Investors want MS CEO to dump Xbox Brand

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#101 Edited by lostrib (34418 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@juarbles said:

@cainetao11 said:

@juarbles: still disagree. Ive had priceless times with my nephew on Kinect. So what you're saying is him and I aren't "real gamers", or better yet, we're "anti gaming" because we're open minded enough to game on PC, tablet, Nintendo 3ds, Sony ps3/4 with BC, vita with BC, 360 with BC, and Xbox one? No my friend, I am a gamer, like my father before me........... OK so he wasn't a gamer, and I couldn't resist the RotJ reference. But when you go around limiting or defining something as broad as gaming, its like a human being saying another doesn't deserve to be called human because they wear kilts. Its ignorance.

By definition anyone who supports a company or system set up to harm or destroy gaming is anti-gamer. Open minded =/= anti-gaming. Being ignorant about what you're actually defending is not being open-minded but your ignorance will end up hurting gaming for all of us. We need more crusaders against anti-gaming in general.Sadly anti-gamers are everywhere nowadays thanks to Microsoft and their xboner army.

You sound really ignorant

You sound like you don't do well with women and come here to compensate.

Lol, that's just funny

#102 Posted by lostrib (34418 posts) -

@charizard1605 said:

@bforrester420 said:

You sound like you don't do well with women and come here to compensate.

Tell us all how you really feel

Lostrib is a toolbox. He has this superiority complex that comes off as desperate.

Not sure if serious

#103 Posted by tormentos (17094 posts) -

@dabear said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

And yet you haven't been here since 2006..... Way to go. An article written today that holds credibility and you're loling. Really nice.

Egg on your face. My old account is "dabear", and I have been on GS since 2002...

Yes, Animal-Mother, this is StormyJoe's original account that I do not use anymore. Check the date...

Liar you did use this account 2 months ago...lol

Before any one knew it was yours..

#104 Posted by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

From your own article about the likelyhood of this happening.

"But doing so would mean repudiating much of the legacy of his predecessors, Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer, who have long believed that Microsoft needs to win over consumers, not just corporate IT managers. As a 22-year Microsoft insider, Nadella owes much of his career to Gates and Ballmer."

Yeah considering Nadella just asked Gates to play a more active role in the company this is highly unlikely.

As Stormy said Sony will go BK before this happens. But hey, Sony Fan can dream right?

#105 Edited by StormyJoe (4889 posts) -

@tormentos said:

@dabear said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

And yet you haven't been here since 2006..... Way to go. An article written today that holds credibility and you're loling. Really nice.

Egg on your face. My old account is "dabear", and I have been on GS since 2002...

Yes, Animal-Mother, this is StormyJoe's original account that I do not use anymore. Check the date...

Liar you did use this account 2 months ago...lol

Before any one knew it was yours..

FOR WHAT? I might have used it once, when I was flipping back and forth to show someone my old account, but that was an oversight. That account has been inactive for years.

#106 Posted by super600 (30299 posts) -

The current MS ceo supports/likes the xbox brand so he won't get rid of it right now.

#107 Edited by SonySoldier-_- (718 posts) -

Hmm, is it a coincidence that this news is being reported again right after lemmings have been celebrating and circle jerking over Sony's financial problems? Now its the Cows turn to do the same thing. Both Lems and Cows are probably hoping for their main competitors demise in the gaming division which is sad.

#108 Edited by tormentos (17094 posts) -

Snappy response. Look, if the PS3 had sold like the PS2 did at $600, you think it would have come down in price? You really think Sony would have "learned" anything and not charged at least $600 (probably more) for the PS4?

Please.

First of all the winner of this gen was the Wii and was $250,if the xbox 360 wasn't there even more people would have flock to the Wii,and the price disparity between the wii and PS3 was even bigger.

The PS3 would have never sold like the PS2 at that price ever,in fact sony sold at $300 like close to 30 million PS2,the rest $199 or less.

Second the PS4 was going to be what it is no matter what,it was a disaster for sony profits wise,that $600 unit machine cost $800+ to make,sony selling 40 million PS4 at $600 with the same loss would have landed sony in hell even more.

By the way sony had 2 consoles release for $299 because the xbox was even on the market,the PS3 was expensive because it had expensive hardware,the xbox 360 didn't even had HDMI or wifi for Christ sake.

There was an option Nintendo was there and they won,without the xbox 360 Nintendo would have won who knows if by more than PS2 level.

#109 Posted by -Renegade (8340 posts) -

@shawn30 said:

One quote from the financial manager of one investor is opinion at best. But Xbox provides far to much in the way of profits going forward, as well as mind share and public image. If you look at RROD, you can never forget it. It happened, period, point blank. But if it didn't happen they 360 would have been wildly profitable. That one design error killed the profits, and its a testament to the gaming division that they have operated in the black the last five years while still eating away at the RROD debt. With the One not having any hardware issues this far (fingers crossed) The business of selling it worldwide while ensuring all features are present and constantly being updated, as well as games and apps, is the plan going forward. Moving over 3 million units in the face of overwhelming bad press, online polls, SonyGaf, and terrible decision making by key people at the debut and at E3, the One is moving at a good pace going forward and with a great gaming line-up. I don't have any worries that the business of Xbox will be slow growth and steady improvement of the OS, features, and exclusive games. Minus RROD the One will likely be in the black by year 2 going forward..

investors wanted bill gates to step down from chairman last year and now hes no longer chairmen. i think its more then just opinion.

http://nypost.com/2013/10/02/top-microsoft-investors-want-to-boot-bill-gates/

#110 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

yup...I have actually known about this for awhile. I think its a good move

why xbox? several reasons.

1. Microsoft is good in the business to business space and that universe works completely different then consumer products and services. The company really would need to be split in half to be proficient in both spaces.

2. It doesnt make a lot of sense to have just one consumer product. Either go all out or dont go at all.

3. Xbox is Steve Balmers project which actually didnt make money for a long time so its considered risky.

4. xbox one is about as future proof as my grandmother. To be serious they would have to redesign it nearly compeltely

#111 Posted by tormentos (17094 posts) -
#112 Posted by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

Hmm, is it a coincidence that this news is being reported again right after lemmings have been celebrating and circle jerking over Sony's financial problems? Now its the Cows turn to do the same thing. Both Lems and Cows are probably hoping for their main competitors demise in the gaming division which is sad.

No its not coincidence. Every time Sony has bad press this 'activist investor' story circulates but never changes. The funny thing is that Sony financial news is always fresh and never the same.

Last year it was SOE being sold off.

Sony's stock downgraded to junk.

PC division being sold off.

Then a billion dollar loss expected for fiscal 2013.

MSofts bad news

'Activist investor wants to trash Xbox' oh noes activist crybaby throws tantrum again, and again, and again............

Big difference.

#113 Posted by treedoor (7648 posts) -

@treedoor said:

That'd be bad for console gaming, but oh well.

Console gaming was just fine when the PS1 and PS2 only had Nintendo to compete against.

And console gaming was just fine when Nintendo only had Sega to compete against, but aren't you glad Sony released their own console?

Times change. The PS3 was awful in its first few years, and would have been even more awful if the Xbox 360 wasn't there setting the precedent for how online play should work, how features should work, and for how a console should be designed (the pre-launch PS3 had two cell processors, and no gpu).

The PS4 is what we have now as a result of what Microsoft did with the 360, and how Sony responded to it.

Imagine how awful the PS4 would be if Sony never had any reason to change their hardware design philosophy, or any reason to improve PSN. That thought makes me barf.

#114 Posted by no-scope-AK47 (2725 posts) -

I am actually surprised the xbox brand is still alive it has yet to make any money.

#115 Posted by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@_Matt_ said:

I can see why they would want to kill Bing and the Surface, they suck balls;

but why Xbox?

because its not profitable and never has been.

Some investors have suggested that Microsoft spin off its money-losing consumer products and focus solely on the enterprise.

did you miss this part of the article?

Now only if you knew that the Xbox has been in the black for almost half the decade. You might want to educate yourself on what 'consumer products' encompasses.

#116 Posted by Couth_ (10013 posts) -

Why does this topic come up so often? I don't mean on the forum, but it seems to get reported by news outlets every month..

#117 Posted by Animal-Mother (26549 posts) -

@kuu2 said:

From your own article about the likelyhood of this happening.

"But doing so would mean repudiating much of the legacy of his predecessors, Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer, who have long believed that Microsoft needs to win over consumers, not just corporate IT managers. As a 22-year Microsoft insider, Nadella owes much of his career to Gates and Ballmer."

Yeah considering Nadella just asked Gates to play a more active role in the company this is highly unlikely.

As Stormy said Sony will go BK before this happens. But hey, Sony Fan can dream right?

I never said it was going to happen..... Bah. I'm just stating something I read. I've never said the xbox brand was going to be sold, I never said it was sold, I never said anything except in the event if it ever did sell who would it go to.

#118 Edited by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@balfe1990 said:

@charizard1605 said:

Yeah, they need to go the Samsung strategy of brute forcing their way into the market.

Maybe now that Microsoft's in charge, that might change.

Or they might trip and fumble as per usual.

I don't know, they did do a good job of turning the Xbox and Surface around overall. Microsoft always fails with its first attempt, but manages to prevail through sheer persistence.

Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.

#119 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@balfe1990 said:

Yeah, I believe it also powers Yahoo searches now. Ever since Mayer took over, they just seem to outsource every facet of their business to those more established.

That whole Windows Phone stat comes with some caveats though; namely it's emerging in obscure markets where the iPhone would never have taken off anyway(also because Apple has essentially abandoned those markets, if they ever really had any intention of becoming a powerhouse there in the first place). It's booming in India and the Philippines though, which is great.

Though it won't be approaching Android numbers or even iOS anytime soon. I wish it would, it's a fantastic platform.

@cainetao11

All good man, I'm prone to the odd fart of the brain myself.

India, Phillipines, Mexico, plus many western European territories as well. In other places, it is (understandably) growing faster than iOS and Android.

Point is, Microsoft's consumer business bets are for the long haul- listening to short sighted investors trying to make a quick buck would be disastrous.

there is the problem

internet use is increase, cable tv viewership is declining.

Is Cable TV future proof? no

Is a gaming device that can not handle VR properly future proof? no

Is a living room device that charges you extra money to access the internet future proof? no

Put a Steam Machine in your living room, pay for the internet only once and watch all your content on the internet and disconnect your cable service....THAT is the future

#120 Edited by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@no-scope-AK47 said:

I am actually surprised the xbox brand is still alive it has yet to make any money.

This is patently false but keep saying it, it makes you look seriously misinformed and uneducated in this matter.

#121 Edited by kuu2 (6962 posts) -
@SEANMCAD said:

@charizard1605 said:

India, Phillipines, Mexico, plus many western European territories as well. In other places, it is (understandably) growing faster than iOS and Android.

Point is, Microsoft's consumer business bets are for the long haul- listening to short sighted investors trying to make a quick buck would be disastrous.

there is the problem

internet use is increase, cable tv viewership is declining.

Is Cable TV future proof? no

Is a gaming device that can not handle VR properly future proof? no

Is a living room device that charges you extra money to access the internet future proof? no

Put a Steam Machine in your living room, pay for the internet only once and watch all your content on the internet and disconnect your cable service....THAT is the future

char is totally correct.

I also love the mentioning of Steam Machines. Who the hell is going to buy one of those???? It won't be joe consumer and it sure as hell won't be die hard PC fans. No one can tell me who these dumb machines will be purchased by. Didn't Valve already back track on their poorly engineered controller? Valve knows nothing about hardware and their most successful invention was a software delivery service.

#122 Posted by Animal-Mother (26549 posts) -

@kuu2 said:
@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

@charizard1605 said:

Yeah, they need to go the Samsung strategy of brute forcing their way into the market.

Maybe now that Microsoft's in charge, that might change.

Or they might trip and fumble as per usual.

I don't know, they did do a good job of turning the Xbox and Surface around overall. Microsoft always fails with its first attempt, but manages to prevail through sheer persistence.

Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.

lol what?

#123 Posted by CrownKingArthur (4430 posts) -

@kuu2 said:
@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

@charizard1605 said:

Yeah, they need to go the Samsung strategy of brute forcing their way into the market.

Maybe now that Microsoft's in charge, that might change.

Or they might trip and fumble as per usual.

I don't know, they did do a good job of turning the Xbox and Surface around overall. Microsoft always fails with its first attempt, but manages to prevail through sheer persistence.

Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.

lol what?

i'm sure we all don't not remember when nintendo didn't not take a chance on the not wii gaming console.

#124 Posted by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@kuu2 said:
@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

@charizard1605 said:

Yeah, they need to go the Samsung strategy of brute forcing their way into the market.

Maybe now that Microsoft's in charge, that might change.

Or they might trip and fumble as per usual.

I don't know, they did do a good job of turning the Xbox and Surface around overall. Microsoft always fails with its first attempt, but manages to prevail through sheer persistence.

Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.

lol what?

The original Xbox sold 25 million and lost billions, the 360 will sell 90 million when it is all said and done. The original Surface had a billion dollar write down, and Surface 2 is selling like hot cakes. What didn't you understand about my comment?????

#125 Posted by FoxbatAlpha (6140 posts) -

Anything is possible but I think this going to hinge on two things.

1. How well the X1 does this next year or two.

2. When will Sony take another turn for the worse essentially eliminating itself from competing with MS.

#126 Edited by Animal-Mother (26549 posts) -

@kuu2 said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@kuu2 said:
@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

@charizard1605 said:

Yeah, they need to go the Samsung strategy of brute forcing their way into the market.

Maybe now that Microsoft's in charge, that might change.

Or they might trip and fumble as per usual.

I don't know, they did do a good job of turning the Xbox and Surface around overall. Microsoft always fails with its first attempt, but manages to prevail through sheer persistence.

Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.

lol what?

The original Xbox sold 25 million and lost billions, the 360 will sell 90 million when it is all said and done. The original Surface had a billion dollar write down, and Surface 2 is selling like hot cakes. What didn't you understand about my comment?????

I'm sure these companies know a thing or two about taking chances.

I.E. Nintendo and their gloriously beautiful fuck up the Wii-U

And Sony Taking a very big swing and a miss with the chance of the cell processor that cost them ground, hundreds of millions and so on and a lot more.

I'm sure these companies know better than You and I what taking a financial risk means.

#127 Posted by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@Animal-Mother said:

@kuu2 said:
@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

@charizard1605 said:

Yeah, they need to go the Samsung strategy of brute forcing their way into the market.

Maybe now that Microsoft's in charge, that might change.

Or they might trip and fumble as per usual.

I don't know, they did do a good job of turning the Xbox and Surface around overall. Microsoft always fails with its first attempt, but manages to prevail through sheer persistence.

Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.

lol what?

i'm sure we all don't not remember when nintendo didn't not take a chance on the not wii gaming console.

Sweet, then they went the safe route again with the WiiU, plus the Wii was safe in terms of cost to Nintendo. Nintendo knew they couldn't compete on the same level as Sony and MSoft when it came to console power (Nintendo still doesn't have an online multiplayer infrastructure or robust 3rd party lineup) they don't innovate in the slightest. Also don't bring up the fact that their handheld has been stuck in the stoneage since its inception. But hey don't let facts get in the way of a good story.

#128 Posted by mbrockway (3399 posts) -

@Floppy_Jim said:

Investors wanna dump Xbox, Wii U is dead, Sony continues to be doomed....well, aren't these fun happy times.

DIdn't you hear? The world is ending too!

The world actually already ended (or near enough before all the lights go out), the known universe is a simulation made out of a 3D hologram being projected off a 2D surface. Turns out Star Ocean 3 was right all along.

#129 Posted by Animal-Mother (26549 posts) -

@kuu2 said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@kuu2 said:
@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

@charizard1605 said:

Yeah, they need to go the Samsung strategy of brute forcing their way into the market.

Maybe now that Microsoft's in charge, that might change.

Or they might trip and fumble as per usual.

I don't know, they did do a good job of turning the Xbox and Surface around overall. Microsoft always fails with its first attempt, but manages to prevail through sheer persistence.

Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.

lol what?

i'm sure we all don't not remember when nintendo didn't not take a chance on the not wii gaming console.

Sweet, then they went the safe route again with the WiiU, plus the Wii was safe in terms of cost to Nintendo. Nintendo knew they couldn't compete on the same level as Sony and MSoft when it came to console power (Nintendo still doesn't have an online multiplayer infrastructure or robust 3rd party lineup) they don't innovate in the slightest. Also don't bring up the fact that their handheld has been stuck in the stoneage since its inception. But hey don't let facts get in the way of a good story.

The DS maybe. But you cannot deny they've made strides the past 15 years.

#130 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@kuu2 said:
@SEANMCAD said:

@charizard1605 said:

India, Phillipines, Mexico, plus many western European territories as well. In other places, it is (understandably) growing faster than iOS and Android.

Point is, Microsoft's consumer business bets are for the long haul- listening to short sighted investors trying to make a quick buck would be disastrous.

there is the problem

internet use is increase, cable tv viewership is declining.

Is Cable TV future proof? no

Is a gaming device that can not handle VR properly future proof? no

Is a living room device that charges you extra money to access the internet future proof? no

Put a Steam Machine in your living room, pay for the internet only once and watch all your content on the internet and disconnect your cable service....THAT is the future

char is totally correct.

I also love the mentioning of Steam Machines. Who the hell is going to buy one of those???? It won't be joe consumer and it sure as hell won't be die hard PC fans. No one can tell me who these dumb machines will be purchased by. Didn't Valve already back track on their poorly engineered controller? Valve knows nothing about hardware and their most successful invention was a software delivery service.

here is the thing.

Internet viewership is on the rise and will be the standard future. People will continue to disconnect from their cable TV.

so....how do I get all that media from the internet to the living room? well xbox, ps4 and Steam Machine.

Which will give you no restrictions or extra fees to do so? Steam machine.

I think the real question is why would anyone in their right mind choose an Xbox of PS4 over a Steam machine?

#131 Edited by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@kuu2 said:

The original Xbox sold 25 million and lost billions, the 360 will sell 90 million when it is all said and done. The original Surface had a billion dollar write down, and Surface 2 is selling like hot cakes. What didn't you understand about my comment?????

I'm sure these companies know a thing or two about taking chances.

I.E. Nintendo and their gloriously beautiful fuck up the Wii-U

And Sony Taking a very big swing and a miss with the chance of the cell processor that cost them ground, hundreds of millions and so on and a lot more.

I'm sure these companies know better than You and I what taking a financial risk means.

And both are in the toilet financially because their lack of vision. Again like I said MSoft has the money to actually pull off what the other two can't.

#132 Posted by IMAHAPYHIPPO (2563 posts) -

@Couth_: It won't stop showing up until MIcrosoft has actually made a profit on the Xbox brand, which after R&D and launching the first Xbox and the red ring disaster of the 360, I believe they're still over a billion dollars under.

#133 Posted by charizard1605 (56010 posts) -

@kuu2 said:
@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

@charizard1605 said:

Yeah, they need to go the Samsung strategy of brute forcing their way into the market.

Maybe now that Microsoft's in charge, that might change.

Or they might trip and fumble as per usual.

I don't know, they did do a good job of turning the Xbox and Surface around overall. Microsoft always fails with its first attempt, but manages to prevail through sheer persistence.

Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.

Is this a joke?

#134 Posted by hoyalawya (342 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

Yeah, I believe it also powers Yahoo searches now. Ever since Mayer took over, they just seem to outsource every facet of their business to those more established.

That whole Windows Phone stat comes with some caveats though; namely it's emerging in obscure markets where the iPhone would never have taken off anyway(also because Apple has essentially abandoned those markets, if they ever really had any intention of becoming a powerhouse there in the first place). It's booming in India and the Philippines though, which is great.

Though it won't be approaching Android numbers or even iOS anytime soon. I wish it would, it's a fantastic platform.

@cainetao11

All good man, I'm prone to the odd fart of the brain myself.

India, Phillipines, Mexico, plus many western European territories as well. In other places, it is (understandably) growing faster than iOS and Android.

Point is, Microsoft's consumer business bets are for the long haul- listening to short sighted investors trying to make a quick buck would be disastrous.

there is the problem

internet use is increase, cable tv viewership is declining.

Is Cable TV future proof? no

Is a gaming device that can not handle VR properly future proof? no

Is a living room device that charges you extra money to access the internet future proof? no

Put a Steam Machine in your living room, pay for the internet only once and watch all your content on the internet and disconnect your cable service....THAT is the future

I agree that the bolded statement is the vision for the future. However, the vision will not happen in the near future. Content owners and telecom companies have too much invested in their current assets. In the USA, live sports and premium contents (HBO, ShowTime, some cable TV channels) generally cannot be streamed unless you also have subscription to cable. And advertising revenues on TV keep climbing (although slowly) despite declining TV viewership. A live TV ad spot on a popular program/event is worth much more than say a banner on espn.com. TV will not die in the near future. To me, the short-term approach is what the Xbox One is trying to do. Marry the cable box with online contents, games and mobile computing devices (Smartglass - although it sucks now, the potential is there). The key is how to keep people on your system and not switch to other boxes for contents not available on your device. Microsoft has shown its innovation in this area. I wouldn't be surprise if the Amazon, Google and Apple boxes follow the same HDMI-in approach when they release their respective boxes.

#135 Edited by Animal-Mother (26549 posts) -

@kuu2 said:
@Animal-Mother said:

@kuu2 said:

The original Xbox sold 25 million and lost billions, the 360 will sell 90 million when it is all said and done. The original Surface had a billion dollar write down, and Surface 2 is selling like hot cakes. What didn't you understand about my comment?????

I'm sure these companies know a thing or two about taking chances.

I.E. Nintendo and their gloriously beautiful fuck up the Wii-U

And Sony Taking a very big swing and a miss with the chance of the cell processor that cost them ground, hundreds of millions and so on and a lot more.

I'm sure these companies know better than You and I what taking a financial risk means.

And both are in the toilet financially because their lack of vision. Again like I said MSoft has the money to actually pull off what the other two can't.

Yes because Microsoft has had profound vision..... Getting into the games market was Just so much of MS vision that the other companies stole that idea before it was even conceived that MS would go into console gaming. I like podcasting with you more. You sound so mean when you type!

#136 Posted by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@kuu2 said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@kuu2 said:
@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

@charizard1605 said:

Yeah, they need to go the Samsung strategy of brute forcing their way into the market.

Maybe now that Microsoft's in charge, that might change.

Or they might trip and fumble as per usual.

I don't know, they did do a good job of turning the Xbox and Surface around overall. Microsoft always fails with its first attempt, but manages to prevail through sheer persistence.

Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.

lol what?

i'm sure we all don't not remember when nintendo didn't not take a chance on the not wii gaming console.

Sweet, then they went the safe route again with the WiiU, plus the Wii was safe in terms of cost to Nintendo. Nintendo knew they couldn't compete on the same level as Sony and MSoft when it came to console power (Nintendo still doesn't have an online multiplayer infrastructure or robust 3rd party lineup) they don't innovate in the slightest. Also don't bring up the fact that their handheld has been stuck in the stoneage since its inception. But hey don't let facts get in the way of a good story.

The DS maybe. But you cannot deny they've made strides the past 15 years.

The Wii was somewhat daring only because in the mind of the hardcore gamer it was never going to be purchased. It catered to ultra casual audience who really didn't like videogaming but liked ease of use. Kinect does the same thing in bringing in that same audience but thankfully MSoft didn't abandon the controller all together. The Wii was successful in the short term, but Nintendo has nowhere to go from it. It is like the 3DS, they were going for a quick cash in on 3D which ultimately led them back to 2D.

#137 Posted by CrownKingArthur (4430 posts) -

@kuu2 said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@kuu2 said:
@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

@charizard1605 said:

Yeah, they need to go the Samsung strategy of brute forcing their way into the market.

Maybe now that Microsoft's in charge, that might change.

Or they might trip and fumble as per usual.

I don't know, they did do a good job of turning the Xbox and Surface around overall. Microsoft always fails with its first attempt, but manages to prevail through sheer persistence.

Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.

lol what?

i'm sure we all don't not remember when nintendo didn't not take a chance on the not wii gaming console.

Sweet, then they went the safe route again with the WiiU, plus the Wii was safe in terms of cost to Nintendo. Nintendo knew they couldn't compete on the same level as Sony and MSoft when it came to console power (Nintendo still doesn't have an online multiplayer infrastructure or robust 3rd party lineup) they don't innovate in the slightest. Also don't bring up the fact that their handheld has been stuck in the stoneage since its inception. But hey don't let facts get in the way of a good story.

The DS maybe. But you cannot deny they've made strides the past 15 years.

thing is - i didn't like the wii. i thought it was stupid.

but it is true that nintendo took a chance by making a game console with a control scheme far removed from tradition. kuu2 said 'Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.'

and regarding nintendo i have to disagree, i didn't like what they did but they did take a chance.

although having thought about it, i'm not so sure about sony. their best innovation is probably x square circle triangle.

#138 Edited by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

Yeah, I believe it also powers Yahoo searches now. Ever since Mayer took over, they just seem to outsource every facet of their business to those more established.

That whole Windows Phone stat comes with some caveats though; namely it's emerging in obscure markets where the iPhone would never have taken off anyway(also because Apple has essentially abandoned those markets, if they ever really had any intention of becoming a powerhouse there in the first place). It's booming in India and the Philippines though, which is great.

Though it won't be approaching Android numbers or even iOS anytime soon. I wish it would, it's a fantastic platform.

@cainetao11

All good man, I'm prone to the odd fart of the brain myself.

India, Phillipines, Mexico, plus many western European territories as well. In other places, it is (understandably) growing faster than iOS and Android.

Point is, Microsoft's consumer business bets are for the long haul- listening to short sighted investors trying to make a quick buck would be disastrous.

there is the problem

internet use is increase, cable tv viewership is declining.

Is Cable TV future proof? no

Is a gaming device that can not handle VR properly future proof? no

Is a living room device that charges you extra money to access the internet future proof? no

Put a Steam Machine in your living room, pay for the internet only once and watch all your content on the internet and disconnect your cable service....THAT is the future

I agree that the bolded statement is the vision for the future. However, the vision will not happen in the near future. Content owners and telecom companies have too much invested in their current assets. In the USA, live sports and premium contents (HBO, ShowTime, some cable TV channels) generally cannot be streamed unless you also have subscription to cable. And advertising revenues on TV keep climbing (although slowly) despite declining TV viewership. A live TV ad spot on a popular program/event is worth much more than say a banner on espn.com. TV will not die in the near future. To me, the short-term approach is what the Xbox One is trying to do. Marry the cable box with online contents, games and mobile computing devices (Smartglass - although it sucks now, the potential is there). The key is how to keep people on your system and not switch to other boxes for contents not available on your device. Microsoft has shown its innovation in this area. I wouldn't be surprise if the Amazon, Google and Apple boxes follow the same HDMI-in approach when they release their respective boxes.

And nowhere are games even mentioned. I can do all that with a $100 Rocku box.

Steam Machine will be one of the biggest boondoggles we will see since the 3DO. No one is going to care about these boxes.

#139 Edited by charizard1605 (56010 posts) -

@kuu2 said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@kuu2 said:

@CrownKingArthur said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@kuu2 said:
@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

@charizard1605 said:

Yeah, they need to go the Samsung strategy of brute forcing their way into the market.

Maybe now that Microsoft's in charge, that might change.

Or they might trip and fumble as per usual.

I don't know, they did do a good job of turning the Xbox and Surface around overall. Microsoft always fails with its first attempt, but manages to prevail through sheer persistence.

Lots of money allows you to take chances, something Sony and Nintendo know nothing about.

lol what?

i'm sure we all don't not remember when nintendo didn't not take a chance on the not wii gaming console.

Sweet, then they went the safe route again with the WiiU, plus the Wii was safe in terms of cost to Nintendo. Nintendo knew they couldn't compete on the same level as Sony and MSoft when it came to console power (Nintendo still doesn't have an online multiplayer infrastructure or robust 3rd party lineup) they don't innovate in the slightest. Also don't bring up the fact that their handheld has been stuck in the stoneage since its inception. But hey don't let facts get in the way of a good story.

The DS maybe. But you cannot deny they've made strides the past 15 years.

The Wii was somewhat daring only because in the mind of the hardcore gamer it was never going to be purchased. It catered to ultra casual audience who really didn't like videogaming but liked ease of use. Kinect does the same thing in bringing in that same audience but thankfully MSoft didn't abandon the controller all together. The Wii was successful in the short term, but Nintendo has nowhere to go from it. It is like the 3DS, they were going for a quick cash in on 3D which ultimately led them back to 2D.

Lol, hedging your bets so that you can ensure that the entire company doesn't fail because of one flopped product isn't 'not being daring/not taking risks,' it's smart financial planning and long term thinking.

Nintendo, like Sony, has taken some incredible risks with its products. The Wii was a risk. The DS was a risk. The entire company was bet on those two products. The 3DS was a safer product, the Wii U was absolutely a risk. Hence the failing of the Wii U having such a negative impact in their bottom line- if it hadn't been a risky product, its failure wouldn't have affected them as badly as it did.

Sony? The PS3 was a risk through and through. It was pushing so many new technologies at the same time (HDMI, Blu Ray, Wifi, The Cell). The PS4 is comparatively a safer product, as is the PS Vita, but again, Sony and Nintendo have taken more risks than Microsoft has. What was Microsoft's biggest risk? Kinect, which was them just deciding to ride the Wii wave? Xbox Live? I'll give them that, twelve years ago. That's it. That's the extent of their risks in the gaming space.

Everything else? Those risks come from Sony and Nintendo. You know, the companies that are less financially stable.

#140 Posted by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@kuu2 said:

@hoyalawya said:

@SEANMCAD said:

@charizard1605 said:

@balfe1990 said:

Yeah, I believe it also powers Yahoo searches now. Ever since Mayer took over, they just seem to outsource every facet of their business to those more established.

That whole Windows Phone stat comes with some caveats though; namely it's emerging in obscure markets where the iPhone would never have taken off anyway(also because Apple has essentially abandoned those markets, if they ever really had any intention of becoming a powerhouse there in the first place). It's booming in India and the Philippines though, which is great.

Though it won't be approaching Android numbers or even iOS anytime soon. I wish it would, it's a fantastic platform.

@cainetao11

All good man, I'm prone to the odd fart of the brain myself.

India, Phillipines, Mexico, plus many western European territories as well. In other places, it is (understandably) growing faster than iOS and Android.

Point is, Microsoft's consumer business bets are for the long haul- listening to short sighted investors trying to make a quick buck would be disastrous.

there is the problem

internet use is increase, cable tv viewership is declining.

Is Cable TV future proof? no

Is a gaming device that can not handle VR properly future proof? no

Is a living room device that charges you extra money to access the internet future proof? no

Put a Steam Machine in your living room, pay for the internet only once and watch all your content on the internet and disconnect your cable service....THAT is the future

I agree that the bolded statement is the vision for the future. However, the vision will not happen in the near future. Content owners and telecom companies have too much invested in their current assets. In the USA, live sports and premium contents (HBO, ShowTime, some cable TV channels) generally cannot be streamed unless you also have subscription to cable. And advertising revenues on TV keep climbing (although slowly) despite declining TV viewership. A live TV ad spot on a popular program/event is worth much more than say a banner on espn.com. TV will not die in the near future. To me, the short-term approach is what the Xbox One is trying to do. Marry the cable box with online contents, games and mobile computing devices (Smartglass - although it sucks now, the potential is there). The key is how to keep people on your system and not switch to other boxes for contents not available on your device. Microsoft has shown its innovation in this area. I wouldn't be surprise if the Amazon, Google and Apple boxes follow the same HDMI-in approach when they release their respective boxes.

And nowhere are games even mentioned. I can do all that with a $100 Rocku box.

Steam Machine will be one of the biggest boondoggles we will see since the 3DO. No one is going to care about these boxes.

The reason I am focusing so much on non-gaming topics here is because that is what the xbox is. The Xbox is not so much a game machine as it is a living room machine because of all the focus on the cable features. The focus on the cable features is a clear tell that Microsoft does NOT know the future in this space.

In all ways known to man from video, music, communication and well..everything..other than games the Steam Machine wins. So....if they do in fact make Linux more viable you can kiss both xbox and ps4 goodbye.

#141 Posted by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@kuu2 said:
@Animal-Mother said:

I'm sure these companies know a thing or two about taking chances.

I.E. Nintendo and their gloriously beautiful fuck up the Wii-U

And Sony Taking a very big swing and a miss with the chance of the cell processor that cost them ground, hundreds of millions and so on and a lot more.

I'm sure these companies know better than You and I what taking a financial risk means.

And both are in the toilet financially because their lack of vision. Again like I said MSoft has the money to actually pull off what the other two can't.

Yes because Microsoft has had profound vision..... Getting into the games market was Just so much of MS vision that the other companies stole that idea before it was even conceived that MS would go into console gaming. I like podcasting with you more. You sound so mean when you type!


From the beginning this has been more than games for MSoft. It is a battle for the living room, and TV is a part of that no matter what shape that will take in the future. It is the reason that MSoft has games yes, but has partnered with the NFL, has its own video/music store, and integrated Skype interaction. You are correct their vision was never entirely games. In essence I think it started with the collaboration on the Dreamcast just like Sony with the Nintendo CD attachment.

#142 Edited by Evo_nine (1645 posts) -

Dump and spin off are two entirely different things.

But yes, xbox is successful enough to stand on its own feet and it should spin off from Microsoft and become its own entity of which Microsoft will own a 100% share.

That would be the smartest thing to do.

#143 Posted by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@kuu2 said:

@Animal-Mother said:

The DS maybe. But you cannot deny they've made strides the past 15 years.

The Wii was somewhat daring only because in the mind of the hardcore gamer it was never going to be purchased. It catered to ultra casual audience who really didn't like videogaming but liked ease of use. Kinect does the same thing in bringing in that same audience but thankfully MSoft didn't abandon the controller all together. The Wii was successful in the short term, but Nintendo has nowhere to go from it. It is like the 3DS, they were going for a quick cash in on 3D which ultimately led them back to 2D.

Lol, hedging your bets so that you can ensure that the entire company doesn't fail because of one flopped product isn't 'not being daring/not taking risks,' it's smart financial planning and long term thinking.

Nintendo, like Sony, has taken some incredible risks with its products. The Wii was a risk. The DS was a risk. The entire company was bet on those two products. The 3DS was a safer product, the Wii U was absolutely a risk. Hence the failing of the Wii U having such a negative impact in their bottom line- if it hadn't been a risky product, its failure wouldn't have affected them as badly as it did.

Sony? The PS3 was a risk through and through. It was pushing so many new technologies at the same time (HDMI, Blu Ray, Wifi, The Cell). The PS4 is comparatively a safer product, as is the PS Vita, but again, Sony and Nintendo have taken more risks than Microsoft has. What was Microsoft's biggest risk? Kinect, which was them just deciding to ride the Wii wave? Xbox Live? I'll give them that, twelve years ago. That's it. That's the extent of their risks in the gaming space.

Everything else? Those risks come from Sony and Nintendo. You know, the companies that are less financially stable.

Xbox Live was probably the single biggest contribution to gaming in the last two decades. There are so many things that have spawned from it for all the other consoles. Kinect is also a groundbreaker as well. It has changed how my home interacts with media in the living room. My two year old says Xbox on for craps sake.

I already said the Wii was somewhat risky, and I for sure give Sony props for the Vita being more innovative than any Nintendo hand held of recent memory. Blu Ray is not a Sony invention, HDMI no, and I belive the Cell was also a collabrative effort. Which of those were successful though????? The PS3 was a mismash of a lot of technology yes but was it truly something that brought new people into gaming???

The Wii did, Xbox Live and Kinect did, Sony??????

#144 Posted by Ackad (3158 posts) -

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

You're implying that this is your alt account then?

#145 Edited by SEANMCAD (5464 posts) -

@kuu2 said:
@Animal-Mother said:

@kuu2 said:
@Animal-Mother said:

I'm sure these companies know a thing or two about taking chances.

I.E. Nintendo and their gloriously beautiful fuck up the Wii-U

And Sony Taking a very big swing and a miss with the chance of the cell processor that cost them ground, hundreds of millions and so on and a lot more.

I'm sure these companies know better than You and I what taking a financial risk means.

And both are in the toilet financially because their lack of vision. Again like I said MSoft has the money to actually pull off what the other two can't.

Yes because Microsoft has had profound vision..... Getting into the games market was Just so much of MS vision that the other companies stole that idea before it was even conceived that MS would go into console gaming. I like podcasting with you more. You sound so mean when you type!

From the beginning this has been more than games for MSoft. It is a battle for the living room, and TV is a part of that no matter what shape that will take in the future. It is the reason that MSoft has games yes, but has partnered with the NFL, has its own video/music store, and integrated Skype interaction. You are correct their vision was never entirely games. In essence I think it started with the collaboration on the Dreamcast just like Sony with the Nintendo CD attachment.

the internet in the living room is a question but to be honest TV in the living room is actually questionable.That is where Microsoft lost focus, didnt do proper research.

Just as a side note, the only reason to have cable TV is for sports and I watched the Super Bowl from the internet with no sign in....times they are a changing

#146 Posted by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@kuu2 said:

@hoyalawya said:

I agree that the bolded statement is the vision for the future. However, the vision will not happen in the near future. Content owners and telecom companies have too much invested in their current assets. In the USA, live sports and premium contents (HBO, ShowTime, some cable TV channels) generally cannot be streamed unless you also have subscription to cable. And advertising revenues on TV keep climbing (although slowly) despite declining TV viewership. A live TV ad spot on a popular program/event is worth much more than say a banner on espn.com. TV will not die in the near future. To me, the short-term approach is what the Xbox One is trying to do. Marry the cable box with online contents, games and mobile computing devices (Smartglass - although it sucks now, the potential is there). The key is how to keep people on your system and not switch to other boxes for contents not available on your device. Microsoft has shown its innovation in this area. I wouldn't be surprise if the Amazon, Google and Apple boxes follow the same HDMI-in approach when they release their respective boxes.

And nowhere are games even mentioned. I can do all that with a $100 Rocku box.

Steam Machine will be one of the biggest boondoggles we will see since the 3DO. No one is going to care about these boxes.

The reason I am focusing so much on non-gaming topics here is because that is what the xbox is. The Xbox is not so much a game machine as it is a living room machine because of all the focus on the cable features. The focus on the cable features is a clear tell that Microsoft does NOT know the future in this space.

In all ways known to man from video, music, communication and well..everything..other than games the Steam Machine wins. So....if they do in fact make Linux more viable you can kiss both xbox and ps4 goodbye.

Games are played in the living room though and MSoft was the first console to really consolidate everything. Steam Boxes are going to be a very niche product and I don't think even Valve knows who they are targeted at. If you asked someone on the street what a steambox was you might get slapped in the face.....XD

Alas though we have taken this way off topic but I do love the discussion.

#147 Posted by Shielder7 (5151 posts) -

If they do there will be a mass Lemming suicide.

#148 Posted by StormyJoe (4889 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@tormentos said:

Liar you did use this account 2 months ago...lol

Before any one knew it was yours..

FOR WHAT?

http://www.gamespot.com/forums/system-wars-314159282/reviews-are-wrong-knack-is-great-very-underated-li-30938862/

To claim Knack sucked...hahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

OK. Again, if I did, then I meant to be logged into this account. Go ahead, go through that "dabear" posting history. I have only logged into it recently to say "Yeah, I have been on GS since 2002".

I do not use that login anymore.

#149 Posted by kuu2 (6962 posts) -

@SEANMCAD said:

@kuu2 said:
@Animal-Mother said:

Yes because Microsoft has had profound vision..... Getting into the games market was Just so much of MS vision that the other companies stole that idea before it was even conceived that MS would go into console gaming. I like podcasting with you more. You sound so mean when you type!

From the beginning this has been more than games for MSoft. It is a battle for the living room, and TV is a part of that no matter what shape that will take in the future. It is the reason that MSoft has games yes, but has partnered with the NFL, has its own video/music store, and integrated Skype interaction. You are correct their vision was never entirely games. In essence I think it started with the collaboration on the Dreamcast just like Sony with the Nintendo CD attachment.

the internet in the living room is a question but to be honest TV in the living room is actually questionable.That is where Microsoft lost focus, didnt do proper research.

Just as a side note, the only reason to have cable TV is for sports and I watched the Super Bowl from the internet with no sign in....times they are a changing

It will be interesting to see in the near future. The problem from detaching from Cable or Satallite is really are not detaching. The companies that own ISPs are the same companies that pump in Cable and Satallite. TV will exist it will just be in a different form. MSoft has already mastered how to control Netflix, Amazon Instant Video, Hulu, and other services with Kinect I would also bet money that whatever interation that comes along next they are already working on how to master it. People forget how bare bones the 36o was when it first launched and where it is now, I have full confidence in MSoft continuing to improve on what they started with The One.

#150 Posted by StormyJoe (4889 posts) -

@Ackad said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Animal-Mother said:

@StormyJoe: Sony has been going bankrupt since 09. Go preach to a different choir about this.

LOL!

Cows have been posting articles that MS is going to sell the Xbox brand since 2006.

You're implying that this is your alt account then?

An "alt" account would imply that I use two accounts. I do not - I use this one. The only time I really use my "dabear" account is when I am showing people that I have been on GS since 2002.