we've ALL been waiting for? Oh wait .... but nobody bought it.

Or how how nobody bought Forza: Horizon??? Because according to you, ONLY selling over a million means nobody cares for, or bought it right?

Or does that only count for PS exclusives?

"And excuse me for not being excited about the 20 exclusive games for the PS4 in the first year. I bet most of those will be indie games (nothing bad about it, but rarely anything special either)."

And you are wrong on this point as well... 20 of those exclusives will come from Sony's 1st party, such as Sony Santa Monica, Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch, Sony Bend... ect. etc. Studios ACTUALLY worth mentioning, that actually HAVE a decent portfolio, and not to mention TALENT.

Unlike the VAST majority of Microsoft's studios... Excuse me, but I just have a hard time getting hyped for games from no name studios, studios who've worked on nothing but shovelware and other garbage their whole careers, or other small XBLA games not worth mentioning...

malokevi3949d ago

@dedicatedtogamers

What a horribly cynical attitude you appear to have. MS showed off some fabulous games at E3. I was far more impressed with their lineup than with the PS4 lineup.

I'm not even going to pretend to understand this pissing contest. You seem so set in your ways that your not willing to recognize a good thing when you see it.

Which is fine, but there's no need to moan and complain whenever somebody speaks favorably about MS' new platform. DRM and always on have been reversed, the games have been put on display, the money is being put to work, and things seem to be falling into place.

What, pray tell, is so bad about that? For any gamer?

joefrost003949d ago

Actually they threw around way more games than sony at there conference
Lets be honest here if it wasnt for sony taking shots at MS that would have been a pretty boring conference
Cause what matters most was the games and MS beat them at that
That is a fact
Lol you said throw.around screen shots I forgot how much you sony fanboys love your non gameplay pictures
2005 movies sony showed ring a bell
But sony has a halo and there so honest where MS is the devil and they buy everything they never did anything on there own

rainslacker3949d ago

Azure is a huge service for MS. They put this out because it's for all their clients that use cloud, or want better use of it, and they had some PR stuff about how they care about Iowa and stuff. This is one of those times when you have to see MS as a whole, and not just the Xbox division. This goes for both sides of the fan boy fence, I might add.

Azure isn't entirely for Xbox. I would imagine Xbox won't even get 10% of all of Azures resources at peak times, and that's aiming high.

Azure itself is a very good cloud service apparently. From my prior research into cloud for a client it was one I looked into heavily due to it's development tools available. It is somewhat costly though for a corporate level use, which is what I needed. I imagine the cost for MS would be solely in the cost to run and maintain the servers though.

maniacmayhem3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

@Dedicated

Waitaminute...

you're asking MS for screenshots, game announcements and features...

Did you miss their whole E3 conference, where they showed Games, Game play, Game Demos, Game trailers and did you miss their conference before E3 where they talked about the X1 features?

I know you didn't miss that because you posted a blog about it 1 minute after it ended.

"(even though Sony said 20 PS4 exclusives in the first year, while Microsoft said 15)"

Shouldn't you be asking Sony for screenshots and game announcements of these mysterious 20 games since they didn't show anything new at their E3. And most of the game they did feature were multiplats.

Edit:
I also love how you totally tried to shift points and bring up mud from the far past in your third post. It's as if you were scrambling to get out of your insane MS rant when the spotlight was shined on you.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 3949d ago
THamm3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

For everyone who wants to put a negative spin on this or for everyone claiming that the MS and X1 isn't getting the recognition it deserves, and for everyone who says that all the PS4 preorders ruined the future of gaming____well the PS4 is $100 cheaper and that is the #1 reason that the PS4 is going to out do the X1. So all this cloud stuff and othe PR crap can lay down to one Benjamin Franklin, because with the specs so close to most consumers that's all that matters. So no Sony fans didn't ruin the MS evolution revolution cloud freedom gaming takeover, MS vision ruined themselves

sAVAge_bEaST3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

wow, MS .shills are thick on this article, (why wouldn't they be) 12 disagrees, at time of writing, for speaking TRUTH.
It's M$ such anti-truth attitude, -smoke and mirrors, through clouds.,
This is the attitude that is hurting them the most.

Yomommabinladin3948d ago

Ps fans cant find a argument about the xbox after Ms took off DRM so the only argument is the price "its cheaper so lets buy it, take my money" Without doing research just cause its cheaper dosent mean it beats other products in every single category, xbox One Dosent just play games unlike ps4, xbox one cost more because of ton of features and Kinect turns your HDtv into a smart tv Sure beats Samsung smart tv. If your just a gamer buy the ps4 but if you Want all in one entertainment even games pearson buy the xbox one if your wealthly why not buy both

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3948d ago
FrigidDARKNESS3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

Very nice. ...keep in mind folks Microsoft and Samsung collaborated to build the worlds fastes most efficient cloud servers.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Why o why3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

Never knew that. Samsung have a bag of money floating around. A part of the samsung group manufacture ships yeah ships with an 's'... they also acquired rolex a while back. They have deep pockets and why the spend so much on marketing even more than apple.....madness

TheLyonKing3949d ago

700 to cloud support but it won't just be for xbone, they will share the same servers as their main portfolio of software.

The Meerkat3949d ago

You seem to put that in a negative way.
I see that as a plus point, if multiple sources can effectively use the same cloud then doesn't that bode well for cross platform gaming in the future?

TheLyonKing3949d ago

Sorry it wasn't meant to spin of negativly, cloud is the furture and its great ms are investing fairly heavily in it.

Just don't want people to think it is solely for xb1

morganfell3949d ago

It isn't a matter of negativity but of facts. It will be shared with Xbox chief among them.

Also if you dig down into the facts you will notice the building has yet to be constructed. The idea that a data center will be built from the ground up and then servers installed, up, tested and fully functional by launch will likely not happen. I doubt MS will go with a butler building and a concrete pad.

The idea of building a single massive data center is not the best thing for customers where latency is your biggest enemy. Gaikai tech utilizes dispersed server farms to handle geographic areas. Depending on the one large NSA center will severly limit applications.

Geezus3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

@morganfell microsoft has tons of data centers spread out across the world especially here in the U.S. this building project seems to be adding support for that specific area of the country (iowa) for the allocation of their cloud services in general (phones, tablets, business centers...etc). sure some might operate soley for the xbox one in that area but they will prob. most likely allocate alot of the servers being built there to strengthen their Azure coverage in that area in general not as the main base of operation for the 300000 servers they specifically allocated to the One which most likely already exist as they are an extension of their current data centers . As you said a single server farm wont work and im sure MS knows that cuz they run a pretty succesful cloud service in general and know what they are doing when it comes to data center/ servers/ cloud computing and all that good stuff. their 300000 servers are probably spread around the world to service the 45 mill + of xbox live subscribers.

Diver3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

Just having data centers isn't a qualifier. It requires they got the right servers an server structure. An virtual servers well ha ha.

Besides the point was that the data center cost 700 mil ain't built.

rainslacker3949d ago

@morgan and Geezus

There are 9 datacenters located around the world(this one will make 10). 4 in the US, 2 in Asia, and 2 in Europe. There are CDN(Content Delivery Network) nodes in 24 countries. The largest datacenter is in dublin, Ireland which houses 100K servers.

The cloud works as sort of a insular internet, which runs on top of the regular internet. It is extremely fast actually. MS Azure cloud is also "dispersed" and can run applications from any datacenter it see's fit to offload tasks if necessary.

Seriously N4G mods. Can't we make the wikipedia page for Azure a sticky on the front page so people will stop assuming that cloud is everywhere and people can read an article about the basics of how it works?

morganfell3947d ago

And most of those are virtual servers. Which is where people keep missing the point. Cloud cloud cloud. One big desperate PR attempt to make up for the lack of raw onboard power.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3947d ago
green3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

Off course they will share the servers with other Microsoft services but it is good to know that XBOX Live will be the main benefactor

"The data centre will support a number of Microsoft's cloud services, but Xbox Live will be chief among them. "
http://www.gamesindustry.bi...

Mustang300C20123949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

Yeah okay man. This is Azure 2010.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

Swiggins3949d ago

If Microsoft can SOMEHOW pull this whole cloud business off then it's going to be one of the next big things in the industry.

However, when presented with all of the elements I still don't see how it's going to work...can somebody put this in perspective for me, I'm not much of a technology guy.

Skynetone3949d ago (Edited 3949d ago )

its so you can play games online

ms and google believe, in the future everything will be in the cloud, your programs your os your pictures/videos etc etc so if you connect to any pc in the world youll have access to all your stuff, will people want all there stuff on the internet is anyone's guess

this is ms where talking about, they have zero interest in gaming, I suspect all this cloud talk has got to do with windows 9 and other features they have in mind, of course it will work for xbox live aswell but I don't thing its there primary reason in fact I thinks its pretty far down there list, ms are not investing billions of dollars so people can game online

ms record last gen has been pretty bad, for such a big company, sony had more games with dedicated servers, in fact most first party games had them

NeoRatt3949d ago

MS has had the cloud business for several years now. MS Azure its known as allows you to host thinks like e-mail, web portals, databases, software applications, and the MS Windows Server OS in the cloud. MS adds new cloud accounts for development at a rate of 5,000 - 7,000 per week. MS also has shifted a lot of focus to Office 365 as well, which is MS Office in the cloud. Finally, MS has SkyDrive which is their version of drop box.

This is a well established business that has picked up steam and is making them good money.

Xbox Live is a small extension to this business. Meaning they already have the systems in place to do this, all they are doing is adding another service on the list.

One final thing. Apparently MS can add 8,000 servers to this infrastructure with 24 hours notice. They have a standard trailer config and arrangements with hardware vendors that allows them to simply order and receive delivery quickly.

Show all comments (92)
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?"

purple1013d 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 22h 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 21h 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 21h 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 12h ago (Edited 1d 12h 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 21h ago

Yay steam

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

Tacoboto1d 19h 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 19h 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 7h 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 16h 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.

14d 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