For me, as a regular COD player, I'm now doing PC Game Pass for a year, once every three years.
$144 a year, but I save my $70/year COD purchase. So if I waited on 2 years of Activision/EA/Bethesda/MS/etc titles, I can be damn sure there's at least $74 worth of games to play for the rest of the year. Indiana Jones alone pretty much got me there already. Yes, I'm renting but I never go back to the old games. You can say good job MS for getting $144 from me, but man in agg...
So, devil's advocate, if they didn't have the S perhaps there would be even fewer Xboxes out there? Maybe the S saved them from dying out even sooner...
Ok OO, I guess I'll bite. MS is trying to make Windows handheld friendly. Valve did that with Linux via SteamOS. First deployed it on Steam Deck, then generalized it so it can be released on different hardware. One of the handheld manufacturers are actually releasing a Steam OS version. This has been the first serious movement for gaming on Linux like ever.
Now MS wakes up and decides they should build a SteamOS experience into Windows. Completely a defensive move after Valve s...
Read the article. The VP of Next Gen is working on WINDOWS. That's because your next Gen Xbox is a PC. The ultimate gaming machine as you call it already exists except for backwards compatibility with console binaries which they've alluded to be working on...
So you DO get it, and you're just trying to confuse people via misdirection.
Only reason anyone would want Windows is when the game simply won't run on the Steam Deck. As long as steam OS continues to grow in popularity, that issue will become more and more uncommon. And they need to solve for the anti-cheat issues.
Outside of that, Windows has a LONG way to go before being in the same league as SteamOS.
That's not what this is
Exactly. Funny to see the misunderstanding here.
The VP of next Gen is telling us they're going to be spending this year working on ... Windows.
BTW, another great example of how MS does business. Waits until a competitor innovates, gets traction, and starts to threaten their Windows business before finally committing to try and copy them in the last minute. Now they've got a lot of catching up to do.
@Vits, "for their streaming service to function, they need console hardware" - not sure i get what you mean there. The strategy from their perspective is that you pay hardly anything for the hardware (a streaming stick and controller) and then pay more monthly as a sub, which is right in line with what they've been pushing with kinda everything from Office 365 to Azure. They currently have Xboxes racked up in their data centers, but they're pushing for cross platform saves s...
I'd be really surprised if MS is investing in the console space at this point. If anything is coming out next year I'd guess it's a streaming stick or something.
With XSX sales being worse than XB1, there's no way they'd release an incrementally better console next year for a super small set of customers. Phil alluded to that in an interview and said they're focusing more on the PC space, whatever that means. A new console with a new controller feature set is ...
@eon, yeah looking over the last year the avg might be down ~ 50k.
"obviously, if the player count went down on Steam it probably went down on every platform" - not if you believe that some % of people chose to get PC GamePass instead of buying COD this year. I'm just one person, but that's exactly what I did.
Wait, so you submit the story adding "console wars" to the title, then say it's not about the console wars. Clever.
So the news is that MS buys up all the biggest game developers and, in turn, are making a lot more revenue? Wow. In related news, if you eat more, you'll gain more weight.
Once the actual console was is over, the "how much is Microsoft making" discussion is even less relevant. It's not really Xbox anymore.
Doesn't feel like the game is designed for gunplay. I tried it a few times on hard, and when hordes of soldiers swarm you and headshots won't take them down in one shot you stop using them
Exclusives have always been the main driver towards console success. Why do you think that's changing?
Look at the streaming services - Hulu, Netflix Disney, Paramount, etc. Exclusive content is pretty much the only thing differentiating them.
And we're talking about console hardware - that's what this article i about. Xbox obviously won't need exclusives to be fully third party, if that's what they're doing
I don't think Xbox has the better OS - it takes up more space and resources if memory serves. I don't know if they kept the Xbox One architecture with the XSX (I'm guessing they did), but that was known for not being efficient at all. PS is Linux based and runs pretty lean - not a hint of Windows
Sony may be releasing exclusives on PC, but certainly not on Xbox consoles
Meanwhile, Steam has brought in the Steam Deck and of rumors are true, they may have a Steam Box in the making (again). While MS has been distracted buying up the industry and Sony has been distracted by dreams of GaaS, Steam has been quietly innovating. Good on 'em
Doubling down on your console would be pushing exclusives, not giving them away.
There's gotta be a line somewhere where they say it's not worth it anymore to invest in the next generation. None of us know where that line is, but every year they get closer to it (diminishing sales) and they're acting like they already crossed it.
@foxhole and @logic you guys couldn't be further from the truth. That's not how the console business works. You need exclusive content to draw and retain your customers so they buy games via your platform. Nintendo and Sony do this constantly. The only reason Xbox is moving away from this is because they're giving up on the console. If your next Xbox has Steam or Epic on it, it's not really a console anymore - MS would give up their cut on game sales just like on PC.