Predicting the (actually very exciting) future of next gen Xbox hardware
An analyst recently said that next gen, only either Xbox or PlayStation will survive as a console manufacturer. Here's why that's silly.
What does Xbox's next gen look like? I think there's more hints out there than many potentially realize.
Recently, a game analyst predicted that, next gen, there won't be room in the high end console market for both PlayStation and Xbox, insinuating essentially that Xbox would have to die. That's dumb, for a variety of reasons, but we'll focus on the more obvious ones right now.
As we head into 2025, the hardware we use to play games on is becoming increasingly incidental. I wrote recently how Xbox mostly won't have console exclusives moving forward, but it may not even matter. Increasingly, PlayStation is bringing its games to Steam, and Valve is about to let manufacturers build "consoles" based on its OS, which will be full of PlayStation's games anyway. In that universe, the very idea of the "console exclusive" game becomes a little silly.
The future of gaming from the platform holders' perspective, at least generally, is going to revolve around content and software sales. The hardware that content lives on will become increasingly incidental, as more and more users adopt device-agnostic platforms like Steam and cloud to build their gaming libraries.
So, will Xbox have to exit hardware completely next gen? I believe that, in fact, the opposite will be true — instead of there being fewer Xbox-branded devices next gen, there will be more than ever, but they might not all be built by Microsoft itself.
Xbox put a Windows OEM vet in charge of hardware back in 2023
As Microsoft has expanded its gaming footprint, so too has it needed to split duties across various disciplines. Overseeing Xbox hardware at a high level is Sarah Bond, current President of Xbox. All the hardware and platform teams answer into Sarah, who is charged with executing Microsoft's "Xbox everywhere" strategy.
Below Sarah Bond is Jason Ronald, who is now known as VP of Next Gen. Jason is in charge specifically of executing the new Xbox hardware ecosystem from first party. However, there's another individual that the Xbox community rarely talks about, she who actually leads Xbox's hardware ecosystem.
Get the Windows Central Newsletter
All the latest news, reviews, and guides for Windows and Xbox diehards.
Roanne Sones came to Xbox a couple of years ago. Sones is a 22-year Microsoft vet and was previously Microsoft's Windows OEM lead, responsible for developing partnerships between Microsoft and PC manufacturers like Dell, Lenovo, ASUS, and so on. I met Roanne Sones at an event in LA a couple of years ago, where Xbox's initial shoots of a multi-device future started to take shape. In the press area, Microsoft had set up all of the devices that it considers part of the Xbox ecosystem — which goes far beyond the Xbox Series X|S consoles that traditionalists consider as being the "only" Xbox.
On deck were devices like the ASUS ROG Ally PC gaming handheld, which was new at the time. The Xbox Series X and S were present, naturally. We also had devices like the Razer Kishi V2 Pro mobile controller grip, and the Logitech G Cloud Android streaming handheld. This was way before Microsoft partnered up with Samsung for cloud gaming directly on TVs, or Amazon for cloud gaming directly on Fire Sticks. Even back then, it was a strong visual hint at what Roanne's tenure at Xbox would look like.
Sones' was clearly specifically brought in to help forge Xbox's future, which increasingly looks a lot more like Valve and Steam than PlayStation and Nintendo. Next month at CES 2025, Valve with debut the first non-Valve Steam PCs, in partnership with Lenovo. Xbox's Jason Ronald will also be there, doubtless to discuss how Microsoft is working hard to improve Windows on PC gaming handhelds.
Today, Windows has a huge compatibility advantage over Steam OS and distros like Bazzite, but the latter have big performance and usability advantages. Steam OS is far, far more intuitive on a gaming handheld. And when it's coupled with Valve's Proton emulation layer it, presents an existential threat to Windows itself potentially — which isn't always the most optimized gaming platform for consumers.
But what does this mean for today's Xbox console customer? What does it have to do with the next-gen systems? Read on.
The Windowsification of Xbox solves a ton of issues
Despite some minor variances the Xbox and PlayStation platforms are virtually identical these days, both based on x86 AMD chips that diverge almost arbitrarily. As costs in general rise and new users into the gaming ecosystem flatline, the ability to grow margins and deliver for stakeholders becomes constrained. To solve this, publishers ram games with microtransactions, preorder bonuses, premium early access, and various other strategies to squeeze more money out of the existing user base. Another potentially less self-destructive way developers could save money is if porting games between systems was even more streamlined.
While the Xbox ecosystem arguably has better support than it ever has, third-party support could be boosted even further if it was even more closely aligned with Windows PC, which remains the far bigger platform. Microsoft is currently working towards this goal, and I have it on good authority that the development platform for the next gen Xbox ecosystem will be more Windows-like than it ever has been. Developers will be able to deploy their games to the Microsoft Store across PC and the next gen Xbox consoles more easily than ever, in theory.
In essence, it's my prediction that the next gen Xbox consoles will essentially be more PC-like than ever before. Xbox CEO Phil Spencer has hinted as much when he described a desire to bring third-party stores like Epic and GOG to Xbox consoles. You can't really achieve that if the console itself can't run Win32 Windows game packages natively.
Further more, it is my prediction and hope that, by making the next Xbox more Windows-like than ever, for consumers, I would hope that Xbox Play Anywhere becomes a standard requirement for publishers. If "everything is an Xbox" as Microsoft describes, then I need to be able to take my games from this Windows-ified Xbox console to my laptop PC to cloud devices to a Samsung Smart Fridge. Xbox Play Anywhere is the Xbox ecosystem's most underrated feature in that universe Microsoft is trying to develop, and right now, it's fairly limited, especially on games that never arrived in Xbox Game Pass. More developers are opting in without a Game Pass deal, though. Metaphor, Death Stranding, and Final Fantasy Pixel Remasters being a few recent examples.
Furthermore, I would hope that at least for next-gen systems, Microsoft will drop the anachronistic paywall for premium multiplayer games. It would make absolutely zero sense if I could run the Epic Store on my Xbox, and then be asked to pay for multiplayer. Dropping the pay wall for next-gen only might also encourage existing Xbox users to upgrade at a greater cadence than we've seen between the Xbox One and Xbox Series X|S generation, too. If this shiny new Xbox device is a PC, then it needs to behave like one — both for consumers and developers.
... And manufacturers, for that matter. Given Roanne Sones' expertise, you'd have to assume that this Windows-like Xbox ecosystem would also lend itself to a licensing model. Manufacturers like Lenovo, ASUS, and others that are building Steam OS gaming devices, would also be able to build their own Xbox OS gaming devices. For Microsoft, this would solve their global footprint issue when it comes to distributing hardware. Microsoft is historically poor at marketing and representing its products with retailers outside of the United States. What if you could get Samsung to promote their own Xbox hardware locally in Korea? What if you could get an ASUS Xbox promoted in Taiwan? Microsoft could keep the spec recommendations tight to ensure consistency for console consumers who expect things to "just work," while also having OEMs develop devices and price points that perhaps have stronger regional appeal.
Execution is absolutely key, and nowhere near guaranteed
But, yes. None of this is guaranteed. It's a nice vision, potentially, solving various issues. OEMs with more expertise in hardware could potentially make better "Xbox consoles" for regions outside of Anglo-centric regions like the United States and UK, with marketing to match. Microsoft will still develop its own Xbox consoles for core fans and as reference devices for OEMs, including both handhelds and traditional devices. A more Windows-like development environment could lead to a boost in support from creative indies who presently favor Steam, as well as third-party publishers who typically favor PlayStation. Future games would be less equipment bound, and would hopefully roam to other future Windows devices and hardware more easily, future-proofing our content and our access. A more Windows-like environment could also make the devices more versatile too, giving greater access to non-gaming apps and services.
However, putting full Windows under the hood could create issues, too. Windows is a quirky operating system, and isn't always as reliable as the lightweight Xbox OS designed specifically for gaming. A ton of work would have to flood into making Windows more usable on gaming handhelds, as well as via gamepads on TVs. You can't do basic things like open text boxes or close UAC windows with a controller on Windows, and having to manage things like drivers and peripheral software is the antithesis of what console gaming is supposed to be — simple and easy. The very last thing I want to see on my Xbox is a blue screen of death. There's also the matter of backward compatibility... games on Xbox Series X|S today are not designed (or licensed even) to run on Windows. For Microsoft to build a system that doesn't support the existing library natively would be insanity, potentially, particularly when such a small percentage of the library supports Xbox Play Anywhere for PC future compatibility.
It's not impossible that consumers wouldn't just wholesale reject these ideas, though, particularly if executed poorly. The big fear in the Xbox community is that, we'll end up losing access to our digital games, if Microsoft isn't able to protect the current hardware ecosystem. Encouraging users to engage with Xbox on devices that aren't attached to the Xbox ecosystem doesn't inspire confidence, at least today.
If Microsoft does execute on this vision, it could totally change the game industry, and ensure Xbox's long term hardware future.
Jez Corden is the Executive Editor at Windows Central, focusing primarily on all things Xbox and gaming. Jez is known for breaking exclusive news and analysis as relates to the Microsoft ecosystem while being powered by tea. Follow on Twitter (X) and Threads, and listen to his XB2 Podcast, all about, you guessed it, Xbox!
-
Papictu For me what has made ecosystems like Xbox or Playstation attractive is precisely the advantage of having everything unified: profile, achievements, library...Reply
To me this smells terrible, it's just my opinion and there will be those who see advantages in this mainly, but depending on how they solve details such as achievements or digital purchases, after 20 years playing on Xbox I think it will become a place where I do not want to be. -
Lurking_Lurker_Lurks Consoles have felt like they've been in a rut since they started and I think that shows with how they're performing after all this time. In every way, they should've become a popular gateway into a new medium of entertainment. They didn't. In fact, in a lot of ways gaming has grown beyond the home console and left it behind. Consoles struggle to pick up 200 million users in a lifetime (and by struggle, I mean they fall short of it by quite a large margin (with said margin varying each generation (for example Nintendo's home consoles have historically flopped every other generation (gamecube sold 20 million, Wii sold 100 million, WiiU sold 13 million (oof)...)))). All the billions of gamers are on PC and Mobile. The AAA gaming industry is really starting to feel this disconnect to as costs continue to rise and there's not a ton more people to sell to with high end PC gaming being expensive and consoles still not taking off (rather it seems like they peaked at a rather low altitude).Reply
Speaking from personal experience, I have to say I HATED consoles growing up. Well, that's a major hyperbole. I hated consoles when I started to grow up. As a kid, it was literally all fun and games. There were a lot of us siblings so we'd get every console and share. As I got older though, I started to notice that the console market was uniquely... kinda terrible. My life was increasingly dotted with smartphones, tablets, and PCs and all the digital technologies, and I couldn't help but notice that for everything else I was into... there were very few walls. I could start a Netflix movie on my phone and finish it on my TV picking up exactly where I left off. I could also download content to any device Netflix was on. As time went on I could even download and play mobile games across devices and transfer save data. When I bought a DVD I could watch it on literally any device with a DVD player and then they started selling ditigal codes so you'd have the physical DVD and the digital copy and then they also started up movies anywhere and you can access your digital movie library on any device. I noticed more and more that the consoles offered the polar opposite experience. We STILL don't even have free cloud saves across the board (only Xbox does it). I started to hate consoles and vehemently hate exclusives as I just wanted that experience which I knew was possible because I got it on every other tech platform. I wanted games to be more widely available across the board and I wanted to be able to play wherever and access my library and be able to seamlessly pick up where I left off. I grew very bitter playing video games on consoles knowing they were so anti consumer compared to the rest of the tech in my life. I grew up in an iPhone family and even the iPhone wasn't as locked down as consoles (in fact, as I kid I didn't even recognize it was a closed ecosystem even when with people who used Android whereas it was glaringly obvious with consoles). It reached a critical point when the Xbox One and PS4 initially launched. As always I got every console (over the course of multiple Christmases and birthdays). At first I took not being able to play my 360 and PS3 games as business as usual (I had been playing consoles as old as the Nintendo 64 due to my family), but as time passed I got really, really frustrated with it. The critical point was when Playstation sold PS Now and game streaming as their solution (and my mom not really knowing what it was bought me a few months of it as a gift). It was god awful at the time (streaming was not remotely good enough for gaming TEN YEARS AGO) and felt like such an insult. That's when it really hit me that these companies were choosing to do this. They could give consumers a better, more open, more cohesive, and more valuable experience where everything is as widely available as in other markets but just don't because they're afraid no one would want their box. They failed to properly market a product worth buying and instead keep selling me a ball & chain trap using exclusive games as bait. And I was done with it.
I very nearly stopped gaming entirely as that generation went on. I just was not gaming as much, and didn't really know how to get into PC gaming so it felt like the end. And I've seen my siblings move on from gaming and I always went to school knowing most people didn't game at all on consoles, and it felt like I was starting to get why after so many years of gaming being my favorite form of entertainment (well either gaming or reading). That was when Xbox started to come out with its native backwards compatibility program, PC initiative, and Xbox Play Anywhere. I have to tell you even before I knew how to game on PC, I got excited by that. Xbox was actually doing something to create unique value for it's customers and not just dangle shiny games in front of a mouse trap to try and get people locked into the most walled garden in the digital landscape. It made me enjoy gaming again even when I couldn't take advantage of it. I similarly just felt better about gaming when I saw stuff like Xbox putting Ori on Switch and Xbox pushing for cross play whereas Playstation was against it. Then I really got into gamepass.
It's felt a little sad and disappointing to me seeing how poorly the Xbox fan base has reacted to this generation. To each their own, but I've been estatic at most every move Xbox has made. Having grown up a lot and learned a lot more about business and marketing, I really REALLY think they're messaging, consistency, and execution desperately need work, but the general concept of what is happening I love. Xbox Cloud Gaming is what I wanted PS Now to be. Something that takes advantage of streaming and puts it on devices that can't handle my games instead of a roundabout solution to backwards compatibility that cost $20 a month (though streaming on Sony TVs was neat (I actually made my mom buy a Sony TV for the family room when she upgraded and we still use that TV 10+ years later)). Xbox Game Pass Ultimate eventually got me into PC gaming (a little through a bad old gaming laptop and now a LOT through my Steam deck and Legion Go (steam deck got me into Steam, but I really can't go back from my legion go and having access to Xbox Play Anywhere, PC game pass, cloud gaming, AND steam and any other launcher)). And I am genuinely more happy gaming knowing that Xbox is pushing for an initiative of our games everywhere and supporting digital libraries in ways that are next level compared to other platforms. Just the other day I went on reddit, saw a post that Xenoverse 2 was made Xbox Play Anywhere (it wasn't when it launched), and downloaded that sucker on my legion go. People are scared about digital libraries and I'm lost there because Xbox is the console least likely to make you lose access to your games. Nintendo and PlayStation have historically given gamers the middle finger when it came to game preservation and backwards compatibility. It was inconsistent even within the same console generation (take the Wii for example: the first model launched able to play GameCube games but overtime subsequent models lost this feature). Xbox was the same, but proved that in the One generation (well... later in the One generation) they had a dedication to native backwards compatibility (supporting games we owned in previous gens on disc or digitally). One of my favorite things with the series S|X were how they elevated that with FPS boosts for 360 era games. Wish they just did more of it. Even when Xbox announced games going to other platforms, much like Ori I was happy about the move. Again, marketing and messaging and strategy execution deserve criticism, but at the end of the day I'm somehow who LIKES when good art (and video games are art to me; there's a reason why they are my favorite entertainment medium) can be enjoyed by more people.
I really would like to live in the world where Xbox is praised for leading the charge into changing the console market and gaming industry on the whole into what it should have been eons ago. And maybe we will some day. I've like the meat and core of everything Xbox has done this generation. It has me gaming more than I ever did before (even more than when I was a kid) and enjoying it more than I ever have. Last generation had me feeling hopelessness regarding game. I had despaired that it would always remain as it was, and at the time I saw what it was as nothing but an insult to my worth as a consumer and the worth of video games as an artistic medium to share valuable and just fun experiences with people. Now, I CAN say that I am excited for where gaming is going.
All that said, Microsoft could 100% fumble. OEMs are difficult to handle and we've seen the mess on windows. I would argue that Xbox console hardware should remain proprietary, but Microsoft should work to bring a more Xbox like experience to Windows. Don't make Xbox more windows based, make windows more Xbox based. Then companies like Lenovo can sell gaming devices with an Xbox brand but are still windows PCs just maybe with an Xbox gaming mode like SteamOS (having a Linux desktop mode and steam gaming mode). Overall, make improvements to gaming on windows and bring it under an Xbox branding UX/UI umbrella. This is partially being done with the current Xbox game bar which in compact mode pulls up recently played games across launchers/storefronts and let's you open them or any launcher right from the XBOX game bar menu. Console hardware should remain a proprietary experience though, just with greater connection to other platforms (like with more play anywhere games). Consoles should remain a consistent experience and don't need the full windows gunk. They also do need to stay something that Microsoft can sell at a subsidized cost. The series S would NOT be possible at its price and power if it was a gaming laptop running full windows. -
Lurking_Lurker_Lurks (I was told I wrote too much so now it's too posts; this one is kinda the tl;dr). Regardless, the future of gaming overall is exciting. I just hope, consoles reap some of the benefit they deserve. Like I want people to actually want to buy consoles because they're a good valued piece of hardware with a great ecosystem and no other reason. The Xbox Series S should be in every household. For $200 to $350 (pending sales) you get a small compact home entertainment device that can play any modern game with a massive library of backwards compatible games it can run better than the hardware it originally released on, AND have access to every streaming service or ditigal entertainment app one would buy an apple TV for. It is a little more expensive, but opens up a doorway to a whole new form of entertainment. I really want to live in the world where more people game, where I can game in more places with the same library, and where I can game knowing more people have access to fantastic Even if Xbox can't accomplish that know for whatever reasons, they were the spark and fanned the flames. Valve is hot on their toes to build that very same ecosystem. Sony is only going to do more multiplatform releases and even Nintendo seems to be at least slightly more consistently supporting game preservation and backwards compatibility (we'll see... expectations are low for Nintendo but eventually (like a long eventually) even they'll start doing more multiplatform and making games more available. Sony is also tackling cloud gaming much better this time around and seems more interested in portable hardware that isn't separate from their home console (unlike the vita) or just a remote play device, but rather let's you natively play your library away from the home consoles, which would be especially cool as to pull this off they'd also need to start doing free cloud saves. Whereas Xbox is looking closer than ever to copying PC and getting rid of paid multiplayer As a gamer, I can't imagine wanting to live in any other time (okay, I could imagine it for pricing; costs need to go down, but that's a much more widespread issue... WHY HAVE GROCERIES GOTTEN SO EXPENSIVE 😭). Anyway, that's my Ted Talk. If you read all the way to the end, wow. Get a life. Go play some games. Again, the website itself told me to get my essay out of here. Clearly I need to be gaming 🤣.Reply -
GraniteStateColin Lurking_Lurker_Lurks said:Consoles have felt like they've been in a rut since they started and I think that shows with how they're performing after all this time. In every way, they should've become a popular gateway into a new medium of entertainment. They didn't. In fact, in a lot of ways gaming has grown beyond the home console and left it behind. Consoles struggle to pick up 200 million users in a lifetime (and by struggle, I mean they fall short of it by quite a large margin (with said margin varying each generation (for example Nintendo's home consoles have historically flopped every other generation (gamecube sold 20 million, Wii sold 100 million, WiiU sold 13 million (oof)...)))). All the billions of gamers are on PC and Mobile. The AAA gaming industry is really starting to feel this disconnect to as costs continue to rise and there's not a ton more people to sell to with high end PC gaming being expensive and consoles still not taking off (rather it seems like they peaked at a rather low altitude).
...
You clearly have a passion for this, which I respect. I think I agree with your point that Windows should become more Xbox like, rather than the other way around, IF by that you mean Xbox retains its simplicity and Windows gains something like an Xbox app that effectively lets Windows run/play Xbox games.
I disagree that OEMs are a problem for Windows or would be for Xbox. HP, Dell, Lenovo, Asus, Acer, and others have made wonderful Windows PC's and the success of Windows is due in large part to their work. As long as MS defines specs for what will be an Xbox so there is no user-impacting fragmentation and confusion over what systems can play which games, I thing that having competing manufactures is only helpful, as it has been with PC's. -
Lurking_Lurker_Lurks
I hear you and do agree that competiting manufactures leads to some great outcomes as well. My concern is that rather than windows becoming more like Xbox (where gaming is simple and often times "just works") we risk seeing the opposite with Xbox taking on the worst traits of Windows PCs, that is the clunk. Like right now the big Windows Update has been out for weeks and it keeps running into problems on different hardware or with different software. Now, I will say Microsoft is at fault here for not doing a better job at maintaining their windows ecosystem with all the different types of hardware, but that's also partially the issue. Will Xbox start repeating those same mistakes if they go the OEM route? Then there's also the issue PC gaming has where sometimes hardware requires specific software updates from the manufacturer due to certain configurations which is yet another point in which everything can go wrong.GraniteStateColin said:I disagree that OEMs are a problem for Windows or would be for Xbox. HP, Dell, Lenovo, Asus, Acer, and others have made wonderful Windows PC's and the success of Windows is due in large part to their work. As long as MS defines specs for what will be an Xbox so there is no user-impacting fragmentation and confusion over what systems can play which games, I thing that having competing manufactures is only helpful, as it has been with PC's.
There's definitely pros and cons to each. I mean using Windows PCs for example, there is a reason why Mac users are happy in their closed ecosystem where Apple controls everything from the hardware to the operating system and they can expect a little more consistent experience. That's not what I prefer personally, but I can see the argument for it. My thoughts are that if Xbox keeps the Xbox console as a first party experience where they handle the hardware and operating system, then they can keep console gaming consistent and easy to use for those who want it. On the other hand for those who want more options and are willing to navigate the potential problems that might arise with that, windows can just be made to offer a far, far better gaming experience overall. And ideally Xbox play anywhere will have expanded greatly so that no matter where you play, your library and saves will be there.
That's the best of both worlds in my eyes with the reality in mind that Microsoft isn't perfect and that more variables tend to add more potential problems. Otherwise, if we were in a perfect world I'd love hardware manufacturers competing with each other to offer better value for their "Xbox console" (though we'd also run into the issue of pricing as these manufacturers couldn't offset costs at all with software sales). -
fjtorres5591 The assumption being made that for XBOX to be more Windows compatible it must run off Windows just isn't necessarily the only way to get there from here.Reply
XBOX runs a Windows-derived OS atop a hypervisor but the hardware is not limited to running just the "XBOX OS". Developer mode allows booting into a different PC-like OS. That is how retro game emulators can be installed and run.
Nothing says the next XBOX (or even the current ones) can't boot up a custom gaming-only Windows version (WindowsG?) or even SteamOS or that a general availability version of the core Hypervisor can be installed on generic gaming PCs with a minimum of Series S capabilities. The latter would allow OEM PCs that can cross boot into the walled XBOX garden from the open Windows environment and the former could allow traditionally locked consoles to boot into " anything goes" compatibility modes.
The issues games have don't all come from the gaming-specific Windows components but often from the rest of the Windows OS, the parts that support non-windows apps. A gaming-focused Windows release can strip out all non-gaming Windows functions much like "Lite" unofficial Windows versions do. Windows is built to be all things to all people but it doesn't have to be and a version of full Windows that can reboot into a lean gaming only configuration (not XBOX OS) would address many of the issues gamers have on Windows handhelds and, for that matter gaming laptops and desktops.
One comment from Sarah Bond that led to much head scratching and has since been forgotten is when she announced the formation of a team for *forward compatibility*. What exactly might that mean? Well, one answer is the ability to crossboot up a Windows-compatible OS. Think on it: Xboxes are effectively entry-level gaming PCs so such a move would only be acknowledging that reality.
More, it would mean that the next gen XBOX would debut with tens of millions (60M?) installed base on day one. Normally the first wave of new generation console games are designed to be crossgen because of the low installed base of the new boxes but if the hardware itself is crossgen that problem goes away.
Developers would have but one *scalable* build to maintain. Unlike current Windows games where Scalability is optional, next gen scalability would be required and desirable to address the entry level of consoles and handhelds. Instead of being an outlier, INDIANA JONES' scalability of RT features would be the norm. Good for console gamers, who get to keep their existing hardware longer, good for PC gamers who get a access to the deep XBOX game library and a stable floor for PC games, and good for developers who save costs and get an enlarged market for a single release. In addition to the usual fine-grained settings, games could choose a console setting to start with and then fine tune upwards based on the hardware.
Making XBOX Windows compatible (and yes, optionally SteamOS compatible--for a fee, of course) would make both hardware platforms better. And provide a compelling case for both MS and OEM products on a common "this is an XBOX" ecosystem.
It can be done.
Will it be done?
TBD. -
GraniteStateColin Lurking_Lurker_Lurks said:I hear you and do agree that competiting manufactures leads to some great outcomes as well. My concern is that rather than windows becoming more like Xbox (where gaming is simple and often times "just works") we risk seeing the opposite with Xbox taking on the worst traits of Windows PCs, that is the clunk. Like right now the big Windows Update has been out for weeks and it keeps running into problems on different hardware or with different software. Now, I will say Microsoft is at fault here for not doing a better job at maintaining their windows ecosystem with all the different types of hardware, but that's also partially the issue. Will Xbox start repeating those same mistakes if they go the OEM route? Then there's also the issue PC gaming has where sometimes hardware requires specific software updates from the manufacturer due to certain configurations which is yet another point in which everything can go wrong.
There's definitely pros and cons to each. I mean using Windows PCs for example, there is a reason why Mac users are happy in their closed ecosystem where Apple controls everything from the hardware to the operating system and they can expect a little more consistent experience. That's not what I prefer personally, but I can see the argument for it. My thoughts are that if Xbox keeps the Xbox console as a first party experience where they handle the hardware and operating system, then they can keep console gaming consistent and easy to use for those who want it. On the other hand for those who want more options and are willing to navigate the potential problems that might arise with that, windows can just be made to offer a far, far better gaming experience overall. And ideally Xbox play anywhere will have expanded greatly so that no matter where you play, your library and saves will be there.
That's the best of both worlds in my eyes with the reality in mind that Microsoft isn't perfect and that more variables tend to add more potential problems. Otherwise, if we were in a perfect world I'd love hardware manufacturers competing with each other to offer better value for their "Xbox console" (though we'd also run into the issue of pricing as these manufacturers couldn't offset costs at all with software sales).
All fair points, but it seems like the only real criticism there is on the differentiated rollout times for system updates. I agree with you that could occur with OEMs making different Xbox hardware. However, it is extremely rare (maybe never happens, other than particular bug fixes) that an app won't run due to the status of a system update. The Xbox equivalent would be that the home UI for launching apps might temporarily vary between Xboxes: one guy has the June 2026 UI and his buddy still has the April 2026 version and it won't update yet until some driver or other issues are worked out. But this doesn't affect gameplay for either user.
I agree that's not great, but it seems like a small price to pay if it resulted in greater overall Xbox marketshare and therefore more attention from game devs. Further, I'd argue that we already have this today anyway: some gamers are in the various Insider rings and so experience a different UI than those who only use the general release UI. To be fair, it's different when it's a user choice vs. a consequence of your hardware, but point being this is not a source of problems for any of these users and so wouldn't be even if it resulted in staggered UI updates.