• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

EA Puts foot in mouth, MS has no comment

lupi

Lifer
http://www.seattletimes.com/busines...numbers-point-to-ps4s-big-lead-over-xbox-one/

Sony said earlier this month that it has sold upward of 35.9 million PlayStation 4 consoles. That leaves 19 million for the Xbox One, by EA’s estimate.

Microsoft, for its part, stopped releasing reports of Xbox One unit sales last year, switching the company’s preferred metric to users of the Xbox Live multiplayer and game sales platform. The company on Friday declined to comment on EA’s sales estimate.
 
i'm sure all of the people who own ps4 and xbox one stock on this forum will really care about this news.

Actually this is significant beyond fanboyism, as Microsoft has been considering dumping Xbox entirely and they don't seem to be making much real inroads against Sony this gen, despite all their work. I think that would be foolish, but I could see them look to make it a service and compete with Steam. They could even still make an Xbox system, but it'd be different, make it more like the Surface line, where its good, but is meant as much to help OEMs do their own versions.
 
Actually this is significant beyond fanboyism, as Microsoft has been considering dumping Xbox entirely and they don't seem to be making much real inroads against Sony this gen, despite all their work. I think that would be foolish, but I could see them look to make it a service and compete with Steam. They could even still make an Xbox system, but it'd be different, make it more like the Surface line, where its good, but is meant as much to help OEMs do their own versions.

Says who? The closest I've seen is some market analyst playing armchair quarterback and telling MS how to run it's business. I certainly haven't seen anything close to that come out of MS itself.
 
Actually this is significant beyond fanboyism, as Microsoft has been considering dumping Xbox entirely and they don't seem to be making much real inroads against Sony this gen, despite all their work. I think that would be foolish, but I could see them look to make it a service and compete with Steam. They could even still make an Xbox system, but it'd be different, make it more like the Surface line, where its good, but is meant as much to help OEMs do their own versions.

You do realize the Xbox One has sold like 3x the number of consoles as the Xbox 360 in the first 2 years of it's life right?

Also, EA is ESTIMATING the number of consoles. And, without any real numbers from MS, they are simply guessing.
 
Actually this is significant beyond fanboyism, as Microsoft has been considering dumping Xbox entirely and they don't seem to be making much real inroads against Sony this gen, despite all their work. I think that would be foolish, but I could see them look to make it a service and compete with Steam. They could even still make an Xbox system, but it'd be different, make it more like the Surface line, where its good, but is meant as much to help OEMs do their own versions.

Man, I have these exact thoughts every time I boot up the good ole' Xbone!! All I do is wonder how Microsoft is even making any profit or gaining marketshare, then I get depressed and just play Clash of Clans instead.
 
Actually this is significant beyond fanboyism, as Microsoft has been considering dumping Xbox entirely and they don't seem to be making much real inroads against Sony this gen, despite all their work. I think that would be foolish, but I could see them look to make it a service and compete with Steam. They could even still make an Xbox system, but it'd be different, make it more like the Surface line, where its good, but is meant as much to help OEMs do their own versions.

This really isn't a fair point. That was something rumored long ago, before the launch of the Xbox One, and when it was completely floundering in the media after E3. Since then, it has sold very well, even compared to its predecessor's hot start when it was the only option on the market for a year. It's just made to look bad by what might end up being the best-selling console in gaming history, depending on how long this generation lasts. Microsoft just announced that its XBL totals have gone up again, higher than ever. That service is almost pure profit in large chunks, since the infrastructure exists already.

More likely than a Steam competitor is cross-buy on all Windows 10 devices. We'll see if it happens, I don't expect it, but being able to pay once and play Rise of the Tomb Raideron XB1 and W10 PCs would be nice.

Says who? The closest I've seen is some market analyst playing armchair quarterback and telling MS how to run it's business. I certainly haven't seen anything close to that come out of MS itself.

It's been rumored for some time, often in a tone that Xbox would be spun off into its own business. However, that was with Mattrick's anti-consumer trash talking. Phil Spencer's got the P.R. side down pat, the games are plentiful and of good quality, and I don't see how they could have any issues turning a profit now. The hardware has to be dirt cheap with Kinect out of the way and AMD working on such old tech for the thing.

exactly how has EA put foot in mouth?

factual sales data is factual.

Except nothing about this is factual. It's a half-assed guess based on unstated hypothesis. Also, we don't know for sure if Sony's numbers are sales or shipped, same for EA. We also don't know the metrics EA is using, which have the potential to actually be higher than reality. So, no, it's baseless speculation on EA's part, in some respects, and they didn't over anything to point to the source of the guess.
 
Don't think I care, nor do I have much to add except that I haven't actually played anything on either the PS4 or XB1 in months. I download all the giveaway games for PSN+ and XBL Gold but never really play them. Nothing interesting I guess until SF5 next month.
 
Says who? The closest I've seen is some market analyst playing armchair quarterback and telling MS how to run it's business. I certainly haven't seen anything close to that come out of MS itself.

Does Bill Gates carry enough clout for you to understand they've absolutely been seriously considering doing that?

Gates said he’s certain that “Satya and the team would look at that [selling the Xbox division] and it’s up to them.” If the new CEO chose do so, he would “absolutely” support him.

I really don't get some of you. You people act like its fanboyism when apparently you were just sticking your fingers in your ears and not really paying attention.

Next up are you guys going to try to convince people that the Wii U has been a smashing success and hasn't been problematic at all? Because that is the level of willful ignorance you're exerting to pretend that Xbox is doing fine.

You do realize the Xbox One has sold like 3x the number of consoles as the Xbox 360 in the first 2 years of it's life right?

Also, EA is ESTIMATING the number of consoles. And, without any real numbers from MS, they are simply guessing.

You realize that doesn't matter if they're not making real money from Xbox?

You can keep pretending it doesn't matter, but it is very obvious to anyone paying any attention. Poor sales alone made Microsoft drop Kinect even though they were very adamant about it being an integral part of using an Xbox One. They outright admitted that hurt them and that they were doing it to try and spur sales.

Couple that with them doing price drops and sales and its still not really making a difference in their situation. Likewise they've had the blockbuster games come out, spent money for exclusives, and it still isn't mattering that much.

This really isn't a fair point. That was something rumored long ago, before the launch of the Xbox One, and when it was completely floundering in the media after E3. Since then, it has sold very well, even compared to its predecessor's hot start when it was the only option on the market for a year. It's just made to look bad by what might end up being the best-selling console in gaming history, depending on how long this generation lasts. Microsoft just announced that its XBL totals have gone up again, higher than ever. That service is almost pure profit in large chunks, since the infrastructure exists already.

More likely than a Steam competitor is cross-buy on all Windows 10 devices. We'll see if it happens, I don't expect it, but being able to pay once and play Rise of the Tomb Raideron XB1 and W10 PCs would be nice.



It's been rumored for some time, often in a tone that Xbox would be spun off into its own business. However, that was with Mattrick's anti-consumer trash talking. Phil Spencer's got the P.R. side down pat, the games are plentiful and of good quality, and I don't see how they could have any issues turning a profit now. The hardware has to be dirt cheap with Kinect out of the way and AMD working on such old tech for the thing.



Except nothing about this is factual. It's a half-assed guess based on unstated hypothesis. Also, we don't know for sure if Sony's numbers are sales or shipped, same for EA. We also don't know the metrics EA is using, which have the potential to actually be higher than reality. So, no, it's baseless speculation on EA's part, in some respects, and they didn't over anything to point to the source of the guess.

Sorry but it has absolutely not just been rumors and they've persisted well after the One's launch. See my quote above, that was from about mid-2014. There is absolute pressure on Microsoft over the Xbox. This has been a big issue with high level Microsoft stock owners (for years actually). And yes you can point to it being an issue basically constantly, and the Xbox still going, but Microsoft has changed a LOT in just the last 5 years. They're not at all the same company they were.

Also, sales don't mean anything. IIRC even with the 360 winning in sales it actually only lost Microsoft money.
http://www.neowin.net/news/report-microsofts-xbox-division-has-lost-nearly-3-billion-in-10-years

This is from their just released (in the past week) financial call:
On the one hand, Xbox revenue was down $703 million or 20 percent; total sales volume was down 10 percent, with the company selling 6.6 million Xboxes in the quarter, and average selling price also fell due to the Xbox One price cut.

But everything is fine!

Actually, maybe I need to point some things out to you people. I'm not a fanboy at all. I actually bought a One (largely because I got a good deal on it during holiday sales, and there's a few games I was interested in). I don't own a PS4 and doubtful I will anytime soon.

I am not saying Xbox is going to be killed off tomorrow or anytime soon. They'll almost absolutely let the One run a course of a good 5 years if not longer. I actually think there is a good chance we'll see another Xbox, for a couple of simple reasons. It won't really cost Microsoft that much, and console sales has helped AMD, who I think will make an APU targeting consoles again, and once again offer a good deal. In fact that deal alone is probably why the One wasn't shuttered already (Microsoft and Sony got really good deals for the APUs). If they'd spent money like they did on the 360, I think it would have been killed off already. But they'll be able to shrink their costs (they outright admitted they overbuilt the One to prevent any 360 like issues, and so when they move to 14/16nm, they'll be able to make big gains and be more in line with the PS4), and not lose tons of money. I don't see them having anything that will change the One vs PS4 dynamic though, and Morpheus could be a big boost for Sony I think.

I do think we'll see Xbox change to be more like a Steam Machine. It'll have an Xbox interface (possibly an App or something that could work on mobile, Win10, Xbox, etc), but it will be running over Win10 (which effectively the One is already doing). And I think it will become more like the Surface line in that Microsoft will have their own version, but they'll also push for OEMs to be able to make their own (to keep them from making Steam Machines, or capitalize on the work they already put into making a Steam Machine, if they offer cheap Windows upgrade for it, it'd be a no brainer for OEMs and consumers; largely I think that already happens with Steam Machines, you're better off ponying up a bit more and getting a full Windows one that you can then put SteamOS on if you want or just play Steam from Windows). This will help them make inroads against Steam on PC, while continuing the Xbox brand (which is considered a successful brand by everyone but their stockholders basically), and it would actually I think help them both (get more Xbox Gold subscribers, help bolster their PC gaming.
 
Part of the problem with the 360 losing money was the RROD and all they had to do to handle that situation. It also doesn't matter what Bill Gates says, he isn't the CEO and the head of Xbox is doing a fine job.
 
That quote you took looked only at consoles. It doesn't consider AT ALL what the various branches of Xbox are, or any real details. It says 40% of sales were after a console price cut, suggesting it means less money made for Microsoft. However, it doesn't consider the lowered costs in parts as the tech aged. I'm sure making a 360 in 2004/2005 (early production) was much more expensive than 5 years later, and even the 8 years later than signified the emergence of the newer consoles. On top of that, there is no examination of software or services sales.

What's more, this generation seems quite different. For starters, losses were probably pushed by things like still working with (and spending money to build up) an infant Xbox LIVE system. The consoles last generation were relatively stronger than the new ones, when put next to PCs of their ages. The new consoles seem to not be the money sinks that their predecessors were. So, my best guess is that with the networking stuff seemingly settled, the hardware costs relatively down, and the continually growing XBL subscriptions, the finances of the Xbox division have improved. I don't think you would see Microsoft develop the Elite controller, create a bunch of special, painted consoles, acquire Gears of War, let Call of Duty walk to PS4 with its DLC deals, acquire more development studios, work on more first-party publishing deals, fund the development of Rise of the Tomb Raider in a big way, all while making moves to sell off/kill that arm of the company.

Like Mobile, Microsoft seems to think that gaming is a major player in long-term markets for their Windows 10 experience. Xbox is a brand that can attract the younger consumers. It can familiarize them with Windows 10, then lead to possible Surface and Surface Phone purchases. It's like they're making it a gateway drug to long-term customers for Windows 10.
 
I suppose I could go out and buy a PS4 and be a poser. I would be a poser since I would not be playing with my friends. I pretty much buy into the platform my group is established on, which has been the case since 2001. Of course, some will need to explicitly state that it made no difference what the platform is/was as it was and still is the friends i was playing with.
 
PS4 sold more but both have outsold their predecessors no? I mean I'm sure Microsoft would love to be #1 but they are making money, in the long run they will be fine. Xbox "Two" will be a powerhouse no doubt about that.
 
The funny part of that statement, of course, is how horrible Sony's finances have been for a long time, while Microsoft continues to rake in money as a whole.

But to future's point, I don't agree. Sure, the XB1 is outselling the 360, but I'd imagine that the R&D and overall effort of the Xbox crew is greater than what the 360 had behind it. No, I don't think that the Xbox division is in trouble now, but they're almost outselling the 360 because gaming's so popular that it's hard to NOT do better (which really speaks to the appalling failure of the Wii U).
 
If anything Sony would go bankrupt sooner than Microsoft. PS4 is about the only thing keeping them afloat with their once famous tv's sinking like a stone. Microsoft in contrast can afford to blow it with the xbox. Selling OSs alone could keep them profitable.

Actually this is significant beyond fanboyism, as Microsoft has been considering dumping Xbox entirely and they don't seem to be making much real inroads against Sony this gen, despite all their work. I think that would be foolish, but I could see them look to make it a service and compete with Steam. They could even still make an Xbox system, but it'd be different, make it more like the Surface line, where its good, but is meant as much to help OEMs do their own versions.

I really hope it doesn't happen. I mean, I own a PS4 and am loving this gen. But if Microsoft pulled out the PS5 would be $600 and barely better than this gen. I mean who the hell else is going to keep Sony honest? Nintendo?! I don't think so. The only reason and I mean the ONLY reason the PS4 was a cheaper, more powerful, easy to design for etc. was because the 360 forced Sony to give a f#$%.
 
Microsoft's also taking to giving W10 away to legacy customers for a while longer, and they're not planning to actually release a new OS anymore, just update the old one. As such, the money from OS licenses could dry up. It seems the cloud services like Azure, Office 365, and OneDrive are going to be driving the company's finances long-term.
 
Microsoft's also taking to giving W10 away to legacy customers for a while longer, and they're not planning to actually release a new OS anymore, just update the old one. As such, the money from OS licenses could dry up. It seems the cloud services like Azure, Office 365, and OneDrive are going to be driving the company's finances long-term.

No. Their strategy is selling only "new" Windows licenses that will last a life time on a single machine. PC sellers will still have to buy a license for each machine they ship and enterprise clients will still have to buy licenses. Those are MS's biggest money makers in the OS market anyway. Home users not having to buy Windows 11 or 12 isn't going to hurt MS.
 
No. Their strategy is selling only "new" Windows licenses that will last a life time on a single machine. PC sellers will still have to buy a license for each machine they ship and enterprise clients will still have to buy licenses. Those are MS's biggest money makers in the OS market anyway. Home users not having to buy Windows 11 or 12 isn't going to hurt MS.

It absolutely matters. You don't have people paying to upgrade anymore. There are plenty of users who keep their hardware for 2 OS cycles (5+ years). For example, my sister's home-built desktop started on Windows 7. She paid the $40 W8 upgrade, and is now going to W10 for free. Without the upgrade discounts of those OS releases, her payments would probably be close to $150, maybe even $200.

The matter of self-built PCs, I'm not sure of. Are they going to make me buy a new copy of Windows if I upgrade my PC? If not, then I don't get what your point is. If they do that, then which parts do and don't count in that scenario? Do I have to repurchase the OS if I change my GPU? CPU? RAM? HDD? SSD? Motherboard?
 
It absolutely matters. You don't have people paying to upgrade anymore. There are plenty of users who keep their hardware for 2 OS cycles (5+ years). For example, my sister's home-built desktop started on Windows 7. She paid the $40 W8 upgrade, and is now going to W10 for free. Without the upgrade discounts of those OS releases, her payments would probably be close to $150, maybe even $200.
Huh? MS would lose the $40 from you sister. Hardly a huge deal.

The matter of self-built PCs, I'm not sure of. Are they going to make me buy a new copy of Windows if I upgrade my PC? If not, then I don't get what your point is. If they do that, then which parts do and don't count in that scenario? Do I have to repurchase the OS if I change my GPU? CPU? RAM? HDD? SSD? Motherboard?

Maybe you don't know this, but an OEM license of Windows is only good for the system you built. Changing I believe the CPU and MB is their idea of a "new PC". However, you can still call to get activated and if you have a reason such as "mb and cpu died" they let you.

MS makes the lion's share on enterprise licenses and companies like Asus and Dell. That will still continue. The only OS pricing model changing is user updates on a valid license, which will be similar to the Windows 8 to Windows 10 model of no cost.
 
It absolutely matters. You don't have people paying to upgrade anymore. There are plenty of users who keep their hardware for 2 OS cycles (5+ years). For example, my sister's home-built desktop started on Windows 7. She paid the $40 W8 upgrade, and is now going to W10 for free. Without the upgrade discounts of those OS releases, her payments would probably be close to $150, maybe even $200.

The matter of self-built PCs, I'm not sure of. Are they going to make me buy a new copy of Windows if I upgrade my PC? If not, then I don't get what your point is. If they do that, then which parts do and don't count in that scenario? Do I have to repurchase the OS if I change my GPU? CPU? RAM? HDD? SSD? Motherboard?

If you change the Motherboard and CPU and attempt a clean install your license will not be valid any longer. You will have to purchase a new one.
 
Huh? MS would lose the $40 from you sister. Hardly a huge deal.

No, they would have lost about $100-150 from my sister because they didn't charge for W10 and had a discount for an early W8 upgrade. Not sure how you came to that number in any way, since my argument was that they are throwing out money by not charging customers typical, full prices to upgrade, and now making the OS free to upgrade for a year for the vast majority of folks.

If you change the Motherboard and CPU and attempt a clean install your license will not be valid any longer. You will have to purchase a new one.

The obvious question then, what if you only change one of them? If your board dies, but you keep the same CPU, what happens? What if you are an AMD person who's able to keep a board across generations? What if you are using W10 from a W8 upgrade whose key predates that matter?

Regardless, I'm in CS, and my school gives me the OS for free. Nothing I have to worry about.
 
No, they would have lost about $100-150 from my sister because they didn't charge for W10 and had a discount for an early W8 upgrade. Not sure how you came to that number in any way, since my argument was that they are throwing out money by not charging customers typical, full prices to upgrade, and now making the OS free to upgrade for a year for the vast majority of folks.
I came up with that number because YOU said it. She paid $40 for Windows 8, and then got free Windows 10. Also, MS already doesn't make money every year on OS upgrades. They make money on PC builders paying for each license and on companies paying for them. MS doesn't care about users buying their OS. It is such a small market they aren't losing any real income.

The obvious question then, what if you only change one of them? If your board dies, but you keep the same CPU, what happens? What if you are an AMD person who's able to keep a board across generations? What if you are using W10 from a W8 upgrade whose key predates that matter?

Regardless, I'm in CS, and my school gives me the OS for free. Nothing I have to worry about.

You don't have a key that predates this model for OEM copies of Windows. It has been that way for a long time (XP at least). An OEM copy of Windows 7 should not activate on a new MB or CPU combination than the one it was originally activated on. However, this generally isn't an issue because you just use the help or call MS and tell them you had to replace faulty hardware and acknowledge that copy of Windows is only activated on one machine and are good to go.
 
Back
Top