Microsoft's Project Helix sounds like it could be better for gamers than the Series X but in a way that is worse for Xbox

It's important to get out of the way early on that there's still a lot we don't know about Microsoft's Project Helix— including how it will implement even the elements we do know about.

We know that Project Helix is designed to play Xbox and PC games, and it could bridge the gap between a Windows PC and a traditional Xbox. This means it will likely give more creative freedom than the likes of the Xbox Series X, and theoretically gives players more ways to play.

And, in a sense, one could argue that the Sony PlayStation 6 and whatever Nintendo does next is less its competition than the likes of the Steam Machine or prebuilt gaming PCs. On one hand, this seems like it could be a decent device. On the other hand, it feels like just another nail in the coffin that Xbox has been slowly dropping into the freshly dug earth that is Xbox Play Anywhere, a lack of exclusives, and a struggling USP.

Microsoft has a few things in its favour when it comes to making a kind of PC / kind of Xbox experience. Xbox consoles have traditionally been loss leaders, because Microsoft can make its cash back on software licence fees and extra hardware like peripherals. Someone building you a PC will not get a cut of whatever Steam makes, so they need to profit from selling the device. So, Project Helix could theoretically offer a PC-like experience, perhaps with some built-in Xbox branding and Xbox store incentives, and for cheaper than the competition.

Project Helix appears to have a tentative release date of late 2027, with a chance of being pushed back to 2028, and the memory crisis may not have ended by then. Micron recently revealed demand is in excess of supply for the foreseeable future, with plans to balance it out over 2027 and 2028, and SK Hynix recently suggested the wafer shortage will last until 2030.

As cynical as it feels to say, this could actually offer a bit of an advantage to the likes of Microsoft. It's a huge corporation which will have lines of communication and contracts with manufacturers, it has a long road to launch, and it can afford to sell at a loss. If it can offer a Windows-like experience with its Xbox Mode app, it's not hard to see why one might choose the more bespoke Project Helix over something prebuilt.

That selling point makes more sense with Xbox's last few years of strategy, too. The majority of 'true' exclusive games (that is to say, exclusives that are only on Xbox) are mostly reserved for backwards compatible games like Lost Odyssey.

With its catalogue and controller being available on PC, and the Xbox software coming to Windows in the future, I see very little reason for one to pick an Xbox Series X now over a PC. On its launch, ease of use and price made an argument, but the gap has been bridged somewhat, which means an Xbox Series X is sort of like a PC, except without access to Steam, Epic Games Store, and many other bits of PC software.

And Sony seems to have got the message that the scarcity of exclusives can sell consoles, as it is reportedly backing away from launching games on PC. Coming up to the launch of the PS6, users will likely want to feel like the console gives them access to something new and not available to PS5 and PC users.

But Project Helix trying to emulate a PC means that exclusives don't have to be its biggest selling point. It can theoretically offer a finetuned streamlined experience with PC games, and could even eat some costs to get it into the hands of customers for lower prices. That, to me, makes it already a more attractive option than the Xbox Series X.

I still don't think it's good enough, though, and I'm not fully convinced it's not just one more step backwards for Xbox to retreat from the console space. A few months ago, I said, "Everything is an Xbox now, so I see no reason to buy Xbox again". Though Microsoft retired the 'This is an Xbox' ad campaign, my feelings haven't fully changed.

Because even if the marketing is gone, the feeling remains. Xbox is an ecosystem that has spread to a seemingly endless list of devices, and it's getting easier to emulate the Xbox experience without having to throw cash at a new device and a separate storefront. But, in losing its appeal as a console, it could gain some appeal in a similar market to the likes of mini PCs.

Project Helix doesn't have to be built with upgradability in mind, so much as ease of use, and prettiness, and buyers will know that going in. But, ultimately, is that what one wants from a console, and importantly, is it good for the broader market?

To me, Sony and Nintendo feel like they operate side by side, giving distinct enough selling points to not feel like a direct competition. Microsoft's Xbox division could serve to keep Sony in line.

Think of that one 20-second video of PlayStation showing off how to share games. This snippy little response to Xbox's DMR fiasco is exactly the counterweight I'm talking about. If the PS5 proved to be unpopular, Xbox could have capitalised on its mistakes and punished it. With Xbox fitting into that middleground, Sony doesn't really have a balancing force, and that feels troublesome to me.

Xbox, in a console world, is part of the big three. It's admittedly the smallest part of the big three, but it has presence nonetheless. In a PC manufacturing world, it's one of a dozen, and I don't know yet if it has the chops to be worth the lateral move. Better on paper isn't necessarily better in practice.