backtop


Print 48 comment(s) - last by Netscorer.. on Feb 11 at 2:29 PM


  (Source: AFP)
Consoles were a second option for Microsoft

Despite the success of the Xbox, that was not Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT) first choice plan in the gaming space, according to an IGN interview with a former Microsoft executive.  Joachim Kempin, who was VP of Windows Sales at Microsoft for 20 years starting in 1983, says his former employer only decided to build the Xbox after a falling out with Japanese gaming giant Sony Corp. (TYO:6758).

I. Sony Console Worried Gates

The original Xbox and its successor, the Xbox 360, had their low points (red rings of death, for example), but have established themselves as a popular console gaming option, selling millions of units.  The gaming unit is perceived as one of Microsoft's strong performing businesses.

Perhaps predicting both the rise of the console and tablet as replacements/challengers to the traditional PC, Bill Gates reportedly in the 1990s sounded the alarm when Sony announced the original PlayStation.  Seeing Sony jump into the market, Microsoft became determined to beat its former partner, who was turning its back on PC gaming for a non-Microsoft alternative.

Describes Mr. Kempin:

The main reason was to stop Sony. You see, Sony and Microsoft…they never had a very friendly relationship, okay? And this wasn’t because Microsoft didn’t want that.

Sony was always very arm’s length with Microsoft. Yeah, they bought Windows for their PCs but when you really take a hard look at that, they were never Microsoft’s friend... but as soon as they came out with a video console, Microsoft just looked at that and said 'well, we have to beat them, so let’s do our own.

The original PlayStation launched in 1994.  Then in 2000 Sony introduced the PlayStation 2, which added PC-like media player functionality and broader support for online gaming on third-party servers.  A year later Microsoft countered with the Xbox.

II. Crafting a Console

The payoff of consoles -- by Sony's model, at least -- has traditionally been the licensing fees paid by game publishers.  The hardware itself is often sold at-cost, or even at a modest loss.  For that reason Microsoft had trouble convincing a PC maker to hop onboard the Xbox experiment.

Joachim Kempin
Joachim Kempin, a 20 year veteran of Microsoft is spilling the dirt on the history of the Xbox. 
[Image Source: Twitter]

Recalls Mr. Kempin, "I went out to several PC manufacturers and tried to beg them to do the Xbox thing and keep the device manufacturing out of Microsoft. The guys were smart enough not to bite, because they studied the Sony model and saw that Sony could not make money on that hardware model, ever. So they supplemented it with software royalties, and Microsoft copied that model."

As for Xbox profitability, he argues that developers have always been the winners; that Microsoft has managed to break-even, but not do much better than that.  He comments, "They’re just maybe a little bit above breakeven, that’s all there is. This is not a big money-making machine for Microsoft."

Xbox 360
A former Microsoft exec. claims the Xbox is not a big money-maker for the tech giant.
[Image Source: Gamasutra]

Microsoft is currently diving into a third-generation console, which is expected to launch this holiday season.  After trumping Sony in the last generation (dubbed by some as the "seventh-generation") of consoles, there are some trouble signs for the upcoming Xbox 720.  While the spec looks somewhat similar to Sony, Sony's hardware is reportedly slightly more powerful and considerably easier to develop for.

Microsoft also may alienate customers with its stance on used games; reportedly it is tying purchases to your Xbox Live account, as a means of stopping game resale (which it earns no cut from).  Sony, while a long time support of strict digital rights management, has not yet announced a similar anti-resale provision.

Source: IGN



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: 3rd generation curse
By inighthawki on 2/7/2013 10:25:03 PM , Rating: 3
Since when is PS3 and N64 a dud? N64 was an outstanding console and had quite a few great games. PS3 is pretty much on par with the 360...


RE: 3rd generation curse
By Guspaz on 2/8/2013 12:15:09 PM , Rating: 3
The N64 wasn't a dud, but it did continue the trend of Nintendo's decline (until the Wii):

Sales figures (rounded to nearest million) versus all major competitors:
NES: 62 million (vs 13 million Master Systems)
SNES: 49 million (vs 42 million Megadrive/Genesis)
N64: 33 million (vs 102 million PS1)
GC: 22 million (vs 188 million XBox/PS2/DC)
Wii: 99 million (vs 146 million PS2/360)

In terms of judging the success of the console in terms of the market, that gives us the following marketshare statistics for Nintendo:

NES: 83%
SNES: 54%
N64: 24%
GC: 10%
Wii: 40%

So, was the N64 a failure? Well, in the sense that it represented a major loss in both marketshare and absolute sales, yes. But that was also true of the SNES, which is not considered to be a failure. It was, however, the first time that Nintendo did not have a majority market share.


RE: 3rd generation curse
By Guspaz on 2/8/2013 12:16:03 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, that Wii generation should have read PS3/360, and the numbers are right even if the name isn't.


"I mean, if you wanna break down someone's door, why don't you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!" -- Jon Stewart on Apple and the iPhone














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki