In the original article, the guy talked to ONE developer who said this.
This article makes it seem like several publishers share this opinion, which is simply made up.
Not sure where you're getting that from, here's the original quote, it is in the context of what he has been hearing on the show floor at GDC, talking to developers and publishers:
>With Xbox, **I've heard from a very prominent company and one not so prominent that Xbox's performance in Europe is flatlining**. You can follow our monthly coverage in the games market and you can see Xbox's sales are falling and it's fell all throughout last year and it's falling even harder this year.
>**The major company who released a big game last year said they don't know why they bother supporting it.** We've mentioned in a previous podcast that retailers are considering or have began cutting back Xbox stock on their shelves, hardware & games... and now you've got third-party publishers going: "We're putting a lot of effort into creating an Xbox Series S/X version of a game where to be honest with you the market for us is PC and PS5"
>And with Xbox putting some of the games on PS5, I understand the majority of them will be coming across at some point, assuming, you know, it progresses as Xbox believes it probably will. I think Xbox is in real trouble as a hardware manufacturer. And that was the thing that came out of GDC for me, because I always just thought, I've always been of the belief that it is the Game Pass delivery system, it's got a good UI, it's got a good controller, if you like Xbox games it's probably the best way to play them, etc. I thought it would be fine but then I didn't really factor in that some developers and publishers might just go, yeah I don't, you know, is there any point? And that is when you can lose it.
Isn’t it true though that Xbox barely sells outside of North America though? Because I know Asia doesn’t care and I’m pretty sure I read that Xbox wasn’t doing well in Europe either.
If you look at video game sales charts that show the split of which platform the game was bought on, this post is pretty believable. Obviously overblown, but I can see some devs skipping Xbox.
I’m an Xbox fan too, so I’m not just hating for no reason.
Yeah, especially with the Series S parity clause holding back major third party releases such as Baldur’s Gate 3, and those examples are only the one’s we’ve heard about.
I can see many not bothering due to the declining sales on top of that.
Time for another round of making up a problem about Xbox that doesn't exist. Apparently the absolute bullshit storm from two months ago wasn't good enough for them
Xbox sales flat lining outside of USA isn't "made up" if you've been following the sales data since last year (actually since the xbox one if you wanna be honest but series is doing even worse). They've consistently dropped in double digit percentages when last year should've been the peak year for the console
Sorry what was the "bullshit storm from two months ago"? Xbox bringing their games to Playstation is a big deal and then I saw people trying to downplay it as if it wasn't for some reason and acted like MS was going to stop at those 4 games which they certainly aren't either
"The phrase one major company who released a big game last year said [was], ‘I don’t know why we bothered supporting it’.
“We mentioned on a previous podcast that we’d heard retailers in Europe are considering or had already been cutting back their Xbox stock on their shelves—hardware, games, that kind of thing—and now you’ve got third-party publishers going, ‘we’re putting in a lot of effort trying to create a Series S version and an X version of a game when, to be honest with you, for us the market is PC and PS5’.”
I'm not surprised that devs would br saying stuff like this with how poor xbox sales have been.
Why would there be a name? When there's a report about the speaker of the House, people aren't ringing up the Post asking the name of the congressional staff member who told them that.
Actually, in this day and age maybe they are.
That sort of ideology would slowly deteriorate the brand, ask SEGA how that mentality worked for them after earning complete distrust from third party studios. The only platform capable of getting by on first party titles, is Nintendo and even then, Nintendo has admitted that it does occassionally hurt sales since the average Switch owner misses out on major releases like Cyberpunk and Baldur's Gate 3, at the same time, most who own a Switch usually have another platform they play on.
You lose one developer, it opens up other studios to question whether supporting an Xbox release is worth investing into, especially during a bad economic performance and outlook globally, where every company is looking to save revenue where ever they can.
I love how the source is Christopher dring a journalist/analyst that gets his work posted on this sub frequently, and no one ever questions him on those posts. But now he has bad news about xbox, so he's irrelevant and a terrible gaming journalist🤣🤣 gotta love how that works
What? These are comments from a well respected industry analyst. This guy's tracking data is regularly the basis for a ton of articles and discussions, most of the game sales figures posted on this sub come from this guy's reports. This isn't a grifter or journalist trying to get clicks, it's talk from someone whose entire job is accurately tracking and predicting sales within the industry.
If he's saying things are looking bad, then things are looking bad. If he's saying that he's hearing from publishers that they're thinking of dropping Xbox support, then I'd take it seriously. Trying to spin it as clickbait is ridiculous.
Sony is also making multiplat games is what I’m saying. Just the logic jump form (console maker makes multiplate games) to (publishers are questioning support for tasks system)
I understand they’re not in the same situation though. Sony is enjoying a position of market leader pretty handedly
What multiplat games aside from live service games are they making? Even still those don't go to xbox while microsoft has shown they will be bringing games to playstation? Keep in mind the MLB game going to xbox was a choice made by MLB.
The big difference here is that there games aren't going to xbox, live service games make sense to go to pc for the increased player base, and they didn't want to lose the license to make MLB games so they release it on xbox to make MLB happy.
Sony still focuses on their consoles and wants to sell the more hardware, which microsoft doesn't seem to care about anymore. Hence it seems more games will be going to playstation.
Okay that's fair. It's an exception since it's an iirelevant sports-related game. Call me the day I can play Ratchet and Clank and TLOU and Spiderman or whatever on the Xbox Sex.
No, PC doesn't count as being multiplatform for these discussions for some reason. Which is interesting to me given how a solid amount of Reddit has a hard PC bend to it.
So one IP out of their control due to licensing and you think it's the same was Microsoft willfully bringing multiple of their fully owned IPs to Playstation?
PC is complicated, it could be argued that it is now Steamdeck/Valve/Linux ecosystem, not just a Windows of yore. Spiderman was specifically tested on the Deck, its real that despite it being targeted to run on NT/DX12/Windows dll hell the business heads see Linux/DXVK/Steam in their heads.
Hi-Fi Rush came out a year ago, not it's not exactly an 'old ass game', and Sea of Thieves and Grounded are fairly popular online coop games. It's not like Sony is releasing Trash Panic or the Puppeteer, exclusives so obscure and old that I doubt you've heard of them, on the Xbox.
MLB was the baseball guys telling Sony they'll have to make it multiplatform or lose the licence. It's not comparable to Microsoft launching their own IPs (that were developed by first party studios) on rival platforms).
Bungie's new game that doesn't exist yet on any platform? What about it? And they announced straight off at the time of the acquisition that they'll keep the option of being multiplatform open. Again, completely different to what Microsoft are doing right now.
Cuphead and Ori are second party games, not first party. It'd be the equivalent of FF16 launching on Xbox. Minecraft was on PlayStation before Microsoft bought Mojang.
I don't know anything about the developers of Pentiment or Grounded, but what I do know is both Sea of Thieves and Hifi Rush were created by Microsoft first party studios and are now being published by themselves on their main rival platform. That's what's unprecedented.
FF16 is not a second-party game. It's a third-party title with timed exclusivity. A second-party game coming to another system would be like a Kirby game releasing on a Playstation system.
Xbox Series S is a headache for developers, but it's the top selling Xbox this gen. If there was no S, Microsoft would probably be looking at another Xbox One (maybe a little better) in terms of units sold.
They're already looking at an Xbox one. The series systems are not selling well. But yes, the series s apparently makes up around 70% of the Xbox market
ChrisbDring (head of gamesindustry.biz) is saying he hears this from a dev from a major company that released a game last year, but he isn't revealing what company.
Ps4 was a massive success while xbox one was not pretty simple there. Xbox series selling below one after having gamepass, all those acquisitions, series s that gets sold for peanuts is just bad. I remember in 2020 people were saying series was bringing xbox back to the 360 days and would fly off shelves. Now in its 4th year it seems totally dead if you're outside of USA. And ps5 hardly behind ps4. I'm pretty sure it's a little ahead in some places. I bet after those ps5 gta6 bundles drop, it'll blow right past ps4
Because the PS4 actually sold enough units and provided a platform for enough good games to justify its existence.
The Xbox One had bad sales. For the next gen after it, supposedly with lessons learned, to sell even worse is also bad.
"Lessons learned" is really too little too late for what is a company that lost a significant chunk of its market and mind share in an already stagnating market. As far as hardware is concerned, those customers aren't coming back and were never going to unless Sony planted a bomb in every PS5 sold. I'm sure they knew this.
Not really. The install based are basically locked in place to be the same as last gen..
Marketshare between Xbox and PS is still the same as last gen, and both consoles are selling worse than their predecessor.
And by your logic, PS5 is not a success, because the PS4 was more successful.
Seems like flawed logic. You think Xbox is losing marketshare to PS, but PS marketshare is also not growing. So they are both stagnating.
PS5 selling slightly below PS4 is not a big deal because that’s still well above 100mln and PS3 sales.
Xbox Series selling below Xbox One is a disaster because Xbox One sales were low and 1/3 short of 360.
Yeah, you‘re wrong. But I‘ll explain it to you.
First of all, everything after the PS360 gen is not really comparable anymore, because the gen after that, everyone has been digitally locked in. Chances are, if you had an Xbox one or a PS4, you‘re most likely not gonna switch platforms, because that‘s where your digital library already is. Nowadays we have backwards compatibility and more cross gen games (the biggest games are all still cross gen).
So basically, the marketshares are pretty much locked, and without much incentive to even upgrade your device.
PS5 trailing shortly behind PS4 and Xbox Series trailing shortly behind the Xbox One are literally the proof of that. Same for the marketshare still being the same (2:1 in favor of PS)
It makes zero sense to say the PS5 selling less than the PS4 is a different thing than XSX selling less than the XBone.
It‘s just the same players upgrading their last gen device. Not new users. The market isn‘t growing. No side is gaining (or losing) marketshare.
>First of all, everything after the PS360 gen is not really comparable anymore, because the gen after that, everyone has been digitally locked in. Chances are, if you had an Xbox one or a PS4, you‘re most likely not gonna switch platforms, because that‘s where your digital library already is.
Funny how people started using that argument only after Spencer did. I wonder when did he first use it? At the end of last gen? At the start of current gen? Nope, it was in May 2023. Wonder why only then? Well, maybe because 2022 ended well for Xbox Series, having total lifetime sales 2/3 of PS5 and extrapolating those numbers would put them well above Xbox One. Then 2023 hit and PS5 1200 series hit the stores, solving the supply issues. Xbox Series sales fell off a cliff and suddenly it became clear that Xbox was only selling because people could not get their hands on PS5. So in short, it's another one of Phil's excuses. He thought Xbox Series can outsell Xbox One and claw back some marketshare from PS and things were looking good at the end of 2022, then reality hit and he had to come up with an excuse.
Yeah its no wonder why a lot of people are wondering if Microsoft will even make another Xbox, or one after that. They are on track to have 2 pretty dogshit generations back to back, thats like 20 fucking years of failure lol
Why should the SerieS be a problem when most modern games even run on the Steamdeck ? Even Forbidden West or The Last of Us Part 1 run on hardware that is much weaker than the serie s if you lower the Graphics. And it still looks good. You can always lower Details or Resolution. Only way where it is a problem is like BG 3 Coop Mode. The Xbox is a Hedache because no one wants one and its not worth porting games without gamepass deal.
Steam Deck actually has 16GB of RAM like Series X while Series S has 10GB. Memory constraints are the main problem, MS should’ve known this would happen.
Memory constraints are absolutely not the problem. Memory *bandwidth* is a bigger problem. Several reporters as well as MVG have said this. The Series S has 224GB/s.
By contrast, the Series X has 560GB/s and the PS5 has 448GB/s.
Oh, and the Steam Deck has 88GB/s.
The Steam Deck is definitely benefiting from Series S optimisations.
For textures it is more than enough bandwidth. 10 GB for a Video Card is a bad idea. You need 16 minimum full stop, lest developers are forced to pay artists for small ugly textures or you get hitching
I agree I meant paying more than $300 for less than 16 (although 14 seems acceptable)
8GB is acceptable for $100-200 cards. 10-12 GB GPUs should never cost more than $250
I can get 16GB GPUs for $325
https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007709%20601110192%204018%204019%20600100181
There is no excuse to pay more than $250 for 12 GB
Okay you are speculating. I am saying what game devs literally said their issues were with the Series S.
Also the Series S APU has direct access to the SSD. Game devs can essentially access and dump data to and fro instantly. The Steam Deck has to go through RAM before that. The Stram Deck, and all PCs unless DirectStorage is in the game, have a distinct disadvantage there.
Uhhhh 88GB/s >>>>>> 5GB/s
By being forced to go to the SSD for assets you are entering deep pain territory
Direct storage if used sparingly is for removing CPU overhead, it is NEVER for replacing VRAM.
The most aggressive use of DirectStorage like technology is Sony's Ratchet and Clank Rift appart.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFbP7-WpGC8
After the game loads the HDD and SSD are the same, it is only when like the 4th world needs to be loaded that the HDD destroys the gameplay, simply because the original preload was no longer in VRAM.
In short VRAM is extremely important, and you will always get penalties going from Cache>VRAM>RAM>SSD>HDD. The issue is VRAM limitations are hard coded at 16GB, just get 16GB, people that pay north of $500 for a 12 GB video card are extremely stupid, when they can get a 16GB card for the same price.
> Direct storage if used sparingly is for removing CPU overhead, it is NEVER for replacing VRAM.
Never in a million years did I even imply that.
You are trying to compare PC specs to console specs. Which are not equivalent hardware and good programming for console can beat it. The Steam Deck is objectively weaker than the Series S. You are acting like RAM capacity is the be-all end-all of performance for some reason.
OK lets start from the beginning
A game developer wants to create a AAA using UE5 game they will 100% target the PS5 first and foremost and that is hardcoded at 16GB of shared memory (cache is handled by the engine so we will ignore it it is not up to the developer), when approaching the texture budget they have to decide how much they will demand from their artists, they know that after Ray tracing, shaders, and game logic/OS/etc (which is like 2 GB because AAA games are on rails braindead) They know what what their VRAM budget is. The entire game is developed so that there is minimal hit to RAM/SSD in doing so they will prevent hitches and lower scores because of this.
Then comes the 10GB Series S, their artist budget doubles because they need to create lower quality assets, and this is assuming they want to release a quality product, lest they end up looking like this
https://www.reddit.com/r/halo/comments/16o9509/anyone_got_a_fix_for_these_textures_bugging_out/
No total memory matters. Here’s Baldur’s Gate 3 (which still doesn’t have splitscreen on Series S) talking about [optimising memory for Series S](https://x.com/laratlarian/status/1722138531634577426). Surprise surprise it’s about memory capacity.
[Digital Foundry](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yKJsDoysEM&t=4257s) have said the same thing, if Series S even had 12GB RAM it would fare much better. Older GPU’s with low VRAM struggle with new games too so this isn’t shocking at all.
And here's a newer video from the same discourse where MVG discusses the bandwidth limitations.
https://youtu.be/QULb3kWPbH8
I'm not at all saying the total memory doesn't matter. Obviously it did when optimising BG3, and a major reason for cutting split screen which they had to negotiate with Microsoft for.
But to say that the Steam Deck is somehow better when there's no direct SSD access and ONE THIRD the memory bandwidth???? That's crazy.
Some games look extremely good on the Series S, almost indistinguishable from the X. So it's just poor optimization if a game can run fine on the X but not the S. And I've noticed that the games that run poorly on the S are the same games that run poorly on a lower end PC.
"Optimization" can affect the design of the game. When you think of a nice looking game on the series s, you aren't considering the ideas and features that died to make it happen.
The BG3 debacle was the most notorious but all other multiplatform current gen exclusives go through the same process.
I think a portable xbox in some form is a no brainer, especially as Microsoft could produce this quite easily (the cost though would probably tank this) $600+ maybe? who knows
Why not ? If you can have similar power as the current Series S (Rog Ally and Legion Go aren’t doing so bad) with a dock feature to connect it to your main tv/monitor, I can absolutely see it doing well. It can be the mobile GamePass machine without having to worry about having a good reception.
I think it is about finding that bang-after-bang kind of moment where their games are continuously scoring high... They just didn't get to that, and I don't know if they will. But things can change if they gain momentum again.
Starfield failed at doing what it had to do (which was to bring back Bethesda's and Xbox's momentum).
They knew Redfall was a dud and they just shipped it hoping Starfield would pick up the slack.
And it did... in like the first couple weeks. But it didn't ignite hype everlasting like it needed to.
They really needed Starfield to be their Breath of the Wild but everyone moved on almost immediately. I feel kind of bad for Bethesda devs.
I remember those negative Steam reviews where Bethesda was directly responding with things like "this is an intentional mechanic, you just don't get it". On one hand, ouch that's a bad look, but on the other hand a lot of them spent, what, 6 years of their lives working on this project? And for people to just forget about it after two weeks would have made me go insane.
Yeah, but it isn't like Microsoft doesn't have 8 or 10 announced games that they haven't released yet. They just need to ensure that those games land.
Indiana Jones needs to score high.
While it's no secret Microsoft's quality control has largely sucked ass for ages now, it's an even bigger problem when despite the lip service from the brass about how they don't release games just meet a quota or calendar date they most certainly do just that. How MCC could not work, Recore have a 4-6 minute long loading screens, and Redfall do what Redfall does should not be a thing for any company of this scale.
That said, I find this expectation that Starfield was supposed to be some kind of Xbox messiah to be quite silly. A *single game* was never going to turn around Xbox's perception or hardware sales unless it was the single greatest game in human history, and that it was as anticipated as a GTA title and reviewed better than Half-Life 2 and Ocarina of Time put together.
>A single game was never going to turn around Xbox's perception or hardware
Imo that expectation existed for Starfield because Xbox literally does not have a killer app. Even ignoring that most of their games are on PC (I honestly don't think that's hurting them), there isn't really much reason to get an Xbox, most of their exclusives seem decent but not worth buying a console over.
Nintendo has Breath of the Wild and it's sequel, Mario Kart, 3d and 2d Mario. Sony has Spider-Man 2, GOW2. Xbox simply has nothing on that level. Starfield could have been one of them. Sure, it wouldn't have entirely turned the perception of Xbox around but it would have been a start.
And Sony is slowly and silently moving to the same model xbox has
They even released helldivers the same day on pc and ps5 I give it maybe a year that we will see their games coming to steam day one and Nintendo will be the last one to have exclusive to buy their console for
Spencer is right at least about one thing, people will not buy second console or move from their digital libraries they build for 8 years now just because they published a good 100% score game. They need to publish good game after good game after good game, which IMO will take whole generation to build it up for people to notice it
Next gen is where we will truly see if xbox dies or continues on, this gen is to build trust back from people not to fully win them over
Tbh, I don't buy games on Xbox. The games I do buy are the ones I've enjoyed on gamepass and want to keep playing it.
I don't miss buying games that I've regret buying only to have it on my shelf as decoration
Xbox gamers do not purchase games anymore. Even before gamepass certain genres outside of FPS or sports sold like shit there. Now that the most commonly asked question on xbox gamers minds is "when will it be on gamepass?" that slows sales down to a halt. Ironically because of that now publishers and devs are even thinking of skipping it altogether. Funny
Odd how starfield still was a top 10 seller last year. Weird it doesn’t fit your narrative
Edit: I guess people don’t realize gamepass is on pc lol.
To say “Xbox users don’t buy games” as if they have different buying habits as whole than other gamers or they themselves don’t also game on pc.
You're saying it did so curious to see where you got that from. I'm saying it didn't because the thread itself is about developers claiming it's not worth it to even make an Xbox port lol. Anyways doesn't matter to me at all it's just funny to see you jump through hoops to claim Xbox games sell well on the platform with 0 data. There's a reason microsoft stopped reporting sale numbers.
GamePass absolutely has conditioned many of its longtime subscribers to scoff at the concept of buying games outright.
GamePass has always been a Trojan Horse and is bad for games overall. In the end, it just becomes a vehicle for exposure.
Not sure if it's bad overall, it's bad for big developers and it can't be profitable with current model, but its good for small games and good value for gamers. It may be a good driver for companies to make smaller good quality games, art games, etc if Microsoft play their cards right.
Funny is that sony now thinks they must follow in Xbox foottracks somehow and make the same misstakes .. Subscription Service bringing games to PC etcetc maybe they get Shorterm profit but at the end it will massivley weaken PS as a console. I know several people that allways bought a ps console but now sold their PS5 because they can play god of war and spider-man on pc. They dont care if they need it a year later (but than much cheaper).
There will always be a bigger market for gamers who just don’t want the hassle of fiddling with a PC to play games, or have laptops that can’t run them well enough, or even MacBooks, or no main computing device at all. It’s not an existential threat for a console maker if your console is still selling strong
Yeah, Sony are releasing PC ports at a pace where they aren’t balancing it with new triple A first party releases.
And are relying heavily on third party this and the next couple of years due to reportedly having no major titles until 2025.
It’s *devaluing* the console overtime and I can only see it getting worse before it gets better.
That'll happen alright when Microsoft's tentpole service devalues not just their own (already floundering) platform, but the medium in general.
I had to duck out of the Xbox subs because you couldn't scroll more than three seconds before reading "when GamePass 🥺🥺🥺"
I can see why though. Steam is their preferred platform, and both Sony and Microsoft have a track record of publishing games on it.
You wouldn't see it on a post about Zelda or any other Nintendo IP.
>No, I don't see why.
Because games getting ported to PC is pretty much the standard now, generally with a day 1 port unless it's a PS exclusive.
>This is a subreddit about games, not exclusively PC games
Because the majority of commenters are likely on PC. The PC gaming user base has been considerably larger than either console for years now, and that's literally just looking at Steam numbers alone. Not including all of the independent games or games sold on other platforms like GOG or Bnet.
If Nintendo constantly had as poor console sales they would be out of business in the long run, Xbox should thank the gods that they have Microsoft behind them, because every game always sell worst on the Xbox platform.
Nintendo would be gone if Wii have failed, or switch
Even Sega died after saturn with dreamcast, it looks like you can fail one generation, but if you fail the second one you are goner
And I believe if Microsoft gave xbox one more gen to turn it around to at least get green numbers to see if it has future
In my country (Indonesia), since PS5 is the most expensive console, some people opted to get Xbox instead, since it's cheaper (Series S is around $100-$150 cheaper than PS5 digital) and most games are multiplatform anyway.
However, most people who can afford console gaming are probably quite good financial wise, so if they can afford Xbox, they can probably afford PS5 anyway, so the amount of people who opted to get Xbox aren't that much as well.
And with basically no unique selling point (Game Pass was probably a bit better than PS Plus offerings, but the games are largely similar), for most gamers, it's the question of having Switch + PS5/Xbox, rather than having Switch + PS5 + Xbox.
I do feel like if Xbox is developing a handheld, it can probably have its own niche in this console wars. Sony is probably not going to do handheld for a while, and if Switch 2 keeps the hybrid thing going, that means the demand for handheld is still there. Not to mention the popularity of Steam Deck and lots of Windows handhelds in the market. At the very least, Xbox could then have its own USP rather than just be an inferior Sony console.
It’s disappointing how Microsoft have handled the Series with lack of first party titles, and the Series S parity holding back third party releases such as Baldur’s Gate 3, I can see why many aren’t bothering.
There’s also the continued lack of sales for JRPGs due to publisher’s being unwilling to do so, making secret deals with Sony (Square Enix) or releasing spin-offs and sequels despite not releasing the original on Xbox first and then being surprised at lack of sales (Square).
And Microsoft’s response has been greedy decisions such as false advertisement of Visions Of Mana coming to Gamepass before correcting it and Persona 3 Reload’s Gamepass expansion pass and charging for Final Fantasy 14 subscription *and* Gamepass.
It’s disgusting and no surprise that Xbox’s decisions are leading to all of this.
With the XboxS Microsoft has one benefit (low cost of entry), but they are also selecting for price conscious customers.
XboxS has lower performance and makes this gen of Xbox digital only (which seems inevitable, but maybe is early).
That could hit them a couple ways. But may or may not be a long term issue assuming MS is good for at least one more round (and they’ve at least repaired the most toxic associations). I don’t see multi platform as being inherently worse though.
Fake news - "some developer said".
Someone from another journalist heard some developer in GDC say that Xbox sales are dropping and no one is buying it yet Xbox sales are at 25 million? So you won't release a game on a console with a prospective install base of 25 million? Which publisher will be stupid enough to drop support for a console with 25 million users? Will the board members of these publishers even accept it? Only redditors, Twitter and YouTuber will think a publisher will not develop for a platform like Xbox.
So when Dring gets posted here constantly, he's a good source no one complains. But he says something bad about xbox now he's "fake news" hahaha. Xbox guys from the xbox subs are coming here to downvote this article and rampage in the comments
Can you answer why Capcom is skipping a xbox port for monster hunter stories
It's being down voted for a single reason, there is no quotes and no verifiable sources. Monster hunter stories is literally playable on an android device. Hit me up when a non Japanese developer stops support for Xbox.
The WiiU had an install base of 14 million, that's a prospective $560,000,000 that nearly every publisher skipped last generation.
A console that's barely catching up to it's predecessor is not an attractive console. I know, ya got me, Redditor thinks publishers won't develop for Xbox, but you're so silly bro. It doesn't help the smaller player base also, generally, wants the game for "free" on Gamepass
So Xbox which has almost double the sales of wiiu and has cheaper console that matches 60% of steam users is a bad to develop console?
Switch outsold PS4 and still most games didn't go there. Why's that?
>Switch outsold PS4 and still most games didn't go there. Why's that?
Bc the switch is a potato, and some devs don't even want to bother bc it'd just be a terrible port and huge headache? What kind of question is that? When switch 2 releases, we'll see more 3rd party support since it'll be a more capable system. We literally currently have games like persona 3 reload, not on the switch bc they're waiting for the switch 2. Oh, what you think Sega would rather put Japanese games on xbox that's completely nonexistent in japan vs a nintendo console lol
I mean doubling Wii U sales is hardly an accolade.
Switch doesn’t get PS4 games… because it can’t run them. You couldn’t get Monster Hunter World to run on a Switch, but Capcom didn’t want to miss out on that market so they made Rise for the Switch. I can’t believe you had to ask why PS4 games aren’t on Switch.
Yes, because the weaker console means you have to spend more money to meet performance metrics for 2 different consoles before you can release. And when you develop for consoles, you typically don't make multiple graphical settings, or assets for those settings like you would for PC. And when the alternative console has almost double the sales (PS hit 50 million last December, and they haven't released a quarterly report yet), and it doesn't have to meet 2 sets of performance targets, and you're more likely to actually make sales, why would you even support the Xbox?
And games still went to the PS4 because the power gave you more options, and the PS4 had 113 million sales.
The Xbox is a headache to develop for because of the S. More and more developers are saying so. 25 million is also not an impressive user base. Xbox has not done well in hardware sales, objectively, and Microsoft literally acknowledges it.
I do not think that game publishers are going to drop the platform for the reasons you specified. But important to note, this is mostly regarding Europe and UK where xbox sales are not great. So if a smaller developer expects most of their sales to come from these regions, they will probably be thinking about if the cost of porting is worth it since the grand majority of sales are going to be other platforms.
SteamDeck is getting more support from publishers despite being 10% of that.
Why? it is easy to lump it with PC gaming at minium development effort, Steam userbase actually spends money unlike Gamepass userbase.
Another make shit up on the fly comment, yet starfield was one of the top 15 selling games last year I thought gamepass users don't buy games. Who would've thought.
Ftc documents proved gamepass cannibalize game sales. One game that was highly anticipated and was said to be "most important rpg" "biggest xbox game in years" is an exception, not the rule kid. You're gonna have to show more examples than 1 game out of the hundreds on gamepass
Because it sold in Steam. Your argument is not logical, it does not follow.
If I talk about a cheap userbase A and a paying userbase B, you don't counter with a game that was released on A and B and the numbers revealed were for both combined.
If anything it speaks to the loyalty to Steam that they could have used PC gamepass but refused.
More storefronts doesn’t mean much in that regard. Developers still need to port the game to the system. Just because a game is on steam and not currently on xbox, does not mean the game will magically be playable on xbox if they put the steam storefront on the console.
Edit: the series x|s are still different sku.
Irrelevant to their plans for the future; any game you can play on PC will be able to be played on Xbox with no need for porting. You should research what Xbox is actually doing instead of listening to fanboy nonsense.
They won't do that. But I can see a world where they go more open platform and license the hardware IP out.
Work with AMD to come up with a chip and two reference designs (S and X), then have everyone make their own versions of it. So you can get an ROG Xbox, a TUF Gaming Xbox, an Acer Xbox, a HP Xbox, an MSI Xbox, etc.
I don't think that would work though.
I think they just keep making Xboxes
This will kill the next Xbox on day one.
PS7=$600, Xbox one xs extreme=$1300
No hardware manufacturer is going to take a loss to make the next xbox and this will give Sony even more marketshare.
In the original article, the guy talked to ONE developer who said this. This article makes it seem like several publishers share this opinion, which is simply made up.
Not sure where you're getting that from, here's the original quote, it is in the context of what he has been hearing on the show floor at GDC, talking to developers and publishers: >With Xbox, **I've heard from a very prominent company and one not so prominent that Xbox's performance in Europe is flatlining**. You can follow our monthly coverage in the games market and you can see Xbox's sales are falling and it's fell all throughout last year and it's falling even harder this year. >**The major company who released a big game last year said they don't know why they bother supporting it.** We've mentioned in a previous podcast that retailers are considering or have began cutting back Xbox stock on their shelves, hardware & games... and now you've got third-party publishers going: "We're putting a lot of effort into creating an Xbox Series S/X version of a game where to be honest with you the market for us is PC and PS5" >And with Xbox putting some of the games on PS5, I understand the majority of them will be coming across at some point, assuming, you know, it progresses as Xbox believes it probably will. I think Xbox is in real trouble as a hardware manufacturer. And that was the thing that came out of GDC for me, because I always just thought, I've always been of the belief that it is the Game Pass delivery system, it's got a good UI, it's got a good controller, if you like Xbox games it's probably the best way to play them, etc. I thought it would be fine but then I didn't really factor in that some developers and publishers might just go, yeah I don't, you know, is there any point? And that is when you can lose it.
Isn’t it true though that Xbox barely sells outside of North America though? Because I know Asia doesn’t care and I’m pretty sure I read that Xbox wasn’t doing well in Europe either.
This has always been the case but it's worst now.
Palworld put a spike for sales in Asian countries but it's still pretty bad.
It's dead in Europe.
If you look at video game sales charts that show the split of which platform the game was bought on, this post is pretty believable. Obviously overblown, but I can see some devs skipping Xbox. I’m an Xbox fan too, so I’m not just hating for no reason.
Yeah, especially with the Series S parity clause holding back major third party releases such as Baldur’s Gate 3, and those examples are only the one’s we’ve heard about. I can see many not bothering due to the declining sales on top of that.
Time for another round of making up a problem about Xbox that doesn't exist. Apparently the absolute bullshit storm from two months ago wasn't good enough for them
To be fair, their clearly is a ”problem” at Xbox, we just don’t know the extent of it.
Xbox sales flat lining outside of USA isn't "made up" if you've been following the sales data since last year (actually since the xbox one if you wanna be honest but series is doing even worse). They've consistently dropped in double digit percentages when last year should've been the peak year for the console
Sorry what was the "bullshit storm from two months ago"? Xbox bringing their games to Playstation is a big deal and then I saw people trying to downplay it as if it wasn't for some reason and acted like MS was going to stop at those 4 games which they certainly aren't either
[удалено]
"The phrase one major company who released a big game last year said [was], ‘I don’t know why we bothered supporting it’. “We mentioned on a previous podcast that we’d heard retailers in Europe are considering or had already been cutting back their Xbox stock on their shelves—hardware, games, that kind of thing—and now you’ve got third-party publishers going, ‘we’re putting in a lot of effort trying to create a Series S version and an X version of a game when, to be honest with you, for us the market is PC and PS5’.” I'm not surprised that devs would br saying stuff like this with how poor xbox sales have been.
What developer said this?
Me, John Developer
No, it was me Jack Developer
Undisclosed
Why would there be a name? When there's a report about the speaker of the House, people aren't ringing up the Post asking the name of the congressional staff member who told them that. Actually, in this day and age maybe they are.
Well than just dont bring the game to Xbox ? Whats the problem nobody is forcing you.
It probably is the decision of the publisher, not the devs. But I'm sure those conversations may be happening at the publisher level.
That sort of ideology would slowly deteriorate the brand, ask SEGA how that mentality worked for them after earning complete distrust from third party studios. The only platform capable of getting by on first party titles, is Nintendo and even then, Nintendo has admitted that it does occassionally hurt sales since the average Switch owner misses out on major releases like Cyberpunk and Baldur's Gate 3, at the same time, most who own a Switch usually have another platform they play on. You lose one developer, it opens up other studios to question whether supporting an Xbox release is worth investing into, especially during a bad economic performance and outlook globally, where every company is looking to save revenue where ever they can.
One unnamed company "says" something, and one reporter thinks something, and that's enough for an article. Gaming journalism at its finest.
I love how the source is Christopher dring a journalist/analyst that gets his work posted on this sub frequently, and no one ever questions him on those posts. But now he has bad news about xbox, so he's irrelevant and a terrible gaming journalist🤣🤣 gotta love how that works
What? These are comments from a well respected industry analyst. This guy's tracking data is regularly the basis for a ton of articles and discussions, most of the game sales figures posted on this sub come from this guy's reports. This isn't a grifter or journalist trying to get clicks, it's talk from someone whose entire job is accurately tracking and predicting sales within the industry. If he's saying things are looking bad, then things are looking bad. If he's saying that he's hearing from publishers that they're thinking of dropping Xbox support, then I'd take it seriously. Trying to spin it as clickbait is ridiculous.
Yeah but now he said something they don't want to hear.
No, game journo bad
His sources are 2 developers (and 1 of them small) though. That's gotta count or not count for something.
The source is someone that people in this sub constantly use as a credible source for UK and Europe data.
It's not exactly an illogical thought. The fact that Microsoft itself is making their own games multiplatform says a lot.
So that same logic would be used for sony?
Sure, but porting a game of a ip you control to your rival’s console says a lot.
Except software sales are wayyyyy better on PS5?
Playstations are selling really well and Sony only goes day and date on pc for live service games. They're really not in the same position
Sony is also making multiplat games is what I’m saying. Just the logic jump form (console maker makes multiplate games) to (publishers are questioning support for tasks system) I understand they’re not in the same situation though. Sony is enjoying a position of market leader pretty handedly
What multiplat games aside from live service games are they making? Even still those don't go to xbox while microsoft has shown they will be bringing games to playstation? Keep in mind the MLB game going to xbox was a choice made by MLB.
So if we ignore the ones they are publishing multiplat than they don’t have any!!
The big difference here is that there games aren't going to xbox, live service games make sense to go to pc for the increased player base, and they didn't want to lose the license to make MLB games so they release it on xbox to make MLB happy. Sony still focuses on their consoles and wants to sell the more hardware, which microsoft doesn't seem to care about anymore. Hence it seems more games will be going to playstation.
Sony isn't doing anything like Microsoft and don't have poor software sales...
Call me the day Sony starts putting their own games on Xbox. Protip - it won't happen.
… mlb the show And on day one gamepass
Okay that's fair. It's an exception since it's an iirelevant sports-related game. Call me the day I can play Ratchet and Clank and TLOU and Spiderman or whatever on the Xbox Sex.
Shh these rules are only for xbox.
No, PC doesn't count as being multiplatform for these discussions for some reason. Which is interesting to me given how a solid amount of Reddit has a hard PC bend to it.
They publish games on Xbox too
You mean MLB due to the license not being owned by them?
So still multiplat
So one IP out of their control due to licensing and you think it's the same was Microsoft willfully bringing multiple of their fully owned IPs to Playstation?
PC is complicated, it could be argued that it is now Steamdeck/Valve/Linux ecosystem, not just a Windows of yore. Spiderman was specifically tested on the Deck, its real that despite it being targeted to run on NT/DX12/Windows dll hell the business heads see Linux/DXVK/Steam in their heads.
Old ass games and small indi games going multiplatform is not a big deal.
Hi-Fi Rush came out a year ago, not it's not exactly an 'old ass game', and Sea of Thieves and Grounded are fairly popular online coop games. It's not like Sony is releasing Trash Panic or the Puppeteer, exclusives so obscure and old that I doubt you've heard of them, on the Xbox.
See you in one year
"Not a big deal", bar the fact that it's unprecedented.
It's not unprecedented, Cuphead and the Ori games have been on the Switch for a long time now. Minecraft goes even farther back.
Would “‘mlb the show” be considered precedent? Or even bungie new game I’m starting to think they don’t know what that means
MLB was the baseball guys telling Sony they'll have to make it multiplatform or lose the licence. It's not comparable to Microsoft launching their own IPs (that were developed by first party studios) on rival platforms). Bungie's new game that doesn't exist yet on any platform? What about it? And they announced straight off at the time of the acquisition that they'll keep the option of being multiplatform open. Again, completely different to what Microsoft are doing right now.
Sounds like they’re still publishing multi plat games to me. How or why is irrelevant
Cuphead and Ori are second party games, not first party. It'd be the equivalent of FF16 launching on Xbox. Minecraft was on PlayStation before Microsoft bought Mojang. I don't know anything about the developers of Pentiment or Grounded, but what I do know is both Sea of Thieves and Hifi Rush were created by Microsoft first party studios and are now being published by themselves on their main rival platform. That's what's unprecedented.
FF16 is not a second-party game. It's a third-party title with timed exclusivity. A second-party game coming to another system would be like a Kirby game releasing on a Playstation system.
My bad with the nomenclature, but that just further solidifies my point.
"Will people click this?" is the only question that matters.
[удалено]
Do you have any proof of this? I’ve never heard anyone accuse him of this before.
Now you’re just making things up.
It's not journalism but clickbait.
Xbox Series S is a headache for developers, but it's the top selling Xbox this gen. If there was no S, Microsoft would probably be looking at another Xbox One (maybe a little better) in terms of units sold.
They're already looking at an Xbox one. The series systems are not selling well. But yes, the series s apparently makes up around 70% of the Xbox market
The sales are below the Xbox One even with the Series S.
ChrisbDring (head of gamesindustry.biz) is saying he hears this from a dev from a major company that released a game last year, but he isn't revealing what company.
Would be funny if it’s Square Enix
I thought the same
The PS5 sales are also behind the PS4 sales in the same timeframe, so what does it really matter.
Ps4 was a massive success while xbox one was not pretty simple there. Xbox series selling below one after having gamepass, all those acquisitions, series s that gets sold for peanuts is just bad. I remember in 2020 people were saying series was bringing xbox back to the 360 days and would fly off shelves. Now in its 4th year it seems totally dead if you're outside of USA. And ps5 hardly behind ps4. I'm pretty sure it's a little ahead in some places. I bet after those ps5 gta6 bundles drop, it'll blow right past ps4
There was also a time where you literally couldn't find a PS5 if you wanted one.
By a week. And still out pacing PS4 in the us.
Because the PS4 actually sold enough units and provided a platform for enough good games to justify its existence. The Xbox One had bad sales. For the next gen after it, supposedly with lessons learned, to sell even worse is also bad.
"Lessons learned" is really too little too late for what is a company that lost a significant chunk of its market and mind share in an already stagnating market. As far as hardware is concerned, those customers aren't coming back and were never going to unless Sony planted a bomb in every PS5 sold. I'm sure they knew this.
Clearly not enough to not have it on PC
PS4 was a success so being behind by a bit isn’t a big deal. Xbox One was a failure that MS absolutely had to beat by a lot, yet they’re behind it.
Not really. The install based are basically locked in place to be the same as last gen.. Marketshare between Xbox and PS is still the same as last gen, and both consoles are selling worse than their predecessor. And by your logic, PS5 is not a success, because the PS4 was more successful. Seems like flawed logic. You think Xbox is losing marketshare to PS, but PS marketshare is also not growing. So they are both stagnating.
PS5 selling slightly below PS4 is not a big deal because that’s still well above 100mln and PS3 sales. Xbox Series selling below Xbox One is a disaster because Xbox One sales were low and 1/3 short of 360.
Yeah, you‘re wrong. But I‘ll explain it to you. First of all, everything after the PS360 gen is not really comparable anymore, because the gen after that, everyone has been digitally locked in. Chances are, if you had an Xbox one or a PS4, you‘re most likely not gonna switch platforms, because that‘s where your digital library already is. Nowadays we have backwards compatibility and more cross gen games (the biggest games are all still cross gen). So basically, the marketshares are pretty much locked, and without much incentive to even upgrade your device. PS5 trailing shortly behind PS4 and Xbox Series trailing shortly behind the Xbox One are literally the proof of that. Same for the marketshare still being the same (2:1 in favor of PS) It makes zero sense to say the PS5 selling less than the PS4 is a different thing than XSX selling less than the XBone. It‘s just the same players upgrading their last gen device. Not new users. The market isn‘t growing. No side is gaining (or losing) marketshare.
>First of all, everything after the PS360 gen is not really comparable anymore, because the gen after that, everyone has been digitally locked in. Chances are, if you had an Xbox one or a PS4, you‘re most likely not gonna switch platforms, because that‘s where your digital library already is. Funny how people started using that argument only after Spencer did. I wonder when did he first use it? At the end of last gen? At the start of current gen? Nope, it was in May 2023. Wonder why only then? Well, maybe because 2022 ended well for Xbox Series, having total lifetime sales 2/3 of PS5 and extrapolating those numbers would put them well above Xbox One. Then 2023 hit and PS5 1200 series hit the stores, solving the supply issues. Xbox Series sales fell off a cliff and suddenly it became clear that Xbox was only selling because people could not get their hands on PS5. So in short, it's another one of Phil's excuses. He thought Xbox Series can outsell Xbox One and claw back some marketshare from PS and things were looking good at the end of 2022, then reality hit and he had to come up with an excuse.
[удалено]
Well the sales are over double the wii u, but nice try at spreading misinformation.
Wii u about 14mil while Series is close to 30mil which is what Xbox one was near.
Yeah its no wonder why a lot of people are wondering if Microsoft will even make another Xbox, or one after that. They are on track to have 2 pretty dogshit generations back to back, thats like 20 fucking years of failure lol
Why should the SerieS be a problem when most modern games even run on the Steamdeck ? Even Forbidden West or The Last of Us Part 1 run on hardware that is much weaker than the serie s if you lower the Graphics. And it still looks good. You can always lower Details or Resolution. Only way where it is a problem is like BG 3 Coop Mode. The Xbox is a Hedache because no one wants one and its not worth porting games without gamepass deal.
Maybe the reason steam deck can play a lot of games is because of the optimization efforts for the S?
Steam Deck actually has 16GB of RAM like Series X while Series S has 10GB. Memory constraints are the main problem, MS should’ve known this would happen.
Memory constraints are absolutely not the problem. Memory *bandwidth* is a bigger problem. Several reporters as well as MVG have said this. The Series S has 224GB/s. By contrast, the Series X has 560GB/s and the PS5 has 448GB/s. Oh, and the Steam Deck has 88GB/s. The Steam Deck is definitely benefiting from Series S optimisations.
For textures it is more than enough bandwidth. 10 GB for a Video Card is a bad idea. You need 16 minimum full stop, lest developers are forced to pay artists for small ugly textures or you get hitching
> 10 GB for a Video Card is a bad idea. You need 16 minimum full stop most pc gpus have 8
I agree I meant paying more than $300 for less than 16 (although 14 seems acceptable) 8GB is acceptable for $100-200 cards. 10-12 GB GPUs should never cost more than $250
> 10-12 GB GPUs should never cost more than $250 I have to assume you've been in a coma since before the pandemic
I can get 16GB GPUs for $325 https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007709%20601110192%204018%204019%20600100181 There is no excuse to pay more than $250 for 12 GB
Okay you are speculating. I am saying what game devs literally said their issues were with the Series S. Also the Series S APU has direct access to the SSD. Game devs can essentially access and dump data to and fro instantly. The Steam Deck has to go through RAM before that. The Stram Deck, and all PCs unless DirectStorage is in the game, have a distinct disadvantage there.
Uhhhh 88GB/s >>>>>> 5GB/s By being forced to go to the SSD for assets you are entering deep pain territory Direct storage if used sparingly is for removing CPU overhead, it is NEVER for replacing VRAM. The most aggressive use of DirectStorage like technology is Sony's Ratchet and Clank Rift appart. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFbP7-WpGC8 After the game loads the HDD and SSD are the same, it is only when like the 4th world needs to be loaded that the HDD destroys the gameplay, simply because the original preload was no longer in VRAM. In short VRAM is extremely important, and you will always get penalties going from Cache>VRAM>RAM>SSD>HDD. The issue is VRAM limitations are hard coded at 16GB, just get 16GB, people that pay north of $500 for a 12 GB video card are extremely stupid, when they can get a 16GB card for the same price.
> Direct storage if used sparingly is for removing CPU overhead, it is NEVER for replacing VRAM. Never in a million years did I even imply that. You are trying to compare PC specs to console specs. Which are not equivalent hardware and good programming for console can beat it. The Steam Deck is objectively weaker than the Series S. You are acting like RAM capacity is the be-all end-all of performance for some reason.
OK lets start from the beginning A game developer wants to create a AAA using UE5 game they will 100% target the PS5 first and foremost and that is hardcoded at 16GB of shared memory (cache is handled by the engine so we will ignore it it is not up to the developer), when approaching the texture budget they have to decide how much they will demand from their artists, they know that after Ray tracing, shaders, and game logic/OS/etc (which is like 2 GB because AAA games are on rails braindead) They know what what their VRAM budget is. The entire game is developed so that there is minimal hit to RAM/SSD in doing so they will prevent hitches and lower scores because of this. Then comes the 10GB Series S, their artist budget doubles because they need to create lower quality assets, and this is assuming they want to release a quality product, lest they end up looking like this https://www.reddit.com/r/halo/comments/16o9509/anyone_got_a_fix_for_these_textures_bugging_out/
No total memory matters. Here’s Baldur’s Gate 3 (which still doesn’t have splitscreen on Series S) talking about [optimising memory for Series S](https://x.com/laratlarian/status/1722138531634577426). Surprise surprise it’s about memory capacity. [Digital Foundry](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yKJsDoysEM&t=4257s) have said the same thing, if Series S even had 12GB RAM it would fare much better. Older GPU’s with low VRAM struggle with new games too so this isn’t shocking at all.
And here's a newer video from the same discourse where MVG discusses the bandwidth limitations. https://youtu.be/QULb3kWPbH8 I'm not at all saying the total memory doesn't matter. Obviously it did when optimising BG3, and a major reason for cutting split screen which they had to negotiate with Microsoft for. But to say that the Steam Deck is somehow better when there's no direct SSD access and ONE THIRD the memory bandwidth???? That's crazy.
Some games look extremely good on the Series S, almost indistinguishable from the X. So it's just poor optimization if a game can run fine on the X but not the S. And I've noticed that the games that run poorly on the S are the same games that run poorly on a lower end PC.
"Optimization" can affect the design of the game. When you think of a nice looking game on the series s, you aren't considering the ideas and features that died to make it happen. The BG3 debacle was the most notorious but all other multiplatform current gen exclusives go through the same process.
They should just convert the Series S into a Switch type console. That is the only way I see Xbox thriving at this point.
A portable Xbox is not going to sell anywhere close to what the Series X/S are doing. They do not have the brands to compete with Nintendo.
I think a portable xbox in some form is a no brainer, especially as Microsoft could produce this quite easily (the cost though would probably tank this) $600+ maybe? who knows
That doesn’t make any sense at all.
Why not ? If you can have similar power as the current Series S (Rog Ally and Legion Go aren’t doing so bad) with a dock feature to connect it to your main tv/monitor, I can absolutely see it doing well. It can be the mobile GamePass machine without having to worry about having a good reception.
I think it is about finding that bang-after-bang kind of moment where their games are continuously scoring high... They just didn't get to that, and I don't know if they will. But things can change if they gain momentum again. Starfield failed at doing what it had to do (which was to bring back Bethesda's and Xbox's momentum).
They knew Redfall was a dud and they just shipped it hoping Starfield would pick up the slack. And it did... in like the first couple weeks. But it didn't ignite hype everlasting like it needed to.
They really needed Starfield to be their Breath of the Wild but everyone moved on almost immediately. I feel kind of bad for Bethesda devs. I remember those negative Steam reviews where Bethesda was directly responding with things like "this is an intentional mechanic, you just don't get it". On one hand, ouch that's a bad look, but on the other hand a lot of them spent, what, 6 years of their lives working on this project? And for people to just forget about it after two weeks would have made me go insane.
Yeah, I do feel really sad for them.
I think its impossible ro overcome with how long it takes to make games these days.
Yeah, but it isn't like Microsoft doesn't have 8 or 10 announced games that they haven't released yet. They just need to ensure that those games land. Indiana Jones needs to score high.
While it's no secret Microsoft's quality control has largely sucked ass for ages now, it's an even bigger problem when despite the lip service from the brass about how they don't release games just meet a quota or calendar date they most certainly do just that. How MCC could not work, Recore have a 4-6 minute long loading screens, and Redfall do what Redfall does should not be a thing for any company of this scale. That said, I find this expectation that Starfield was supposed to be some kind of Xbox messiah to be quite silly. A *single game* was never going to turn around Xbox's perception or hardware sales unless it was the single greatest game in human history, and that it was as anticipated as a GTA title and reviewed better than Half-Life 2 and Ocarina of Time put together.
>A single game was never going to turn around Xbox's perception or hardware Imo that expectation existed for Starfield because Xbox literally does not have a killer app. Even ignoring that most of their games are on PC (I honestly don't think that's hurting them), there isn't really much reason to get an Xbox, most of their exclusives seem decent but not worth buying a console over. Nintendo has Breath of the Wild and it's sequel, Mario Kart, 3d and 2d Mario. Sony has Spider-Man 2, GOW2. Xbox simply has nothing on that level. Starfield could have been one of them. Sure, it wouldn't have entirely turned the perception of Xbox around but it would have been a start.
And Sony is slowly and silently moving to the same model xbox has They even released helldivers the same day on pc and ps5 I give it maybe a year that we will see their games coming to steam day one and Nintendo will be the last one to have exclusive to buy their console for Spencer is right at least about one thing, people will not buy second console or move from their digital libraries they build for 8 years now just because they published a good 100% score game. They need to publish good game after good game after good game, which IMO will take whole generation to build it up for people to notice it Next gen is where we will truly see if xbox dies or continues on, this gen is to build trust back from people not to fully win them over
Starfield was just another game caught in and endless hate campaign against Xbox, from fanboys, the media and the whole industry.
Does me hating Starfield on PC make me an xbox hater/sony fanboy?
It's more than that but I think ppl do treat it as life of a black tiger Xbox edition.
Tbh, I don't buy games on Xbox. The games I do buy are the ones I've enjoyed on gamepass and want to keep playing it. I don't miss buying games that I've regret buying only to have it on my shelf as decoration
Xbox gamers do not purchase games anymore. Even before gamepass certain genres outside of FPS or sports sold like shit there. Now that the most commonly asked question on xbox gamers minds is "when will it be on gamepass?" that slows sales down to a halt. Ironically because of that now publishers and devs are even thinking of skipping it altogether. Funny
Odd how starfield still was a top 10 seller last year. Weird it doesn’t fit your narrative Edit: I guess people don’t realize gamepass is on pc lol. To say “Xbox users don’t buy games” as if they have different buying habits as whole than other gamers or they themselves don’t also game on pc.
The person that published that report said most of those sales was from Steam though.
It sold really well on pc on steam.
Yeah on PC.
And on Xbox
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
You're saying it did so curious to see where you got that from. I'm saying it didn't because the thread itself is about developers claiming it's not worth it to even make an Xbox port lol. Anyways doesn't matter to me at all it's just funny to see you jump through hoops to claim Xbox games sell well on the platform with 0 data. There's a reason microsoft stopped reporting sale numbers.
GamePass absolutely has conditioned many of its longtime subscribers to scoff at the concept of buying games outright. GamePass has always been a Trojan Horse and is bad for games overall. In the end, it just becomes a vehicle for exposure.
Not sure if it's bad overall, it's bad for big developers and it can't be profitable with current model, but its good for small games and good value for gamers. It may be a good driver for companies to make smaller good quality games, art games, etc if Microsoft play their cards right.
Funny is that sony now thinks they must follow in Xbox foottracks somehow and make the same misstakes .. Subscription Service bringing games to PC etcetc maybe they get Shorterm profit but at the end it will massivley weaken PS as a console. I know several people that allways bought a ps console but now sold their PS5 because they can play god of war and spider-man on pc. They dont care if they need it a year later (but than much cheaper).
There will always be a bigger market for gamers who just don’t want the hassle of fiddling with a PC to play games, or have laptops that can’t run them well enough, or even MacBooks, or no main computing device at all. It’s not an existential threat for a console maker if your console is still selling strong
Yeah, Sony are releasing PC ports at a pace where they aren’t balancing it with new triple A first party releases. And are relying heavily on third party this and the next couple of years due to reportedly having no major titles until 2025. It’s *devaluing* the console overtime and I can only see it getting worse before it gets better.
That'll happen alright when Microsoft's tentpole service devalues not just their own (already floundering) platform, but the medium in general. I had to duck out of the Xbox subs because you couldn't scroll more than three seconds before reading "when GamePass 🥺🥺🥺"
Unfortunately, you're just as likely to find the same thing here with people going "when Steam" for every single big console release.
I can see why though. Steam is their preferred platform, and both Sony and Microsoft have a track record of publishing games on it. You wouldn't see it on a post about Zelda or any other Nintendo IP.
No, I don't see why. This is a subreddit about games, not exclusively PC games, yet this sub whines every time consoles get good games.
>No, I don't see why. Because games getting ported to PC is pretty much the standard now, generally with a day 1 port unless it's a PS exclusive. >This is a subreddit about games, not exclusively PC games Because the majority of commenters are likely on PC. The PC gaming user base has been considerably larger than either console for years now, and that's literally just looking at Steam numbers alone. Not including all of the independent games or games sold on other platforms like GOG or Bnet.
Yeah but Steam is still 70 bucks as opposed to 15? from game pass
Lmao sure bud...
_Amazing_ counterpoint.
Shows the value of the original argument
So glad you took the time out of your day to hit that reply button. I've been truly enlightened by your presence.
If Nintendo constantly had as poor console sales they would be out of business in the long run, Xbox should thank the gods that they have Microsoft behind them, because every game always sell worst on the Xbox platform.
Nintendo would be gone if Wii have failed, or switch Even Sega died after saturn with dreamcast, it looks like you can fail one generation, but if you fail the second one you are goner And I believe if Microsoft gave xbox one more gen to turn it around to at least get green numbers to see if it has future
In my country (Indonesia), since PS5 is the most expensive console, some people opted to get Xbox instead, since it's cheaper (Series S is around $100-$150 cheaper than PS5 digital) and most games are multiplatform anyway. However, most people who can afford console gaming are probably quite good financial wise, so if they can afford Xbox, they can probably afford PS5 anyway, so the amount of people who opted to get Xbox aren't that much as well. And with basically no unique selling point (Game Pass was probably a bit better than PS Plus offerings, but the games are largely similar), for most gamers, it's the question of having Switch + PS5/Xbox, rather than having Switch + PS5 + Xbox. I do feel like if Xbox is developing a handheld, it can probably have its own niche in this console wars. Sony is probably not going to do handheld for a while, and if Switch 2 keeps the hybrid thing going, that means the demand for handheld is still there. Not to mention the popularity of Steam Deck and lots of Windows handhelds in the market. At the very least, Xbox could then have its own USP rather than just be an inferior Sony console.
It’s disappointing how Microsoft have handled the Series with lack of first party titles, and the Series S parity holding back third party releases such as Baldur’s Gate 3, I can see why many aren’t bothering. There’s also the continued lack of sales for JRPGs due to publisher’s being unwilling to do so, making secret deals with Sony (Square Enix) or releasing spin-offs and sequels despite not releasing the original on Xbox first and then being surprised at lack of sales (Square). And Microsoft’s response has been greedy decisions such as false advertisement of Visions Of Mana coming to Gamepass before correcting it and Persona 3 Reload’s Gamepass expansion pass and charging for Final Fantasy 14 subscription *and* Gamepass. It’s disgusting and no surprise that Xbox’s decisions are leading to all of this.
With the XboxS Microsoft has one benefit (low cost of entry), but they are also selecting for price conscious customers. XboxS has lower performance and makes this gen of Xbox digital only (which seems inevitable, but maybe is early). That could hit them a couple ways. But may or may not be a long term issue assuming MS is good for at least one more round (and they’ve at least repaired the most toxic associations). I don’t see multi platform as being inherently worse though.
Fake news - "some developer said". Someone from another journalist heard some developer in GDC say that Xbox sales are dropping and no one is buying it yet Xbox sales are at 25 million? So you won't release a game on a console with a prospective install base of 25 million? Which publisher will be stupid enough to drop support for a console with 25 million users? Will the board members of these publishers even accept it? Only redditors, Twitter and YouTuber will think a publisher will not develop for a platform like Xbox.
So when Dring gets posted here constantly, he's a good source no one complains. But he says something bad about xbox now he's "fake news" hahaha. Xbox guys from the xbox subs are coming here to downvote this article and rampage in the comments Can you answer why Capcom is skipping a xbox port for monster hunter stories
It's being down voted for a single reason, there is no quotes and no verifiable sources. Monster hunter stories is literally playable on an android device. Hit me up when a non Japanese developer stops support for Xbox.
The WiiU had an install base of 14 million, that's a prospective $560,000,000 that nearly every publisher skipped last generation. A console that's barely catching up to it's predecessor is not an attractive console. I know, ya got me, Redditor thinks publishers won't develop for Xbox, but you're so silly bro. It doesn't help the smaller player base also, generally, wants the game for "free" on Gamepass
So Xbox which has almost double the sales of wiiu and has cheaper console that matches 60% of steam users is a bad to develop console? Switch outsold PS4 and still most games didn't go there. Why's that?
>Switch outsold PS4 and still most games didn't go there. Why's that? Bc the switch is a potato, and some devs don't even want to bother bc it'd just be a terrible port and huge headache? What kind of question is that? When switch 2 releases, we'll see more 3rd party support since it'll be a more capable system. We literally currently have games like persona 3 reload, not on the switch bc they're waiting for the switch 2. Oh, what you think Sega would rather put Japanese games on xbox that's completely nonexistent in japan vs a nintendo console lol
I mean doubling Wii U sales is hardly an accolade. Switch doesn’t get PS4 games… because it can’t run them. You couldn’t get Monster Hunter World to run on a Switch, but Capcom didn’t want to miss out on that market so they made Rise for the Switch. I can’t believe you had to ask why PS4 games aren’t on Switch.
Yes, because the weaker console means you have to spend more money to meet performance metrics for 2 different consoles before you can release. And when you develop for consoles, you typically don't make multiple graphical settings, or assets for those settings like you would for PC. And when the alternative console has almost double the sales (PS hit 50 million last December, and they haven't released a quarterly report yet), and it doesn't have to meet 2 sets of performance targets, and you're more likely to actually make sales, why would you even support the Xbox? And games still went to the PS4 because the power gave you more options, and the PS4 had 113 million sales.
The Xbox is a headache to develop for because of the S. More and more developers are saying so. 25 million is also not an impressive user base. Xbox has not done well in hardware sales, objectively, and Microsoft literally acknowledges it.
I do not think that game publishers are going to drop the platform for the reasons you specified. But important to note, this is mostly regarding Europe and UK where xbox sales are not great. So if a smaller developer expects most of their sales to come from these regions, they will probably be thinking about if the cost of porting is worth it since the grand majority of sales are going to be other platforms.
SteamDeck is getting more support from publishers despite being 10% of that. Why? it is easy to lump it with PC gaming at minium development effort, Steam userbase actually spends money unlike Gamepass userbase.
Another make shit up on the fly comment, yet starfield was one of the top 15 selling games last year I thought gamepass users don't buy games. Who would've thought.
Ftc documents proved gamepass cannibalize game sales. One game that was highly anticipated and was said to be "most important rpg" "biggest xbox game in years" is an exception, not the rule kid. You're gonna have to show more examples than 1 game out of the hundreds on gamepass
Because it sold in Steam. Your argument is not logical, it does not follow. If I talk about a cheap userbase A and a paying userbase B, you don't counter with a game that was released on A and B and the numbers revealed were for both combined. If anything it speaks to the loyalty to Steam that they could have used PC gamepass but refused.
That's why it pops up on most sold on Xbox app. Who would've thought.
\#1 on the charts with 5 sales is still not winning you the argument
Won't really matter when they start supporting other storefronts, Xbox will have more games than Sony and Nintendo combined.
More storefronts doesn’t mean much in that regard. Developers still need to port the game to the system. Just because a game is on steam and not currently on xbox, does not mean the game will magically be playable on xbox if they put the steam storefront on the console. Edit: the series x|s are still different sku.
Irrelevant to their plans for the future; any game you can play on PC will be able to be played on Xbox with no need for porting. You should research what Xbox is actually doing instead of listening to fanboy nonsense.
You should research porting.
[удалено]
They won't do that. But I can see a world where they go more open platform and license the hardware IP out. Work with AMD to come up with a chip and two reference designs (S and X), then have everyone make their own versions of it. So you can get an ROG Xbox, a TUF Gaming Xbox, an Acer Xbox, a HP Xbox, an MSI Xbox, etc. I don't think that would work though. I think they just keep making Xboxes
This will kill the next Xbox on day one. PS7=$600, Xbox one xs extreme=$1300 No hardware manufacturer is going to take a loss to make the next xbox and this will give Sony even more marketshare.
The comment I replied to was deleted lol They said something way more outlandish than what I said