We know, Phil, we know. That's what Gestridens was saying in that Discord leak, too
.
That's no longer possible. Both Sony & M$ have conditioned devs into expecting x86 PC-like boxes, so going down the Kutaragi route will only result in an even bigger defeat than what they're facing today. It would be interesting to see a modern take on EE/CELL design principles, but that ship has sailed.
Not necessarily. For starters I don't think Spencer is suggesting they want to "differentiate on hardware" as in a massive architectural shift CPU or GPU-wise. They're not gonna suddenly go back to PowerPC, or go for a MIPS processor, or revive Matrox to make a custom GPU. Granted, both PowerPC and MIPS are still in use and very capable, but there's little need for them in a modern gaming platform when x86-64 and ARM serve all the same needs, and are much more prolific in the gaming market.
He's basically hinting at two things: 1) that rumored Xbox handheld, and 2) the rumored PC OEM-style Xbox devices leaked in that Discord message over a year ago. Those are both ways they probably feel differentiate Xbox in hardware against platforms like PlayStation, even if MS are otherwise bringing all their games to PS, Switch etc. as a multiplat publisher.
And hell of a sub services/revenue killer for them.
This is a reason I still don't think those next Xbox devices are going to be completely Windows-based. Why they're going to be more "Xbox with deeper Windows integration" vs. the inverse.
If it's basically a Windows gaming box with some Xbox features on top, much the leverage with putting Xbox Store first-and-foremost and Game Pass alongside that, which they can currently do on the console, will be lost. Since MS puts all their games Day 1 on Steam, and there are cheaper (and arguably better) subscription services on PC both for normal gaming and cloud gaming, the only guaranteed money a Windows gaming box (w/ Xbox features embedded) could bring is off upfront hardware sales.
Whereas if they keep the underpinning OS to Xbox OS, but layer in enough Windows functionality so various Windows apps can natively run (I guess through compatibility layers), then when it comes to alternative storefronts they probably at least have a choice. They can still see the priciest model where you get access to those storefronts like you would on PC, but they could also do a lower-priced, soft-subsidized model tying access to those stores into a Game Pass subscription, like a locked contract, for some time period.
So they have the cheaper model with a smaller profit margin (or maybe even sold at-cost), but where they make up the profit over time through the Game Pass contract. And if it's someone who already has a subscription, you just have them pay the difference of whatever tier gives the alternative storefront access, for the set time period. And that tier, I figure would probably be an additional one above Ultimate.
It's probably their best option, and they could also retain standard over the hardware to a degree where even though they bring in PC-like modularity and upgrade options, they're purpose-built for their hardware, and maybe it's just MS and some select 3P OEMs making variants of them. There's also a degree of quality control they'd still be able to enforce, which gets lost if they go fully PC.