PlayStation Move comprises three separate components – the Move Controller, the Navigation Sub-Controller and the PlayStation Eye. Some games will require just the Eye, some the Eye and the Move and some all three.
Michael Pachter thinks multi-SKU approach and mixed requirements of titles could lead to low initial sales.
Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter believes it's an incorrect gamers' perception that Microsoft has lost to Sony.
"If we change what our goal is, we're not losing" attitude. Kind of like how Microsoft didn't lose to Valve, they just changed their business model. And they didn't lose to Android and iOS, they just changed their business model. They 100%, after spending 3 generations competing heavily in console hardware, aren't losing to Sony, they're just changing their business model.
You can't ever lose if you just 'change your business model'!
Patcher predicted that take two would be brought out by ea he knows very little about the content of games and is so numbers focused
Yet I remember that he predicted perfectly that there was no way the acquisition of ABK would not go through and that the FTC and the CMA would fold when all the media had It's basically over kind of news.
He mentioned that MS would outsource COD streaming rights (or deny COD from appearing on GP) in UK.
What's kinda crazy to me is - if they retreat from consoles they're left with a business model that depends on making great games that people want to buy.
What has been Xbox's biggest issue over the last decade or so?
It's not like they're falling back to a strength...
They didn't retreat and even promised the biggest generational leap! Where did you get retreat from?
And just think of all those game franchises that are trapped with them, especially those they bought instead of creating.
@Gamer Yeah, just like the One X was a leap. Just like Series X was a leap. What did they bring to the table.....a leap in games? No, they brought sweet f all. Guys like you just never learn or are just dumb, falling for MS' talk talk talk over and over again.
Business is all about money not actual sales. If I sell 1 thing for 1 million and you sell 10000 things for 900k Who really won.
The person who sold 10000 things because he has developed a consumer base and consistent revenue stream while simultaneously showing that he has the capacity to obtain market share.
The person who sold 1 thing for a million hasnt proven much outside of the simple fact that he can get an idiot to pay a copious amount of money for a single product. Holla at me when he has proven he can do it consistently overtime.
This is a nuanced subject matter
How about the gamers perspective
Xbox as a console business is last in the gamersphere. Pivot after pivot, swerve after swerve. If it wasn't for pc the xbox console would died a while back. Console owners need to choose what's best for them, their experiences or the console owners profits
Great. Guess who is in third place (just talking the main console market, not even including mobile and PC) both on software sales, hardware sales, and video game revenue?
***Chris you might wanna do ya research ***
You're right! It's only 2nd place on revenue. Good on you.
"Based on these revenues, we can see that: PlayStation made $11.3 billion more than Xbox, and $14.7 billion more than Nintendo. Xbox made $3.4 billion more than Nintendo."
Now, do you want to find me proof that Xbox isn't in third on hardware and software sales? They've literally cannibalized their own sales via subscription services and their hardware is well known to be last place.
But, hey, Microsoft is okay losing in every category here, why would they get rid of a part of their business that they are in turn (and wasn't accounted for in 2023 numbers totally since it was distributed over 5 years, 2023, 2024, 2025, 2026, and 2027, the cost of their latest purchase) spending more than 7x their annual revenue on.
@Chris I'm glad you did ya research seen you were wrong but you also forgetting this. Revenue isn't everything my friend, remember business is about money
https://www.essentiallyspor...
Oh my days, this is a terrible analogy...
If it was just about money, Microsoft wouldn't be doing a sub model, would they? They are literally making it cheaper than game purchases to get more uptake from more people. The goal is to have enough recurring subs over time to increase revenue (and eventually profitability), but that doesn't work in your assessment because they literally need to "sell 10000 things".
Good grief...
***Revenue isn't everything my friend***
Yeah, you know what that TweakTown report doesn't include? Any of the cost to buy ABK. That makes it a massive loss. Massive.
@DarXyde
That analogy still works, they need to consistently sell those subs to maintain/gain revenue, if they can't constantly sell those subs.
Switch "things" with "Subs", and it still works, but they need to constantly convince people to keep buying that subscription, other people will drop their subscription and revenue will decline.
FinalFantasyFanatic,
I don't think that quite works:
The argument this guy is making actually sounds supportive of Playstation selling a game over Game Pass subs.
Let's take a practical example, Persona 3 Reload.
If Atlus sells you the game at $70 on Playstation and "gives it away" on Xbox as long as you continue to pay for Game Pass, well... Following their logic, wouldn't it be better if fewer people buy it for a higher price than basing it on engagement via more people on XGP? How many people would you need to play P3R on Game Pass to get the same revenue?
Eventually, the latter *can be better*, but there is the matter of a larger install base on Playstation and XGP subs are a fraction of Xbox gamers.
It's a bit ironic and I think biases are on full display because what Philly boi is saying is, in principle, more supportive of the PlayStation model, but the thing is, PlayStation has both a higher price of access AND a larger pool to pull from.
If we want to talk about the manufacturers themselves and hardware, Xbox can be purchased cheaper than PS5, but it is still getting trounced in number of sales and price of admission.
I don't really see how this argument works.
The console war we've been watching for the last two decades has been what I find interesting. I don't really care how much profit MS can make by buying King and running Candy Crush any more than I care how much money they make bleeding businesses for MS Office licenses. That's boring. The fun thing to watch has been the work these companies have put in to try to win the console market.
The obvious rebuttal to Pachter's cray cray notion is that you wouldn't have to change your model if you were winning.
Or "those who win get to change their business model."
Fanboyism ends at a brick wall of "big company no care about whether you like or hate them, get a life."
Sony said similar things when their Walkman was beaten by Apple and when Samsung surpassed them in the TV market. I can go on and on but I'm sure you get the picture. Business is business. All companies take a whippen every now and and then. The difference is how you bounce back. Microsoft net worth has grown over the years. Business wise they are very successful and no matter what, sony would love to be where they are financially. Sony isn't the competition microsoft worries about. That been clear for a long time now. Microsoft wants gaming to be a part of their ecosystem. Sony needs it. Big difference there.
There's a lot wrong here.
First, the attempt to turn this argument into one about other failed businesses. Which, surprisingly, you make the argument I'm making but then...
Second, the attempt to confirm that Microsoft isn't competition when Microsoft admitted in court that they are.
Third, the attempt to act like Microsoft, from a business perspective, doesn't need what they spent over $100b to acquire but Sony does? Laughable.
Businesses are about profits. If you stop earning enough profit in a division, it goes away. Simple as that. Xbox is a division competiting against Valve, Epic, Sony, Nintendo, Android, and iOS. Simple as that. Xbox, to remain 'part of the ecosystem' needs to not cost the company more than it brings in. Simple.
They actually won.
The whole point was to force Sony into playing ball so that they could not put “windows” in more jeopardy than it was at the time.
Apple, Google, then Sony innovating while partnered with Linux…
When will people realize it has never been about gaming as to why Microsoft got into gaming?
Trojan horses people.
With the way Linux and Steam Deck are going, Linux might one day catch up to Windows, it's doing pretty well for gaming these days compared to say, 10 years, or even 5 years ago.
I don't understand who u r saying won...
But I agree in that I wouldn't be surprised if Windows was part of the calculus for MS supporting Xbox. The OS was based on Windows at first and Xbox One kinda had two Windows instances if you count the hypervisor.
But, like the console space, I think MS is walking back on OS domination. Apple and Google completely ate their lunch because....surprise surprise they innovated. I'm 100% confident the reason Phil talks (and shows) about the Asus ROG Ally more than Steam Deck is because of Windows. The Steam Deck has to sting for them.
Well, yeah, that's the point. They're too big-a-company for fanboy stuff to be at-all relevant.
Well last I checked a company goal is to make more and more money,
Nintendo could be an example of how they stopped trying to compete with Sony (during the Gamecube day) and decided to focus on a different market and reinvented themselves with the WII.
They reinvented themselves with the Switch by bringing 2 markets together when ppl said that portable consoles were doomed thanks to cellphones and tablets.
Sony's business models also changed when they decided to port games to PC something that was never supposed to happen.
If Xbox exits a market (consoles) to focus on another (games) I guess I don't care anymore. They lost the console market and pretty much the same companies that have been there before making games are still there flying a different flag. If they suck, other companies will eat their lunch by making better games.
How's this guy still around. According to him consoles were dying after ps2, ps3 Era.
Analysts are never wrong, the market just had a swift change for which no one could account.
In his Gametrailers past I’ve found Pachter to be friendly and entertaining. However he’s always blindly predicted Xbox success even up to the start of this generation. Now Pachter has adopted and repeated the new terminology of Microsoft, that it hasn’t lost the console war, it just wants more business. This is illuminating because it suggest he, like Tom Warren at the Verge, is inline with Microsoft’s PR strategy.
He was the only person who completely nailed how the ABK court case would play out. When everyone said the deal was dead, he said no and stood firm and said MS would do exactly what they did.
Did everyone say the deal was dead?
Most analytics said it would go through, but be delayed, which actually was the case.
Thing is, if fanboys understood business, they wouldn't be wasting their time commenting on gaming websites.
And you are here to lecture the rest of us because you understand business and MS is doing great?
Technically Microsoft is doing great, it's just not in gaming, OS and software (e.g. Microsoft Office) is where they're doing great business. I can't think of many other ventures they've had that has worked out for them, despite resorting to some of the same tactics that made them the dominate OS for computers.
Microsoft own things like Microsoft Office and Windows, games are secondary to them. If Xbox shut down the computer company will be ok
They only way that plan works is if people still want to play in their ecosystem.
Eventually, they’re ecosystem needs more games.
Helldivers 2 could swing Xbots to ps6 if it isn’t countered by the end of the gen.
Supposedly some well known Halo modders will be making a mode similar to Helldivers.
https://gamerant.com/halo-i...
Without procedurally generated levels, they’ll face the same problem as Destiny: fighting the same enemies in the exact same arenas does get repetitive eventually.
Helldivers succeeds as a GaaS because of its unusually well implemented use of procedural level creation. That, paired with its fun enemies to kill, makes it a GaaS with a long lifespan.
There is a pretty good chance that those with XB also have PS, but not the other way around.
What kind of Jedi mind tricks do you have to come up with to get through your day?
What is the point of always having to lie or make shit up just to win? It's like cheating to win how can you feel like you accomplished something?
I haven't bought an Xbox since the 360 days, just stuck with PC and PS, sometimes Nintendo.
Pachter is a deranged Sony hating idiot. This so called analysts has been predicting the demise of playstation for years now (kinda like Jaffe). After the ABK deal passed regulators, he was so gleeful that "dumb Sony" was finished. Now that reality has brought big mighty Microsoft on bended knees offering up their games unconditionally, the goal posts shift again. Now it was all part of the plan. Seriously this guy is an embarrassment to his profession, in how is opinions on Playstation comes off as being driven by weird energy towards them as a company.
Calm down
Sont couldn't care about you liking them, nor would Microsoft. L
Good for us gamers. People need to realize MS owns a lot of IP’s so then allowing their games on other platforms is a huge win
Business is changing and now it’s about having content on as many platforms as possible. I for one hope after these 4 games there are other games from MS which will end up on PlayStation and Nintendo along with pc. The argument from Xbox fans is nonsense because they will still get all exclusives day one on GP while others are paying full price or waiting on sales
Ms is changing. The third place company usually doesn't make changes that the others swing to. Don't bring up gamepass cause segatv and psnow were first. Sony did redo psnow into psplus but it's not the same.
Patcher has always been wrong on his predictions for years. A quality track record that guy.
The PlayStation smear articles are back in full force, my lord is the seething real. These are pc and xbox players jealous of the many upcoming exclusives.
If Phil Spencer says it is true, then it must be true. This is my life philosophy.
Is that really you? Is this sarcasm Im sensing? What happened? You saw the light or something?
Pachter has been riding MS's d*#k for several gens in a row and DOGGING Sony every chance he gets lol I don't put stock in anything he says anymore because he only props up Microsoft while crapping on Sony and Nintendo.
Lost me at "Win Business". Win what exactly? All the market share and flood it with one company's mission? Get wrecked. Pachter take a huge flying leap off of your fart cloud that you are jet-intake inhaling.
Also, a Video game analyst with a horrible track record for accuracy is offering expertise on winning. Hilarious.
If you constantly move the goal posts to a favourable position you'll never 'lose'.
However, by doing this you'll only give yourself a false sense of victory as everyone else will see you have only cheated yourself.
Michael Pachter needs to stop comparing movies to video games. I can have 2 broken wrist and the flu and still watch a movie but with 2 broken wrist and feeling sick it would be difficult for me to play a video game.
I didn’t know this guy was still around. I figured he was enjoying his golden years somewhere that wasn’t video games because he always off by a mile. I mean I think the average gamer could really out analyze him with no problem.
Yes we know Microsoft’s end game. But it’s hard seeing that come to fruition at this state of 33 million including the 12-13 million Xbox gold players.
I guess if they can buy more publishers and studios with their trillion dollar company they can out business Sony. Buy up the market forcing people to have gamepass to play games will definitely get their 300 million subscribers.
Microsoft has definitely lost to both Sony and Nintendo in the console Hardware buisness. Now in terms of software they already have surpassed both Sony and Nintendo as the largest games publisher.
I wonder if that line/reasoning is how Phil and his VP team keep their jobs when MSFT demands better.
putting all your exclusives on your rival platforms with higher framerates and better features
I'm not seeing a massive win here, unless its opposite day, also known as E3
Could have fooled me this whole time I thought Sony was winning. PlayStation having huge success must mean Xbox and Microsoft are not losing. Sounds legit.
Haha LMAO. This guy must doppelgänger as stand up comedy in his spare time. What he said was hilarious.
"Long long game ".Seems like Microsoft wants to sell video games on all consoles and platforms out today . Michael Pacther even said. not until 10 to 15 years from now that we will see people just use their phones to play COD . Probably longer than that I believe.
the only ones that think that this is about winning or losing is Spencer.
and Pachter is also talking out of his arse alot.
His point isn't wrong. Microsoft are clearly pivoting away from a model where selling consoles is a priority. I don't think anyone can dispute that in future they are looking to subscription numbers and digital sales as the barometer for success and in most part, this change has occurred because console sales its a battle they can't win - Phil Spencer said so himself just after Redfall launched.
Where Michael is wrong is in the analysis of the situation though. It doesn't matter what barometer you use currently - be it consoles, subs or sales - Microsoft are losing in all of them - and badly.
Time will tell whether that will ever change. MS are well positioned as a publisher but they send mixed messages. On one hand you see a lot of promising single player story games or RPGs but with the other they talk obsessively about monetisation and mobile. Maybe we can have both but forgive us all for not trusting them based on their recent track record.
I always avoid people that try to trick people into believing they are stupid. Patch is a Class A.
So, why not just make cheeseburgers then? They’re losing in the console arena—in the game industry and to Sony. That’s their business and they’ve just been utterly failing at it. Now, they may pull a Sega and abandon making hardware and will no longer be a major publisher, sure ok, but thats a dramatic shift in power and position. Sega is no longer doing Nintendo or PlayStation money. So, I’m not sure how much of “winning at business” they’re doing in the console arena.
They're all in it for the money obviously, many gaming companies have shifted away from consoles such as Atari, SNK and SEGA as examples. Never understood why Microsoft joined the 'console war', which at the time, it was up against the Dreamcast, GameCube and PlayStation 2, not forgetting the PC. A typical 'business brain' would rather make more millions or billions from software than faff on with the added cost of a console. Microsoft messed up with Windows and Internet Explorer, now it's Xbox. Move on and continue with games on PC and PlayStation 5. Crack on with VR games and knock out some games for the Switch and Switch 2 in the future. Lastly, if Nintendo ditched consoles, the likes of Mario Kart and Zelda on PC and PlayStation 5 would obviously rake in more gold coins. The problem is, Nintendo doesn't have the best 'business brain' out there. There's plenty of mobile devices out there for handheld gaming, right down to tablets. How many games would Nintendo sell on Apple and Samsung devices? We all know the answer to that.
Has he ever being proven right? I sincerely cant recall a time where his predictions came true which is all you need to know about this "analyst"
Air Conflicts: Secret Wars debuted in 2011, and later updated for modern consoles. However, it's the PlayStation 3 edition that stands out.
Wedbush games industry analyst Michael Pachter weighs in.
But to a 100 million? Absolutely not I can realistically see 5 to 6 million within the year.
Pachter gets paid for making terrible predictions. Must be nice lmao.
Yea that’s unrealistic. Still the subscriber count is going to increase significantly when Activision/Blizzard games hit the service.
"skyrocket", that's highly doubtful you're not accounting for the fact that the majority of those people who are will download those games on gp already have gp.
I feel they will increase but there are people out there like me for instance that didnt really care for the games they made. Especially cod eh pass. Skyrocket though seems to be overstated.
It won't hit 100 million unless Ms cam produce high quality exclusives and release one every month
Better question is at what price point and subscription number will it become profitable for Ms because the more profit it makes the more resources Ms will allocate to make it grow
Recurring subscriptions is what most companies with services want. Believe it or not the reason so many of these companies want us to turn on the automatic payment is because they know a lot of people forget to turn it off. It's like gym membership they know only 40% of the people will use it while other 60% will keep paying in hopes of going one day
darthv72
Also you made a comment in the other story I forgot to reply to you but why are you paying $45 to renew when you can pay $26-28
There are always deals
This was the first time it renewed for 45, i will get other deals before it does it again.
Reality of the subscriber business model is regardless of the medium, and as Netflix is currently experiencing, they all have a user base ceiling. Is game pass good value, sure, but will it convert non-gamers into Xbox gamers, nope! Brand awareness and deals only reach so far and ultimately a gamer with the money to subscribe is most likely already a gamer.
Nintendo has the ability to turn non-gamers into gamers. The only game that has this ability in Microsoft’s arsenal is Minecraft.
No. Not even Nintendo can "magically" convert non-gamers. Sure as eff such can't be done by the likes of Uncharted or Halo. The best you're going to get is someone who wants to watch for the graphics and action, but sur as eff isn't paying upwards to a publisher desired $100+ per single game + DLC/MT much less a recurring sub.
And it the Bobby Koticks of the industry that need that drilled into their heads, not us.
Nintendo had the wii that brought non gamers. Thats it. Switch isnt bring in non gamers unless your talking about kids having their first system. My kids all have ps4s but we always have bought the newest nintendo console. Mainly for their first party games.
Also i dont feel like minecraft is gonna bring in non gamers. I just dont understand the comment.
Most adult gamers I know still see switch as a “kids” console and don’t own one. I only personally know 2 other adults who use one. So no, Nintendo doesn’t turn non gamers into gamers. They have issues just being seen as a worthwhile system currently with the new generation out.
I was a gamer, and gamed alot. Haven't lately, and got GamePass about 6 months ago, and I friggin love it. Love seeing some smaller indie games that I can play comfortably without worrying about sinking hundreds of hours into like I did when I was younger.
So yes, "non-gamers" will see incredible appeal in gamepass. So far, GamePass reminds me a bit of the good ol' Xbox Live Arcade days, and that's never a bad thing.
Havent lately but you were a gamer. How long is lately. You already admitted you were a gamer so you are not a non gamer even if you took a small break.
How many xbone consoles did they sell last gen. Approx 50mill.
That's then the max they could hope to have in subscribers.
If there lucky. Very very lucky. As half Their fans jumped ship I rekon.
Which means there gonna have over 50 million subscribers. Sony fanboys have a knack for saying MS won't do X, Y, Z only for them to do X, Y, Z. You'd think you'd learn by now.
Gamepass is also on PC and streaming. Also Series X|S is outselling Xbox one so clearly they didn't lose half their fans.
Did you guys even read the article? They are talking mainly about TenCent and specifically Riot Games and the agreements that Xbox has with them.
Then they go on to talk about Xbox offering special perks to people that play under TenCent umbrella. To play those same games on GP. 168 million gamer base is nothing to snuff at.
With incentives, deals they make with other developers, the convenience of playing on any device and of course the cost. They could hit and break that 100 million barrier.
If your just focused on Activision, then thats like looking at the top of a Iceberg and thinking that’s the whole thing.
Wait. So we've gone through this "Gamepass is the future" and "Sony needs to copy Gamepass" BS when, years after implementation, its yet to hit 100 million subs? When its not only on the console but PC?
*facepalm*
It’s been in existence for 5 years. So your saying with all the content that will be coming, plus all the deals they’ll be doing with other companies they can’t do 100 million?
I honestly expect in the next two years they be there and possibly beyond.
Okay, you're saying its been around for five years, that's "true" potential lies in what's not even on it, so how is my "MS already won, but not really" argument wrong when there is nothing - NOTHING - of actually substance that supports said "success"?
If anything, from all the billions thrown into it with no solid reruns, how is Gamepass currently nothing but an expanding sinkhole?
I never said anything about MS winning. But subscriptions services always start at a loss. Usually it takes years to start turning a profit. But do you honestly support the idea that with all the studios MS has and all the content they will produce. That the service isn’t going to grow?
If in the next five years they haven’t really grown nor turned a profit. Then you could say it’s a failure and time to hang it up. But with Mountain of content coming. I personally don’t see that happening. Peace
Given they've had loads of studios beforehand only to let them rot, have practically needed to be shamed to bring back IPs and have suffered multiple droughts in producing games, yeas, color me doubtful. Nevermind their issues with SP gaming.
And by "winning" I mean the asinine insistence by paid and unpaid shills as well as their fanbase that GP has turned them a profit despite that buying Bethesda alone will take decades to recoup. The further insistence that Sony needs to do the same.
And then there's your insistence on this as current nonexistent mountain of content.
The difference being that those studios you spoke of were developed internally. MS and Xbox were under two different leaders back then. Ballmer and Matrick. Both who lacked understanding of the gaming Market.
So your saying that under Nadella and Phil spending billions on these companies. With a proven track record of their own are somehow going to produce nothing???
You don’t make sense. I can tell you right now when a company spends billions, no less 68 billion for one company. They aren’t going to produce vaporware that’s for sure.
They aren't going to produce much other than what's already been made or is generally recognized. Fallout and Skyrim then Starfield which technically are all the same game with different themes. Phil spent multiples of what it would take to make and market a gen's worth of games in order to own a few proven titles with attached audiences.
A difference of choice and risk, and no choice with little risk with expectation to exploit.
And no. The studios I mentioned earlier weren't all internal. Many were 3rd part with notable IPs. Left to rot and eventually closed, with many of their people shifted around into new studios of which many again simply rotted away till closed. That was pretty much Rare till eventually Sea Of Thieves: a game that took years any worthy content.
And Phil was around during all that.
If I don't make sense to you its because you see MS as "Your Team" who will beat Sony rather than a game publisher that's put potential profit and market domination over a game publisher should be doing, which is making games.
Well you seem to color people with a certain lens. I don’t mind a good differing of opinions. But as always it devolves into what side your on. I purposely didn’t paint you as a Sony fan and MS hater because I just wanted some good back and fourth. Unfortunately you decided to paint me in that light because I decided to defend Xbox.
I actually like both systems and both companies as well. Both companies have had their ups and downs. Both have folded studios into others or closed them down entirely.
As for your assertion that MS has a history of not supporting studios, that has no merit. Forza studio killing it since 2001, Bungie killed it right up to when MS allowed them to buy back their studio(only major publisher to ever have done that). Mojang studios is another one that comes to mind. Not counting all the excellent pc games Microsoft game studios produced over the years. Seems to me your just putting out opinions without researching the facts.
Of course Sony and Nintendo have an excellent track record of supporting their studios. I love the games that they make and have fond memories of many hours played.
But I defend MS on this site a little more because of the extreme attitudes towards them here. People get riled up so easily and accuse each other of this and that all the time……predictable
Again, the next two years we’ll see if Microsoft just spent $76.5 billion dollars on two companies just to turn around and not support them.
That’s why I’m confused, not because as you so blatantly accused me of be an Xbox fanboy. Because in the real world you don’t lay down Billions of dollars for nothing in return. Usually CEOs that have mis-appropriated funds are fired or the companies are sued by investors to recoup their losses.
So for you to say that they aren’t going to produce anything of merit beyond the typical franchises and not acknowledged the real life implications of running a company is what left me confused. That’s not fanboy crap, that’s reality. Peace
I accuse you of being an XBox fanboy because of your insistence that Gamepass is a good thing, which its not. That the billions MS spent on two major game companies is a good thing, which its not. That MS have only supported their studios, which they haven't.
They've supported studios with major, established IPs before they bought them, but have been otherwise clueless to continue them much less create successful IPs of their own. Bungie buying themselves out at Halo's height - because they thought it was finished yet MS wanted more - with 343 taking over to mixed results is evidence of that. As was buying Mojang when nothing further could really be done with Minecraft after becoming an industry staple. Aside from graphical tweaks. Likewise buying Bethesda and Activision right now means nothing more than denial or leverage against Sony.
As well as content for Gamepass, or version 2.0 of always online. If that comes to fruition, consumer game ownership will vanish as overall quality is effected by the same mentality infesting the mobile market.
Well I can understand your concern about GP and understand the ownership issue. Thats always been a concern wether you talk about music, movies and of course games. I can however put my old Xbox discs in a newer systems and play them. Sony has allowed that to a degree. So you can still own your own content.
As for you grouping everyone who on GP as an Xbox fanboy, we’ll I doubt theirs anything I could say to change your mindset on that, so I won’t.
Peace
No to this day Mouse on PC has lag, thats why they advertise regarding to how much accurate it is. That's just mouse, streaming? really? Ask the Esports if streaming could work? They'll laugh at you.
Once they really start advertising the App availability in new TVs next year, combined with the release of the big games like Starfield and Redfall, along with ActiBlizz games like CoD, there is going to be a huge swell of new subs. They'll likely be bundling controllers and new 3 month subs with the TVs. There is a storm brewing.
Another thing, I can see a world where Netflix and MS are locked in an agreement. Gamepass could potentially be included with Netflix and vice versa. Immediately putting them over 100 million subs. They're already working together so it's actually more than likely to happen at this point.
Haven't they already had big games hit the service? Where was the "huge swell" from Horizon and Halo Infinite? Isn't the service already available on multiple devices why would adding the app to TV's make a huge difference? This "storm" you guys keep trying to sell everyone on isn't likely to be much more then a brief down poor. I'm not saying gp won't see an increase but this constant over exaggeration just isn't going to happen and there's plenty of past data that proves that. Time for folks to temper expectations.
They could very much do. I'll keep subbing if they keep offering me the £1 for 1 month or 3 months subs.
Also if they keep the price low. I think the full price is £7 a month for standard gamepass if I recall or £12 a month for gamepass ultimate. I personally think these are fair prices and absolute max you should charge for these services. With many more people joining the PC community. People remaining and joining Xbox. Don't forget the Streaming users who may not have a pc or Xbox. It's what I deffinetly would be using to play the new elder scrolls on the cheap if I didn't own a Xbox or capable PC.
No. Xbox doesn’t have a large enough audience. Even in the glory days of the Xbox 360, they sold about 80M consoles. And now they have rival game subscription services to contend with.
Same nonsense, different day. The Kinect, The Cloud, Xbox one x, game pass.
"Everyone is going to buy into it. There's 3 1/2 billion gamers out there or more just waiting to buy into the next thing Microsoft drops."
Then, reality sets in. Microsoft's brand can only reach so many people and is only popular in certain circles. Kinect faded. The Cloud talk faded. One x faded. Now it's game pass.
Pairing themselves with TVs isn't going to work. And big games don't play well on small phones. Non gamers aren't going to become gamers on phones trying to play competitively against regular gamers in COD.
There have been subscription services before. Gaikai didn't do it. On Live didn't. Stadia didn't. Sony did had TV support and there just wasn't a demand from non gamers. So, Sony discontinued pushing TVs with it. Even with Microsoft's publisher acquisitions, non gamers aren't running to get an Xbox. Nintendo and Sony fans aren't rushing to get an Xbox. Even after the Bethesda announcement. But the narrative is that millions if not billions are just salivating and waiting for Microsoft's content.
There will be an uptick. But not the uptick some like to believe like some huge wave of gamers are going to jump in. Microsoft has yet to prove to gamers that they can consistently put out great content on consoles and PCs. Even game pass currently isn't consistent.What's makes some believe they have the talent and management to go global with their services? And, free active users on cellphones are not subscribers paying money.
If that's you disagreeing brewin, it doesn't matter. They won't reach 3 billion and they don't have the knack to push 100 million any time soon. Pairing with Netflix won't push TV and movie watchers to play games when Netflix themselves can't even get them to play games.
You guys consistently believe Microsoft's next thing is the thing that will take over. It never does. Their parent company's wallet buying spree is the only thing that would take over. And that will never go over well of buying up the industry.
If cloud faded, how are they adding more games each week/month? One X ran its course, it was discontinued like One S like PS4 like PS4 Pro... its a circle of life thing.
As for Kinect, it didnt fade it was killed once Mattrick was gone. Best decision ever, unless you were a fan then I feel bad for you.
Darth, power of the cloud and extra graphics power were a lot of things spewed by you guys. Crackdown, driveatars, and sea of thieves water was the result. No one cared and PS4 still ran over Xbox one and One x. That cloud power was meaningless.
Kinect was dead because Microsoft made no quality games to justify its existence and the forced bundling at launch. But you guys continue to make Don your scapegoat. PSVR proved its existence and is getting a sequel headset potentially better in every way over the first. See, Sony doesn't have to make excuses like you're doing. Even PS Move lives on through BC on PS5 over a decade later. Kinect can't be used at all on series x. But hey. Fastest selling peripheral right? Guinness book right?
So, the best decision was to drop the tech for consoles just like Microsoft partnered with multiple PC manufacturers but made no VR games for all those Windows headsets? But you'll still blame Don when it was Phil who was part of that and not Don who left a long time ago. Are you going to blame Don again?
Now, you guys talk up game pass, game pass, game pass. Because no one talks about Halo, Gears or Forza. Time and again, it's always this huge thing but turns out to be a mole hill. Puff pieces and influencers can't change the fact that Microsoft is not as popular worldwide. And even then, you'll regret it if 100 million or more are streaming with subscriptions over offline ownership. But I guess you need to find out for yourself. Just like we told you guys about paying for online.
I think if MS keeps aquiring studios and maybeadd a video streaming service with it/familyplans they def will get alot more new subscribers.
difficult to say.
MS isnt rly offering a whole lot of variety of games.
sure, gamepass might have alot of different games, but it would be difficult to outline all of them to non-gamers or casuals.
Pachters "predictions" arent something we should take as face value, hes been dead wrong about alot of stuff.
there's also the cloud gaming nonsense for tvs etc. if you have the connection for it, sure. but who has? input lag and stuttering is still a problem lol especially if you wanna play at a reasonable resolution and framerate.
and even with Activision, their games are not everyones cup of tea, and theres also the reality of switching over to xbox consoles. not everyone wants or likes xbox.
im sure there will a rise in gamepass subs when their games hit the service, but i doubt it will stay that way.
No games will require the subcontroller since a DS3 can be used in it's place.
By definition then, PS Move games require a PS Eye and a PS Move controller. No problem at all...
The Wii has lots of controller options and no one seems to have a problem there...
r.
I'm getting the bundle. I think those will sell like hot cakes since it got everything all in 1.
But i think people aren't too dumb to understand you need a camera and a wand to play a game, which can be bought separate or bundled.
for $59.99 because that is how the Move is a complete controller.
I was initially confused by Sony's approach by all of this. I would of thought they would of took the 'bundle it all into one package' approach to make it simple.
HOWEVER, and this is a big however, by not bundling the navigation controller in, it makes the price look more attractive to potential buyers. The price is the big thing surrounding these motion controllers so by omitting the navigation controller, the price can come down and maybe it will turn a few heads in the process.
It's just a thought.