• 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.

Microsoft quietly told Apple it was willing to turn big Xbox-exclusive games into iPhone apps.

kingfey

Banned
The fact it's outselling other MS consoles means nothing when you're talking about how MS consoles are selling.
it's not selling anywhere near the hypothetical 100M in any case.


No you dont. You don't earn gold subscribers from somebody playing your game on a mobile or PC. You don't earn 30% on games people buy on steam or Epic store.
You can lose subscribers to a service faster than you lose a console user. A console sale promotes vendor lock in. Switching consoles means selling controllers, losing your past games etc. Losing a subscriber is somebody just hitting unsubscribe if they want to switch to another service.
15$ is what you will pay to play gamepass ultimate.

MS is planning on (buy the game, play it in xcloud) service in the future. There is 30% cut from dlc and mtx.

If MS moved to xcloud fully, everyone will pay 15$ a month for the service. If they hit 50m subscribers, they will get 750m a month, or 9b a year from the subs alone. This doesn't count the mtx cut, gamepass has, or the dlc people buying it.

You are easily seeing $15b from the service. That what xbox revenue was from their console last year.

The more the subs, the more money the sub will make.

If the sub reaches 100m in the future, that would $1.5b a month, or $18b a year.

This is close to what Sony earned on the last financial report. Subs alone is close to those numbers. No game sales, no mtx sales. Pure subs, which is at 100m sub.

Now this sub is at 20m, so it will take time. The difference between this sub and hardwares, is you dont upgrade to next gen.

One more thing, selling console is at a loss. MS doesn't make much profit from Their console sales.
 

Three

Member
15$ is what you will pay to play gamepass ultimate.

MS is planning on (buy the game, play it in xcloud) service in the future. There is 30% cut from dlc and mtx.

If MS moved to xcloud fully, everyone will pay 15$ a month for the service. If they hit 50m subscribers, they will get 750m a month, or 9b a year from the subs alone. This doesn't count the mtx cut, gamepass has, or the dlc people buying it.

You are easily seeing $15b from the service. That what xbox revenue was from their console last year.

The more the subs, the more money the sub will make.

If the sub reaches 100m in the future, that would $1.5b a month, or $18b a year.

This is close to what Sony earned on the last financial report. Subs alone is close to those numbers. No game sales, no mtx sales. Pure subs, which is at 100m sub.

Now this sub is at 20m, so it will take time. The difference between this sub and hardwares, is you dont upgrade to next gen.

One more thing, selling console is at a loss. MS doesn't make much profit from Their console sales.
Not all subs will be gamepass ultimate subs but for the sake of argument lets say they are all $15 per month subs to play your games on a phone.

100M subs you say would be $18B a year. Sony revenue last year was $25B.

A pipe dream of 100M subs assuming all of them are going for the expensive $15 per month ultimate package and it doesn't match selling more consoles and games on a vendor locked machine.

Now imagine 100M consoles sold and 50m gamepass subs + 50M gold subs.

How much do you think that would make?
Gamepass is hovering around the 20M mark based mostly on how many xboxes there are out there.

Consoles being sold at a loss should tell you exactly how important console sales are. If console sales don't matter, if streaming is all that matters, if your competition is Amazon and Google why lose money trying to get consoles out there? Amazon and Google aren't, right? You just need a controller. Go after that streaming goodness that is 1000M potential PCs and Mobiles and make pure profit. Or you can just snap back into the reality where console sales are very important, enough for a company to take losses for long term gain.
 
Last edited:

kingfey

Banned
Not all subs will be gamepass ultimate subs but for the sake of argument lets say they are all $15 per month subs to play your games on a phone.

100M subs you say would be $18B a year. Sony revenue last year was $25B.

A pipe dream of 100M subs assuming all of them are going for the expensive $15 per month ultimate package and it doesn't match selling more consoles and games on a vendor locked machine.

Now imagine 100M consoles sold and 50m gamepass subs + 50M gold subs.

How much do you think that would make?
Gamepass is hovering around the 20M mark based mostly on how many xboxes there are out there.
Gamepass+xcloud is 15$.

Consoles won't reach broader target, which MS want to get.

Sony $25b isn't consistent, but the 100m sub is. Since the money is coming from the sub. We aren't even counting the mtx/dlc/ or owning gaming sales.


Consoles being sold at a loss should tell you exactly how important console sales are. If console sales don't matter, if streaming is all that matters, if your competition is Amazon and Google why lose money trying to get consoles out there? Amazon and Google aren't, right? You just need a controller. Go after that streaming goodness that is 1000M potential PCs and Mobiles and make pure profit. Or you can just snap back into reality where console sales are very important, enough for a company to take losses for long term gain.
Because they can simply buy studios now.
Google can buy Activision, and lock that studio on stadia.
Amazon can buy EA and Ubisoft and lock them on Luna.
As long as these 2 have enough to buy studios, they can be a threat.

What do you think will happen, if Apple/Google/Amazon buys Entire Sony business?

Do you think they won't be a threat?

Just because they are failing now, doesn't mean they are out of the race. There are big companies who are buying studios left and right.

Embracer has alot of studios. Tencent has alot.

(Subsidiaries. As of August 2021, Embracer Group has eight operative groups consisting of 77 internal studios and publishers and the overall group had a total of about 8000 employees in 45 different countries.)

Google/Amazon can buy that studio.
 

Godot25

Member
Fuck Apple and their double standards.
I don't understand why Netflix does not need to make separate app for every TV Show/movie, but somehow Google and Xbox has to.

Well. I understand. It's about money at the end of the day. But it is still shitty.
 

Three

Member
Gamepass+xcloud is 15$.

Consoles won't reach broader target, which MS want to get.

Sony $25b isn't consistent, but the 100m sub is. Since the money is coming from the sub. We aren't even counting the mtx/dlc/ or owning gaming sales.



Because they can simply buy studios now.
Google can buy Activision, and lock that studio on stadia.
Amazon can buy EA and Ubisoft and lock them on Luna.
As long as these 2 have enough to buy studios, they can be a threat.

What do you think will happen, if Apple/Google/Amazon buys Entire Sony business?

Do you think they won't be a threat?

Just because they are failing now, doesn't mean they are out of the race. There are big companies who are buying studios left and right.

Embracer has alot of studios. Tencent has alot.

(Subsidiaries. As of August 2021, Embracer Group has eight operative groups consisting of 77 internal studios and publishers and the overall group had a total of about 8000 employees in 45 different countries.)

Google/Amazon can buy that studio.
You're talking about a hypothetical 100M why would that be consistent? You didn't answer the question though. If consoles lose money and are a drop in the ocean compared to the streaming consumers and competition from Amazon and Google. Why did MS release a console at all? It's a very simple question that 'acquisitions' isn't an answer to.
 

Dr Bass

Member
That's fine, but these consoles are still in competition and Phil Spencer has said in the past that is a competition he wants to win. We've seen that to be the case continuously with the amount of marketing Microsoft has put into both their Xbox Series consoles. These companies have multiple goals and multiple strategies working in concert. It is fine to say that Microsoft (and Sony to a lesser extent) have expanded their gaming strategy beyond consoles but winning that console competition is still a major goal for all involved.



Apple is no more a monopoly than Xbox or PlayStation is though. If we go down the road of regulating walled gardens I'm not sure we are going to like the result.
Apple is WAY more a monopoly than Xbox/PS. Denying it is not understanding the nature that mobile computing devices play on a global scale.

For many people their mobile device is their only computer. To have two companies control what software can run on what are essentially personal computers, for the entire planet, is an incredibly dangerous situation to be in.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Apple is WAY more a monopoly than Xbox/PS. Denying it is not understanding the nature that mobile computing devices play on a global scale.

For many people their mobile device is their only computer. To have two companies control what software can run on what are essentially personal computers, for the entire planet, is an incredibly dangerous situation to be in.

Well.....the courts in the Epic case ruled Apple wasn't a monopoly at all so.....

Confused Bugs Bunny GIF by Looney Tunes
 

Dr Bass

Member
Well.....the courts in the Epic case ruled Apple wasn't a monopoly at all so.....

Confused Bugs Bunny GIF by Looney Tunes

This is a fallacy known as the "appeal to authority."

I also really don't think you want to go down that road when talking about if laws or judicial decisions imply what's right.

Courts are not infallible, and they are often lack knowledge when it comes to tech. Same with governments. Apple and Google are, in fact, a duopoly in the mobile computing space, and act in tandem to have monopoly power. There is no arguing this. What are your other real options for having mobile computing? How do you deliver mobile software to the billions of people across the globe? What happens to companies if Apple decides they don't want their app on the store simply because they don't like them, or they want to steal their idea? Both things have happened, as revealed in the court case. Apple and Google have the power to destroy businesses on a whim. No company (or govt) should ever have that power. Apple IS a monopoly.
 

Topher

Gold Member
This is a fallacy known as the "appeal to authority."

I also really don't think you want to go down that road when talking about if laws or judicial decisions imply what's right.

Courts are not infallible, and they are often lack knowledge when it comes to tech. Same with governments. Apple and Google are, in fact, a duopoly in the mobile computing space, and act in tandem to have monopoly power. There is no arguing this. What are your other real options for having mobile computing? How do you deliver mobile software to the billions of people across the globe? What happens to companies if Apple decides they don't want their app on the store simply because they don't like them, or they want to steal their idea? Both things have happened, as revealed in the court case. Apple and Google have the power to destroy businesses on a whim. No company (or govt) should ever have that power. Apple IS a monopoly.

Did I say the court was right? No, I said that is how they ruled. It doesn't matter if you or I think Apple is a monopoly or not. Factually, if a court says Apple is not a monopoly then you can argue till you are blue in the face and it doesn't make a bit of difference. That ruling is under appeal though and very well end up in the Supreme Court so it is far from over.
 

Dr Bass

Member
Did I say the court was right? No, I said that is how they ruled. It doesn't matter if you or I think Apple is a monopoly or not. Factually, if a court says Apple is not a monopoly then you can argue till you are blue in the face and it doesn't make a bit of difference. That ruling is under appeal though and very well end up in the Supreme Court so it is far from over.
Well you stated that Apple is no more a monopoly than PS or Xbox, then proceeded to respond with "well the court agrees with that statement" followed by a bugs bunny shrug and walk off gif. That to me would pretty clearly state that you were saying you thought the court was right because it "agreed" with your previous statement ...

Not sure how else I could have interpreted that?

Of course it matters what the general public thinks though. The "noise" around Apple's behavior has been getting louder, and developers are getting pretty pissed off about the entire situation. As a result congress people/senators are taking notice and introducing legislation to make what they are doing illegal. It's not going to be settled through the courts, it's going to eventually be broken up via the govt. And I am pretty positive it will happen eventually. It's just not sustainable for the economy to have two companies lording over every business that exists and seeking a 30% rent. It's completely absurd. It won't last forever. Apple should get in front of this and just open things up so they won't have the mark of being ripped a new one by the govt, like Microsoft.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Well you stated that Apple is no more a monopoly than PS or Xbox, then proceeded to respond with "well the court agrees with that statement" followed by a bugs bunny shrug and walk off gif. That to me would pretty clearly state that you were saying you thought the court was right because it "agreed" with your previous statement ...

Not sure how else I could have interpreted that?

The point in that post was Apple being a monopoly or not being a monopoly is not a straightforward question. Bugs shrugging was meant to indicate that I'm not necessarily endorsing that ruling but simply stating the fact of it. That was not as clear as I thought it was, obviously. My bad.
 

kingfey

Banned
You're talking about a hypothetical 100M why would that be consistent? You didn't answer the question though. If consoles lose money and are a drop in the ocean compared to the streaming consumers and competition from Amazon and Google. Why did MS release a console at all? It's a very simple question that 'acquisitions' isn't an answer to.
Maybe because they are on the console business for 3 generation, and won't drop it immediately.

As of now, they are heavily focusing on cloud business, doing day1 games on cloud, porting it to their old console, upgrading the xcloud with xsx hardwares.

Everything is layed down for the future.

There is console shortages now, and people want to play next gen. And because not enough console is produced now, people will jump on cloud to play those games.
 

Dane

Member
Apple don't care and don't want without their royalties, so Microsoft circumvented that with the browser.

And regarding monopoly, that Epic lawsuit was full of BS and hypocrisy, as EGS is trying to force a monopoly under the guise of a competition against Steam. You can buy an Android phone from plenty of companies and these represent like 25-30% of the US market.
 

reksveks

Member
xcloud runs on browser, didn't the iOS get support for this?
Yeah, this version does but the initial version of xcloud was like Netflix which didn't have any iap. Apple still kicked that out making a rather weird distinction between xcloud and Netflix based off purely commercial reasons.

I was slightly confused at what app cause epic also introduced an In-app browser to circumvent the apple rule around iap.
 

zaanan

Banned
Funk Apple, lol. The sooner they get their anti competitive asses regulated the better.

I’m all for a free market, but monopolies actually work against openness.
Are you using a hitherto-unknown definition of the word “monopoly?” Because:
  • Samsung is #1 in mobile hardware market share
  • iOS is less than 20% mobile software market share
If you are referring to the app store being a monopoly on iOS, that is nonsensical. Like saying Google store is a monopoly on Android, or Windows store is a monopoly on Windows.

Cary Elwes Disney Plus GIF by Disney+
 

Shmunter

Gold Member
Are you using a hitherto-unknown definition of the word “monopoly?” Because:
  • Samsung is #1 in mobile hardware market share
  • iOS is less than 20% mobile software market share
If you are referring to the app store being a monopoly on iOS, that is nonsensical. Like saying Google store is a monopoly on Android, or Windows store is a monopoly on Windows.

Cary Elwes Disney Plus GIF by Disney+
Yes I’m referring to the exclusive control by Apple of the single store option and payments on IOS.

It allows them to enforce anti competitive measures where publishers get arbitrarily rejected from the eco system if they wish to publish something that may compete with Apple. Such as the example discussed here.

So, no this is not comparable to store xyz elsewhere unless the store is the only gateway to the entire platform. Console stores are the only equivalent as others have pointed out.

Hope you see the difference.
 

zaanan

Banned
Yes I’m referring to the exclusive control by Apple of the single store option and payments on IOS.

It allows them to enforce anti competitive measures where publishers get arbitrarily rejected from the eco system if they wish to publish something that may compete with Apple. Such as the example discussed here.

So, no this is not comparable to store xyz elsewhere unless the store is the only gateway to the entire platform. Console stores are the only equivalent as others have pointed out.

Hope you see the difference.
The difference is academic. Their hardware, their software, their platform, their rules. Anybody that doesn’t like it is free to put their software on any or all of a dozen other mobile device brands. It is not the government’s job to force Apple to carry its competitor’s products, just as it’s not the govt’s job to force Target to sell Walmart-branded shit.
 

Topher

Gold Member
More like “Oh that’s company that gave us a bunch of money and kept us afloat for a long time.”

You mean the time "that company" bought stock in Apple in order for Apple to drop its lawsuit?
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Gold Member
The difference is academic. Their hardware, their software, their platform, their rules. Anybody that doesn’t like it is free to put their software on any or all of a dozen other mobile device brands. It is not the government’s job to force Apple to carry its competitor’s products, just as it’s not the govt’s job to force Target to sell Walmart-branded shit.
You seem all over the place with your reasoning without much reasoning at all.
 

Three

Member
Are they struggling to sell consoles as you said or are they not. Simple question
Simple answer yes. compared to the competition they absolutely are. Why does this upset you. When you're always third and a competitor outsells you in 3 years compared to what it took you 6 years to do, selling consoles isn't a strength. Would that be a better term for you to accept? Compared to their competitors selling consoles isn't MS' strength.
 
Last edited:

Lone Wolf

Member
Simple answer yes. compared to the competition they absolutely are. Why does this upset you. When you're always third and a competitor outsells you in 3 years compared to what it took you 6 years to do, selling consoles isn't a strength. Would that be a better term for you to accept? Compared to their competitors selling consoles isn't MS' strength.
That’s like saying , Ram, GM and Toyota struggle to sell trucks because Ford has been number 1 for years. It’s just not true.
 

kingfey

Banned
Simple answer yes. compared to the competition they absolutely are. Why does this upset you. When you're always third and a competitor outsells you in 3 years compared to what it took you 6 years to do, selling consoles isn't a strength. Would that be a better term for you to accept? Compared to their competitors selling consoles isn't MS' strength.
Sony has broader market share, MS isnt.

So Sony isn't outselling MS, it's just that Sony has tapped in to markets, where Xbox doesn't exist.

Not to mention ps2 had ps1, which helped the console spread faster.

Areas like east Asia, where xbox doesn't have a market.

Hardware numbers in this case is meaningless. Ps3 lost to xbox 360, until xbox one disaster, which gave ps4 a massive boost in the west.

Even with that disaster, xbox is picking up itself, and had a massive console sales with this gen. 8.3m is massive compared to the xbox one. They are outselling xbox one in Japan. This shows the lead Playstation had is evaporating soon. In 3-4 years, I expect xbox to catch up with ps5, especially if they focus heavily on gamepass. And this shortage crises is their chance to do it, plus the Bethesda library.
 

Three

Member
That’s like saying , Ram, GM and Toyota struggle to sell trucks because Ford has been number 1 for years. It’s just not true.
What's the difference between a car analogy or a server analogy?
GM no, Ram no, Toyota sure why not.

Best selling pickups
Ford F-Series sales ~800,000
Toyota Tacoma ~250,000


So if you told me Toyota struggles to sell pickups compared to Ford last year I'd agree.
 
Last edited:

Three

Member
Sony has broader market share, MS isnt.

So Sony isn't outselling MS, it's just that Sony has tapped in to markets, where Xbox doesn't exist.

Not to mention ps2 had ps1, which helped the console spread faster.

Areas like east Asia, where xbox doesn't have a market.

Hardware numbers in this case is meaningless. Ps3 lost to xbox 360, until xbox one disaster, which gave ps4 a massive boost in the west.

Even with that disaster, xbox is picking up itself, and had a massive console sales with this gen. 8.3m is massive compared to the xbox one. They are outselling xbox one in Japan. This shows the lead Playstation had is evaporating soon. In 3-4 years, I expect xbox to catch up with ps5, especially if they focus heavily on gamepass. And this shortage crises is their chance to do it, plus the Bethesda library.
These are the dumbest excuses I've read. "has a broader market share" which I guess is your roundabout way of saying xbox struggles to sell in other countries. Xbox entered those markets like asia and Europe. It struggled to sell in those markets. Simple fact. "Doesn't have a market" is a euphemism for struggles to sell consoles there.
 

kingfey

Banned
These are the dumbest excuses I've read. "has a broader market share" which I guess is your roundabout way of saying xbox struggles to sell in other countries. Xbox entered those markets like asia and Europe. It struggled to sell in those markets. Simple fact. "Doesn't have a market" is a euphemism for struggles to sell consoles there.
:messenger_expressionless:
How the hell is xbox is struggling in these market, when its not even in these markets.

Xbox is western console. It started in west. PlayStation started in the east. By the time, the playstation come to the west, it already market in these areas.

Xbox is still doesn't appear in certain eastern countries.
 
Last edited:
Switch is handle held. You can play it anywhere.

November 14, 2019
That is when Xcloud was released. It was beta for phones. They did it for browser, pc and console this year.

MS would still choose cloud. Because they arent reaching the numbers with hardwares.

As of now, ps5 is 13m, while xsx/s is at 8.3m.

You simply dont get 100m faster by over night. By the time consoles are reaching that numbers, those cloud subscription will surpass them.
Cloud is the future but not the immediate one. Here in Germany in Munich Garching that is one of the biggest area with 1000 big tech and any other companies you can imagine there are areas that don't have good internet reception. From Munich to Regensburg there many areas again with poor connection. And that is Germany one of the most advanced countries in Europe, and people think tomorrow Sony/Microsoft will drop the consoles for cloud based gaming?? Maybe in the next 20 years can be feasible but not in the immediate future
 

Three

Member
:messenger_expressionless:
How the hell is xbox is struggling in these market, when its not even in these markets.

Xbox is western console. It started in west. PlayStation started in the east. By the time, the playstation come to the west, it already market in these areas.

Xbox is still doesn't appear in certain eastern countries.
What are you talking about? Xbox is not in Europe? xbox is not in Asia? Both of which it is blatantly struggling to sell in. Which asain country are you referring to exactly where PS and Nintendo are getting all these sales xbox isn't simply because it hasn't appeared in it? As far as I know xbox released officially in more countries than playstation even.
 
Last edited:

kingfey

Banned
What are you talking about? Xbox is not in Europe? xbox is not in Asia? Both of which it is blatantly struggling to sell in. Which asain country are you referring to exactly where PS and Nintendo are getting all these sales xbox isn't simply because it hasn't appeared in it? As far as I know xbox released officially in more countries than playstation even.

The xbox one was selling 50 copies per week in japan. That is how bad xbox in asia.
 
Last edited:

kingfey

Banned
The difference is academic. Their hardware, their software, their platform, their rules. Anybody that doesn’t like it is free to put their software on any or all of a dozen other mobile device brands. It is not the government’s job to force Apple to carry its competitor’s products, just as it’s not the govt’s job to force Target to sell Walmart-branded shit.
Apple is selling the device to customers. Customers has the right to get these apps.

Apple needs a clear point, what their store is. Is is garden wallet, or is it open market?

If its open market, does it have the right to block an app like gamepass.
 
Top Bottom