Unlike Sony, Microsoft [Is] In A Better Position To Take More Risks With The Xbox Brand

"Now, however, Microsoft is a revitalized company, on the back of its services offerings, and Windows is rebounding from the failure of Windows 8 with the success of Windows 10. The Xbox business, meanwhile, has suffered at the hands of the PS4 in recent years- all of which is to say that the importance of Xbox to Microsoft overall has diminished, and it has started a lot to feel like its own thing again."

[SpaceRanger]

It doesn't matter how much MS makes from its other assets. No smart person, no matter how much money their company makes, would want to lose money in any division. If MS truly didn't care about not being profitable in the Xbox portion of their hardware, they wouldn't be trying as hard as they are to be competitive against other successful hardware.

"MS has billions, they could just buy out the developers or the licensing for the game". I'm 100% sure that MS will not and has not ever dumped any of its billions (made from actual profitable assets) for exclusives on its own hardware that is not profitable.

[DrierofLeaves]

The article isn't about that at all, and it even addresses the point you are raising.
The article is simply saying that given Xbox's relative insignificance to Microsoft overall, compared to PlayStation's significance to Sony as a whole, Microsoft can go more nuts with Xbox than Sony can with the PS4. That's all. That's it.

[Aloy-Boyfriend]

And yet Sony has way more 1st party studios making games for it and investing pretty hard on them. Those AAA games ain't cheap to make. And let's not forgrt their 2nd party relationships making 1sr party content for them

Where are the 1st party studios Microsoft?

MS needs to take the risk with Scorpio to gain momentum and try to beat Sony with the PS4. On the Other hand, Sony is also taking the risk with Neo while investing a lot of money with all those AAA games they showed. They got less to worry about MS because they are on the lead, and yet they got PS VR which is a huge risk

If Sony was as doomed and poor as the haters say, how is it that the PlayStation division is so strong?

MS having other succesful assets is not helping Xbox at all. On the contrary, their Windows10 division is taking the games from Xbox. Sony struggling with their other business is not having any effect on PlayStation. So tell me Gamingbolt how gaming being significan/unsignificat to either company has anything to do at all with taking more risk? I would think that if gaming is not important to MS like you say, then they wouldn't be investing into it. However you have spun it into something that it isn't

[darthv72]

They both take risks. I think sony takes a bit more because, unlike their other products/services Sony is the holder of, the playstation is their most promising consumer oriented line. So they want to ensure it is getting as much funding and support as they can muster.

MS might not take the xbox (and gaming) as seriously as sony but to say they are in a better position to take risks is a bit misleading. Like kurata said below, no company likes to lose $$. MS has done many neat things in testing but their timing usually always gets overshadowed by another product that beats them to the punch. I can remember Gates demoing the original surface touch screen at a trade show long before there was such a thing as the ipad but it wasnt quite ready to be shrunk down (it was the size of a table after all) and when it was ready, the ipad had already become a huge hit.

Same with their zune media player. A great little unit (anyone who really used it would likely agree in comparison to the ipod) but it came out after the fact and trying to be an alternative to the ipod just doesnt work out. It didnt work out to the various number of portable media players from sony, creative labs, archos... the ipod was THE thing to have in spite of it also being a bit restrictive when compared to others on the market.

Consumers go where the popularity is because they feel if all these other people like it then I should too. With sony taking more risks than MS is why they are getting the PSVR and have secured various studios to provide content for their platform. I'm sure "Xbox" wants to take more risks but it is "MS" that pulls the strings. At least Sony is allowing Playstation to succeed (or fail) on its own merits. And it has been nothing but a success. Xbox should just concern itself with releasing some original games (like Sega had to do back in the day) to compete with the likes of ones that may be similar on other platforms.

That is where competing really comes into play, but unless MS realizes this then xbox will always be just a tertiary project for MS instead of primary or even secondary.

[Silly gameAr]

And, it's a gamingolt article, so it was made for hits. That's all. That's it.

If MS have more resources and were able to take more risk, then why haven't they throughout the xbox's life cycle? They've played it pretty safe until recently, when they decided to start the next gen earlier then usual.

[DarXyde]

That's...very similar to what Space Ranger is talking about. The difference is he/she addresses significance as profitability. You're literally talking about the same thing with less concise phrasing.

But to address the points here, Microsoft actually can't go more nuts. You need to consider the operating costs of these companies in relation to revenue. I don't have those figures, but it goes without saying that, although Microsoft has more money to toss around, they technically can't. They need to make conscious decisions to keep investors happy. The same applies to Sony. Since PlayStation is very profitable for Sony, it makes great sense to invest there.

HOWEVER, in light of the recent merging of Windows and Xbox, they likely have a shared pool of funds which benefits both. In that regard, Microsoft is doing pretty well. But Sony's also just about finished putting resources into PSVR's R&D which was pretty substantial. All I can say is neither are in a bad position to make moves. How much they have at their disposal is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things because employees at both companies are unlikely to be paid the same, the staff is unlikely the same size, the revenue and operating costs differ, and they're both still pretty prolific as it is.

[turdburgler1080]

Correct. If Sony screws up the Playstation they will go bankrupt .

[badz149]

"better position"? more like better financial backing!

[Notellin]

So what you're saying is because Sony needs PlayStation to be successful the ball is in Microsoft's hands to take risks?

If anything that means Sony is going to take more risks because they need PlayStation and the market to carry their business.

This article and the reasoning is just pure biased, opinionated trash. I'd say just by looking at things Sony has and is taking far more risks by releasing New IP's and creating it's own VR platform.

Regardless of how you feel about the console war and brand loyalty very few could argue Microsoft is taking more risks.

[freshslicepizza]

@pramath16051
"The article is simply saying that given Xbox's relative insignificance to Microsoft overall, compared to PlayStation's significance to Sony as a whole, Microsoft can go more nuts with Xbox than Sony can with the PS4."

this is true. all one has to do is look at how sony is addressing ps4 neo. they don't even want to talk about it yet we all know its coming. sony is so scared to make a mistake in their messaging that they need to analyze the reaction to project scorpio first. they also know they have to get the pricing right and be very clear they are not diving the ps4 userbase. their loyal fans are so vocal that sony is scared of doing anything that might get them some negative feedback which they cannot afford to have because so much is riding on the success of the ps4. the ps4 neo pricing and release date is likely to be announced very quickly before release as they also fear lost sales of those waiting.

sony was also last to announce pricing for vr because again they want to look like the mainstream hero's amd analyze what the others are doing first. that's why next e3 i would love sony to be first for once so thay cannot react.

[LabRat]

Pretty much, but your on N4G, so tread softly.

[Geoff900]

@XiKurapikaKurta Maybe MS is just waiting for their Scorpio, the current Xbox One isn't that powerful, so they need something with more humph behind it.

My honest opinion MS/Sony on the games department is neither are bringing out a lot of new games as much as prior gen, I think mostly because of sheer cost and time.

Both machines have a lot of 3rd party titles, and are heavily marketing them as their own exclusive games, I think we should wait a few years to see what devs are upto, this generation came too quickly and underpowered, and most devs are trying to do what they can with what they have got.

When their next consoles come to market their updated models, I think devs will have a lot more to show by then.

[Godmars290]

The only problem with the line of thought that gaming is insignificant in regards to MS versus their other concerns, than that means they aren't applying the right kind of attention to it. Is the very reason why they failed in Japan and the 360 lost ground against the PS3.

[thisismyaccount]

"The article is simply saying that given Xbox's relative insignificance to Microsoft overall, compared to PlayStation's significance to Sony as a whole"

What the beans are you talking about? Sony is making around $70+ billions annually, of which close to 15 come from PlayStation (~21%). Microsoft makes about 90+ billions annually, of which $10.18 come from the Gaming and Computing Division (~11%). We don´t have any real Xbox only data (without the Computing part like Surface/W10 etc.) only MAUS.

If the other Sony division would make more, PS "significance" would be lower around Microsoft levels. It just shows that MS makes more blingbling with Windows than Xbox since inception. Dunno if true or if the 360 was already in decline from 2009 on but :

"In 2009, worldwide revenue of the XBox 360 totaled about a miserable 2.09 billion U.S. dollars."
http://www.statista.com/sta...

Sony since 2008
http://www.statista.com/sta...
Microsoft 2012 - 2015 (in case this page is locked behind paywall) https://imgur.com/yk4hE82
http://www.statista.com/sta...

[pyroxxx]

They went very nuts already,.. So nuts in fact, that the xbox brand is globally irrelevant.

[freshslicepizza]

@thisismyaccount

here are the top 100 companies in the world by market value. microsoft is #5, where is sony? if this was prior to 2005 they would be right up there but we all know since then sony has retracted in value and in size.

http://www.statista.com/sta...

[XisThatKid]

Your absolutely correct and this is my exact point between MS and Sony. MS has tried to sell Xbox a few times in the past one rumor was Amazon was interested in buying a couple years back. Sony RELIES on PlayStation . At one point or for a while it was 47% of companies revenue. There's much larger space for error on MS part if they need it. MS is going to continue broadening the horizon with Xbox scope with attempted business risks.

[jb227]

"The article is simply saying that given Xbox's relative insignificance to Microsoft overall, compared to PlayStation's significance to Sony as a whole, Microsoft can go more nuts with Xbox than Sony can with the PS4. That's all. That's it."

...and there is a big difference between "can" & "will". Does anyone see MS as the biggest risk takers in the industry? Have they ever been hoisted w/ that title? The entire issue w/ Xbox is the lack of risks...they've focused in on the same handful of games for nearly 3 entire generations, and they are going back to the well to ideas like BC as ways to "innovate". Playstation just has a longer history of taking risks w/ games and functionality and they continue to hold that crown. Even now we see PSVR, the first & potentially only console VR solution on the market, along w/ huge new exclusive ip's like Horizon & ground up reimaginings of key franchises like God of War.

It's all MS can do to keep pushing out their big 4 (erm, now big 3 I guess after Fable got the ax) and picking up some timed or third party exclusives from time to time. I would give them the benefit of the doubt moving forward w/ relatively new brass in Phil Spencer, but he's already contradicted himself & flat out lied on multiple occasions in order to go back to the old business strategies. As Rise of the Tomb Raider was being released, he's claiming that he "Doesn't want to do any more timed deals" and that he "wants to own his games moving forward", only to announce less than a year later that MS will be pushing out yet another timed exclusive in DR4. This will be their modus operandi moving forward I assume, and it is the furthest thing from risky, I'd just call it cheap & reactionary.

[Christopher]

***No smart person, no matter how much money their company makes, would want to lose money in any division.***

That's the thing, MS hasn't lost money. They've always walked away with a profit at the end of the day.

The question is how much of a profit margin as well as how important that area of investment is to the overall business plan.

To answer that: profit margins aren't high but the arena of video games and closed platforms leading to licensing profits is essential to Microsoft's long-term plans.

Windows 10 is something Microsoft wants to turn into the equivalent of Google Play and iTunes. They want to ensure people have access to it by making Windows 10 free for as long as possible. They then want to make sure that developing for a wide array of platforms is as easy as possible by creating and promoting DX12 development with UWP so that you can port games across various platforms (phone, tablet, PC tablet, PC, console) faster than before.

[Goldfinger0]

BINGO! +1 for intelligence

[wsoutlaw87]

Its not good for a company like ms to have a division that only makes some profits, the amount matters. The xbox ties up millions, so the profit margin has to be more than they would make just having the cash in simple investments. Ms, as you can see with their original xbox one + kinect reveal and release, want to own your living room and have that device you use every day.

[yeahright2]

Strange, you say something and get mostly agrees, goldfinger simply says that he agrees with you but he gets mostly disagrees. N4G community, I love you but you're weird sometimes.

[yeahokwhatever]

"They've always walked away with a profit at the end of the day. " how many billions has the xbox brand lost to date? i know they had a couple of years in the black, after about 10 in the red.. are they still down over 6 billion? did they recoup some of that by recycling unused kinects? theres a reason many on the board aren't happy about the xbox brand, and its because its a money hole.

[Aloy-Boyfriend]

Sure because losing money💰is an option to any company... Right?

Sony takes a lot of risk as well. They got how many... 12 dev house under their umbrella? That's a lot of considering most, if not all, have over a hundred people working on each unlike MS who closed a handful of them. Sony still keeps pumping money to their gaming division despite the company hanging on a threat thanks to their electronic division. With PlayStation they got more reasons to push it even harder. It is not like they are gonna sink instantly for trying something. And yet, here they are getting into the VR market.

[joeorc]

@XiKurapikaKurta
100% exactly !

how do people think a company that along with crazy Ken took a $3 million investment in 1993, into a asset worth in the billions!

Playstation again is not a "Division" of Sony..its a Held Asset!

The PlayStation as it's own corpus has its own Board of Directors, it does not just get access. To Sony the holding companies money, like Microsoft's xbox Division gets.

Xbox division does not have its own Board of Directors that are separate from Microsoft.

Sony's PlayStation on any its expenditure is always a Risk..reason because it's in Million's.. Yes Microsoft's own Xbox division can be floated by Microsoft..no problem, but trying to imply Sony's PlayStation cannot take any risks, well it's ironic..because that's exactly what PlayStation always takes..all the time.

LoL.

[P_Bomb]

Well said. + bubble

[yeahokwhatever]

fun fact: playstation has to PAY for sony TVs in their offices.

[joeorc]

Direct from the article: claim

[Compare this to Sony- as GamesIndustry rightly points out, the PlayStation is now instrumental to the future, and therefore success, and even survival, of the company. Games, network services, television, VR, media services, software ecosystem, media formats- PlayStation is the vehicle for it all. This means that Sony cannot afford to screw it up with the PlayStation at any point- since the PlayStation is the vehicle that the future of Sony itself rests on.]

Stop..just please Stop..
1st off Sony's Survival as a corporate corpus does not reside in PlayStation for Sony's future Survival.
2nd off PlayStation is the 5th profit generations Whole owned "Subsidiary"

Unlike Microsoft's Xbox [Division]
PlayStation is Not a [Division] of Sony..it is a separate multiple Subsidiary Conglomerate!
With its own Board of Directors!
That is not the same thing as Microsoft's.
This is the 2nd time Gaming Bolt "opinion" pieces has been passed along on N4G as facts , when you would think those making claims would or should know more about how each companies corporate corpus is set up.

3rd the big claim again how Microsoft is this massive company..Sony employ over 130,000+ people at its company..PlayStation as a Subsidiary Conglomerate has less than 10,000 people employ at its Various world wide locations.

Market cap..is just a gauge for stock market to buy stock for cheaper..its based on "perceptions" on what rating agency's rate what a company's stock is worth..never mind the physical assets that the company own may in fact be worth billions in holdings.

Ironic thing is Dan Loeb who purchased 7% of Sony Stock was told to basically take a flying leap on his suggestion to put Sony's entertainment properties for Public offering..fast forward..PlayStation stock is still private held, no publication c offer is still worth billions , and Dan Loeb and his hedge fund took to its tail between his legs , sold off his Sony Stock.

Microsoft's still trying to put a PC under the TV, "taking Risks"

While Sony just said..screw it..were going to take PlayStation in, to take over the TV itself..your game console still needs a screen to display it's content, well chances are in the near future..Sony's making sure that smart TV has PlayStation software and services. Already on the TV itself..

PlayStation Vue is as a subscription service is on
Smart TV's
PlayStation 3 & 4
Roku
Amazon fire player and stick
Google's chrome cast, Android OS Google play store.
Apple iPad, iPhone, iPod..deal soon for Apple TV

While Again Microsoft's still after 38+ years trying to get the PC to be the default entertainment box for the Living room.
While pretty much everyone else is just taking over the TV itself..

If I was a betting Man, the ones being able to take chances in the computer entertainment marker for the Living room will include Sony as well because as of right now, no matter how hard Microsoft's tried to get rid of Nintendo or Sony to supplement them as the main computer entertainment box in the Living room just not has planned out.

Sony now has monetized the Cable TV user for the PlayStation Subsidiary. Which brings even more money into Sony itself.

[Silly gameAr]

Seems like you should make your own gaming website and write articles. You do a better job at explaining then Gamingbolt, and it sounds like you're actually well informed and do actual research.

[Rimeskeem]

I agree, I would rather read his articles than gamingbolts.

[Goldfinger0]

"Sony now has monetized the Cable TV user for the PlayStation Subsidiary. Which brings even more money into Sony itself."

Funny you would mention that as a positive, because when Microsoft mentioned TV the industry blasted them for talking about TV on an xbox. I remember reading the "Tv! Tv! Tv! comments on n4g" Now it's a good thing that Sony is offering a Television service on Playstation? I could have sworn Playstation community stated they bought a console to play games, not watch television smh.

[Pongwater]

I could have sworn MS got flack for introducing their new console more as a multimedia box than a gaming device, while Sony simply added multimedia functions to a device that was clearly gaming oriented.

smh

OT - MS is in a position where they have to take more risks, and you better believe it's a risk to throw their millions of console fans using controllers up against the mouse and keyboard PC users in online games.

[Goldfinger0]

@Pongwater

"millions of console fans using controllers up against the mouse and keyboard PC users in online games"

Phil already stated he wouldn't allow that disadvantage, that's common knowledge that a mouse will destroy anyone using a controller. Since we're discussing controllers, lets give MS props for offering their customers the option to customize any controller they want? Elite controller, or design lab. Wouldn't it be great if Sony offered such a service?

@XiKurapikaKurta

"Xbox fanboys still beating the dead horse?"

Hope you aren't referring to me as a fanboy of anything? I have a psnID, with vita platinum trophies and ps4 platinum trophies. I also have a steam ID with over 200 games, and an xbox live gamertag. But you wouldn't believe that considering you used the word "xbox fanboy", so you're obviously pro Sony anti MS/Nintendo lol

[iceman06]

The issue was the first impression. When gamers here about and see a new console, they pretty much expect games. However, the focus that MS chose (for that presentation at least) was focused on everything else. It just wasn't a good look at the time. Most people were well aware that it did, indeed, play games. But, the impression that was left (from that presentation) was that games weren't as important as pushing these other features. Otherwise, they would have been showcased. I heard and saw many diehard Xbox fans that were disappointed by that reveal and it's focus. It wasn't just a Playstation fan thing. (though it WAS part of the munitions used to flame the console wars)

IMO, people welcome features that can enhance the console. However, the games come first. PS3 initially took a lot of flak (mostly media) for their multimedia approach as well. People thought that the cost was driven up by that focus. (blu ray, every card reader imaginable, etc.) They even had games. At that point, it was a trust issue with pricing and the perception that Sony was arrogant for even suggesting such a high one. (even though they were taking huge hits per console)

[yeahright2]

Well the core issue there was MS screwed up their messaging. MS did mention that the games were going to show up at E3, and they did. Basically MS approached the reveal as a way to try and increase the size of the market that were interested in an X1 while not giving enough attention to gamers. Basically "TV" was just about all they talked about and fanboys on the other side smelled blood. Where as Playstation walked the line expertly when doing both, media and games. Basically people looked at MS and saw TV, they look at plasystation and saw games and TV as an option.

Also important to note is how they're doing it also works to Sony's advantage. MS was just doing a pass through. Basically your Kinect was a remote that used your voice and the xbox gave your directv or dish or whatever box a fresh new UI. And while that's nice and some people enjoy it, What Sony is doing is replacing that box. And with cord cutting fast becoming a viable option, PS vue was the better move.

[thisismyaccount]

Copy&Paste Own Comment/Reply from above:

Sony is making around $70+ billions annually, of which close to 15 come from PlayStation (~21%). Microsoft makes about 90+ billions annually, of which $10.18 come from the Gaming and Computing Division (~11%). We don´t have any real Xbox only data (without the Computing part like Surface/W10 etc.) only MAUS.

Sony since 2008
http://www.statista.com/sta...
Microsoft 2012 - 2015 (in case this page is locked behind paywall) https://imgur.com/yk4hE82
http://www.statista.com/sta...

[yeahright2]

It's thanks to comments like yours I can decide whether an article is worth clicking on or just click bait. Based on your own and some others, seems this was just written by someone rooting for xbox to try and get clicks.
Thanks joeorc, sorry you had to read through what sounds like a crappy article.

[YinYangGaming]

If anything it seems Nadella isn't being as generous as Balmer was with the Xbox budget this gen but we must remember Sony are more reliant on PlayStation than Microsoft will ever be on Xbox, but as long as they both make money (PSA they're both currently profitable) then Sony and Microsoft are happy

[IGiveHugs2NakedWomen]

Another "Sony is resting everything on Playstation" nonsensical article.

Anyone own a iPhone or Samsung Galaxy? Millions of people do and guess what? The diodes and image sensors in those phones are made by Sony...

Have you ever seen those ads for credit from Sony? That's because Sony is making a profit in international banking.

Ever heard of CAT scans, Xray machines, and other radiology equipment? Yep, Sony makes those and parts for them.

Sony also sells insurance, owns real estate, and has subsidiaries in every major market on the planet. Sony hasn't placed all of their eggs in one basket as the author claims, rather, Sony has merged elements of it's technological and entertainment business interests in order to form Sony Interactive Entertainment. Most of their divisions have always been profitable all except one, the electronics division. Sony kept manufacturing high end electronics that no one wanted, coupled with the global banking/financial crisis of 2008, Sony began losing money year after year until 2013, and losses were averted that year by selling off assets and getting rid of dead weight like Sony Online Entertainment and the Vaio laptop computer brand. A piece of advice to the next pseudo journalist who wants to write an article claiming Sony would be nothing without Playstation:

DO SOME RESEARCH INSTEAD OF MAKING THINGS UP!!!!

[Kaneki-Ken]

Don't forget that Sony owns a part of Blu-ray which help create it along with other top companies.

[MachuchalBrotha316]

Yes thats true, but Microsoft is also part of the Blu Ray association , granted they're not a co founder like Sony. But they are one of the companies in the board of directors for blu ray.

[MachuchalBrotha316]

Dude MS has as much going on in the real world sector as Sony does. Stop making as Sony is the only company to have its hands on everything aside from gaming. Just like MS has contracts with medical, military, NASA, etc. And your friend mentions blu ray....well did you know MS owns one of the codecs used on it. Do some research as well and stop making it like MS doesnt do shit either.

And I really dont care, but it was just funny how you went bat crazy on all the amazing things Sony does aside from gaming yet dont bring anything up for MS.

And still even with so many Sony ventures, MS still takes in more money than Sony as a whole. And thats a fact not made up.

[IGiveHugs2NakedWomen]

The article claims that Sony can't afford to take risks but everyone who has two eyes can see that Sony is taking all the risks while Microsoft sits back and rides the coat tails of others.

What has Microsoft put out this year that shows any form of risk taking? NOTHING. Meanwhile, Sony releases several exclusives with more to come and PSVR. The article just doesn't pass the snuff test buddy.

[yeahokwhatever]

all of the ignorance related to sony is based off of a couple of years where they had very expensive TVs on the market and at the same time, Vizio mainstreamed cheap TVs that people tell themselves is just as good so Sony's TV market crashed for a couple years and sony felt it. I have a high-end Vizio as a second screen for my PC(i like what vizio did, i just dont pretend theyre amazing sets). Its nowhere near as good as my 5 year old Panasonic Plasma, and it shouldnt even be considered in the same device category as a proper high-end sony tv.

[yeahokwhatever]

yep, and if you want to know what kind of camera iPhones will have in two years, just take a picture with an Xperia.

[gangsta_red]

"...all the risks while Microsoft sits back and rides the coat tails of others."

You pretty much proved MachuchalBrotha316 point. You went bat crazy explaining what you think Sony is doing but all the while never mentioning or acknowledging that MS has just as much investment in other areas besides gaming. Not to mention saying that MS is sitting back and riding coat tails just proves how you really don't have two eyes to see anything.

"What has Microsoft put out this year that shows any form of risk taking? NOTHING."

Really? So Sony putting out the sequels to the some of their most successful franchises this year and promoting them is more of a risk? Especially on one of the most successful console brand name on its fourth iteration?

[IGiveHugs2NakedWomen]

The article is making claims that have no basis in reality. Funny thing is you probably believe this nonsense that GamingBolt calls a story.

[Rimeskeem]

Here's the thing. There is one thing that Sony has and MS simply cannot beat them at. Sony cares more about their devs in every way. How many devs does Sony own now? 13? Plus they are attracting indies? Their is nothing that MS can do except pay for 3rd party exclusivity to even come remotely close to the amount of games Sony is shooting out. Hell, MS just gave up on exclusives and decided to put everything on PC do hopefully get more sells. And because of the PC they are making Scorpio not to compete with PlayStation but to compete with PC itself. They want to make a console stronger than a PC so people would rather buy the console and play their games on their console. Phil is trying to keep Xbox alive because let's face it. A company doesn't like taking hits in any part of their infrastructure so if a part is underperforming or failing they either lower the budget or cut it off entirely. would explain the cuts to the developers.

[Goldfinger0]

1) "Here's the thing. There is one thing that Sony has and MS simply cannot beat them at. Sony cares more about their devs in every way. How many devs does Sony own now?"

Let me ask you this, you truly believe that a hardware company cares more about developers developing software than Microsoft? We're referring to Microsoft the software company smh.
-Microsoft = Software & programming
-Sony = Hardware

Didn't Microsoft state they've invested over $1 Billion dollars on games this gen? Hell they even acquired Minecraft for $2.5 Billion, then acquired Havok engine for an undisclosed amount. Anyhow, why spew nonsense such as Sony cares more about developers than Microsoft, just because you prefer one brand over another? unnecessary considering neither company cares more than the other smh.

2) "And because of the PC they are making Scorpio not to compete with PlayStation but to compete with PC itself."

Why would Scorpio compete with a PC, that's running Windows 10? Project Scorpio is for the consumer who wants PC quality, but prefer to game on a console. There are over 250 million PC's with Windows 10 installed, and Windows 10 will be installed across every MS device moving forward. I don't see how they're competing against one another, when MS clearly stated (xbox one, xbox one s, xbox scorpio, phones, tablets, pc) are all under ONE umbrella/ONE ecosystem.

3) "They want to make a console stronger than a PC so people would rather buy the console and play their games on their console."

Why does it bother you that they want to make a console stronger than a PC? No console will ever be stronger than a PC, but with Project Scorpio and Microsofts UWP, I'm sure they want to offer a console as close a spec as possible.

4) "A company doesn't like taking hits in any part of their infrastructure so if a part is underperforming or failing they either lower the budget or cut it off entirely. would explain the cuts to the developers."

So what you're implying is that when Sony closed studios and laid off developers, they cared more about the developers than MS? smh,

[IGiveHugs2NakedWomen]

Compare the exclusive games that come from Sony's development studios vs Microsoft's development studios.

Microsoft only has 4 relevant development studios while Sony has what? 14 or 15? The "caring about developers" statement is a bit much, but clearly, Sony is more interested in m aintaining good working relationships with developers than Microsoft is. Microsoft does not encourage creativity, originality, or trying something new when it comes to the exclusive games that come to it's consoles. 90% of their games are geared towards white males. Even Lionhead Studios developers were butting heads with Microsoft's marketing execs over their "cookie cutter" development strategies. Sony allows their developers to explore, to create, to bring whatever vision they see to their games and it shows:
Bloodborne
Death Stranding
Days Gone
Detroit Become Human
The Last Guardian
Horizon Zero Dawn
Drawn to Death
Dreams
Everybody's Gone to the Rapture
Gravity Rush 2 - I've never seen anything like it
Here They Lie
Knack
The Order 1886
The Tomorrow Children
vs
Quantum Break, Ryse, Scalebound, Recore, Sea of Thieves

So what else are Microsoft studios and their third party partners working on? Nothing that exudes creativity or risk taking, that much is certain.

[ibrake4naps]

this is true. Sony is in NO position to take risks with the Xbox brand...

[ONESHOTV2]

of course with with US$ 93.58 billion (2015) in cumulative revenue compare to Sony 8 trillion¥ in (2016) you can convert if it if you want but it won't be the same as the US dollar. MS didnt put out their revenue for this year yet but i'm sure it's still going to be higher than the yen. anyway on topic i have said MS is forcing Sony hand but no one wants to listen MS likes competition but i dont think they are even paying attention to what Sony is doing the gaming business is pocket change to them that's why they are pushing most of their games to windows hoping they can get a little more out of it. if i was the the CEO i would have done the same as well. (edit) before anyone call fanboy or whatever i dont own any MS product except for windows 10 which almost everyone owns so dont type crap if you are going to reply.

[MachuchalBrotha316]

Lol...don't be so Naive. I like Xbox but don't go thinking MS doesnt care. All these moves have been to counter Sonys momentum. Its not helping but definitely making it better for the gamers who decide to support Xbox.

[Tallpine]

Ugh I had this response all written out then I noticed gamingbolt.

[BattleAxe]

"Unlike Sony, Microsoft Are In A Better Position To Take More Risks With The Xbox Brand"

Very true indeed!

[OB1Biker]

Yea another BS piece from GBOLT
Could as well be a piece about 'Unlike Ms, Sony are in a BETTER position to take MORE risk with the Playstation brand'

As long as they gets clicks for their console war baits.

[BattleAxe]

LOL

[uth11]

Actually that's backwards. MS can afford to be complacent in gaming, Sony can't.

[Goldfinger0]

"MS can afford to be complacent in gaming, Sony can't."

Um no! complacent was the xbox one console under Mattrick. Not being complacent is the xbox one S, backwards compatibility, xbox mobile app (game streaming, party chat across devices etc), Elite controller, Design lab controllers, etc...

[uth11]

The point is Xbox is such a tiny part of their business they can be complacent and it won't hurt their overall business much.

The PS4 is a much bigger deal to Sony on the other hand.. they really can't afford to screw it up

[superchiller]

Another totally biased, anti-Sony clickbait article from Gamingbolt. No surprise, the author (Rashid Sayed) has been trying to smear Sony for a while now. Best thing to do, just ignore the articles from Gamingbolt, they're totally biased and very poorly thought out.

[GNCFLYER]

Worst part about G bolt isnt even the articles.

Ever try going there on a mobile device? The ads destroy anything your trying to read.

[phoenixwing]

As others have mentioned in here. Sony with PSVR is a huge risk as well as the NEO. In fact I believe that VR is a misstep on their part but you have to risk catching on the latest fad if you want to stay in the game.

Edit: because you never know, a fad one day may be a thing in the future like 3d gaming

[susanto1228]

This is a no brainer Sony has already said that the PS4 is there major brand they will live and die by it....the Xperia was a horrible failure, the Vita (we know how that's going), their laptop division was sold off and Samsung #$#$# their TV line meanwhile MSFT main business is software.

[Skankinruby]

Microsoft has the funds to go nuts with their gaming division and yet they're stale as all hell. What's the point of bringing this up and what does it tell you about how much they really care?

[King_Lothric]

And yet it is Sony who take more risks, how ironic. Sony is taking risks by making their own VR headset while Microsoft is just giving support to others VR headsets (is that taking risks).

Sony is also taking more risks by allowing their studios to make new an exiting games like The Last Guardian, Horizon, Days Gone and others.

So, while MS has the money to do whatever they want, it is Sony who is really taking the big risks.

[subtenko]

Dumb, Microsoft has billions, yet they cut studios left and right, close projects like project spark, etc. Why all these devs prefer to develop so many exclusives for playstation when Microsoft has billions? Why is there even competition?

I'll tell you why.......cause microsoft has billions, so yall finished talkin about money or yall done? Ima go play a game

[WeAreLegion]

The title doesn't make sense. Read it again.

[iceman06]

Even the lead in is a jumbled mess of a message.

[Cohagen420]

Actually, the reason Microsoft has so much money is because they don't take any risks, and immediately look to cut anything that results in a loss.

[InTheZoneAC]

Microsoft is

not Microsoft are

and regardless of what M$ does, you can guarantee it's a mistake. They've proven they have failed several times and are desperate with their last resort, the Scorpio.

[KTF26]

They took a risk and the f**ked it up

[wsoutlaw87]

who wrote this title? Terrible sentence

[BioNeo]

"Microsoft is"...

[starchild]

It's not quite so simple. It actually depends on which dialect of English you speak, the meaning you are trying to impart, subtleties of emphasis, avoidance of ambiguity, etc.

Have a read here: http://english.stackexchang...

[Artemidorus]

It's Trollingbolt so not to be taken seriously until a credible website says the same.

[Deltaguy]

psvr, pstv, ps now are all bigger risk than anything xbox has done besides boxing in the kinect

[Psytrix]

If anyone is taking risks, it's Sony - and it's paying off.

[Psytrix]

Someone obviously disagrees - with which risk I wonder.... The PS Vita?..... The PSVR?..... PS Now?....... The amount of resources put into first party studios?

[DivineAssault]

We'll see about this scorpio.. Price and all before i even consider it.. I know they want my business and want windows in my home but they gotta earn it.

[ILostMyMind]

This site belongs to Microsoft? It is always decreasing the PlayStation and favoring the XBox. Always.

[microgenius]

Gamingbolt is pathetic

[Jayszen]

Ultimately, only games matter. We don't buy a console to just admire it but to play games and as long as the Playstation brand continues to deliver exclusive and multiplatform games, the console will remain popular regardless of what happens with the Xbox. If Microsoft does behave as their pals at Gamingbolt suggest, so what? Good for them. Meanwhile, Playstation gamers will be enjoying games on the PS4, PSVR and Neo. Everyone is happy!

[SatanicEyeJesus]

Man, another Gamingbolt imbecile article. People there are desperate to destroy PS.

[Sevir]

MS is taking less risks than Sony, Where Sony has Fully provided a platform for VR, MS has chosen to court external platform holders to license the VR platform to work on there's, much like they offered an offered an add on HD-DVD drive instead of incorpating Blu-Ray/HD-DVD as a format for going... They took less risks. And that's the business model they've always taken, they are never truly ahead of the curve they are usually reactionary to industry trends...

They Don't Have a dedicated VR platform, they do however partner with a competitor of Sony and support VR cheaply. That's what Scorpio is a platform that is reactionary and a support to VR and higher end gaming. They take risks but the risks are small.

Taking risks, big risks, is dumping money tons of if into the unproven, investing in your own proprietary technology in emergent markets and pushing it and hoping it becomes a viable success, HTC, Oculus, Sony they are in it.

MS has the money but they won't dive in and Risk it like they those three are.

Who knows if these new markets will be successful, but you only need to see which is trying to grow the market. You launch a platform, developers come to it.

[yeahokwhatever]

change to: "unlike sony, microsoft needs SOMETHING to work"

[DafunkyRebel]

Xbox should be brimming with heavy hitter exclusives yet they go for the same tired out franchises when they have the funds to truly make gamers happy is just unforgivable. When you have a company like Sony that makes less money yet are willing to dish out funds to make amazing games it really tells you how selfish MS and its investors are