- cross-posted to:
- xbox@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- xbox@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
EGS isn’t any good on PC. What makes them think a workable console version is coming any time soon?
Yeah, they still haven’t fixed the slow ass scrolling performance in the client and have barely introduced any platform features to their store. It’s so bad.
I’ve been using Heroic launcher and it’s made a massive difference fwiw.
Yeah, to be honest, if Apple’s model is not legal, then neither is Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo…
It’s a good argument.
It’s not the same model though, is it? I can buy XBox, PS an Nintendo games in a shit ton of physical or digital stores. So there are different channels. There is no equivalent on iOS. If you don’t want to publish in the app store, no one will be able to install your app (developers with own certs and enterprise customers with mdm excluded).
A chunk of those sales go to the platform, regardless of where they’re bought. And you can’t just sell an Xbox/playstation game without permission and royalties
This is true, but they’re also now selling digital-only consoles. For some customers, the digital store is their only choice.
Don’t/can’t you still buy codes in other stores, though?
You can buy Apple gift cards in other stores too
But not directly the apps. I can, however, for example buy codes for individual xbox games from different vendors.
Right, but I feel that this method of distribution is very similar to gift cards in that the retailer has no control over pricing, promotions, etc. additionally, these codes cannot be re-used.
if Apple’s model is not legal, then neither is Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo…
Except it’s not about the model itself, it’s about market power. Neither game console maker has a monopoly, not even Nintendo.
Are there any other virtual stores on the console? There’s obviously physical store fronts, but I’m pretty sure there’s only the one digitally on console.
Are there any other virtual stores on the console?
No but since none of the console vendors have a monopoly, antitrust laws don’t apply. They can do practically any shit as long as none have a dominant market position.
Apple doesn’t have a monopoly though, there’s still Android. And outside of the US Android is more popular than iOS.
Apple doesn’t have a monopoly though, there’s still Android.
Based on revenue, it has, though. iPhones are being bought by people who spend more money in app stores than the average Android user.
And based on the lawsuit right now, US vs Apple
So Nintendo can force everyone to buy a Switch to play Mario games? From what I see, consoles are locked in as well and we are forced to have PS/Xbox/Switch for their exclusive games. And this is legal because they aren’t as big as Apple? Why can’t I buy one console to play any game I want just like I can install any OS on Android?
And this is legal because they aren’t as big as Apple?
Apple can do whatever they want on iPads, Mac, and Vision Pro. At least WRT Gatekeeper status in the EU, only iPhone is covered.
Did not know that. So it’s just the sales numbers then because iPad is the same as an iPhone in terms of functionality and restrictions. Mac is more open compared to their mobile devices.
So it’s just the sales numbers then because iPad is the same as an iPhone in terms of functionality and restrictions.
Sales numbers and more specifically market power of the Apple App Store on iPhones. In absolute numbers there are more Android devices out there but that includes super low-end devices where the owners don’t spend as much money on apps.
Apparently tablets aren’t being seen as big of a factor in the overall market, at least according to the EU. The special exceptionfs announced recently by Apple for the EU also for the most part are only about iPhone.
“The changes do not apply outside of the EU, nor do they apply to iPadOS in any country.” –https://www.macrumors.com/2024/03/06/alternative-ios-app-stores-eu-grace-period/
Microsoft is edging closer to a monopoly, which may be why they’re making this move.
Microsoft is edging closer to a monopoly
Windows is a monopoly, Xbox is not.
I’m fully aware of that but if history showed one thing it’s that Microsoft runs game developers into the ground.
Also Take Two, Nintendo, EA, and Sony exist. Microsoft has no monopoly just because they bought a crap publisher. The lastest Call of Duty game on mobile already tanked.
I agree that it is about market power, but one could make the argument that Xbox/PlayStation have a duopoly similar to iOS/Android.
Although I think PlayStation dominated with roughly a 70/30 split worldwide (higher in Europe). Nintendo is somewhat in its own category imo, since they mostly do their own games and don’t directly compete in that sense.
But I guess in a way consoles also compete with PCs.
one could make the argument that Xbox/PlayStation have a duopoly similar to iOS/Android.
You’ll have a hard time arguing that. Conventional wisdom groups all video games consoles together:
And overall video game revenue is centered around mobile:
Source: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/video-game-industry-revenues-by-platform/
The arcade experience of having to put in money to play just moved to mobile.
The Series X would make a great Steambox
Yeah, well I want game pass on Steam and Linux, but we can’t get everything we want, Phil.
I think it’s gonna get there very soon. Steam on Xbox, and also Xbox on steam deck.
The only issue with the latter is Valve is using proton translation to bypass windows and make their own thing, it’s a tremendously grey area that Microsoft has said NOTHING about, only because Steam is legit and game sale money go to publishers.
Imagine if Yuzu was legit and game sales still went to nintendo or 3rd parties, the tech behind proton and yuzu nce aren’t dissimilar!
Proton should be called PINE instead because PINE Is Not an Emulator.
How is Valve using Proton a grey area?
I’m guessing that they don’t mean a legally grey area. I think they probably mean it’s a grey area for Microsoft because Proton helps people get around needing Windows to play games made for Windows and Microsoft has an interest in keeping people on their OS.
Steam suspicously absent from this conversation, but I’m willing to be patient and see.
It’s a positive attitude for Spencer to take, but would have to see it in practice to be able to make judgment on if he really stands behind those words or if he is simply making a strategic business decision whose real motives are simply masked by these words.
The latter is par for the course for corporations, so we don’t have a lot to lean on in favor of him truly holding these values, sadly. One can hope, however, that miracles can and do happen.
I think Valve in particular has more incentive to make a console-esque PC that runs Steam than they do to make a storefront on someone else’s console.
That’s not where Valve makes their money from though. Their money primarily comes from store purchases, so anything to expand Steam’s reach is better for them. Plus, keeping Steam as relevant and ubiquitous as possible will in turn promote sales of the Steam Deck. The Xbox and Steam Deck cater to fundamentally different use cases anyways.
Damn that’d go hard for Itch.io
Might as well allow me to install a other OS at this point
Playstation let you do that for a while.
I remember Linux for PlayStation 2 back in the days.
It’s finally happening? Console manufacturers realizing that the old model, that’s worse for the consumer, doesn’t make sense anymore?
No, there won’t be another xbox. Phil Spencer is angling to get gamepass on nintendo and sony. But he’s going to have to force it through the courts and government legislation, much like epic is doing with mobile stores now.
It’s a play for gamepass, not the consumer
It’s a play for the consumer’s money, and when the consumer has better options than the traditional console model, the console model breaks down. They’ve got at least one more Xbox in them, whether or not that next Xbox is just a PC with different branding.
The “better option” is subscription services where you own nothing and the bottom drops out of the industry, just like music and film. You can cheer for that if you want, but it is not in the interests of the consumer.
I wasn’t cheering for subscription services. I was cheering that this exclusivity model of walled gardens no longer makes economic sense, while open platforms are on the rise. Microsoft is hoping that their pivot will result in more subscribers to their subscription service, but all signs are pointing to them having a rough time of growing beyond where they stand now, for all sorts of reasons.
And how much of a cut would you be taking Phil?
Fun fact: Microsoft can already do that: Just ship a Windows
containerVM on Xbox.Edit: Apparently “container” is the wrong term.
Have you ever tried to setup a Windows container let alone one on an Xbox? Even Microsoft knows windows containers are fucking shit, just look at azure Linux, it’s the entire reason for it’s existence
Even Microsoft knows windows containers are fucking shit
The Xbox System Software contains a heavily modified Hyper-V hypervisor (known as NanoVisor) as its host OS and two partitions. One of the partitions, the “Exclusive” partition is a custom virtual machine (VM) for games; the other partition, the “Shared” partition is a custom VM for running multiple apps including the OS. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_system_software#System
Xbox already runs two VMs. Just throw in a third with real Windows.
A VM and a container are two completely different pieces of technology…
A VM and a container are two completely different pieces of technology…
I’m sorry I mixed up the terminology. I was sure the point of “Microsoft can ship Windows with Xbox” came across no matter what.
No worries, it’s an understandable mistake.
