Support NeoGAF

[Imru’ al-Qays]

Well, that's the thing, home consoles do compete with handhelds. It's a battle that consoles lost in Japan. It's the reason why the XL model is so popular, people are using their handhelds as their primary gaming device at home, perhaps with little to no use outside. Nintendo themselves have lost some of their console audience to handhelds which is why you see things like Smash 3DS.

The double-down on handhelds is also a double down on lower cost devices. Both would be sub $200, the console might even be sub $150(This would of course give them a shot at increasing their console sales significantly). The handheld may be given TV compatibility to further directly compete with consoles. The shared library is a strengthened library for both which could also increase sales for both which means more hardware profit and more first and third party games sold. And they don't need to have the AAA budgets they would if they switch to AAA consoles which means shorter development times allowing more games released as well as less development cost leading to less marketing cost doubly leading to more profit.

So you think the NX is going to be along the lines of a beefier Roku or Vita TV in terms of price? Hadn't considered that - I could see that strategy working. Make the console so goddamn cheap that people will just buy the damn thing.

 

[Boombloxer]

It's a tricky situation but I think the audience is there, it's just that the hardware isn't, the 360 audience were fast to jump ship when the other ship was better and I think the audience will jump ship again if every DF Face-Off ends with "As for consoles, NX is the clear winner, both in visuals and performance" and people on the streets/schools/work etc talks about how the NX version is the best.
Nintendo just need to get the right multiplat there early on to showcase this and the discussions, comparisons, the right marketing and word of mouth will do the rest.

Think of it this way, if the performance doesn't matter then why does just about how every PS4/XB1 comparison discussion end the same way? There is the usual talk about sub 1080p, sub 30fps etc, someone says that they like the XB1 version because they like the controller more or that's what his/hers friends are buying, but in the end it's a celebration about how awesome PS4 is and how crappy XB1 is.

Sony knows this, that's why they're hyping performance so much, been doing it for several generations. (The handhelds is another story though, not sure what's happening there tbh)

Now swap PS4 with NX in this way of thinking. If every game on NX has better visuals, better performance, every comparison end the same way, would you still sit happily on the fence with your "crappy" PS4 version when "everyone else" is celebrating the awesome NX version?

Nintendo just need to get the snowball rolling, the first games are extremely important, first showcase must be a slam dunk, good enough to sway over the cranky naysayers who will dissect everything to find the tiniest negative and blow it out of proportion. It won't be easy but like I said, Nintendo wouldn't end the generation this early unless they knew they were sitting on something good, otherwise it would probably be smarter economically to just sit this one out and wait for the real end of the generation to come.


One problem for NX and consoles in general though is that PCs are getting more popular with great controller support, and they are entering the living room too now. I'm currently playing Witcher 3 with PC-Ultra visuals at 60fps with a wireless controller, and I can do it through a dead silent box in my living room.
Why would I want the ~30fps console version?
This is a question that all console makers need to have an answer to on a bigger scale in the coming years or the performance hyping at big events will be answered with laughter instead of cheering.

That audience left Nintendo a long time ago and isn't coming back. Especially not when 3rd party support is a giant question mark, same with tech. There is no reason to expect a giant leap from them, basically ever.

The PC is the same way--until you can guaranteed play games on one box with the same ease and a single sign-on, forget it. People will go through multiple consoles before touching a PC as the primary option.
No answer is required, because it's already settled.

 

[Nightengale]

write-up

Excellent write-up and perspective of the situation, Ribman. I'm not entirely sold on everything you say just yet ( I need more time to see how Xbox fares in the next 6 months or so)... but... this line, man...

aka the worst example of affinity marketing since Haze on PS3.

Holy shit. Ice cold.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

snip

Great post. Where do you think the rot began to set in, by the way? Was it the post-Kinect drought? Halo 4? Letting Bungie go?

There have been a lot of catastrophically bad decisions that've gotten Microsoft to this point. It's almost hard to figure out how far back to go.

 

[Rymuth]

post

Very well written.

Great post. Where do you think the rot began to set in, by the way? Was it the post-Kinect drought? Halo 4? Letting Bungie go?

When Shane Kim left.

 

[tattooed_dwarf]

.

. MS and Nintendo have done fuck-all to foster an international brand.
.

I see this thrown around lot, but have you any actual knowledge how MS acts and markets xbone for example in Finland or Brasil?

 

[noobie]

are we going to see creamsugar back with more numbers?

 

[sheamus]

It will bomb and in spectacular fashion too.

A JRPG exclusive to a gaming brand that has no affinity for the genre is a terrible mistake.

If it was on PC as well, then may be it would have a shot at pulling in some decent numbers.

It's a platinum game it will bomb so hard

 

[Shin-chan]

Great post. Where do you think the rot began to set in, by the way? Was it the post-Kinect drought? Halo 4? Letting Bungie go?

There have been a lot of catastrophically bad decisions that've gotten Microsoft to this point. It's almost hard to figure out how far back to go.

I'm not sure there would be a specific factor to pinpoint it. This environment is just the one that was heavily cultivated throughout last gen. So many studios going bust and all of the sales being concentrated in a small number of titles that release in November. Creating and cultivating brands is so difficult and expensive now, you basically need to go the Sony route of trying out 10 ideas and hoping one is lightning in a bottle (e.g. The Last of Us for every 9 Puppeteers) or the Activision/EA/Ubisoft route of putting so much muscle behind a new IP it becomes too big to fail (Destiny/Titanfall/Watch_Dogs).

Microsoft unfortunately has concentrated it's studios onto the same brands it's been handling pretty much from the beginning. It's inevitable that interest will gradually fall. There are more Forza games than GT and the latter has been around since the PSX. They don't have the breadth of studios to throw 10 ideas at the market and see what sticks, and their efforts to maintain brand strength are proving unsuccessful in the current climate. At least Minecraft will keep them going for at least another decade or so ... but not if they make it exclusive at any point. We also know they kind of kill IP that aren't hyper successful, or at least kick them to the curb (see every JRPG exclusive/money hat early last gen, the way Tomb Raider has been ignored now it isn't the console war answer to Uncharted 4 due to the delay, the way that Rare was exclusively making Kinect games after their sales eclipsed their early gen titles). None of their new IPs have been given the same marketing as they gave Titanfall. Sony is guilty of this with Destiny and Star Wars, but as stated before they have a larger number of ideas in fluctuation that they can afford several niche, less marketable titles. Microsoft hasn't really done either of the two mentioned strategies for developing new brands since the original Gears. Arguably Kinect too, but we've seen exactly what happened there this gen.

 

[camac002]

performance hyping at big events will be answered with laughter instead of cheering.

Very unlikely.

 

[Bitch Pudding]

wall'o text

I mostly agree. But then again (and you mentioned that yourself) Sony did a lot to harm the PlayStation brand with their PS3 approach. Remember how many people, including 99% of NeoGAFs user base, predicted that MS or Nintendo would dominate the next (current) generation of consoles because of that?

Brand is important, but people are forgetful as long as you're able to come up with a superior product like Sony's PS4. Hence, it's a little bit too early for XBOX's (or Nintendo NX's) swane song.


Concerning XBOX One's life cycle sales, I am well aware that XBOX One will most likely not reach its predecessors sales numbers. The 60+ million I mentioned is already 25% lower than what XBOX 360 achieved and is based on the console's total life cycle, ending far after 2020.

 

[ps3ud0]

Doesn't XBOX One currently perform better than its 80+ million predecessor? Why wouldn't it reach at least 60+ million units at the end of its life cycle?

If you take out out the launch months it already shows that XO isnt competing that well with the X360 (I did ask for a graph of this once but ZhugeEX got himself banned, anyone else capable?) - 50mil is pushing it if we assume a 6 year life cycle.

ps3ud0 8)

 

[Chobel]

I think one of the factors of CoD selling better on XBO than on PS4 is "get free game with each XBO purchase" deal in CoD release week. In that week XBO must have moved a lot of software. And It happened in SBF release week too.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

I mostly agree. But then again (and you mentioned that yourself) Sony did a lot to harm the PlayStation brand with their PS3 approach. Remember how many people, including 99% of NeoGAFs user base, predicted that MS or Nintendo would dominate the next (current) generation of consoles because of that?

Brand is important, but people are forgetful as long as you're able to come up with a superior product like Sony's PS4. Hence, it's a little bit too early for XBOX's (or Nintendo NX's) swane song.

Sony had half of an extra-long generation to redeem itself, though. The PS4 didn't do it all on its own. People had been primed to defect back to PlayStation by years of quality exclusives. I'm not sure this generation will be long enough for Microsoft to pull something like that off, especially considering that their first-party studios are in much worse shape than Sony's were at this point last gen.

 

[Dash_Riprock]

I'm still not sure was MS' gameplan was for the XB1. Lets ignore the whole DRM bullshit for a moment:
What was their plan to outsell Sony overall? The XB1 is clearly catering only to the US with its cable features and English voice recognition. So what was the plan with the rest of the world? Where they really banking on the XB1 massively outselling the PS4 in the states like the 360 did? Did they really expect Sony to release a more expensive system a year later just like with the PS3? So much of MS' strategy seemed to be banking on a repeat of last gen, as if Sony would learn nothing from the early PS3 fiasco.

The only explanation I can think that doesn't paint MS like arrogant, '06 Sony-esque pricks is that Sony's February reveal caught them off guard and they were forced to cobble something together.

 

[Nightengale]

So what was the plan with the rest of the world? .

EA FIFA partnership for mainland Europe in general
Partnership with Paris Saint-Germain F.C./Zlatan for France market
Continued Forza for mainland Europe in general
Local assembly of XB1 for lower prices in Brazil market
The various China stuff they did that ZhugeEx posted (Halo MCC marketing, etc)
etc

Who knows what plans they may have had for Asia/Tier-3 markets. Anything that was on the drawing board probably got cancelled by now anyway, after resources are diverted back to holding the fort.

 

[Bitch Pudding]

Sony had half of an extra-long generation to redeem itself, though. The PS4 didn't do it all on its own. People had been primed to defect back to PlayStation by years of quality exclusives. I'm not sure this generation will be long enough for Microsoft to pull something like that off, especially considering that their first-party studios are in much worse shape than Sony's were at this point last gen.

MS is currently trying the exact same thing: Delivering exciting successors of existing IPs and coming up with new IPs like QB, SO, Scalebound and so on.

Thing is, and this might be caused by a certain lack of 1st party studios, it seems like they just can't deliver the same amount of sheer quantity AND quality like Sony did during the later years of PS3. Maybe they're still relying too much on their three trademark IPs, jeopardizing the respective fan base with very unlucky decisions.

 

[Sky Saw]

2.) Fallout 4 (PS4, Xbox One, PC | Bethesda Softworks) - Up 70% versus Fallout: New Vegas

How depressing.

 

[AniHawk]

This is just what I believe is happening. The effect of this is by the end of the generation, the Xbox brand equity is going to be in the toilet. The value of the Xbox brand to consumers is going to be lower than its ever been, and the value of Xbox hardware to Microsoft is going to be lower than the amount of hours spent trying to play Uncharted 4 on Xbox One. I think by the end of this generation, we're going to fully realize that the Xbox Two requires Sony to make PS3-era level of mistakes in order to have a shot. As always, anything can happen and I could be completely wrong in everything, but I have a feeling that the more deliberately convoluted press releases we get from Microsoft, the more we'll realize how badly Microsoft handled the Xbox brand this generation.

i don't really have a dog in the microsoft/sony race. who does better here is about as interesting as the presidential campaign between jack johnson and john jackson. that said, i love speculating, and i think the idea that microsoft is done and there's no reversing things as far as next gen is concerned doesn't take into account a lot of the stuff that goes on behind the scenes. the direction behind xbox changed wildly from 2005 to 2015, and can be broken down into a few key areas:

(now before 2005, i think microsoft was largely directionless. they were basically throwing shit at the wall and seeing what stuck, making games with anyone as long as it could be exclusive. the best thing they did in this era was buy bungie and get xbox live up and running)

2005-mid 2010: the console for gamers. and by gamers, i really mean the 18-34 year old male playing online shooters. this was microsoft really leveraging xbox live as a way to create a community. and hell, it worked. they managed to ship nearly 40 million systems by the end of 2009, massively up over the predecessor which had sold 24 million in the same time, while also selling far more software. it was also the go-to place if you had a multiplayer game. the 360 may have been outclassed by the ps3, but most of the time, multiplayer games looked or ran better on the 360. the moves microsoft made here included promoting indie games like braid and limbo, and making xbox live the centerpiece of the console (remember that e3 when you could download some demos of games on the show floor? crazy right?)

mid 2010-mid 2013: the console for everyone. bungie left to do their own thing and no one ever heard from them ever again. this is when kinect took off and microsoft started to coast a little on the success of it afterwards. late 2010 and all of 2011 were the highest points of the 360, and from this it's hard not to see why they would have thought they'd struck gold. while first-party games and franchises were no longer new and exciting, and usually made from companies unaffiliated with the property originally, the 360 had become the place for family games (not just kinect), and it was still the go-to console for multiplatform titles. it's this version of the 360 that led the platform to become the best-selling console of the 7th generation in the united states.

mid 2013-late 2014: the console for no one. the reveal of the xbox one was disastrous. e3 2013 was actually fine, but it was completely overshadowed by the may 2013 reveal to the point where people mistaken announcements from the reveal as showing up in the e3 show, especially in the context of sony's show later that day. but basically the direction of the thing was 'kinect is popular so we'll do that... and because we have the system for everyone, we'll put in other non-gaming features like we've always wanted. we've conquered the living room, people!' with a dash of 'oh and let's not let anyone fucking pirate anything.' if i have to pick a period of the xbox's history that was even more mired in 'please the board room guys' than the original period where microsoft was just trying to get their foot in the door, it has to be this one. microsoft wanted something that had a broad reach with its accessibility and features, but they also wanted a high end machine. the result was a system that could play multiplatform games, but with a price point that was prohibitively expensive to the main fanbase they wanted. even if they did secure the espn-loving crowd and families (probably with a $300 consoles and something marketed more explicitly towards them), they wouldn't have gotten around the always-online thing.

late 2014-present: the console for gamers. microsoft spent most of 2014 and all of 2013 undoing the mistakes of the may reveal. but they couldn't drop kinect and as a result, couldn't drop the price. they couldn't make the system more powerful either. however, they were able to eventually drop the price rather significantly in late 2014, and kept going into 2015 to where it was selling at a lower price than the ps4 (until the two were finally on equal footing late in the year). online-only is now a bad dream, xbox tv is dead, kinect is gone, and the family push is gone with it (although it's the second best performing platform for family games of the 8th gen systems a lot of the times - probably a holdover from the 360 userbase). phil spencer seems to be doing and saying all the right things too. backwards compatibility with the previous generation isn't a major system-selling thing, but it's definitely a show of good will. rare replay and sea of thieves also shows microsoft acknowledging the company's legacy and letting them stretch their legs a little with something new that looks like something they wanted to do. there's overall a bigger push to make microsoft's first-party stuff mean something.

what i want to say is, direction and passion matters. i don't know if you can put too much stock into what happened in 2015 either since it was most likely holdover from stuff decided when don mattrick was in charge. i have to assume for instance, that the halo tv show was supposed to happen with halo 5 (sony managed to get the powers tv show out about one year after bendis started talking about it, and a few days after he stopped talking about it). a lot of other first-party games were probably made in times less friendly to developers. i don't think it's necessarily the best indication of how things will happen moving forward.

the last thing i want to touch upon is how we don't even know the plan for the ninth generation. personally? i'm thinking that microsoft might join nintendo in the os game and start applying xbox to more than one kind of device, while marketing one very specific gamer device to start with. if xbox can become a platform that is played on pc the same way steam is, as well as being a dedicated hardware that is purchased in store, that might be the sort of thing that could blindside the competition in the next generation and reach more people.

 

[Bitch Pudding]

I'm still not sure was MS' gameplan was for the XB1. Lets ignore the whole DRM bullshit for a moment:
What was their plan to outsell Sony overall? The XB1 is clearly catering only to the US with its cable features and English voice recognition. So what was the plan with the rest of the world? Where they really banking on the XB1 massively outselling the PS4 in the states like the 360 did? Did they really expect Sony to release a more expensive system a year later just like with the PS3? So much of MS' strategy seemed to be banking on a repeat of last gen, as if Sony would learn nothing from the early PS3 fiasco.

The only explanation I can think that doesn't paint MS like arrogant, '06 Sony-esque pricks is that Sony's February reveal caught them off guard and they were forced to cobble something together.

Maybe the One's name is the solution to your question. They thought they would dominate the living rooms of the world (or at least the US) by delivering an all-in-one enterainment system. A system that also offers a lot of TVTVTV solutions as well as a superior, true next-gen motion-control system, a gimmick that was a big thing last gen. AND they tried to add new digital distribution channels and possibilities. So they tried to build a superior system without true weaknesses (they even added 8 GB of RAM thinking Sony wouldn't be able to keep up tech-wise due to PS4's more expensive GDDR5 RAM solution).

Thing is btw, that both MS and Nintendo failed because of focussing too much on hypes: In MS case it was motion control, while Nintendo thought it would be cool to combine a gaming console with a tablet.

 

[Stone Ocean]

I'm still not sure was MS' gameplan was for the XB1. Lets ignore the whole DRM bullshit for a moment:
What was their plan to outsell Sony overall? The XB1 is clearly catering only to the US with its cable features and English voice recognition. So what was the plan with the rest of the world? Where they really banking on the XB1 massively outselling the PS4 in the states like the 360 did? Did they really expect Sony to release a more expensive system a year later just like with the PS3? So much of MS' strategy seemed to be banking on a repeat of last gen, as if Sony would learn nothing from the early PS3 fiasco.

The only explanation I can think that doesn't paint MS like arrogant, '06 Sony-esque pricks is that Sony's February reveal caught them off guard and they were forced to cobble something together.

Considering the decisions that led up to the console's launch, it feels like Microsoft was planning to be huge in their home turf yeah, rest of the world be damned. Their whole "all in one" narrative was meant to push the XB1 into a multimedia tycoon, they wanted people to buy it regardless of it's gaming features and pay a premium for it, not to beat Sony but sorta move away from the gaming industry as a focus and try and gobble everything up, making up for potential WW losses by just selling a fuckton in the US.

Turns out consumers didn't give a shit so they have to pull the famous 180, but now they have to sell a cracked idea of their vision to people they just told to fuck off a couple months ago while the competition was patting them in the head saying "we're not like those idiots lol" the whole time.

 

[opticalmace]

i don't really have a dog in the microsoft/sony race. who does better here is about as interesting as the presidential campaign between jack johnson and john jackson. that said, i love speculating, and i think the idea that microsoft is done and there's no reversing things as far as next gen is concerned doesn't take into account a lot of the stuff that goes on behind the scenes. the direction behind xbox changed wildly from 2005 to 2015, and can be broken down into a few key areas:

(now before 2005, i think microsoft was largely directionless. they were basically throwing shit at the wall and seeing what stuck, making games with anyone as long as it could be exclusive. the best thing they did in this era was buy bungie and get xbox live up and running)

2005-mid 2010: the console for gamers. and by gamers, i really mean the 18-34 year old male playing online shooters. this was microsoft really leveraging xbox live as a way to create a community. and hell, it worked. they managed to ship nearly 40 million systems by the end of 2009, massively up over the predecessor which had sold 24 million in the same time, while also selling far more software. it was also the go-to place if you had a multiplayer game. the 360 may have been outclassed by the ps3, but most of the time, multiplayer games looked or ran better on the 360. the moves microsoft made here included promoting indie games like braid and limbo, and making xbox live the centerpiece of the console (remember that e3 when you could download some demos of games on the show floor? crazy right?)

mid 2010-mid 2013: the console for everyone. bungie left to do their own thing and no one ever heard from them ever again. this is when kinect took off and microsoft started to coast a little on the success of it afterwards. late 2010 and all of 2011 were the highest points of the 360, and from this it's hard not to see why they would have thought they'd struck gold. while first-party games and franchises were no longer new and exciting, and usually made from companies unaffiliated with the property originally, the 360 had become the place for family games (not just kinect), and it was still the go-to console for multiplatform titles. it's this version of the 360 that led the platform to become the best-selling console of the 7th generation in the united states.

mid 2013-late 2014: the console for no one. the reveal of the xbox one was disastrous. e3 2013 was actually fine, but it was completely overshadowed by the may 2013 reveal to the point where people mistaken announcements from the reveal as showing up in the e3 show, especially in the context of sony's show later that day. but basically the direction of the thing was 'kinect is popular so we'll do that... and because we have the system for everyone, we'll put in other non-gaming features like we've always wanted. we've conquered the living room, people!' with a dash of 'oh and let's not let anyone fucking pirate anything.' if i have to pick a period of the xbox's history that was even more mired in 'please the board room guys' than the original period where microsoft was just trying to get their foot in the door, it has to be this one. microsoft wanted something that had a broad reach with its accessibility and features, but they also wanted a high end machine. the result was a system that could play multiplatform games, but with a price point that was prohibitively expensive to the main fanbase they wanted. even if they did secure the espn-loving crowd and families (probably with a $300 consoles and something marketed more explicitly towards them), they wouldn't have gotten around the always-online thing.

late 2014-present: the console for gamers. microsoft spent most of 2014 and all of 2013 undoing the mistakes of the may reveal. but they couldn't drop kinect and as a result, couldn't drop the price. they couldn't make the system more powerful either. however, they were able to eventually drop the price rather significantly in late 2014, and kept going into 2015 to where it was selling at a lower price than the ps4 (until the two were finally on equal footing late in the year). online-only is now a bad dream, xbox tv is dead, kinect is gone, and the family push is gone with it (although it's the second best performing platform for family games of the 8th gen systems a lot of the times - probably a holdover from the 360 userbase). phil spencer seems to be doing and saying all the right things too. backwards compatibility with the previous generation isn't a major system-selling thing, but it's definitely a show of good will. rare replay and sea of thieves also shows microsoft acknowledging the company's legacy and letting them stretch their legs a little with something new that looks like something they wanted to do. there's overall a bigger push to make microsoft's first-party stuff mean something.

what i want to say is, direction and passion matters. i don't know if you can put too much stock into what happened in 2015 either since it was most likely holdover from stuff decided when don mattrick was in charge. i have to assume for instance, that the halo tv show was supposed to happen with halo 5 (sony managed to get the powers tv show out about one year after bendis started talking about it, and a few days after he stopped talking about it). a lot of other first-party games were probably made in times less friendly to developers. i don't think it's necessarily the best indication of how things will happen moving forward.

the last thing i want to touch upon is how we don't even know the plan for the ninth generation. personally? i'm thinking that microsoft might join nintendo in the os game and start applying xbox to more than one kind of device, while marketing one very specific gamer device to start with. if xbox can become a platform that is played on pc the same way steam is, as well as being a dedicated hardware that is purchased in store, that might be the sort of thing that could blindside the competition in the next generation and reach more people.

Great post.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

It's a tricky situation but I think the audience is there, it's just that the hardware isn't, the 360 audience were fast to jump ship when the other ship was better and I think the audience will jump ship again if every DF Face-Off ends with "As for consoles, NX is the clear winner, both in visuals and performance" and people on the streets/schools/work etc talks about how the NX version is the best.
Nintendo just need to get the right multiplat there early on to showcase this and the discussions, comparisons, the right marketing and word of mouth will do the rest.

Think of it this way, if the performance doesn't matter then why does just about how every PS4/XB1 comparison discussion end the same way? There is the usual talk about sub 1080p, sub 30fps etc, someone says that they like the XB1 version because they like the controller more or that's what his/hers friends are buying, but in the end it's a celebration about how awesome PS4 is and how crappy XB1 is.

Sony knows this, that's why they're hyping performance so much, been doing it for several generations. (The handhelds is another story though, not sure what's happening there tbh)

Now swap PS4 with NX in this way of thinking. If every game on NX has better visuals, better performance, every comparison end the same way, would you still sit happily on the fence with your "crappy" PS4 version when "everyone else" is celebrating the awesome NX version?

Nintendo just need to get the snowball rolling, the first games are extremely important, first showcase must be a slam dunk, good enough to sway over the cranky naysayers who will dissect everything to find the tiniest negative and blow it out of proportion. It won't be easy but like I said, Nintendo wouldn't end the generation this early unless they knew they were sitting on something good, otherwise it would probably be smarter economically to just sit this one out and wait for the real end of the generation to come.


One problem for NX and consoles in general though is that PCs are getting more popular with great controller support, and they are entering the living room too now. I'm currently playing Witcher 3 with PC-Ultra visuals at 60fps with a wireless controller, and I can do it through a dead silent box in my living room.
Why would I want the ~30fps console version?
This is a question that all console makers need to have an answer to on a bigger scale in the coming years or the performance hyping at big events will be answered with laughter instead of cheering.

Nintendo released the Wii U. A console that was, in many ways, on par with the 360 and PS3, but 6 years too late. Why do you think the NX will be any different?

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

I'm still not sure was MS' gameplan was for the XB1. Lets ignore the whole DRM bullshit for a moment:
What was their plan to outsell Sony overall? The XB1 is clearly catering only to the US with its cable features and English voice recognition. So what was the plan with the rest of the world? Where they really banking on the XB1 massively outselling the PS4 in the states like the 360 did? Did they really expect Sony to release a more expensive system a year later just like with the PS3? So much of MS' strategy seemed to be banking on a repeat of last gen, as if Sony would learn nothing from the early PS3 fiasco.

The only explanation I can think that doesn't paint MS like arrogant, '06 Sony-esque pricks is that Sony's February reveal caught them off guard and they were forced to cobble something together.

I mean, the Bone was hardly the only crucially important ecosystem late-Ballmer Microsoft managed to catastrophically and systematically fail at. Remember Windows Phone? The whole Nokia saga was exactly the sort of clueless nonsense that Mattrick was up to.

 

[FelipeMGM]

EA FIFA partnership for mainland Europe in general
Partnership with Paris Saint-Germain F.C./Zlatan for France market
Continued Forza for mainland Europe in general
Local assembly of XB1 for lower prices in Brazil market
The various China stuff they did that ZhugeEx posted (Halo MCC marketing, etc)
etc

Who knows what plans they may have had for Asia/Tier-3 markets. Anything that was on the drawing board probably got cancelled by now anyway, after resources are diverted back to holding the fort.

And you know what is crazy about the Xbox One in Brazil? Officially its the console leading the market, but that is because the official PS4 use to be waaay more expensive, almost two times the price of a XOne, so PS4 here sold most of its units trough grey market, consoles coming mostly from US or Mexico. And you can clearly see that the market is in favor for Playstation 4 here based on game prices. Xbox One games drop the launching price within two weeks. For like the past 15 days already you can buy Rise of the Tomb Raider for something like 35 dollars, same for Halo 5 10-15 days after launch. Games are basically 45-50% off couple weeks after launch, and that clearly means they are not selling very well, despite the investments Microsoft makes on the country.

 

[kyser73]

To tie this entire block of text back to my original prediction, I'll state what I believe is happening and what we'll see happen at the end of the generation. Hopefully the following can give you my perspective on what the released sales numbers mean. Globally, the Xbox One is a failed product that has hurt the Xbox brand. What's happening in regions outside of NA is that people are choosing to exclusively support the PS4 because due to a number of public and private miscalculations, the Xbox brand is now considered unfriendly to people who want to play videogames. This is just what I believe is happening. The effect of this is by the end of the generation, the Xbox brand equity is going to be in the toilet. The value of the Xbox brand to consumers is going to be lower than its ever been, and the value of Xbox hardware to Microsoft is going to be lower than the amount of hours spent trying to play Uncharted 4 on Xbox One. I think by the end of this generation, we're going to fully realize that the Xbox Two requires Sony to make PS3-era level of mistakes in order to have a shot. As always, anything can happen and I could be completely wrong in everything, but I have a feeling that the more deliberately convoluted press releases we get from Microsoft, the more we'll realize how badly Microsoft handled the Xbox brand this generation.

First, awesome post. Really clear & informative on the fundamentals of branding.

I've left the last paragraph as it mirrors my own post in a thread on 'What can MS do to catch Sony?' I made the point that, whereas Sony had spent two gens putting in hard yards on things like language localisation and other small but important items and that is what kept PS3 alive when they dropped the ball in the U.S., MS have no such global basis, and the damage done to the Xbox brand this gen outside of NA & a few other markets mean that MS has more than a mountain to climb for XboxTwo.

 

[kinoki]

The board members want them to become more competitive and PS4/XB1 won't be all that powerful in 2016 so that's why I assume that NX will beat them in that area, otherwise it would just be another WiiU situation or an attempt to recapture the Wii audience and possibly fail even harder.

Perhaps that's just me but I felt that the WiiU was an attempt to satisfy both hardcore and casual with a single machine. Focus on one of those groups and you'll be fine.

 

[modalife]

To tie this entire block of text back to my original prediction, I'll state what I believe is happening and what we'll see happen at the end of the generation. Hopefully the following can give you my perspective on what the released sales numbers mean. Globally, the Xbox One is a failed product that has hurt the Xbox brand. What's happening in regions outside of NA is that people are choosing to exclusively support the PS4 because due to a number of public and private miscalculations, the Xbox brand is now considered unfriendly to people who want to play videogames. This is just what I believe is happening. The effect of this is by the end of the generation, the Xbox brand equity is going to be in the toilet. The value of the Xbox brand to consumers is going to be lower than its ever been, and the value of Xbox hardware to Microsoft is going to be lower than the amount of hours spent trying to play Uncharted 4 on Xbox One. I think by the end of this generation, we're going to fully realize that the Xbox Two requires Sony to make PS3-era level of mistakes in order to have a shot. As always, anything can happen and I could be completely wrong in everything, but I have a feeling that the more deliberately convoluted press releases we get from Microsoft, the more we'll realize how badly Microsoft handled the Xbox brand this generation.

Great write-up, and agreed. The Xbox One has taken a big hit, the magic is gone. Thankfully (for gamers), the competition has picked off where they left off.

 

[Dash_Riprock]

Why are people so convinced that the NX will outperform the PS4/XB1? Have specs leaked already?

 

[RexNovis]

Why are people so convinced that the NX will outperform the PS4/XB1? Have specs leaked already?

No. But Nintendo fans tend to be a special breed. They never let trivial things like "official announcements" and "facts" get in the way of creating unrealistic expectations.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

Why are people so convinced that the NX will outperform the PS4/XB1? Have specs leaked already?

I honestly have no idea, but it almost comes off as wishful thinking - "If Nintendo have more powerful hardware, then surely everyone will come back"

When was the last time Nintendo released hardware that out performed competition?

 

[Dash_Riprock]

No. But Nintendo fans tend to be a special breed. They never let trivial things like "official announcements" and "facts" get in the way of creating unrealistic expectations.

I honestly have no idea, but it almost comes off as wishful thinking - "If Nintendo have more powerful hardware, then surely everyone will come back"

When was the last time Nintendo released hardware that out performed competition?

What really strikes if that for two console Gens now Nintendo fans have been adament that Nintendo doesn't care about graphics.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

I honestly have no idea, but it almost comes off as wishful thinking - "If Nintendo have more powerful hardware, then surely everyone will come back"

When was the last time Nintendo released hardware that out performed competition?

The Gamecube! And it didn't work!

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

The Gamecube! And it didn't work!

To be entirely fair, apart from the "blip" that was the Wii, Nintendo's console sales have been on a downward trend anyway.

So, more powerful hardware, less powerful hardware, you're still going to have the Nintendo faithful proclaiming it as "the best", so, really, it comes back to the point, it doesn't matter what Nintendo do, the mass market just doesn't really care.

 

[Steroyd]

What really strikes if that for two console Gens now Nintendo fans have been adament that Nintendo doesn't care about graphics.

It's not about graphics, it's about 3rd party support and and right now even 10% of 3rd party sales is better than 0%.

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

It's not about graphics, it's about 3rd party support and and right now even 10% of 3rd party sales is better than 0%.

Nintendo need to focus on getting an install base that third parties want to support, not trying to court them based on dreams and wishful thinking and the ship has already sailed for third party relations. NX is going to be the Wii U all over again if they take that route. Third party developers release games, no one buys them, third party developers drop support. I, honestly, don't think Nintendo are capable of that, as the Wii U has shown.

So, what are their next steps? Keep releasing hardware for the Nintendo faithful? Might as well go the whole hog and make a high powered, expensive, but long lasting console, because Nintendo fans will buy it anyway.

 

[SeanR1221]

It's possible that PSVR could be the PS4's Kinect in terms of sales. Really depending on the price of it.

It's already been said it will be priced like a console, so I really doubt it will make a big splash in sales.

 

[Occam]

I'm still massively suspicious of rrod inflating 360 figures. Before MS started doing a wholesale replacement you'd hear of so many people who bought a replacement.

Anecdotal, but I know of several people who purchased more than one 360, even after Microsoft started the replacement program. For instance because they didn't want a refurbished unit that would crap out again within a couple of months.

I'd love to know what the actual install base of 360 and PS3 was at its peak.

 

[SeanR1221]

Nintendo need to focus on getting an install base that third parties want to support, not trying to court them based on dreams and wishful thinking and the ship has already sailed for third party relations. NX is going to be the Wii U all over again if they take that route. Third party developers release games, no one buys them, third party developers drop support. I, honestly, don't think Nintendo are capable of that, as the Wii U has shown.

So, what are their next steps? Keep releasing hardware for the Nintendo faithful? Might as well go the whole hog and make a high powered, expensive, but long lasting console, because Nintendo fans will buy it anyway.

Maybe hand some more franchises to 3rd parties as a way to meet in the middle.

This way third parties aren't competing with "nintendo" games and Nintendo gets more third party support.

 

[KurtSloane]

I see this thrown around lot, but have you any actual knowledge how MS acts and markets xbone for example in Finland or Brasil?

Let's talk about tier 2 countries as the way MS treated its international markets.

 

[KurtSloane]

Maybe hand some more franchises to 3rd parties as a way to meet in the middle.

This way third parties aren't competing with "nintendo" games and Nintendo gets more third party support.

The game playing market that buys the big third party AAA games every year have no history of doing so on Nintendo platforms, they have no affinity with them.

Their will also be a huge section of the market that has never played Nintendo IP.


Nintendo abandoned the core market, for along time, this is what hurts them the most.

I don't see them ever changing that.

 

[Ushay]

i don't really have a dog in the microsoft/sony race. who does better here is about as interesting as the presidential campaign between jack johnson and john jackson. that said, i love speculating, and i think the idea that microsoft is done and there's no reversing things as far as next gen is concerned doesn't take into account a lot of the stuff that goes on behind the scenes. the direction behind xbox changed wildly from 2005 to 2015, and can be broken down into a few key areas:

(now before 2005, i think microsoft was largely directionless. they were basically throwing shit at the wall and seeing what stuck, making games with anyone as long as it could be exclusive. the best thing they did in this era was buy bungie and get xbox live up and running)

2005-mid 2010: the console for gamers. and by gamers, i really mean the 18-34 year old male playing online shooters. this was microsoft really leveraging xbox live as a way to create a community. and hell, it worked. they managed to ship nearly 40 million systems by the end of 2009, massively up over the predecessor which had sold 24 million in the same time, while also selling far more software. it was also the go-to place if you had a multiplayer game. the 360 may have been outclassed by the ps3, but most of the time, multiplayer games looked or ran better on the 360. the moves microsoft made here included promoting indie games like braid and limbo, and making xbox live the centerpiece of the console (remember that e3 when you could download some demos of games on the show floor? crazy right?)

mid 2010-mid 2013: the console for everyone. bungie left to do their own thing and no one ever heard from them ever again. this is when kinect took off and microsoft started to coast a little on the success of it afterwards. late 2010 and all of 2011 were the highest points of the 360, and from this it's hard not to see why they would have thought they'd struck gold. while first-party games and franchises were no longer new and exciting, and usually made from companies unaffiliated with the property originally, the 360 had become the place for family games (not just kinect), and it was still the go-to console for multiplatform titles. it's this version of the 360 that led the platform to become the best-selling console of the 7th generation in the united states.

mid 2013-late 2014: the console for no one. the reveal of the xbox one was disastrous. e3 2013 was actually fine, but it was completely overshadowed by the may 2013 reveal to the point where people mistaken announcements from the reveal as showing up in the e3 show, especially in the context of sony's show later that day. but basically the direction of the thing was 'kinect is popular so we'll do that... and because we have the system for everyone, we'll put in other non-gaming features like we've always wanted. we've conquered the living room, people!' with a dash of 'oh and let's not let anyone fucking pirate anything.' if i have to pick a period of the xbox's history that was even more mired in 'please the board room guys' than the original period where microsoft was just trying to get their foot in the door, it has to be this one. microsoft wanted something that had a broad reach with its accessibility and features, but they also wanted a high end machine. the result was a system that could play multiplatform games, but with a price point that was prohibitively expensive to the main fanbase they wanted. even if they did secure the espn-loving crowd and families (probably with a $300 consoles and something marketed more explicitly towards them), they wouldn't have gotten around the always-online thing.

late 2014-present: the console for gamers. microsoft spent most of 2014 and all of 2013 undoing the mistakes of the may reveal. but they couldn't drop kinect and as a result, couldn't drop the price. they couldn't make the system more powerful either. however, they were able to eventually drop the price rather significantly in late 2014, and kept going into 2015 to where it was selling at a lower price than the ps4 (until the two were finally on equal footing late in the year). online-only is now a bad dream, xbox tv is dead, kinect is gone, and the family push is gone with it (although it's the second best performing platform for family games of the 8th gen systems a lot of the times - probably a holdover from the 360 userbase). phil spencer seems to be doing and saying all the right things too. backwards compatibility with the previous generation isn't a major system-selling thing, but it's definitely a show of good will. rare replay and sea of thieves also shows microsoft acknowledging the company's legacy and letting them stretch their legs a little with something new that looks like something they wanted to do. there's overall a bigger push to make microsoft's first-party stuff mean something.

what i want to say is, direction and passion matters. i don't know if you can put too much stock into what happened in 2015 either since it was most likely holdover from stuff decided when don mattrick was in charge. i have to assume for instance, that the halo tv show was supposed to happen with halo 5 (sony managed to get the powers tv show out about one year after bendis started talking about it, and a few days after he stopped talking about it). a lot of other first-party games were probably made in times less friendly to developers. i don't think it's necessarily the best indication of how things will happen moving forward.

the last thing i want to touch upon is how we don't even know the plan for the ninth generation. personally? i'm thinking that microsoft might join nintendo in the os game and start applying xbox to more than one kind of device, while marketing one very specific gamer device to start with. if xbox can become a platform that is played on pc the same way steam is, as well as being a dedicated hardware that is purchased in store, that might be the sort of thing that could blindside the competition in the next generation and reach more people.

A nice read, in addition to Ribs little piece above (no pun intended). Polarising opinions.

The way I see it, there are a lot of consumers with no brand loyalty, the malleable market so to speak. And I think this is the market MS lost at the start of this generation, I think its very possible they can be re-engaged as a 2nd console user base, but this will depend entirely on content MS develop and how they come to market.

The last 2 years have taught us very important lessons in what MS can and cannot get away with when it comes to establishing its exclusive content. Tomb Raider is the best and most recent example, MS needed to fill a void in their portfolio and did it in the worst way possible, and I hope it teaches them a lesson in where to focus their efforts in the future. On the other end of the spectrum we have games like Street Fighter V, praised and applauded for going exclusive this generation. This isn't a stab at Sony, if anything it should outline clearly to MS what consumers are willing to tolerate from them this generation. And also should highlight to them where 3rd party allegiances lie and what it takes to have those without repercussions.

I believe MS need to re-establish themselves this generation, with a supreme focus on 1st party output and high quality IP. They are doing it no matter how you view them, through hardware accessories like Elite Controller and new IP like Scalebound and Sea of Thieves. They need to keep doing it, and explore new avenues like JRPGs. With Nadella showing full support and Phil in charge I can realistically see a complete turnaround ( no I don't mean market share).. by the time the next gen arrives.

MS is playing second fiddle, and they should play to that tune imo.

 

[SeanR1221]

The game playing market that buys the big third party AAA games every year have no history of doing so on Nintendo platforms, they have no affinity with them.

Their will also be a huge section of the market that has never played Nintendo IP.


Nintendo abandoned the core market, for along time, this is what hurts them the most.

I don't see them ever changing that.

I don't think you understood my post.

Instead of bringing typical third party games to third parties, third parties could use one of nintendo franchises and make a game on the NX.

 

[Steroyd]

Nintendo need to focus on getting an install base that third parties want to support, not trying to court them based on dreams and wishful thinking and the ship has already sailed for third party relations. NX is going to be the Wii U all over again if they take that route. Third party developers release games, no one buys them, third party developers drop support. I, honestly, don't think Nintendo are capable of that, as the Wii U has shown.

So, what are their next steps? Keep releasing hardware for the Nintendo faithful? Might as well go the whole hog and make a high powered, expensive, but long lasting console, because Nintendo fans will buy it anyway.

You need to think about what that means, EA isn't going to release a Battlefront on the NX if it doesn't have online features that can facilitate season passes and the like, Rockstar definitely isn't going to release a GTA on NX if it still use DVD's, hell they may even guarantee not having FFVIIR on the system if it can't run Unreal Engine 4.

Then you look at people not buying said games on the system because they're either a)Late and still full priced. or b)Missing features that are prevelant on other systems and still charged full price anyway, and we end up with a self fulfilling prophecy.

Now will Nintendo making a console comparable to the PS4ONE in specs automatically fix that.... There's a chance, a better chance than no chance than what happened with the WiiU, whose third party support dried up in absolution when 3rd party devs moved onto the "next generation" in terms of PS4ONE games.

 

[Boombloxer]

I don't think you understood my post.

Instead of bringing typical third party games to third parties, third parties could use one of nintendo franchises and make a game on the NX.

The only 3rd parties that would do this are the ones Nintendo paid directly to do so.
No one else is interested in leasing their IP when they can build their own.

There's a chance, a better chance than no chance than what happened with the WiiU, whose third party support dried up in absolution when 3rd party devs moved onto the "next generation" in terms of PS4ONE games.

Not really. Nintendo's 3rd party relations are bad.
It's not just about specs, folks have to want to support the machine with the games they are passionate about and the ones that will make coin.
They will not do that for a system that's so different from everything else unless the userbase is large.

Not sure we'll ever see Nintendo lead anything ever again really. Handhelds are a stopgap, but that's contracting.

 

[SeanR1221]

The only 3rd parties that would do this are the ones Nintendo paid directly to do so.
No one else is interested in leasing their IP when they can build their own.

Nintendo has mentioned multiple times over the past few years they want to leverage their IPs more.

So, I think theres definitely a possibility it can happen.

 

[Durante]

9 percent more units than Fallout 3

Maybe my expectations were a bit too high, but I actually expected FO4 to do even better than that.

 

[IvanJ]

I don't think you understood my post.

Instead of bringing typical third party games to third parties, third parties could use one of nintendo franchises and make a game on the NX.

Somehow I doubt any side would agree to that.
Nintendo would be losing creative control of their IPs, letting others profit from brands they have been building for the past 30 years.
3rd parties would in turn be paying a fee (a license or a profit share) while limiting themselves to only one platform. Unless it's a small unproven developer that can gain some experience and will work for food, but I doubt that was the idea. Activision or EA or others have very little to gain by entering these deals.

This just looks like a lose-lose deal to me.

 

[igordennis]

And you know what is crazy about the Xbox One in Brazil? Officially its the console leading the market, but that is because the PS4 use to be waaay more expensive, almost two times the price of a XOne, so PS4 here sold most of its units trough grey market, consoles coming mostly from US or Mexico. And you can clearly see that the market is in favor for Playstation 4 here based on game prices. Xbox One games drop the launching price within two weeks. For like the past 15 days already you can buy Rise of the Tomb Raider for something like 35 dollars, same for Halo 5 10-15 days after launch. Games are basically 45-50% off couple weeks after launch, and that clearly means they are not selling very well, despite the investments Microsoft makes on the country.

As a brazilian this is (anedoctally) true. Playstation just has way more mindshare and recognition here, mostly because of the PS2.

 

[IvanJ]

Nintendo has mentioned multiple times over the past few years they want to leverage their IPs more.

So, I think theres definitely a possibility it can happen.

I think leveraging their IPs does not mean what you proposed. It just means using them more outside gaming, as in merchandising, movies, theme parks, toys etc.
They are reluctant to use their strong IPs even for their own mobile games.