Hacker News Reader

Comment by autoexec | Hacker News Reader

I really don't understand the point of Xbox.

Nintendo has the worst hardware, but consistently delivers a small number of really great games you can't play anywhere else. Any game you can play on a Xbox you could also play on a real PC and have a vastly better experience and far more utility. Xbox is just a shitty, ad infested, crippled gaming PC. Playstation is heading in that direction as they lose more exclusives, but at least their hardware is better than Microsoft's so the games look/play better.

Microsoft might as well give up and just sell a bunch of low-mid range gaming PCs in console shaped cases, running windows, ship them with controllers and just brand them as Xboxes. At least for now. Eventually Microsoft wants games as a service, where you buy a dumb terminal/cheap thin client and they stream games you pay excessively high prices for but never actually own to your screen.

View on HN

What you described with the "might as well give up" is literally the idea behind Project Helix. It's a PC branded as Xbox with some compatibility layers glued in.

Xbox now is a game studio, not a console manufacturer. Look at them through that lens. Doom, Halo, Overwatch, Fallout, whatever else, whether you are into them or not, they own a lot of franchises and those are their core now.

Depending on the hardware, if they let you get to a desktop, and you can run regular windows programs (especially steam and emulators) it might actually be worth it for some people. Especially for households where nobody owns a desktop/laptop, just phones and tablets.

As far as I'm aware so far, the plan is to have Windows boot into "Xbox mode", like the Steam Deck boots into "big picture". And have an exit button to get a normal desktop and other stores/games.

Basically just trying to challenge Valve on the scale of Microsoft's access to hardware and undercutting their price while doing the same thing with a different default store. Also compatibility with actual Xbox games, which won't be a thing on the steam deck.

> And have an exit button to get a normal desktop and other stores/games.

Sure, because that seems like a thing current Microsoft would do for their users...

I'm not sure what the point of vibe reading is when the announcement[1] is right there and explicitly calls out third party store support, being able to play "your PC games", and the fact that the device will run Windows. Could they backtrack on all this? Maybe, but it seems a bit too late for that.

The only thing I'm not certain of is the exact shape of the "exit button". It could be a "desktop app" like Windows 8 had, instead. Could be some way to add third party games to the Xbox launcher UI. Barely relevant, anyway.

[1]: https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2026/03/11/project-helix-buildin...

> Could they backtrack on all this? Maybe, but it seems a bit too late for that.

So we're talking about taking a PC, which is a general purpose gaming platform able to use multiple stores equally, and giving Microsoft control over what can and can't run on it?

Of course Microsoft would backtrack, exactly as soon as the financial benefit to them outweighs the reputational cost.

They've been salivating over recurring revenue ever since Apple pivoted their model into leveraging hardware locking to privilege first party services.

"Giving Microsoft control" is a strange idea. If you are a DOS/Windows user (and to a large extent even if you aren't), then Microsoft was in control of the PC since the platform's inception and this doesn't change anything. Helix is a PC. Running an x86_64 CPU. It runs Windows (with some extra fluff that runs on boot), and someone will put some Linux or other on it eventually.

When I was talking about backtracking, I meant doing so before the release of the project, which would be reputation damage with no profit. And if it's out, as specified, then there's not really any backtracking to speak of anymore.

> Xbox now is a game studio

A shitty one at that.

Microsoft runs monopolies. Business software Monopoly specifically.

They cannot make user and customer focused software. They cannot make user and customer focused hardware. They do not care about customers.

Although I guess they have proven to be okay at data centers.

What should the Xbox be if Microsoft was a competent organization, like half of what apple is? And I'm not an Apple fan by the way

- since they have a monopoly of PC gaming, much to the pain of PC gaming users, that should afford them the ability to effortlessly Port x86 base games to an x86 gaming console platform

- because of their extensive relationships with PC hardware manufacturers, it should afford them the ability to produce a very powerful but cost-effective gaming platform

- Maybe even since steam runs primarily on x86, Microsoft could have partnered with steam to get their games onto that platform relatively seamlessly

- The PC gaming has several decades of dos and windows games that could have been updated, remade, or the like, so there should have been a wealth of ip available to them

- and with good coordination, should have been able to bootstrap dozens of software gaming studios to make actual good games exclusive to their platform

Well Microsoft succeeded at some of this. They did not succeed to the necessary degree, especially with treating their own custom games

I find modern Windows very frustrating. The Xbox lets you play games that might be available on PC/Windows but you don't have to deal with Windows. That's why my sister has an Xbox. She ditched Windows for a Mac years ago because Windows kept getting more annoying, but the Xbox was easily usable in 2013 and it still is today.

Xbox is designed for kids, who's parents don't want them to have full access to a desktop computer and don't know how powerful of a gaming computer they need (people like to claim its cheaper but it really isn't, and it's easier to spend more on fast hardware you don't really need).

Because of this eco-system for kids, xbox has great multiplayer support (including locally for friends), and the software was a clearer focus with less bloat. I don't see xbox market going away any time soon unless people stop having kids

hmmm, that does not make sense. for one, xbox competes with playstation and playstation is definitely not designed for kids.

second, nintendo exists for "family friendly" market.

I guess kids suggests someone quite young, but my impression was they (xbox and playstation) were built for people in high school and younger, which is why the product makes sense. As OP pointed out, if you were 35 just getting into gaming you'd just buy a desktop.

Consoles like Xbox serve parents who aren't tech-savvy enough to hunt for PC deals and don't want their kid to have free access to the internet.

For what its worth I used to work on a parental controls app startup and this is a consensus I found talking to customers (parents), they like their devices to do one narrow thing so they can control how their child spends their free time. There are of course adults who play it but this is the core of the market, and the strongest value-add in my opinion.

Nintendo's offering is absolutely the "for kids" console.

every platform is also a community. a network of players, like a neighborhood, or a bar. Your friends & acquaintances are there. The whole is more than the sum of it's parts. It's more than just hardware, or exclusives.

I switched from PS to Xbox a few years ago, because my family and friends were playing there.

There's also some nice technical benefits, but compared to my friends, who cares?

It'd be nice if companies were forced to allow interoperability, at least optionally, and had good standards for making that easier on developers no matter what platform or title. There are some valid reasons to segregate PC and console gamers (depending on the game), but that kind of social network lock-in is mainly an artificial constraint which is anti-competitive and ultimately anti-consumer. Those are the kinds of barriers the internet should be removing from our lives.

I agree but people will still self segregate . It’s natural .

An open platform becomes a slum and an exclusive one opens up. Friendster MySpace Facebook instagram and so on

If you allow everyone you lose the community by definition.

> Microsoft might as well give up and just sell a bunch of low-mid range gaming PCs in console shaped cases, running windows, ship them with controllers and just brand them as Xboxes.

But, that's exactly what they're doing right now, and you're still not satisfied? What would be different compared to today? It very much is exactly what they're doing.

I haven't seen it yet. Maybe I'll be satisfied when I do, but as of today it still makes no sense to buy an xbox and hasn't made sense for many many years.

The series S at launch, probably until year 3 or so, was arguably the greatest deal in gaming. Especially with how easy it was to get cheap (even free) gamepass.

bought an xbox series x + gamepass at the start of covid lockdowns. been playing since. before that i hadn't played video games in like a decade. maybe there aren't a lot of people in my category but to me gamepass + xbox is the closest thing to netflix for games. series x brought some nice things like quick resume which is fantastic for someone who only can dedicate a little time per day on gaming. for people who are not hardcore gamers it really ticks a lot of boxes.

I can only see gamepass being a good thing for the most casual gamers. It hurts developers and gamers alike. It's basically the ultimate DRM for games. You never own your games. You have to beg a company for their permission to play them (revocable at any time, for any reason). The games can be censored or modified without notice. Games can be removed and made unplayable at any time without notice. Prices to access whatever games they do allow you to access can increase at any time. It gives them yet another way to force ads on you. They have an endless number of ways to enshittify the service to pressure you to subscribe to higher tiers at higher prices. I certainly don't want to think about how I'm running up a meter while I play or have to worry if I have enough "gaming minutes" left this month or if I'll get cut off. That's just the issues with gamepass. Console gaming in general involves a growing list of compromises.

Most of those same arguments can be made for Netflix, but it's a lot less expensive to buy a DVD or Bluray to get around that restriction for the shows that matter to you. I think most people who are serious about movies have some kind of collection of physical media.

I know that leveraging that kind of control over what games people are allowed to play and keeping their hands in players wallet at all times pulling out cash at regular intervals forever is where Microsoft wants things to go for everyone, but it'll feel like a massive loss as someone who loves games and enjoys the fact that when the mood strikes me I can pull out my PS1 and replay Symphony of the Night or even my old Atari 2600 and play a game of Night Driver or Riddle of the Sphinx. As long as the hardware holds up I can enjoy my old games or loan them out to friends and family (props to old hardware by the way, most of my old consoles including both the Atari and the PS1 are still working fine while I'm already on my third PS5 controller).

I'm with you on the quick resume feature though. The PS5 actually had that when I got it, and it was handy, but they removed it in an update for some reason. I'm guessing it was either breaking saves or it took more effort to keep working with new titles than they wanted to expend.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com