Will there be another Xbox?

[Crystal]

What do we think? Is Microsoft going to keep going in the console market?

To me it seems more like Microsoft have been on a spree of acquiring studios precisely because they want out of the console market and publishing gives them plenty of platforms to release on, and puts the hardware costs squarely on the shoulders of PC makers, end users, Sony and Nintendo. It's a smart strategy, and I think that's exactly where they're heading.

 

[Spiner202]

I think Microsoft has no idea what to do anymore. Granted, I don't follow them as closely as Sony or Nintendo, but I think basically everything they have done after the 360 hasn't really worked that well for them. Game Pass is the one thing consumers like, and I don't think it's making them much money.

The biggest elephant in the room is that games just take too long to make now. Sony and Nintendo have figured out how to balance long development times with a multi-year schedule for releases to ensure they have multiple interesting 1st party IPs nearly every year*. That's more out of necessity in Nintendo's case than Sony's, but it feels like Microsoft just acquires studios hoping that they'll solve this problem. By contrast, I think Sony has a much more direct influence on the studios they own.

As for the original question at hand, I think they will continue to release consoles, solely because Sony has outsmarted them on PC by starting to release Sony exclusives on PC after a few years. If there's no Xbox console, I feel like PC players won't have any loyalty to Microsoft, and might just buy Sony's 1st party games instead of Microsoft's (in reality, people will buy the best games, regardless of who makes them, but Sony is pumping out games in greater quality and quantity right now).

*As a quick footnote, I don't actually think Sony has this figured out at all. They've hit an acceptable number of annual releases, but I think they'd be the first to admit that the industry would benefit from shorter development times.

 

[Fool's Requiem]

I think Microsoft should focus on PC. Sony, Nintendo, and now Valve have a good stranglehold on the console market. It also makes it much easier to allow their games on other consoles without having to worry about an exclusivity outcry.

 

[Mark]

Look… I’m not gonna pretend that I knew all of this then, but I didn’t like the idea of Microsoft entering the console market to begin with. It wasn’t “their” place. They already had the PC market and their own following with it, as well as a increasing amount of support for multi-platform releases that entitled them to *some* of the same titles offered on consoles. “They” weren’t happy with *some*, they wanted ALL. I think two decades down the line, they’re in a position where they’re flexing their muscle a little bit trying to put strain in the developers and hopefully eliminate competition along the way. However… I don’t think the fan base is gonna go for that. For fuck’s sake… Sonic got a goddamn makeover. As we’re seeing with the petition for Starfield on PS5… people make their opinions known in numbers more now than ever. The question is… are they gonna make their opinion known with their wallet?

 

[Raine]

There will definitely be another Xbox, as a short and simple answer.

The question is what, exactly, Microsoft is going to do Game Pass, with xCloud, with "Microsoft Gaming" as a whole. The Xbone (that's crossbone, y'dig?) announcement with all the anti-consumer DRM and always online bullshit absolutely torpedoed Xbox itself, after a couple years of super god awful trend chasing at the tail end of the X360's lifecycle via Kinect. They also made the wonderfully brilliant series of ideas that included 1) Not buying Epic back before they became the Fortnite studio, 2) closing damn near every internal studio they had on both console and PC and 3) doubling down on bad policies like requiring Xbox Live Gold in order to play Free-to-Play games.

Towards the middle to end of the Xbone lifecycle, things improved. They refocused. They started spending money in good ways, like working with Square Enix to make a pseudo-remaster of the Final Fantasy XIII trilogy. Even if those games suck (lol). They invested a ton of time and effort into making the Xbone (and by extension, now S|X) backwards compatible with many X360 and OG Xbox games. Partnered with indies, reversed a lot of dumb policies (including the aforementioned F2P one), and started picking up smaller studios that would help fill out their portfolio.

The issue is when they bought ZeniMax/Bethesda. They did that specifically because of Starfield, and specifically Sony throwing around the idea of tying that up as a 1-year PS5 exclusive via moneyhat, but like... that's a super knee-jerk move that I think is going to bite them in the ass. It'll move some consoles, and it'll sell gangbusters on PC, but missing out on that Sony userbase will hurt. It's counterproductive to an extent, but I wouldn't really be shocked if Starfield does end up on PS5 after a year or two. For the same reason that, should the ActiBlizz deal go through, they're not going to yank Call of Duty from PlayStation. They'll do everything they can to incentivize people hitting that up on Game Pass, or otherwise playing on Xbox/PC, but again - gonna lose too much money not tapping that other userbase.

The vision with Microsoft Gaming seems to be an extension of the initial Xbone stance, just without the bitter pill: They don't want to be a console, not really, they want to be your gateway. They want to be the device under your TV that takes you to a huge library of games and other forms of entertainment on the fly - downloaded (Game Pass) and/or streamed (xCloud). To accomplish that, as they've sort of done with Nintendo already through Minecraft, they want to put Xbox Live onto other consoles and devices. I don't know how responsive Nintendo would be to extending that further, and Sony would need to be completely forced to accept it, but... that's their endgame.

Xbox itself is just keeping the door propped open in the meantime. And for that door to not close, they really need to start throwing a ton of money at Japanese studios. Not to purchase them (lol @ Sega buyout rumors for 20 years and counting), but simply to ensure games quit skipping the platform. It's asinine that Xbox has Final Fantasy VII: Crisis Core Reunion, but not VII Remake. It's fucking stupid that X360 has Star Ocean: The Last Hope (SO4) and The Last Remnant, but Xbone didn't get either of their 4K Remasters. It's dumb that Xbox has SO4 and SO6, but didn't get First Departure R (SO1), Integrity & Faithlessness (SO5) and doesn't seem to be in line to get Second Story R (SO2) either.

...And yeah I'm mostly salty because I'm locked into the Xbox ecosystem, am primarily interested in games from Japanese studios, and keep being denied.
We own everything besides the PS5, I simply just can't be bothered to change the channel. Also I prefer the Xbox controller after all these years.

 

[Major Isoor]

I think you're right Warp, personally. Especially about the Xbox controllers - my only (mothballed) TV-based consoles are the PS2, PS3 and Wii, but the xbone (x-bone) controller is what I use for many games on the PC. Just feels waaay better than the PS controllers, even if I prefer Sony's numbered shoulder button scheme over calling them RB RT LB LT like MS does

 

[Bandicoot]

I think there will be another Xbox, but I think it could be a coin flip if it’s their final one. I’ll be pissed if it is. I do not like Jim Ryan though, and put almost all of the current drama at his feet.

 

[Advocate for Ants! Mouth]

I still hate their branding.

Just move onto the YBox and call it a day.

 

[Raine]

I think there will be another Xbox, but I think it could be a coin flip if it’s their final one. I’ll be pissed if it is. I do not like Jim Ryan though, and put almost all of the current drama at his feet.

We'll definitely find out soon enough. Somehow already 3 years into this generation and I genuinely could not list more than 5 exclusives. I mean that's the general state of PS5 too, but... yeah. If I name 5 PS5-exclusive games everyone, myself included, just says "Yeah those are good." I scour a list for S|X games and it's like "meh". (Or "aren't those actually on PC too?")

Jim Ryan absolutely sucks and should've been jettisoned the moment he started trashing the PS legacy library and the almost-but-not-quite shuttering of the PS3 PSN store. That latter thing is why I can't justify trying to (continue) build(ing) my PS3/4/5 collection. Even if both PS3 and X360 are doomed to shut down within the next 5~10 years, Microsoft has at least given the illusion that they care through backwards compatibility.

I still hate their branding.

Just move onto the YBox and call it a day.

Millennial Cube or Zoomer Block.

Their branding is always completely stupid. The Xbox 360 was named that way because it otherwise would've been something like "Xbox 2" versus "PlayStation 3." Clearly one of these is inferior!

Not sure what happened with the Xbox One. But it was DoA, so it's just the Crossbone (Xbone) to me.

Series XS seems innocent enough, but I'm on to them. S and X divided by | is the branding, officially. It's a blatant anagram for Six (relative PS5 lol) and no one can convince me otherwise. Hence, S|X.

 

[Jawneh]

There's always going to be another console every couple years, whether it be a whole new gen or just a slightly better and faster current gen one. From a business perspective, it makes sense to create a new platform to then sell their new shiny exclusive games on. To make things better (or worse) is that remakes are a huge hit these days, so re-releasing games on the new platform for a price instead of just allowing backwards compatibility (fuck you Nintendo, especially), you just want to make sure people are on your platform to give you more money.

But are we getting close to the point where just making a new faster box is kind of moot as the current one can run games almost too well? Yes. We're definitely almost there, but not innovating or at least rebranding the current box and adding another number or letter to the name to generate hype and sales makes no sense.

 

[Bandicoot]

There's always going to be another console every couple years, whether it be a whole new gen or just a slightly better and faster current gen one. From a business perspective, it makes sense to create a new platform to then sell their new shiny exclusive games on. To make things better (or worse) is that remakes are a huge hit these days, so re-releasing games on the new platform for a price instead of just allowing backwards compatibility (fuck you Nintendo, especially), you just want to make sure people are on your platform to give you more money.

But are we getting close to the point where just making a new faster box is kind of moot as the current one can run games almost too well? Yes. We're definitely almost there, but not innovating or at least rebranding the current box and adding another number or letter to the name to generate hype and sales makes no sense.

Tbf, I think the goalposts have been set by the Starfield conversation. I’m happy with good graphics and lower frame rate as I’m not a pc gamer, but the next step for consoles is graphics AND Frames, not OR.

 

[Jawneh]

Tbf, I think the goalposts have been set by the Starfield conversation. I’m happy with good graphics and lower frame rate as I’m not a pc gamer, but the next step for consoles is graphics AND Frames, not OR.

I do agree there. I'm fairly active with keeping up what the latest and greatest tech is, so looking at what the current best can do today will be that much better for the next big console release.

... but the realist in my is saying that there will be 2-3 different consoles, where the first is a marginal upgrade to the current and the other two will be the ones you thought was going to be the new thing that is actually capable of all the graphics and frames. And honestly, before we get both, I believe there will be a section where games will let you choose if you want the eye candy or smoothness. FF16 comes to mind right now.

 

[Raine]

so re-releasing games on the new platform for a price instead of just allowing backwards compatibility (fuck you Nintendo, especially), you just want to make sure people are on your platform to give you more money.

One of the strangest heel turns of all time. Went from being great about backcompat - even had stuff like the GameBoy Player and GBA Player that went above and beyond - to having absolutely none. And the Switch Online stuff on top of that...

Going to be super curious what the Switch successor does about all this. As it stands now, I will never purchase anything digitally (or that requires additional downloads) for Nintendo platforms again.

 

[Jawneh]

I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo did keep the same cartridge for the next Switch. They already did that with GB/C to GBA. Mainly since they look to be making better money with their online subs and digital games than physical goods. The Switch is in its own niche and thriving, so it's unlikely they'd try to do any super special innovation like GameCube to Wii was.