-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Phillip W. Spencer III:"We want our Xbox hardware to win based on the hardware capabilities that we have.""
RetroGamingUK
Member
PS6 Pro specs, in 2028, unsubsidesed!?
If that isn’t the most expensive console in the world and it doesn’t appeal to gamers because it doesn’t have exclusives which makes it not a very good gaming machine.
unlurkified
Member
I’d be down for a $1,000 super powerful unsubsidized Xbox in 2026 if the top-tier Xbox games like Gears don’t hit PS5 on release and if the PS6 is confirmed to be at least two years away at that point.
GoldenEye98
posts news as their odd job
I've suggested before that like a 4yr All-Access plan would allow for a $1000+ console.
When you think of console generation length, increasing hardware costs and subscriptions. I feel like tying it all together will be the inevitable result for console gaming imo....
A $1000 console + 4 years of gamepass ultimate would work out to about ~$40/mth....
When you think of console generation length, increasing hardware costs and subscriptions. I feel like tying it all together will be the inevitable result for console gaming imo....
A $1000 console + 4 years of gamepass ultimate would work out to about ~$40/mth....
vaibhavpisal
Member
If it’s unsubsidised, even a few million sales would be profitable
NickFire
Member
Wouldn’t that basically be them giving away either 4 yrs of ultimate or a 1000 console?
Deal like that sounds solid enough. Just don’t see it happening though. They aren’t really going all platform because Phil had coffee with developers in my opinion. Feels more like he got told start making real money before that golden parachute gets deployed IMO.
Last edited:
GoldenEye98
posts news as their odd job
$20*48mths = $960 for gamepass ultimate
$1000 console + $960 = $1960
$1960/48mths = $40.83/mth.....
Rambone
Member
I could be tempted into buying another Xbox console if it ran a dual windows / xbox hybrid OS and was equivalent or better than my current PC spec which would be a gen12 i9, 64gb ram and 3080ti. Yea, I'd be happy to play games on whatever that might be if it was dead silent (unlike my current machine) . In the meantime M$ has removed most of the reasons I would buy a console in the first place which is exclusive access to games that I can't play anywhere else and is the reason why I still game on my Playstation and Switch.
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
It’s going to be a tough sell for sure
lughnasadh123
Member
What is even left for innovation to push console sales beyond the most dedicated core base when all your games are going to the other competitors?
NickFire
Member
My bad. I just woke up when I read that post. My math was way off. Thought the payment plan was only 2 years.
Last edited:
EverydayBeast
ChatGPT 0.1
Experienced the series x for Halo infinite unfortunately after Gears and MCC owning a series x didn’t feel like a requirement.
While this is appealing argument for forum nerds like ourselves, it's advertising to a tiny niche audience and we have 15 years worth of data on it being that already. It's not new, and it's only going to become an ever smaller niche with (their) consoles being a diminishingly small part of the market.
That aside - the whole 'platform war' strategy would be more interesting if MS showed a modicum of taking it seriously - but outside of their console devices, the UX and platform experience in general is incredibly poor, and well - plainly put - not competitive at all. And again - that's after a decade+ of investment into it - they no longer have the 'new starter' excuse, and even back when they did, it just cemented their irrelevance.
The only reason XBox store still has any visibility at all is that competition is collectively just as bad (outside of Steam), and they burned money on GamePass for over half a decade now to keep it visible.
RetroGamingUK
Member
Sony aren't relevant to MS in the bigger picture. They aren't exactly "owning the living room" as once feared.Let’s talk about what Sony did to Microsoft’s console business shall we
panda-zebra
Member
Spencer is expert at saying very little of substance while having the faithful read exactly what they want to hear into meagre words of worth.
In my eyes "winning hardware based on capabilities" does not invoke imaginings of all-powerful xbox behemoth some are far too eager to conjure, but a device that is accessible to many and not tied to a living room TV screen. Doing something a bit different than a box under a TV. Something cheap to produce in massive numbers where the first question won't be "can I afford it?". That kind of thing fits the bill for an xbox device that could "win" on capabilities, not an expensive PC with an XBOX sticker on it.
Your thinking is a nonsense. At just a few million units the BOM is fucking massive for a powerful device on the back of R&D, realisation and implementation. You have to do numbers to make anything viable in this space unless you're Valve and can subsidise such vanity projects; XBOX hasn't and won't ever function again as an entity funded by the warchest fighting imagined foes. Speaking of which...
Big wow. MS invented a bogeyman threat and set forth to slay a paper tiger of their own invention. Wasted billions fighting a war that was only ever in their head. lol. lmfao even.
Wake up. It's not about how relevant Sony are to MS, that's a fanboi fanfic distraction. What should have Spencer's devoted disciples concerned is how relevant XBOX remains to MS and how long it takes before serious pressure is applied if and when things don't go quite to plan yet again.
Cyberpunkd
Member
This is $500/year…
I think next few years will see a massive backlash to all the sub services that got greedy and pushed price increases to their limit.
The fact that Sony became a shadow of what they were in the 90s doesn't mean that there weren't other obvious benefits for MS to continue investing in the gaming space.
vaibhavpisal
Member
I don’t get it. Are you saying its not possible to make a powerful xbox?
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
To be fair, the most powerful console could appeal to plenty of people.
I think Xbox not guaranteeing any exclusives isn't the right strategy, but the most played games are multiplatform and a subset of gamers (the ones buying PS5 Pro, or the latest pc graphics cards) do want things to look as good as possible, so a powerful console without exclusives wouldn't be without charm. Sarah Bond and Spencer are both making noises that sound like Xbox are going all in on power. If they can find middle ground between high performance but between high price pc and Pro console prices, then some people will be interested. How mainstream that can be, I don't know, but pc seems to be growing in popularity so people do spend significantly to game.
To some degree, Xbox could depend on having the best version of more than 99% of all console games released, just no Spiderman. To some degree, for Xbox players there's no change in game selection.
The pitch is would you prefer the best version of Elden Ring, Call of Duty, Cyberpunk, Grand Theft Auto, Doom, etc. or another remake of The Last of Us, timed exclusivity of a final fantasy and another 3rd person comic book game in Wolverine.
Some people will balk at the price. Some people will want Sony's shaven headed space lady game above all else. But that doesn't mean nobody would want it and that it'd be a bad gaming machine.
Last edited:
Radical_3d
Member
RetroGamingUK
Member
I was referring to Sony as a company, not the PlayStation division.
RetroGamingUK
Member
DJ12
Member
The truth wouldn't hurt at this point.
Madserb2023
Member
I am not sure the strategy is sound. For the next Xbox to be a viable option over the PS6 without exclusives it would have to be significantly more powerful. There would have to be such a profound difference. It would have to be a case where the Xbox version runs at 120 and the PS6 version runs at 60. I would certainly buy one if it was the case. However, without taking a massive loss it would need to cost a lot more and people who want the best will just get a PC anyway.
It's relevant that Sony didn't become the force that MS feared.
You seem fixated on the sales of Xbox consoles, not me.
Around the time ps5 pro launched there was a quote from Phil Spencer saying he didn't think an expensive console would grow the market I might be wrong though I'll try to find it
Daneel Elijah
Member
I like the idea, but always found it basically impossible to put into practice. I hope that you can explain it to me if I am wrong, but I think that a new generation begins when the tech is there to make it worth it for gamers, devs and you can make a new console cheap enough. With tech slowing down, I was under the belief that Xbox can't make a console that can be powerful enough to be reasonably able to beat the PS6 while giving it 1 or even 2 years to get better tech. If the console is on top of that not sold at a loss if the rumors are true, then how can they make it sell outside of a few hardcore fans?
they cant. it'll be their last ditch, high-priced experiment, probably will not even launch world-wide, as the brand is basically dead in most parts of the planet.
will fail worse than series as you'd expect and their full sega-fication will be completed within 4-5 years or so.
of course accompanied by phil's sweat little lies at every step of the way too
Last edited:
Daneel Elijah
Member
I also think that their chances are really slim and that Xbox position is really bad right now. But the question is not about Xbox chances to have a great success next gen, it is more about how can they plan around their strengths and weaknesses for their hardware? We know that they are selling less than ever before. The PS5 is going to push for another 100+ millions consoles sold, and the brand should continue with the PS6. The Switch 2 will be there soon, and have no reason to fail as far as we know. With this competition, and the fact that tech upgrades are getting slower than before, all of Xbox choices will create problems for them. Discussing them outside of the expectation that they are doomed is what I am curious about. If Xbox plan to go early, will Sony just ignore them, or use the opportunity to beat them a their own game by upgrading their hardware to have a easy marketing win? Sell a cheap PS5 Slim, or have their own version of a Series S/X with the PS5 pro and the PS6?
Donald mac Ronald
Member
What's he talking about, who Is he talking to?
Has he Joe biden memory problems? This reads like something phil should have said just before the console launched 5 years ago..
This guy just talks nonsense none stop.
Has he Joe biden memory problems? This reads like something phil should have said just before the console launched 5 years ago..
This guy just talks nonsense none stop.
Yoboman
Member
Xbox and gaming in general was at its best when we had console aligned exclusives filling every niche
PS had MGS, Xbox had Splinter Cell
PS had FF, KH, DQ, Xbox had KOTOR/Mass Effect, Nintendo had Zelda
PS had Gran Turismo, Xbox had Forza, Nintendo had Mario Kart
PS had Jak/Ratchet, Nintendo had Mario, Xbox had Conker/Banjo/Psychonauts
PS had Uncharted, Xbox had Gears, Nintendo had RE4
PS had Killzone, Xbox had Halo, Nintendo had Metroid Prime
PS had DMC, GOW and Xbox had Ninja Gaiden
PS had Tekken, Xbox had DOA, Nintendo had Smash Bros
Or just the pure blockbuster rivalries like GTA and Halo shooting it out for biggest game of the year
Gaming was much more interesting with cross platform rivalries and we all tried to get every console back then because of it. Jealousy of the games you didn't have access to was just incentive to get those games
Xbox 360 was successful because of exclusives. Xbox hasn't come close since because they don't get it
I feel like I'm being gaslit by people saying exclusives are a bad thing
PS had MGS, Xbox had Splinter Cell
PS had FF, KH, DQ, Xbox had KOTOR/Mass Effect, Nintendo had Zelda
PS had Gran Turismo, Xbox had Forza, Nintendo had Mario Kart
PS had Jak/Ratchet, Nintendo had Mario, Xbox had Conker/Banjo/Psychonauts
PS had Uncharted, Xbox had Gears, Nintendo had RE4
PS had Killzone, Xbox had Halo, Nintendo had Metroid Prime
PS had DMC, GOW and Xbox had Ninja Gaiden
PS had Tekken, Xbox had DOA, Nintendo had Smash Bros
Or just the pure blockbuster rivalries like GTA and Halo shooting it out for biggest game of the year
Gaming was much more interesting with cross platform rivalries and we all tried to get every console back then because of it. Jealousy of the games you didn't have access to was just incentive to get those games
Xbox 360 was successful because of exclusives. Xbox hasn't come close since because they don't get it
I feel like I'm being gaslit by people saying exclusives are a bad thing
Last edited:
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
Well, just in the spirit of discussion, my point responds to the guy who says an expensive console without exclusives can't be desirable. I don't think that's true, that's all.
It doesn't mean it's what I want, or hope for, but I can see how it would be something some people would like.
If the criteria is "must grow the market" then that's something else again.
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
Well, I'm not an expert and was only responding to someone who said it was impossible for a console that pitched itself as a device that was more powerful but didn't have exclusives to be desirable. That was the whole point I was chiming in on.
TehGoomba7s
Member
sony doesnt have to do anything special to counter an early ms-box
microsoft is in no position to dictate any generation start, all of their game studios will be depending on ps5 sales for years to come. there would be a tiny user-base that will trust ms with yet another pricey hw purchase anyways.
and their box would be leapfrogged by ps6 in 1-2 years.
im pretty sure whatever they do will fail worse than series and they'll leave hardware altogether just after that.
they are already re-branding themselves as "microsoft gaming" and distancing from xbox
for a while, old and bitter xbox fans will continue to be traumatized by the crumbling of decades old console warrior identity, some will keep clinging to "sony too" blanket for comfort,
eventually nature will heal.
basically whatever happened to sega fanboys back at the day, i wasnt around
Last edited:
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
I was referring to Sony in general, not PlayStation. It is well documented that Sony experienced serious decline through the 2000s.
Halo is Back
Member
And yet actions at the company have given ZERO reason for people to buy an Xbox and I say this as a long-time Xbox fan and supporter. No way in hell will I buy another Xbox console moving forward. By the time a new console generation starts, I will invest in a gaming PC since both MS and Sony games are being ported to the PC now.
saintjules
Gold Member
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
Looks like Bill Gates fixed his server, Snoop is still an Xbox player as of a decade later:
Snoop Dogg and His 'Xbox Year in Review' Prove He's a True G-amer
With over 1,300 hours on his Xbox, Snoop Dogg has come out swinging to show that he's not afraid to throw down online.
www.vice.com
Hudo
Gold Member
Not true. He successfully resurrected Microsoft's PC gaming IPs. Flight Simulator and Age of Empires are very successful in their niches. And while you might argue that both are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, to me, they are actually not. Sony have let Wipeout and Motorstorm die, and that was a big contributor to me leaving Playstation behind. Bring the games, and I'll even make a fucking account on your dogshit online service, if the games are good.