Xbox Game Studios Stupidity Hate Thread Game Pass Edition

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Xbox having the worst period for hardware sales ever
PlayStation having the worst period for hardware sales since like 2000.

It’s like these companies feel entitled to not lose a dime on their hardware that’s use to make up their console losses with game sales, accessories, and services. Who knew that some out of touch execs thought it was fine to continue to jack up prices in a bad economy?

Console prices - $600-900 dollars
New games - $60 to a $100. And that’s almost all digital
Services - $10-$25.
Accessories - $60 to $400
Microtransactions - Enter price here.

Like, who wants to pay these prices? It’s like all going digital, jacking up the price for everything year after year, and chasing dying trends is coming to a head.
The industry's chickens have finally come home to roost thanks to the AI bubble. I never would have guessed that would be the straw that broke the camel's back but a lot of issues came to head at the same time: big studios making games that no one wants, rising hardware prices, bloated game development teams and execs gambling on what they think will be the next Fortnite with hundreds of millions of dollars.

All the chuds they ignored and alienated saw how unsustainable this all was but understanding basic economics is problematic to the average AAA game dev.
 
Like, who wants to pay these prices?
Midwits love to bring up 'MUH INFLATION' to argue that actually none of this is that bad and really we're lucky prices aren't even higher, but they never consider that nobody gives a fuck about inflation: there's a hard ceiling on what most people are willing to pay for a device they don't actually need that only does one thing other devices they already own don't.

The main selling point of consoles was always they were significantly cheaper and more convenient than a gaming PC: you accepted you were getting weaker hardware that does less in exchange for ease of use, cool exclusives and not having to buy a bunch of extra shit (monitor, keyboard + mouse, speakers etc).

For example, a top-end PC in 1997 cost about $4,000 just for the tower (source), a PS1 cost $149, the N64 and Saturn cost $199. If you want the best console experience in 2026 a PS5 Pro with disc drive costs $979, a 2TB Steam Machine costs $1,400, but you can buy/build a solid gaming PC for between $1,200-$2,000 (probably much less if you really know your stuff).

TL;DR Unless you desperately need to play the aggressively mid, DEI-ridden console exclusives of the 9th generation or are addicted to trophies/achievements there's no longer any reason to buy a console over a PC.
 
Looks like the golden goose isnt producing like it used to.

Microsoft had been using profits from Activision-Blizzard to subsidize the XBOX brand, but after Call of Duty had an off year, it added another issue to the pile XBOX faced.

“Putting Call of Duty into XBOX Game Pass cannibalized both sides. As players fled the $30 price tag, there was less money for XBOX Game Pass to subsidize Call of Duty’s cannibalized sales for those who remained. The model broke under its own weight and had to be reset back to its lower price, wiping out a year or more of growth,” the report notes. “With XBOX unable to acquire hardware to sell to find new members in XBOX Game Pass, which has been the pot of money XBOX has been using to subsidize other parts of the business, once again, the model began to break down.”

Microsoft Reportedly Used Activision-Blizzard to Subsidize XBOX
 
Duh. Microsoft is looking to sell Xbox to another company like Google or Apple. They want to make it look as profitable as possible for when the big fire sale of Xbox and Microsoft Gaming happens next generation.
Tim Cook walks on stage and announces that Apple now owns Halo, proceeding to break the minds of every remaining diehard fanboy.
 
you accepted you were getting weaker hardware
Actually only true since the PS4/Xbox One gen when MS and Sony literally started building weak PCs instead of consoles. Previously consoles always had an edge on PCs on release, sometimes even for a long time. Consoles are just complete dog shit shit these days.
 
Previously consoles always had an edge on PCs on release, sometimes even for a long time.
Then why were console versions almost always inferior to their PC counterparts? Doom on the SNES looks and runs markedly worse than the original, Quake II on PS1/N64 ran at a much lower resolution with worse textures and animations; Half Life, Max Payne and Deus Ex all had to make concessions and add extra loading screens just to run on PS2, and any multi-platform game on the PS3/360 looked and ran best on PC.

A lot of these ports were still amazing (especially Quake II on PS1), but I don't think I've ever seen an example of a console version of a game being superior to PC.
 
Then why were console versions almost always inferior to their PC counterparts? Doom on the SNES looks and runs markedly worse than the original, Quake II on PS1/N64 ran at a much lower resolution with worse textures and animations; Half Life, Max Payne and Deus Ex all had to make concessions and add extra loading screens just to run on PS2, and any multi-platform game on the PS3/360 looked and ran best on PC.

A lot of these ports were still amazing (especially Quake II on PS1), but I don't think I've ever seen an example of a console version of a game being superior to PC.
There was a time, mostly during 7th gen, when a lot of AAA games got terrible PC ports. Some were poorly optimized while others had terrible DRM like Games for Windows Live. Battlefield 3’s server browser only worked on an actual browser.
 
Midwits love to bring up 'MUH INFLATION' to argue that actually none of this is that bad and really we're lucky prices aren't even higher, but they never consider that nobody gives a fuck about inflation: there's a hard ceiling on what most people are willing to pay for a device they don't actually need that only does one thing other devices they already own don't.

The main selling point of consoles was always they were significantly cheaper and more convenient than a gaming PC: you accepted you were getting weaker hardware that does less in exchange for ease of use, cool exclusives and not having to buy a bunch of extra shit (monitor, keyboard + mouse, speakers etc).

For example, a top-end PC in 1997 cost about $4,000 just for the tower (source), a PS1 cost $149, the N64 and Saturn cost $199. If you want the best console experience in 2026 a PS5 Pro with disc drive costs $979, a 2TB Steam Machine costs $1,400, but you can buy/build a solid gaming PC for between $1,200-$2,000 (probably much less if you really know your stuff).

TL;DR Unless you desperately need to play the aggressively mid, DEI-ridden console exclusives of the 9th generation or are addicted to trophies/achievements there's no longer any reason to buy a console over a PC.
You forgot to add in online fees, that ps5 pro turns to $1379 with 5 years of online time.
 
Then why were console versions almost always inferior to their PC counterparts? Doom on the SNES looks and runs markedly worse than the original, Quake II on PS1/N64 ran at a much lower resolution with worse textures and animations; Half Life, Max Payne and Deus Ex all had to make concessions and add extra loading screens just to run on PS2, and any multi-platform game on the PS3/360 looked and ran best on PC.

A lot of these ports were still amazing (especially Quake II on PS1), but I don't think I've ever seen an example of a console version of a game being superior to PC.
why was the spongebob movie video game on consoles different from the one on pc? xbox and playstation got action platformers but on pc it was a point and click adventure game
 
There was a time, mostly during 7th gen, when a lot of AAA games got terrible PC ports. Some were poorly optimized while others had terrible DRM like Games for Windows Live. Battlefield 3’s server browser only worked on an actual browser.
True but that wasn't the fault of the games or the hardware but the retards in management (shoutout to EA making Sim City always online and killing the franchise), just like the PS3 port of Bayonetta being borederline unplayable despite the console being much more powerful than the 360 which ran it fine.
You forgot to add in online fees, that ps5 pro turns to $1379 with 5 years of online time.
I don't wanna sound like a shill but at least with PS+ I always find I get my moneysworth, and I don't even play anything online.

It's still fucking dumb to charge for online multiplayer and cloud saves but I get 36 "free" games a year and even though most of them are mid I only need 3 or 4 bangers to get what I paid for.
 
Consoles have become gimped faggot PCs rather than plug in play video game devices. I think we would all love a system where you hook it in, put in a cart then press power on.
 
Then why were console versions almost always inferior to their PC counterparts? Doom on the SNES looks and runs markedly worse than the original, Quake II on PS1/N64 ran at a much lower resolution with worse textures and animations; Half Life, Max Payne and Deus Ex all had to make concessions and add extra loading screens just to run on PS2, and any multi-platform game on the PS3/360 looked and ran best on PC.

A lot of these ports were still amazing (especially Quake II on PS1), but I don't think I've ever seen an example of a console version of a game being superior to PC.
I said on release.
1782664461366.png
Another example: Show me a PC racing game that could compete with Gran Turismo 3 when it came out.
 
I said on release.
Okay, so what you actually meant was with console you got to play worse versions of PC games several years after they originally released.
Another example: Show me a PC racing game that could compete with Gran Turismo 3 when it came out.
So that would be one of the exclusives I mentioned in my original post which were tailored to the system's bespoke hardware and a USP of consoles.

In other words you're citing a benefit that used to exist and doesn't any more because, as you said, modern consoles are just gimped PCs.
People make fun of the PS5 for having no gaems which is valid but I genuinely cannot name a single game off the top of my head that is exclusive to the Xbox Series S.
I found this list of the best Xbox exclusives, and the only game on that isn't at least also on PC is Indiana Jones And The Great Circle, which has since come to PS5 and Switch 2 and according the Wikipedos did release on PC at the same time as Xbox so the journoscum couldn't even get that right.

Other than that the only Xbox exclusives are for the 360 or OG Xbox, and the Series consoles can't run most of them.
 
Última edición:
I don't think Microsoft wants to sell consoles anymore and wants to focus on selling software and the "XBOX brand".

Sort of? The only thing keeping MS in the game trying to outlast Sony is that sweet, sweet money-for-nothing 30% digital cut. Problem is that nobody uses the Microsft Store on PC, and cloud gaming for mobile devices is a money furnace, so while they don't want to make a console for its own sake it's the only route for their rent-seeking.
 
Okay, so what you actually meant was with console you got to play worse versions of PC games several years after they originally released.
So that would be one of the exclusives I mentioned in my original post which were tailored to the system's bespoke hardware and a USP of consoles.

In other words you're citing a benefit that used to exist and doesn't any more because, as you said, modern consoles are just gimped PCs.
I am not defending consoles, retard. But they were certainly better because they had custom architecture before the PS4 generation. There was actually some interesting tech in them. Now we just have gimped PCs.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo