Xbox biggest advantage is Azure when it comes to the future of "Off-Console Gaming" but with Portal in the mix there is a reminder that there is close to 50 million PlayStation servers in people's homes around the world & growing.
When companies like Sony or MS talk about "off-console gaming" they mean to expand to PC and mobile gaming markets and in a secondary way to rival consoles. And mostly with native games, because cloud gaming is too niche as of today and will continue to be for at least 5-10 years.
Portal isn't included there because it's a PS5 accesory. It does remote play, which has nothing to do with cloud gaming or online multiplayer.
Inside the development and marketing costs of a AAA game for console, PC or mobile the server costs are a relatively small part of it. In cloud gaming, server costs are the main cost.
But in both cases, inside the server costs the part of Azure, that is the license of the software to manage the servers or renting servers is relatively small. By far the biggest part of the server costs is the internet bandwith and storage spent. That cost is obviously paid by MS, Sony or any gaming company with a cloud gaming service or online multiplayer games, etc and basically costs the same for all of them. It's the same for all. So there's no important advantage for MS. It's a residual advantage, the same than Sony owning most cloud gaming related game streaming patents, that MS and other companies have to pay to use.
Then there's the physical servers. Sony uses their own PS3/PS4/PS5 hardware based servers for PS Cloud gaming, with their own software to manage them. They can't rent Azure servers for that.
Then, there's the datacenters, which are big rooms/buildings full of servers put in optimal conditions. Sony, MS and other companies with huge online services put many servers across the world in datacenters owned by many big and small companies, in most cases local ones who store there servers for Sony, MS, Amazon, Meta, Google, Netflix and any big or small online app, game, web, streaming service etc. All the big companies like Sony, Amazon, MS or Meta have their own datacenters (way more in the case of MS than Sony) but they are often a small part of the total, being the majority of their servers stored in 3rd party datacenters around the world because it's cheaper than to have your own datacenter.
My question is: why even care about 'metrics' in the first place? Do these people own substantial number of shares in either company?
People care about metrics because love gaming and are curious about the performance of the companies to know if they perform better or worse than the others, because that may impact in the future output of the companies (as if investing more or less in this or that type of game because that worked better or worse).
Have nothing to do with the market value of shares. This is a gaming forum, not an investors forum.