MS buys vivendi games division?
- Thread starter Qroach
- Start date
CaptainHowdy
Regular
sorry, I dont agree, in the older WC games, you just build a lot of the most powerful unit to win, doesnt work in this one, creeping the heros to level them up, picking the right mix of magic users/Melee units.. there is a LOT of balance and depth, you just wont see it all in a weeks worth of single player gaming.
From the few multiplayer sessions I have spent with WC3 I think I can follow you. I find it incredibly hard to find the right mix of units, there simply is no single build-this-and-kill-all unit, not one. Balancing the dozen or so units every race has and most of all using your magic to the fullest seems to be the trick. I have to admit that I love this idea and the exectuion is great, but I actually find it almost too hardcore for a casual RTS player as I am... damn good game though. 
Someone doesn't seem to live in reality w/ regards to Microsoft, the XBox, and PC game support. Try and follow me here:
1) Microsoft's primary source of income is the Windows operating system, and they lose money on the XBox.
2) The majority of Windows operating system sales spawn from the purchase of a new computer.
3) Purchases of new computers are largely influenced by the ever-increasing system requirements for PC games.
Microsoft trying to diminish the PC gaming market in favor of XBox-specific game titles would be the worst business decision in history. What on earth makes you think they want to do this? Do you honestly think the royalties Microsoft makes off XBox-only games from developers they own would ever come close to the ammount of revenue they make off the copies of WindowsXP they sell to PC gamers buying new computers? You're talking pennies on the dollar, and Microsoft already owns the Windows license; they don't have to pay $1-2 BILLION dollars to get it.
I'm probably wasting my breath, though. I'm sure you'll come up with some other illogical reason Microsoft would want to kill themselves off just to get Xbox exclusive games. Have fun in La La Land.
1) Microsoft's primary source of income is the Windows operating system, and they lose money on the XBox.
2) The majority of Windows operating system sales spawn from the purchase of a new computer.
3) Purchases of new computers are largely influenced by the ever-increasing system requirements for PC games.
Microsoft trying to diminish the PC gaming market in favor of XBox-specific game titles would be the worst business decision in history. What on earth makes you think they want to do this? Do you honestly think the royalties Microsoft makes off XBox-only games from developers they own would ever come close to the ammount of revenue they make off the copies of WindowsXP they sell to PC gamers buying new computers? You're talking pennies on the dollar, and Microsoft already owns the Windows license; they don't have to pay $1-2 BILLION dollars to get it.
I'm probably wasting my breath, though. I'm sure you'll come up with some other illogical reason Microsoft would want to kill themselves off just to get Xbox exclusive games. Have fun in La La Land.
Gollum:
Yes, it has been tried, but those attempts failed not only on controls but hardware aswell (mainly thinking about RTS on PSX). Lets face it, TVs now have the ability to display in hi-res aswell as the consoles to produce these. Controls can be overcome if they really wanted to make it a success. What I am proposing is that Microsoft may make Blizzard games an Xbox(2) flagship title. They may, but they may not - if it ever comes that far anyway.
Crusher:
True, Microsofts primary source of income is their Windows OS. But you sound as if "PC Gamers" are the reason why their selling that much... do you have any numbers to back that up? If that were true (that the majority of windows buyers are PC-Gamers), then I'd sure be suprised. If not though, then I don't quite see your point what bad it would do if Microsoft would shift Blizzard games onto consoles. I think the relevant point is:
potential $$$ console industry > current $$$ PC game market
At the moment, Xbox is struggling to even compete with Sony. Bringing a Blizzard flagship title excelusivily on Xbox2 might not only convert PC gamers into console buyer, but they will also build up their marketshare.
As for questioning the importance of Microsoft and Xbox though: seeing how much Microsoft is willing to spend on a "flopping" Xbox, I do think it is quite important to them. Perhaps "Sony being a threat" isn't far off afterall if you watch Microsoft's actions...
Yes, it has been tried, but those attempts failed not only on controls but hardware aswell (mainly thinking about RTS on PSX). Lets face it, TVs now have the ability to display in hi-res aswell as the consoles to produce these. Controls can be overcome if they really wanted to make it a success. What I am proposing is that Microsoft may make Blizzard games an Xbox(2) flagship title. They may, but they may not - if it ever comes that far anyway.
Crusher:
True, Microsofts primary source of income is their Windows OS. But you sound as if "PC Gamers" are the reason why their selling that much... do you have any numbers to back that up? If that were true (that the majority of windows buyers are PC-Gamers), then I'd sure be suprised. If not though, then I don't quite see your point what bad it would do if Microsoft would shift Blizzard games onto consoles. I think the relevant point is:
potential $$$ console industry > current $$$ PC game market
At the moment, Xbox is struggling to even compete with Sony. Bringing a Blizzard flagship title excelusivily on Xbox2 might not only convert PC gamers into console buyer, but they will also build up their marketshare.
As for questioning the importance of Microsoft and Xbox though: seeing how much Microsoft is willing to spend on a "flopping" Xbox, I do think it is quite important to them. Perhaps "Sony being a threat" isn't far off afterall if you watch Microsoft's actions...
Phil said:
That depends on who you are. If you also sell the OS and control the API being used to run the games with, I'm not sure that equation holds true. To put it another way, I'm willing to bet Microsoft makes a lot more money off one PC gamer than they do off one X-Box player.
I'm not saying they have no reason to push the X-Box, certainly the ideal customer would own and play games on both. But it's silly to think Microsoft would favor the X-Box at the expense of the PC gaming market.
That's undebatable of course. What I am refering to is the potential the console gaming industry has for Microsoft if they were to gain 1st position. I think it is clear that the industrial leader (at the moment Sony) makes a lot more money on a single consosle gamer than Microsoft does on a PC gamer. Also, don't forget pirating issues. Of course they still make money off their API, but really, how much?
If THIS is true, then I can really see why Microsoft fears Sony as a potential threat.
All the more reason I see them going head on in the console industry...CaptainHowdy
Regular
when MS gets back to supporting PC games, maybe I will bite my tongue, until that day, I go by experience.
BenSkywalker
Regular
You can make a strong argument that Office is the number one reason, but gaming is a long way off from number two. Total gaming revenue for PC software this year will likely fall somewhere between $2-$3Billion dollars in the US. Microsoft will profit roughly $10Billion. Roughed out, for every dollar of gaming software sold, MS makes $3-$5 in profits. PCs as business machines and internet gateways are by far the two most dominant factors in Windows being dominant. When looking at Windows vs Mac, it is a matter of open versus closed platform. People can buy a Windows based PC from literaly thousands of different places. You want a Mac you have to buy one assembled by Apple and pay far too much, then deal with lack of software. Linux isn't close to being ready for the type of consumers that use their optical drive trays as cup holders, and even if it was it would have problems with software availability.
Total PC software revenues utterly dwarf console software revenue, and console software revenues dwarf PC gaming revenue. Gaming under Windows may be a big reason why the enthusiast market sticks with MS, but it is a non factor for the majority of PC users. Someone mentioned new PC sales being driven by gaming. The most popular graphics solutions are Intel integrated devices, incredibly poor compared to two or even three year old add in board technology.
Windows gaming is a key part of M$' success. The one thing that sets M$' platforms apart from its competitors are their viability as consumer products. They have the games and whatever else you could possibly need as a regular user. If (when) M$' dominance in the consumer space falters you will see alternative OS'es (mainly Linux) really take off in the business segment of the market completely undermining its sources of revenue. M$ knows this and it knows that Sony is looking to offer more compelling products to the average consumer, that is why it entered the console race with the Xbox which is really nothing but a scaled down PC disguised as a gaming machine - a trojan horse.
CaptainHowdy
Regular
gamers make up less than 15% of the PC market, thats not a valid argument.
CaptainHowdy
Regular
logic, comparing the number of copies of windows sold each year to average PC gamesales, and knowing that pretty much every business in the country has at least 4-5 PC's running a windows OS.
CaptainHowdy
Regular
15% is a very generous guess, probally a very high exargeration.
being gamers without a doubt make up a very small portion of the OS market.
think of it this way, each city in america has lets say, 2000 PC Gamers, that same city will have at least 2000 business's in the surrounding area with at least 10-15 computers in each...
how do you think information is gathered? its by taking such numbers, averaging them and making an educated guess, there is no such thing as a dead on accurate number, but its certainly safe to say its very close.
another source of proof?
Dell, Gateway, HP, Compaq, all rank up as Americas best selling PC's..
a gamer that buys one of these system, isnt a very smart gamer.
being gamers without a doubt make up a very small portion of the OS market.
think of it this way, each city in america has lets say, 2000 PC Gamers, that same city will have at least 2000 business's in the surrounding area with at least 10-15 computers in each...
how do you think information is gathered? its by taking such numbers, averaging them and making an educated guess, there is no such thing as a dead on accurate number, but its certainly safe to say its very close.
another source of proof?
Dell, Gateway, HP, Compaq, all rank up as Americas best selling PC's..
a gamer that buys one of these system, isnt a very smart gamer.
BenSkywalker
Regular
Cybermac-
Gaming plays a very, very small part of that. Look to total gaming revenue for all of PCs compared to Windows revenue alone.
Linux needs Office to take off. Office is the overwhelming driving force behind MS's dominance in the business world. At the company I work for we have a rather diverse mix of different platforms in use, including Linux and OS/2. The actual PCs all run Windows and nearly all of them have one thing installed on them besides to OS, the Office suite. The company my mother works for has the same situation(although they run Unix and don't use OS/2). Office is the reason they have PCs. Linux may do fine in the enthusiast or server market, until Office is ported it doesn't really stand a chance in the business segment at large.
It's a trojan horse for the digital hub which is complimentary to PCs, not replacements. It has the potential to be an enormously lucrative market, but anyone who thinks it will replace the PC isn't thinking straight.
Glonk
How many people do you know that have never used a warez Windows copy?
The amount of people who use Linux total, dual boot or not, is ~5% of the PC market(according to market research cited by Linux advocates). Be is dead, Irix is a far smaller niche, Macs are accounting for ~3% of the market, there simply is not, nor has there ever been, a mass of people waiting to drop Windows as soon as games get ported. If it were the case, titles that are ported to Linux would actually sell, which they don't. Loki Games went under for a reason, and it wasn't because Linux titles were tearing up the charts(or even making a very weak appearance for that matter).
Quincy
I would have to agree, 15% is far too generous. Look at the amount of titles releases for the PC each year and how many titles they sell on average compared to consoles, then factor in the installed base of PCs is greater then an order of magnitude higher then the consoles on a global basis. PC gaming is plenty healthy enough to staty a viable market, but it is very far removed from being close to a driving force for the mass market.
Look at the best selling graphics solutions, integrated Intel. nVidia's best moving product for several years was then TNT2 M64 and TNT Vanta. Add in graphics boards are the exception in the PC world, I'm actually relieved when someone wants me to upgrade their rig and I see a POS M64 in there, at least they have an AGP port which isn't that common in today's market. Decidedly low end sound solutions are also the norm.
If you want to say that gamers are pushing the envelope in terms of driving CPU and GPU technology you can make a very strong argument, but top tier products(fastest current CPU or GPU) tend to account for far less then 1% of total sales.
Gaming plays a very, very small part of that. Look to total gaming revenue for all of PCs compared to Windows revenue alone.
Linux needs Office to take off. Office is the overwhelming driving force behind MS's dominance in the business world. At the company I work for we have a rather diverse mix of different platforms in use, including Linux and OS/2. The actual PCs all run Windows and nearly all of them have one thing installed on them besides to OS, the Office suite. The company my mother works for has the same situation(although they run Unix and don't use OS/2). Office is the reason they have PCs. Linux may do fine in the enthusiast or server market, until Office is ported it doesn't really stand a chance in the business segment at large.
It's a trojan horse for the digital hub which is complimentary to PCs, not replacements. It has the potential to be an enormously lucrative market, but anyone who thinks it will replace the PC isn't thinking straight.
Glonk
How many people do you know that have never used a warez Windows copy?
The amount of people who use Linux total, dual boot or not, is ~5% of the PC market(according to market research cited by Linux advocates). Be is dead, Irix is a far smaller niche, Macs are accounting for ~3% of the market, there simply is not, nor has there ever been, a mass of people waiting to drop Windows as soon as games get ported. If it were the case, titles that are ported to Linux would actually sell, which they don't. Loki Games went under for a reason, and it wasn't because Linux titles were tearing up the charts(or even making a very weak appearance for that matter).
Quincy
I would have to agree, 15% is far too generous. Look at the amount of titles releases for the PC each year and how many titles they sell on average compared to consoles, then factor in the installed base of PCs is greater then an order of magnitude higher then the consoles on a global basis. PC gaming is plenty healthy enough to staty a viable market, but it is very far removed from being close to a driving force for the mass market.
Look at the best selling graphics solutions, integrated Intel. nVidia's best moving product for several years was then TNT2 M64 and TNT Vanta. Add in graphics boards are the exception in the PC world, I'm actually relieved when someone wants me to upgrade their rig and I see a POS M64 in there, at least they have an AGP port which isn't that common in today's market. Decidedly low end sound solutions are also the norm.
If you want to say that gamers are pushing the envelope in terms of driving CPU and GPU technology you can make a very strong argument, but top tier products(fastest current CPU or GPU) tend to account for far less then 1% of total sales.
JF_Aidan_Pryde
Regular
BenSkywalker said:
IMO, the PS2/3 with the right software both compliments and compete with the PC, which is why MS is worried. For many people who just wants to get connected, email and be entertained, a PS will suffice and remove the need to purchase a PC with Windows. It will not replace Spreadsheets, business etc, nor is it meant to - 'Sony is an entertainment company.'
