Open link in next tab
Xbox Console Sales Are Tanking
https://kotaku.com/xbox-ps5-sales-exclusivity-starfield-microsoft-1851436748
No wonder Microsoft is exploring bringing its games to PlayStation 5
ā¢
I didn't see that coming, and it's a welcome development. If it warps the general PC hardware market enough that devs start optimizing for a standard platform, it'll result in less buggy products at launch. And maybe orienting development towards a relatively underpowered platform will make it easier for those of us dumb enough to that like to spend more on a desktop to hit those 60 FPS targets.
I think it's more important that it gives Valve a method of avoiding being shoehorned into a "Windows only world". The Steam Deck is largely why Linux has pushed past 2% market share on the Steam Hardware Survey consistently now. Holo, which is the codename for SteamOS on the Deck, makes up over half of Steam on Linux.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not dillusional. Windows is still far and away the majority platform and will be for some time. However, there is a real, functional choice now that didn't exist a few years ago.
Chicken and Egg. Linux is barely above 2%. When it breaks 10-20% market share, I expect companies will start making native ports more common.
The fact that proton/dxvk/vulkan/wine let's things just work with little to no changes is already pretty incredible.
ā¢
Chicken egg problem is exactly why incentivizing (which is not the same as mandating) would make sense.
ā¢
True, but even if Steam were to offer a x% lower cut on sales for Linux users if the developer makes a Linux-native build, it'd still not entice many to build and maintain a native port if they are only saving x% off a tiny y% of users. Other poster's point being that incentives like this would actually become enticing to companies when Linux market share (Proton users) increases.
Doubtful Steam is gonna offer a share cut on all sales when it runs on Proton for the 2% of userbase using Linux, and from that only a minority would care whether or not it's native anyway.
ā¢
Valve could start by releasing a Steam Deck SDK for Visual Studio that exposes an "Export to Steam Deck" option when targets the latest release of Steam Linux Runtime.
Currently they offer Docker containers which is good but could be improved.
Back when Steam Machines were a thing and Valve tried to only push Linux native games, game developers got placements on Steam Store's landing page banner in return.
ā¢
The benefit of Steam is backwards compatibility. The moment you force native porting you lose your greatest benefit. Since you anyway have to build backwards compatibility with Windows you gain nothing by incentivizing native Linux and the developers gain nothing from being incentivized to build native because their games will work through Proton.
There's no reason for Valve to incentivize native builds. It's the devs that need to have an incentive to develop natively for Linux. And with the market share being what it is there's no incentive for the devs either.
ā¢
I see you don't know about Steam Linux Runtimes which are backwards and forwards compatible. 1.0 ("scout") is based on Ubuntu 12.04, so already 12 years of binary compatibility.
ā¢
I think you're missing the point. It's not about OS backwards compatibility, it's user library backwards compatibility. Imagine if proton didn't exist and you have 15 years of Steam library that has expanded on a yearly basis. You now buy the Steam Deck to play your library. What games can you play? I guarantee you couldn't play 99% of your library because less than 1% of all games on Steam have been made natively for Linux. If you can't play 99% of your library what's the point of owning the deck? This is why Valve is pouring money into Proton, because Proton is the tool that gives users backwards compatibility for their library. Without proton the Steam Deck would be an utter failure.
It's also why they don't need to incentivize native builds, because they already solved that problem on their own with Proton. Why put effort into having developers develop native builds when you could just put that effort into Proton and essentially get the same result (and extra benefits) without hoping the developers do something they didn't want to do in the first place?
ā¢
I think youāre missing the point. Itās not about OS backwards compatibility, itās user library backwards compatibility.
I never proposed to ax Proton, so I'm not the one here missing any points.
Itās also why they donāt need to incentivize native builds, because they already solved that problem on their own with Proton. Why put effort into having developers develop native builds when you could just put that effort into Proton and essentially get the same result (and extra benefits) without hoping the developers do something they didnāt want to do in the first place?
I explained several times already that game updates breaking Proton compatibility is a real thing that would not have happened with native games.
Game developers develop for dedicated platforms other than Windows all the time. They're called game consoles. Native games don't just mysteriously break on updates or suddenly ban players because the game developer out of the blue decided that Proton is cheating. First launch of games doesn't annoy with those stupid Microsoft runtime installer scripts, etc. Proper native games could be optimized the way console games are instead of relying on multiple levels of Windows compatibility layers (the newest BS Proton has to deal with is gamepad compatibility for launchers via a special input wrapper) ā they are just a smoother experience all around.
ā¢
Proton is so good that devs have actually gotten better performance by dropping their native Linux build and just running a proton-emulated version in Linux š
ā¢
And then they release an update for their game and it breaks on Proton. Happens every now and then. A proper native build would not have that problem.
It doesn't really matter though, because Wine is mature enough that it's not a hacky diy fix, it's a viable solution. None of the games I play run any worse on Linux than they did on Windows, and some run better. The vast majority of people don't care whether it's native or not, they just want it to work.
ā¢
how i personally see it is that it welcomes devs to set a new minimum pc requirement to target. due to valve not doing contstent iterations (which imo is actually a good thing), it gives people a point of performance comparison reference to when wanting to play a new title.
ā¢
I am not a marketing expert, but when headlines pile up implicating that Microsoft doesn't fully stand behind XBox anymore, no wonder the number for new customers tank. I wouldn't "invest" in something that seems to be on the way out either.
ā¢
Judging by how Sony is doing even though they clearly "won" with the PS5, it looks like consoles as we know them are not long for this world, and that seems to be the idea Microsoft is pivoting around.
ā¢
Xbox should just go straight pc game setup for the living room. A mass produced windows (I know, blegh) pc with a pretty solid gpu and Xbox controllers. Basically the steam deck treatment for the living room.
ā¢
That's pretty much what the Xbox has been since the beginning. The original runs fucking directX and runs so similarly to PCs of the era under the hood that porting shit to it is famously easy. It's why the homebrew scene for it was so mind bogglingly huge.
Numerous times at E3 when they had demo units of new consoles people saw that the debug menus meant for staff were some mangled form of the current (at the time) Windows OS.
Most modern game consoles don't use much specialty hardware anymore. The OG Switch uses the nvidea shield CPU just downclocked, and can run android easily. Some emulators literally run better on the Switch through Android than as homebrew "native" apps.
ā¢
Yes, but games were always "xbox" games. I straight up mean open for pretty much all PC games to run on. If a game dev makes their game work with an x box control scheme, you can play it.
Or if you want to plug in a mouse and keyboard. Or they could support controller mapping, like Steam. Or they could just let you install Steam on it.
ā¢
And it is very bad for the consumers, as the console market highly needs the competition. Itās a shame how MS is dropping the ball with Xbox
ā¢
I still believe their naming conventions has destroyed the brand.
Grandma that wants to buy a toy for their kids can go to the store and buy the next PlayStation. Xboxā¦ which one do they buy? They donāt, they buy the easy option.
ā¢
This happened to me! I thought I was buying the newest gen. But thenā¦games I was trying to buy were ānot optimized for your console.ā
Iām still not sure which one I have. I think I have the ONE S. But the games Iām looking to buy are āoptimized for X|S series,ā butā¦donāt work on my console. Iām moving to PlayStation soon.
Also, I have a feeling all that news a few months ago about how theyāre gonna stop support for Xbox and may not continue to make games for it or will shut down the console division or whatever cannot have helped sales. I donāt remember the articles exactly. But the impression I was left with was Xbox was on its way out. Why would I buy another if theyāre unsure of its future?
ā¢
This is exactly what happened with my mom trying to buy a Christmas gift for my nephew. She knew he had an Xbox but had no clue which version it was so she didn't know which version of a game to get. I told her to just buy an Xbox store gift card and call it a day, much easier than trying to figure out which version of the console he had. Didn't want her to buy him a disc if he had the Series S.
ā¢
It's not like you can buy a 360 or One in the store though. They're selling two versions of the same model.
I have seen people very confused about which games will run on their system, though. Most are still cross compatible with XB1 and Series X, but some are Series X only now and the boxes aren't marked clearly enough for some people to tell the difference.
Admittedly I don't play on Xbox, but yeah their console naming is baffling to me and I honestly don't know/can't be bothered to figure it out. PlayStation is simple. Bigger numbers equal newer. Pro version? Just a modest step up but still clearly identifies as the same Gen.
When Xbox launched the One, I thought, "oh they're going to reset the numbering convention. It's awkward now but will be easier going forward." Boy was I wrong.
On the other end there's Nintendo, but the names are so different and distinct it's easy enough to distinguish (except whatever the hell Wii U was).
Microsoft seems caught in the middle. They clearly didn't want to be like PlayStation, but they don't want to/can't come up with unique names, so you get just a mouthful of nonsense letters and numbers.
ā¢
Microsoft have sucked at naming things basically forever. Look at their windows versions. First they were numbered after the year release which made sense, they kind of break the trend with millennium edition but it's still sort of worked because it came out in 2000. Was also a 2000 which confused things and then after that it just continued to go downhill.
95, 98, 2000 (presumably because they didn't want to call it 00), XP, Vista, 7, 8, 10 (because nine is evil for some reason), 11
There's a rumor the next version is going to be called X, I assume because they haven't really advanced as a company since the '90s and they still think that's cool.
(because nine is evil for some reason)
Keeps support for poorly coded programs working. In the old days, a quick and hacky way to determine which Windows version the system was on was to have the program check the OS name. If the name started with the characters "Windows 9" you knew it was either Win95 or Win98 and ran in one mode, but if it was something else it ran in the other mode. If the new OS was named Windows 9, then certain old programs would break when run on it. Yes, the people who would have coded that way are idiots, and sure, the number of people running those programs may be in the single digits, but Microsoft has been pretty serious about maintaining backwards compatibility, even if that means ever more cruft and jank.
The other reason is marketing. "See? It's not anything like that awful Windows 8! We skipped all the way to 10 to demonstrate how different it is! Please come back!"
ā¢
That's a good point that I hadn't considered as I thought the sentiment was solely toward the console itself. It may be a blessing in disguise though as now grandma can just buy you a gift card if she's unsure which version of game to buy, so that way you don't wind up with some off-brand game you'll never play.
The only thing I will concede is that being able to shorten Xbox One X to XbOX was clever. Naming it the Xbox One in the first place was mind numbingly stupid, though.
ā¢
I used to have a black XBox sitting beneath the TV gathering dust. I think it is a One by the shape. As for the new ones I have no idea off the top of my head which is the best. I've seen some on sale in places, but the impulse buy isn't there because I have no idea what I would be getting. I don't own a PlayStation, but if I wanted one I know that 5 is the newest, and you can get the small slim one or the big Pro one.
ā¢
It's pretty late in its life, could be that anyone who would be a potential sale got one at this point? I remember that being, at the time, the reason for the sharp decline in Ocarina of Time sales in Japan, they effectively sold one to everyone who has an N64 so they "maxed out".
ā¢
According this chart from Ars Technica the switch and ps5 were still growing during the same period so then the question would be why the number of Xbox potential buyers is so much smaller than the others.
ā¢
Yeah I'm trying to look at this and understand almost anything from this and it's actually impossible.
ā¢
Yeah I think they shouldāve at least color coded each console with the companies color instead of picking arbitrary colors.
ā¢
Any new purchasers (I am one) are also probably waiting for the mid-generation update coming later this year.
ā¢
Well according this chart from Ars Technica both the ps5 and switch were growing during the same period of time.
ā¢
I'm biased but I really think Nintendo might be the last one standing in the system market in 2/3 gens
I think PlayStation will still be around for the more high end games since Nintendo consoles are usually underpowered. And exclusive games
I also can't imagine Nintendo's next console not being a mobile one so I think there's definitely a market for a traditional stationary console.
Well, they've already announce that they're just doing a slightly upgraded switch for their next console
No, they haven't. https://lemmy.world/post/14770183
First off, that's not Nintendo. That's a third party controller manufacturer. Secondly, they're basing that entirely off the specs they got for new controllers and docks. All that's really confirmed by the article is that the next system will have a similar form factor with iteratively improved controllers and docks. Which is in the 'fucking obvious' category. Their speculation about the actual internal hardware specs was pulled straight from their ass.
ā¢
Yeah I had a read up and there's been almost nothing from Nintendo, so everything is educated guesses at best
When Xcloud eventually (promises, promises, Phil) gets purchased games access, there'll be no need for the console anymore. Hell, PC gamers could (in theory, anyway) play GTA VI by buying the Xbox version and playing it on Xcloud (again, if purchased games comes to it, it's been promised for years).
ā¢
I have no interest in my gaming experience being at the mercy of network latency. It's bad enough for online games, but there's no getting around that other than physically going to the same location as everyone else you are playing with. Big no for single player games. If cloud gaming does replace locally computed gaming, it will be another case of enshitification.
I have a buddy with a catering gig who works on film sets all over, an RV trailer with kitchen and a tv and Xbox in the back that weād fire up in between meal times. No wifi when youāre filming a snowboarding video in the mountains ā¦if they force that into every game then him and people like him will just stop buying new games altogether.
ā¢
Someone at Microsoft thinks they can sell the expensive razor blades without selling razors. Probably why they purchased Activision.
Itās a shame because Microsoft made some interesting hardware for a while.
ā¢
Theyāve made a lot of good peripherals like keyboards, mice, joysticks. Xbox one used to support Kinect and TV tuners which was nice.
The surface line has been interesting, and Iād be tempted to buy one if they didnāt come with Windows 11 (I need to look up if you can install Win 10 on the newer ones).
They came out with some wild stuff during the Sidekick phone days like Microsoft Kin and Zune. But honestly current management doesnāt seem to be interested in anything but boring but profitable software services (like Xbox game pass) that they can charge a subscription for.
Edit: I wish Zelifcam hadnāt deleted his comments. They were good questions/conversation.
ā¢
As someone who has dealt with a couple dozen Surface devices in a corporate setting, I cannot recommend them. They're fine when they work. When they have issues though, they are practically impossible to repair. Keyboard port issues, dock connection issues, bricked devices, and even expanding batteries are all issues I've run into. When you have an issue, Microsoft will just swap it out for a different one rather than fix the device.
ā¢
At an old company I joined they had rolled them out to all employees. Six months before me getting onboard they had already given up, but we still had to support the ones out in the field. Fun fact about Surfaces, despite it being MS hardware running an MS operating system, the Windows 10 and 11 base system does not have drivers for the keyboard or mouse. You have to use a special image for the Surface devices. That meant maintaining two custom WIM images for deployment and keeping them in sync. We scrapped the remaining Surfaces and gave people the choice of Macs or ThinkPads instead. You can guess which was more popular among the office folk.
ā¢
I'm really curious when Microsoft will start seeing the fruits of all their purchases. They've bought up a lot of game devs. Seems modern games cook for 3-4 years before publishing, so some might be turning up soon.
ā¢
I think next generation could have some.pretty good Microsoft exclusives. If they had a Xbox handheld next Gen I would buy it. Otherwise I will pass honestly. I've had every Xbox since the original. I'm old and just play steamdeck now!
ā¢
Microsoft has pushed and pushed and pushed and finally achieved their goal of going digital-only with Game Pass. I'm 100% confident that the next console won't have physical media options, so I probably won't be getting it as I don't want Microsoft dictating whether I own something or not.
ā¢
I used the 360 as my main console back in the day because it was getting all the good games and multiplats usually ran better on it. I got a PS3 in late 2009 when the price dropped and it started getting worthwhile exclusives. When Microsoft tried to pull that always online crap with the One, they lost me forever. Since all of their games are on PC day one, there's even less reason for me to get one.
ā¢
I personally would by a ps6 in a heartbeat, and likely the switch 2. I've bought an Xbox one which I sold after the dust on it got too much, and a series x whoch also never gets turned on. 2 gen burns in a row is enough for me to exclude it from my console purchase next gen.
I'll probably get the Switch 2 when they do their mid-gen refresh model, but I think I'll skip the PS6. Sony ports their stuff to PC after a few years now and I'm a patient gamer type anyway.
ā¢
The switch 2 it's just an upgrade. You're still going to be able to play all the same games
This is what Microsoft has been actively moving towards since at least the planning of windows 8.
Why bother losing money on physical consoles when you can get people to pay for xbox live on pc?
ā¢
They tried and failed to get people to pay for Xbox Live on PC. I'm surprised they still charge for it on consoles.
ā¢
Maybe that fact that nearly all first party games mid at best, you still have to pay a monthly fee for multiplayer games, the terrible UI and the fact that 1TB of extra harddrive space costs 200ā¬ have something to do with it?
I still have never seen whatever the newest version of xbox is called in the stores. I've seen PS5's now and then, but still never even seen an xbox to buy.
I'm a cloud gamer because I do not have much expendable income. I definitely am not interested in consoles. If my situation improves, I will go back to PC.