Support NeoGAF

[Dabaus]

I am wondering since the decision was reversed so quickly if this was some just kind of reverse psychology scheme, to make Microsoft seem like they really are the good guys who care about consumers. After much deliberation we here at Microsoft have deemed that we only serve the players interest, bluster, bluster, bluster...thanks have a good day.

Nah, didnt they print xbl gold cards with increased prices like months ago?

Good guy Phil Spencer is one of the most hilarious propaganda I've seen. People think this guy is their friend and absolve him of all the blame even though he was the head of first party going back to 2008 and the head of Xbox from day 0 of the XBox One gen. Easily the worst gen ever.

I think microsoft on the whole is a broken company. I was watching this clip of Steve Balmer, Bill Gates and a bunch of other MS execs dancing on stage at the windows 95 launch and it just looked like they were completely clueless and in their own their reality. I have seen MS conferences where they have tried to sell me TV, kinectimals, a real life Porsche and Madden Kinect and it's always made me wonder if these people are detached from reality.

That's not to say Sony and Nintendo dont have bad conferences. Wonderbook and Wii Music will go down in history as the funniest and worst presentations ever. But there is always a feeling that the MS execs dont really understand their own market. Yusuf Mehdi, Matt Booty, Phil Spencer, and others feel like they come from a different planet even when they are trying to do something nice like giving us the most powerful console or selling us gamepass. It never feels genuine and almost comes across as them trying to do us a favor.

The fact that Matt Booty went out and said that we will not have any AAA next gen first party titles for the first 2-3 years is so goddamn delusional, I instantly refused to believe it. Many thought he was talking about the 2 years starting from 2019 so we would start getting games in 2021 but Phil later clarified that it will be starting from the Xbox Series X launch. These guys are completely out of touch with reality. They do not understand how to run this business. They dont want to run this business. They want gaming to be something else. Half of the things they do feel like self sabotage. Or things Mitt Romney would do when brought in as a firm to streamline the business and sell off bad assets.

Series S exists because of this mentality. Some exec looked at the $500 price tag of the series X and said 'nope, we need higher market penetration on day one, what else you got?' Gamepass so transparently fits in the services business model of their office and azure services that it's clear they are trying to shoehorn in this model that simply wont work for a myriad of reasons. Doubling the price is so delusional it reminds me of the tv tv tv conference because they are so out of touch with this industry. They want to keep changing it to be something it's not. People dont want to watch TV. They dont want to play Kinect games. They dont want to be forced into buying gamepass. If gamepass was really that amazing, everyone would buy it just like they did Netflix. HBO spent decades building up a portfolio. Gamepass has been around for like 3 years and MS thinks everyone must buy it.

This will never change because the company culture is rotten. These guys chase success and follow trends. They dont innovate. it's why Apple is where they are. I really believe they dont understand what gamers want. We dont want Gamepass. We want games.

Fantastic post and i see youre having a string of them! Its probably been pointed out before but XBL gold is like the only thing in the xbox division that consistently makes a profit. If theyre willing to be so careless about their only golden goose, then maybe the assumption that the xbox division has access to all of daddy nadellas money, no strings attached is a bit naïve. Clearly something is wrong money wise behind the scenes if theyre willing to DOUBLE the price of the only thing that makes money. Am i reading too much into that? Maybe.

 

[Shelookdlvl18]

You’re still on that excuse someone else thought of for you? Awesome! All they need is 3 or 4 more worldwide pandemics and look out 25 mil.... It’s still $1 and they’re still giving it away

You're absolutely the LAST person who should be telling someone that. You've been peddling your unfounded conspiracy theory around here ad nauseam. You're obtuse on a level rarely witnessed.

 

[FrankWza]

It’s as valid as your numbers

It’s not. We don’t know how much of that can be attributed to people staying home and how many paid $1 because it’s hidden behind hidden gold numbers. Again, padded

 

[THE DUCK]

Netflix has anywhere to 115-120 Million and still has issues making money.

Netflix has zero issues making money.

 

[FrankWza]

You're absolutely the LAST person who should be telling someone that. You've been peddling your unfounded conspiracy theory around here ad nauseam. You're obtuse on a level rarely witnessed.

And yet, nobody can present an official number or statement from Msoft to dispute it. Why? Because it’s hidden. And, coincidentally just doubled the price of gold . When you can show me the amount of gold users and the attach rate we can call it whatever you want. But they buckled under pressure because the majority of their customers have gold and were upset at the price doubling.

 

[NickFire]

Well, that was an absolute whirlwind of Xbox news this past weekend. I honestly don't know what was more stunning. The news that Gold doubled in price for a year, or the almost immediate scrapping of the plan with a sweetener (F2P becoming F2P) thrown into the mix? Could go either way there.

Anyway, in my opinion the decision to reverse course potentially saved their entire platform. MS may see GP as their future, but I don't see any road to that future if every single prospective purchaser knows they can't play multiplayer (including Fortnite) unless they pay $10 per month for the privilege. That is just way too extreme of a price hike in one fell swoop, and coming at the beginning of a new generation it was just begging to reduce Xbox's historical market share. This could have been even more damaging than TV & Kinnect, because at least those two albatrosses provided the consumer something whether they wanted it or not, while this literally just upped the cost for the sake of it.

All that said, and while they deserve kudos for reversing course, the initial plan has raised a ton of questions. Why was such a drastic hike even contemplated, never mind put into motion? When was it contemplated? What did they consider an acceptable loss of consumers when this was planned, and what metrics did they really on to determine they would blow past that to the extent they changed plans immediately? Why plan it for January 2021, as opposed to the launch of Series S/X? How vital to their long term strategy was the plan, and where does scrapping it leave them? How many full priced GP subscribers do they actually have, compared to people who got it essentially free? What percent of GP users stay on when their introductory price ends? Do they have anything in the next couple years that they expect to make GP look like a must have to casuals? Is the expected pipeline of games from all these purchases really so slim that they thought making Gold a really bad deal was the only way to get casuals to sign up and stay on?

 

[Papacheeks]

Netflix has zero issues making money.

Oh my sweet child.

Netflix loses the battle, but it's still on target to win Wall Street's war

Netflix shares fell after reporting fewer subscribers than forecast, but the company's main investment thesis remains in tact.

www.cnbc.com

Read that, and know that they had been borrowing money to fund a lot of their ventures for tv shows/ films. It's getting's less, but up till this past year they were still not in the making money hand over fist. And they still are not.

It has been borrowing billions each year to fund its plethora of original and licensed shows and movies. Believers in Netflix have predicted that as the company’s price-value proposition wins over the global population (with a product far cheaper than traditional pay TV in almost all regions of the world), it will eventually be able to fund its own programming without lending. This will propel the company into a reliable money-maker with plenty of growth runway ahead of it.
The company said Tuesday that it’s closer than ever to getting there. The grand plan is on track. Sure, the subscriber trajectory isn’t great -- from 15.8 million additions in the first quarter to 10.1 million in the second quarter to 2.2 million in the third quarter. But Netflix warned investors of this earlier this year, saying last quarter that most people who wanted Netflix for pandemic quarantines had already signed up.
The big story isn’t the subscriber miss. It’s that Netflix gets closer to self-funding. And that’s music to the ears of Netflix shareholders.

Netflix One Question: Is It Losing Money Or Making Money?

Netflix stock has emerged a star performer through the coronavirus pandemic, rising by ~25% year-to-date, as people consume more content while being confined to their homes. The company added close to 16 million subscribers over the first quarter, handily beating its guidance of about 7 million...

www.forbes.com

This shows that over the years they have been starting to make higher net income, but because of other streaming services like Disney+ they now 100% have to rely on original or exclusive content. Which is why they burn more cash than they bring in.

This probably is also Gamepass's issue now as well.

When Will Netflix End Its Cash Burn?

Netflix investors are debating the streamer's outlook more than ever after it lowered its subscriber growth forecast for 2019 on Oct. 16 ahead of November's launch of competitors from Disney and Apple, wondering when it will stop its cash burn.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

Maybe read up a little before making such posts.

 

[FrankWza]

but I don't see any road to that future if every single prospective purchaser knows they can't play multiplayer (including Fortnite) unless they pay $10 per month for the privilege.

Why plan it for January 2021, as opposed to the launch of Series S/X? How vital to their long term strategy was the plan, and where does scrapping it leave them? How many full priced GP subscribers do they actually have, compared to people who got it essentially free? What percent of GP users stay on when their introductory price ends? Do they have anything in the next couple years that they expect to make GP look like a must have to casuals? Is the expected pipeline of games from all these purchases really so slim that they thought making Gold a really bad deal was the only way to get casuals to sign up and stay on?

Excellent post overall but I’m just highlighting these parts as they are, to me, the biggest head scratchers. With out gold, you’re taking away value from so many games that, while may have a single player component or campaign, are largely thought of as multiplayer games.
As far as your part about the numbers, like I’ve stated a few times, why is it hidden? Is asking for some transparency out of the question? Why volunteer the 10 million and 15 million “milestones” but never mention a number in the 3 years prior? Why say that live has 90 million users, but let everyone have to guess how many are gold users that pay for the service?

 

[SlimySnake]

Why go through typing all that, only to completely defeat your own point at the end?

Much of your post is in reference to Microsoft as an entire company, rather than just the Xbox division. The actual points you touch on however, are more Xbox related.

You don't think MS execs don't have a firm grasp on reality, they're delusional, don't understand how to run a business, have rotten company culture, are out of touch with the industry, and are broken overall as a company. You mentioned each of these things in your post. You then conclude it by adding that MS "Chases success and follows trends", and that "they don't innovate. It's why Apple is where they are."

Where is Apple exactly if that's your comparison. They don't make a gaming console, and I'd hardly call much of anything about their play store as innovative. If you're comparing them as overall companies, it wouldn't be difficult to argue in Microsoft's favor there either. By summarizing your tirade with a 'That's why MS is successful like Apple is", you really just kinda defeat the whole point you were trying to make.

Even if we ignore that part, your entire argument doesn't hold much weight. The fact is, that they are indeed a successful company. They tend to innovate more than most companies. While they do follow trends at times, all companies do that, and as it relates to gaming... There's been several trends they haven't followed as well as trends they innovated and were subsequently followed. It boils down to this. If Microsoft were the way you described it, the facts, data, numbers, etc... wouldn't be what they actually are. So apparently, you might want to focus more on your own touch with reality vs MS's.

Apple has completely changed the world with the iPhone. Their iPods were technological marvel at the time, and while they have slowed down in recent years, the iWatch and iPads are innovative products in every household.

Microsoft on the other hand sat on their laurels after the success of windows. Their foray into gaming is pretty much the only new somewhat successful consumer facing product they have made in over two decades. Zune, windows phone, all disasters. Azure subs, MS office subs, and other services have brought them success, but they are a services company now. They cannot compete with Apple on products. And they cannot compete with Sony and Nintendo on games. So they are chasing the services model on consoles instead of trying to innovate and make products worth buying.

The Apple comparison is literally there to show that this isnt a xbox problem, it's a Microsoft problem. Just like how they werent able to keep up with Apple, they are struggling to keep up with Sony and Nintendo, and pivoting to services to emulate the success of their parent division. Chasing that service model in this industry is entirely flawed because gaming is part of the entertainment industry, and simply offering services without innovating or inspiring will not do.

 

[SlimySnake]

Nah, didnt they print xbl gold cards with increased prices like months ago?

Fantastic post and i see youre having a string of them! Its probably been pointed out before but XBL gold is like the only thing in the xbox division that consistently makes a profit. If theyre willing to be so careless about their only golden goose, then maybe the assumption that the xbox division has access to all of daddy nadellas money, no strings attached is a bit naïve. Clearly something is wrong money wise behind the scenes if theyre willing to DOUBLE the price of the only thing that makes money. Am i reading too much into that? Maybe.

It could be them realizing they overpaid for zenimax and that they simply would have to launch games on the PlayStation to make the money back. So they do the next best thing and rip off their fans who have stayed with them through it all. Make no mistake, despite all the mistakes at the start of the gen, Xbox one sold 28 million in the u.s, only 6 million behind the ps4. They did this because they knew they would get away with it.

Either that or they are trying to get everyone to sub to gamepass and they thought this would get everyone to sub to gamepass instead.

Either way i agree this is desperate.

 

[NickFire]

Excellent post overall but I’m just highlighting these parts as they are, to me, the biggest head scratchers. With out gold, you’re taking away value from so many games that, while may have a single player component or campaign, are largely thought of as multiplayer games.
As far as your part about the numbers, like I’ve stated a few times, why is it hidden? Is asking for some transparency out of the question? Why volunteer the 10 million and 15 million “milestones” but never mention a number in the 3 years prior? Why say that live has 90 million users, but let everyone have to guess how many are gold users that pay for the service?

I've basically always assumed they hid numbers / changed how they report things because they wanted to give the appearance of winning from behind. At this moment I'm wondering if they have been / are trying to prevent an outright shareholder mutiny regarding the future of the division under the MS umbrella. I might get flamed for suggesting that possible hypothetical motivation, but there has to be a lot more to the story than they decided to double the price of Gold for shits and giggles, and then changed their mind in response to the obvious and predictable audience reaction. To me it screams of a desperation move followed by a desperation move, and the exact opposite of what I would expect from a company who knows its audience and the industry overall.

 

[Rolla]

This will never change because the company culture is rotten. These guys chase success and follow trends. They dont innovate. it's why Apple is where they are. I really believe they dont understand what gamers want. We dont want Gamepass. We want games.

Your whole post was well thought out but I really felt the bolded... I remeber the interview Phil Spencer gave about Horizon Zero dawn...

“The audience for those big story-driven games... I won’t say it isn’t as large, but they’re not as consistent,” says Spencer. “You’ll have things like Zelda or Horizon Zero Dawn that’ll come out, and they’ll do really well, but they don’t have the same impact that they used to have, because the big service-based games are capturing such a large amount of the audience."

Xbox chief: we need to create a Netflix of video games

In a frank discussion about the modern games industry, Phil Spencer discusses the potential of episodic games and pros and cons of downloadable content

www.theguardian.com

• Horizon Zero Dawn Launched in February 2017
• Phil Spencer gave that interview in April 2017
• Horizon Zero Dawn Hits 10 Million Copies sold in February 2019

Three years later, Phil is still yet to release any IP that builds confidence, mindshare, or momentum beyond his core supporters. Three years later, Phil doubles the price of his subscription service to mass public outcry. Three years later, Phil has yet to release any IP that has the same, similar, or even in the same realm of sales success as Horizon Zero Dawn.

This debacle for me shines a spotlight on just how hollow the " X amount of players" PR really is.

 

[FrankWza]

It could be them realizing they overpaid for zenimax

they’ll get their pound of flesh somehow

possible hypothetical motivation, but there has to be a lot more to the story than they decided to double the price of Gold for shits and giggles, and then changed their mind in response to the obvious and predictable audience reaction.

Unfortunately, due to their lack of transparency, we’re only left to make what are assumptions by definition. But let’s be honest, it’s pretty obvious there’s more to it.
Live had been a paid service for many years, but they don’t disclose numbers that separates the paid from “active” users. Then they don’t mention anything about gamepass numbers for 3 years but are quick to point out hitting 10 and then 15 million. One thing I can say for sure is, more x gamers want/need gold than gamepass. They know that and that’s why they’re Trojan horsing it in.

 

[SlimySnake]

Your whole post was well thought out but I really felt the bolded... I remeber the interview Phil Spencer gave about Horizon Zero dawn...

“The audience for those big story-driven games... I won’t say it isn’t as large, but they’re not as consistent,” says Spencer. “You’ll have things like Zelda or Horizon Zero Dawn that’ll come out, and they’ll do really well, but they don’t have the same impact that they used to have, because the big service-based games are capturing such a large amount of the audience."

Xbox chief: we need to create a Netflix of video games

In a frank discussion about the modern games industry, Phil Spencer discusses the potential of episodic games and pros and cons of downloadable content

www.theguardian.com

• Horizon Zero Dawn Launched in February 2017
• Phil Spencer gave that interview in April 2017
• Horizon Zero Dawn Hits 10 Million Copies sold in February 2019

Three years later, Phil is still yet to release any IP that builds confidence, mindshare, or momentum beyond his core supporters. Three years later, Phil doubles the price of his subscription service to mass public outcry. Three years later, Phil has yet to release any IP that has the same, similar, or even in the same realm of sales success as Horizon Zero Dawn.

This debacle for me shines a spotlight on just how hollow the " X amount of players" PR really is.

yep. I will never forget that comment. It felt so out of touch.

BTW, It's almost February 2021 so 4 years since Horizon Launched in 2017. ;p 4 years in which his best game was Forza Horizon 4 a racing game. And we are looking at at least 2-3 more years before Fable, Avowed or PD0 come out.

As much as I liked their acquisition of Zenimax, I am no longer hopeful about it. I thought them buying so many studios meant that they were in it for good and were in it for the right reasons, but stuff like this erodes confidence in their leadership and worse their intentions. Everyone is in it for the money, but its the way you go about it that matters as well. Those $7 billion went to games that would have come out on Xbox anyway instead of first party games that would move this industry forward. Especially with Sony dragging their feet with cross gen games creating this void of true next gen games with new ideas that change the way we play games. In February 2017, Phil could've signed off on next gen launch titles taking full advantage of these amazing CPUs and SSDs leaving Sony scrambling to get their games out.

 

[FrankWza]

Those $7 billion went to games that would have come out on Xbox anyway instead of first party games that would move this industry forward.

The longer it stands idle the more those returns diminish. You’re right. They would have been better off investing half that in studios that could have games ready for launch and gone after market share. Instead, they’re setting up the zeni games to hit when these introductory or $1 subs start to expire so they can keep them paying a monthly fee.

 

[devilNprada]

Oh my sweet child.

Netflix loses the battle, but it's still on target to win Wall Street's war

Netflix shares fell after reporting fewer subscribers than forecast, but the company's main investment thesis remains in tact.

www.cnbc.com

Read that, and know that they had been borrowing money to fund a lot of their ventures for tv shows/ films. It's getting's less, but up till this past year they were still not in the making money hand over fist. And they still are not.

It has been borrowing billions each year to fund its plethora of original and licensed shows and movies. Believers in Netflix have predicted that as the company’s price-value proposition wins over the global population (with a product far cheaper than traditional pay TV in almost all regions of the world), it will eventually be able to fund its own programming without lending. This will propel the company into a reliable money-maker with plenty of growth runway ahead of it.
The company said Tuesday that it’s closer than ever to getting there. The grand plan is on track. Sure, the subscriber trajectory isn’t great -- from 15.8 million additions in the first quarter to 10.1 million in the second quarter to 2.2 million in the third quarter. But Netflix warned investors of this earlier this year, saying last quarter that most people who wanted Netflix for pandemic quarantines had already signed up.
The big story isn’t the subscriber miss. It’s that Netflix gets closer to self-funding. And that’s music to the ears of Netflix shareholders.

Netflix One Question: Is It Losing Money Or Making Money?

Netflix stock has emerged a star performer through the coronavirus pandemic, rising by ~25% year-to-date, as people consume more content while being confined to their homes. The company added close to 16 million subscribers over the first quarter, handily beating its guidance of about 7 million...

www.forbes.com

This shows that over the years they have been starting to make higher net income, but because of other streaming services like Disney+ they now 100% have to rely on original or exclusive content. Which is why they burn more cash than they bring in.

This probably is also Gamepass's issue now as well.

When Will Netflix End Its Cash Burn?

Netflix investors are debating the streamer's outlook more than ever after it lowered its subscriber growth forecast for 2019 on Oct. 16 ahead of November's launch of competitors from Disney and Apple, wondering when it will stop its cash burn.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

Maybe read up a little before making such posts.

You are completely mixing up cash flows and net income...
This industry has large cash outlays with long term benefits and amortizations...
Negative cash flows does not mean not profitable!

This is old news though... they recently hit 200 million subscribers...
Also CNBC

Netflix shares see their biggest jump in four years

The company revealed in its Q4 2020 earnings report that it was considering stock buybacks and surpassed 200 million subscribers for the first time.

www.cnbc.com

 

[mckmas8808]

They were just testing the waters. They'll be back at it. MS genuinely looks more and more like they are completely clueless about this video games thing.

This does feel like they were testing the waters. There's NO WAY in the world MS would change a policy like this without thinking through all the issues gamers would have with it. Just to it back 18 hours later......nah. They are trying to find a way to pay for that $7.5 Billion acquisition. MS will be back in 6 months with a different way to make up that money (now lost due to the reversal).

 

[sainraja]

I think the Bethesda purchase caught the attention of other execs at MS and there has to be some internal debates going on. Phil has a good vision for where xbox needs to be, the problem is it's going to cost tens of billions and we probably won't see Game Pass' full potential until 2023 at the earliest. Will corporate MS hold on until then while Sony ravages them in sales and the press?

Hardcore gamers are a tough crowd to please and enterprise MS probably thinks Game Pass should be snagging tens of millions of users now... they don't understand it takes known IP and massive, exclusive AAA games to bring them. Most hardcore gamers could give a shit about cost, they will buy what they want for whatever the price. Bottomline, MS needs Elder Scrolls 6, Fallout 5, etc, etc sooner rather than later.

I think the potential of game pass has already been shown. We just don't have a clear direction of its future and somethings that are yet to be delivered (e.g. new first party games day and date).

 

[LisaMariaMartin]

This does feel like they were testing the waters. There's NO WAY in the world MS would change a policy like this without thinking through all the issues gamers would have with it. Just to it back 18 hours later......nah. They are trying to find a way to pay for that $7.5 Billion acquisition. MS will be back in 6 months with a different way to make up that money (now lost due to the reversal).

They haven't bought Zenimax yet.

That move wasn't about cash. It was about converting Gold users to GPU which is pretty much all they care about these days. They miscalculated and reverted. Thats really all there is to it. You're delusional if you actually think MS of all companies is jonesing to recoup a clear long term investment into gaming in such a short amount of time. It's completely idiotic to even contemplate.

 

[mckmas8808]

They haven't bought Zenimax yet.

That move wasn't about cash. It was about converting Gold users to GPU which is pretty much all they care about these days. They miscalculated and reverted. Thats really all there is to it. You're delusional if you actually think MS of all companies is jonesing to recoup a clear long term investment into gaming in such a short amount of time. It's completely idiotic to even contemplate.

The bolded is about recouping money for a long term investment. Stop think MS isn't a business.

 

[Papacheeks]

You are completely mixing up cash flows and net income...
This industry has large cash outlays with long term benefits and amortizations...
Negative cash flows does not mean not profitable!

This is old news though... they recently hit 200 million subscribers...
Also CNBC

Netflix shares see their biggest jump in four years

The company revealed in its Q4 2020 earnings report that it was considering stock buybacks and surpassed 200 million subscribers for the first time.

www.cnbc.com

You did not answer what I put up and if you actually read any of those links it talks about debt, and cash issues netflix has had for years. Hence why they increased their prices a couple years ago, they were not making money, but gained market share because of the number of subs. They are in more debt than net profit. If they didn't have such a large spending budget, they would have more net income reported.

You should read the things you post:

The video streaming giant said it expects to become cash flow positive after 2021, helping to make the bull case for analysts.

Share price is irrelevant to net income which is what you actually make. Their share price is so high because of the amount of subscribers not the amount of money net profit wise they are making. Revenue they made 20+ billion, but only took home 1.86 billion out of net income. Thats not good. And that is because of their spending.

Netflix: net profit by year 2000-2023 | Statista

Netflix's net profit amounted to 5.4 billion USD in 2023. This was an increase of around 1 billion USD from 2022.

www.statista.com

Netflix’s worldwide video content budget surpassed 12 billion U.S. dollars in 2018, marking a five-fold increase since 2013. The streaming platform has become known for its many original shows reaching fans across the globe, including ‘Stranger Things’, ‘Orange is the New Black’, and ’13 Reasons Why’.

And now think about how Microsoft literally spent more than half of that on one giant purchase with Zenimax. Not including how much it cost to buy ninja theory, double fine, obsidian. On top of opening more studios/projects. ANd on top of the deal they made with EA, and from rumors possibly Ubisoft. Look at netflix as what is in store for microsoft. The good news is they seem to be making moves similar to Disney+ to own most of their own content for their service.

 

[sainraja]

You must really love Sony, you bring them up all the time in Xbox threads.

The best chance is for MS to do it first not Sony, the one in the lead is always the least likely to throw away free money for good PR. MS are the ones that need the pendulum shift, not Sony.

If they did that, that would be the biggest reversal that there ever was since for years they were the only ones pushing for paid online and maintained that charging a monthly/yearly fee is necessary to continue to maintain it. You are right that they are in the position to be able to do it and influence the rest of the industry but I doubt they actually will do it given the history. I think they did such a good job of convincing everyone of that is why when Sony finally did it no one really made a fuss and just understood it as a necessary thing. I know many people argue (to this day) that XBL is much better than PSN but I've played online on both platforms and a lot more on PSN during the PS3 era and I don't have that many complaints from playing online on it.)

 

[Shelookdlvl18]

Apple has completely changed the world with the iPhone. Their iPods were technological marvel at the time, and while they have slowed down in recent years, the iWatch and iPads are innovative products in every household.

Microsoft on the other hand sat on their laurels after the success of windows. Their foray into gaming is pretty much the only new somewhat successful consumer facing product they have made in over two decades. Zune, windows phone, all disasters. Azure subs, MS office subs, and other services have brought them success, but they are a services company now. They cannot compete with Apple on products. And they cannot compete with Sony and Nintendo on games. So they are chasing the services model on consoles instead of trying to innovate and make products worth buying.

The Apple comparison is literally there to show that this isnt a xbox problem, it's a Microsoft problem. Just like how they werent able to keep up with Apple, they are struggling to keep up with Sony and Nintendo, and pivoting to services to emulate the success of their parent division. Chasing that service model in this industry is entirely flawed because gaming is part of the entertainment industry, and simply offering services without innovating or inspiring will not do.

You can't boast about how Apple changed the world with their iPhone, and then point to MS testing on their laurels after windows, and expect to be taken seriously. They both were leaders in those markets, and continue to do so.

Microsoft is a bit more then simply a services company. Do suggest otherwise is either done so out of bad faith or lack of knowledge. They're also a software company, as well as a hardware company. You list two disasters as examples of them failing, while listing three that suggest they're successful. All while trying to argue that they're a failing company that doesn't know how run their company, and being out of touch with reality.

As far comparing Apple and Microsoft? Considering that both regularly trade places as the richest companies in the world, I would assume that 99% of people would easily conclude that they're both successful companies that are innovative and trend setting leaders in their industries. Seeing as you're obviously in that 1%... We can just disagree I suppose on that front. If you believe that in the first place, I doubt anything posted here would effect your opinion anyway.

Microsoft compete just fine in the gaming space. The position that Microsoft occupies in the gaming industry is one that any of the other Tech giants would kill to have... Apple included. Atari struggled in the gaming industry. Sega, struggled in the gaming industry. It's such a daunting and expensive task to be successful in the gaming platform market that it's simply beyond reach for almost every company. The ones that got in early like Nintendo, and to a lesser extent Sony are enjoying the spoils from doing so. Microsoft was able to get in just before the buzzer so to speak, and had to play catch up, but they made it. And as such are also able to enjoy them as well.

As far as Microsoft pivoting to a services model? I believe Sony was using that model with PSNow before Gamepass came along. So you could potentially have your "gotcha" moment there as far as them chasing trends. Of course doing so would require you to explain what makes MS a failure and Sony (or anyone else) a success in that regard. Not to mention the fact that MS now currently leads that model which their competitors now follow them on. Simply waving away the model as flawed due to the games being part of the entertainment industry is strange. Netflix is successful and exists in that very industry. Hulu, Amazon, Disney, etc... They all use almost the exact same model in the entertainment industry. EA, Ubisoft, Epic, Stadia, etc... are currently using such models in the gaming industry. Despite Gamepass having arguably the best value for games, and despite it being among the most successful.... You're claiming that it's a failure in progress because it doesn't inspire or innovate to your liking.

I'm doubtful of your prediction.

 

[Dabaus]

It could be them realizing they overpaid for zenimax and that they simply would have to launch games on the PlayStation to make the money back. So they do the next best thing and rip off their fans who have stayed with them through it all. Make no mistake, despite all the mistakes at the start of the gen, Xbox one sold 28 million in the u.s, only 6 million behind the ps4. They did this because they knew they would get away with it.

Either that or they are trying to get everyone to sub to gamepass and they thought this would get everyone to sub to gamepass instead.

Either way i agree this is desperate.

Snake, youve said alot about MS and I agree with you. With that said what do you think about sony at the moment and their seemingly radio silence? Do you think its wise that Jim Ryan is focusing on organic growth even though seems like a weekly event that a studio gets gobbled up by a bigger one?

 

[Shelookdlvl18]

This does feel like they were testing the waters. There's NO WAY in the world MS would change a policy like this without thinking through all the issues gamers would have with it. Just to it back 18 hours later......nah. They are trying to find a way to pay for that $7.5 Billion acquisition. MS will be back in 6 months with a different way to make up that money (now lost due to the reversal).

Maybe, but I seriously doubt the reason is because they're scrambling around trying to find a way to pay back that $7.5b.

Microsoft has a history of making bewildering decisions that they immediately reverse depending on how the consumer base reacts.

 

[NickFire]

This does feel like they were testing the waters. There's NO WAY in the world MS would change a policy like this without thinking through all the issues gamers would have with it. Just to it back 18 hours later......nah. They are trying to find a way to pay for that $7.5 Billion acquisition. MS will be back in 6 months with a different way to make up that money (now lost due to the reversal).

I suppose the shortage of new gen consoles gave them cover to test waters without actually losing customers to a competitor's purchase. But why would they ever do a market test like this? They could have done the same thing with a simple "off the record" phone call to a couple journalists where they leaked the plan in advance. They would have gotten the exact same audience reaction when the possibility of a doubled price was floated on twitter, and then been able to deny that it was ever in the plans when it was resoundingly rejected by their audience.

The more I think about the last few months, the harder it is to shake the feeling that they have been writing or planning to write checks that the shareholders aren't gonna want to see cashed based on internal numbers.

 

[LisaMariaMartin]

The bolded is about recouping money for a long term investment. Stop think MS isn't a business.

I think you need to stop thinking Microsoft is a mom & pop store that is hurting after buying too many cans of pepsi.

 

[quest]

yep. I will never forget that comment. It felt so out of touch.

BTW, It's almost February 2021 so 4 years since Horizon Launched in 2017. ;p 4 years in which his best game was Forza Horizon 4 a racing game. And we are looking at at least 2-3 more years before Fable, Avowed or PD0 come out.

As much as I liked their acquisition of Zenimax, I am no longer hopeful about it. I thought them buying so many studios meant that they were in it for good and were in it for the right reasons, but stuff like this erodes confidence in their leadership and worse their intentions. Everyone is in it for the money, but its the way you go about it that matters as well. Those $7 billion went to games that would have come out on Xbox anyway instead of first party games that would move this industry forward. Especially with Sony dragging their feet with cross gen games creating this void of true next gen games with new ideas that change the way we play games. In February 2017, Phil could've signed off on next gen launch titles taking full advantage of these amazing CPUs and SSDs leaving Sony scrambling to get their games out.

When would of those Zenimax came out for Xbox 1,2 or 3 years after they launched on ps5? Ryan locked up the first 2 zenimax games and was inches from closing Starfield. What studios in February 2017 was Phil supposed to make all these games with? The new studios closed in june 2018 and the best ones already had games in development. Microsoft higher ups invested to late in the division for the launch. Even Ryan with the best studios on the planet the best he could do was a remaster of a ps3 game and ps4 dlc. No God of War no Spiderman 2 no Horizon 2 no naughty dog game ect.

 

[SlimySnake]

You can't boast about how Apple changed the world with their iPhone, and then point to MS testing on their laurels after windows, and expect to be taken seriously. They both were leaders in those markets, and continue to do so.

Microsoft is a bit more then simply a services company. Do suggest otherwise is either done so out of bad faith or lack of knowledge. They're also a software company, as well as a hardware company. You list two disasters as examples of them failing, while listing three that suggest they're successful. All while trying to argue that they're a failing company that doesn't know how run their company, and being out of touch with reality.

As far comparing Apple and Microsoft? Considering that both regularly trade places as the richest companies in the world, I would assume that 99% of people would easily conclude that they're both successful companies that are innovative and trend setting leaders in their industries. Seeing as you're obviously in that 1%... We can just disagree I suppose on that front. If you believe that in the first place, I doubt anything posted here would effect your opinion anyway.

Microsoft compete just fine in the gaming space. The position that Microsoft occupies in the gaming industry is one that any of the other Tech giants would kill to have... Apple included. Atari struggled in the gaming industry. Sega, struggled in the gaming industry. It's such a daunting and expensive task to be successful in the gaming platform market that it's simply beyond reach for almost every company. The ones that got in early like Nintendo, and to a lesser extent Sony are enjoying the spoils from doing so. Microsoft was able to get in just before the buzzer so to speak, and had to play catch up, but they made it. And as such are also able to enjoy them as well.

As far as Microsoft pivoting to a services model? I believe Sony was using that model with PSNow before Gamepass came along. So you could potentially have your "gotcha" moment there as far as them chasing trends. Of course doing so would require you to explain what makes MS a failure and Sony (or anyone else) a success in that regard. Not to mention the fact that MS now currently leads that model which their competitors now follow them on. Simply waving away the model as flawed due to the games being part of the entertainment industry is strange. Netflix is successful and exists in that very industry. Hulu, Amazon, Disney, etc... They all use almost the exact same model in the entertainment industry. EA, Ubisoft, Epic, Stadia, etc... are currently using such models in the gaming industry. Despite Gamepass having arguably the best value for games, and despite it being among the most successful.... You're claiming that it's a failure in progress because it doesn't inspire or innovate to your liking.

I'm doubtful of your prediction.

There is really nothing more to be said here. You continue to miss the point behind the Apple comparison and I am done trying to explain it to you. I mean who gives a shit if MS has a $1.6 trillion market cap when they have not put out a single GOTY contender in well over a decade? Or put out a product on par with the iPod, iPhone, iWatch or iPad that consumers actually use. They are all enterprise at the moment which is great business, and I never said otherwise.

If you think MS being able to compete is good enough then good for you. I expect and want more. I want games, not services. I want innovation, not profits. I am not a stock holder. I am a gamer. Gamepass changes the delivery model, it doesn't change the industry like we would want a great innovative game to. Azure brings them billions, but I dont see anyone here jerking off to it or lining up to buy it like we do iPhones. Xbox is their gateway to that kind of entertainment product, and I am sorry but just competing isnt good enough.

If it was they wouldn't be going out there doubling the price of gold to get people to sub to gamepass. People would embrace it like they did Netflix back in the day.

 

[Shelookdlvl18]

The bolded is about recouping money for a long term investment. Stop think MS isn't a business.

No, they pretty much nailed it. MS is certainly a business, and what they stated doesn't suggest otherwise.

MS has Gold, it has Gamepass, it has Ultimate, and it's the start of a new gen, with new people trying to navigate them. It's pretty much universally opined by analysts that the move was designed to encourage new users towards Gamepass Ultimate.

Pretending they're scrambling to recoup money for any purchase... Much less one they haven't even completed yet doesn't make near as much sense. Stop thinking MS isn't one of the richest entities on the planet.

 

[SlimySnake]

Snake, youve said alot about MS and I agree with you. With that said what do you think about sony at the moment and their seemingly radio silence? Do you think its wise that Jim Ryan is focusing on organic growth even though seems like a weekly event that a studio gets gobbled up by a bigger one?

I think Jim Ryan is just as clueless. I really dont think there is a grand plan here. He was going out there trying to buy up timed exclusives thinking he could compete with MS's war chest and inadvertently forced MS's hand. Now millions of PS owners might never get to play Star Citizen, the next Doom, the next Elder Scrolls or Fallout. He's a moron who had his bluff called out by Microsoft in one of the most embarrassing defeats ever for a CEO.

I look at the $10 price hike on games, constant buying of timed exclusives, their 180 on cross gen games, games like MLB going mulitplatform, Horizon going to PC, and I see Microsoft-lite. Jim is the kind of guy who would love to double the price of PS+.

When would of those Zenimax came out for Xbox 1,2 or 3 years after they launched on ps5? Ryan locked up the first 2 zenimax games and was inches from closing Starfield. What studios in February 2017 was Phil supposed to make all these games with? The new studios closed in june 2018 and the best ones already had games in development. Microsoft higher ups invested to late in the division for the launch. Even Ryan with the best studios on the planet the best he could do was a remaster of a ps3 game and ps4 dlc. No God of War no Spiderman 2 no Horizon 2 no naughty dog game ect.

Microsoft should've made Halo and Gears 5 next gen only titles. Especially by 2018 when they first revealed Halo via the slipstream demo. It shouldve been clear to them by 2018 that the gen was over and they shouldve just made it a next gen only game back in 2018. Ninja theory didnt need to make that trash game I cant even recall the name of. Even if they didnt make launch, a fall 2021 Hellblade 2 wouldve been something.

I think everyone has mismanaged this coming generation. The only difference is that Sony closed off the generation with a bang with basically three GOTYs in the last three years and several other goty contenders on top of that. They get a pass for now, but if they fuck up some more with underwhelming gow and horizon gameplay demos, they are going to get a pushback. The problem is that their direct competition is literally phoning it in right now so if Horizon 2 and GoW2 look cross gen as fuck like Miles then compared to Halo Infinite they would still look next gen. It's hard to get outraged when we dont know whats possible with this next gen.

 

[devilNprada]

You should read the things you post:

I said negative cash flow has nothing to do with net income...
Which is absolutley true, when you look at the change in assets.


Let's not get insulting....

Because this post was 100% wrong...

Netflix has anywhere to 115-120 Million and still has issues making money.

 

[Knitted Knight]

One thing from reading a lot of the reactions here, on twitter and elsewhere is the fact that GamePass is simply not enough to sell the box (the Xbox). It's very telling when your consumers are threatening max exodus and coming to terms with the reality of divorse that the marketing bubble of the "best value in gaming" falls through to the abyss. A lot of your own core simply don't want it, nor see the value you tout. If you can't even fool your own with underhanded upsale strategies you really think you're going to draw from the core of the competition because of said "selling point"? Yep, I got a waterfront home in the middle of the saraha to sell you too. How's that plan to recoup $7.5 billion going? Not off to a great start now is it? Unless folks assumed that was for charity? What's the timeline? 6-10 years? Does Phil even have a full generation leash? Folks that continue to invest with vast digital libraries on a brand that has transcended the box itself (out of necessity) are walking a slippery rope. This whole drama also goes back to one central point - people will pay for quality, whether that be Nintendo games or Sony blockbusters - they'll pay the price, and go where the quality food is. Nothing is ever gonna change that.

 

[pasterpl]

There is really nothing more to be said here. You continue to miss the point behind the Apple comparison and I am done trying to explain it to you. I mean who gives a shit if MS has a $1.6 trillion market cap when they have not put out a single GOTY contender in well over a decade? Or put out a product on par with the iPod, iPhone, iWatch or iPad that consumers actually use. They are all enterprise at the moment which is great business, and I never said otherwise.

If you think MS being able to compete is good enough then good for you. I expect and want more. I want games, not services. I want innovation, not profits. I am not a stock holder. I am a gamer. Gamepass changes the delivery model, it doesn't change the industry like we would want a great innovative game to. Azure brings them billions, but I dont see anyone here jerking off to it or lining up to buy it like we do iPhones. Xbox is their gateway to that kind of entertainment product, and I am sorry but just competing isnt good enough.

If it was they wouldn't be going out there doubling the price of gold to get people to sub to gamepass. People would embrace it like they did Netflix back in the day.

that’s so funny to read, when;

Snap, Microsoft and Tesla are the world's most innovative companies of 2020, according to Fast Company ... Siemens, Sprout World and Elvie lead in Europe - GeniusWorks

Innovation drives the world forwards at incredible pace. Augmented reality that brings joy into the daily lives of more than 163 million people. Drones deliver vital medicines across the remotest parts of Africa. Brands develop creative business models to reduce society’s addiction to new...

www.thegeniusworks.com

also games like flight simulator are more innovative (tech wise) than anything that Sony produced in the last decade, you want innovation in gaming space as a gamer, you shouldn’t be looking at goty rankings, while Sony games a highly rated they are not innovative, it is the same blue print with different label (that’s my opinion, I owned all playstation consoles, still own PS4 pro and played most of Sony exclusives released last gen)

 

[Dabaus]

I think Jim Ryan is just as clueless. I really dont think there is a grand plan here. He was going out there trying to buy up timed exclusives thinking he could compete with MS's war chest and inadvertently forced MS's hand. Now millions of PS owners might never get to play Star Citizen, the next Doom, the next Elder Scrolls or Fallout. He's a moron who had his bluff called out by Microsoft in one of the most embarrassing defeats ever for a CEO.

I look at the $10 price hike on games, constant buying of timed exclusives, their 180 on cross gen games, games like MLB going mulitplatform, Horizon going to PC, and I see Microsoft-lite. Jim is the kind of guy who would love to double the price of PS+.

Microsoft should've made Halo and Gears 5 next gen only titles. Especially by 2018 when they first revealed Halo via the slipstream demo. It shouldve been clear to them by 2018 that the gen was over and they shouldve just made it a next gen only game back in 2018. Ninja theory didnt need to make that trash game I cant even recall the name of. Even if they didnt make launch, a fall 2021 Hellblade 2 wouldve been something.

I think everyone has mismanaged this coming generation. The only difference is that Sony closed off the generation with a bang with basically three GOTYs in the last three years and several other goty contenders on top of that. They get a pass for now, but if they fuck up some more with underwhelming gow and horizon gameplay demos, they are going to get a pushback. The problem is that their direct competition is literally phoning it in right now so if Horizon 2 and GoW2 look cross gen as fuck like Miles then compared to Halo Infinite they would still look next gen. It's hard to get outraged when we dont know whats possible with this next gen.

I agree with you about Jim Ryan, he seems clueless, short sighted, and in over his head. He seems cheap as well for some reason. Its ironic to me that hes the one who said "content is king" a few years ago and yet only micoprosft is the one actively expanding the type of content available, how they manage it is another story altogether though.

Another thing i dont understand is why Sony hasnt rebranded PSNOW or attempted to make it more appealing, even marketing wise acknowledge. I dont want them to make it their only focus but seems like a good enough service to be proud of and having 5 or 6 million people actually paying 10 bucks a month wouldnt hurt the bottom line and seems like realistic goal. I wonder if behind the scenes third parties are seeing drastic declines in software sales on xbox and have asked sony to "tone down all this streaming talk, were getting killed here."

 

[Salty Popsicle]

One thing from reading a lot of the reactions here, on twitter and elsewhere is the fact that GamePass is simply not enough to sell the box (the Xbox). It's very telling when your consumers are threatening max exodus and coming to terms with the reality of divorse that the marketing bubble of the "best value in gaming" falls through to the abyss. A lot of your own core simply don't want it, nor see the value you tout. If you can't even fool your own with underhanded upsale strategies you really think you're going to draw from the core of the competition because of said "selling point"? Yep, I got a waterfront home in the middle of the saraha to sell you too. How's that plan to recoup $7.5 billion going? Not off to a great start now is it? Unless folks assumed that was for charity? What's the timeline? 6-10 years? Does Phil even have a full generation leash? Folks that continue to invest with vast digital libraries on a brand that has transcended the box itself (out of necessity) are walking a slippery rope. This whole drama also goes back to one central point - people will pay for quality, whether that be Nintendo games or Sony blockbusters - they'll pay the price, and go where the quality food is. Nothing is ever gonna change that.

The only people on social media complaining about Xbox GamePass are those who own the competitor consoles.

 

[quest]

that’s so funny to read, when;

Snap, Microsoft and Tesla are the world's most innovative companies of 2020, according to Fast Company ... Siemens, Sprout World and Elvie lead in Europe - GeniusWorks

Innovation drives the world forwards at incredible pace. Augmented reality that brings joy into the daily lives of more than 163 million people. Drones deliver vital medicines across the remotest parts of Africa. Brands develop creative business models to reduce society’s addiction to new...

www.thegeniusworks.com

also games like flight simulator are more innovative (tech wise) than anything that Sony produced in the last decade, you want innovation in gaming space as a gamer, you shouldn’t be looking at goty rankings, while Sony games a highly rated they are not innovative, it is the same blue print with different label (that’s my opinion, I owned all playstation consoles, still own PS4 pro and played most of Sony exclusives released last gen)

Actually a lot of the Sony games have followed the uncharted-last of us template. It is a great template just insert different play mechanics. That is why so many of them feel the same. Even the last God of War was the template down to the side kick. I'll buy and play many of them but they feel the same like a wes craveb movie

 

[AgentP]

also games like flight simulator are more innovative (tech wise) than anything that Sony produced in the last decade, you want innovation in gaming space as a gamer, you shouldn’t be looking at goty rankings, while Sony games a highly rated they are not innovative, it is the same blue print with different label (that’s my opinion, I owned all playstation consoles, still own PS4 pro and played most of Sony exclusives released last gen)

So a flight sim that has been around for decades is innovation, but things PS VR and Dreams is nothing. Gotcha.

 

[fallingdove]

that’s so funny to read, when;

Snap, Microsoft and Tesla are the world's most innovative companies of 2020, according to Fast Company ... Siemens, Sprout World and Elvie lead in Europe - GeniusWorks

Innovation drives the world forwards at incredible pace. Augmented reality that brings joy into the daily lives of more than 163 million people. Drones deliver vital medicines across the remotest parts of Africa. Brands develop creative business models to reduce society’s addiction to new...

www.thegeniusworks.com

also games like flight simulator are more innovative (tech wise) than anything that Sony produced in the last decade, you want innovation in gaming space as a gamer, you shouldn’t be looking at goty rankings, while Sony games a highly rated they are not innovative, it is the same blue print with different label (that’s my opinion, I owned all playstation consoles, still own PS4 pro and played most of Sony exclusives released last gen)

It's strange that the article you link to chose to focus on Fast Company's subjective criteria while also referencing BCG's much more scientific innovation review which takes into account R&D and business performance (Microsoft is near the top on both lists by the way). That said, I don't know that the article disprove's SlimySnake 's comment. Innovation is extremely subjective and both lists take into account contributions from every business unit and not just Xbox.

Personally, I feel as though the graphics tech, story telling, and and even consumer devices (mass market DVD in PS2, bluray + cell in PS3, mass market VR with PS4, and mass market liquid metal cooling + custom I/O tech in PS5) have "felt" more innovative than the industry standard/off the shelf approach that MS has typically taken.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

The only people on social media complaining about Xbox GamePass are those who own the competitor consoles.

If people who own Xbox also already own Gamepass, then we wouldn't get the situation of outrage when the price of Gold doubled. Because the only people who are being shafted by it are those who pay Gold but doesn't pay Gamepass. So you are saying these people don't exist, and those non-existent people are the ones who forced Xbox to back down?

 

[fallingdove]

So a flight sim that has been around for decades is innovation, but things PS VR and Dreams is nothing. Gotcha.

People tend to ignore the non-GOTY nominated content. Even games like Gravity Rush, Patapon, Locoroco, Parappa the Rappa, and Astro Bot RM have pushed outside the box ideas while other companies have stuck with the tried and true.

 

[Papacheeks]

I said negative cash flow has nothing to do with net income...
Which is absolutley true, when you look at the change in assets.


Let's not get insulting....

Because this post was 100% wrong...

So I was wrong with the number of subs not the part about not making money. They if you clicked on that site shows you from 1998 to now where they are. They made 1.86 in net profit it 2019m but spent some odd 20 billion. Their market cap is what is very strong and stock, but in terms of profitability, no. They just in the past couple years have started to make some kind of profit after operating income is taken into consideration.

But because of original movies/shows they spend way more on average than they make. WHich is why they had cash flow issues and still are not out of the woods. Look at how long they have been doing this. Now there's even more competition with Disney plus which also owns ESPN+ AND HULU. They are bigger than netflix in terms of IP worth.

So you literally used my estimate number for amount of subscribers as the talking point to correct me? In all the links I provided? ANd we are talking about how much more expensive it is for video game service. Operating cost has to be way more for gamepass than streaming.

 

[NickFire]

I think Jim Ryan is just as clueless. I really dont think there is a grand plan here. He was going out there trying to buy up timed exclusives thinking he could compete with MS's war chest and inadvertently forced MS's hand. Now millions of PS owners might never get to play Star Citizen, the next Doom, the next Elder Scrolls or Fallout. He's a moron who had his bluff called out by Microsoft in one of the most embarrassing defeats ever for a CEO.

Thank you for the sensible chuckle, but was this meant to be as satirical as it sounds?

 

[Majima Everywhere System]

For me, this only goes away with a public statement that the Xbox Live Gold price will never increase, and have it in their terms. They should never have charged for Gold in the 360 era once DLC and arcade kicked off, and it only gets less costly and more lucrative for them as time goes on. They can trim the free games if the money doesn't go as far as it used to.

There is no reason they cannot own that, because it will never be a big risk. The risk now is we know MS is up to no good and this was a temporary reverse course, which has just as much impact as actually doing it.

What they should be do is incentivize purchasing on the platform. If you do X amount of purchasing, live costs scale down. They never lose the revenue, just transform it, and the one game a year folk are taxed accordingly.

 

[devilNprada]

Netflix has anywhere to 115-120 Million and still has issues making money.

So you're back peddling....

They made 1.86 in net profit it 2019m but spent some odd 20 billion.

They just in the past couple years have started to make some kind of profit after operating income is taken into consideration.

Which is fine, but why be so rude and insulting to people?

Maybe read up a little before making such posts.

You should read the things you post:

 

[SlimySnake]

I agree with you about Jim Ryan, he seems clueless, short sighted, and in over his head. He seems cheap as well for some reason. Its ironic to me that hes the one who said "content is king" a few years ago and yet only micoprosft is the one actively expanding the type of content available, how they manage it is another story altogether though.

Another thing i dont understand is why Sony hasnt rebranded PSNOW or attempted to make it more appealing, even marketing wise acknowledge. I dont want them to make it their only focus but seems like a good enough service to be proud of and having 5 or 6 million people actually paying 10 bucks a month wouldnt hurt the bottom line and seems like realistic goal. I wonder if behind the scenes third parties are seeing drastic declines in software sales on xbox and have asked sony to "tone down all this streaming talk, were getting killed here."

PS Now is fine the way it is. Most people who play playstation games are perfectly willing to pay full price for them. That service is for a very different kind of gamer. One that doesnt spend money on a lot of games on day one. The less they worry about PS Now the better. I would rather both Sony and MS focus on delivery high quality next gen titles. Games have become very predictable and third parties have stopped innovating.

Thank you for the sensible chuckle, but was this meant to be as satirical as it sounds?

I am here all week.

 

[Papacheeks]

So you're back peddling....




Which is fine, but why be so rude and insulting to people?

It was obvious you didn't read anything I put down for links. Statista was the main one that is legit and shows the time line for net profit on top of the spending they do. I didn't back peddle, I just guessed on the number of subscribers I knew it was well over a 100. So sue me I can make a mistake on something that if also you looked before pandemic was down but now is increased.

The main talking point was profit since we are talking subscription services, I was not being rude. It's a known fact if you looked at that timeline and also paid attention to news that netflix is always in the talks about either sub numbers, profit, and it's up and down stock numbers. Netflix is talked about a lot and i would argue is used as the main comparison to gamepass.

Gamepass has a giant uphill battle, if netflix since 1998 can't make giant profits, where do you think Xbox gamepass is going to be?

It cost way more to maintain gamepass than a streaming service. It takes more dedicated hardware for streaming games, online match making, data farms for OS storage, teams to work on the OS/windows store to add titles that dont have store versions. I work in televsion we have streaming setups that take out local channels and sends them to amazon test servers for stream analyzing. Other companies do alot of the heavy lifting of sending out the stream to all providers. MS is a one man band. Netflix though has all their own facities, also probably leverages other company's they employ.

But I can bet my account the setup for streaming games, data centers, OS engineers, server maintenance is more for gaming than it is video content.

 

[ComputerBlue]

Then stop paying, it's a free market. There are alternatives.

Alright there out of the loope lol

You tell the guys at asbo and playground they are producing some of the worst games in the industry. I am sure that would get a good laugh.

Where did I say anything even remotely similar to that?

 

[iHaunter]

So they actually DID plan on increasing it, what a douchebag move. $120 just to play online with a handful of free AA games? What a ripoff.

 

[mckmas8808]

No, they pretty much nailed it. MS is certainly a business, and what they stated doesn't suggest otherwise.

MS has Gold, it has Gamepass, it has Ultimate, and it's the start of a new gen, with new people trying to navigate them. It's pretty much universally opined by analysts that the move was designed to encourage new users towards Gamepass Ultimate.

Pretending they're scrambling to recoup money for any purchase... Much less one they haven't even completed yet doesn't make near as much sense. Stop thinking MS isn't one of the richest entities on the planet.

I think you are misunderstanding my point. The bolded IS Microsoft attempting to "make their money" back on a purchase that they know that's coming. They were willing to "kill" Xbox Gold in order to artificially boost Gamepass Ultimate for a reason. We all know that reason is due to

They want people to go from spending $50 a year to spending $180 a year. There's a reason they tried to do this now and not last year.