Eighth Generation general discussion

Why do that though? They've lost money on the deal so I don't see how that really helps them.

It helps them by hindering the competition. If true, it means they did it to stop Sony from growing beyond what Microsoft was willing to deal with.

But how are they any sort of threat to Microsoft if they're not in the console market?

Because it would be a rival company branching out and making profits where they, Microsoft, aren't. All of the money ultimately goes back to Sony as a whole and they could concievably try to branch out into software afterwards.

And doing that is worth almost 6.8 billion dollars? I sincerely doubt their profits would be cut into that deeply if they didn't go after Sony. I just can't see any way they came out better by getting into the console market.

edited 17th Jun '13 1:17:22 PM by Kostya

I can't claim to know Microsoft's exact plans behind the Xbox. They where certainly on for the long haul, and they have been posting a profit lately so I guess there was hope that it would eventually even out. They certainly hurt Sony bad this generation. I wonder if they've gone into Sunk Cost Fallacy though.

Cross post:

Microsoft Thinks they are over delivering value.

...................................

Too bad the Xbox One isn't really that impressive. If someone wants a multi-media device then they'll get a computer.

I get them entering but they didn't start to turn any kind of profit until the 360 was out for several years. I'm just confused about why they decided to continue in the console market to begin with. They could have just cut their losses with the original and dropped out. Now they're about to be plunged even further into the red because of the inevitable failure of the Xbox One.

They never expected to make a profit with the original Xbox, they wanted to "Establish a brand" which worked pretty well. And if the Xbone does flop maybe they will pull out. They certainly don't expect it too, though.

Microsoft as a whole will turn out massive profits in the foreseeable future due to the sheer monopoly power of both Windows (despite them losing their touch) and Direct X (There was even something I saw in one of our PS 4 discussions of its games being DX compatible!). They can afford to rebuild their whole gaming division several times over if they want.

I just have a hard time believing that they wanted to be 6.78 billion in the hole a decade later. Even if the Xbox One is a success it will take them at least six years to make a serious profit. By that point we'll be in 2017 and they'll have been at this for 17 years. I don't see how it's logical to wait 17 years before you turn a profit on something. For all they know gaming could have crashed and burned by then or they might just lose everything because of one bad decision*cough*Xbox One*cough*.

I know they'll be profitable as a company but their gaming division's profits, or lack thereof, are ridiculous. They apparently did this to hinder Sony yet they wasted 6.78 billion to do it. I fail to see how Sony could have threatened them to the point where that 6.78 billion is classified under money well spent or acceptable losses.

edited 17th Jun '13 2:05:42 PM by Kostya

Well, Sony WAS the dominant console maker circa the PS 1 and PS 2 era. So dominant that PS 2 sales alone were over 100 million, whereas Xbox and Gamecube sales were both fighting for a distant second. It seems that to MS, it's worth stunting Sony's growth even if it meant losing a lot of money in the process, and for a time, Sony seemed to be at a distant 3rd in the PS 3 generation, thus looking like everything was going according to plan for MS.

But what does stunting its growth do for them? Sony is not a direct threat to Microsoft and even if they became one I doubt stopping that is worth 6.78 billion dollars.

What apparently set it off is Sony openly bragging around 1999 that they would kill PC gaming, as claimed by Ken Kutaragi, detailed in this article.

Microsoft may be primarily a software company and Sony primarily a hardware company but we have to recall that Sony pushes its own proprietary software and services over Microsoft's.

That is an area where competition occurs since every Sony device is a device on which a copy of Microsoft software and a Microsoft service subscription are not being sold.

There's always this cycle of company arrogance and humility. Nintendo got pretty arrogant with the 8-bit and 16-bit eras and then rethought their PR and decisions after the Fifth Generation, and Sony got pretty arrogant with the Fifth Generation and Sixth Generation and they're rethinking their decisions after the Seventh Generation.

Apparently, someone on Neo-Gaf said that the pre-order numbers of the PS 4 and Xbox One (Though the former probably had more, obviously) last week broke records. Apparently, Preorders were at 2,500 consoles A MINUTE! On Amazon alone!

And people say consoles are dead...

edited 21st Jun '13 11:04:43 AM by Demongodofchaos2

People say Nintendo is dead.

People say EA is dead.

People said we would all be dead today.

We aren't all dead? Oops...

As long as EA has their mega-popular franchises, they won't be dead.

Nintendo may be the Determinator of the three big console makers, but the Wii U is probably going to be in last place. There's even more anticipation for the ONE than there is for the Wii U's upcoming heavy hitters.

People will still buy Wii U for Smash Bros, and seems to me plenty of people are going with a PS 4+Wii U combo. In any case Nintendo's probably got some money to throw away from the Wii's sales. Or am I horribly wrong in assuming that?

The Wii U is probably not going to be in last place at all. It's more likely the Xbox One will be. Wii U and PS 4 both have some extremely powerful points going for them. It's most likely going to be PS 4 > Wii U > Xbox One.

Even with Microsoft taking back a lot of what they did, they still left in some undesirable stuff and a huge price(justified price or not) that'll be a major deal breaker. Wii U easily beats it overall. Very few of the Xbox One's exclusives are going to do much at all. PS 4 has better ones overall.(the opinions of the PS 4 having less good exclusives over the Xbox One are in the minority)

But the ONE still has Call of Duty; that alone should guarantee massive sales.

Nope. Not going to do jack with the highest price, and a policy to have it always be watching you.

It'll get some initial sales, but the policies are a huge changer for anyone doing research. It's not going to be anywhere but 3rd place among the main three unless they remove the "Always watching you" bit.

A lot of places refuse to get it due to that alone. Call of Duty(the series) is on other systems overall, anyway.

edited 22nd Jun '13 6:22:39 PM by Irene

Call of Duty Ghosts? That's also coming out for the PS 4, Windows, PS 3, and 360.