Microsoft says it will stick with its Xbox business come hell or high water. But with years of heavy losses behind it the time has arrived to turn a profit. Has it all been worth the effort and how can the company turn its hard won market share gains into actual profits?
Earlier this week, an interview with Microsoft COO Kevin Turner affirmed that Microsoft is willing to stay the course with its videogame business, despite the fact that it hasn't been profitable on an annual basis since the original Xbox launched in 2001.
For some, the reaction to the interview was surely, "'Duh.' Of course Microsoft plans to stick with the Xbox business." That reaction stems from the fact that it's easy to see Microsoft's successes as the lone next generation console on the market. The games library is good, upcoming titles are looking great, Xbox Live is a robust service with many appealing features and Microsoft is insistent that it will move 10 million hardware units by the end of the year.
But all of these successes and admirable plans have come at great expense-greater than Microsoft had expected initially. For fiscal year 2005, Microsoft's home and entertainment division posted a $485 million net loss.
After its third fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2006, when Microsoft posted a $388 million operating loss for its home and entertainment division, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer issued an internal e-mail that stated, "…The cost of producing Xbox 360 consoles was higher than expected..."
In fiscal 2006, ended June 30, 2006, the division lost $1.26 billion, mainly due to Xbox 360 launch expenses.
Of course, these losses represent investment-heavy investment that Microsoft hopes to turn into profits by fiscal 2008, the target date that Robbie Bach said the home and entertainment division would turn a profit.
The question is, how much loss is too much? Microsoft's resources for supporting the Xbox 360 business seem unlimited, as other profitable divisions rake in the dough. But would it take for Microsoft to throw in the towel?...more at next-gen.biz...
VGChartz's Mark Nielsen: "Upon finally finishing Devil May Cry 5 recently - after it spent several years on my “I’ll play that soon” list - I considered giving it a fittingly-named Late Look article. However, considering that this was indeed the final piece I was missing in the DMC puzzle, I decided to instead take this opportunity to take a look back at the entirety of this genre-defining series and rank the entries. What also made this a particularly tempting notion was that while most high-profile series have developed fairly evenly over time, with a few bumps on the road, the history of Devil May Cry has, at least in my eyes, been an absolute roller coaster, with everything from total disasters to action game gold."
Me leaving it out should be telling of my thoughts on it. Better than 2 as a DMC game.
Still a good game though.
3,1,4,5 to me, never played 2. 5 gameplay is amazing but level design was really disappointing to me, just a bunch of plain arenas, the story felt like a worse written rehash of the 3rd and the charater models looked weird ( specially the ladies ). Another problem with 5 was that there was not enough content for 3 charaters so I could never really familiarize with any of them
2.
Dmc.
4.
5.
1.
3.
God DMC2 was an awful game.
And in case this isn't obvious it goes worst to best
Order changes depending on your focus. I tend to focus on gameplay/fun factor, so...
5, 3, 1, 4, 2.
I really didn't like 4 but commend Dante's weapon diversity. The retreading of old ground was pretty unacceptable to me.
But even then... Still more enjoyable than 2 for me
Activision and Raven Software's 2006 action role-playing game, Marvel: Ultimate Alliance, has found its way to the Xbox Store.
Used to love this one, but X-Men Legends 1 and 2 will always be my favorites, especially Rise of Apocalypse. Would pay some good money to play it today with online multiplayer, back then I had no way to get a modem
I remember buying them dirt cheap on the PS4 and then a few days later I read they were delisted. I was wondering why the bundle was price so low and got my answer when that happened.
Sad to say this is one game franchise next to the Xmen that needs a sequel. I use to play the hell out of Xmen Legends and Marvel Ultimate Alliance. Was great when my cousin had the OG Xbox play with four other people and then playing online. Great games glad to see it reappear even though I own the discs love the mechanics of this game.
Misleading. This page is whats available for people who owned the game prior to delisting.
Plenty of unforgettable games have completely messed up their players throughout the years, all the way back from the PS1 days to the dark recesses of the modern internet.
“It's very hard to calculate the worth of a defensive business. I personally think Sony will have a really hard time with the PS3—fewer games at launch, $200 price premium, and yet they're losing more money per console than Microsoft is on the 360. More long-term, imagine no PlayStation 4 and how Microsoft might profit from such an environment.”
Yup it really could happen. PS3 failing like the mighty Nintendo once fell hard. And no PS4. Although I won't wish it. Competition is good. But I truly believe the PS3 will fall so freaking hard. Especially this Christmas when fanboys will say: "Damn here I have Killzone 2/3 CGI stuff but then ingame in Gears of War on this demopod... Why wait any longer? Let's buy the 360 with Gears and a couple of other games!"
I really see that happening, especially here in Europe. Ppl hate Sony for pushing it back to spring 2007
If they do not reach 20 million consols sold ver a 5 year span.
"Microsoft is willing to stay the course with its videogame business, despite the fact that it hasn’t been profitable on an annual basis since the original Xbox launched in 2001"
- That's just plain funny. But from a business point of view, thats REALLY bad business. The only damper to that statement is the fact that it's Moneypots Microsoft behind it so they don't care if they lose some money since they already have loads. Any other company would think, hmm, we've lost loads of money on this. Lets stop.
"Microsoft is insistent that it will move 10 million hardware units by the end of the year"
Ahaha, dream on. But they are refering to SHIPPING 10 million units, not selling. Shipping 10 million is of course possible. But if they think they're gonna sell 10 million consoles by the end of the year, FAT CHANCE. Its already taken them nearly a year to sell 5-6 million consoles. And with the Wii and PS3 launching in a few weeks, they think they are gonna crank up 5 million more sales by the end of the year?
Microsoft had a whole year to themselves and only sold 5-6 million consoles. They're never gonna reach 10 million consoles by the end of the year when they have competition
The only (possible) negative stories they can muster seems to be about MS's profits which happens to blow Sony's profits (on a whole) out of the water.
hey im not a fanboy cuz i dont buy games i just rent them ... but i see MS spending alot of $$ just to stay on the race ... they have billions to spend ... is true they havent even see any plus signs yet... i do think that even tho sony is shipping few consoles in a year they will sell more ...actually PS3 will be sold out for a year long since everybody will buy that thing