Console Failures and Successes *spawn*

Shortbread

Island Hopper
Legend
Regardless of ratios, Microsoft XBO is a failure compared to XB360, as PS3 was to PS2. And I don't simply mean in terms of unit sales ...I also mean first party game support, third party exclusives and XBO base model performance/value when compared to Sony PS4 base model. And NO, Microsoft isn't doomed because of it, not in the fashion where PS3 damn near sunk the corporation. So in the end, the ratio di** sizing is somewhat pointless, when the XBO install base, first party content and third party exclusives is anemic when compared to it's predecessor. But these types of failures tends to translate into better services, products and games, the next time around.
 
Regardless of ratios, Microsoft XBO is a failure compared to XB360, as PS3 was to PS2. And I don't simply mean in terms of unit sales ...I also mean first party game support, third party exclusives and XBO base model performance/value when compared to Sony PS4 base model. And NO, Microsoft isn't doomed because of it, not in the fashion where PS3 damn near sunk the corporation. So in the end, the ratio di** sizing is somewhat pointless, when the XBO install base, first party content and third party exclusives is anemic when compared to it's predecessor. But these types of failures tends to translate into better services, products and games, the next time around.

What we’re seeing with Sony is a bunch of remakes of games people may have missed last generation since the PS3’s reach was so much less.

We could easily see a MS revival in the next gen where they revive old games and francises they’re skipping right now. Why release your best idea now when if you save it two years it could be a huge selling bonus to pull back some of the market that fondly remembers the 360? MS isn’t sunk and their lack of first party content could even be strategic. I imagine the content they produce going forward will be forward compatible with the X2. I wonder if this gap in first party content was to re-engineer some games for forward compatibility with a new SDK/architecture?
 
Regardless of ratios, Microsoft XBO is a failure compared to XB360, as PS3 was to PS2. And I don't simply mean in terms of unit sales ...I also mean first party game support, third party exclusives and XBO base model performance/value when compared to Sony PS4 base model. And NO, Microsoft isn't doomed because of it, not in the fashion where PS3 damn near sunk the corporation. So in the end, the ratio di** sizing is somewhat pointless, when the XBO install base, first party content and third party exclusives is anemic when compared to it's predecessor. But these types of failures tends to translate into better services, products and games, the next time around.


That's simply how you choose to look at it.

Go look at EA's annual report for 2010. When talking direct sales to retailers, EA's report breaks out GameStop and Walmart individually generating between 16 and 12% of annual revenue of EA business from 2008 to 2010 which means EA generated about 30% of its sales through those two stores over that three year period.

Now look at EA's annual report for 2017. GameStop is only generating somewhere south of 10% of EA's annual sales and has so for the last three years. There is no mention of Walmart. So who are retailers EA chose to breakout in their report?

The store fronts of MS and Sony where EA generated 17% and 19% (a combined 36% and on a path of growth) of their annual revenue for fiscal year 2017. MS has generated at least 15% for the last three years. You think any other publishers breakout of retail sales data would produce something to the contrary of what EA has experienced?

Sony and MS are effectively becoming the two biggest retailers for console gaming software. You think from a business perspective anyone at MS considers the XB1 a failure in contrast to the 360 with the prospect of XB1 storefront in the future generating more PS4/XB console software sales revenue than GameStop and Walmart combined if it hasn't done so already?

The biggest reason you don't see Sony and MS patting themselves on the back, popping champagne and twerking to Drake songs on YouTube is because their growth is shrinking the business of all their retail partners. But Phil elevation to senior leadership didn't happen simply from turning around the XB1 with a targeted lifetime unit sales of approx. 20 million less than the 360. Keeping the XB platform relevant and allowing MS to become a major retailer of console software is probably what encouraged that promotion.

Yes in terms of console system wars where unit sales as a metric is king, the XB1 is "losing". In terms of XB platform as a business where $ as a metric is king, the XB1 is winning.
 
That's simply how you choose to look at it.

Go look at EA's annual report for 2010. When talking direct sales to retailers, EA's report breaks out GameStop and Walmart individually generating between 16 and 12% of annual revenue of EA business from 2008 to 2010 which means EA generated about 30% of its sales through those two stores over that three year period.

Now look at EA's annual report for 2017. GameStop is only generating somewhere south of 10% of EA's annual sales and has so for the last three years. There is no mention of Walmart. So who are retailers EA chose to breakout in their report?

The store fronts of MS and Sony where EA generated 17% and 19% (a combined 36% and on a path of growth) of their annual revenue for fiscal year 2017. MS has generated at least 15% for the last three years. You think any other publishers breakout of retail sales data would produce something to the contrary of what EA has experienced?

Sony and MS are effectively becoming the two biggest retailers for console gaming software. You think from a business perspective anyone at MS considers the XB1 a failure in contrast to the 360 with the prospect of XB1 storefront in the future generating more PS4/XB console software sales revenue than GameStop and Walmart combined if it hasn't done so already?

The biggest reason you don't see Sony and MS patting themselves on the back, popping champagne and twerking to Drake songs on YouTube is because their growth is shrinking the business of all their retail partners. But Phil elevation to senior leadership didn't happen simply from turning around the XB1 with a targeted lifetime unit sales of approx. 20 million less than the 360. Keeping the XB platform relevant and allowing MS to become a major retailer of console software is probably what encouraged that promotion.

Yes in terms of console system wars where unit sales as a metric is king, the XB1 is "losing". In terms of XB platform as a business where $ as a metric is king, the XB1 is winning.
They may be winning, but I am not sure it's how big corporations work. "Winning" usually is not enough for them.

Maybe some execs at Microsoft want to win the way PlayStation currently win, like: "PSN make more money than the whole of Nintendo".
 
Doesn't XBLive make more money than all of Nintendo too, if not its got to be close I'd think?
 
What we’re seeing with Sony is a bunch of remakes of games people may have missed last generation since the PS3’s reach was so much less.

We could easily see a MS revival in the next gen where they revive old games and francises they’re skipping right now. Why release your best idea now when if you save it two years it could be a huge selling bonus to pull back some of the market that fondly remembers the 360? MS isn’t sunk and their lack of first party content could even be strategic. I imagine the content they produce going forward will be forward compatible with the X2. I wonder if this gap in first party content was to re-engineer some games for forward compatibility with a new SDK/architecture?

I suspect if next gen is fully BC and they can release enhanced editions at will; then your points may not be as relevant as they are for this generation. PS4 requires remasters because there is no BC to PS3. Not the case with Xbox and we're seeing more enhanced games for X1X moving some of those older titles up to 4K for instance.

I don't see this applying to next gen, there's really no reason to hold back, just release the title and people will continue to buy it freely into next gen.
 
They may be winning, but I am not sure it's how big corporations work. "Winning" usually is not enough for them.

Maybe some execs at Microsoft want to win the way PlayStation currently win, like: "PSN make more money than the whole of Nintendo".
corporations don't 'win'.

Winning is keeping your shareholders happy. If you are generating a good return on stock value relative to costs, most shareholders will be happy. If you have to spend money to ensure that your business has long term vision, then shareholders are also okay with that.

Console 'winning' has no value and no company chases 'winning'. They certainly compare themselves to the competition, for making strategy and seeing if they are going to reach targets, but at the end of the day many decisions are made to the benefit of either short term or long term profit. Sustainable profit etc.

That's why console wars is pretty dumb. And that's why company loyalty is dumb unless you have an invested stake in the profits of that company.
 
I think shareholders know like we all know that market share is good for the bottom line. Implying otherwise is kind of silly.
 
I think shareholders know like we all know that market share is good for the bottom line. Implying otherwise is kind of silly.
My counter point is that Apple has little market share compared to the sea of PCs and phones out there, while Android and Windows owns the rest of it. And when it comes to bottom line, despite their tiny marketshare their profits are massive. They have high margins on all their products and they go to great lengths to protecting their margins.
 
corporations don't 'win'.

Yes they do... if you dominate a market, then you win... it's not console war, it's considering facts.

My counter point is that Apple has little market share compared to the sea of PCs and phones out there, while Android and Windows owns the rest of it. And when it comes to bottom line, despite their tiny marketshare their profits are massive. They have high margins on all their products and they go to great lengths to protecting their margins.

MS doesn't sell hardware like Apple... your example is flawed.

In the console market, MS and Sony sell exactly the same thing... so the market share is determinant.
 
Last edited:
Yes in terms of console system wars where unit sales as a metric is king, the XB1 is "losing". In terms of XB platform as a business where $ as a metric is king, the XB1 is winning.

Xbox One is still a failure because they could have done much better. They're not winning as they should do... even if we imagine that the PS3 was more profitable than the PS2, it's still a massive failure for Sony because they won a bronze medal instead of a gold one...
 
Last edited:
That's simply how you choose to look at it.

Go look at EA's annual report for 2010. When talking direct sales to retailers, EA's report breaks out GameStop and Walmart individually generating between 16 and 12% of annual revenue of EA business from 2008 to 2010 which means EA generated about 30% of its sales through those two stores over that three year period.

Now look at EA's annual report for 2017. GameStop is only generating somewhere south of 10% of EA's annual sales and has so for the last three years. There is no mention of Walmart. So who are retailers EA chose to breakout in their report?

The store fronts of MS and Sony where EA generated 17% and 19% (a combined 36% and on a path of growth) of their annual revenue for fiscal year 2017. MS has generated at least 15% for the last three years. You think any other publishers breakout of retail sales data would produce something to the contrary of what EA has experienced?

Sony and MS are effectively becoming the two biggest retailers for console gaming software. You think from a business perspective anyone at MS considers the XB1 a failure in contrast to the 360 with the prospect of XB1 storefront in the future generating more PS4/XB console software sales revenue than GameStop and Walmart combined if it hasn't done so already?

The biggest reason you don't see Sony and MS patting themselves on the back, popping champagne and twerking to Drake songs on YouTube is because their growth is shrinking the business of all their retail partners. But Phil elevation to senior leadership didn't happen simply from turning around the XB1 with a targeted lifetime unit sales of approx. 20 million less than the 360. Keeping the XB platform relevant and allowing MS to become a major retailer of console software is probably what encouraged that promotion.

Yes in terms of console system wars where unit sales as a metric is king, the XB1 is "losing". In terms of XB platform as a business where $ as a metric is king, the XB1 is winning.

This is all fine & dandy, and I agree for the most part. However, Microsoft's "dollar metrics" from the growing inroads into digital content (movies, games, apps, etc...), is more so of consumers switching from physical content providers (GameStop, Walmart, Target, etc...), to digital content providers (STEAM, PSN, Origin, MSO, etc...). And yes, MS (Sony and Nintendo included) will soak up the greater shares of these sales compared to physical retailers as we push along through the digital age of things.

With XB1 userbase sitting between 35-37 million users, I could see Microsoft still having the greater share of digital content downloads/dollars than say Sony, even with it's 76 million userbase. Not only factoring in Microsoft XB1 userbase, but also the PC userbase that has access to Xbox Play Anywhere games and/or XBO ported titles. So yes, this would be a success in Microsoft's book. However, companies/corporation also looks at what wasn't gained or the losses "that shouldn't have happened." Yes Microsoft made greater revenue across it's software stream, but it also failed to capitalize [maximum potential] from a smaller Xbox userbase. In other words, yes Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo are effectively cutting out the physical content middlemen when it comes to software sales and getting greater returns ...but it's also valid not to lose any customers from previous generations that could maximize those streams.

My post was simply pointing out the failure of the XBO unit sales, first party content and third party exclusives, when compared to the XB360. Not that it didn't make money. Hell, PS3 made Sony money, but it still was a failure on so many levels.
 
With XB1 userbase sitting between 35-37 million users, I could see Microsoft still having the greater share of digital content downloads/dollars than say Sony, even with it's 76 million userbase.

590499
 
My counter point is that Apple has little market share compared to the sea of PCs and phones out there, while Android and Windows owns the rest of it. And when it comes to bottom line, despite their tiny marketshare their profits are massive. They have high margins on all their products and they go to great lengths to protecting their margins.

I think they’re the number three PC seller behind HP and Dell and have around 12% of the PC market. I’m not sure that’s “tiny”.
 
Exactly this. And that's not even counting the subscriptions.

That's why Sony isn't interesting at losing money to sell more consoles (similar to Nintendo). They sell consoles in order that those PS4 owners buy games and / or PS+ subscriptions.

They don't want people that buy their consoles to watch UHD movies or freely play PS1 / PS2 / PS3 disc games (and even paying license to third parties because the source code would need to be modified for the emulator). They prefer selling remasters for that.
 
They don't want people that buy their consoles to watch UHD movies or freely play PS1 / PS2 / PS3 disc games (and even paying license to third parties because the source code would need to be modified for the emulator). They prefer selling remasters for that.

Then they need to drop the "4 the players" bullshit. Sony isn't getting a free pass on this. Sure it's cool to make money and maximize profits, but not at the expense of gamers whom wanted UHD capabilities and the possibility of playing previous generation games, without paying for it.
 
I think they’re the number three PC seller behind HP and Dell and have around 12% of the PC market. I’m not sure that’s “tiny”.
Apple comparatively to these numbers has a much smaller portion of the pie than the X1 : PS4 : Nin split in both PC and Mobile space.
But profit wise, is debatably one of the most/if not the most profitable company today.


cotd414updated.png


Phones:
chart-ww-smartphone-os-market-share.jpg
 
Back
Top