Xbox Business Update Podcast | Xbox Everywhere Direction Discussion

What will Xbox do

  • Player owned digital libraries now on cloud

    Votes: 3 23.1%
  • Multiplatform all exclusives to all platforms

    Votes: 3 23.1%
  • Multiplatform only select exclusive titles

    Votes: 8 61.5%
  • Surface hardware strategy

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • 3rd party hardware strategy

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • Mobile hardware strategy

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • Slim Revision hardware strategy

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • This will be a nothing burger

    Votes: 4 30.8%
  • *new* Xbox Games for Mobile Strategy

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • *new* Executive leadership changes (ie: named leaders moves/exits/retires)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    13
  • Poll closed .
SoT and Fallout 76 weren't luck. Talented teams, bungled launchea and then lots of hard work to realise their proper potential.
True. SoT had it own problems but it got sorted out and it’s a good game now. Also launching it on PS5 had also good effect as msft noticed that it bumped Xbox active player count. I think to some degree FH5 is also GaaS it has content update seasons new car packs and what not.
 
Fallout 76 was arguably saved by Xbox, and that was pre-acquisition. Todd Howard has been open about the games rocky launch, but this quote always stood out to me
Todd Howard said:
"When that game launched, the litany of issues we had... we let a lot of people down, and there was very little we didn't screw up honestly. And one of the people that I called was Phil [Spencer], and I said 'there are so many things we're dealing with, what advice do you have?'"
"He put me in touch with some people at Xbox who were able to look at all of the games in the system and what was important and what wasn't important, [and compare them] to the other games that made it for the long haul. And that kind of advice really, really helped us, and now seeing Fallout 76 being one of the most played games on Xbox, we're incredibly fortunate to be there."
They looked at the data, made some of the more important fixes, and signed a Gamepass deal.
 
He put me in touch with some people at Xbox who were able to look at all of the games in the system and what was important and what wasn't important, [and compare them] to the other games that made it for the long haul. And that kind of advice really, really helped us, and now seeing Fallout 76 being one of the most played games on Xbox, we're incredibly fortunate to be there."
So they basically needed a project manager?
 
Pretty much every other dev was good enough to get around the memory issues.
It's really appalling how degrading are some of your comments about other people. How do you think businesses are run? You need certain competencies but you only fill your vacancies with ultra competent people? Good luck with that. You're hiring according to your needs and sometimes you get extraordinary talent but most often than not you don't. You're still much better off having someone doing OK job than not having anyone for that spot. But even if you get absolute geniuses, you're still bound by financial realities you operate in. Sometimes it just doesn't make sense to put effort into something (e.g. port). And that's absolutely fine. That doesn't mean some people "aren't good enough", it means hard decisions were made and even your superhuman crew ended up not shipping something or shipping something sub-par. Going around and calling people incompetent doesn't contribute much to anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPT
I think whenever we see a situation where the game is designed to be PC first and then ported to Series S, this is a problem that arises. But games that are developed from the get go with Series S in mind never have this memory issue. Because they know the requirements up front, they can design a memory model that will work for S and other platforms. It's only when you go PC first, and port later do you run into this issue. But it's not impossible to fix, but you're talking about a full port that could take a year to get it to run correctly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPT
In other words, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the S memory system.

Sometimes I get carried away with my criticisms, but it would be helpful around here if people didn't keep talking about the 1% of the time devs had actual problems with trying to do PC ports to S just because they have an axe to grind against the S.
 
In other words, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the S memory system.

Sometimes I get carried away with my criticisms, but it would be helpful around here if people didn't keep talking about the 1% of the time devs had actual problems with trying to do PC ports to S just because they have an axe to grind against the S.
Regarding a hypothetical next-gen Xbox: let's say MS plans an Xbox PC (even with multiple configurations). In this case, the console runs PC games on a more optimized game OS. How much memory (DDR5 or 6) do you think is needed for the CPU in such a case compared to a traditional PC?
 
Regarding a hypothetical next-gen Xbox: let's say MS plans an Xbox PC (even with multiple configurations). In this case, the console runs PC games on a more optimized game OS. How much memory (DDR5 or 6) do you think is needed for the CPU in such a case compared to a traditional PC?
That's a really good point. Does data need to be duplicated between system ram and video ram on APU's on PC? I think it does, but I haven't seen much discussion about it. If so, that would be a huge waste on resources.
 
I don't say this to diminish 'one persons' work', but Launcher 10 is copying a UI that it took a team to invent in the first place. It's also built on a platform / leverages an underlaying framework that took hundreds (thousands?) of developers the best part of 20 years to mature.
 
I don't say this to diminish 'one persons' work', but Launcher 10 is copying a UI that it took a team to invent in the first place. It's also built on a platform / leverages an underlaying framework that took hundreds (thousands?) of developers the best part of 20 years to mature.
This isn't unlike the UE games "developed by one guy", though, is it? They stand upon the shoulders of giants.
 
This isn't unlike the UE games "developed by one guy", though, is it? They stand upon the shoulders of giants.

In the context it was used, it felt a bit like using a solo Unity game to slag off the state of Epic Game Score.

That's not to say that MS shouldn't be doing a better job on their PC Xbox app. People shouldn't be having issues like the one the Kingmakers dev experienced as a bare minimum level of proficiency.

I'm not make excuses, but I bet the developers PC Xbox app are continually have a lovely time interfacing with both the Windows Store and Xbox backend.
 
My theory is the following:

- Series consoles are now only sold by online stores outside of America, and they apparently conduct quiet, restrained marketing regarding the consoles. This may be due to the introduction of a new hardware strategy.
- There have been strong rumors for a year that the next console will actually be a PC with PC games, in fact this might be the best and safest hardware strategy from a business point of view if they need hardware.
- Because of Game Pass, we know they need hardware to continue their subscription service.
- The new GPU generation will be released this spring, which can be a suitable basis for the next consoles.
- There is no reason to wait another two years for significantly more powerful hardware, because we can see that there are no big advances at the level of silicon/rasterization. The GPUs released this year are equipped with excellent upscaling and AI capabilities, which provide a good foundation for next-generation games.
 
My theory is the following:

- Series consoles are now only sold by online stores outside of America, and they apparently conduct quiet, restrained marketing regarding the consoles. This may be due to the introduction of a new hardware strategy.
- There have been strong rumors for a year that the next console will actually be a PC with PC games, in fact this might be the best and safest hardware strategy from a business point of view if they need hardware.
- Because of Game Pass, we know they need hardware to continue their subscription service.
- The new GPU generation will be released this spring, which can be a suitable basis for the next consoles.
- There is no reason to wait another two years for significantly more powerful hardware, because we can see that there are no big advances at the level of silicon/rasterization. The GPUs released this year are equipped with excellent upscaling and AI capabilities, which provide a good foundation for next-generation games.
If they use Nvidia, they can get next gen now. With AMD, they would have to wait for two years at least.
 
My theory is the following:

- Series consoles are now only sold by online stores outside of America, and they apparently conduct quiet, restrained marketing regarding the consoles. This may be due to the introduction of a new hardware strategy.
- There have been strong rumors for a year that the next console will actually be a PC with PC games, in fact this might be the best and safest hardware strategy from a business point of view if they need hardware.
- Because of Game Pass, we know they need hardware to continue their subscription service.
- The new GPU generation will be released this spring, which can be a suitable basis for the next consoles.
- There is no reason to wait another two years for significantly more powerful hardware, because we can see that there are no big advances at the level of silicon/rasterization. The GPUs released this year are equipped with excellent upscaling and AI capabilities, which provide a good foundation for next-generation games.
Now that MS has acknowledged that they can't beat Sony at Sony's game because of entrenched digital ecosystems and few new entrants to the market, they only really have two reasons to bring out new hardware: GP and dedicated fans that are part of the Xbox ecosystem (mostly which are the same customers at this point).

They don't make much money if someone doesn't subscribe to GP, so I'm betting their focus is to sell new hardware to GP subscribers rather than the other way around. Thus, I agree with the notion that they will try to sell as much as possible through digital storefronts, especially in Europe.

I'm thinking 2027 now, as that's what the rumor mill and AMD's time table are suggesting. Unlike some people around here, I don't think they need to worry about Sony's time table anymore. Their hardware is just about maintaining and expanding GP and not about attracting PS owners anymore. 30+ dev teams can fill in any software gaps and besides, we're looking at 2-3 years of cross gen anyway.

The idea of it being a PC in a box is great as that would allow for higher end versions for enthusiasts from OEMs, but the base version can't be more than $100 more to make this happen. In other words, if the base "console" Xbox Prime would have been $599, then I think making a PC compatible Xbox Prime is worth it for $699 or less. The brilliant thing about the PC Xbox Prime is that Sony ports will work on it. Sony couldn't bring a title to PC without it working on the Xbox Prime. Sony would be "forced" into multi-platform.

Xbox Marketing: "Get an Xbox Prime and GP for amazing value, and play The Last of Us and Spider-Man if you want. We're all one big happy family now."
 
If they use Nvidia, they can get next gen now. With AMD, they would have to wait for two years at least.
I don't know which manufacturer's GPU (or even complete VGA) they choose, but the AMD 9070XT with FSR4 and significantly increased RT capacity
it would be perfectly adequate for a quality gaming performance.

Also, don't forget that if they take the PC path, they can release new configurations every 3-4 years.
 
Now that MS has acknowledged that they can't beat Sony at Sony's game because of entrenched digital ecosystems and few new entrants to the market, they only really have two reasons to bring out new hardware: GP and dedicated fans that are part of the Xbox ecosystem (mostly which are the same customers at this point).

They don't make much money if someone doesn't subscribe to GP, so I'm betting their focus is to sell new hardware to GP subscribers rather than the other way around. Thus, I agree with the notion that they will try to sell as much as possible through digital storefronts, especially in Europe.

I'm thinking 2027 now, as that's what the rumor mill and AMD's time table are suggesting. Unlike some people around here, I don't think they need to worry about Sony's time table anymore. Their hardware is just about maintaining and expanding GP and not about attracting PS owners anymore. 30+ dev teams can fill in any software gaps and besides, we're looking at 2-3 years of cross gen anyway.

The idea of it being a PC in a box is great as that would allow for higher end versions for enthusiasts from OEMs, but the base version can't be more than $100 more to make this happen. In other words, if the base "console" Xbox Prime would have been $599, then I think making a PC compatible Xbox Prime is worth it for $699 or less. The brilliant thing about the PC Xbox Prime is that Sony ports will work on it. Sony couldn't bring a title to PC without it working on the Xbox Prime. Sony would be "forced" into multi-platform.

Xbox Marketing: "Get an Xbox Prime and GP for amazing value, and play The Last of Us and Spider-Man if you want. We're all one big happy family now."
I'm fine with Series X, and I'm sure that even if they release new hardware, they'll support the current one for at least 2-3 years, and it's also guaranteed that their own games will look good on the current console.

But. Why would they wait years when everything is given to launch a consoled PC-centric system? If I were in the management now, I would easily launch such a hardware family this fall. This would ensure that GP users can switch to the new hardware in time. If they only wanted to release a new console in 2027, they would advertise the current one better.

I know that many people are still watching the power race, which is why they would wait for the next consoles, but things have changed. As I wrote in my previous post, what is the guarantee that in 2-3 years they will be able to achieve a significant technological leap in terms of hardware? According to current benchmarks and forecasts, this is unlikely. However, if power still matters, then a console PC strategy with different performance packages can also be a solution. Then it is always possible to get a better config.
 
Last edited:
I don't know which manufacturer's GPU (or even complete VGA) they choose, but the AMD 9070XT with FSR4 and significantly increased RT capacity
it would be perfectly adequate for a quality gaming performance.

Also, don't forget that if they take the PC path, they can release new configurations every 3-4 years.
I don't believe that AMD will get anywhere near Nvidia in ray tracing or ai until UDNA. RDNA 4 looks like a mid step while waiting for a true new architecture.
 
I don't believe that AMD will get anywhere near Nvidia in ray tracing or ai until UDNA. RDNA 4 looks like a mid step while waiting for a true new architecture.
UDNA RDNA... doesn't count. This is just marketing text. They've hit their ceiling with traditional rasterization, and the next architecture won't be significantly better in terms of raw power. The new Nvidia VGAs also know more than the previous generation almost only because of AI, and this will also be the case with AMD.
 
Back
Top