vgZero: "Microsoft is in a seemingly precarious position heading into this year’s E3. Nintendo will be unveiling a brand new home console along with a number of announcements regarding its software, not to mention its recently-launched 3DS handheld which will be garnering a lot of attention as gamers anxiously await some quality titles for the system. Sony will also be on hand to spill all the details regarding its new handheld, the NGP (soon to be called PlayStation Vita, or so we hear), and will have an impressive library of exclusives to show off for the PlayStation 3. Microsoft, on the other hand, doesn’t have any new consoles to show off (that we know of), does not have a competitor in the handheld market, and has a comparatively sparse line-up of upcoming exclusives for the Xbox 360 heading into this year’s E3. As a result, Microsoft has left a lot of big questions to be answered this week. Will there be some big new Xbox 360 exclusives to show off? Are there any worthy Kinect-compatible games coming for the “hardcore” crowd? What new features will be coming to Xbox Live this year? We try to sift through the scuttlebutt in an attempt to get a feel for what Microsoft will have to show at E3 2011."
Senior Director and Video Game Industry Advisor at Circana Mat Piscatella has revealed Starfield was the best-selling video in the US based on dollar sales for the week ending April 11th.
For the week that nothing else of note launched.. I’m sure it will sell some copies but look at what released that week
lol but we were told starfield was a bad game and PS players didn’t want it
It turns out they REALLY wanted it bad. Top seller for the week and it even hit #1 on the preorders, ahead of first party games like SAROS
Narrative gone. Blown wide open.
Why are you so one sided? Context always matters. If nothing else big released that week, then obviously a game from a major publisher will reach #1. The real question is how many copies. You can sell 10,000 and be #1. So lets get to the bottom of it and not take things at face value, huh? Also, ALL fanboys are a pain. Grown men and women praising a multi-billionaire company that never cared about you personally. They don't even know you yet you've invested your time and energy, maybe your whole life, to d-riding a company. I know it's hard to come to grips with reality and realizing change is needed if this is the highlight of your life. Not everyone can accept they're wrong and grow. I hope you do. Too many toxic adults acting like children on N4G. It's why I stopped using it for many years. I used to love it here. Sadly it's about Xbox vs PS even in 2026. It's not 2008 anymore. Lets move on yeah?
Sometimes Microsoft and Sony lies just to hide their embarrassment. WHat you thought Microsoft and Sony are competitor? Dude illuminati controls both and distraction is their weapons!
Why do you think both plays good cop bad cop bs!
I have talked about not being able to get into this game at launch. I still haven't given it another go, even though I think it looks great and has come a very long way since launch. Some people just want it to fail, even if it is a great game. I know why, we all do.
Starfield didn't just have the best sales for a week, but it was pre-ordered on PS store, with very nice numbers. I really need to start it again, on my PS5 though. So I can see how it is now. It has had some major updates.
I am looking forward to it all over again now.
Its not that people want the game to fail. Its that Bethesda wont ever improve their games if you guys keep calling slop like starfield great games. Pure as that. Formulaic, chasing the trends, slop.
Like Bethesda has fallen off since FO4.
Ive a PC 4070, no interest in Starfield since the beginning since despite Bethesda owning some serious FPS legacy within their ranks...They just like seem to hate good shooting mechanics.
I dont see whats the appeal and thats ok. But how can you guys call it great? By what metric? The story? The Gameplay? The package all together? Hell I'm enjoying Crimson Desert, but I've got my issues with some design choices, but I do think the game is better as a whole than its individual parts. Is that the case for Starfield?
To be honest alot of you starfield stans dont make a great case for yourself, since I've never heard a starfield say what it is they enjoyed about it other just it being another Bethesda game that feels familiar yet new to them. Yall dont make the case on whats so great about starfield that keeps you coming back.
What does it do that makes it great that everyone like me is missing?
Like I wanted to like the Starfield, but after seeing its first trailer, it pretty much came out like I thought it was. Bethesda has been coasting off prestige for years now. and honestly starfield is proof of that.
It's still as Bad as it was on Xbox. Of cause some playstation user's are curious and because there is a lot of them then the sales are gonna be somewhat okay for small time period. But still a very sad story what starfield turned out to be. Maybe the biggest disappointment in my gaming life.
Former Xbox executive Ed Fries comments on the early days of Xbox, the opinion of Japanese game companies, and more.
Replies(2)I dont think that'll ever happen. But i must say back in the day, they were definitely trying because they were more cash rich than their competitors.
I think MS were and still are the richer company. They tried to acquire Sega back in the day (and considered doing so again more recently), they obviously bought exclusivity to Halo which was originally shown as a Mac title. I don’t think as a company MS can claim the moral high ground here. It’s a wilful lack of self awareness.
Of course Sony would try exactly the same if they had the resources, but when the PS2 dominated the industry was in a much healthier place with an abundance of great third parties.
This has been a depressing generation as far as first party decisions are concerned. The fact we are debating business plans rather than which game is better is a sad reflection of the state of things.
There was Nintendo as well, Sony wouldn't have had a monopoly. In fact, the world would be better today if Xbox never existed in the first place. They pretty much brought all bad practices we have today. We might have gotten all of it either way, but not this early. In term of franchises, I don't think there is anything Microsoft released that would actually be missed if it didn't exist. Even Halo the world wouldn't notice if Halo didn't exist.
I think almost everyone will agree that a monopoly is not good for the industry. But that being said, the competition needs to be smart and strategic with their business. Simply buying up publishers and traditional third-party studios just to keep them out of the other companies reach is not a sustainable practice. That goes for all parties so don't think I'm just referring to Xbox.
I'm no business guru by any stretch of the imagination but I firmly believe that the best way to drive consumers to your software and hardware is to invest smart in your first-party studios. Give them full support and guidance in making unique, fun games that are only available to play in your ecosystem and the gamers will come.
But first party studios aren't enough. They only make up a small portion of the industry. Without 3rd party there would be no industry for Microsoft or sony.Developing games take time and money and sometimes you gotta make moves to stay competitive.
Nah, I never said first-party was enough. I said it’s the ‘best way’ to drive gamers to your platform. 3rd-party is a free-for-all and there’s no guarantee that gamers will use your hardware to play the game. If you want to push your own software and/or hardware you need first-party, or at least exclusive deals with third-party studios.
Then why be so emotional and continue to talk about it. Xbox will never die be ause it stays in so many people's head.
How can you even see him being "emotional" in that comment?
If anything, you're the emotional one, constantly trying to go at anyone that says anything against Microsoft. So when you call him emotional, it comes off as deflection
Replies(2)
Microsoft’s new Xbox chief, Asha Sharma, has signaled that Xbox Game Pass pricing is about to change. In an internal memo to Xbox employees, obtained by The Verge, Sharma admits that “Game Pass has become too expensive for players” and that Microsoft needs “a better value equation.”
Microsoft has been talking about adding commercials to get the cost down. Not in game, but before you start a session. I would just open my game then get all the stuff I need to done, before sitting down to play.
If they cut the price down enough to justify it, I'd do it. Most Sub services are giving the option now. If it's worth it!
Multiple tiers. You decide at what level you want the ads. Obtrusive gives you access to more games. This will allow ads to play during crucial moments of gameplay, almost guaranteeing you fail/die. However you gain access to more games. Unobtrusive only shows ads before/after you play, however you get a fraction of the games. /s
FUK ads ... dont u have enough? MS should just make games and sell them, for indie or AA games get them on GP so to give visibility to small studios. They got into a business model which is not sustainable as it is killing their first party studios. Their fault .. .
You do realize that has been one of the big reasons for the mass exodus of people leaving subscription services. Getting ad's while paying for a service and having the price continually jack up and ad time.
What you said is not what I saw. What I read said at THE START of a session! Why be a jerk? It isn't like, I was intentionally lying, like so many do! Also, commercials will be an OPTION! Just like Netflix, Hulu, Prime, etc, offer them. GP is also aiming for free Cloud gaming with an AD supported tier.
I mean, do you even use GP? If you do and don't want commercials, you can pay not to have them. I in my OG comment said I might go the commercial tier IF it's worth it. No I wouldn't have all my loading screens be an ad like you said.
Have a great day.
I will never understand why people want forced ads in their faces in their games or their console. It's never worth it not even with a lower price tier.
Replies(4)
Microsoft owns a massive collection of iconic IPs, yet somehow they keep proving they have absolutely no idea how to run the video game business.
Its not their job to run the game business. Everyone has a business model. You do what works for you. You react to changes in the market. Thats really all you can do.
No, actually reacting to the market is how Sony threw $400 million (reportedly) at Concord.
Interesting, isn't it?
Halo, Forza, Gears of War, Fable, Minecraft, and now Bethesda games... These should allow them to print money!
Especially selling them to the huge Playstation base. I say add Nintendo to the release schedule if it is truly about selling software. Get the games to the most gamers.
But, Microsoft heads set the price in the first place. Don't scapegoat Phil and Sarah on that as I don't think made those calls, and a $650 Series X and $400 Series S is a nonstarter for most.
The cost of the consoles is outside of their control, they aren't going to sell at a loss when they aren't making money off games sales cos xbox players hardly buy any games thanks to games pass, which costs far too much to run and make the first party titles for. The console prices are determined by various global factors effecting hardware atm.
This is actually correct and what made things harder for Phil and Sarah was Amy hood demanding a 20% return on top of that
I get all of the outside forces here on console pricing. They aren't selling at all which was also one of the reasons they went multi-plat, so there seems to be no answer here for them as are you saying a 5 year old Xbox costs you more to make in 2026 than in 2020? If that is the case there is nothing further to say. I have two Series Xs so I hope they last.
@hiawa23 yes that is exactly what I'm saying same for ps5. Remember these devices would have been finalised 208/2019. They were designed during a period of particularly low hardware and rare earth materials etc. They aren't designed to be efficient and are large and have large heat footprints. Both new consoles will benefit from new manufacturing process reducing amounts of silicon although the leaks about next gen xbox strongly suggest it has a much larger chip set than ps6, in line with average pc chips etc size and cooling. All of this now costs alot more than it has previously. Meanwhile leaked documentation about ps6 explicitly states that Sony following recent global shocks like covid and Ukraine war wanted to future proof ps6 from cost perspective. This means lower emergy usage, smaller chips etc and likely form factor and thus weight. This will also lead to cheaper shipping costs. I fully expect base ps6 to come in at cheaper then ps5 pro. Which is likely to be discontinued.
They'll probably just end up killing off the surviving Xbox users who are left and that are into that model. They won't regain the vast majority they lost either.
I would love to think that MS has something up their sleeve, but I will probably be let down.
Doom and gloom for 360? Wee will soon know if this is the case. But M$ is not stupid, they are in this to win.
Using speculations about e3 to spin Microsoft's success over the competition as of late :P
Nintendo needs to worry about combating Kinect not bringing the Wii in the hd era with a new console. Microsoft forced Nintendo to launch a new console because of motion tech not console hardware.