Critically Acclaimed Hi-Fi Rush "Didn't Make The Money It Needed To Make" - Report

@majikayo666: The "entry level" for consoles are indeed way easier, of course that will be enticing for many people. But the videogame market is already reaching a level of maturity, this industry is 40+ years old, the longer you keep offering the same product, people will get naturally tired and look for alternatives (or other hobbies entirely). And the alternatives are the mobile market and PC to some (small) extent. Japan for example, they pretty much abandoned consoles in favor of playing on phones or the Switch, they got tired of the "home console" formula. China seems to have ditched consoles as well, Korea, etc.. the asian markets are moving to something else (of course they did not abandoned consoles completely, I'm not talking about the extremes, but they play games more on mobile than anything else). And no wonder, Japan was a pioneer as home console goes, they are experiencing the same bullshit for decades.

Maybe it's just a matter of time for some regions in Europe to do the same, I am portuguese and I honestly don't know many people who actually own a console (even less so a PC), they are all addicted to their phones... in Brazil however, many people takes advantage of piracy on PC, they rarely move to a nextgen console because they are still using the old consoles that are unlocked for piracy, etc.. If you think about what the PS5 offers nowadays, it is not that much different if compared to the Super Nes: you have a dedicated machine were you can play games on it... and that's it. The PS5 has some multimedia capabilities, but they can't even be compared with a PC, nowadays there's a lot more alternatives if compared to the Super Nes days, you can keep up with the "gaming" hobby and do so much more if you try different machines and services, more people are noticing that every day.

So the home console market is stagnated, there's a huge influx of new consumers (the pandemic played a key role in that), some are getting hooked by the hobby, etc.. but it will only be a matter of time for them to analyze the situation and look for cheaper/better alternatives. And Microsoft is preparing themselves for that, when streaming takes over in like 10, 15 years from now, they will offer a streaming technology that will only require a screen and nothing else, it will not be expensive and weird like the Google Stadia, that will pretty much be the beginning of the end for the home console "formula"... and really, I can't see Nintendo or Sony competing against that, they don't have the same infrastructure. Hell, Nintendo can't set up a online match of Smash Bross currently, imagine streaming the whole thing? So the Activision purchase should never be a thing imo, because when streaming becomes accessible Microsoft will literally engulf the videogame market, killing the competition. I talked positively about PC as an alternative, but PC users knows very well how the Microsoft monopoly is AWFUL, consumers should avoid monopolies at any cost (yes, that also goes for the people who are not willing to buy their PC games in other store fronts, they only buy on Steam and nothing else... bloody idiots smh)

@majikayo666: GS' newest misinformer strikes again...

Most people who have consoles due to the convenience require those conveniences because THEY'RE TOO BUSY to do anything else. If anything, they're the polar opposite of lazy. And this idea that all PC gamers are modders and computer whizzes spending their entire day tricking out their PCs is just a misconception fueled by Youtubers and typical gamer bravado. PC gamers claiming they did all this work on their PCs is the gaming equivalent of boys claiming they had sex in high school: 90% of them are lying. The reality is they liked installed a GPU and declared it a "build".

And, please, Nintendo's market is dominated by Japanese guys playing their handhelds while riding a train, so get this idea of kids out of your head. That's just how they like to market things in Japan. If every kid grew up overnight, they'd still be a handheld centric dev.

@majikayo666: Nah, Nintendo is making more than enough because they keep all their titles exclusive. And they have already released some garbage mobile games and that's fine for them as those are no competition for what's available on their handhelds.

Those exclusives are the only thing Nintendo has. If you only take Zelda and Mario away and make them multiplat, or just available on PC, it would cripple them. Nintendo wants to sell their hardware and games for that hardware and from what I always keep hearing their games barely go down in price over time and rarely ever go on sale. All of that is only possible because of the position they're in, having those big exclusives that many people really want to play. If they weren't exclusive to their platforms, then most people would rather play them on PC or elsewhere because Nintendo's hardware is generally the shittiest option for playing anything.

@spectral: I was talking about the expenses. A Xbox Series X is priced at $500, with smart purchases and if you stay "humble" with some key parts like the GPU, you can invest like $700, $800 tops to build up a decent PC. I know many people assume the PC costs double the price if you build it from zero (if that was really the case, then sure, the console is a much better deal), it can be expensive indeed, but only if you mess up your choices. And at the moment you have the bases in place, if the PC is "future proof" enough, when the console cycle shifts you just have to upgrade one or two components. For example, in my case I will just have to pay $250 for a refurbished GPU and I will be ready for the PS5 generation.

So really, it's not space science, anyone can do it (especially nowadays with the internet offering tons of "guides", performance comparisons, etc). Consoles charge a extra monthly fee to allow their users to play online, which is a complete absurd, there's no such thing on PC. So PC users also have this advantage, at the long run they will most likely expend less in a cycle (6 to 8 years) if compared to console users, even if the entry level is more expensive. I am admittedly a cheapskate (which is the opposite of the whole "PC master race" stupidity, those people burn money irrationally), for me it's all about convenience at a cheaper price... if I can have a multi purpose machine that can allow me to keep playing the hobby at a cheaper price in the long run, why the hell should I even consider the Xbox console who can only provide the "gaming" hobby and nothing else? It's simply illogical. I guess there's many Xbox users who are noticing the obvious with time, why be limited to a "gaming" machine only if you can have those same functionalities on a PC? And Microsoft itself recognizes that, they don't care if you have a PC or Xbox, as long as you are consuming their software it's all fine, the whole premise of the gamepass is just that, Microsoft is preparing itself for the long run (which means streaming, with just a screen and internet connection you can play their content, no reason to be limited to a secondary machine to make that "connection")

@spectral: Typical MOBO prices routinely outprice the Switch and Series S.

@gleencross: MS has never provided concrete numbers proving exactly how devs make money with Game Pass. It's always been just on their word and nothing else, and we all know MS' word is garbage, and for every dev that says they did well with GamePass, there is another stating they're wary of it...and of course you can never be certain of devs that did say they worked well with MS because no dev would ever want to piss off a major gaming/PC publisher like that. MS even recently stated GamePass was just scraping by to everyone's surprise. Even I thought GamePass was doing well.

@reznik00: which is why video game companies shouldn't be surprised when their game doesn't sell well, when people pirate their game and why people complained when they started to sell their games for $70 even though such customers at the wrong and the companies are right because who is right or wrong doesn't matter when the fact is it's the reality of the situation whatever if it's unfortunately or not

I actually disagree on limiting the idea of necessity to just keep breathing. anything related to entertainment is necessity of psychological needs. when a society gets bored they become moody and therefore they likely to commit crimes. poor societies means people cannot access to entertainment and it means they do commit crime either for fun and/or they are that depressive. also depressed people started to get physically sick as well as mentally getting sick and they can even die. in that context calling video games "luxury" is like president saying "eating cheese is luxury so eat pasta if you are poor then!!!". sure a person can have fun without video games but not many people can have fun without playing video games which they are called gamers and that's actually why video game companies can survive. yet when you don't give a reason for gamers to pay for you they will basically won't pay for you therefore you cannot survive as a company. you cannot do business by being greedy. by being greedy you will earn in short-term but you'll lose in long-term but the point of business is surviving in the jungle of business forever and doing whatever it takes to survive which most companies doesn't do anything they have to do to survive therefore they become history and in university they teach people why these companies couldn't survive lol

I disagree what Maslow thought but he at least made a good point about how people prioritize their needs in comparison to other things you think they are luxury. because of this when a person having a problem paying for their rent they will stop buying video game. but gamers still keep buying games even when they have to sell their kidney which is why Maslow was wrong lol. around the world prices getting high for everything which means increasing the price of video games does backfire for video game companies as much as releasing low quality same as before products. people keep playing old games because they are better for them. and when food, rent and medicine prices climbing high Microsoft wonders why I didn't buy Hi-Fi Rush and being sad for it but I didn't buy the game exactly because video games are a luxury for me like you said. instead of playing Hi-Fi Rush I make a painting to entertain myself. for me opportunity cost of not playing Hi-Fi Rush is so trivial and in fact by playing the game I wouldn't gain anything and I would lose whatever is required for me to play it so by not playing the game I'm winning. so Microsoft's lose is my gain lol

@reznik00: Not sure why you're directing your comment at me, but yes, games are not a necessity, which is my point. People are spending less on everything, not just games, in order to afford the rising cost of living. Corporations that are still making a ton of profit keep whining about how sales have decreased.

Why should they not suffer the same losses the rest of us have to endure? It's like when the economy struggles, the rich still expect to get richer at everyone else's expense, and articles like this seem to want us to feel bad for them.

@spectral: if you think a ps2 game cannot have such graphics then you didn't see a ps2 game before. check rogue galaxy or something lol

@Barighm: even when I was little I didn't like cartoons and their visual style. blame my DNA lol

@gleencross: look at Rogue Galaxy. even the robot design is similar lol

@m4a5: Jeff Grub reputation is pretty average, but he does routinely call things and receive reliable info. Certainly more than you do, heh.