Yup! They did this to themselves with the whole Series S thing. Consumers were always going to save up more the PS5 over the Series S. Thinking they could undercut Sony was their undoing. They could have gone the 360 route and simply focused on making great games for a single console with a clear message to gamers.
Do you think there will be a mid gen refresh console from Sony and Microsoft?
- Thread starter invictis
- Start date
I dont think Sony is ever going to use variable clock speeds like on the PS5. They'll just aim for minimum 2.23GHz fixed on the GPU, this way no back compatibility issues. So its going to be a lower clocked 7800XT GPU but I dont think less than 2.23GHz.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
The verdict is still out on the S. We don't know the sales breakdown. I don't think the S has hindered Xbox game development much at all. S owners know they might lose the occasional feature like split-screen in BG3. Xbox haters will always exaggerate the problems. It's par for the course. Xbox has issues with rarely being the lead platform, but that really isn't something that will change until MS sell more units.
I don't think most people know what MS is really up against. The ecosystems more or less got locked last generation. And worse, if you were on the fence and 2 out of 3 of your friends got locked into PS ecosystem, you're much more likely to get drawn into that ecosystem this generation. MS has new users (little Jimmy) and people who are willing to buy a 2nd system as potential console growth targets. Both of these are easier to draw in at $250 than $500. If this generation ends with MS at 50-60 million units and half of them are S units, it's safe to say that the S actually saved Xbox. We won't know the truth for years.
My guess is that the S represents 25-33% of Xbox sales. That's 6-8 million units out of 25 million units. Sony is around 48 million units right now. Not quite 2:1. Can you imagine if Xbox was only at 17 million units, almost 3:1? Much worse.
I don't think most people know what MS is really up against. The ecosystems more or less got locked last generation. And worse, if you were on the fence and 2 out of 3 of your friends got locked into PS ecosystem, you're much more likely to get drawn into that ecosystem this generation. MS has new users (little Jimmy) and people who are willing to buy a 2nd system as potential console growth targets. Both of these are easier to draw in at $250 than $500. If this generation ends with MS at 50-60 million units and half of them are S units, it's safe to say that the S actually saved Xbox. We won't know the truth for years.
My guess is that the S represents 25-33% of Xbox sales. That's 6-8 million units out of 25 million units. Sony is around 48 million units right now. Not quite 2:1. Can you imagine if Xbox was only at 17 million units, almost 3:1? Much worse.
Last edited:
Playstation had momentum coming into this year. You cant exactly correlate one year's sales down to only those games released that year when it comes to consoles. They are all about rolling perception and whatnot.
That said, you're also ignoring 3rd party exclusives like Final Fantasy XVI and Baldur's Gate 3(not meant to be exclusive, but turned into one). And it's not about quantity, either. I've maintained for a while now that the big problem Xbox has is the reputation for their quality of exclusives. They wont succeed until they fix that.
For weeks, MS has been selling Xboxes globally at a lower price, for example, the X costs $350 and the S costs $230 on Amazon. Sales will likely increase significantly as a result. I think this pricing should be kept in order to increase the number of potential Game Pass subscribers in the future.
As for the mid-generation console, I thought it was a stupid idea and I was convinced that this generation could last until 2027 with the current Xboxes. However, due to the development habits used in the game industry, and due to the not very well optimized new generation game engines, e.g. UE5, I currently see that it is better to release nextgen sooner rather than later. Maybe MS should schedule the next Xbox for 2025, one year after the PS5pro, and present it as a new generation. The question is how much a more advanced console can be sold in the market two years from now.
But the GAMES are still the most decisive, many exclusive games are needed.
As for the mid-generation console, I thought it was a stupid idea and I was convinced that this generation could last until 2027 with the current Xboxes. However, due to the development habits used in the game industry, and due to the not very well optimized new generation game engines, e.g. UE5, I currently see that it is better to release nextgen sooner rather than later. Maybe MS should schedule the next Xbox for 2025, one year after the PS5pro, and present it as a new generation. The question is how much a more advanced console can be sold in the market two years from now.
But the GAMES are still the most decisive, many exclusive games are needed.
Your logic make zero sense to me. What's the problem of the S being able to run the same games with less resolution for a significant lower price? If the customer decides for a PS5 that has nothing really to do with the S and X options.
This stupid narrative that it impacts games for X negatively came mostly from trolls/fanboys at NeoGAF. If you believe such disinformation I'm sure there will be new ones coming with the next Xbox.
The reality is that only the guys behind BG3 ran into a problem probably because they didn't really use their memory budget for 4k textures on the XSX/PS5 but their co-op gimmick. At least that's how it looked from the outside.
Last edited:
The amount of memory is going to be one of the biggest leaps with next gen systems. If they release a "next gen" console instead of a pro console in 2025 or 2026 they would pay through the nose for 32GB of GDDR7(double the memory at double the memory bandwidth). At the end of 2027 or 2028 Sony will pay peanuts for well over 32GB of GDDR7. GDDR7 was announced this year and will be releasing 2024 so a next gen console in 2025 would be a disaster just from a Bill of Materials perspective. And all that to play cross gen games designed around 16GB of memory for at least 3 years. And thats just memory alone. They'd need to get a decent Gen 5 NVMe SSD as well at launch to set a base throughput for disk storage. That as well would be more expensive in 2025(but not as big a deal as the memory). I think without going too far there are several arguments(both hardware and software development lifecycle related issues) for why 2025 would be a bad year to launch a next gen console. Developers will make more money during these years developing for current gen due to the larger user base than a new next gen system with very few consoles sold. I think Sony is more on point in this regard with the pro console. MSFT hamstrung themselves with two consoles at launch so they are more hesitant to add a third console. But I think they are in the right direction with the Brooklin where they will dramatically reduce the size of the Series X and drop its price as well. Although I wonder if they will provide a disc drive add on of some sort since a lot of people like that.
I think you'd appreciate my message more if you were a software engineer.
I am. Just not games.
Frenetic Pony
Veteran
I still don't see how Gamepass makes them money. I think the math they used is severely flawed, going (in example) "Ok the average spend for a consumer on gaming per year is $90. But if we get them to up that to $120 per year we benefit the entire industry on average and get to pocket some of the difference ourselves."
The problem is, that's only how a certain percentage of consumers treat subscriptions. Some, the type that play games all the time, will be saving money with gamepass even if they subscribe year around, bringing spend for the entire industry down there. Others treat them as "do one or two months to get the one or two things I want" and then cancel it for the rest of the year, a lot of people do this. So again, you're bringing spend down for the entire industry, $10-17 for a $40-70 game, or more, is a deal for the customer but not for the supplier (either MS or the dev).
Gamepass is only a net gain for MS and devs from the type of consumer that subscribes year round AND wouldn't have spent as much money otherwise. A market who's size I'd happily call into question, Larian and "BG3 probably never going to be on Gamepass" demonstrates plenty in the industry aren't taken in by Microsoft's Magic Math either.
Costs = $1Bn
Revenue = $2.9Bn
Quality is subjective, of course, but momentum isn't. This is exactly what Phil was saying when he said something to the effect that Microsoft could start making 10/10 games and people wouldn't just trade in their Playstations for Xboxs. Sony had momentum coming into this generation. But, as the consoles launched at the end of 2020, Microsoft had it's best year ever for first party releases, according to Metacritic. They were recognized as the best publisher in the industry for the calendar year, and have the best average score of any publisher in any calendar year ever, again according to Metacritic. Did Xbox outsell Playstation that year? Did the momentum of good games carry them into the next? Find out next week on "Nope: The Story About None of it Mattering".
Just like Android and IOS, or Windows on PC... It's really hard to get people to leave an ecosystem they've invested in.
What do you expect from the BG3 guy? That they announce that it will be on GP and limit the game's sales window?
GP is mainly a MS game abo service and an after market "sales/marketing" service to 3rd parties with the chance of some special deals in-between with a win/win for all sides. I'm pretty sure the companies which put their games on it had valid reasons to do so...
It seems some people look at this far too dogmatic or project something in it which it isn't.
Last edited:
You bring up very valid points. I think MSFT is trying to drive up subscriptions of those sticky customers who maintain the subscription for a whole year and more. How they'll achieve this is worth watching because for now they market the large library of games on their platform but thats not what gamers are really looking for. Gamers primarily want new experiences that push the visual envelope and that they enjoy. Playing older games is compelling and nostalgic but I think the vast majority of old games just dont get as much time as newer titles(and by new titles I also include those that may not be new but new to a specific consumer that never played them). Currently Game Pass provides value in that you can find titles you didnt play the previous year for "free" on the platform. When I got my Series X I spent a lot of money on Xbox One discs of games I had missed out on; but these ended up coming to Gamepass, so ever since then I dont always buy at launch 3rd party games I think will eventually end up on Gamepass, and I am not so sure how positive this is to the overall gaming industry. So it has some value to the consumer as you said but not too sure about the developers. As well I am yet to see any value in terms of newer titles or games that launch on Gamepass that give me that joy I got playing on Xbox or Xbox 360 or PS2 or PS3 of PS4. They havent delivered in that department and that gives Sony a huge advantage because they can offer a similar service to Game Pass with their Playstation Plus while also having a more steady stream of exclusives.
50 games launched day one one gamepass this year. At least 4 of them (Sea of Stars, HiFi Rush, Cocoon, and Forza Motorsports) took home awards at The Game Awards. I'm sure PS+ is great. There are great games on there, but they aren't releasing games day one of the same quality or frequency as Gamepass. I'm not sure Sony even had a more steady stream of exclusives this year. They certainly didn't have more first party exclusives. If you aren't playing PSVR games, Sony only published 1 exclusive this year.
There was a DLC of Gears called Hive that came out I think December 2020. This one was good and I think MSFT should have marketed much more than they did. Great graphics, great gameplay as well. But a lot of those others were meh for me. I was disappointed in Forza Motorsport although it was one of my most highly anticipated games(you can watch the sentiment most youtube channels of this game, they echo my experience exactly). I think I need more of a burnout series of racing now with two player split screen. Cocoon is something I would buy an iPad to play, I havent tried out Sea of Stars, will play it and see if I like it but again this is a game I could play on my iPad. Lets not even get into Starfield, that game disappointed me with traversal and how long the game takes to actually start making any sense. I agreethis year Sony did not do as well as previous years but they have been pushing out at least 1 great AAA game per year and more in previous years. Xbox on the other hand has been delaying games since launch only to release them in terrible state(Exceptions exist like Forza Horizon 5 and MSFT simulator, but redfall, starfield, Halo infinite were all duds for me tbh, although I enjoed the multiplayer on halo infinite) The best exclusive games I played on my Series X off the top of my head were Quantum Break and Gears Hive Busters. Essentially I dont want to compare with Sony but it hasnt been the norm for Sony to have only one major title in a year.
That was cost for 3rd parties. Doesn't include other costs like operating or creating their own first-party content. Original quote: "We've put a lot of money into the market, over a billion dollars a year supporting third-party games coming into Game Pass. "
Tkumpathenurple
Veteran
And "over a billion" could very well mean infinity billion, a billion and one, or anything in between. So we're still none the wiser.
Just a few collected thoughts that seem to go together best under a "new hardware" topic.
- A sales benefit of Series S will probably come when lower budget gamers are forced to move on from X1/PS4 as those platforms get abandoned. These gamers may be reluctant to abandon physical and second hand games though. The Series S always had to be there from the start of the generation in order to exist.
- Gamepass will only continue to grow in terms of value as Acti-blizz game are incorporated. At least for the next few years, Gamepass will require a strong home console presence to support a large enough userbase. For this reason, I think there will be another Xbox console.
- If Gamepass is popular on Series S - with even a few million consistent subscribers using it - there will probably be a S2. MS will have all the data they need about this. (Needs a bit more memory next time though).
- "Rolling generations", with a well supported window of transition, will be key to keeping Gamepass subs going.
- Once MS have a sufficient hardware advantage over RDNA2, they might as well go with their next machine. I'm not talking about just a bigger RDNA2 with a few tweaks, I'm talking about a transformative jump in RT performance and upscaling technology. If that's 2026, so be it.
- A sales benefit of Series S will probably come when lower budget gamers are forced to move on from X1/PS4 as those platforms get abandoned. These gamers may be reluctant to abandon physical and second hand games though. The Series S always had to be there from the start of the generation in order to exist.
- Gamepass will only continue to grow in terms of value as Acti-blizz game are incorporated. At least for the next few years, Gamepass will require a strong home console presence to support a large enough userbase. For this reason, I think there will be another Xbox console.
- If Gamepass is popular on Series S - with even a few million consistent subscribers using it - there will probably be a S2. MS will have all the data they need about this. (Needs a bit more memory next time though).
- "Rolling generations", with a well supported window of transition, will be key to keeping Gamepass subs going.
- Once MS have a sufficient hardware advantage over RDNA2, they might as well go with their next machine. I'm not talking about just a bigger RDNA2 with a few tweaks, I'm talking about a transformative jump in RT performance and upscaling technology. If that's 2026, so be it.
The current Series X is also capable of beautiful graphics, just look at Hellblade 2, which the general public believes looks better than anything else. I have no doubt that the exclusive titles coming next year and beyond will be extremely spectacular on current generation hardware.
The problem is the multiplatform developments, especially UE5, which simply cannot keep up with the level of serious programming that is invested in exclusive games. The trend is simply that the developers do not optimize enough, and thus the more powerful new console will be needed. However, for the time being, I don't see how this can be overcome with a single released hardware that is at a reasonable price for the masses.
The problem is the multiplatform developments, especially UE5, which simply cannot keep up with the level of serious programming that is invested in exclusive games. The trend is simply that the developers do not optimize enough, and thus the more powerful new console will be needed. However, for the time being, I don't see how this can be overcome with a single released hardware that is at a reasonable price for the masses.
It may be necessary to develop a special hardware that will perform well for UE5 in the next 6-8 years and they can give it to customers at an affordable price, since no one will buy a console for 1000 dollars. We probably need to take a closer look at this question.
Similar threads
