Doug Heffernan
Member
Because your public prediction has no chance of being accurate.
Are you from the future?
Because your public prediction has no chance of being accurate.
The Wii was an anolmany, and even it that case, I think time's distorted the machine. What the Wii did right (and XBO hasn't) is it appealed to both core and casual gamers right off the bat.
They had Red Steel and Twilight Princess, but they also had Wii Sports. XBO's lineup was very core-focused, but for a system trying to pull off a Wii strategy, they somehow forgot to focus on a 1st-party casual game for launch. They goofed.
These. Microsoft's in a no win situation. One of two things will happen:
1.) Microsoft keeps the price where it is, but lose a ton of marketshare & sales to Sony, or
2.) Cut the price to $400 & lose a ton of money off of each Xbox One console sold, causing their shareholders to revolt & to spin the Xbox brand off.
Let me guess, you hope for door #2 and will keep the doom and gloom comments coming until it happens.
I think they'll react by cutting this console generation short just like they did the first time. Expect to see a very powerful backward compatible new Xbox console in 2017.
Are you from the future?
Like Hindle said, MS is going to make an effort to take Europe any second now, there's you parity.
Worst case scenario is that they cut the price to match PS4 and people still don't bite. I think their best choice if the trouncing continues is to drop Kinect AND cut the price to $349. That way even if they are losing the graphics war they can sell it on decent first party exclusives, moderate third party money hats and a cheaper platform.
Present circumstance? Let me tell you about present circumstance.
Again what is the fascination with dropping the kinect? It makes no sense! Why not make it $400 with kinect and a game?
The kinect is a great piece of tech. It's a feature that Sony can't match. They need to keep it
The kinect is a great piece of tech. It's a feature that Sony can't match. They need to keep it
Since all the murmurs of investor discontent with Xbox started last year, and increased since Ballmer announced his resignation, I can't see how the Xbox can be sold off to another, external party.
The Xbox is tied into Microsoft services too tightly. How would Live subscriptions work? Smartglass integration? Skydrive integration? Windows app store integration?
I could see Xbox being spun off as a subsidiary. Still owned by MS, standing on its own and not supported by other MS revenue streams to obfuscate its financial success or otherwise. I just can't see how an Amazon/Samsung etc could take over the brand, without taking over a ton of other MS brands at the same time.
Can anyone with more business acumen than I comment on what I've just said?
It's not about "doom & gloom," it's about what's based on reality. Everyone's been saying the same thing.
You may hope but not everyone wants or thinks MS will sell off the XBox division. Not everyone thinks the XBox One is selling as terribly as you make it out to be either. I have read quite a few comments about how the XBox One has actually outsold the XBox 360 in the same time frame. I have also read conflicting stories about the revenue XBox generates for Microsoft. You suggest it's lost them money every year. Do you or anyone else have any real data to back that up?
Again what is the fascination with dropping the kinect? It makes no sense! Why not make it $400 with kinect and a game?
The kinect is a great piece of tech. It's a feature that Sony can't match. They need to keep it
No, a strong launch is great but it doesn't matter in the long run if it doesn't sell consistently well. The X1 is tracking ahead of the 360 because of it's big launch. To put things into perspective, it's first Jan. was far below the 360's first Jan.
If you want proof of big launch =/= guaranteed success, ask the Wii U.
No one wants it though or at least not the vast majority. Even at the same price as Sony with a piece of tech no one wants, the majority of people are paying the same price for weaker tech. Dropping 100 bux and keeping the same productions costs is more of a financial hit than drop 150 and ditching about 70-90 bux worth of production costs and makes the product more attractive for the majority of people. That's my 2 cents.
No one wants it though or at least not the vast majority. Even at the same price as Sony with a piece of tech no one wants, the majority of people are paying the same price for weaker tech. Dropping 100 bux and keeping the same productions costs is more of a financial hit than drop 150 and ditching about 70-90 bux worth of production costs and makes the product more attractive for the majority of people. That's my 2 cents.
Present circumstance? Let me tell you about present circumstance.
Valve and their various project partners are about to start selling Steam Machines. Though they are not Windows devices, you, I, and everyone else knows that the vast majority of them will dual-boot Windows for at least the next few years due to how much of the Steam library is Windows-reliant. These are going to be paid installations - either at the standard bulk price for PC manufacturer preload or even retail MSRP for Steam Machines that don't have a dual-boot option from the manufacturer - meaning they will actually be generating more revenue per unit sold for Microsoft than the XB1, and actually bringing users into the "Windows ecosystem".
Now, in present circumstance - sitting on a division that's never been a significant profit generator, that appears to have no bright future, and is currently clearly struggling - if the Devices division comes and says, "We need to up our budget. Sony's eating our lunch and now everyone else is taking a bite, too. We can't stay in this if we don't spend more" then what is the rational way to respond to that?
I know what I would say: you expect me to give you guys more money to waste trying to fight against a product which is, unintentionally or not, more profitable for us than yours is, and aligns more closely with the goals of our core business and overall brand strategy? Right, let me get right on that.
Get out of the console business, and get back into the PC gaming business. I hate to say that as a gamer, because the last thing I want is for Microsoft to come back and pull off another fuck-up in the PC space. The fact of the matter is, though, that PC games are inherently movers of Windows while console games are not, and the two are largely at odds with each other. The support for X-Box has always been supporting a side-project that is inherently bad for the core business, because every X-Box unit sold is a potential PC gamer missed out on.
Windows is still the de facto platform for PC gaming, but if Microsoft continues fighting their winter war in Russia they're going to come back to a mess at home; in another three years the adoption rate of Linux distros may have actually reached the point where people can start to transition away, and Microsoft's done such a damn fine job of making Valve want to get away from Windows that they're likely to push that.
Put the money back into PC gaming. Work with the giants of the industry. Give Valve a reason to want PC gaming to continue to be a Windows feature, rather than having to begrudgingly accept it as such and work quietly to undermine it. Give gamers a reason to want to play games on Windows PCs - whether in the traditional sense, or on Surface, or on a living room box like a Steam Machine - rather than consoles.
Or, you know, keep undermining PC as a platform and thus removing one of the few reasons that actually remain for home use of Windows, driving even more users to iOS devices and consoles and thus ensuring the only future left for the company is in enterprise because no one actually bothers to own a home PC anymore. Force a wedge even deeper between Microsoft and PC game outlets, until Steam takes their ball and goes home. That's a great plan, too! I'm sure no investor would look at you like you were some kind of idiot if you proposed that to them.
That is likely because MS over shipped the system and stock sat there. We will have a better idea in the next couple of months how it is tracking. When did the XBox 360 sell as much as the XBox One has so far?
They dont care about winning a fake "war", they care about selling systems and are doing fine. XB1s profibillity has nothing to do with selling more than Sony.
My 2 cents is that people who haven't used it are the ones who don't want it. Or people that have no intentions on buying an xbox no matter what MS does to improve.
But I respect your opinion on the lowering costs, but I do believe MS needs something that stands out and they need to market the kinect better. They just can't be a weaker system at a lower cost IMO.
Maybe you should learn a little more about MS as a company these days before making predictions. MS is fighting a battle on many fronts, and losing on virtually all of them. MS is moving more into Enterprise services as Windows becomes more and more obsolete. Azure, Office365, etc ... THIS is the focus for MS. Check out the discounts MS is giving on Office to try and keep their core business in tact.
Google and Amazon are making things VERY hard for MS right now. Also, the entire X-Box division with the Surface, Windows Phone, and of course the Xbox is taking major, major red. Bing, Nokia, Surface are all huge, huge market failures. In gaming, the XB1 is getting completely annihilated by the PS4, and virtually every third party game is better on PS4, and sales reflect it. And this is just a small portion of the picture... the battle for the living room is already lost - not to Sony, but to Google and Apple.
You have to look at the big picture, and history. IBM, HP, and Dell have already made the move to Enterprise services. And MS will do the same. They will shed the non-profit parts of the company like the X-Box division, and become Enterprise focused. THAT is where the profit is.
The rest of it is all lost. The Windows Phone is NOTHING on the Android and IOS. The Surface tablet also will gain no significant marketshare. Bing? Seriously, not going to happen. And the XB1? If Titanfall isn't the end all be all, that will be a HUGE problem for MS. Look at all the "service" money they are losing alone with the loss of LIVE subscriptions - money that comes with market share that MS is losing. And there won't be any "buying" exclusives either - the whole division is in the red and not going to get the funds to do so from the parent company.
This comes from someone who competes with MS on the Enterprise level, and is very aware of how things stand for MS as a company. Once upon a time, I worked for them before I left for much better opportunities. I.E. Why I have so much MS stock...
Put the money back into PC gaming. Work with the giants of the industry. Give Valve a reason to want PC gaming to continue to be a Windows feature, rather than having to begrudgingly accept it as such and work quietly to undermine it. Give gamers a reason to want to play games on Windows PCs - whether in the traditional sense, or on Surface, or on a living room box like a Steam Machine - rather than consoles.
I'm always mystified in threads like these by people who STILL, in 2014, are doing the whole "Console Warz" thing. I mean, hell, I was a huge Nintendo fanboy growing up, and always will have a soft spot in my heart for Mario Inc., but I'm confused by how adults can really buy into the notion that these companies are in some way benevolent forces only concerned with creating "great experiences for great gamers!". They want your money, and they're trying to most effectively manipulate you into parting with it. I'm sure that there are plenty of individual developers and people within these companies who love gaming and really do care, but their heart is rendered more or less irrelevant by the crushing demands of free market capitalism.
That being said, PS4 is a system that's cheaper and more powerful than the Xbone. It's also, by most accounts, substantially easier to program for. It will win this console generation.
Exclusives don't matter anymore, because exclusives are stupid from a sales standpoint. That's why Nintendo has been so utterly fucked of late, because publishers aren't dumping millions into software that "takes advantage of the platform", thereby placing all of their eggs into one tiny basket within an extremely volatile market. People want cheap boxes to play the latest CoD/Assasin's Creed/Madden/etc., and the PS4 does that cheaper and better, therefore it wins. If you think that being able to talk to your console or "snap" to a TV show is a $100 luxury that the average person will buy into, you're living in a fandom bubble.
Except they are not being profitable with the amount of Xbones they sold in terms of the amount of Xbones they still have in the stores.
Noones getting profitable at this point of time. They have yet to recoup R&D costs.
Having units in stores is not equivalent to meeting sales goals. Of course with R&D it will take a long time for these consoles/games to start making MS or Sony money. However, to say just a few months after a system has come out (which has sold 3 million units) that it needs a turn around is crazy.
You drop the price of the XB1 at E3 and release Halo this Fall, that will push A LOT of units.
The Halo released this fall is almost certainly going to be the Halo 2 Anniversary Edition and not Halo 5. Halo 5 will likely be 2015
And H2, while no doubt good, won't push systems, no where near what Halo 5 would do. Makes me wonder why they pushed it back, I would have thought they'd try their best to get it out this year.
If I were MS I would be releasing a new SKU With GDDR5, no kinect and a beefed up APU and hand out 4 million trade vouchers for people who already bought the system.
No way the X1 will survive 6 more years of engine enhancements while struggling with standard last gen ports and having to go down to 720p for most newer engines. Will be unimaginable what they may be forcing devs to do even 2 years from now.
The trade would essentially be what they did with the replacement program for busted 360s. But do it fast while you only have maybe 4,000,000 to replace and not 10,000,000 at the end of next year.
They've been reacting since Sony's E3 conference.
If I were MS I would be releasing a new SKU With GDDR5, no kinect and a beefed up APU and hand out 4 million trade vouchers for people who already bought the system.
No way the X1 will survive 6 more years of engine enhancements while struggling with standard last gen ports and having to go down to 720p for most newer engines. Will be unimaginable what they may be forcing devs to do even 2 years from now.
The trade would essentially be what they did with the replacement program for busted 360s. But do it fast while you only have maybe 4,000,000 to replace and not 10,000,000 at the end of next year.
From what i understand xbox has never made any profits just losses that's why some shareholders are tying to push MS to get rid off it.
Get out of the console business, and get back into the PC gaming business. I hate to say that as a gamer, because the last thing I want is for Microsoft to come back and pull off another fuck-up in the PC space. The fact of the matter is, though, that PC games are inherently movers of Windows while console games are not, and the two are largely at odds with each other. The support for X-Box has always been supporting a side-project that is inherently bad for the core business, because every X-Box unit sold is a potential PC gamer missed out on.
Windows is still the de facto platform for PC gaming, but if Microsoft continues fighting their winter war in Russia they're going to come back to a mess at home; in another three years the adoption rate of Linux distros may have actually reached the point where people can start to transition away, and Microsoft's done such a damn fine job of making Valve want to get away from Windows that they're likely to push that.
Put the money back into PC gaming. Work with the giants of the industry. Give Valve a reason to want PC gaming to continue to be a Windows feature, rather than having to begrudgingly accept it as such and work quietly to undermine it. Give gamers a reason to want to play games on Windows PCs - whether in the traditional sense, or on Surface, or on a living room box like a Steam Machine - rather than consoles.
Or, you know, keep undermining PC as a platform and thus removing one of the few reasons that actually remain for home use of Windows, driving even more users to iOS devices and consoles and thus ensuring the only future left for the company is in enterprise because no one actually bothers to own a home PC anymore. Force a wedge even deeper between Microsoft and PC game outlets, until Steam takes their ball and goes home. That's a great plan, too! I'm sure no investor would look at you like you were some kind of idiot if you proposed that to them.
The key to success or failure is whether or not they manage to meet internal sales targets and revenue goals. That said, with any public company there are always going to be investors who look at competitors and say, "Why are they so much more profitable in this industry than we are? If you guys are so much worse at doing this, why are we giving you so much money to do it when we could be giving it to someone who's better at their job?"
The problem is that every indication we had was that their projections for sales were somewhat on the ambitious side, and that's before they got a bloody nose and had to spend yet another pile of money trying to repair the PR debacles and interest shortfalls that resulted from their pratfall of a reveal. The numbers they need to move to reach profitability have only increased from their initial estimates, and their ability to reach those figures seems to be dwindling by the day.
Full-time investors tend to be very smart - or have people who are that they pay to keep them informed, at least - and can read a data line perfectly well. If the Devices division told them, "We project to have sold X million units by Y date, resulting in Z revenue" then when investors see they're coming up short on sales by the appointed date they're going to assume (probably correctly) that the division can't meet their promises of turning a profit and opt to either cut their funding or get rid of them entirely.
To investors, the X-Box brand has been a litany of broken promises where future profitability is concerned; the prevailing attitude at the moment is not going to be "oh they missed another internal target and will be in the red another two years longer than expected, but we know they'll turn this around eventually". There are serious unanswered questions about the division's ability to ever remain meaningfully profitable in the long term that need to be addressed sooner, not later.