A post-mortem of Xbox or: how $3 trillion cant buy you love Readers FeatureGameCentralPublished December 21, 2024 1:00am Is the Xbox dream over? (Microsoft/Metro)One reader believes Microsofts days as a console manufacturer are effectively over and has a theory for where he thinks they went wrong.Well, what a week its been for Xbox. Weve had claims, by a notoriously pro-Microsoft insider, that the era of Xbox exclusives is over, then the head Microsoft saying hes redefining what it means to be an Xbox fan (he probably meant that to sound like a good thing, but it doesnt), and then reports about the Xbox Series X being quietly withdrawn from sale in Europe. Oh, and US sales were down 29% last month, just before Christmas.Short of a meteorite dropping on Xbox HQ Im not sure it couldve got much worse than that. But then we had a story about how analysts think theres no longer room for three console formats and that its either PlayStation or Xbox thats going to get pushed out. I dont think you have to be a PlayStation zealot to think that maybe thats going to be Xbox losing out.Dont get me wrong, I dont think any of this is good news. Sony needs strong competition to stop them taking advantage, but I dont think Microsoft has offered that since the Xbox 360 era. And even then only for two or three years, until Sony caught up with them and suddenly all Microsoft cared about was Kinect.Given that Microsoft is worth $3 trillion, enough to buy Sony many times over, it is staggering how inept theyve been at challenging them. Even buying Activision Blizzard hasnt helped them, in fact that was the nail in the coffin.Yes, they are now the biggest games publisher in the West but the price of spending all that money is that they cannot afford to release any of the games only on Xbox, so they have effectively forced themselves to become third party.I dont know what they mean about their next gen plans, and Id be surprised if they did, but Xbox hardware is now nothing but a niche and I cant see anything that would ever change that. And thats for the simple reason that Microsoft never really seems to have understand the games industry properly.I dont doubt Phil Spencers passion for it but the simplest rule of gaming is that games sell consoles, but thats something hes never seemed to fully grasp. Or to put it even more simply, nothing matters but the games. Nothing, and yet thats always been Microsofts weak point. How big will Fable be? (Xbox Games Studios)A few years ago, Spencer famously said that even a 11/10 game wouldnt save Xbox, correctly pointing out that the PlayStation 4 generation was a bad one to lose because thats when everyone became locked into an ecosystem and theres no way something like Halo Infinite was going to coax them out.The problem with this is, like most things Spencer says, its only half right. Yes, losing the ecosystem war was a serious blow but it wasnt the end. Nintendo doesnt have much of an ecosystem but things like that dont matter to them because for them making great games isnt a problem.Spencer was absolutely wrong when he said an 11/10 game wouldnt change anything. I checked and what he actually said is: There is no world where Starfield is an 11 out of 10 and people start selling their PS5, thats not going to happen.Thats kind of a silly thing to say though because theres no world in which Starfield would ever get that kind of score or that that kind of game would appeal to a wide enough group of people to make a difference. Nor would Halo or Gears Of War or, Im willing to bet, Fable. Despite all the money theyve spent, Microsoft just doesnt have that sort of talent to hand.They had to basically shut down and restart the developers of Halo, the new team they set up for Gears Of War has made no impact, and Im highly dubious that the developers of Forza know how to make a comedy action role-player.If, however, Microsoft had made a brand new franchise, ideally a brand new concept, that was a great game and got great reviews, then that absolutely wouldve turned heads. But Id argue the only titles theyve ever had like that are the two Halos, over 20 years ago.Despite being the youngest of the three console makers, Xbox has always had their head stuck in the past, convincing itself that its franchises are on par with Sony and Nintendo in terms of quality and popularity when theyre really not or at least not in the last two decades.They spent $72 billion on Activision Blizzard but imagine if they had used just a fraction of that to experiment with new ideas and new IP, things that couldve actually made a difference. If theyd come up with next Pokmon or The Last Of Us. But they squandered all that money in a deal that killed their dreams of being a top console maker dead.Xbox as a brand will carry on, sure, but it wont mean the same thing as it used to. Microsoft has tried to paint this as a positive but its not. The only purpose of a games company is to make games and making your own console gives you an enormous advantage with that.More TrendingSo yeah, they can be Activision Blizzard with a new name, and a few extra studios, but everything that Xbox was meant to be when it started out is now impossible to achieve. All the money in the world and theyve been schooled by companies much smaller and less rich, but which understand gaming a lot better than they ever have.By reader 84Colbat But is it really? (Microsoft)The readers features do not necessarily represent the views of GameCentral or Metro.You can submit your own 500 to 600-word reader feature at any time, which if used will be published in the next appropriate weekend slot. Just contact us at gamecentral@metro.co.uk or use our Submit Stuff page and you wont need to send an email.GameCentralExclusive analysis, latest releases, and bonus community content.This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Your information will be used in line with our Privacy Policy