The article is fom a few days ago and he just reshared it not even because of the article itself but to specifically point out the hint for the Doom announcement. And him reporting or reiterating the multiplat considerations as part of the report after the layoffs makes sense.
3 Likes
Alright, but if i was on Xbox i would be trying my very best to make sure many games maintain exclusive status just for safe keeping and making sure customers of hardware remain happy.
I hope am right on this, because putting everything on other consoles is begging for you to just not make anymore hardware and no one wants that. Simply because PLaystation would start to make more Third party exclusive games alongside Nintendo and that makes me upset.
At that point just port everything
1 Like
I hope not, i like the hardware and its vastly better to use than playstation in my personal opinion.
Additionally, i do not think they are stupid enough to simply port everything under the map. Mostly because if the want their ambitions to be meet, they need exclusive games to fuel it.
3 Likes
Agreed. It’s a fantastic console.
It would be fucking ridiculous if they were to announce a new Gears and announce it for PS5 there too. But I don’t think they will do that during their own show. And if they do something it probably won’t be 6 but the collection coming, which…isn’t any better. And this would show that these plans have kicked into high gear for damn sure.
If it’s needed to keep Xbox as a whole for these fuckers in suits…i guess? But then I can absolutely see a lot of loyal Xbox players just quitting and making PS their main. Who knows, maybe Xbox goes for day and date on other platforms way sooner than we all expect. Expect the unexpected from here on out. 
1 Like
Tim Getty from KFD nailed it for me this week when he said that the closed studios differed from the likes of Ninja Theory, Double Fine, and Compulsion, in that they were part of a group that had far bigger and more valuable IP. Whereas the ones above were bought exactly for what they are/have, so they should hopefully be safe from closure.
Only the Xbox execs can truly know, but it does appear that Arkane Austin and Tango were not really wanted from the off.
I do have to mention that Matt Booty did mention, whether its a good sign or not, that porting the other four games did stress the brand. So i can definetly see them being very apprehensive about porting anything massive if they want to at least maintain their loyal consumers. Which i believe they will respect.
3 Likes
Sea of thieves is absolutely dominating the PlayStation charts. The experiment was a success. I imagine everything is on the table for ports now
1 Like
One of the first things that I try to do is the understand that most of these people reporting on videogames are not actually journalists.
Instead, they make their living stoking the flames of fanboys to pad their bank accounts.
Sarah Bond states that a new console is on the horizon. This is what I am excited for, not that Halo Infinite May be coming on some other console after 3 years.
5 Likes
If they want their brand, identity and players not to go under they will make exclusives games. Its sells, just make live service games multiplatform no single player, is that so much to ask?!
3 Likes
Yes, I think it is now. The old exclusive/hardware-first model is dying.
Maybe if they focused on downsizing triple A games and to smaller experiences than maybe its worth it to keep exclusive. It could be seen as desirable even.
I mean we are hearing about a bunch of Horizon games from Playstation in the works that would be only accessed on playstation consoles. So how is that a good look for Xbox in return?
Cause i bet it will sell well.
Exactly.
Earlier I said that emotions are running high and everyone wants Phil’s head on on a platter. I understand, he’s Xbox’s CEO.
But the truth is that he reports to Nadella. If Nadella and Hood tell Phil what numbers he and shareholders want to see, guess who has to execute the dirty deed to make those numbers happen?
Some people will argue that if Phil really cared he could have pushed back. In reality if he did/didn’t then he could loose his job or be forced to resign. And at that point him resigning or getting fired (like some people are asking) would be irrelevant as nothing would change this trajectory. They would just get somebody else that would get with the program.
2 Likes
It looks like our “old” way of thinking is an outdated business model for them so I doubt they care much about exclusivity anymore so everything is on the table now, choosing to put their games on Playstation instead of marketing and try to sell their consoles in Europe should be an indication of how much they care about identity and console in general.
That being said with how over the place they are lately they could also care about HW and that sweet 30% cut that they are getting from every sale on their store but it will be interesting to see how they will manage to have their pie whole and the dog sated too (this is the Greek version of the saying lol). Who knows maybe they will be OK with their next console selling Wii U numbers? it’s all about that Gen Z man. 
I don’t think “normal” exclusives are needed to sell a console anymore. The only games that help are perhaps those linked to multiple media like Spider-Man or Harry Potter. Starfield didn’t help the sales of Xbox consoles, or Final Fantasy VII Rebirth doesn’t even seem to have contributed to selling more PS5. I think at this point it’s a question of marketing and brand perception whether a console sells or not. And try to tie the marketing of casual games to your console like Sony did with FIFA and Call of Duty
4 Likes
Games cost too much and too long to make to be stuck to one platform anymore, only Nintendo can get away with this and even then, their costs are going up as well
Plus Gen Z are beyond aren’t caring, they are all on phones and PC gaming has never been easier to jump into
1 Like
I believe it’s all still 100% about subscription revenue growth and the cloud. Satya isn’t going to give up on that destination. Nor should he, not when it’s obvious that the console market has been long stagnant and newer generations of gamers have different preferences.
Gaming ending up device agnostic and cloud-based is inevitable. Someone will come out on top of that. Microsoft are still best positioned to come out on top in that landscape shift, but they have to put themselves in the best position to attract users to their services over the course of that shift. It’s obvious the Xbox hardware alone, or a console-first strategy, can’t serve them best towards reaching that end.
The multi-plat pivot is not them retreating from their original ambitions or goals for Game Pass or the mobile store (why they said they bought ABK). They’re also not going to settle for old business-as-usual publisher models either.
The multi-plat approach will somehow be in service of Game Pass growth and mobile store usage. That’s obvious when Sarah Bond just mentioned some relation between in-game stores and discounts through their mobile store. I imagine Game Pass grows to include those discounts, on top of the other benefits of continuing your game on any device (why she and Phil mention cross-progression and playing on any device) and accessing a lot of other games.
As for losing the 30% cut, I think that just shifts to the mobile store goals and has way more potential upside.
If they have the top sub service with Game Pass and the top mobile store for purchases in a gaming market all built on the cloud, then devs and publishers will want to be there for exposure. Microsoft can get a cut of those sales and MTX. There is also the opportunity to provide that infrastructure for publishers that don’t want to use resources to build it themselves. I bet they also attract those publishers to their infrastructure by allowing them to have their own transaction model, like they are doing with Microsoft Store, where they don’t have to give Microsoft a cut (but obviously are paying for the use of the infrastructure).
1 Like
I think so too, however I do think it’s pretty much what has been explained several times by many as well as hinted at by the Xbox leadership, in that previously released franchises will stay multiplatform, GAAS might release on Xbox initially but quickly head to other platforms or just straight up release everywhere, and core franchises will either stay exclusive, or head to competing platforms when they run out of steam or in order to attract new players.
For example, if you have a show where you bring a trailer for a Gears Trilogy for example, and announce it as coming to PS5 and Switch 2 as well, but then announced Gears 6 as Xbox exclusive, it could make sense in order to pull people towards your ecosystem, which is something the executives have alluded to in the direct.
Some people seem hellbent on MS going either 3rd party or full exclusive, but I think the hybrid approach is the best one in order to keep your current userbase happy, maximize revenues, and stay strong in the current transition while getting the most reach in terms of users.
5 Likes
Let’s just say for the sake of argument they drop hardware and go all 3’rd party…
That would be an INSANE drop in revenue. Hardware revenue, Game Pass revenue, 30% cut from all third party games revenue. All content and services revenue including Game Pass Core (previously Xbox Live), etc… Even with the current drop in hardware sales overall it’s still a major source of revenue for them.
It just doesn’t make sense which is why I don’t think they’ll go that route. However they should be doing more to cater to and protect that side of the business . Not actively trying to kill and dissuade it’s console business with their current moves.
If they want to put all their games on PlayStation then they have to figure out a way to incentivise people to buy their console. Game Pass is not enough. Either core single player games stay exclusive or maybe release them 12-18 months later. They really painted themselves into a corner here.
4 Likes
I can somewhat understand it, but would it not be for the best to just try and market Gears heavily instead of porting to playstation and Nintendo 2?
Cause i still feel like its a recipe for disaster if they port a flagship as recognizable as Gears to a rival console. It can jeoperdize its identity in the long run and i really do not want that to occur because ramifications can and could be severe.
That’s why am against porting more games to other consoles, it can have repurcussions that we can’t see at the moment but it can lead to harm the hardware side of things, which i think is important for their investment in both AI and Cloud.
1 Like