What is the point of Xbox? : games

[-] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 35 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Gaming journalists sure want a Sony monopoly of gaming consoles, don't they?

If Xbox didn't exist, consumers could only choose PlayStation. Nintendo has shown they have no interest in making real console hardware to compete with Sony or Microsoft anymore, so consumers will get literally only one console choice. That's bad. Especially since they could set prices at whatever they want and nobody could challenge it.

I get journalists hate Xbox, but Xbox needs to exist as a consumer option.

[-] callouscomic@lemm.ee 22 points 5 months ago

steam deck exists: "am I a joke to you?"

[-] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The Steam Deck is not a console, it is a handheld Linux PC with "console gaming" TV output as an afterthought, just like the Nintendo Switch is a handheld android tablet with console gaming as an afterthought.

[-] mortalic@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago

K... This is just not true. Plenty of AAA games run well on the steam deck. Currently installed on mine, RDR2, cyberpunk 2077, horizon zero dawn, Forza horizon, uncharted legacy of thieves, the last of us, and for funsies I just started another fallout 4 playthrough. I'm sure others have lots of other AAA games they play on their deck.

If it's the exclusives you're missing, like Gran Turismo or something, I think that's a different argument.

[-] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

Being able to play AAA games is not a qualifier for a console. My PC can also play AAA games, but it is not a console.

The Steam Deck, and Switch, are both handhelds. It is a subcategory of game console, but it is not considered a game console just the same as a Game Boy is not considered a console, but it is a handheld. Both the Steam Deck and Switch have a screen and internal battery, along with a controller that is built onto the device, like a Game Boy.

A Steam Machine is a Linux PC, but is more similar to a console than the Steam Deck.

[-] mortalic@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

I mean, the nuance you describe is notable. But I sit on the couch, using controllers and play the same games you would on ps or Xbox. Both of which run variants of Linux/windows.

It appears the nuance is no longer important.

[-] applepie@kbin.social 5 points 5 months ago

I think that's the point bro above is making tho... sure you an use it like one. But it does not compete directly with PS5 and Xbox. Different audience and primary use case is different.

If Xbox dies, steam deck is not a proper substitute for people who buy TV consoles. I guess steam could make steam console tho tbh

[-] mortalic@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

Why do you say it isn't a proper substitute? What features is it missing?

[-] applepie@kbin.social 3 points 5 months ago

it aint ready for mainstream, it still has issues and translation layer aint perfect at all. my gaming rig is on linux. I guess this will be resolved at some point and valve will release a TV console version.
The hardware is not in the same class, in fact it literally under powered because it is a handheld. Guy who wants headshot noobs 4 loolz wants that 4k60 fps experience.

[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

not "features" per se, but consoles have a better performance-to-price ratio compared to handhelds. In the bill of materials for a handheld you're paying for a screen and battery that are unnecessary expenses if you just need a console. in a console, that money will go towards higher powered hardware to run games, and maybe some other ancillary things. Also in a console you can have a better cooling system since you're not constrained to a mobile form factor. Also in a console you can use higher power since performance is not being balanced with batter life.

[-] tan00k@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Reading through the above comments it seems like goalposts keep moving on what counts as a console. Does the wii u not count as a console because the controller had a screen and the price to performance is poor?

I'm not sure any of you have a concrete definition for a console, and maybe there isn't one. It might be more of a spectrum with open and configurable devices on one end and the more focused devices with walled garden software on the other.

Then you can say that ps5 is more like a console than steam deck is, and steam deck is more like a console than a pc.

[-] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Does the wii u not count as a console because the controller had a screen and the price to performance is poor?

The WiiU Gamepad did not function on its own, it had to be connected to the actual console in order to function. It was literally a controller with a screen. It did not have any functionality without the console.

[-] tan00k@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

The person I was responding to was citing costs accrued for screen and battery as a reasoning for why steam deck is not a console, so I was giving an example (wii u) that contradicts that reasoning.

I don't actually care if you consider the steam deck or wii u or anything is a console or not. My point was that I don't see a concrete definition anywhere in this thread and that maybe a more nuanced view would be appropriate.

[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

The person I was responding to was citing costs accrued for screen and battery as a reasoning for why steam deck is not a console

No, i was answering your question “what features is steam deck missing compared to consoles”.

[-] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

I see. I will try to provide as detailed of a concrete definition as possible for you.

A video game console is an electronic device that is built with the specific purpose of playing video games. It can do other things as well, but its primary function that it is designed around is playing video games. A console does not have a built in screen or control device, but instead those devices are separate and connect to the console in order to give it inputs and for it to output its signal to the user. A video game console does not run a standard computer operating system that one might find on a workstation, but it can run a modified version of a standard operating system that is specifically optimized for the console hardware to play video games more efficiently The console device is to be placed in a permanent location while in operation, and must be plugged into an electrical socket or similar power supply, as it is not powered by an internal battery.

A handheld is a subcategory of video game console that differs by having a screen and controller built into the device. It is not in a permanent location while in operation, rather it is operated while held in the users hands. These have a battery to provide power to the unit.

[-] tan00k@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Ah, that does clarify a lot. You're wanting a term to refer to the Xbox and Playstation class devices since they're in this closely competing realm, but people already have a preconceived notion of what a "console" is (I would consider handheld to be consoles, for example).

It does seem like it would be useful to have a term for those.

[-] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Well this is the traditional definition of a video game console, it includes all video game consoles before the current generation. For example, the SNES, SEGA Genesis, and PC Engine/TurboGrafx16 were all competing consoles, but the SEGA GameGear and Nintendo Gameboy were not competing with those consoles.

As I said, handhelds are a subcategory of console. Like how a laptop is a subcategory of personal computer.

[-] tan00k@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

If it's a subcategory of console then it is a console. Otherwise it's like saying a square is not a rectangle because it is a square, or a cat is not a mammal because it is a cat.

That's why I say you are searching for a term for things like the Xbox and Playstation - because it would be useful to have a term for that. Simply "console" is not a good fit imo, but you may disagree.

[-] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

A handheld is a kind of console. It is not in competition or in the same class as a regular console.

A square is a kind of rectangle, nobody that says "draw a rectangle" expects you to draw a square, they expect a box with two sides longer than the other two but equal in length to each other adjoined at 90° angles. A square is a subcategory of rectangle. Its definition includes some features of a rectangle, but it also has other features that define it as clearly different from a rectangle.

Likewise a laptop is a subcategory of personal computer. A tablet such as a Microsoft Surface could also be a subcategory of personal computer. But if someone talks about their PC, you don't think of a laptop or Surface.

Its the same with consoles and handhelds. By technicality one could call a handheld a console in the same way a person could call a Surface a personal computer, but that would be the same as calling a hot dog a sandwich, or calling a submarine a boat.

Perhaps "home console" would be more descriptive, but since video game consoles were always understood to not be handheld devices, there is no need to subdivide the parent category. Just "consoles" and "handhelds" works fine.

[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

i would say the wiiu is a special case console. they tried adding a screen to a typical console design and it didn’t really work. that’s why they pivoted to the switch which is much more like a portable than a console.

the vast, vast majority of consoles don’t have screens built into their controllers.

[-] callouscomic@lemm.ee 1 points 5 months ago

Most of Nintendo's pre-Switch "consoles" arguably had poor performance-to-price ratios in terms of hardware.

Also, a PC doesn't have the constraints of a mobile form factor and better cooling and can have better performance without the built in battery and screen. You just argued to me that a PC can be a console.

This all seems arbitrary to argue the differences.

[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

if those nintendos had to build in a screen or battery they’d have even worse performance for the price.

yes, PC has some commonalities with consoles, but there are other aspects that make a PC a PC rather than a console.

This is not an arbitrary discussion, it’s a semantic discussion. these terms have non-arbitrary meanings.

[-] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

While you can do that with a Steam Deck or Nintendo Switch, that was not their primary design. Its no different than plugging in a laptop to a TV with a wireless controller and gaming on that. That is not a console, it was not designed as such.

Additionally, the quality of gaming experience you get from a Switch is worse than on Steam Deck for intensive games, even for native Switch games sometimes. But the quality of games on the Steam Deck is worse than a purpose built game console like the Xbox Series X or PS5. Keep in mind the Steam Deck is 2 years newer than the Xbox Series X or PS5. While the experience may be comparable on some less intensive games, the console experience is objectively better.

Steam Deck and Nintendo Switch are not competition to Xbox or PlayStation. Valve and Nintendo don't view them as such, and neither do consumers.

[-] NewNewAccount@lemmy.world 17 points 5 months ago

Gaming journalists and consumers alike want Xbox to be better. Did you even bother to read the article?

[-] cbarrick@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago

Nintendo has shown they have no interest in making real console hardware

Ah yes, the no true Scotsman argument.

Nintendo doesn't make hardware to compete with Sony and Microsoft, despite having the best selling console hardware all-time, among the current generation, and among several previous generations.

You don't have to be a graphical powerhouse to compete with PlayStation and Xbox...

[-] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 17 points 5 months ago

Nintendo is not competing with Microsoft or Sony, and that's why they can sell more.

People arent choosing between Xbox, PlayStation, or Switch. Theyre choosing between Xbox or PlayStation, and also buying a Switch. That is not competition.

[-] OriginalUsername7@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago

Gaming journalists sure want a Sony monopoly of gaming consoles, don’t they?

Despite the inflammatory headline, I don't think that's really the point of the article. It's much less "why even bother", and more "do they even know what they're doing over there"?

Any hatred the writer has for Xbox seems to be focused on how Microsoft are running things, not letting the studios take chances or even make a bit of a dud game.

As a platform, the point of Xbox is supposed to be to make things people enjoy. But MS seem hyper-focused on insane rates of growth, more users, more subscribers, bigger profits. Anything that doesn't fit that gets cut, regardless of how well it was received by fans or critics.

I don't get the impression the writer hates Xbox, but is just frustrated that they've been making the same mistake over and over again, which has allowed Sony to dominate the console space.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 8 points 5 months ago

I don't think anybody wants a monopoly, because it means the leader can stagnate, and honestly that's already happened. Sony are getting complacent, the big releases are few and far between. We're all getting less for our money, no matter what team you're on.

I often buy multiple consoles in a generation, but I didn't get the Xbox One or Xbox Series consoles, because there's no reason to, and it's not because I've got an expensive PC either, still being on a 1060. Being late to the game is fine, PS3 did that and ended up selling pretty much as many as the Xbox 360 in the end, but where is that spark from MS? They've gambled it all on Game Pass and I'm not sure you can run an entire gaming division on that, same as Netflix couldn't compete with Hollywood without the box office money. The cloud growth just hasn't happened for them. It doesn't feel as good as local play, and I suspect it never will. A PS5 has hit pricing that isn't really that expensive for fairly casual gamers, although the most casual went mobile ages ago and I doubt they're coming back.

Xbox hardware is fine, there just isn't any reason to own it. If it ran Windows and I could install my Steam library on it, I'd have got it on day one, but how does that make MS money? There's even been noises about the next Xbox allowing Steam, although I don't know how true that it is. I would guess the only way that can happen is if MS get a chunk of Valve's money every time somebody buys a game through Steam for Xbox. It's the only real feature that would get me to buy one right now.

[-] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I get journalists hate Xbox, but Xbox needs to exist as a consumer option.

I don't understand, is this a thing? "All journalists hate Xbox" I mean. I've never heard this before. Like there's a mandate that journalists have to hate the Xbox?

EDIT: I'll eat the downvotes, I just want to understand what the fuck they're talking about

[-] Ephera@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago

Nah, it's an obviously false take, because as you say, why would all journalists agree on this?

XBOX has been underwhelming for a while and journalists will report on that, and they will focus on those bad parts and certainly also sometimes make it sound worse than it really is, because it brings in clicks.

That can make it look like journalists dislike XBOX, but causality is simply the other way around.

[-] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Yeah the comment felt like bizarre astroturfing -- Why would 'gaming journalists' specifically not want Xbox to succeed, but want Playstation to? Like somehow a Sony monopoly is great for... journalists? A very strange take.

XBOX has been underwhelming for a while and journalists will report on that, and they will focus on those bad parts and certainly also sometimes make it sound worse than it really is, because it brings in clicks.

I worked at Microsoft and I can assure you, they deserve every bit of hate they get. And it really is that bad. There was a point with the Xbox One where Sony was beating 'us' in every single market we were actively tracking except specific parts of the US. Yet we had directive after directive for clearly nonsensical ideas like targeting Japan for console sales.

I also worked (third party) with Sony and they aren't much better, but they at least understand how to get their consoles bought. Microsoft hasn't known how to do that since the 360.

[-] dinckelman@lemmy.world 35 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Microsoft and Google really aren't too dissimilar, in a lot of ways. The only reason why Xbox still exists isn't because they're so incredibly passionate about it. There was a niche for them to make money, and they've created a product in it, that has the minimum viable qualities to complete. Issue is that just as Google does, they stopped caring about it entirely, after the initial pitch

[-] Ashtear@lemm.ee 30 points 5 months ago

Xbox buys talent, mismanages it in search of impossible scale, and cuts it loose - be that the 20-year experts of Fable, or the battle-scarred makers of Dishonored, or the invigorating new generation behind Hi-Fi Rush.

Talking up the demerits of capitalism in the massive gaming industry has been more common as of late (perhaps especially so on Lemmy), and I do think there is nuance in that conversation.

There's no reasonable nuance here. Microsoft clearly wants insane return on investment from their studios, and I don't see how that leaves room for the art of video game design.

[-] ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world 26 points 5 months ago

It is so damning that the entire industry has reacted that way. It's not that they closed a studio, that cod have been ignored. It's how brazenly they closed successful studios for being successful while talking out the other side of their mouth to the press.

It feels gross in a much more palpable way. And with everything else going on in tech it feels so wrong coming from one of the biggest companies in earth.

I'm 100% over Xbox. I hope their next console is the worst release since ET on Atari.

[-] SplashJackson@lemmy.ca 24 points 5 months ago

We should go back to Nintendo versus Sega times, give me my Dreamcast 2 and my Virtual Boy Advance

[-] Beetschnapps@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

I don’t want to go back to sega fucking up the hardware game that bad…

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 4 points 5 months ago

I think in this business you can survive a generation in the wilderness. Nintendo had it with the Wii U. Arguably Sony had one with the PS3.

Two in a row? Well you're out. Saturn followed by Dreamcast. MS are in their second, and tbh, it looks like they're pivoting towards being a cross platform publisher and subscription provider. They can certainly afford to keep throwing money at the issue, but if there's no results, there's only so long they'll be allowed to continue doing that before the boss pulls the rug on it. He does not seem like a man who is excited by his gaming division.

[-] Katana314@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago

Obvious frustrations aside, this article gives a great summary not just of current events but the last decade with Microsoft/Xbox.

[-] HEXN3T 15 points 5 months ago

For when the PS5 is out of stock. It isn't out of stock anymore.

[-] CeeBee@lemmy.world 23 points 5 months ago

Sony is just as bad in their own ways.

[-] HEXN3T 8 points 5 months ago

I know, but that doesn't change that the PS5, for its lack of exclusives, is way more successful.

Games

Weekly Threads:

Rules: