Whatever else you think of them, Microsoft has undeniably invested
heavily into gaming. Not only do they have their XBox series of gaming
consoles, but they've also acquired numerous third-party studios
(Bethesda, Activision, etc.), and have their own game service (XBox
Game Pass). They gone from a company that had an almost
inconsequential side-hustle in the gaming industry to one of its
behemoths.

Shame it doesn't seem to be working out all that well for them.

Their XBox consoles have struggled to maintain relevance, especially
recently, where they are a distant third to Sony and Nintendo.*
Revenue from their Game Pass service hasn't increased in two years.**
Even as they buy new studios, they're being forced to close their
older ones. Their attempts to leverage their gaming IPs into
multimedia juggernauts haven't been particularly successful.

It's not so surprising that Microsoft is struggling. They've ALWAYS
been struggling in to gain a foothold in the gaming market. What is
unusual is that they are struggling despite putting so much effort and
money into the attempt. It's not like Microsoft is going to collapse
anytime soon, of course. But most companies see a lot better return on
investment.

*
https://www.statista.com/statistics/276768/global-unit-sales-of-video-game-consoles/
** https://twitter.com/MatPiscatella/status/1787873505092202867
***
https://www.polygon.com/24151045/microsoft-xbox-studio-closures-tango-gameworks-arkane-austin-redfall

On Fri, 10 May 2024 10:50:44 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

>It's not so surprising that Microsoft is struggling. They've ALWAYS
>been struggling in to gain a foothold in the gaming market. What is
>unusual is that they are struggling despite putting so much effort and
>money into the attempt. It's not like Microsoft is going to collapse
>anytime soon, of course. But most companies see a lot better return on
>investment.

Microsoft is consistently cited as one of the most financially healthy
tech companies in existence. I think you're forgetting that gaming is
a largely inconsequential side hustle for Microsoft?

It is not uncommon for companies of that size to incur strategic
losses in specific divisions as part of a bigger plan (one they don't
necessarily outwardly reveal).

I personally think MS invests in gaming to diminish the threat
surface. For example if they let Sony go uncontested in consoles, the
PS could potentially morph into some sort of consumer personal
computer that eats into marketshare for Windows in the consumer space.

Life doesn't revolve solely around gaming.. I get that it's the
subject of this newsgroup, but you're making some dogmatic statements
that are failing to take the bigger picture into consideration.

On 10/05/2024 15:50, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> It's not so surprising that Microsoft is struggling. They've ALWAYS
> been struggling in to gain a foothold in the gaming market. What is
> unusual is that they are struggling despite putting so much effort and
> money into the attempt. It's not like Microsoft is going to collapse
> anytime soon, of course. But most companies see a lot better return on
> investment.

Is it really that surprising as consumers are a rather fickle bunch when
it comes to what they will or won't buy. Money obviously helps but it's
only one part of the equation. Indeed one of the faults pointed out with
capitalism is that it assumes people are far more rationale in their
choices than they actually are.

It's similar to the brave new world of the internet where in the sea of
ideas the good ones would float to the top. Didn't quite turn out like
that.

On Tue, 14 May 2024 10:31:23 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>On 10/05/2024 15:50, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>It's similar to the brave new world of the internet where in the sea of
>ideas the good ones would float to the top. Didn't quite turn out like
>that.

Oh, the promise of the Internet in the early 90s. How far we've
fallen.

It would be easy to blame AOL for allowing hoi polloi into our
precious garden of ideas ;-), but I think there's more to blame to be
laid on Canter and Siegel, who led the charge in bringing
commercialism and advertising onto the 'net.

Once that became normalized, the 'net was doomed.

On 5/14/2024 2:31 AM, JAB wrote:
> On 10/05/2024 15:50, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>> It's not so surprising that Microsoft is struggling. They've ALWAYS
>> been struggling in to gain a foothold in the gaming market. What is
>> unusual is that they are struggling despite putting so much effort and
>> money into the attempt. It's not like Microsoft is going to collapse
>> anytime soon, of course. But most companies see a lot better return on
>> investment.
>
> Is it really that surprising as consumers are a rather fickle bunch when
> it comes to what they will or won't buy. Money obviously helps but it's
> only one part of the equation. Indeed one of the faults pointed out with
> capitalism is that it assumes people are far more rationale in their
> choices than they actually are.
>
> It's similar to the brave new world of the internet where in the sea of
> ideas the good ones would float to the top. Didn't quite turn out like
> that.

More like a toilet bowl and what floats to the top of that.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Fri, 10 May 2024 10:50:44 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>Whatever else you think of them, Microsoft has undeniably invested
>heavily into gaming. Not only do they have their XBox series of gaming
>consoles, but they've also acquired numerous third-party studios
>(Bethesda, Activision, etc.), and have their own game service (XBox
>Game Pass). They gone from a company that had an almost
>inconsequential side-hustle in the gaming industry to one of its
>behemoths.
>
>Shame it doesn't seem to be working out all that well for them.

Here's a followup article expressing the same concerns as mine (but
even more long-winded! ;-)
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/microsofts-mystifying-mismanagement-this-week-in-business

The article suggests that it's not any outside issues causing the
problem but management that screwed up. Well, duh. Although the 8
billion dollar stock buy-back didn't help. Why invest in your own
company, after all, when instead you can just enrich the biggest
shareholders? Long-term interest in the company, what's that? Better
to just fire off another few thousand workers and then chase the next
fad.

Bah.

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote at 14:21 this Tuesday (GMT):
> On Tue, 14 May 2024 10:31:23 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>>On 10/05/2024 15:50, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
>
>>It's similar to the brave new world of the internet where in the sea of
>>ideas the good ones would float to the top. Didn't quite turn out like
>>that.
>
> Oh, the promise of the Internet in the early 90s. How far we've
> fallen.
>
> It would be easy to blame AOL for allowing hoi polloi into our
> precious garden of ideas ;-), but I think there's more to blame to be
> laid on Canter and Siegel, who led the charge in bringing
> commercialism and advertising onto the 'net.
>
> Once that became normalized, the 'net was doomed.

Adblock at least helps..
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 14/05/2024 15:38, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 5/14/2024 2:31 AM, JAB wrote:
>> On 10/05/2024 15:50, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>> It's not so surprising that Microsoft is struggling. They've ALWAYS
>>> been struggling in to gain a foothold in the gaming market. What is
>>> unusual is that they are struggling despite putting so much effort and
>>> money into the attempt. It's not like Microsoft is going to collapse
>>> anytime soon, of course. But most companies see a lot better return on
>>> investment.
>>
>> Is it really that surprising as consumers are a rather fickle bunch
>> when it comes to what they will or won't buy. Money obviously helps
>> but it's only one part of the equation. Indeed one of the faults
>> pointed out with capitalism is that it assumes people are far more
>> rationale in their choices than they actually are.
>>
>> It's similar to the brave new world of the internet where in the sea
>> of ideas the good ones would float to the top. Didn't quite turn out
>> like that.
>
> More like a toilet bowl and what floats to the top of that.
>

I thin it more as silos fall of brown stuff that once you get into one
you sink deeper and deeper!

On 14/05/2024 15:38, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 5/14/2024 2:31 AM, JAB wrote:
>> On 10/05/2024 15:50, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>> It's not so surprising that Microsoft is struggling. They've ALWAYS
>>> been struggling in to gain a foothold in the gaming market. What is
>>> unusual is that they are struggling despite putting so much effort and
>>> money into the attempt. It's not like Microsoft is going to collapse
>>> anytime soon, of course. But most companies see a lot better return on
>>> investment.
>>
>> Is it really that surprising as consumers are a rather fickle bunch
>> when it comes to what they will or won't buy. Money obviously helps
>> but it's only one part of the equation. Indeed one of the faults
>> pointed out with capitalism is that it assumes people are far more
>> rationale in their choices than they actually are.
>>
>> It's similar to the brave new world of the internet where in the sea
>> of ideas the good ones would float to the top. Didn't quite turn out
>> like that.
>
> More like a toilet bowl and what floats to the top of that.
>

thin = think, fall = full!

On 5/14/2024 8:30 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
> Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote at 14:21 this Tuesday (GMT):
>> On Tue, 14 May 2024 10:31:23 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>>> On 10/05/2024 15:50, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>
>>
>>> It's similar to the brave new world of the internet where in the sea of
>>> ideas the good ones would float to the top. Didn't quite turn out like
>>> that.
>>
>> Oh, the promise of the Internet in the early 90s. How far we've
>> fallen.
>>
>> It would be easy to blame AOL for allowing hoi polloi into our
>> precious garden of ideas ;-), but I think there's more to blame to be
>> laid on Canter and Siegel, who led the charge in bringing
>> commercialism and advertising onto the 'net.
>>
>> Once that became normalized, the 'net was doomed.
>
>
> Adblock at least helps..

Not enough.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 5/14/2024 9:28 AM, JAB wrote:
> On 14/05/2024 15:38, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>> On 5/14/2024 2:31 AM, JAB wrote:
>>> On 10/05/2024 15:50, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>> It's not so surprising that Microsoft is struggling. They've ALWAYS
>>>> been struggling in to gain a foothold in the gaming market. What is
>>>> unusual is that they are struggling despite putting so much effort and
>>>> money into the attempt. It's not like Microsoft is going to collapse
>>>> anytime soon, of course. But most companies see a lot better return on
>>>> investment.
>>>
>>> Is it really that surprising as consumers are a rather fickle bunch
>>> when it comes to what they will or won't buy. Money obviously helps
>>> but it's only one part of the equation. Indeed one of the faults
>>> pointed out with capitalism is that it assumes people are far more
>>> rationale in their choices than they actually are.
>>>
>>> It's similar to the brave new world of the internet where in the sea
>>> of ideas the good ones would float to the top. Didn't quite turn out
>>> like that.
>>
>> More like a toilet bowl and what floats to the top of that.
>>
>
> thin = think, fall = full!

That's it, just keep thrashing around so you sink faster. :P

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 15/05/2024 02:01, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>>>> It's similar to the brave new world of the internet where in the sea
>>>> of ideas the good ones would float to the top. Didn't quite turn out
>>>> like that.
>>>
>>> More like a toilet bowl and what floats to the top of that.
>>>
>>
>> thin = think, fall = full!
>
> That's it, just keep thrashing around so you sink faster.  :P

Content algorithms don't help with the focus on here's more content that
re-enforces what you already believe. There's a few people down our
local pub who will basically believe anything the some random person
posted on Facebook if it supports their own narrative.

Winter flu kills more people than COVID; how many people, on average,
does winter flu kill; I don't. I mean how does someone function in real
life with that set of reasoning skills?

On 5/15/2024 1:42 AM, JAB wrote:
> On 15/05/2024 02:01, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>>>>> It's similar to the brave new world of the internet where in the
>>>>> sea of ideas the good ones would float to the top. Didn't quite
>>>>> turn out like that.
>>>>
>>>> More like a toilet bowl and what floats to the top of that.
>>>>
>>>
>>> thin = think, fall = full!
>>
>> That's it, just keep thrashing around so you sink faster.  :P
>
> Content algorithms don't help with the focus on here's more content that
> re-enforces what you already believe. There's a few people down our
> local pub who will basically believe anything the some random person
> posted on Facebook if it supports their own narrative.
>
> Winter flu kills more people than COVID; how many people, on average,
> does winter flu kill; I don't. I mean how does someone function in real
> life with that set of reasoning skills?

The same way the antelope herd survives. ;)

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote at 00:59 this Wednesday (GMT):
> On 5/14/2024 8:30 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote at 14:21 this Tuesday (GMT):
>>> On Tue, 14 May 2024 10:31:23 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:
>>>> On 10/05/2024 15:50, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> It's similar to the brave new world of the internet where in the sea of
>>>> ideas the good ones would float to the top. Didn't quite turn out like
>>>> that.
>>>
>>> Oh, the promise of the Internet in the early 90s. How far we've
>>> fallen.
>>>
>>> It would be easy to blame AOL for allowing hoi polloi into our
>>> precious garden of ideas ;-), but I think there's more to blame to be
>>> laid on Canter and Siegel, who led the charge in bringing
>>> commercialism and advertising onto the 'net.
>>>
>>> Once that became normalized, the 'net was doomed.
>>
>>
>> Adblock at least helps..
>
> Not enough.

At least its something..
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Wed, 15 May 2024 14:50:08 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07
<candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:

>At least its something..

Adblockers work fine on YouTube which is the only place I care about
them working.