240°

Microsoft Might Bring Back Cut Xbox One Features That People Liked

When Microsoft announced it was removing certain restrictions from its next-generation Xbox, including internet connection requirements and region-locked software, the response was largely enthusiastic. But the company's Xbox One policy reversals resulted in some features — like the intriguing Family Sharing plan and playing without a game disc in the drive — being cut.

Fortunately, Microsoft corporate vice president Marc Whitten says some of those features, like Family Sharing, could ultimately return to Xbox One.

GameCents3933d ago

Do it. I still don't see why family sharing cannot be done for digital games.
It would also be nice to be able to sell/trade digital games with other xbox live users. Microsoft could charge a fee for every transaction but it is better than not being able to sell a game you're unlikely to every play again.

Blank3933d ago

You know I dont like this but its not all about me. So I was thinking what if you can choose? As a service? But whatever im going to keep tabs on this wishing for the best.

xHeavYx3933d ago

Find Angry Joe's interview with Major Nelson. He kept saying that you can" check" the game that someone else buys. " family sharing" is just a fancy name for "demo". Do you really think a developer/ publisher would allow one game to be shared by ten people?

Blank3933d ago

@heavy

Im aware of that but the thing is it never officially rolled out cant judge it but dont get it twisted im not for it. But if people really want this, put it as an option the select few that want it can do the sharing/demoing whatever thing among themselves. Idk I for myself would rather this not happen at all and just leave thigs be as it is the DLC became norm leave used games alone.

georgeenoob3933d ago (Edited 3933d ago )

Sony fanboys are gonna go to church tomorrow.

creatchee3933d ago (Edited 3933d ago )

@xHeavYx

"Do you really think a developer/ publisher would allow one game to be shared by ten people?"

Now that you mention it, that is precisely what happens with games now. We lend them to our friends. When that's done we trade them in and sell them. Then the new person does the same thing we did and the process repeats. All from the sale of one new copy.

Controlling that situation and limiting it to ten people would make developers and publishers happy. We get to share games without lending a physical copy, they get to sell a digital copy that doesn't have the same costs as a boxed copy AND isn't infintely transferable. It works for all parties involved.

And if you don't like that, you can still buy the disc version and do it the traditional way.

fr0sty3933d ago (Edited 3933d ago )

So, you lend every one of your games to 10 people? There is no way that you do, so enabling 10 to play full versions of all of your games will not fly with the publishers.

Even with the one friend at a time being able to play it, I still don't see it flying when 10 people can have access to that one game. Sony already lets you install your games on another PS3 if you sign into your account to download it on a friend's PS3, and will even let them play it on their account after install, but they make you deactivate it from one ps3 before you can install it on another. that used to be 5 ps3's, but publishers made them scale it back.

It's likely to be like what was rumored in those pastebin dumps, a demo of the game that requires you to buy it after an hour. Much akin to Sony's full game trials with PS+.

SpaZaA3933d ago

creatchee has absolutely no idea of just how badly a buy 1 share to 9 people system would work in a digital ecosystem.
Anybody with the audacity to compare sharing digitally to physically and actually saying publishers would RATHER digital sharing in a system where they would loose up to 9 sales per title is just...well.. fucking stupid.

Seriously, anybody who thinks the family sharing plan was even remotely like what MS alluded to, with the ability to share full titles with 9 friends, without restriction, well those people should not breed, there is enough fucktards around as it is.

Grown Folks Talk3932d ago

Yep, family share makes no sense. Sharing with 10 people? No way. What DOES make sense is making a restrictive DEMO sharing plan where people have to sit & hope 1 of 10 other people aren't playing a DEMO when you want to play a DEMO instead of using the marketplace that already has DEMOS you can play WHENEVER you want.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3932d ago
DigitalRaptor3933d ago (Edited 3933d ago )

Because this is Microsoft we're talking about. They know that they could have provided the family sharing for digital games. So why did they remove it?

My theory is that since they wanted console wide-DRM, their leveraging point (something to appease those complaining) was the family share. But it was never going to be more than a "demo mode". It just wasn't - if you think about the repercussions that would have on publishers and how Sony tried this with 5 consoles, and publishers complained, so now it's only 2 devices.

Microsoft definitely weren't expecting such a backlash, so now that they've had to remove all the DRM on physical and always-online connectivity - a key part of their plan - why would they let people have access to 9 free game licenses per purchase? They could easily make it only applicable to digital purchases. They won't because now there is literally nothing they consider appease-worthy.

DeFFeR3933d ago

"it was never going to be more than a "demo mode". It just wasn't"

Except when Whitten said explicitly that it wasn't a demo mode, and not to 'believe every rumor you read on the internet'. It was basically PS3s game share, improved.

SpaZaA3933d ago (Edited 3933d ago )

@DeFFeR
"Except when Whitten said explicitly that it wasn't a demo mode, and not to 'believe every rumor you read on the internet'. It was basically PS3s game share, improved."

Yes the same PS3 game share which publishers pressured Sony to change from 5 systems to 2.

Yes, just like that, publishers looked at how many people used or rather, abused the sharing ability on PS3, and after pushing Sony to reduce the number of active consoles, turned around and said, you know what, with Microsofts next console, lets allow it on 10 systems!

Not only that, all you have to do is add your friends to your "family share" plan, you don't even have to put all of your account details on each console!

What a brilliant idea.

That way for every game sold digitally, people can set up groups online (which actually had begun upon first reveal of the family share plan) and they can share to 9 other people, they could all share the costs within the group and pay 1/10th of the price for every game!

YES!
that would be such a great idea!!!!!!!!!

I shouldn't have to go to such lengths to explain just how stupid it is that people believed this shit. But alas, some people really are this thick.

Grown Folks Talk3932d ago

They posted the details on their Xbox Wire site on June 6th. Week before E3, 2 weeks before the policy changes. People just lack reading comprehension. Family share is exactly like current sharing only w/o being tied to your local area. If everybody could play at the same time, it would be an issue. They can't. It's no different than loaning a disc. Whoever has the disc can play, the others can't.

n4rc3932d ago

That's exactly what is was.. People are taking comments as fact again..

You had a list of 10 people.. They could share your games.. If I had halo on there, any one of those 10 can play it all they want.. Provided I'm not playing it..

That's exactly how lending a physical disk works now.. So why is it so impossible?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3932d ago
SpaZaA3933d ago (Edited 3933d ago )

From the original interview:
"And I understand people see things like Family Sharing and they’re like, ‘Wow, I was really looking forward to that,’ which is more of an engineering reality time frame type-thing.”

What in the actual fuck does that even mean?

"engineering reality time frame type-thing."

More PR fucking nonsense from Microsoft.

HammadTheBeast3933d ago

The meticulous time-proxy ambuxtroxations of the command scripts pertaining to the reductions in hallucinogens means.... you get this packaged with DRM or gtfo.

-MS

I really hope the people who believe that you'd get 10 copies of a game to just digitally share with anyone were joking or trolling.

n4rc3932d ago

Or you could learn to read Hammad.. Would save you from looking like such a moron all the time..

wishingW3L3933d ago

the only reason people want the "Family Sharing" it's because they'll be able to buy 1 game and 9 will play it for free... Or at least that's what they think. XD

GameCents3933d ago

Wow Captain Obvious, so brave of you to reveal your true identity like this.

fsfsxii3933d ago

Some people are actually that retarded. If you seriously think that MS or any publisher will allow their games to be givin away for 9 people minus the original buyer, then you need some reality check.

DeFFeR3933d ago

Except that it happens with physical discs all the time...

It wasn't as simple as 10 people borrowing it - there were limits to how many could be borrowing it consecutively - only one friend could borrow it at a time in addition to the original owner.

People just heard 'always online' and freaked their shit and drew worst case scenarios. MS shot themselves in the foot by sending mixed signals and Mattrick telling people to buy a 360.

There was good to some of the features, but they were overshadowed by the concerns and the snowball effect of people online who pull shit out of their ass and claim it as fact.

MasterCornholio3933d ago (Edited 3933d ago )

I don't see why people are so hyped for full game demos when we already have them on the PS4 with plus.

Do people honestly believe that publishers are willing to lose nine tenths of their sales because of an unrestricted family plan?

Motorola RAZR i

MysticStrummer3933d ago

It's a little different, since PS+ dictates which games get the demo, and the One's method would give you demos of games that other people bought.

But you're right, some people thought used games were a problem for publishers yet they'd allow full games to be shared with multiple people. It made no sense.

n4rc3933d ago

I'm really hoping they just scraped those features as a quick fix..

That they will find a better way to give consumers both options.. I was all for the original

HammadTheBeast3933d ago

There's a petition going around if you'd like to sign it.

nugnugs3932d ago

Yeah, go check out the comments, its rather amusing.

Godmars2903933d ago

You'd expect them to have been able to never remove them in the first place. They much have been that tied into the DRM.

As is, still they should be more than able to phase them back in within a year of release.

And still its going to look like they're playing catch up to Sony allowing to put a digital library on any PS4.

GameCents3933d ago

Pretty sure you can still play digital games on every Xbox One as long as you log in your profile.
Heck, you can do that on xbox 360!

GameCents3933d ago (Edited 3933d ago )

What's there to disagree with folks?
"As we previously announced, consumers will be able to sign on to any Xbox One console and have access to all their digital games," a Microsoft representative said. "Once the required data--a fraction of the entire game--is on their hard drive, they can jump into the action while the rest of the game finishes downloading in the background. And of course, on Xbox 360, consumers today can download their digital games on any console after signing in to their Xbox Live account." . . . http://www.gamespot.com/new...
For those thinking this was pre-180: "So, for example, while you are logged in at your friend’s house, you can play your games," Microsoft said at the time. Microsoft has confirmed with GameSpot that following the company's major policy reversal last month, this feature is UNCHANGED.

As you can see, Microsoft aren't the ones playing catch up with this feature. I personally didn't see why everybody was celebrating like it's a huge win for SONY when I've had this feature on 360 albeit without the play as you download option for years.
People like shutupandtakemymoney should shut up and inform their ignorant selves. It isn't game sharing, it's simply game accessing on any console and guess what, you HAVE TO BE LOGGED ON, ps4, xbox one or x360

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney3933d ago (Edited 3933d ago )

lol xboxers mad at ur comment..
"PS4 digital library accessible on any system"
http://www.gamespot.com/new...

sign the drm petition to get back shared library!!
https://www.change.org/peti...

20k in 3 days! Lets go!!

Death3933d ago

You can't put a digital library on any PS4. In order to keep games from being illegally duplicated Sony will limit the active consoles like they do now. Sharing accounts isn't the same as shared games. It's bypassing Sony's almost non existent "security" to keep this from happening. The idea was to make it so people with multiple systems in the same house could access their games from either console.

The proposed system by Microsoft had gamers ripping their entire library to the HDD and having access to them whereever they went by accessing their accounts remotely and redownloading the game. There was no limit to this, but the games wouldn't be playable from the remote console unless it was one of the 10 once the original purchaser signed off or signed on from a different console. The 24 hour check in was for consoles that went offline and couldn't have the remotely installed games deactivated in real time when the original user signed back in. Unless both consoles remained connected to the server, the shared game had a time limit that was not finalized. In order to play online, each user in the family share plan needed a copy of the game.

The scary DRM was the tool used to keep gamers honest by either deactivating games that were no longer connected or traded in. If you were the original purcheser and traded in your game, nothing would prevent you from playing the ripped game since the disc didn't need to be in the drive. The 24 hour check in verified your library was in sync with the trades that were processed at retail.

DigitalRaptor3933d ago

"The idea was to make it so people with multiple systems in the same house could access their games from either console."

I don't know about you but I don't know anyone with 10 family members in their houses. This was always going to be abused by extending it to your friends living hundreds if not thousands of miles apart.

Death3933d ago

I was referring to Sony's 2 console limit.

Microsoft's proposed plan was for up to 10 "family" members that came from your friends list. They had access to your library like a friend or family members does to your physical copy but with the benefit of digital delivery. If either console went offline it was a timed "demo" more than a shared game. Save data could be used if you bought the game after sharing and the online component would have moved additonal units if you wanted to play with your friends. Used copies paid publishers on resales also which was a first. With the restrictions/limitations the potential to get games out and played could help developers sell games more than anything.

shutUpAndTakeMyMoney3933d ago (Edited 3933d ago )

$400.

edit: ok xbox fans u win $600

GameCents3933d ago (Edited 3933d ago )

Edit, lol never mind, 2 bubble syndrome has kicked in. Feels the need to troll because he's down to so few bubbles.

Shadonic3933d ago

chill dude 2 bubble life is hard :(

Show all comments (59)
280°

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

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

purple1015d ago

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

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

Nice one ☝️

Zeref4d ago

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

DarXyde4d ago

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

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

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

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

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

PhillyDonJawn4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

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

Einhander19724d ago

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

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

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

MrBaskerville4d ago

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

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

shinoff21834d ago

Zeref

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

Profchaos4d ago

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

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

Is that why Hellblade 2 is digital only?

Zeref4d ago

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

MrNinosan4d ago

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

mkis0073d ago (Edited 3d 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
4d ago
Zeref4d ago

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

DarXyde4d ago

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

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

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

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

Einhander19724d ago

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

Einhander19724d ago

Anyone remember games for windows live.

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

BehindTheRows4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

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

Zeref4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

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

Chevalier4d ago

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

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

Tacoboto4d ago

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

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

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

shinoff21834d ago

Yay steam

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

Tacoboto4d ago

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

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

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4d ago
Hofstaderman4d ago

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

crazyCoconuts4d ago

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

Xeofate4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

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

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

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

crazyCoconuts3d ago

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

FinalFantasyFanatic3d ago

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

Show all comments (43)
370°

Could Xbox Soon Become The Next Dreamcast?

Microsoft's future in the video game space is murky right now, so let's break it all down.

Read Full Story >>
thegamer.com
ApocalypseShadow17d ago (Edited 17d ago )

Not anytime soon. But they're on that path.

One thing not mentioned in the article is Microsoft's money bags. If Sega had Microsoft's money, they would have still been around as a hardware manufacturer. Xbox as a platform only survives because of the money bags. They can continue making consoles for the core and port to PC.

The multiplatform strategy is only the result of arrogance and misguided leadership that blew up in their face. They thought gamers would jump on Xbox in droves if they knew that many of their favorite games would be only on Xbox. But that's not happening at all. Sales didn't increase. They decreased. Why? Because the dumb asses thought giving away these expensively made games in a cheap service would also turn the tide.

Gamers on other platforms are willing to buy quality. They don't need to be handed nearly free games in a service that aren't even finished and sometimes average in their development. Gamers buy Nintendo games. They buy Sony games. Microsoft groomed their base to not buy games. Even the quality ones. It has always been their plan to go digital. But most gamers still like single player gaming. Still like physical releases.

Microsoft's problem has always been that they don't produce high quality games at the same output as Nintendo and Sony. Actually, they should be producing quite a lot more because they're worth over 2 TRILLION. How they don't have more is ridiculous and no excuse. Buying publishers to take away from competition only backfired. Because it still takes millions of dollars to continue to make those games from the publishers they snatched. Their only choice was to crawl back to their competitors to help sustain those developers because Nintendo and Sony platforms were the ones buying games.

Am I sorry for Microsoft? Hell no! They deserved last place for putting in the least effort. They deserved the fallout for buying up the industry and didn't make a single blip on the radar against their competitors where they now need those same gamers they took away games from to support them. Part of it may have been to cash in on their competition. But the result is the slow death of their platform. They may go 3rd party. They may keep making hardware. I don't give a shit about them to worry about it. I only give a shit about the destructive nature of their industry moves that only negatively affect gamers. They could sell and drop out of the industry and I wouldn't blink. Probably laugh. But not blink. They deserve whatever comes to them. At least Sega put in the effort when it came to games. They just had poor leadership. Microsoft has poor leadership and barely makes memorable games. That's a killer combination. And not in a good way.

Cacabunga17d ago

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

Crows9017d ago

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

darthv7216d ago

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

Cacabunga16d ago

Darth

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

88316d ago

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

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 16d ago
blacktiger16d 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.

fr0sty16d ago (Edited 16d 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.

shinoff218316d 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?”

ifinitygamer16d ago

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

fr0sty16d ago (Edited 16d ago )

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

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

ifinitygamer16d ago

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

fr0sty16d ago

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

16d ago
JBlaze22616d ago

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

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

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

isarai17d ago

Nah, sega actually makes good games

Becuzisaid17d ago

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

Profchaos17d ago

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

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

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

Becuzisaid17d ago

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

FinalFantasyFanatic16d ago

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

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

Profchaos17d ago

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

Show all comments (72)
80°

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

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

Read Full Story >>
trueachievements.com