I’m just excited for The Evil Within on Game Pass.
6 Likes
Well it’s true? Nothing vague about this statement.
So basically, it’s no clearer than what it was two days ago. They just don’t fucking get it and never ever will. They always put Xbox fans last giving us the left over scraps that dogs eat. Give me a fucking break. SMH.
If they’re going to release just the online MMO games on Sony/Nintendo, then fucking say that. This entire case by case basis is fucking horrible.
If they announce Starfield for PlayStation 5, then im done with Microsoft and Xbox. They can fuck off because if you’re going to give the competition equal or more than what you give your own loyal fan base, I don’t need you and more importantly, I don’t want you.
This also sends the horrible message that any future acquisition may end up being exactly the same as if they don’t acquire them. Unfuckingbelievable. SMH.
3 Likes
Me too
We have no idea which contracts were signed, which deals were made, what Bethesda has demanded in terms of their IP.
We’ll get more clarity in the future, but I agree that the messaging isn’t good. But imagine if Wolfenstein 3 is still coming to PlayStation, then they can’t say: all new games are exclusive to our own platforms. If Starfield has to come to PlayStation, then they can’t say that either. So maybe they have to be vague.
I’m fairly sure most of their output will become exclusive to Xbox. But who knows what the deal is with Indiana Jones for example. This isn’t as easy as we think.
2 Likes
Exactly. What MS did is basically it sold another set of Playstation consoles.
1 Like
7 Likes
What would you rather MS have said? That “all” new bethesda games are exclusive to PC and Xbox? Considering they work on Mobile and VR games, that’s not true, so they can’t use that.
Would you rather they name specific titles, like Starfield and TES6? That definitely was an option, but then you open up the convo to games they didn’t list. It never really ends.
They could have used the word “most” sure, but the entire point behind using “some” is that it’s an unspecified number. It’s the easiest word to use right now while they’re still working through things.
The post read pretty clear to me. I took from it that new Bethesda console games will be exclusive to Xbox and PC. Sure that’s not what they explicitly stated, but that’s my impression.
And I’m pretty sure Nick is asleep.
This week it looks like! Will finally play this dang series.
1 Like
Can we please not meltdown?
1 Like
Well said, better than what I could ever say. Thank you.
1 Like
I agree, one little example of a big game being exclusive would have gone far whether that was Starfield or Elder Scrolls.
So, I see Timdog, Dealer, Colt and others taking laps as a “W”
I kind of agree with them.
Messaging is what it is, but we have confirmation of exclusives in the future.
So I count this dub as massive.
2 Likes
Here are some obvious points to keep in mind when bemoaning that a press release was just a press release:
-
MSFT did in fact provide some new info here; there were delusional people who thought Bethesda games would all stay multiplatform. That is explicitly debunked now.
-
The “some” is in there for a very specific reason, not to just upset fans about a “lack of confidence” which also is delusional. An obvious example is how Sony’s 1-year exclusives disallows devs from ever saying the game will go to other platforms after that year. Again, you can make logical conclusions around the corporate speak.
-
Just like how you don’t make a $7.5bn acquisition to publish multiplats, you also don’t close a deal of that size to spill the beans on everything the day the deal closes. MSFT rightfully wants to milk the hell out of every news cycle they can, and is going to save their biggest stuff for E3. If you expected a Starfield release date and “coming only to Xbox” in a press release, you’re doing it wrong.
-
Even if MSFT is 100% committed to having every big game be an exclusive, there’s not much benefit in announcing that today. Their new consoles are getting bought faster than they can be made, and companies know not to make many forward-looking promises as it restricts optionality in their strategy.
-
Clickbait articles will always exist, especially for MSFT news. Gaming sites know what superfans like to click on, so no matter how clear MSFT was, it’ll always get manipulated.
-
None of this is changing what games you’re playing today. You can type about Starfield all you want, but you’ll still be playing Yakuza or CoD or w/e when you’re not typing. If anything, it justifies being excited about the gamepass announcements that are coming sometime later this week.
9 Likes
Did people really expect them to pull ongoing service games that are ongoing from other platforms or pull Death Loop/Ghostwire and Indiana Jones from other platforms. These deals were already in place before acquisition.
2 Likes
Dumpster fire? Seriously? lol
There are no contractual obligations for normal 3rd party games, just for things like time exclusivity e.t.c.
If Starfield gets released on the ps5 then it is over , for the entire generation, as far as Bethesda games being considered an asset for the Xbox consoles.
2 Likes
Narrative are going to shift when game are going to get reveal
You can have the narrative " MS is not going to make Bethesda game exclusive " for 3 months if you want, when Bethesda blockbuster are going to get announce PC and Xbox only, it wont matter
Xbox has no game disapear when they bought Bethesda, in one day they reverse a narrative, facts will do the talk
Let’s assume this point is the reason for case by case should’ve xbox have abandon the deal?
I certainly think not and I even remember to have said myself I see no good business reason to make Bethesda games for competing platforms unless it was demanded by Bethesda.
Xbox wants gamepass to be future proved and if this is indeed the truth xbox wouldn’t stopped the deal because of that.
But it’s all speculation, we don’t know.
‘‘Then it’s over’’
You mean, it’s over for list wars? Or what? Even if Starfield comes to PlayStation, which could surely happen, then it’s still day one on Game Pass. So, still an asset. $70 on PlayStation. Included in a subscription on Xbox. There’s your asset.
And we have no idea which games Spencer means with ‘some’ Wolfenstein 3? Indiana Jones? The Elder Scrolls Online expansions? Starfield? Who knows!
At some point Xbox fans will need to come to terms with the fact Xbox Game Pass is more important to Microsoft than selling more boxes than Sony.
2 Likes
I was thinking about exactly this just now too. When Phil wrote “some future games will be exclusive, starting with Starfield.” why not do that? On the other hand, maybe they want a big moment for it at their summer show? I guess they could have the deep dive at the Bethesda show and a trailer at Xbox show and then mention exclusive. Unless it isn’t…sigh. Which I honestly would find a baffling decision.
A very optimistic take and I used to think that too but I have no idea what to think right now. This was a good time to be crystal clear about matters.
Phil could have said
"new Bethesda games will be best on Xbox and Game Pass and some of these will be released on other platforms due to existing contracts. We will honor those
In the future we’ll have games from Bethesda and those will be exclusive to Xbox and PC."
But the way it was worded it could mean anything. New games will come to other platforms, which could be anything really, and some future games will be exclusive. We may assume Xbox means getting all the contracted games out of the way and then only have MMO and GaaS (I don’t get why though, again FF14 does just fine, Sea of Thieves…)and the rest is exclusive, but if that were the case I would have expected the wording to be way different. Right now it could mean anything, from TES VI being multiplatform or the next games from Tango, Arkane etc.
1 Like