|
In response to
"Microsoft’s Xbox boss says Amazon and Google are "the main competitors going forward," not Sony or Nintendo. -- (link)"
by
decline
|
I mean, he's not wrong. Sony and Nintendo are small potatoes.
Posted by
Mop (aka rburriel)
Feb 5 '20, 10:01
|
Granted, this is a much more "big picture" conversation, well beyond consoles, but for Microsoft, the Xbox is just one small facet of a larger holistic cloud strategy. The big cloud players are Google Cloud, Amazon Web Services, and Microsoft Azure. Xbox will live or die on Azure.
As streaming gaming becomes a much bigger thing (which Xbox got into on the down-low years ago which surprising success, while Google has stumbled mightily with Stadia), competitors like Sony or Nintendo will either have to build their own clouds (HAHAHAHAH!) or buy into someone else's.
It's total vertical integration for Microsoft. There's certainly anti-competitive conversations that can be had here. Controlling the pipes and the content certainly can be a dangerous thing, but the DOJ has recently shown their willingness to allow this.
And so, yes, gaming from Microsoft is competing with gaming from Google and gaming from Amazon (not really a thing yet, but also not really *NOT* a thing, either - you can argue that the Fire is a gaming streaming console).
I remain adamant that Sony will not exist as an ongoing concern in 5 years. The only reason I feel Nintendo has a chance at survival is because ownership is so closely concentrated in Japan. It (Nintendo) is frankly small potatoes compared to the other players and only such a protectionist bulwark can keep it from getting gobbled up by Microsoft (and, trust me, Microsoft wants to gobble them up).
|
Responses:
|