520°

Why Did Phil Spencer Say Great Games Won't Shift Xbox Sales When They Obviously Would?

Phil Spencer shared his thoughts on the console race in a recent interview, but his comments don't ring true to Xbox's own strategy.

Read Full Story >>
thegamer.com
Jin_Sakai398d ago

Phil said they lost the most important generation with Xbox One when the shift to digital started. Those lost customers moved to PlayStation and making great games won’t make people sell their PS5 and buy an Xbox. That’s just not how it works.

Vanfernal397d ago

I think the argument was flawed. Phil doesn't understand it's not either or. Game consoles need to be appealing for consumers to decide to get one. And the best way to do that is through great games. It's almost as if he encourages tribal fanboyism.

badz149397d ago

right now, nobody should believe what Phil is saying. remember that they are still in the negotiating phase with the regulators in their ABK buyout. showing any strength right now means that they are not in need to own ABK whole. Phil is saying all the wrong things now because he's playing the long game.

at least that's what I think. he might be incompetent, but I don't think he's stupid.

peppeaccardo397d ago

"I see commentary, that if you just build great games everything would turn around. It’s just not true that if we go off and build great games, all of the sudden you’re going to see console shares shift in some dramatic way."
I think Phil-Nocchio is just saying this to justify the fact that they cannot even put together a decent exclusive with any studio they already own.

RauLeCreuset397d ago

"It really does come down to the games, and I find it strange that Spencer reiterated three times in that statement that making great games won’t turn anything around."

Except he didn't express that at any point in the interview, but he knew people would infer that. This is Phil playing Simon Says again.

I'm going to quote where he talks about selling games, except I'm going to call attention to certain keywords by putting them in caps for emphasis. See if you catch the pattern.

"But we’re not in a position - and I see out there, I see commentary, that if you just build great games EVERYTHING WOULD TURN AROUND."

"It’s just not true that if we go off and build great games, ALL OF A SUDDEN you’re going to see console shares shift IN SOME DRAMATIC WAY."

"We want our Xbox community to feel awesome, but this idea that if we just focused more on great games on our console that somehow we’re going to WIN THE CONSOLE WAR doesn't really lay into the reality."

"I see a lot of pundits out there that kinda want to go back to the time when we all had cartridges and discs and every new generation was a clean slate and you could SWITCH THE WHOLE SHARE."

"There’s no world where Starfield is an 11/10 and people START SELLING THEIR PS5s."

Did you catch it? It's a straw-man argument. He's not denying that focusing on 3rd party would improve Xbox sales. He's responding to the criticism of those saying they should prioritize making great games by reframing the argument to make it about whether focusing on games would turn "everything" around, whether building great games would "all of a sudden" cause a "dramatic" shift in console shares, whether focusing more on great games would "win the console war," and whether a single game would cause people to "start selling their PS5s."

It's a sneaky way to seem like he's addressing the criticism while not addressing it, and he does it in a way that reveals they don't care about delivering quality for their customers. It's all about whether they can beat Nintendo and Sony and take their customers. If not, why bother?

Christopher397d ago

@RauLeCreuset gets his comments pretty well here, but I'm just going to say that he needs to be more positive on their role to create great games rather than mire themselves down in unnecessary he said/she said rhetoric of what making great games would mean for them. It would, simply, mean great games instead of not great games.

Pyrofire95397d ago

The biggest factor when buying a new console these days, at least between PS and MS, is where have you already invested literally hundreds of dollars in your game library. You cannot ignore that. I repeat that is the BIGGEST factor.
They may hope to sway new gamers or for people to get multiple systems but the time to grab the most market share was in 2014 and they dropped the ball.

TiredGamer397d ago

"It’s just not true that if we go off and build great games..."

Interesting use of the word "if" in his sentence. Self-admission that they "don't" build great games? Freudian slip perhaps?

S2Killinit397d ago

MS wants everyone to think that they are the poor oppressed company that cannot compete. The truth is that they can easily decide to invest the BILLIONS on their studios and contribute to the console gaming market, unfortunately they prefer to aim for a choke hold on the industry by purchasing crucial existing assets. Therefore, the comments. Its like nothing that comes out of MS’s mouth can be trusted. I wish they would act more like Nintendo and Sony. But, MS is too big for that apparently.

ravens52396d ago

All the games I buy are physical copies. I have 300+ games from ps+. Why would either of these facts make me not play a GREAT AAA Xbox exclusive? Oh you have Netflix, your not gonna use Hulu. As long as they both have something different to offer.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 396d ago
meanmallard397d ago

The problem is why Microsoft thinks it needs people to "sell their PlayStations".

It just speaks to their mindset, they need PlayStation to fail in order for them to feel like they have achieved anything. And thus Phil Spencer continues his trend of being completely unable to have any conversation with out blaming his p[roblems on PlayStation or making some kind of us vs them console war statement.

Microsoft is basically just a parasite trying to leech off PlayStation and Nintendo.

notachance397d ago

Phil needs people to sell their PS because most of the profit comes from platform fee and online subscription, if they bought XB but kept buying multiplatform games and playing online multiplayer on PS that didn’t count as a success.

Which is nigh impossible because XBL is a barren wasteland outside NA/UK lmao. Here in south east asia it’s practically common sense to choose PS because there’s almost no one using XBL, which is hilarious because the multiplayer on a multiplayer-centric console becomes its weakness instead.

BehindTheRows397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

Because the only time Xbox stood a fighting chance is when Sony harmed themselves. A steamrolling PlayStation means Xbox gets its ass demolished. It will always be that way and they know it.

At the same time, they can still do better than they are. That’s a whole other issue that has nothing to do with
PlayStation.

RauLeCreuset397d ago

@meanmallard

"It just speaks to their mindset, they need PlayStation to fail in order for them to feel like they have achieved anything."

It shows that they have no real passion for the industry. What they care about is dominating it.

meanmallard397d ago

The thing that Phil is mad about is not that people gave Redfall a bad review, he's mad because PlayStation and Nintendo give you another option. Phil is mad because people see Redfall and everything else and they do so they buy a PlayStation.

What Phil and Microsoft want is to remove PlayStation and Nintendo to they can crap out games like Redfall and people have to accept it because it's the only option, much like Windows.

With windows they can make it as buggy as they want, shove any unpopular feature or remove any popular feature and no one can complain because they have no other option because Microsoft has so much control that even if you don't want to use Windows you have too because you need to be able to interact with everyone else who uses Windows.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 397d ago
RNTody397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

This is totally a defeatist mentality!! What happened when the Xbox 360 released a year ahead of PS3, was cheaper AND had all the games to go for it? Did Sony say "sorry, we lost the generation at the crucial point", no, they scored exclusives and/or developed quality games like Killzone 2, Metal Gear Solid 4, God of War 3, Uncharted, The Last Of Us, Little Big Planet, Infamous and many others to win over consumers to their console. They refined the console with an upgraded look and slim edition. They upgraded PS Plus. They created value. Maybe people didn't all sell their Xbox 360s, but they certainly bought PlayStation 3s.

What happened when the Wii U flopped? Nintendo still had great games, but came back ten times stronger with The Switch and an even better library of games. Did Nintendo say "too bad, we lost the generation at the crucial moment."

The Xbox One's problem is that for the entire generation they failed to produce a system seller. The decline in games started at the tail end of the Xbox 360 era where they had a redundant Gears of War Judgment to face off against The Last of Us. In almost ten years and two consoles Microsoft has shown no initiative to fund games or develop studios. Microsoft added consumer benefits like backwards compatibility and Game Pass, but the evidence has shown time and time again with Sony and Nintendo that people will buy better games before they will buy better benefits or "value". They will buy the console their friends are buying.

What happened to the Initiative and their AAAA games? All the other studios Microsoft supposedly had? Perfect Dark? Scalebound? Fable? New IPs? Where's Halo now? Gears? The only success is Forza, and Microsoft Flight Simulator which is hardly a game more than it is an impressive educational tool.

Bad management. Bad production. Bad leadership. Focusing on acquisitions at the expense of games. Focusing on benefits and value in the absence of system sellers. Double talk. Bad press. The list goes on.

EvertonFC397d ago

Exactly, Hey Phil so you have basically said you underperformed during xbox one, as you had enough time to actually make AAA 1st party games and bounce back as did sony during the PS3 era with delayed launch, PSN hack etc.
You Phil LOST the Xbox gen not Don because you said SP games are not the future and banked all your eggs into one basket while going after the casual MT/GaaS crowd.

WelkinCole397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

That right there is the reason they are still not doing as well as they should

There was never a ciritcal generation. EVERY generation is ciritcal. The fact is every generation is a chance to start over.

Phil also forget that the most fundamental thing with gaming is the games. Pure and simple. Console gameing was built on SP games and matured on SP games. It still is the heart and soul of gaming. Look at games like Elder Ring or the latest GOW or the new harry potter game for example.

whoever has the best and biggest game selection of various types will always do well. This is not rocket science.

Getting time exclusive does not increase your game collection. It only delays the release of said came on competing console

Buying 3rd party out right to bar their games on competing console doe not increase your game collection

Honestly with the way Phil thinks its clear he has no clue

Godmars290397d ago

Only they really weren't making great games then either. Where in a bit of a drought. That, plus all the online BS, is what lost them their lead.

If you want to call it that.

JackBNimble397d ago

For some reason he said people aren't going to sell their ps5 for xbox even if they have great games. That is the dumbest thing the head of xbox could have said, why the hell would he even think anyone should sell their playstation?
For one , he has given no reason for ps fans to do that and secondly if they had good exclusives that ps fans wanted to play, I'm sure they would buy an xbox as well. Absolutely no reason that you have to give up your ps5 to buy an xbox.

I lost all faith in xbox brand after his last mind blowingly dumbass interview.

I don't game on xbox I game on playstation, but we as gamers can not afford xbox to fail so they can keep Sony in check. Unfortunately xbox hasn't been any sort of competition for a very long time and I wouldn't doubt it if MS shitcans xbox in the near future.

GhostScholar397d ago

Again unless 99 percent of people on this site are lying which I don’t think they are that is how it works actually. Nobody is gonna sell their console of choice and go to the other console. If anything they’ll just buy the one they dont have and keep the one they had first. It’s asinine to say that’s not the case.

Skyfly47397d ago

"We lost the worst generation to lose in the Xbox One generation where everybody built their digital library of games." This simply is not true, this digital shift started during the PS3 generation

zarbor396d ago (Edited 396d ago )

That comment he made about making great games is grounds for removal if MS had any clue about console gaming. Making great AAA exclusive games better than your competitors is 100% the goal. Why did you buy all of those game studios Phil? Why is Starfield exclusive? Stop playing Phil. Not sure how you can lead and not trying to win...to dominate. Nobody wants to follow a loser. Especially a consistent one.

Sony obviously gets it. Nintendo has always got it and why they dominate handheld gaming. Spencer and his crew Aaron Greenberg and the rest of them dudes aren't my type of gamers. They just don't get it 4 console generations in and have learned little from their mistakes. Good luck to all you Xbox only gamers. I can only believe that they appeal to your type of gaming. No hate. We all have different taste so it's cool. I however can't support them anymore

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 396d ago
porkChop398d ago (Edited 398d ago )

That's not what he said. He didn't say they wouldn't sell more Xbox systems, he said they wouldn't overtake PlayStation. Just look at Nintendo. They've consistently made top quality exclusives and they could never really compete without doing something drastically different. Handhelds, motion controls, and a hybrid console like the Switch. Incredible games were never enough for even Nintendo to compete with PlayStation in terms of home consoles. It's like trying to overtake Nintendo in the handheld market.

This is why Xbox tried so hard to make the Kinect a thing, so they'd have some kind of USP that might draw people in to their ecosystem. But that was a failure. PlayStation is so engrained in the console market that making great games literally isn't enough to pull the majority of gamers away. You need a USP, you need something PlayStation doesn't have. Xbox sort of had that for a while with Game Pass but they didn't have a consistent output of great games. That would have been their best chance but they shot themselves in the foot that generation.

So first Xbox needs to get their game dev situation figured out and put out a consistent stream of high quality games. But once they do that they'll still need a USP. Nintendo has hybrids and Sony has VR. What could Xbox actually do that would set them apart and pull people in?

SullysCigar397d ago

Yes, all systems need a USP. You know what PlayStation's USP is? Consistently delivering top quality exclusives.

This is why they're so far in front. This is also why Phil's comments make no sense. If there were 10 GOTY contenders on xbox this year and none on PS5, it would definitely cause a sales shift toward xbox. If this happened for a prolonged period, xbox would overtake PlayStation in market share.

What he REALLY means is they 'can't' beat PlayStation at their own game, for 'reasons', so he's not going to bother trying. This is probably why he thought Redfall was good enough to slop out onto his platform - he's already given up. People understood this, which is why he's seeing such a backlash for those comments.

Just because you'll never be an Olympian, that doesn't mean you shouldn't stay in shape.

anast397d ago

"Just because you'll never be an Olympian, that doesn't mean you shouldn't stay in shape."

I like this.

IRetrouk397d ago

Literally every xbox I've bought was because of their exclusive games.....

porkChop397d ago

Right. I didn't say exclusives don't matter. Of course they do. But Xbox isn't going to be number 1 if they start putting out great games. That kind of market shift is extremely unlikely at this point. They need more than just great games for that to happen.

IRetrouk397d ago

They don't need a market shift, they just need to produce games that people think are worth buying a console for, the target shouldn't be to beat sony or be number 1, but to produce games that make you want the console and or service.
Phill saying people won't sell their ps5s for xboxs, while true, that shouldn't be the target, they should be aiming to make games that make you want to go out and buy an xbox regardless of what else you own.

RedDevils397d ago

Yeah, for anything to "happen", it's need to start putting out great games duh!

Crows90397d ago

Nah. PlayStation is only untouchable because competitors don't risk like they do. Nintendo and MS just make 5he same IP games over and over. Nintendo makes them with quality whereas Xbox is fine if they occasionally land in the low 70s or ad Phil said in the interview ..even 60s...oh well.

Obscure_Observer397d ago

"Nah. PlayStation is only untouchable because competitors don't risk like they do."

How many "risks" is Playstation taking since the current generation started?

Bear in mind that House, Layden and Kaz are not longer around. Things may or may not change.

So far, Death Stranding 2, GT7, Forbidden West, Horizon 3, Ragnarok, R&C... seems pretty safe. Wolverine might be an exception but it still is a very popular Marvel character.

We´ll know more if the rumored Playstation Showcase in June turn out to be true.

Crows90397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

@obscure
Returnal...incredible title...still my favourite this gen.
They also released Sackboy adventure...not common anymore.
Ragnarok is the second entry in a completely new formula for God of War. Incredible game. Lets see what theyll do next since its the end of that arc.
Death stranding 2 is safe??? If I recall death stranding 1 got a ton of crap...anything but safe.
Ratchet & Clank is a platformer...those are never safe...look at ReCore last gen, that was a platformer action game and it didnt manage...mainly i beleive because they didnt polish it up.
Forbidden west is the 2nd entry to the devs new IP...how does that not still constitute as having been a risk???
Many of these are safe now because they risked first.

Our definitions of risk and safe are clearly different.

Obscure_Observer397d ago

@Crows90

"Returnal...incredible title...still my favourite this gen."

Great game, not particularly risky imo, as far big budge AAA games are concerned. Which reminds me that Returnal had some kind of a controversial release due it´s $70 price tag, raising an internet discussion among gamers questioning whether the game was really worth of that price giving its scope and presentation. Some will call it a AA game, but that´s beside the point.

I heard that Housemarque is working on a new IP which will be great if true.

Sackboy is just another smaller game so not much of a risky endeavor at all.

"Death stranding 2 is safe??? If I recall death stranding 1 got a ton of crap...anything but safe."

The first game sold about 10 million copies, so yeah, 100% safe! By comparison, Days Gone sold about 8+ million copies and still failed and get it´s sequel greenlit by Sony. The director blamed Days Gone´s Metascore though.

"Ratchet & Clank is a platformer...those are never safe"

New Ratchet & Clank games by Insomniac are safe as a new Banjo-Kazooie game by RARE would be a safe bet on Xbox. Classic characters and beloved by many.

"ReCore last gen, that was a platformer action game and it didnt manage...mainly i beleive because they didnt polish it up."

ReCore was a new IP at the time. It´s an AA game so not much of a risky game anyway. I heard there´s a sequel in development by the way. Just rumors, though.

"Forbidden west is the 2nd entry to the devs new IP...how does that not still constitute as having been a risk???"

Lol. A sequel for a game which had managed to sell more than 20 Million copies? Risky? Come on, dude, you know there´s absolutely nothing risky about sequels for successful and well established franchises. That´s why Sony will invest in more Horizon games and spin offs rather than invest on a new Kilzone game.

"Many of these are safe now because they risked first."

Yep. When Kaz, House and Layden used to run the show. Now it´s Yoshida, Ryan and Hurst. Like I said, we need to wait for the upcoming Playstation Showcase to know more on what Sony has in store for gamers.

Crows90396d ago

@obscure

Im not going to bother hitting every point though I could.
The point is that Many of those examples that you claim isnt risk doesnt make sense. If Horizon Zero Dawn was a risk for the studio then there is nothing wrong with Playstation continuing that risky IP through its success. How fair is it to say, "playstation doesnt risk anymore, look all their games are sequels to successful new IP" The only reason theyre able to do a sequel is because that initial risk paid off.

Horizon is a new successful IP but it is far from an established IP! Its number 2 and the first game was alright. I particularly wasnt a huge fan of Zero Dawn. You are being completely dishonest here. My butthole is far more established than that IP.

Again you are equating Risk with Dollars spent on production. Im equating Risk with the prospect of multi million copies sold and the possibility of getting the same or better outcome twice or more in a row.

Its also unfair to call Returnal a AA since it is at the level of Hades. Hades is an incredible game and it is absolutely a risk to move a 2d developer into a 3d space.

You compare Ratchet and Clank to Banjo kazooie....well, where the heck is the new Banjo Kazooie game if, as you say, its a safe bet and everyone would pay for it? Called you on that load of BS. No matter how successful a platformer is, platformers are risky, look at Sackboy adventure.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 396d ago
shinoff2183397d ago

Well ms should first try with the games and see how that goes. Hell they've convinced 20nsomething million people already to buy the series console wo then already. Imagine how many will with them. Starfield is enough for me but probably not alot of others.

porkChop397d ago

Agreed. They need to get their shit sorted and put out great games. There's no excuse for it. They have everything they need to consistently make great games and have struggled to do so.

Obscure_Observer397d ago

@porkChop

"Agreed. They need to get their shit sorted and put out great games. There's no excuse for it. They have everything they need to consistently make great games and have struggled to do so"

The problem with gamers, imo, is that most of them thinks games should be out according to their own schedules.

They want impressive, realistic, big, open world, true next gen games, but don´t want to wait for it.

It´s not uncommon to see people on N4G complaining about how MS have the most studios and worst games output.

I mean, seriously? It´s not even 5 years since Phil created and acquired 18 new first party studios beyond those XGS already had before June 2018, which were: RARE, Turn 10, 343i, The Coalition and Mojang.

Not even 5 years and people want tons of AAA games to be out when 6 full years wasn´t enough to Arkane Austin release a non broken game!

What I find interesting, is the fact that some of the same people demanding AAA Xbox games ASAP, are the same people talking sh!t on how MS should allow even more time to Arkane to fix, polish and finish their mess of game.

You can´t have it both ways. So we either wait for the games to be ready to launch, or we´ll continue and be served crappy games like Redfall.

I´m not here defending MS, come June 11 I want to see progress, I want to know how long till I get my hands on Hellblade II and Fable for exemple, on the other hand, I don´t want those devs to rush their games either.

Right now, for Xbox gamers at least, I think It´s a matter of find the right balance between expectations and common sense.

MIDGETonSTILTS17397d ago

Nintendo is different from Xbox and Sony…. They win the kid market by default.

And they could overtake Sony. Just put out better multiplayer games, like you used to…

Flakegriffin397d ago

Allowing the use of Oculus on Xbox’s would be a start.

porkChop397d ago

I mean that's not a bad idea. I don't think that would be enough but it would certainly help. Oculus have sold almost 20 million Quest headsets. Being able to tether a Quest to your Xbox and play VR games would be pretty cool.

Flakegriffin396d ago

@porkchop exactly. It’ll give Xbox users more reasons to continue playing their consoles.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 396d ago
sparky77397d ago ShowReplies(6)
QuantumMechanic397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

I think he said this to lower the bar for future expectations. I've said it time and time again: Microsoft has ZERO long-term interest in being a hardware or game developer. They want only to be a subscription/streaming storefront, siphoning their 30% from everyone else's effort. They're doing as little as possible every step of the way, hoping eventually to meet a critical mass of subscribers. They are not a gaming or entertainment company; they are a software-as-a-service conglomerate. They want to distribute not develop! They jettisoned all their studios and abandoned all their acquired gaming IP at the end of the Xbox 360 era because they thought they could ride on the productivity of third-party releases and their vocal and loyal fanbase. They probably had an initial goal of 10 years to sink their claws into the industry before attempting to push their service agenda to the forefront via the Xbox One DRM and Xbox Marketplace.

jznrpg397d ago

Yep. It’s seems obvious to a lot of us

porkChop397d ago

"They want to distribute not develop!"

So they bought a ton of smaller studios, then spent $7.5B to buy Bethesda, and are now trying to buy ABK for $68B... to not develop games? Take a step back and think critically about what you're suggesting. There is zero logic to that.

RauLeCreuset397d ago

That's a means to an end. You can easily point to better and older examples than MS buying or trying to buy huge 3rd party publishers that come with an existing library of popular games. The point QuantumMechanic is making is that developing is a means to get them to a point where they don't have to do it and can distribute instead.

You're being condescending with the "think critically" closer , but if we're keeping the same energy... We're talking about this because Phil's response to the chorus of people saying make great games was to point out that wouldn't instantly cause a dramatic shift in market share or get people to abandon PS5 and Switch.

RNTody397d ago (Edited 397d ago )

Bethesda and Activision did not need Microsoft to develop games, they published and created their own.

The proof is in facts. It may be a fact that Microsoft bought those publishers, but it's also a fact that Microsoft has contributed zero to any game creation or studio development. As far as the evidence suggests, Microsoft simply wanted to piggyback off Bethesda and Activision on their Game Pass platform.

As we know with Microsoft "wait for E3", there's no point discussing their intent or future plans.

QuantumMechanic397d ago

porkChop: Do you recall the Microsoft Zune? If not, or if it was before your time, let me illustrate my point through its example. The Zune was an early portable digital music player that Microsoft developed to rival the iPod and iTunes. It came with a digital storefront. Why do you think MS got into that business? Was it to produce the music? To nurture the music industry? What ever became of the Zune? Why wasn't/isn't MS producing content in the music industry?

Let me ask you this: If MS were invested in being a game developer, why did they stop developing games towards the end of the Xbox 360 era?

Spending $70 billion of MS' petty cash is more about IP ownership than game development. Look what happened to Rare.
Could it not be that they will (de)value Bethesda and future acquisitions in the same vein as they did with respect to Rare? Spend the money, use them to accomplish a prong of their strategy, and then relegate them to making derivative games while/or then withholding their IP from the greater gaming population.

Finally, an entrenched behemoth company like MS develops long-term business strategy. The Don Mattrick fiasco of the early Xbox One generation provided us with a glimpse into MS' vision. Phil has had some damage control to undertake since then. But---do you really think their long-term interest in the videogame industry has changed? Perhaps the simplest explanation for why Xbox has no games is that they really just don't want to make them. Yes---they are begrudgingly figuring out how to make some----for now.

Petebloodyonion397d ago

look what happened to Rare?
Do you mean the studios that developed Sea of Thieves 5 years ago and are still putting updates on it?
The game that is still the top-played game on Steam by ppl who have bought it?
https://store.steampowered....
Just pointing out that the most successful games from Rare have been under the MS umbrella meaning Kinect Sports and Sea of Thieves.
You may not like that but it is what it is.

porkChop397d ago

@Quantum

They made the Zune because they saw a good business opportunity but underestimated Apple's brand power in the space. Obviously the goal was to make money long-term. That's why any company enters a new market. It's always because they see an opportunity to make money. But the Zune was entirely different from Xbox. MP3 players don't typically have or need exclusive music, so it doesn't matter that MS wasn't producing music because neither were most other companies manufacturing MP3 players.

"Let me ask you this: If MS were invested in being a game developer, why did they stop developing games towards the end of the Xbox 360 era?"

They didn't. They still made games, they just shifted some of their focus to making games for Kinect because they were trying to make that a success. In the final 360 years they still released Forza Motorsport, Forza Horizon, Halo 4, and Gears of War: Judgement.

"Spending $70 billion of MS' petty cash is more about IP ownership than game development."

IP ownership doesn't matter if the IP are dormant. Even if MS stopped making consoles and went Game Pass-only, they would still need to develop new games. People will not perpetually subscribe to a service that doesn't have a steady stream of new, exclusive content. Netflix and Prime Video didn't really start taking off until they started putting out new exclusive content every month. Game Pass is no different. If Xbox stops making games then Game Pass would die in the long-term. So even if they're hoping for a Game Pass-only future it's in their best interest to figure out how to make good games consistently and keep doing it.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 397d ago
Futureshark397d ago

More disingenious nonsense excuses from Spencer.

When PS3 was being trounced by 360, Sony took the big decision to push first class games, hit after hit. PS3 overtook 360 in the final straight after being behind almost the entire generation.

Digital libraries? I gave up my LARGE Rock Band library on Xbox to get a PS4 and continue gaming on there as frankly the Xbone was rubbish.
But then Xbone also introduced backwards compatibility, something the PS4 could not do until it tried with PSNow (and failed realistically). So all that digital investment he speaks of as a reason they have lost is a load of rubbish, narrative changing.

Finally, he says even if Starfield is 11/10, it won't persuade people to sell their PS5 for a Xbox SX. That's not the point, if Starfield is that great then people will BUY a Xbox SX whilst keeping their PS5 too.
I remember seeing queues of people buying 360s with Bioshock when that was released in London (when I bought my copy).

Phil Spencer lies, and he cannot or will not take responsibility for the failures he has overseen.
He's buried Xbox.

Miraak82 397d ago

At this point I feel like the majority of people that are interested in MS bought studios games would rather just by a gaming PC at this point , I sure know I'm looking to invest in one in the next few months .

Show all comments (120)
30°

Interview on Indika with the Actress for Indika (Isabella Inchbald)

Interview with Isabella Inchbald, Actress for (Indika) in Indika which is an emotional, thought provoking journey through a nun's tale in questioning her religion.

Read Full Story >>
gamerheadquarters.com
480°

Mark Cerny: When making consoles, we're not trying to build low-cost PCs

PlayStation legend Mark Cerny discusses PS5, the challenges of making consoles, and his 42-year games industry career

Read Full Story >>
gamesindustry.biz
darthv721d 16h ago

Well... they used to design their own chips. Emotion Engine, Cell, RSX... when they switched to using X86 based chips is now more akin to low-mid cost PCs than before. It may not look like a PC but it pretty much is one. I'd bet it could do productivity stuff just fine if they allowed it to.

Cockney1d 14h ago (Edited 1d 14h ago )

I think series consoles are closer to pc than playstation seeing as they used the full suite of rdna 2 functions, didn't Sony strip a lot of that away to streamline their machine to be games focused? Its probably lacking in the office and productivity department, don't ask me what their custom chip does or doesn't do I just remember reading a lot about at the time, "rdna 1.5" was the call and yet what we see is pretty much level pegging as far as games go

GamerRN1d 12h ago

Actually, stripping that away doesn't streamline, it hinders. Those features are actually helpful for gaming.

And they didn't strip them out, they just didn't work closely enough to be able to use them all since specs weren't finalized. Microsoft took an inside line on that one.

The reason why things are equal is because Xbox rarely has games designed on their box, they are usually designed on PS5 and ported over. So Xbox loses the power edge it has to making up the poor optimization.

It's ok, I think the lesson is you have to have a significant increase in power of 30 percent or more to be noticeable. And you have to sell enough to become the lead console for development otherwise you lose that power.

Einhander19721d 11h ago

@GamerRN

PS5 outperforms series x because it uses custom chips to process things that on xbox need to be done by the GPU/CPU.

Things like Tempest Audio, and it's custom compression chip for SSD as well as having a separate chip for upscaling using checkerboard and presumably FSR runs off it as well.

OlderGamer171d ago

O please stop the myth that the seriesX mythe is the only console that is using the "the full suite or Rdna2" is already debunked al long time ago.

Number1TailzFan1d 13h ago

The consoles use video ram as system ram as well since it's all shared, so nah.

1d 1h ago
Christopher1d 12h ago

You should probably read the whole quote and not just go based on the title.

darthv721d 12h ago

I have read it... I dont think anyone can build a PC that equates to the performance of a PS5/Series X for anywhere close to their selling point. Not for a while at least.

And my comment about them switching from custom chips to more PC related just adds to that fact. whether people want to believe it or not... Sony has built a low cost (not spec, there is a difference) PC.

neutralgamer19921d 12h ago (Edited 1d 12h ago )

We need better games on these consoles. This generation has been such a huge letdown so far. Moving forward these current consoles will be supported even when newer Playstation and Xbox are in the market. AAA games have been so expensive to make and it seems fun is taken out of games and loot boxes take their place. Try playing a NBA 2k game it's like a casino with slot machines

just_looken1d 2h ago

The cost of making these games is a scam

Nba 2k19 to 2k14 its like madden the budget to make went stupid high but the fundamental of the game and the game modes never changed.

Anything now even basic intersection construction is tens of millions but pre coivid few hundred grand.

2018 here is $400 landscaping now here is the pink slip to my car.

I swear the cost of everything is the same but there taking of that huge profit top for there own pockets.

Einhander19721d 11h ago

The PS5 is incredibly customized.

The SSD, the Tempest Audio, the APU itself is a mix of cross generation AMD hardware in order to be more optimized for gaming and cost efficient.

The PS5 Pro also has features from cross generation AMD hardware with RT features from RDNA 4 plus it's own custom upscaler PSSR.

PlayStation 5 Pro features next-gen RDNA 4-based ray tracing engine, allows 2-3x faster RT
https://www.tweaktown.com/n...

PlayStation still uses custom designed hardware.

darthv721d 9h ago

honestly... I dont know why some are taking offense to it being called a low cost PC. It really is... and low cost is a good thing. the article did not say low performance PC... that is totally different.

Einhander19721d 9h ago

I'm saying they still are designing their own chips, they just use AMD templates.

The PS5 APU has features from RDNA 1 2 and 3, and the PS5 Pro adds features from RDNA 4, and the CPU is the same with it own customized features.

Then all of that is paired with other custom chips.

just_looken1d 2h ago

What you all said my rig in my bedroom can do it no issues

That plastic box has a 2020 cpu with the pro using a 2021 6700

The custom is do to them being dirt cheap with a 2 prong power supply so they made a cpu/gpu combo chip aka apu.

Get a amd laptop with there new mobile chips get the same performance.

VincentVanBro1d 9h ago

You’re right but downvoted for some reason.

just_looken1d 2h ago

Its this site even the head admin banned me for awhile being but hurt over my "anti" sony comments.

n4g is pro sony nothing sony will ever do can change that.

Pyrofire951d 7h ago (Edited 1d 7h ago )

When you only look at the big flagship chips that seems true, but there's a lot going on in a modern console that takes advantage of being a dedicated kit. The various elements put into how the pipelines are connected shape the direction of games. End to end decryption and data streaming is something big that PC can only kind of do and with less certainty for example. Dedicated audio chip that rivals the main CPU in the PS4 is a big paradigm shift, devs used to fight for cores and audio was often last priority, whereas in traditional PC design the main CPU does both of those jobs of processing audio and decryption, while also performing all the other CPU based tasks.
It's not the custom silicon that used to be what made consoles but there's a lot more to consoles now. Data storage was not even a consideration and almost no RAM was on old consoles. Now there needs to be an enormous amount of SSD storage, and RAM to make these games tick with how much is demanded from them.

just_looken1d 2h ago

@darth

Your comment show how many sony blindboys are on here

You are 100% correct but to add on the gamecube-ps3 also had a gpu/cpu combo back in the day unlike modern consoles that are just glorified tablets using apu/igpu's.

I miss the ps3 era start of ps4 era that sony was awesome

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1d ago
MIDGETonSTILTS171d 13h ago

Yah, hence the majority of the PS5’s hardware investment going towards an SSD instead of a GPU.

There are countless custom pc gaming rigs out there, and I bet none of them took an SSD-centric approach to their design, like the ps5 did.

just_looken1d 2h ago

LMAO wow sony blind boy's are mad in love

That is called direct storage windows 10 has had that for over 5 year's every computer with a nvme based ssd has had that tech for years.

https://www.thewindowsclub....

The ps6 will then have this new amazing tech you all will go crazy over resize bar
https://www.howtogeek.com/8...

But that tech has been out for 2 years all 40series gpu's intel gpus and the new amd cards have that tech.

There is nothing a ps5 can do over a 4+ year old computer 2019 rig want resize bar? get a cheap amd/intel card for half the cost of a ps5.

MIDGETonSTILTS1714h ago

Clearly you did not watch Cerny’s first ps5 breakdown, so you don’t appreciate EVERYthing Cerny did to leverage their extremely fast SSD.

bigfish1d 13h ago (Edited 1d 13h ago )

I can see where he’s coming from re ps5 not just being a box with parts like a pc. They must also spend an awful lot on r & d just to design the thing so it has aesthetic appeal and typical Japanese with some sort of Philosopy behind the design. Would also think other factors around the custom airflow and the like would cost a lot given that it’s not a standard box shape

TheColbertinator1d 13h ago

That's all a console will ever be.

gold_drake1d 12h ago

true, but the alternative is, relatively, a expensive ordeal.
unless you dont game at all ha.

mkis0071d 7h ago (Edited 1d 7h ago )

Just spent 2000k on a 4070ti super 7800x3d 1440p gaming pc. Honestly consoles will never be replaced at this wide a gap in price. I plan to get a ps5 pro too.

just_looken1d 2h ago

@mk

You waisted 2 grand you mean

At 1440p a amd4 chipset with a 5600x3d combined with a 6750xt even a 6800 can push 1440p just a much for half the cost or less used/new and or sales.

I have a 75hhz monitor in my bedroom 1440p playing games maxed out spent around 1200cad but aio 5800x3d 32gb of ram and a 6750xt 28 or 30 inch monitor.

Every time i hear pc so expensive i just laugh you can spend less than $500 buy a used ebay rig fix it up or a office pc toss in a cheap low profile card.

Pyrofire951d 6h ago

If you look into the hardware beyond just the CPU and GPU things start to look different, and there's plenty beyond just those two parts, those two parts even are modified to their own design in some degree.

Show all comments (55)
50°

Eternal Damnation Interview With Soham Jaiswal, CEO, SD Games

Recently Gareth at Skewed and Reviewed spoke with Soham Jaiswal, CEO, SD Games about the pending Eternal Damnation game. The game is a hybrid of RPG and RTS and cast players as a Spider.