Jump to content
IGNORED

Have Microsoft punished and capitalised on the Japanese console's poor European service?


dizogg
 Share

Recommended Posts

We seem like a pretty pro Xbox 360 forum. I was just wondering why that is, and I thought it may have something to do with it being Western-centric. I think a pretty important aspect of the games industry Microsoft has exploited is the way Japanese companies have failed to cater to our market. Considering Europe and the USA must be a bigger market that Japan, they just didn't seem on-point and totally dedicated to our needs. I think the Xbox consoles are some of the first where I actually feel like they want me to buy their console. Not that they're doing me a favour by releasing new games. Anyone know what i'm saying?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We seem like a pretty pro Xbox 360 forum. I was just wondering why that is, and I thought it may have something to do with it being Western-centric. I think a pretty important aspect of the games industry Microsoft has exploited is the way Japanese companies have failed to cater to our market. Considering Europe and the USA must be a bigger market that Japan, they just didn't seem on-point and totally dedicated to our needs. I think the Xbox consoles are some of the first where I actually feel like they want me to buy their console. Not that they're doing me a favour by releasing new games. Anyone know what i'm saying?

Any gamer who's lived in Japan for a bit knows that the Japanese industry is totally self-sufficient. They produce enough games and have enough of a turnover that if the western industry went tits-up, they could just ignore it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any gamer who's lived in Japan for a bit knows that the Japanese industry is totally self-sufficient. They produce enough games and have enough of a turnover that if the western industry went tits-up, they could just ignore it.

Thats hardly a good way of going about business though. Well I mean theres safety there, but the fact that they could survive with the west is not whats important. Its about profit maximisation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any gamer who's lived in Japan for a bit knows that the Japanese industry is totally self-sufficient. They produce enough games and have enough of a turnover that if the western industry went tits-up, they could just ignore it.

If the western industry went tits-up, the Japanese would benefit greatly from increased exports.

If the western economy goes tits up, the Japanese are screwed because they won't be able to balance their trading deficits with the other far east nations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are a pro-Xbox forum because MS seem to be doing most things right. You can obviously strike the RROD of that list but it's testament to the things that they are actually catering for that we have put up with a very poor situation. I loved my PS1 and the PS2 was the gaming standard in the last generation, but the PS3 had been a series of missed opportunities and missteps. It's not about being Eastern centric it's about delivering on promises. Sony's promise has burned brightly only sporadically and not enough to fund the huge fuel cost of keeping it alight for many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MS are doing well because they're catering for gamers needs, so in agreement with OP.

Live :- It just works, does what we want it to do and is not intrusive.

Game Releases :- There is no major delay between the territories, the same with the live content (Sony should take note of this for the PSN)

Joypad :- A sensible refinement of the already great Xbox S controller. (Seriously I think I'd rather have that boomerang that Sony initially showed than the DualShock deadzone yet again)

Microsoft appear to listen to the core and take stuff onboard.

The problem for Sony is that we are the John The Baptists for consoles, and the PS3 didn't create a lot of goodwill with the 'You'll work extra hours to pay for it' attitude and then frankly not delivering. Then the bad word gets passed about, seriously who would recommend a PS3 above a £99 360? Even now nearly 2 years in it's still not a recommendation I would make to someone.

Microsoft looked at what they did right with the Xbox and refined that. They realised that online was the next major thing and now have at least 5 million people that will want to carry their Gametag and score across to whatever their next platform will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Microsoft looked at what they did right with the Xbox and refined that. They realised that online was the next major thing and now have at least 5 million people that will want to carry their Gametag and score across to whatever their next platform will be.

Online had been predicted as a big thing long before the original original Xbox came out and even now the revenue generated (and userbase) is way off what was predicted. I think they took quite a risk with online on the Xbox and it's paid off. It will be interesting to see how they try and improve the service going forward as well as trying to capture some of the local multiplayer market that Nintendo is currently hoovering up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Online had been predicted as a big thing long before the original original Xbox came out and even now the revenue generated (and userbase) is way off what was predicted. I think they took quite a risk with online on the Xbox and it's paid off. It will be interesting to see how they try and improve the service going forward as well as trying to capture some of the local multiplayer market that Nintendo is currently hoovering up.

How has it paid off?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How has it paid off?

Joke post?

Live Gold means they make money on a service for online play which is free in most other forms. Since 2003, I think I've spent 150 quid on Live fees alone.

DLC and XBLA means direct income to them.

Also the console would feel pretty bare without it- what would the xbox and anything after have been without Live? You can argue that the xbox hasn't paid off, but Live has been their best assest all along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, i'm meant to believe that the quality of XBL has not resulted in additional sales for MS?

I'm sure it has but I don't think this has paid off for MS yet. They're billions in the hole.

Live still has herds of people moving from game to game and leaving others dead. I think that's a problem; not specifically an issue with Live just the fact that there aren't enough people playing online to support more than a few games at once.

Joke post?

Of course not.

I think I've spent 150 quid on Live fees alone.

And how much have MS spent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course not.

See I got confused with what you're saying- if you meant has the xbox project overall paid off with live in consideration than probably not, but with the point that the risk of moving forward with online and Live, then yes that surely has.

And how much have MS spent?

On Live or on the Xbox?

That 30-40 quid is playing for P2P online.

It's probably their best cost to profit ratio revenue. It's most been hardware thats lost them money over the years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any gamer who's lived in Japan for a bit knows that the Japanese industry is totally self-sufficient. They produce enough games and have enough of a turnover that if the western industry went tits-up, they could just ignore it.

Maybe that's how it was 10 years ago, but not today.

If the western industry went tits up the Japanese would have to stop producing Resident Evil 5's of this world pretty sharpish. There isn't enough domestic business to support that calibre of title just in Japan any more because they cost so much to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any gamer who's lived in Japan for a bit knows that the Japanese industry is totally self-sufficient. They produce enough games and have enough of a turnover that if the western industry went tits-up, they could just ignore it.

Thats only because they've never bothered to exploit the western market particularly Europe properly, weve had shit afterthought service from them because thats what we have been. however with the Japanese domestic games industry shrinking over the past few years ( A trend only Nintendo has managed to buck) they have been looking to further develop their western markets its just seems like unbelievably bad luck for Japanese developers that the seemingly obvious choice of the PS3 has failed to deliver the numbers they'd hoped overseas and the alternative of the 360 has had development stalled due to it being a lame duck in Japan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See I got confused with what you're saying- if you meant has the xbox project overall paid off with live in consideration than probably not, but with the point that the risk of moving forward with online and Live, then yes that surely has.

Is there any way to measure it though? We've no idea what they are spending on this service in comparison to the revenue it brings in. They've demonstrated that a reasonable number of people are prepared to pay a subscription but I don't think that necessarily means they have a profitable business.

How would you decide whether this has paid off or hasn't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How has it paid off?

I didn't mean it quite so literally. It has paid off in the sense that anyone who is serious about playing online console games is going to buy a 360. It's impossible to know how much it has cost and how much the subscription fees have offset. Nintendo (being Nintendo) have probably spent next to fuck all so have lost less, Sony, especially with Home, are just pissing money up the wall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any way to measure it though? We've no idea what they are spending on this service in comparison to the revenue it brings in. They've demonstrated that a reasonable number of people are prepared to pay a subscription but I don't think that necessarily means they have a profitable business.

How would you decide whether this has paid off or hasn't?

I have not much evidence that really says this bar one thing, which was their decision to revise the royalty agreements for how much they get from games (as opposed to the developers) very strongly in their favour. It used to be a 70/30 split for devs. Now it's more like 35/65, with the ratio going up to more like 50/50 after a certain number of units have been sold (dunno how many).

This leads me to suspect that Live Arcade does not make MS a profit. As for the online play, I think if it does make money it certainly doesn't make a lot of it. Ditto movie sales etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there any way to measure it though? We've no idea what they are spending on this service in comparison to the revenue it brings in. They've demonstrated that a reasonable number of people are prepared to pay a subscription but I don't think that necessarily means they have a profitable business.

How would you decide whether this has paid off or hasn't?

Simply that Steam and PSN offer the core same thing for free so I can't imagine its a massive sink of cash that even say for example, 5-10 million people on gold worldwide is a respectable amount of money for something the competitors are more or less offering for free with slightly different services.

Again, Phresh's point was that they chose to pursue online as a strong point with the xbox and that decision paid off. Without the emphasis on online- don't you think the xbox brand in the face of the competition would have been a complete disaster? I mean utter disaster- isn't that a pay off enough?

Again, its the hardware that hasn't paid off- the billion dollar repair bill this gen and billion dollar losses from subsidising hardware last gen. Live is their software and its been their main saving grace

I wouldn't argue that the xbox is a success, but I think Live certainly is within the realm of what they've done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's an interesting discussion but doesn't the whole set up of the thread ignore the incredible success Nintendo are having with the Wii?

A more accurate premise would be have MS capatilised on Sony's past poor European service (and arguably current given the launch price of the PS3 and the European PSN store)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simply that Steam and PSN offer the core same thing for free so I can't imagine its a massive sink of cash that even say for example, 5-10 million people on gold worldwide is a respectable amount of money for something the competitors are more or less offering for free with slightly different services.

Is steam really the same thing? I don't know how the online play works on steam but I don't think they have the whole certification thing going on. They aren't trying to control & vet content etc.

Again, Phresh's point was that they chose to pursue online as a strong point with the xbox and that decision paid off. Without the emphasis on online- don't you think the xbox brand in the face of the competition would have been a complete disaster? I mean utter disaster- isn't that a pay off enough?

I honestly don't know. I don't think a high percentage of people are playing online so I can't see how it can be that big a factor. I'm enjoying my 360 without online play.

Again, its the hardware that hasn't paid off- the billion dollar repair bill this gen and billion dollar losses from subsiding hardware last gen. Live is their software and its been their main saving grace

How can you separate the two?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but if I think of a 360 without Live, all I see is a cheapy PS3 imitation that keeps breaking. It loses its purpose.

Eh? The 360 came out first and has a better library and a better controller and better versions of multi-format titles. I'm not trying to make a format-war post but I can't see how anyone could possibly call it a cheap PS3 knock off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh? The 360 came out first and has a better library and a better controller and better versions of multi-format titles. I'm not trying to make a format-war post but I can't see how anyone could possibly call it a cheap PS3 knock off.

By cheap I meant price wise, but they share a massive amount in common.

They share a near identical third party library bar a few handful of games, they both play DVDs and upscale them, both allow streaming media/divx playback, the better versions of multi format are these days small technical differences these days that you could only notice side by side- I choose 360 multiformat because of online/DLC exclusiveness usually. The Playstation would have a far stronger brand simply because of its heritage if the xbox didn't have Live to go along with it, they both offer HD playback in some form or another or have at some point (HD dvd seperate player). The controller I'll give you though.

I own both and they share a lot of core things, but Live is the main distinction. It's the reason I'll buy a game thats the same price on both consoles but I'll play it on the one thats noisier (or was by far until recently) and far more unreliable simply because of the Live implementation and friends etc (and pad if its a shooter so again, you have me there)

It's often why you hear people who own both consoles to moan about one or the other, bar a few exclusive experiences they offer a very similar feel and one tends to usually turn into just the exclusive machine.

I didn't mean tto demean what the 360 is, I love it the best of the three machines and thats loud and clear to anyone who knows me, but I think without it, there would be little to distinguish it from Sony's effort that would have such an impact.

Edit- And by Live I don't just mean online play- I mean everything within the system, private chat, parties, NXE was because of Live and everything that came with it, checking out achievements, checking out whos online via xbox.com or msn all all part of the Live infrastructure, great online updating in comparison to the rubbish PSN, the invite system which is standard. Anything and everything that goes with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.