It's all x86 architecture which makes ports extremely easy to do. The consoles still have their store fronts but the tech inside them is basically form factor PC's. As for upgrading components, don't be surprised if you see Microsoft AND Sony have a modular console when next generation starts where you can swap out the CPU, GPU, RAM and SSD.
@Alabtrosmyster kind of already answered this earlier WRT the APIs. That said, I agree with you that at least the next Xbox will have upgradable CPU, GPU, RAM & SSD
I'm not saying to forget the previous 17 years of Xbox. All im saying is that from 2018 onward has been a whole new direction for the Xbox brand. For Microsoft, the past is mostly irrelevant to what they're doing today.
But it's not irrelevant in reality, because that past is what people remember them for going into the future, until Microsoft corrects for the mistakes of that past. Which they have not actually really done yet.
GamePass simply is not enough to correct for those mistakes, neither is the Series S or Series X being what they are are hardware-wise. It's all about the games, and IMO as a platform holder MS needs a few notable AAA 1P games this gen that are actually industry-leading in at least a couple big ways. Until they can do that, and until they can make a game with broad mass appeal that people associate with them directly, then they'll still be behind.
I agree with them slipping in 2011 and focusing on Kinect, thanks to Mattrick who literally almost single handled killed the Xbox brand yet people believe he was better than what Spencer has been in 5 years just because he got some exclusive games that outside of the big three, no one bought. Mattrick almost killed Xbox and Spencer convinced Nadella to resurrect it.
Hmm...was Mattrick the reason Xbox almost died? I mean he was the face of the brand, but his problem was speaking way too early on the multimedia things. Games-wise, he actually did quite good for XBO's launch and first year or two. They had a stronger launch lineup than the PS4, that was thanks to Mattrick. The interesting Xbox exclusives that came for a few years after he left, were thanks to him. Games like the Ori titles, Cuphead, Quantum Break, Scalebound, Phantom Dust remake, ReCore etc. got going thanks to Mattrick.
What did Phil do for Xbox before GamePass? Well, he cancelled Scalebound, he cancelled Phantom Dust remake, he pushed out a Crackdown 3 that killed the franchise etc. I think some of the things people give Phil credit for with the XBO gen aside GamePass, especially anything before 2018, kind of isn't warranted because IMO that was Phil benefiting from what Mattrick had laid out. I think if Mattrick wasn't so blinded by multimedia (tho TBF, it was also
OTHER Microsoft divisions pushing themselves onto the Xbox brand with XBO and Mattrick had no choice but to cooperate with them) and wasn't so blunt with some of his PR, he'd of stayed at Xbox and the brand would have actually been better off today IMO.
In that sense, he was kind of like a Jim Ryan who just said the wrong thing a little
too many times, but lacked the long-term results record of a Jim Ryan, so he got das boot.
Bleeding Edge was sent out to die and perhaps should have been held for Series console launch but at the same time, im personally happy that it died because I wouldn't want Ninja Theory to waste time on it when they should all be working on Hellblade 2. Plus, the game itself wasn't that good to begin with so why hang on to something that just isn't worth wasting time on?
Except the early beta impressions for Bleeding Edge were actually
quite good, going by what people said. Then things got changed before release and turned off everyone who liked what was there before. Also given Ninja Theory are backed by Microsoft now, why could they not have ensured Bleeding Edge was high-quality and at the same time, work on Hellblade II?
It's not like killing Bleeding Edge helped Hellblade II get developed any faster. Coming up three years since its initial reveal and still hardly any gameplay (or anything that clearly looks like gameplay uncontested), no release date in sight. So how was Bleeding Edge being sent to die beneficial to Hellblade II? Or Project Mara for that matter, which won't even come until 2025 at earliest at this rate, if at all.
Series consoles launched with Gears Tactics so they did have one first party game at launch and yes, it was bad at the time but two years later, do you truly believe that anyone cares? Also, while I love exclusives, people do tend to overrate how important they are. Exclusives are few and far between when compared to the third party multi-platform games that get released on a weekly basis. For example, while I played and completed Gears Tactics on Series X (thanks to Game Pass) and Marvel's Spider Man: Miles Morales on PlayStation 5, the games I played the most were third party multi-platform titles which is what most people play regardless. I had Watch Dogs Legion, Assassin's Creed Valhalla and the best of the three at least for me, Immortals Fenyx Rising (can't wait for the next game!!!) to play. I also had while not a launch game, it released a few weeks later, that being Gears 5: Hivebusters which was freaking great. I enjoyed it more than the base game in 2019.
The importance of exclusives is that they help give a console brand its identity, its culture (yes, consoles have a culture to them because the games they play are creative works just as much as they are products to be sold, and the marketing is often done with creative influences as well. If creativity is involved, some form of culture is created around it) and a means for it to stand out against competitors is a market. They also tend to have the advantage of being afforded the best technical and marketing resources, and ample funding, to create what are often among some of the most industry-defining games historically speaking.
We've seen that play out
numerous times with Nintendo (SMB, Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Smash Bros, Pokemon etc.), Sony (Gran Turismo, Uncharted, TLOU, GOW 2018, Parappa the Rapper etc.), and Sega (Virtua Fighter 3, Outrun, Sonic, Panzer Dragoon, Shenmue etc.). Microsoft's had tastes of this too in the past like with Halo and Forza Horizon, but the point is that exclusives generally have the backing & resources behind them (and technical focus) to push aspects of gaming more than most 3P contemporaries of their time period.
That, and it's tradition to have some new 1P exclusives for a console launch, and that isn't a bad or shameful history to run away from, either. I would also say sub services like Netflix, Disney+, HBOMax etc. disagree with your idea that exclusive content doesn't matter, otherwise those services would be freely sharing their originals with their rivals.
Launch exclusives are highly overrated. Look at PS4/XBO. Xbox One was clearly superior head to head at launch in this regard. How did that work out for Microsoft and the Xbox One brand? LOL. Should Microsoft had had something else available at launch for the consoles? Sure but was it necessary? No because those like me who are buying day one or very close to it (got my Series X on January 4th, 2021 and my PlayStation 5 on February 14th, 2021) are doing so mainly just to have the consoles so we don't have to go nuts trying to get one, especially this generation with the chip shortages due to Covid.
XBO didn't drop off because it had good launch exclusives. It fell off because Xbox management were piss-poor in curating further exclusive content (let alone had bad marketing) after the launch period. They were not able to land a balance between library, marketing, messaging & pricing the way Sony did with PS4, where they had a great launch even with a weaker launch exclusive slate, and just kept improving from there.
Let's not forget about consoles that did extremely well by having strong launch lineups, either. SNES had Super Mario World, PS1 had Toshinden & Ridge Racer, even the OG Xbox carved ahead of Gamecube (especially in the West) thanks mainly to the strength of Halo, a launch exclusive. Maybe you can say launch exclusives aren't as critical today as they once used to be, since the new consoles are BC from Day 1, but they're still very important IMHO.
What could Microsoft have done in 2020 for launch exclusive wise? There was nothing they could do. They put all of their eggs in the Halo Infinite basket and it backfired. But if they would have released Halo Infinite at launch, it would have been far worse than what it currently is. At best, they could have tried to get Gears 5: Hivebusters ready for launch and make it standalone but otherwise, there was nothing that could have been done. Also, those who buy a console at launch aren't doing it for the launch titles. They're doing it to first, have the console already and second, for the potential of what games you'll get down the line and of course the games you already know about.
Well for starters, they could have spread those eggs out. They could have polished Bleeding Edge and touched it up as a Series X/S 1P launch game. They could have tried going for a hell of a lot more than The Falconeer as a launch exclusive, that's for sure. They could have tried netting a game like Watch Dogs into GamePass Day 1.
There are many things they could have done to avoid the embarrassment that was having no launch exclusives for their new system, MS simply did not care to provide any.
If anything, two years later, this launch argument while valid back in 2020 is simply meaningless and pointless now because can Microsoft go back in time to change any of it? No. Can we? No. So what's the point other than just to bash them? To point out a negative that we all know about already and one that can't be changed? And yet, the Series X/S all sold out without any top tier exclusives which is every console launch ever. The hardcore are buying day one no matter what. There literally could be NOTHING at all and these people including myself will still buy the damn thing because we want to have it. So yeah, I get it. Their launch sucked. But who cares? Sony's PS2, PS3 and PS4 launches all sucked. Nintendo Wii and Wii U sucked. Seriously, the percentage that cares about exclusive launch titles is so minimal that they don't even matter and if it's so bad or this or that, then the solution is simple - don't buy the console until there's games that are available for you to play. It's an easy and simple solution.
IMO I think you're actually making a dangerous argument to excuse lack of effort from MS 1P if the idea is they are selling out (which they aren't; albeit they're pacing ahead of XBO & 360 but not by some huge 5 million lead, it's much less than that IMO) without any big games...why should they bother with any big games? I mean people are going to buy a console regardless, right?
Except I don't think that's the case, otherwise GamePass subs (which are strongly tied to Xbox consoles) would not be slowing to a stall by now. Maybe there was a period between launch up to early in the current year where lacking big content was not a detriment for the hardcore adopters (Halo Infinite & FH5 coming out last fall also helped, if momentarily), but apparently that could be affecting GamePass growth on console now. Not having the content they need, Microsoft might've figured to do some sales promos with the Series S to move units and hopefully drive GamePass numbers before FY 2023 Q2 results closed (at the end of November).
I don't think it's really fair to equivalate PS2, PS3, PS4, Wii or Wii U's launches with Series X & S. For one, some of those still had some pretty good games, like Tekken Tag Tournament on PS2 and Red Steel for the Wii. But more importantly, they still had launch exclusives, including 1P ones! Series X & S had virtually no launch exclusives except for The Falconeer, which was quickly forgotten about and had virtually no impact at release anyway. It's like Microsoft didn't even try; at least Sony & Nintendo's systems did. And it's not really about bringing up Series X/S launch environment to hold it against them today, but more to the fact that people won't simply "forget" that the systems launched with no new big exclusives.
So when they have a year like they have this year, where the only 1P releases were Pentiment & Grounded, and no big 3P exclusives for either platform (Xbox or GamePass) outside of arguably Plague Tale: Requiem,...that's just going to compound on stuff like Halo Infinite turning into a wet fart, FH5 ending up in a mediocre state, Flight Sim not really appealing to most people out of that specific niche, Bleeding Edge DOA, Halo Infinite's bad 2020 showing, Starfield's disappointing June Showcase showing, Everwild dev problems, Perfect Dark dev problems...all of that then being contrasted against what companies like Sony & Nintendo have been able to pull off in the same time period.
Yeah, it's
gonna look bad for Xbox comparatively speaking.
So while I agree with you in regards to 2020 launch, two years later, in all honesty, who the fuck cares? I don't. I'm a month away from 2023. Why would I care about their 2020 launch? Here's a fun fact, in 26 months since launch through 2022, 22 out of 26 months, I haven't had a Sony first party exclusive (cross gen or not) to play while on Xbox, it's 24 out of 26 months. Wow. Two extra months I don't have an exclusive. Oh no!!! Seriously, unless you're someone who literally only plays exclusives, I don't see why gamers/consumers would even care to be honest. I don't even care. I have had plenty of games to play this generation. And still a few more to go before 2022 ends which will spill over into 2023.
But what if 2023 is just another 2022? What if Starfield ends up disappointing or gets delayed into 2024? What if Hellblade II still isn't ready for a 2023 launch? What if RedFall isn't your cup of tea after all? What if Avowed isn't going to hit the rumored 2023 release?
Will you just say you're looking forward to 2024, or will you hold Microsoft's feet to the fire for bad management of Xbox division?
As for 2022, every top tier major third party multi-platform game is contracted under a Sony marketing deal which yes, includes a clause that prevents these games from going on Game Pass day one.
The issue shouldn't be those games going to GamePass, however. It should be that Microsoft did not try hard enough to land some marketing deals with those games themselves, and if them insisting on GamePass Day 1 inclusion was a reason for 3P publishers NOT agreeing to marketing deals with Xbox, then that should tell you everything that needs to be said.
In other words, that it's the 3P publishers themselves who are not agreeing to doing content releases for GamePass (certainly not Day 1), and has very little to do with Sony acting draconian and locking the entire 3P industry from doing business with Microsoft for GamePass. Yes, for games Sony have a direct hand in helping co-develop or fund in some capacity, like the recent Callisto Protocol, or RE VIII, of
COURSE they don't want Microsoft to reap the benefits of what Sony themselves put into those games money-wise for dev or marketing, while Microsoft themselves do nothing. How is that fair on the time & money Sony has put into those games?
Outside of those specific games though, you need to ask the actual 3P publishers why they don't see GamePass for Day 1 releases as viable for their business models. There's plenty who have said it, even ABK have said it going by court document transactions!
This is a fact as has already been documented twice in the Epic vs Apple case and via the CMA in regards to COD. Here's a fun fact, as someone who favors Xbox this generation, im not even mad or pissed at Sony for doing this because if it was me, I would do the exact same thing. Sony doesn't want Game Pass to grow at all so what's the best way to help stagnate growth? By preventing third party multi-platform games from being able to go on Game Pass day one. And even if this wasn't a fact even though it is and everyone knows it, that still doesn't guarantee that publishers would say yes to a day one Game Pass deal to begin with.
Again, you need to ask the actual 3P publishers; the idea that Sony have draconian clauses preventing every major 3P publisher from putting their games into GamePass that Sony don't even have any involvement in is ridiculous, and Microsoft knows it. But that didn't stop them from insinuating such with those statements regardless.
Sure Sony doesn't care for GamePass's growth (why should they?), but 3P PUBLISHERS
THEMSELVES also don't seem to care about GamePass's growth, because it's in conflict with their primary business models. That's why companies like ABK have been revealed as saying they would never even put their content into a service like GamePass unless they were being purchased by a company owning such a service.
Ironically enough, Microsoft is one of those companies
.
As for me personally, if I get a few AA games on Game Pass day one like Atomic Heart and Flintlock next year, im already happy because the big AAA games that im interested in, im buying anyway if they don't go on Game Pass day one. My friend loves Game Pass mainly because of all the Indies that go on the service day one. He loves Indie games. Not all of them but a lot of them. I love Game Pass because of Microsoft's first party day one games and AA day one games that I want to play but have no intention on buying. If I get an AAA title, even if it's just once a year that I want to actually play and was going to buy, that's a bonus for me. lol
In general, I agree with you 100% but launch, honestly, two years later, I don't care and don't know why anyone else would. As for 2022, it's been a massive disappointment but like 2020 launch, once im playing Redfall for example, do you really think im going to look back and be like, oh man, I wish I had Xbox exclusives in 2022 to play? Nope. Because im in 2023 so why would I care about the past in which there's not a God damn thing I can do anything about? Besides, I will be too occupied playing Redfall to give two shits about what I wasn't playing in 2022.
Again, it's about the macro market of customers and gamers, not necessarily just yourself. I'm glad you can have the perspective you do on this, but you have to agree there are a LOT of other people who do not, and can have very valid reasons for doing so.
Series X/S consoles are in high demand compared to last generation. It's not even close. Making them PC's so to speak and charging $800 would eliminate that high demand for the vast majority of consumers pretty quickly.
Honestly, how much higher in demand are they compared to XBO? And which one in particular? I've done some sales calcs, I would say as of this post, at most Xbox Series are probably a bit north of 15.5 million sold-through (to customers). For reference, they were probably at 13.16 million sold-through at the start of June, which is less than 2 million ahead of the 360 at that point of the lifecycle.
At most I'd figure Series are 2 million ahead LTD over XBO and 360 sold-through, which IMO doesn't sound great considering the Series S exists. The system that was supposed to help drive the latter-gen mainstream and casual adoption to the early adoption phase of the console cycle. The cheapest of the current-gen system options, by a good mile. But combined S & X are "only" maybe at most 2 million ahead LTD? And that's not considering the cash MS are losing subsidizing Series S units with all the big sales price cuts that have been going on since the middle of Summer!
My idea isn't for them to be PCs, but to change to a business model where they clearly grow where they want to grow (1P sales revenue via supporting multiple platforms with games & services, making further gaming acquisitions, needing to ensure they don't provide a threat to Sony & Nintendo's platform models considering Microsoft doesn't need console gaming via the traditional business model nearly as much as Sony and especially Nintendo do, etc.). Doesn't Microsoft supposedly not care about console unit sales? So, what difference does it make that they sell less Xbox devices going forward on a new model, if they're actually making profit on each unit sold and provide something with better value as both a gaming device & PC productivity package than most OEM PC NUCs, or what a PC user could comparatively build going a-la carte?