betterthings

@Master_Cthulhu70 @fatpunkslim I don't read the advertisements or interviews as just the literal words but rather what they imply, which remains the same: deliver the software wherever there is demand for it. I don't see that changing. I also don't believe Nadella is losing sleep over Xbox hardware sales, especially given that they are now microscopic relative to Microsoft's total gaming revenue. The reason they are talking up Xbox as a console right now, and it is a smart move btw, is because they want to merge PC and console into a next generation living room PC category, and they need Xbox's brand reputation to launch it. That hardware will likely be delegated to OEMs down the line. I don't mind that merger, and I don't think anyone really does, but I am quite skeptical they will ship full Windows on it like the ROG Xbox Ally, simply because the temptation to trojan horse their OneDrive subscription so you can see your photos on the living room television is far too high to resist.

@Banjo @Millionski Xbox is also a business, and businesses don't necessarily need people from their domain background in leadership. TWIV did a deep dive on Asha Sharma and after reading it I am quite confident she is more than capable of leveraging the domain expertise of other specialists within Microsoft Gaming to scale the Xbox brand. I am quite certain Xbox as a business will thrive under her leadership, whether or not it does so in the way console gamers are hoping for.

@fatpunkslim > Regarding the AMD vs. Nvidia debate, I don't think players are particularly attached to one or the other. What they want is the best price to performance ratio.

AMD has generally offered better value in terms of price to performance, given that their products are comparatively cheaper. Yet Nvidia's market share has only grown over the past decade. This clearly disproves your point.
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amds-discrete-desktop-gpu-market-share-hits-all-time-low-as-nvidia-extends-its-lead

> Your comparison with the Steam Deck doesn't apply here. We're talking about a handheld console running Linux with its own limitations, and it's not even the same audience.

I think you may have misread my argument. I was discussing how the next Xbox will be significantly more powerful than the Steam Machine (not the Steam Deck), and will therefore likely cost significantly more to manufacture. The relevance of this comparison comes from Steam hardware surveys. Only 1.78% of users have 32GB of RAM, and only 2.93% have an RTX 4080 or higher. These are the specifications the next Xbox is targeting, and the people who can afford systems like that represent a very small audience. You could argue that the Xbox will be priced lower, which would broaden its target audience, but that claim does not hold up given today's rapidly rising RAM prices.

> As for Game Pass, I actually agree with you. It's a crucial factor for the future success of this console, and they really need to rethink how the subscription tiers are structured.

I think you may have misread this part as well, because I actually argued the opposite. Game Pass may have appeared pro consumer on the surface, but it was ultimately harmful to the Xbox ecosystem. Because players relied on the subscription rather than purchasing games outright, they never built up personal libraries to the same extent they otherwise would have. As a result, fewer people will feel a strong reason to carry their investment forward into the next generation of Xbox.

@Kaloudz > You must be forgetting the very public (and very quick) turnaround that Microsoft performed at the dawn of Xbox One.

And my friend, you must be forgetting they couldn't change anything regarding the hardware until the mid-gen refresh years later, which clearly proves my point that it is too late for Asha Sharma to make any changes to the console. The only thing they can change is the marketing or user experience (both of which will still need to adapt to the console whose design was fixed years ago).

P.S. How do I make phrases bold here?

@BacklogBrad The advantage is to a console player yes, but that doesn't mean they will necessarily upgrade. For example, if someone only wishes to spend $500 on a console and can only shell out $100-200 more due to rising prices, then they will never be able to even consider a $1000 Xbox.

@fatpunkslim I should start by saying I am honestly quite hopeful that this new Xbox would revolutionise PC gaming. But I believe you are viewing things from an overly optimistic lens.

The next Xbox has two potential audiences, Xbox players who have a large game libraries and will gladly pay more to be able to play their games on the next-gen device and PC players who wish to have a console-like experience.

However, I would argue both of these are actually niche audiences. For many casual gamers Xbox Series consoles were their Game Pass machines (also evident by studies which reveal most gamers purchase at most 1 game a year). The potential of them switching to PlayStation is at least the same, if not more, as them upgrading to the next Xbox. According to Steam surveys, 70% of the PC gamers have hardware specs lower than the Steam Machine, which itself is much less powerful and cheaper that what this next Xbox poses to be. This means the next Xbox will price out majority of the PC gaming market. Next, you also have to consider the fact that this next Xbox will have AMD technologies (for upscaling, anti-aliasing, path tracing, etc.) whereas majority of gamers overwhelmingly prefer Nvidia solutions, especially in the era where raw raster performance means nothing.

Again, I believe they can make a potentially incredible product here, but selling it will be even more harder than the Series consoles.

@Kaloudz > "if rumours are to be believed, it's even scared Sony off wanting to release on PC (removing the ability for folks to play Sony / Xbox / PC on a single device)."

If that were even remotely true, then Sony would delist its games from the stores just to ensure Xbox gamers cannot get their hands on the Sony IP. In reality, I believe this is simply a business case of how well their games were selling and what the lack of true exclusives meant for the future PlayStation console sales.

> "the new leadership might change course"
That is entirely unlikely. Console development takes multiple years, so whatever Xbox does this year or the next will likely have already been decided by the previous leadership and the commitments they made to different partners (e.g. AMD). The only difference they can make at this point is the marketing of the device. We will only see Asha Sharma's decisions taking effect by either the end of next year or the start of the year after.

@fatpunkslim > "Imagine games like Gears E‑Day, Blade, Clockwork Revolution, etc., released exclusively on the next Xbox"

Xbox has long given up any hopes for potential first-party exclusives (ever since they started with day one PC releases). At this point, whatever they make will definitely come to Xbox Series X|S (for many more years) and every other non-Xbox PC that has the minimum specs, even if they pull back on PlayStation/Nintendo releases.

@Questionable_Duck If it is a custom PC with Xbox games in a different hypervisor partition (which it likely is), all running within the same Windows OS, then Microsoft won't try to compromise any PC features, including every store and free online access. I agree that this will destroy any potential growth in the Xbox PC storefront sales, but maybe they are only concerned about Game Pass subscriptions from that storefront.

Digital Foundry released a video today and said Series S port is visually worse than the Switch 2 port. I am looking forward to how that could happen, given that Series S ports are usually better than their Switch 2 counterparts. But, maybe the the artistic design used by Capcom and the resulting technogies might be too much to produce great visual (alongside performace) on Series S's older SoC.

@Cikajovazmaj "you can practically ray‑trace a line from DirectX in the ’90s to the accelerated‑compute era we’re in today."
I have only ever seen AI write like that.

@Sol4ris @Banjo- @kmtrain83, if they are talking about transition now, that means Phil didn't plan to retire last year (since a transition would've already been in place by now). You don't suddenly announce a retirement like that without proper internal planning. A proper transition would've been to introduce the new face to the global audience at different Xbox events culminating with Xbox's 25th Anniversary and potential next-gen announcement, and later with a reveal that the torch has been passed on. What I believe happened is Phil had major disagreements and escalations over Nadella's business plan for gaming for many months (the recent Game Pass hikes, last year's and possibly this year's layoffs, etc.), which ended with Nadella demanding Phil retire early this week to plant his puppet leader. People keep suggesting Sarah left because of her ambition, but I think Microslop's recent history with consumer business paints a very different picture. I believe Sarah, who was clearly trained by Phil to be his true successor, was also taken aback by how Phil had to retire and chose to leave with Phil because of what Microslop's culture has become. Phil was probably told to save face for Microslop and thus had to give a statement and say scripted words. This is standard damage control, not a transition.

@kmtrain83 they always did. They just never wanted to invest years cultivating the studios and games like Sony and Nintendo do. Microsoft has always preferred shortcuts over consistent creativity, and that is why they failed in the console space.

@stefan771 I don't know where you are from, but here in the west, the majority of everyday consumers (including gamers) have seen their monthly/annual budgets dramatically increase due to recent years of inflation, without any marginal increase in income. That eats into anything people consider non-necessary for survival. This is also confirmed by multiple surveys, which concluded that most people only buy upto 1 game each year.

Despite Microsoft's efforts to bury this generation

@Fiendish-Beaver While I agree with your general thesis, but I think you missed a key point. The everyday gamer (not us enthusiasts or reward collectors) will leave a platform like cloud gaming if their experience is significantly worse than their local devices (console, PC, or mobile). Therefore, to make the cloud gaming better in quality and performance, they need to have actual users with different internet access (Broadband, Fiber, Hotspot, etc.) all across the globe as test subjects.
Of course, before Microsoft can sell it to the users for a premium, they will make investors happy with these artificial numbers. So, it is probably two things happening at the same time.

@101Force I'm of the opposite opinion. I don't think Microsoft wants to sell the next console. What I mean is that they are only concerned about creating a platform that will have Xbox library on a Windows device, so that the future Windows based third party OEM devices have some exclusivity in terms of games when compared to Linux based devices. Linux is becoming a rising alternative to Windows and having such exclusive software ensures that Microsoft maintains the flow of Windows licensing fees from third-party OEMs.

Since they were not planning to subsidize the hardware this time (making the whole thing as pricey as a same-spec'd PC), they probably didn't reserve memory and storage stock.

@Fiendish-Beaver GTA 6 is a behemoth, not just a gaming one, a cultural one. It is such a big deal that Sony and Rockstar Games consider it a platform seller pre-release. If it releases as planned on November 19 this year, no publisher (in their right mind) will release anything at least two weeks before and after its release. Some publishers will even make that a month before and after, just to make sure people have some money saved after reserving the amount for GTA 6. So, Forza Horizon 6 will never be released in the same month as GTA 6 on PlayStation, the biggest platform for a Grand Theft Auto game.

Probably a cloud first controller to go along with the free tier of Game Pass Ultimate. That combo can act as the cheapest access to gaming.

Just because they don't have ads now doesn't mean it won't get those later. Remember, enshittification runs deep at Microsoft.

KCD Royal Edition was on sale for the first 3 weeks of January (I am GP Ultimate subscriber so it could be partially because of that). This new version isn't expected to be any better than the PC version (apart from maybe the Quick Resume benefit that comes from playing it on Series consoles) but will be significantly better than the current console versions.

I haven't bought it on Xbox because Xbox is moving away from consoles and it makes more sense to then invest in Steam or GOG libraries (I own the base version of KCD on Epic but Epic is not that good of a gaming service as Steam or GOG are).

My theory is that if we get another exceptional curated experience designed for every beat and precise hours you spend in the game (think Clair Obscur Expedition 33, God of War, etc.), the best open world game will never win that year (Kingdom Come Deliverance II, Red Dead Redemption 2, etc.)

I don't think Xbox/Microsoft is doing anything to develop AMD's software technologies. It is AMD all on its own doing stuff and Xbox just integrating it (like any other game developer into their games).

Instead, FSR Redstone was built using the research PlayStation and AMD collectively did for PSSR. So, Sony is much bigger contributor to this than Xbox/Microsoft.

@PsBoxSwitchOwner Dave The Diver is not a mass market game like Skyrim, Oblivion, etc are. So your points doesn't stand.

GTA IV needs a remaster more than a port at this point.

Hear me out, corporate speech has no meaning. He also said only 4 games will go multi-platform. Nothing Phil says or said matters because the actions don't always follow the words. So we should stop reading too much into what one guy has to say when his actions are bound to his shareholders and not his beliefs.

@Questionable_Duck they spent that much developing the PC port, however, once a developer has made a PC port, the Xbox port is quite cheaper to make because all they need to change is the underlying API calls and defining what to limit based on the hardware. That is not easy and still takes time and effort, but is a lot cheaper than making a port for a completely different platform, which Xbox is not (wrt PC).

As @NishimuraX said, Game Pass has drastically changed buying habits on Xbox. Many game studios have backed up this claim, essentially saying it doesn't make sense to develop Xbox port unless they want to put it on Game Pass. Now the reason Sony has made this port is simple - they want the "whales" to buy this, and if these high spenders do, then Sony can earn large revenue from a small minority.