Xbox boss Phil Spencer has been talking to The Guardian following the launch of the Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S this week, noting that he's more invested in player numbers rather than console sales figures.
Asked about why Microsoft doesn't publicly disclose how many Xbox Ones are sold anymore, Spencer highlighted that console sales aren't the key focus of his team, and he doesn't want to disrupt that.
“I know it seems manipulative and I’ll apologise for that, but I don’t want my team’s focus on [console sales]. The primary outcome of all the work that we do is how many players we see, and how often they play. That is what drives Xbox. If I start to highlight something else, both publicly and internally, it changes our focus.
Things that lack backwards compatibility become less interesting. Putting our games on PC becomes a reason that somebody doesn’t have to go and buy an Xbox Series X. I’ll hold fast to this. We publicly disclose player numbers. That’s the thing I want us to be driven by, not how many individual pieces of plastic did we sell.”
The Guardian went on to ask Spencer if he would change his opinion if the Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S started outselling the PlayStation 5, with the Xbox boss promising he "won't do that", and adding that "people who want to pit us against Sony based on who sold the most consoles lose the context of what gaming is about today."
Despite this, Spencer did go into at least a little detail about Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S sales following the launch of the two consoles this past Tuesday, confirming it marked the "largest launch in Xbox history."
What do you make of Spencer's comments? Give us your thoughts down below.
[source theguardian.com]
Comments 21
Makes sense as Xbox isn't 'just' the console but the entire Microsoft gaming division that extends to PC and Mobile gaming too. Focusing purely on Xbox consoles skews the data and discounts ALL those gamers on other platforms that are playing 'Xbox' games and don't want/need the console just because Console Fanboys use numbers as some metric for superiority.
What matters most is the number of Gamers playing the games. What benefit is having 100m console sales if only a few million buy and/or play that game? Its better to have 40m console sales and 20m+ buying/playing that game. Player engagement is a more important metric to developers and publishers!
They don't make money on consoles, especially not this gen. It's all about the software "games" so who cares where you play them so long as you're playing with an Xbox gamer tag or an XGS game.
I'm extremely happy to have a new console vs playing on a laptop personally but in the grand scheme of things I'm part of the minority. But it's great....like really great.
Does the same apply to Sony as well then, but to a lesser extent? As Sony are starting to bring their games onto PC a bit more, does that mean they're more interested in software units. To be honest I would not be surprised if Sony moved into the 'game pass' territory at some point this gen. Its what healthy competition is all about.
Bit like when Sony started the ps plus to validate charging for online, MS had to go the same way to offer 'value' to their service. I expect the same to eventually happen for game pass (whether thats an upgraded PS Now service).
Now that would be a consumer winner this gen if they started competing for that space.
@StonyKL historically Sony waits fir something to be proven as profitable and the comes into the market. They are easing their way to PC because it's free money just sitting there and they are starting to include more games in OA Plus. I know for PS5 Bugsnax was/is there fir a limited time and that destruction all stars was supposed to be there fir a month or two as well. O feel like they will include smaller titles fit a short period and then offer a discount to buy digitally to try and drive up revenue.
They don't have the pockets pay for content or to buy up studios like MS and the tech co's that are required to have a streaming service so o don't see it going past limited time windows.
But like you said competition is great because if Xbox had a wonderful last gen from the start would they have innovated like they have...I'm doubtful.
Which is why he wants "xbox" to count as everyone playing their games on PC, Nintendo and Sony. So when they stop making hardware, they can still say they're "Xbox".
I'm torn on this. As it doesn't really have much effect on me as I play their games better than their consoles can since they come to PC, but not having competition around for Sony would hurt the industry in the long run. Just like how Microsoft got roflstomped this gen and came up with all types of gimmicks to try gain headway. Sony as the significant leader, did basically nothing other than the minimum.
@Krzzystuff Yeah I think perhaps I'm being optimistic. I'll be getting the Game Pass just because its 350 games for a decent price, but if I'm honest there aren't too many games on it I'd actually buy new, hence why it takes this sort of value for me to 'jump in'. And I'll always need my fix of Sony games so won't be saving money with Game Pass, just unable to resist its lure, but if Sony copied MS then I would probably save a ton loads long term. Certainly if my last gen purchases are anything to go by.
Of course once those Bethesda games start dropping then I think the Game Pass value rises exponentially.
@BAMozzy Exactly 100% spot on. Player engagement is a far more useful metric for Microsoft, with their distributed model, than number of boxes sold. As is number of Game Pass Subscribers.
@StonyKL For Sony who still only have the one system (split across 2 SKU's) console sales is likely to still be trumpeted and that makes sense for them. As does software sales. Though of course player engagement is also crucial.
@StonyKL yeah for people who have played most of the games on gamepass it doesn't make as much sense. For me i skipped last gen entirely and Im coming from PlayStation so almost everything in gamepass is new to me so it's a crazy value in my eyes. Was a big draw to Xbox over PS5 for me.
He can be honest and say he's driven by both. Series X/S will probably sell very well and if that truly happens, MS will tout the numbers. There's no shame in their current stated approach or the one I outlined.
@Krzzystuff spot on, I'm the same. At one point I was only going to go Xbox because of this, but I just can't fully do it because Sony have too many games I wouldn't want to miss out on. Even getting a PS5 years down the line was too difficult because of the software slated within the first year being too appealing. Personally think both Sony and MS offer something that true gamers shouldn't miss out on and I get the impression this gen will be top quality from the start.
Phil really has his eye on the ball much more than a lot of other sectors of the industry right now. It makes me think of all the people, including here that say "LOL there's no point to buying an XBox, all I need is a PS5 and my $1500 gaming PC and I can play all those games....why would anyone buy an XBox?" Uhm...yeah....that's the point....you are already playing XBox..... I've never seen people who are actually customers reject the brand.
It's interesting to me, because the focus of Sony, whether they're winning or losing, is always hardware sales hardware sales hardware sales. That misses a lot of people that buy hardware and buy/play few to no games. And there are a lot of those. MS is focused not on who they can convinced to grab Black Friday hardware bundle, and is instead focused on who is regularly and actively engaging with the software ecosystem. Some lambast MS for being focused on the software ecosystem and not caring about the consoles......but Sony's actually the only outlier here. They focus on hardware units as a measure of success. XBox is focused on player engagement. Nintendo, waaay back under Yamauchi set that model into play, with Yamauchi's quite about "A (Famicom) is just a box to play Mario on." Somehow people got caught in the Sony thinking that hardware is the goal of console sales. Nintendo set the same tone XBox is following way back at the dawn of "modern" consoles.
Sega. Well, no use worrying about what their strategy was...
@Menchi I don't think they're going to stop making hardware until the industry is ready to not have hardware. As he says, t they're focused on the platform and ecosystem. They don't needs to sell Microsoft made laptops to sell Windows as a mobile computing platform. But they do, because it helps stablize and keep consistent the ecosystem in every market category. Same with XBoxes, which is almost literally "Surface Gaming" - at some point they won't need to sell a prefab mini-PC to play XBox games on.....but they likely will to round out the whole market environment into a cohesive platform. The hardware, really isn't the goalpost of sales. It's a pillar supporting the platform whole.
And a fine pillar it is. And quite pillar-y, too. Unless you run it horizontal.
@NEStalgia mines horizontal. It's in the basement which is now my home office bit it's really the wife's craft room. She was very concerned about the look of whatever system i was going to get when I was undecided. Haven't heard a comment yet so must be fine with it. For all the married folk they will know that if it wasn't making the spouse happy you sure as hell would hear about it lol.
This makes perfect sense to me. Normally a platform holster would sell a console as means or increasing player base, that you later monetize by selling games plus potentially add on services.
MS is approaching a business model where they can do this via consoles, Windows PCs and mobile via xCloud. They user count is not limited to the console install base, but, as of right now, to the Xbox, PC and Android combined install base.
It will be a huge win for MS if they manage to cut deals where any digital game we buy becomes playable via xCloud EVEN if we are not GamePass subscribers. Think about that, suddenly a dev can just make an Xbox game and potentially sell it to all those players, without thinking about minimum specs!
@StonyKL Sonys case is more about selling more copies of their games, yes, but mostly after they fallen into the back catalog shelf cycle. It's about more money.
In mind MS getting people to play on PC is not just about game copies, but the use of Windows as a gaming platform and potential adoption of GamePass in those players lives.
Btw, Sony already has its GamePass territory with PSNow. They have two big roadblocks with it outside. PS Box, though: for one, they won't make their own games available until no one cares much for them. Number two: their controller special features forces them to demand you connect a PS4 controller to a PC or mobile device to be able to play PSNow games. That is very limiting. And will be even more limiting when they try to add PS5 titles to PSNow.
In Phil we trust. 👍🏻
Phil is so ahead of the game, Sony and Nintendo out here playing checkers while Xbox is playing Chess..
@Tharsman Spot on. The original purpose of the original X-BOX was two-fold. At the time, Windows, and DirectX had a monopoly on game development and kept developers from switching to other platforms. And gaming drove hardware sales which in turn drove Windows sales. The success of Playstation was pulling more developers away from DirectX which wasn't acceptable. XB was created largely to secure DirectX as the core gaming dev platform and keep that lock over development and the games that are built.
It's other purpose was self-described as a "trojan horse to get Windows into the living room."
So absolutely, correct, the whole platform is there to entrench Microsofts overall platform(s) and services into your daily life, from the beginning. A ehem Halo product....if you will.... (ba dum tss)
Sony's model is traditional unit sales because they have no platform to anchor, they're purely in the business of consumer commodities. Problem is, Sony's now up against a rising tide of "platforms" in gaming that aren't just into unit sales. Even Nintendo is building Switch out into something of a platform at this point.
@themightyant Sony relies on Console sales as a metric to entice 3rd Party deals and use the number of sales as metric for reach. If you are looking to make a deal with specific platform bonuses or marketing, you may be more tempted to make a marketing deal or maybe a deal over bonus content.
MS may have a larger install base (for example) but if Sony has more Playstation consoles sold, then its a larger 'single' user base for bonuses and 'sales' on that platform. Console games are more expensive too so giving an 'incentive' to those gamers on that platform to buy it is going to work in Sony's favour if they have more Consoles in the market.
No doubt, some publishers may well be interested in total gamer reach - if they are looking for reach on Game Pass, but I don't know that some will consider PC or Mobile Game Pass subscribers if they are looking purely at game sales. They might not have a 'mobile' option and PC has other options (like Steam) so they may only be interested purely in Console Reach.
MS with their own published games on Game Pass will of course be much more interested in Player Engagement as Game Sales are obviously impacted by Game Pass. They are paying in monthly of course but you want to see active engagement as that is indicative of sustainability - active gamers are less likely to quit subscribing and they can use that to entice third party publishers to consider adding their games to Game Pass.
Sony and MS are on different paths despite both offering similar gaming hardware with a lot of common titles. Sony's Console metric is likely to be more important to them on their path. If it mattered to MS, they wouldn't be doing Game Pass and putting games on other platforms - not day 1 at least - as that's going to have an impact on Console sales.
Point really is, MS and Sony are on different paths with different metrics and importance of those. Sony need you to buy PS5 to sell you their games, MS don't. Sony may well put some games on PC but so far, only after sales are exhausted on Console as a way to generate more income and potentially more sales of the console if people aren't prepared to wait for it to come to PC. MS don't care if you don't buy the console and buy the games on PC or subscribe to Game Pass...
@BAMozzy That's where Sony's generation approach is dangerous.
MS and Nintendo have both had bad generations. Nearly to the point of kicking them out of console making altogether. The last one was so bad for Nintendo it forced them to release the Switch much earlier than MS or Sony.
Sony have never had a bad gen. Their worst one was the PS3 and even that sold like 80 million units. But if they had to suffer through a really bad gen, say like with the PS5, and potentially wait 5-7 years before being able to release the PS6 and hope for the best there, it could really hurt their business. And heaven forbid they have two bad gens in a row. That could see them end up like Sega. Bad luck streaks happen.
This is why what xbox is doing is smart. They are diversifying their income sources. Which is the smartest thing any business or investor could do. That's why I believe you'll see Xbox become the top platform as time goes by.
As a consumer, console units don't matter to me, but I imagine they would matter to developers who in certain situations have to choose between series x|s and ps5 (at least initially).
@Bmartin001
Training Day line. I like it! 👍🏻
And I agree!
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...