I agree with you. Which is why MS are just going all out acquiring publishers. And MS do moneyhat too but its very small and more gamepass deals. I don’t think MS has moneyhatted a game that wasn’t on gamepass outside of a couple of indies. I know people talk about Yakuza LAD…but cmon…came out on ps4 and PC and they probably had a 3 month launch exclusive for next gen. Probably cost half a million for that moneyhat. Minor things.
We know sony has done it for many AAA games and 12 month deals. the length of time is also significant.
Smaller studios will be different as the focused marketing they get from a major platform can help them break through the noise while theres more benefit to focusing on development for one platform at a time. Generally both those benefits are less important to AAA studios with established, well known IP.
Bit late to the party on this, but I was avoiding this thread for a bit because of the lingering disappointment
I think that allowing first-party games on other platforms is, like just about everything else MS do, a play to get people into their ecosystem. MS Rewards, adaptive controllers, cloud licenses, Game Pass, and this. It’s all part of a concerted effort to make themselves un-ignorable. If Xbox is on your radar at all, you might look at what they have to offer, and it’s a lot.
I’ve been doing MS Rewards since early 2016 apparently but was disinterested enough that I used them on Amazon gift cards, knowing they weren’t worth as much as if I redeemed them for MS/Xbox gift cards. It wasn’t until I heard enough consistent praise about Game Pass that I actually sat down and looked at what Xbox had to offer and decided making the jump from PS4 was worth it for me. “What am I really losing out on if I make Xbox my primary platform from here on out? Largely exclusives I enjoyed like Spider-Man and Persona 5, which I can’t play anywhere else.” ← Dramatic irony
They need good attention, and money talks! Making people think “Wow, this game is actually pretty good, what else do they have? Whoa, I could have played this and HOW MANY other games for comparatively cheaper?” is well worth the “loss” of exclusivity (plus they would still get a what, 70% cut of digital sales?). Even without conversion tricks and all that stuff, Game Pass is a great deal for a certain type of person. Munificence fosters much more good will than extravagant - even excessive - shows of wealth.
As to why they DO keep some games exclusive (not from PC of course), I assume there are some extremely deeply researched data that justify why Minecraft should be multiplatform but Starfield shouldn’t. Just because it doesn’t make sense to me doesn’t mean it doesn’t make cents for them
Nah, I’ve double-dipped enough, thanks. I’d rather put that money towards Atlus in the hopes of future entries and ports of old games coming as well. Knowing my luck, I’ll have bought every last one before a Sega acquisition is announced too
There’s also a difference between acquiring a publisher and taking on development and personnel costs and just handing a big sack of money to a company that isn’t in any danger of shutting down without that deal.
Anyway, do you happen to have a source on the sales data? I find that kind of thing really interesting for some reason
Terrific post, as always. Thanks for your measured take.
No, it is not worth it. Considering that people play a handful of games in general and mainly multiplatform anyway, releasing first party games on other platform won’t make a person to switch the ecosystem. Much less in the era where the games are backwards compatible so everything you owned before stays with.
In the first place, Minecraft is multiplatform because the original game was relased on PS before the acquisition. While Dungeons and this new game are multiplatform games is anyone’s guess.
I don’t think you understood what I was going for. I’m talking about a scenario where for instance a PlayStation gamer buys the new Minecraft whatever game (Legends?) and really enjoys it, then learns they could have spent that much money on a few months of Game Pass (which includes this game they just bought and very many multiplatform games). This obviously wouldn’t apply to every consumer but it might pull/convert enough people to be worth it.
Yes, this is my bad, I meant games that use the Minecraft IP, like Dungeons and this new one.
No, it won’t pull a lot of consumers but will encourage more people to move to Playstation. You see, PS games won’t become less attractive while Xbox won’t have and not to mention PS will get them too.
Also after investing 500$ into console, nobody is gonna throw additional 300-500$ in order to invest into another ecosystem. Series S exists for a reason - it is a cheap way for PS folks (and some other) to enter Xbox ecosystem. And it does not require first party releases on other platform and it will make people join Xbox ecosystem and spend money there.
I don’t understand the logic behind Minecraft, but Microsoft did not have consistent policy regarding Xbox for a long long time. Even now, their attitude regarding exclusivity is relatively unreliable - I do believe that they will make each and every game exclusive (they just don’t break contracts and don’t remove released games in PSN) and they did not show any indication of kumbaya attitude.
I don’t think this logic flies in a subscription world. People used to buy a few albums a year, a few DVDs, a few books. Now people are consuming new things on a weekly basis.
Subscription world has not come yet in gaming and we still have platform holders unlike movie industry where each and every device is basically a white label service for a streaming service.
With Xbox Puck, TV app, mobile, PC and Xbox there is no reason for Microsoft to release anything on any other platform.
I think you’re taking much too short of a view here. This is a long-term strategy to portray themselves as a valid if not superior alternative. Obviously someone isn’t going to play a first-party Xbox game on their brand-new PS5 and think “screw this thing, I’m going to get the other one” but if you hear enough positives, it will factor into a future decision.
Here’s another example: Roger’s son Timmy loves Minecraft and plays it on his old PlayStation 4. Roger buys him Minecraft Dungeons and gets a great response. Timmy tells him they’re making a new Minecraft game and is very excited about it.
Roger asks his handsome friend SpiderLink, who explains (a little too emphatically) that he could spend (let’s say) $60 on the (presumably) PS4 version of this game or he could make a big upgrade to the Series S and get a Game Pass subscription for more money upfront but a happier Timmy. SpiderLink goes on to weirdly ardently promote the benefits of the Xbox ecosystem and Roger politely exits the conversation.
MS are very clearly positioning themselves to furnish a very appealing product. They’re utilizing many vectors to attract and retain users using their massive wealth to both secure a steady stream of exclusive content and draw the attention of the hungry but frugal gamer.
I can only speak from my own experience, but I have absolutely no interest in returning to Sony ecosystem despite it being my primary one last gen and an important one in the gen prior. That’s because MS are doing a good job of keeping me happy with their services and products. Negative perception is unbelievably hard to shake off, and they’re still working to shake off the stink of the early Xbox One.
You can’t think of a single reason people might not want to deal with streaming-only games?
It is based on assumption that Timmy does not want Playstation or have no idea what it is and does not have friends who own and play on Playstation.
A lot of people who don’t like streaming never tried. There are some who did not have great experience with it, but most of the people never tried it (or it is not available in their region).
Anyway, I never understood why some Xbox folks want Xbox games on Playstation but don’t ask Sony to do the same. Strange logic.
And that’s great. Xbox exclusive ecosystem will be great and awesome.
Last time I was in GameStop a parent was asking for a PlayStation racing game like Forza Horizon because that’s the game her son’s cousins all had. The GameStop employee recommended Gran Turismo Sport. That poor bastard was definitely going to be disappointed by the PlayStation alternative
I’m getting the impression that you don’t do great with hypotheticals, so I sincerely apologize if that was confusing to you. This example is to illustrate a reasonable possible situation which leads to Microsoft benefiting from the strategy I mentioned.
I was referring to the fact that internet quality varies greatly from person to person. Cloud streaming is a great option and just one of many ways MS are making a push for a broader market.
I’m not asking for Xbox games to be on PlayStation, I’m positing a possible explanation for the decision Xbox leadership already made to do that thing. I would love PS games on Xbox, like I mentioned in the first post you replied to.
It varies but not exactly varies that much. Internet infrastructure is becoming better and better.
The point I was trying to make is that you hypothetical situation is that it relies on the assumption that Roger did not ask Timmy’s opinion.
People flock to Playstation despite knowing (or not knowing) that they don’t have free cloud saves and play anywhere initiatives. So bringing Xbox first party games to PS won’t encourage them to switch to Xbox at all. People don’t play that many games in the first place either so they won’t be able to justify the switch to another ecosystem.
It seems my point was missed. There’s a lot of chat about FF7R exclusivity and not as much about the CC remaster. There’s other threads for the exclusive talk and skipping Xbox, I’d love to see more discussion about the potential of this remastered psp game.
Does anyone think they’ll be any major changes to the game?
They’ve changed the buster sword back to the original design in the CG’s and I feel like it’s a lot of effort to go through if you just wanted to sell a simple remaster.
