270°

Xbox creator believes modern Xbox's "narrative around being more powerful is not helpful today”

Xbox creator Seamus Blackley speaks on the current marketing attempt to push the brand as the "most powerful" console available.

Read Full Story >>
videogamer.com
ABizzel164d ago

It could be helpful only if the results actually show consistently across the board and has undeniable exclusive content to back it up. That hasn’t happened.

What has happened is the weaker platform of the two Xbox has outsold their high-end console allegedly 3:1, which paints the story that most Xbox gamers don’t care about performance. The concern, however, is if they give up the performance crown, then they basically give the battle to PlayStation for the 3rd party market/gamer for free.

They had a $299 console and a $499 console. But would only releasing a $399 Series SX console have worked any better for them, with it being 20% - 30% weaker in GPU performance than the PS5?

I don’t know, but getting off the same cycle as PlayStation like Nintendo did, would probably help Xbox find a healthier balance away from direct competition. Dropping AMD and going full Intel or NVIDIA could help Xbox develop its own software niches that could help them with hardware sales. Going more PC-Console like, will provide Xbox a niche for the family (Game & Work/School). They have a few areas to go hardware wise, the issue is what do they do about software and services now that they’re everywhere.

Scissorman64d ago (Edited 64d ago )

To your first point about the weaker console outselling the more powerful one, it really illustrates how badly MS misread its audience.

I believe folks like Phil Spencer, Matt Booty, and Aaron Greenberg, listened a little too closely to folks online who convinced them that having the most powerful console would somehow cause Sony's loyal install base to flock to Xbox consoles. They followed memes and influencers rather than the market. Phil Spencer rejoiced in an email when the PS5 specs were revealed, thinking that the Series X with its extra terra flops was going to be the deciding factor for the consumer, when in reality, the market had already abandoned Xbox previous generation. Xbox fans online slammed the PS5 for costing the same as a Series X while being a technically inferior machine. This sentiment is what MS execs were looking at. Now we see that not only did the general consumer not care about the slight power advantage the Series X had over the PS5, but Xbox's own audience settled for a cheaper, lower-spec machine, so the terra flops and spec comparisons didn't matter to them either.

XBManiac64d ago (Edited 64d ago )

They listened to their own navels and bank accounts, not the real world that would pay their bills. Where is the power advantage, when the real differences are VR, haptics, happy developers and marketing support? Xbox Series should have been far more powerfull to compensate and outperform PS5.

Abear2164d ago

They want Gamepass subs so a cheap console makes sense, making devs have parity in their games across their SKU’s does not make sense

Profchaos64d ago

It's also worth noting that during the PS4 era when Xbox was known as being weaker than the PS4 that caused some significant embarrassment internally and that drove the push to always have the most powerful system.

Although there's no modern console this time so they are in a weird position where they are going multi plat supporting a pro system while building next gen to leave gen 9 behind asap

abstractel64d ago (Edited 64d ago )

It doesn't matter if you have the most powerful console when you also release the weakest console in the generation, one that has held this whole generation back significantly. Had Microsoft released X only, I think we'd be seeing a much different picture today. They didn't, so Sony, despite their missteps this generation, outclassed Microsoft. Microsoft could have had such a different path because of the momentum they had with the Xbox360 where they capitalized on Sony's mistakes but chose instead to produce two generations of consoles that were inferior.

To suggest that their option is to try and do a Nintendo sounds bizarre to me. They don't have the nostalgia factor that Nintendo has. I don't think multi-platform is the way to go either for them if they want a successful console. What worries me is I think Microsoft will go somewhere in the middle for the next generation, more powerful than the Switch 2 but much less powerful than the PS6 which will hurt developers which in turn will be bad for everyone.

I hope I'm wrong.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 64d ago
XBManiac64d ago (Edited 64d ago )

4:1 (Xbox users care about money) They have now a $299 console with no disc drive option, a $349 console with no disc drive option, a $449 console with no disc drive option, a $499 console with disc drive, a $549 console with disc drive... against two models of PlayStation... Xbox is a mess.

S2Killinit63d ago

At this point they don’t have the most powerful console either, because that is PS5PRO. Seems like this article is a little late.

MS basically released their xbox Pro at the beginning of the gen, which leaves them where they are now.

Eonjay64d ago

So many different angles discussed here. The Xbox was marketed back in 2001 as the most powerful console and that was a part of its DNA and maketing approach; even being picked back up with the Xbox One X and was even part of the intial maketing for the Series X. Like Blackley suggested that approach can come back to bite you today as the cost of being the most powerful and the meaningful results are not really aligned. And even if they were, that cost is automatically reducing your potential market capacity. AI assisted tools like Frame Gen and Super Resolution are really going to remove any real utility from being the 'most powerful'.

I think this is really gonna help keep console prices in check going forward.

XBManiac64d ago (Edited 64d ago )

Xbox 360 was also the most powerfull console for a couple of years (and Xbox 360 games looked and played better than on PlayStation 3 for a while, as well as having experiences that were only on Xbox 360). All that was lost... and then came Xbox One... the end of Xbox started with Xbox One.

jznrpg64d ago

360 wasn’t more powerful it was easier to code for. Also those experiences that were Xbox only were bought and not made by MS and that’s why they are where they are at now. They didn’t come up with their own IP that gave them the know how to make great games. They paid for them and when XB1 wasn’t selling very well they had to pay even more to get exclusives which became less feasible.

OlderGamer1764d ago (Edited 64d ago )

I never forget the ridicoulus PR fraise..."its eating monsters for breakfast"🤗ԅ 13;🤗

Brazz64d ago

It's about balance...
It needs Power, but also needs to be accessible in price, not too complex for production volume, the balance between profit/subsidy (incentivizing the purchase of the console) needs to be taken into account over time, etc.

Sony did better job with PS5 balancing all factors.

XBManiac64d ago (Edited 64d ago )

A console needs something that sell enough units to spark continued interest from developers and the rest of the industry, whether it's portability, power, unique experiences, community, or whatever else they manage to establish as a standard for the platform. Xbox Series has never had none of these things... Even the price has been ‘the same as the other option’ and now, on top of that, Xbox Series seems even more expensive.

Abear2164d ago (Edited 64d ago )

Sony ultimately made devs make two versions of their game (Pro and Reg) so it’s kinda the same.

Where M$ screwed up is their lesser version is literally holding the industry back.

Popsicle64d ago

Releasing a next gen console and then 4 years later releasing a more powerful mid-gen refresh of said next gen console is not the same as releasing a previous gen console at the exact same time as your next gen console and expecting them to achieve parity.

XBManiac64d ago (Edited 64d ago )

First Xbox was not only more powerful, but different (Hard Drive, hardware shaders, unified memory, LAN, etc.). The problem was the software, the price and the marketing team full of noobs and overrated people in the industry that thought the Microsoft name was enough to go in demanding of everyone without the slightest bit of humility. Xbox 360, the first 3 years, fixed many things... but 'The past always comes back and hits you harder' (Splinter)

Abear2164d ago (Edited 64d ago )

Moving to cloud—resolutions and framerate are subject to internet connection and vary wildly—so unless you have Series X and play local, which is in opposition to their business model right now, then resolution and framerate are going to suffer and should not be a priority to the Gamepass streamer.

Show all comments (32)
190°

OG Destiny artist recalls Bungie’s “disgruntled” reaction to Halo 4’s art style change

Original Destiny artist Darren Bacon recalls how Bungie reacted to the art style change of Halo 4 by 343 Industries.

Read Full Story >>
videogamer.com
Tacoboto1d 9h ago

Bungie at that time became the most wonderful bunch of hypocrites in the gaming industry. Knowing this now, gosh the entitlement they felt was out of this world.

Nothing like buying yourself from Microsoft because you don't want to be the Halo Studio anymore, and the FIRST THING you do is sign your next IP over to Activision, for a DECADE, while they are in the middle of ousting the heads of Infinity Ward so they can exert even more control over COD while screwing out the devs at IW...

Should've come as no surprise then that Activision gutted the content of Destiny 1 before launch and was a horrible partner through Destiny 2, until history repeated itself and Bungie had to split from Activision only to wind up in the arms of another major conglomerate that also doesn't know how to handle these unmanageable devs.

Profchaos1d 3h ago

Tti their credit they praised the technical abilities of 343 and I remember at the time thinking halo 4 was a huge graphical leap above reach everything else was rubbish when I actually got to play it but there was no doubt it looked good for the 360 and is probably the best looking game on the system.

But ultimately I think bungie has always had a leadership problem and going independent ultimately proved this it's only getting worse with studio heads being outed by Sony for abuse allegations seems like all bungies past success has been in spite of management not because of it.

But really I think the bungie we have today is not the same one we had in that Xbox era of Bungie

PhillyDonJawn1d 7h ago

I liked the artstyle change. For the most part. Something looked worse but most of everything else looked better. Weapons and vehicles for sure. The wraith come to my mind instantly.
And how can they get mad when the bungie changed it with Halo Reach?

Sciurus_vulgaris13h ago

I know a lot of people dislike Halo 4’s arts style, but there’s thing about it I like and dislike. Personally, the Halo 4 design of Master Chief’s armour is my favourite depiction of the character’s armour.

80°

Dying Light: The Beast – interview with Tymon Smektala (‘Dying Light’ Franchise Director)

An interview with Tymon Smektala (Franchise Director, Dying Light) where I get to ask him as to how Techland was impacted by its DLC story leaks, how the studio has changed after being acquired by Tencent, where he sees the Dying Light franchise going in future, and how he's been able to maintain enthusiasm for the Dying Light franchise since he joined Techland 10-odd years ago. Enjoy!

Read Full Story >>
prankster101.com
70°

“We Are Currently Massively Overexposed And Massively Underprotected," Says Alix Wilton Regan

Alix Wilton Regan chats with TheGamer about the BAFTA Games Awards, AI, and the need for better protection for actors.

Read Full Story >>
thegamer.com