Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

The PS5 and Xbox 2 thread - it's happening

TedNugent

Arcane
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
6,363
The influx of studios they got in the Activision deal can be used to flesh out their Xbox Game Pass service which is making a few billion a year and growing.
Critically, is Gamepass actually making money for Microsoft? Is it making any money for publishers and developers?

But they announced back a couple months after Diablo 4 came out that they reached 12 million players. So it probably did pretty go for them despite all the problems.
Did they really? Christ, that's depressing. I'll admit, I was kind of jaded by the retrospective hatred of D3 and the consistently shrinking subscription numbers of WoW retail and classic.

I also find the push to re-release expansions in Classic absolutely mindbending. What is the point of classic if the original servers bleed out when they release a new expansion? It's like retail from 10 years ago. It was very telling when they stopped publishing subscription numbers.

Apparently, Blizzard explained this themselves:
https://www.wowhead.com/news/reflec...zzard-reveals-subscriber-trends-at-gdc-338238

It even got to the point where they started reflecting on it, and apparently pushed their lead narrative designer, Steve Denuso out the door. Basically, Steve Denuso and some other idiots ruined the game.

1151292.jpg
1151297.jpg


I guess the plan is just to keep releasing classic expansions in conjunction with retail, and apparently this is working to prevent sub fall off alongside the classic+retail sub bundle:
1151293.jpg


Again, kind of depressing actually.

Eh, suffice to say, Diablo 4 was kind of a "fool me once, shame on you," type of situation, I'm one of those that probably are not coming back to these shysters, but it seems I might be in the minority. Just worth noting that they aren't exactly maintaining 10+ million active subscribers like the good old Wrath days.
 
Joined
Nov 23, 2017
Messages
4,172
Yeah, Xbox Game Pass makes money. Back in 2021, just on consoles, Game Pass made $2.9 billion. Their user numbers are up from then.

Phil Spencer said last year they spend over a billion on bring third party games to the service.
 

TedNugent

Arcane
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
6,363
Yeah, Xbox Game Pass makes money. Back in 2021, just on consoles, Game Pass made $2.9 billion. Their user numbers are up from then.

Phil Spencer said last year they spend over a billion on bring third party games to the service.
Well,

https://www.polygon.com/24108700/phil-spencer-interview-2024-xbox-exclusives-layoffs

Phil Spencer said:
But first, for context, Spencer talked about how things used to work when budgeting and greenlighting a video game. The Microsoft exec has been producing games for long enough that he can remember when the financials were relatively straightforward. A publisher could set a sales goal (say, 800,000 units), set an earnout goal (how much money they want to make), and set the price of the game (usually $59.99). From there, a video game’s publisher and/or studio could set a budget.

However, the financial calculus has changed. In 2024, most games are sold across multiple storefronts, often steeply discounted mere weeks after release or included as part of subscription services on launch day. Plus, the games themselves take many years to create with the help of hundreds, if not thousands, of team members, sometimes spread across the world. All of this adds up, and as Spencer says, it can cost “$300 million to build a video game.”


Spencer explained how this cost forces three substantial problems: one for all big-budget games, one unique to console exclusives, and one that spans the entire industry.




  1. The cost “really reduces the risk that publishers are willing to take.” Where previous games needed to sell a few hundred thousand units to justify their cost, new games may need to sell many millions of units. “If you’re a publisher, you know that’s a pretty big number in a world that already has a lot of video games coming.” said Spencer. “How are you going to establish this thing? Am I willing to take the red on new IP — on a new kind of game — when the earnout risk is that high? I think it impinges on the creativity of this industry, which I don’t love. Creativity is like the cornerstone of what we should be about in gaming.”
  2. This cost is particularly prohibitive for exclusives that can only reach so many players. As Spencer explained in our conversation about the perils of exclusivity and walled-garden consoles, these games need to make additional money to justify the console maker subsidizing the cost of the console. As Spencer explained, “[The case for] exclusivity gets pressured as the cost of the game goes up.”
  3. According to Spencer, the console market has not grown in the past year. Though Xbox, PlayStation, and Nintendo Switch consoles continue to sell, Spencer notes that many console gamers are simply upgrading — or, to put it another way, they’re not new to the market and won’t contribute to growth. And without new customers, “everybody else’s customer is your success state,” said Spencer. “You can’t succeed unless you draw in customers from other publishers and other platforms. And because you’re not finding new customers with the games that you’re building, everybody’s kind of fighting over the same-size pie.”



These problems have had a very real, substantial, and immediate human cost. The industry has seen consistent and mounting layoffs, including a particularly rough start to this year. Shortly after Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard King, the company announced it would be laying off 1,900 workers from its gaming division.


Polygon asked Spencer if the ABK layoffs were part of this wider trend, or if there was something unique about the layoffs as they pertain to the current Xbox business.


It’s a little bit of both,” said Spencer. “But I’ll say the thing that has me most concerned for the industry is the lack of growth. And when you have an industry that is projected to be smaller next year in terms of players and dollars, and you get a lot of publicly traded companies that are in the industry that have to show their investors growth — because why else does somebody own a share of someone’s stock if it’s not going to grow? — the side of the business that then gets scrutinized is the cost side. Because if you’re not going to grow the revenue side, then the cost side becomes challenged.

Maybe that's not such a great thing

This comment though:

Commenter on Polygon said:
Meanwhile, other press from MSFT, as recent as January:

"Xbox content and services revenue increased by 61 percent at Microsoft during Q2, largely driven by the Activision Blizzard merger.

Overall, gaming revenue increased by 49 percent to $7.11 billion, with 44 points of net impact from the Activision Blizzard acquisition, to become the third-most lucrative product offering for Microsoft (behind Server and Office). Microsoft CFO Amy Hood suggested that growth matched expectations."

But we can't fund a AAA game for $300 million. Greed greed greed

ActiBlizz is their third-most lucrative product behind Server and Office, lol.

By the way, interesting, I think, how Windows box product used to be an enormous profit driver for Mickey, and now they are driving everyone, especially business, deep into the subscription model.
 

Caim

Arcane
Joined
Aug 1, 2013
Messages
15,820
Location
Dutchland

Could mark the beginning of PlayStation moving back towards being more Japan-centric, that rumoured PS portable might be a way of semi “resetting” the platform and moving things back (my speculation, of course).

Apparently he wants to increase profits by releasing more PS exclusives on PC.

He also wants to kick Bungie in the nuts for fucking up their development timelines.
 

The Decline

Arcane
Joined
Aug 24, 2009
Messages
7,340
Location
Everywhere

Could mark the beginning of PlayStation moving back towards being more Japan-centric, that rumoured PS portable might be a way of semi “resetting” the platform and moving things back (my speculation, of course).

Apparently he wants to increase profits by releasing more PS exclusives on PC.

He also wants to kick Bungie in the nuts for fucking up their development timelines.


Someone tell him he can increase profits if he kills off the US branch.
 

911 Jumper

Educated
Joined
Jun 12, 2023
Messages
913
Apparently he wants to increase profits by releasing more PS exclusives on PC.

He also wants to kick Bungie in the nuts for fucking up their development timelines.
Totoki's a finance guy (he describes himself as being “obsessed with growth”), and the only person that has a higher rank than him is Sony's CEO himself. So I'm not surprised he wants more PS games on PC. It seems like it's his way of putting SIE in recovery mode and just trying pull in as much money as possible via software.

Of course, more games on PC means there are fewer reasons to own a PS5, so I expect PS hardware sales will continue to take a hit. Sony missed its last hardware sales target by about 4 million irc.

Totoki is only going to be there for about a year. So I think he will just trim things down, reduce the bloat, etc. His remarks about Bungie were interesting. I think behind the scenes at Japan HQ, they are probably thinking which western studios to restructure or close next. Seeing London Studio go didn't surprise me. Most UK-based studios are garbage. The best ones are all dead. Perhaps Media Molecule will be next.
 

deuxhero

Arcane
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
11,446
Location
Flowery Land
Was Phil Spencer behind the always online and always Kinect for Xbone? I'd without hesitation give that person, whoever it was, full credit for killing Xbox as a brand as it never recovered from that unforced error. All the best titles could have been exclusive to Xbox Series while it was the cheapest and most powerful console and it still wouldn't have come back from that level of fuckup. As a reminder they only confirmed the online only thing at the launch event because they were specifically asked about it in response to the rumors: MS fully intended to hide it till launch because they knew it would be hated, and even after they walked it back every Xbone had to have online activation with region lock.
 

911 Jumper

Educated
Joined
Jun 12, 2023
Messages
913
Nah, Kinect and Always Online happened under Don Mattrick

Phil Spencer was responsible for the following (taken from his Wiki page):
Since taking over both Xbox and the Gaming division, Spencer has advocated for cross-platform play, as well as launched key initiatives, such as reintroducing backward compatibility to the Xbox platform, the purchase of Mojang and Bethesda, the further development and support of Minecraft, the introduction of Xbox Game Pass, launching the Xbox Adaptive Controller, an increased focus on PC gaming, porting some Microsoft published games to other platforms including the Nintendo Switch, the launch of xCloud, and increasing the number of first-party development studios.
Phil Spencer took over Xbox in March 2014, btw, a few months after Xbox One's launch (Don Mattrick left Xbox in July 2013).
 

Ezekiel

Arcane
Joined
May 3, 2017
Messages
5,589
Horizon Zero Dawn - Walk is a toggle.
God of War - Steam users say no walk button.
Returnal - No walk button.
Days Gone - Walk is a toggle.
Spider-Man - Don't know if it's toggle or hold. Already have on PS4, not buying on/for Steam.

Coincidence? I wanna read Sony's PC port requirements.
 

911 Jumper

Educated
Joined
Jun 12, 2023
Messages
913
Then I 100% blame Mattrick for the death of Xbox.
Don Mattrick got the ball rolling in regard to Xbox's demise, but he left before Xbox One's launch. Phil took over in March 2014 so he's been at the helm for the last 10 years, overseeing both the Xbox One and the current Series X|S generations. I'd say he's responsible for Xbox's demise and current situation.

That said, I don't think Xbox even planned to win this generation. The base Xbox [Series S] is a machine with 10GB of ram, no disc drive, and an inferior GPU. Why would Xbox enter this gen with a base console that is significantly weaker than the base console of its main rival? Bunch of other things Xbox has done this gen such as the keeping confusing console names, same controller, same dashboard, frequent changes to the box art banner, and the lack of new first party exclusives all reinforce my view that winning this gen wasn't part of the plan.
 

flyingjohn

Arcane
Joined
May 14, 2012
Messages
2,984
That said, I don't think Xbox even planned to win this generation
There hasn't been any winners since the wii wiped the floor with everybody. Switch is now doing the same.
Why would Xbox enter this gen with a base console that is significantly weaker than the base console of its main rival?
Gamepass. Microsoft entire strategy for the next decade is cloud + subscription with a touch of AI. Sony is not competing in those fields.
confusing console names,
The people who choose names never buy or interact with any console so no surprise.
lack of new first party exclusives
This is the big one. Buying all those studios and then having a hands off approach was a big mistake.
 

soutaiseiriron

Educated
Joined
Aug 8, 2023
Messages
215
Could mark the beginning of PlayStation moving back towards being more Japan-centric
no rational company would refocus on a shrinking market that's not even a 5th of the population of usa + eu. also pc gaming is growing rapidly in japan mainly because of v-chuubas and apex.

pc ports will increase short term profits but there's no fucking chance there's a long term plan in their heads. cloud gaming still has yet to take off, but maybe cloud gaming. other than that they barely have enough studios to release one game a year, because almost all of what they make is AAAA cinematic slop that takes 300 million and 4 years to develop.

Why would Xbox enter this gen with a base console that is significantly weaker than the base console of its main rival?
they banked on accessibility and it also outsources the work for their cloud gaming division in tandem. a single XSX chip can virtualize to 4x XSS, and they run XSX chips in their datacenters for xbox cloud gaming.
10gb ram isn't really a limitation since you can just cut back resolution and textures until it fits, basically irrelevant really. 720p temporal upscale looks okay enough so the ram/vram budgets are tolerable.
 

deuxhero

Arcane
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
11,446
Location
Flowery Land
Then I 100% blame Mattrick for the death of Xbox.
Don Mattrick got the ball rolling in regard to Xbox's demise, but he left before Xbox One's launch.
Which would explain them removing the always online requirement at launch, but it being so late it had to be a day one patch requiring internet activation. I simply do not think it is possible to recover as a brand, at least in a reasonable amount of time, from the sheer level of retardation that way trying to push an always online console, single use discs, region locked hardware, and mandatory spy camera (not to mention the stupidest name ever) all at once. Spencer may not have saved the brand, but Mattrick definitively killed it.
 

911 Jumper

Educated
Joined
Jun 12, 2023
Messages
913
Which would explain them removing the always online requirement at launch, but it being so late it had to be a day one patch requiring internet activation. I simply do not think it is possible to recover as a brand, at least in a reasonable amount of time, from the sheer level of retardation that way trying to push an always online console, single use discs, region locked hardware, and mandatory spy camera (not to mention the stupidest name ever) all at once. Spencer may not have saved the brand, but Mattrick definitively killed it.
Xbox One launched in November 2013. Spencer took over in March 2014. With the exception of a few months, Spencer was in the driving seat for the entire Xbox One generation. He had six years to course correct. He could have changed the strategy. Xbox One was a failure. Spencer then had the chance to try again with the next Xbox.

He chose to handicap the Xbox Series platform from day one with Series S (enforced parity was an admission that Series S was the base Xbox for this gen). He chose to continue with the stupid console names. Apart from Forza Horizon 5, he had no strong first party exclusives, no triple A exclusives from Japanese partners, nothing despite years of saying the games are coming. Game Pass was his idea. Porting existing exclusives to PC and other platforms was also his idea.

The last two have helped to diminish the value of the Xbox console platform to the point where people don't even need to buy an Xbox console. Series X|S is a bigger flop than Xbox One, which is quite remarkable, and it all happened under Phil Spencer's leadership. But the fact that he is still in charge and still being allowed to engage with the media as the face of Xbox is for me more evidence that the decline was part of a wider plan to transition Xbox to a platform agnostic service. Every capable device is now an “Xbox” under the new strategy. As I said in an earlier post, I don't believe winning the console war was part of Xbox's plans for this gen.

I agree that the Xbox console brand won't recover. I think Microsoft will eventually leave the console business officially. It also wouldn't surprise me if they end up dropping the Xbox branding at some point since it is now associated with two generations of failed consoles.
 

911 Jumper

Educated
Joined
Jun 12, 2023
Messages
913
That said, I don't think Xbox even planned to win this generation
There hasn't been any winners since the wii wiped the floor with everybody. Switch is now doing the same.
Why would Xbox enter this gen with a base console that is significantly weaker than the base console of its main rival?
Gamepass. Microsoft entire strategy for the next decade is cloud + subscription with a touch of AI. Sony is not competing in those fields.
confusing console names,
The people who choose names never buy or interact with any console so no surprise.
lack of new first party exclusives
This is the big one. Buying all those studios and then having a hands off approach was a big mistake.
I think what Nintendo has shown with the Switch is that it's really all about the games. The Switch is essential a low power tablet and yet it will likely hit 150m units sold –despite competition from its high tech home console rivals and more recently Steam Deck and other portable systems.

Regarding Xbox: yes, Game Pass – a Phil Spencer invention is where they want to take Xbox. With what is now known about Xbox's strategy, the underpowered Series S was Microsoft's way of declaring that winning the “console war” isn't important.
no rational company would refocus on a shrinking market that's not even a 5th of the population of usa + eu. also pc gaming is growing rapidly in japan mainly because of v-chuubas and apex.

pc ports will increase short term profits but there's no fucking chance there's a long term plan in their heads. cloud gaming still has yet to take off, but maybe cloud gaming. other than that they barely have enough studios to release one game a year, because almost all of what they make is AAAA cinematic slop that takes 300 million and 4 years to develop.
they banked on accessibility and it also outsources the work for their cloud gaming division in tandem. a single XSX chip can virtualize to 4x XSS, and they run XSX chips in their datacenters for xbox cloud gaming.
10gb ram isn't really a limitation since you can just cut back resolution and textures until it fits, basically irrelevant really. 720p temporal upscale looks okay enough so the ram/vram budgets are tolerable.
Japan-centric in regard to software development was what I meant. For example, most of Nintendo's first party development is done in Japan. I'd like to see something similar to that with PlayStation.

Yes, I agree, PC ports can't be a long term plan. Every PS exclusive that ends up on PC (which now also means Steam Deck) makes the PS5 less desirable. Exclusives matter more than ever now. Nintendo understands this well. The other two less so.

I think Sony will have to dramatically change its strategy at some point in a similar way to how Nintendo merged its handheld and home console platforms via the Switch. I think if PS6 is more of the same with more power, it'll struggle. Four years in, the PS5 is underutilised (just look at how slim its library is), yet it seems Sony is still going ahead with a Pro version this year. More power is pointless when you don't have much to play.

The ram bottleneck on the Series S is a significant issue. There were prominent developers raising concerns about it before the Series S even launched. A piece from September 2020:
Xbox Series S RAM is a “Major Issue” – Several Devs Speak Out About Memory “Bottleneck”

Two years later, developers were still describing it as a “pain”


Developers complaining about tech limitations so early on in a console's lifecycle is astounding. Larian had to drop split screen co-op from Baldur's Gate 3 to get the game working on Series S. The delay caused by the tech issues encountered and Microsoft's enforced parity clause meant PS5 temporarily had BG3 as a console exclusive for a couple of months. The low ram on Series S isn't a non-issue.

If Microsoft cared about making its console business a success, it wouldn't hobble its console in the way that it did with the Series S. Xbox has been telling its fans that the great games are coming since the end of the 360 era. They still haven't delivered. And this is now the second generation where the Xbox is lagging in last place. Yet Phil Spencer still has his job. Therefore from Microsoft's perspective he must be doing right.
 

soutaiseiriron

Educated
Joined
Aug 8, 2023
Messages
215
Japan-centric in regard to software development was what I meant. For example, most of Nintendo's first party development is done in Japan. I'd like to see something similar to that with PlayStation.
yeah, I thought of that point, but with what studios? they have two japan studios left, and one of those is polyphony.
Two years later, developers were still describing it as a “pain”
yes, heard of it, but i still maintain what i said because it has more to do with how desperate they are willing to be. developers port shit that shouldn't run on switch to switch all the time. it sucks ass and it's a fourth rate experience, the same will happen to XSS over time. i think the complaint comes more from developers wanting to offer something that's still next gen and close enough to XSX just at a lower resolution, but that's just not feasible.
Larian had to drop split screen co-op from Baldur's Gate 3 to get the game working on Series S.
fair, but a game like this is an edge case since these types of titles with heavy simulation rarely ever end up on console to begin with.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom