I don’t even recall getting that email and I stopped subbing a long time ago. I was a bit surprised there wasn’t something telling me to sign up right away to lock in my price point. In any event I am like you, except I will likely never have the available time to take advantage of GPU unless my kids are hammering away at it, and they only care about Roblox
Agreed.
I wouldn't say that "it wasn't worth the move", but rather than the perception is that it isn't worth the move. SSD alone makes it worth the move for $300.
I know many people who only play those 3 games and so didn't bother to upgrade.
By the time "people start moving" the new Xbox will arrive.
Agreed. Console sales would have undoubtedly been better this gen though if they didn't work so hard to throw the console under the bus in the name of the MAU.
Performance over PS4/XB1 made the upgrade worth it. We got quick load times, quick updates and quick resume. And for that vocal minority there's the resolution/framerate bump.
Ray Traced Minecraft would have been the next version that would have sparked a huge transition. But that somehow disappeared from all the initial marketing. With the rumored PS5 Pro having outstanding ray tracing capabilities, that could be huge for Sony. And since Microsoft cares about the MAU (even users like me that don't spend on Microsoft but still get counted) and not console sales, Microsoft could serve up that killer app to Sony.
For those of us who can afford to yes. I think that large demographic in the 35+ > 50 was likely the first group of early adopters. The next group is that 16-30 ish group that plays the games above, and if they can't afford to move, then they will stay put on last generation consoles. They'll move with the population, so it's a forced upgrade. I do agree that current gen is definitely a much better experience than last gen, but the price point of these consoles keeps going up, I can't see next generation being cheaper than this generation. But gaming on a budget, you can still get away with on last gen. Nintendo and mobile have the younger markets all locked up.
Agreed; context for those unaware, the largest MC population on console is on PS4. I'm aligned with your thinking on this one as well.
Well there are next-gen versions of these, but they aren't going to make next-gen only versions as they don't want to lose that large audience. If these games represent a sizeable chunk of the console audience, they'll never want to upgrade. Particularly as the hardware isn't dropping down to the $250, $200, and $250 marks like other consoles have, making the value of 'same games at better quality' better.
Yea and this is the challenge I think to the gaming market as a whole. We have more people making games than ever, but despite getting a temporarily audience to allure them to new titles, these same players groups always flock back to the same 'core' games. The F2P model really changed things for the industry and they are still trying to figure out how to adapt to it. The number one most played game is still counter-strike which is insane, and I agree the graphics haven't been updated all that much on it.
That would be such folly. Like, how on earth would they think that would work?
"All your initial and critical early momentum in a new console generation cycle comes from your level of success from the previous generation"
Nintendo is a completely different beast from the Playstation/Xbox market. Using Nintendo as an example doesn't work. They play in their own little space with their own rules, and without any direct competition to worry about. I could write a ton about how what Nintendo does cannot be used as a 'model' for others, but I dont want to get this too off-topic.
Tech investors love talk about AI. But Xbox doesn't have its own stock ticker, so it matters little here. Do you really think gamers are gonna be the type to get all super hyped up about AI buzzwords? I really dont think so.
This does not explain the fact that your statement that the success of a new console depends only on the success of the previous console was not correct. The case of WiiU and Switch was just one example. Nintendo is also a console manufacturer, it has been up and down. When it was down, many people buried it during the Wiiu and it still hasn't happened. The same could be true for any other console manufacturer. Just because the Xbox now only needs 40-50 million on the market (still a much better position than, for example, the WiiU), it does not mean that the next Xbox won't sell twice as much or more.
Thinking that Microsoft has any advantage compared to Sony in ai products or investment is wrong.
Sony doesnt need to invest 10s of billions to have better AI applications than MS. MS's problem in gaming is execution and focus and not money. For example Open AI, Meta and other companies building some of the best LLM models didnt invest the billions into AI research that Google did to come up with Transformers. But its their competitors benefitting the most.
Since it seemed to go in one ear and out the other - I was referring to the situation with Xbox vs Playstation. Nintendo is its own thing nowadays and does not apply to this situation. They are their own little world and market, where totally different rules apply. They do not have direct competition. If Nintendo falters, like they did with Wii U, they do not have to worry about losing previous long-term customers to some directly competing platform. Nintendo fans will always come back if Nintendo does something good. They've got such an insanely rich amount of super popular IP, they do not compete on hardware specs/graphics, and they are the only platform owner who takes a heavy focus on targeting the kid's market.
Microsoft will always need hardware. Even if Xbox's console install base is small, they are banking on growing the market via cloud, and those cloud servers are Xbox hardware, for better or worse. If they are going to offer a console experience via the cloud, then the cloud will be made up of the console.
Excellent points. A lot of good will associated with their gaming services will be eroded away by how badly they handled the hw business. Consumers would rather invest in the Sony and Nintendo ecosystems because those goes execute well in the few things they do. And from this it can be inferred even when they(Sony & Nintendo) make cloud gaming a priority it will be done at the right time, not because they want to save face for their failures in the hw business like Phil is doing.
They aren't trying to save face, they are trying to force the future that isn't here yet. They've been trying to do that since they TVTVTV launched the Xbox One leveraging the power of the cloud. We weren't there yet, just like we aren't there with streaming.
You're right actually!! For as long as the Xbox has existed there's been a diversionary goal. Today its a focus on play anywhere through cloud, streaming, multiplatform, even if the core gaming experience is left behind. Only exceptions were with the OG Xbox where Seamus Blackely and Ed Fries shielded the division and large parts of the Xbox 360 where the diversionary goals werent allowed to set the agenda.
