Support NeoGAF

[intheinbetween]

Which means Microsoft is trying to be on Playstation

Correct me if I’m wrong but Minecraft was already released on PS3 before MS acquired Mojang.

And by the way, Minecraft was an investment quite different than Zenimax.

MS won’t block the existing titles on PS3/PS4/PS5 published by Zenimax or their studios, whether they are on physical media or digital, but MS won’t be releasing the new titles on a competitors platform since they want their customers

 

[Mattyp]

I don’t actually care if Bethesda’s IP’s only go to Xbox. I already stated that I can play their buggy, PC-centric crap on PC in 2026 or whenever some of these non-existent games come out in some far off, dystopian future.

It's like he thinks Microsoft only bought Fallout, should we let him know lads?

Spoiler

For the rest of us that are already aware what are we looking forward to the most Doom, Wolf, Prey or even Rage as a CONSOLE EXCLUSIVE? Prey 2 going to be 10/10 fam.

 

[Killer Sakoman]

Correct me if I’m wrong but Minecraft was already released on PS3 before MS acquired Mojang.

And by the way, Minecraft was an investment quite different than Zenimax.

MS won’t block the existing titles on PS3/PS4/PS5 published by Zenimax or their studios, whether they are on physical media or digital, but MS won’t be releasing the new titles on a competitors platform since they want their customers

Time will tell.
Phil and Greenberg will scream exclusive if it was the case. They are very vague on this one.

 

[quest]

Time will tell.
Phil and Greenberg will scream exclusive if it was the case. They are very vague on this one.

It is a waste right now with no game or systems. That push will come when they show starfield and have more systems produced in the states.

 

[Sleepwalker]

He said case by case.

So when Starfield doesn't come to PS, don't lose hope, you may still get ESVI, and when that doesn't come, you can still hope for Fallout V, and when that doesn't come either maybe there will be a different case in the future.


Remember: case by case.

 

[Neko Mimi Mode]

Time will tell.
Phil and Greenberg will scream exclusive if it was the case. They are very vague on this one.

They really aren't, Phil couldn't be more clear in his comments and he's never been more clear about any other game being exclusive in the past.

There is no reason, zero, for Microsoft to buy Zenimax if not to make it's games Xbox exclusive. That's a fact.

 

[Killer Sakoman]

Do you understand how little sense it would make to put GP on Playstation.. cmon

I didn't say it will land on playstation. I said Microsoft wants ( and definitely is trying) it on playstation. Sony definitely doesn't want it.

 

[Fox Mulder]

I love how exclusives were the #1 most important thing until Xbox gobbled a bunch up. Now it's bad for gamers and the industry?

It’s great for Xbox. Exclusives like Halo or God of War are different than buying up an entire company with popular long running multi platform franchises and millions of fans like Doom or Elder Scrolls.

I think everyone would salty if Google bought Take-Two or EA to pump up Stadia too.

 

[quest]

I didn't say it will land on playstation. I said Microsoft wants ( and definitely is trying) it on playstation. Sony definitely doesn't want it.

Unless Sony waves the 30% it would never come to Sony period just like apple. Gamepass has little margin right now and to give anyone 30% makes it financially unviable.

It’s great for Xbox. Exclusives like Halo or God of War are different than buying up an entire company with popular long running multi platform franchises and millions of fans like Doom or Elder Scrolls.

I think everyone would salty if Google bought Take-Two or EA to pump up Stadia too.

Considering Sony was buying zenimax games as timed exclusives one by one Sony backed Microsoft into a corner blame Sony and mr. Money hat Ryan. They locked up 2 and starfield was next on Ryan's money hat list. Microsoft just stopped Sony from getting all zenimax games timed exclusives the way I see it. Sony is on a mission to content starve Microsoft this was just fighting back.

 

[Redlight]

I didn't say it will land on playstation. I said Microsoft wants ( and definitely is trying) it on playstation. Sony definitely doesn't want it.

Where the hell does that come from? 'Is definitely trying' it on Playstation? Sony doesn't want it?

You guys are just making this shit up now. You're not even within touching distance of reality.

This whole Zenimax thing has really rattled some cages.

 

[sixamp]

Bethesda games must remain xbox console exclusive unless they appear on switch. No xbox exclusives should be on ps5. Maybe after a year of xbox exclusivity but I wouldn't even do that

 

[Redlight]

"There are only a limited number of proven creators of AAA. What Microsoft owns, Sony cannot get."
Bethesda founder Christopher Weaver

Bethesda founder: Microsoft deal is "brilliant counter-move against Sony"

"What Microsoft owns, Sony cannot get," Bethesda founder Christopher Weaver tells Inverse.

www.inverse.com

Can we put this to bed now?

 

[DaGwaphics]

Can you tell me what the difference between buying a 3rd party developer and taking away from the opposing user base is and funding a 3rd party developer with them remaining independent is?

If a 2nd party game is primarily funded by a platform holder, I don't see a problem with that. You are talking about software that probably never gets made otherwise, so that does bring something positive to the table. When you cut an exclusivity deal on something already finished (which all the platform holders have done many times), that is just using money to block others from playing.

Buying a studio, is what it is. That is going to take some games away from some players, but at the same time the platform holder is paying for everything. I think all the players have bought independent studios at one time or another. Is consolidation the best for consumers in the long run, probably not. But, it will continue to happen. That's capitalism for you. There's a ton of fresh money coming into the industry, that will be good in some ways and bad in others.

 

[Clear]

There is no reason, zero, for Microsoft to buy Zenimax if not to make it's games Xbox exclusive. That's a fact.

Thats not the case at all, just getting their titles day#1 on Gamepass followed by a period of exclusivity would be the most profitable way of utilizing the IP.

You don't sell more copies, or widen the value of your properties by restricting the addressable audience, especially when there is already a proven interest for them in the excluded platforms.

Yes. It serves a strategic purpose in making the host platform/service more appealing, but there are limits to the gains offered by this approach. You are only going to gain 1 user per sale, and ultimately everything reaches a point of saturation.

 

[Neko Mimi Mode]

Thats not the case at all, just getting their titles day#1 on Gamepass followed by a period of exclusivity would be the most profitable way of utilizing the IP.

You don't sell more copies, or widen the value of your properties by restricting the addressable audience, especially when there is already a proven interest for them in the excluded platforms.

Yes. It serves a strategic purpose in making the host platform/service more appealing, but there are limits to the gains offered by this approach. You are only going to gain 1 user per sale, and ultimately everything reaches a point of saturation.

Nope.

 

[Three]

If a 2nd party game is primarily funded by a platform holder, I don't see a problem with that. You are talking about software that probably never gets made otherwise, so that does bring something positive to the table. When you cut an exclusivity deal on something already finished (which all the platform holders have done many times), that is just using money to block others from playing.

Buying a studio, is what it is. That is going to take some games away from some players, but at the same time the platform holder is paying for everything. I think all the players have bought independent studios at one time or another. Is consolidation the best for consumers in the long run, probably not. But, it will continue to happen. That's capitalism for you. There's a ton of fresh money coming into the industry, that will be good in some ways and bad in others.

Who cut an exclusivity deal on something already finished let alone started? If you know of such a case then fair enough but games were already in production in the acquisition circumstance too, correct? Both block other platforms while providing funding. One just does it more permanently than the other.

I've always kept the idea that any game already announced on multiple platforms suddenly becoming exclusive whether it be Epic store, xbox, or PS is shitty. Anything unannounced is not a broken promise and no commitment was made in the first place so whatever is happening in the background is of no concern to me.

 

[Lovelygamer]

Bethesda Softworks founder says "Sony won't get what Microsoft owns"

Bethesda Softworks founder says “Sony won’t get what Microsoft owns”

A few days ago, Microsoft announced the purchase of Bethesda. Because of this, discussions began on the Web about whether the studio’s major franchises would go to the PlayStation. Microsoft and Zenimax executives are largely silent about what the deal means for Bethesda, but company founder...

nintendosmash.com

 

[DaGwaphics]

Who cut an exclusivity deal on something already finished let alone started? If you know of such a case then fair enough but games were already in production in the acquisition circumstance too, correct? Both block other platforms while providing funding. One just does it more permanently than the other.

I've always kept the idea that any game already announced on multiple platforms suddenly becoming exclusive whether it be Epic store, xbox, or PS is shitty. Anything unannounced is not a broken promise and no commitment was made in the first place so whatever is happening in the background is of no concern to me.

A better way of putting it I guess was "games that were going to get funded regardless". Take TR for example, that game was coming whether or not MS bought the timed exclusivity. Where SFV may not have been completed at least not on the timetable it was without Sony funding, so I'll give them a pass on that one.

Also, keep in mind that all existing publishing agreements are being honored. MS is publishing more next-gen exclusives to PS5 than XSX at the moment. LOL Nothing announced has been cancelled.

 

[Sleepwalker]

Bethesda Softworks founder says "Sony won't get what Microsoft owns"

Bethesda Softworks founder says “Sony won’t get what Microsoft owns”

A few days ago, Microsoft announced the purchase of Bethesda. Because of this, discussions began on the Web about whether the studio’s major franchises would go to the PlayStation. Microsoft and Zenimax executives are largely silent about what the deal means for Bethesda, but company founder...

nintendosmash.com

He's wrong because posters on a forum tell me it's not profitable to make them exclusive, so they'll come to PS5. No doubt.

 

[HaveButOneLife]

That's a pretty rock solid position, I think.

If a video games console manufacturer buys an entire publisher or developer then they have the right to make sure every game that comes out from that publisher or developer is exclusive to their console. That's how the market works.

There's absolutely no concrete evidence that's what Microsoft will do with Bethesda's games though. It's a perfectly reasonable thing for them to do, if they feel that's the best way to maximise profits. And it's just as reasonable for them to publish Bethesda games to Playstation if that's what makes the most financial sense.

Threads like these are so weird and sad because people start making these bold claims about what definitely will or won't happen in the future, as if they have some insider knowledge of how the company in question intends to operate. I very much doubt Microsoft have decided how they are going to publish Bethesda games in the future yet, because they are not idiots or raging fanboys.

They could keep everything exclusive - in which case I'll buy an Xbox to play the games that I can't elsewhere. Or they could choose to maximise sales by also publishing to Ps5, in which case I'll just buy them on that.

Bottom line, anyone claiming that one thing or another will definitely happen is playing childish console war games, and need to give their heads a wobble.

Agreed, because logically speaking, why would they want their competition to profit off of their games?

Games like Minecraft or ESO stay multiplatform because they already have large player bases. Makes sense.

 

[Aguero9320]

He said case by case.

So when Starfield doesn't come to PS, don't lose hope, you may still get ESVI, and when that doesn't come, you can still hope for Fallout V, and when that doesn't come either maybe there will be a different case in the future.


Remember: case by case.

Or you can subscribe to XCloud on your PS5. If Sony block that there will be an app on the same smart tv your PS5 is hooked up to. You can even use the same controller. What a time to be alive

 

[Based Department]

People who still hope Bethesda games will be released on playstation need to rethink about it from a businessman point of view.
Microsoft business plan is obvious, Xbox, PC and mobile they already have 100m subscribers on xbox live, I don't think they'll release TES6 on PS5 to sell a potential 10m copies which translates into 500m revenues, that's not a big amount considering both companies are willing to pay bigger amounts just for some timed exclusives.
From a business perspective locking TES6 from PS5 would yield them more money on the long run.
I still think they'll release some big multiplayer games filled with microtransactions on PS5.

 

[Clear]

Nope.

You missed the point I was making. By keeping the properties exclusive they sacrifice profit for strategic gain. I wasn't saying they couldn't or wouldn't, I was just saying that for shareholder value in terms of recouping that $7.5b sunken cost it'll take them a lot longer going exclusive versus staying multi-plat with preferential treatment for the owner.

Whether this was a worthwhile acquisition is going to take years to demonstrate, so calling it right or wrong right now would be ridiculously premature.

All that can be fairly said is that Zenimax product will likely sell less than before because they've just cut-off a big chunk of the addressable market. GamePass itself will further reduce sales on both Xbox and PC as it eliminates buy-in premiums, meaning that the balance will need to be made up through post-sale transactions and residuals from the service. As a unit, the former Zenimax group's profits will go down in the short term sharply.

The math isn't complicated.

 

[DaGwaphics]

You missed the point I was making. By keeping the properties exclusive they sacrifice profit for strategic gain. I wasn't saying they couldn't or wouldn't, I was just saying that for shareholder value in terms of recouping that $7.5b sunken cost it'll take them a lot longer going exclusive versus staying multi-plat with preferential treatment for the owner.

These same investors are probably very much sold on the GP approach and are looking at the long-term potential there. Investors like to see moves being made, CoH sitting in a drawer does nothing for them. This isn't a risky amount for MS to spend even if the whole thing falls apart, they could afford to spend a lot more. Investors want them to take swings.

 

[Neko Mimi Mode]

You missed the point I was making. By keeping the properties exclusive they sacrifice profit for strategic gain. I wasn't saying they couldn't or wouldn't, I was just saying that for shareholder value in terms of recouping that $7.5b sunken cost it'll take them a lot longer going exclusive versus staying multi-plat with preferential treatment for the owner.

Whether this was a worthwhile acquisition is going to take years to demonstrate, so calling it right or wrong right now would be ridiculously premature.

All that can be fairly said is that Zenimax product will likely sell less than before because they've just cut-off a big chunk of the addressable market. GamePass itself will further reduce sales on both Xbox and PC as it eliminates buy-in premiums, meaning that the balance will need to be made up through post-sale transactions and residuals from the service. As a unit, the former Zenimax group's profits will go down in the short term sharply.

The math isn't complicated.

Are people still talking about "recouping" the 7.5billion as a reason for making the games go multiplat? This is a fundamental misunderstanding of economics.

Microsoft don't need to recoup anything, they haven't less than they had before, only the 7.5billion is now in assets, it's simple balance sheet stuff.

You are posting in a thread where the head of Xbox, the buyer, and the founder of Bethesda, the acquisition, both say categorically that these games will be Xbox console exclusive. That right, and that right alone, was paid for at 7.5billion.

There's nothing more to discuss here.

 

[Croatoan]

PC keeps winning!

 

[Based Department]

You missed the point I was making. By keeping the properties exclusive they sacrifice profit for strategic gain. I wasn't saying they couldn't or wouldn't, I was just saying that for shareholder value in terms of recouping that $7.5b sunken cost it'll take them a lot longer going exclusive versus staying multi-plat with preferential treatment for the owner.

Whether this was a worthwhile acquisition is going to take years to demonstrate, so calling it right or wrong right now would be ridiculously premature.

All that can be fairly said is that Zenimax product will likely sell less than before because they've just cut-off a big chunk of the addressable market. GamePass itself will further reduce sales on both Xbox and PC as it eliminates buy-in premiums, meaning that the balance will need to be made up through post-sale transactions and residuals from the service. As a unit, the former Zenimax group's profits will go down in the short term sharply.

The math isn't complicated.

You should look at their business plan, they won't sacrifice anything 99% of PS users have phones and/or PCs and/or Xboxes, the games will be released there. selling 10m copies on PS5 (let's assume they'll sell 40m consoles by 2023) would only give them a revenue of 500m, that's not a big deal considering they can make way more money on the long run if they make them exclusives (forcing people to buy their hardware and/or subscribe to their service).
And btw both companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars just to secure timed exclusives

 

[KAOS]

I think the new games will eventually come to sony's console but first and foremost on Xbox/PC/GP! I think it serves sony right for all the timed exclusives they were and are trying to get. The fact that Starfield might not come out for awhile upon release on a sony console when they where trying to get it timed exclusive is funny! I wonder if their ps 5 commercial was hinting at Starfield?!?

 

[Digital Gex]

People bringing up Phils old exclusive comment are forgetting he was addressing questions about other platforms not Sony.

This acquisition is big news and only just looked into what studios they got out it, many media misleading people that they brought Bethesda but they got more than just that.

I wonder if Microsoft will have "I witnessed most powerful console on the planet" T-shirts again like they did with Xbox One X E3. Then another shit "I witnessed games Sony will never get." lol.

But seriously, it's fair game since Microsoft owns the companies, it would be no different if Sony owned them or Nintendo.

 

[SolidSlug]

That should compel Sony to finance new IP that surpasses these franchises. And everyone would benefit from that.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Microsoft don't need to recoup anything, they haven't less than they had before, only the 7.5billion is now in assets, it's simple balance sheet stuff.

The games are exclusives and will stay esclusive, but there is no need to make gross and inaccurate generalisations like that. The assets you invested the money in now are more specialised than the money you converted in them and they actually cost more just to operate (money in a bank generates a positive interest, money converted into a company generates a negative one... wages, electricity, water, food, perks). You cannot easily get back what you invested either.

Also, it is money you have locked down that could have been spent in other ways potentially earning less or more than that as a result (concept of opportunity cost).

 

[Clear]

You should look at their business plan, they won't sacrifice anything 99% of PS users have phones and/or PCs and/or Xboxes, the games will be released there. selling 10m copies on PS5 (let's assume they'll sell 40m consoles by 2023) would only give them a revenue of 500m, that's not a big deal considering they can make way more money on the long run if they make them exclusives (forcing people to buy their hardware and/or subscribe to their service).
And btw both companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars just to secure timed exclusives

They have just paid $7.5b for the business, and now they are responsible for running it. 2300 people across multiple sites is a very considerable amount of burn rate, which needs to be covered before a cent of that $7.5b opportunity cost gets recouped.

Going exclusive they just removed one of the pillars supporting Zenimax's former $510m annual revenue. Think about it: That's 1/15 of just the opportunity cost, and now that business needs to maintain or exceed its current performance despite taking a hefty cut to its addressable market in the short term.

Truthfully, I have zero investment emotionally or monetarily in this so its just all thought-experiment and theory-crafting to me. I'm just surprised that they wouldn't try to maximize profit in the short term because even were the entire market to transition favorably to MS plans and interests, its going to take years to happen.

 

[EliTheIceMan]

So no ES6, Starfield, Fallout 5 on PS5.

Why care?

 

[highrider]

Xbox needs more exclusives!

Hey I didn’t mean those!

 

[Elog]

I like that MS is putting up a fight. That means better games for all. It was a slaughter last generation and that will only create a complacent Sony. Now Sony needs to fight to retain their customers - and that is a good thing.

Ultimately, we will see how MS deals with Bethesda and exclusives. Phil's words so far are meaningless PR words (i.e. totally non-committal). If MS goes all out and actually do not care about how/where you play it makes more sense to have all releases on Sony as well - not sure the last word has been said regarding their strategy internally.

 

[Elog]

They have just paid $7.5b for the business, and now they are responsible for running it. 2300 people across multiple sites is a very considerable amount of burn rate, which needs to be covered before a cent of that $7.5b opportunity cost gets recouped.

Going exclusive they just removed one of the pillars supporting Zenimax's former $510m annual revenue. Think about it: That's 1/15 of just the opportunity cost, and now that business needs to maintain or exceed its current performance despite taking a hefty cut to its addressable market in the short term.

Truthfully, I have zero investment emotionally or monetarily in this so its just all thought-experiment and theory-crafting to me. I'm just surprised that they wouldn't try to maximize profit in the short term because even were the entire market to transition favorably to MS plans and interests, its going to take years to happen.

It is even worse than that. For the sake of argument, let us assume that roughly 50% of a game's development is fixed costs not associated with any platform. And then it costs you 15% or so of the total costs to port it to a specific platform (e.g. PC, Xbox, PS). PS represents roughly 50% of the gaming market for many types of titles. In reality, skipping Playstation means getting rid of close to half your profits for any given title. Or in other words - half the value i.e. 3.75 bn USD. That will not happen.

It is much more likely with times exclusives (3 months or so) to give Xbox a leg to stand on while still getting those Playstation money. I am willing to bet a lot that is how this will play out.

 

[CatLady]

PSA
If anyone here hasn't yet secured a preorder on a Series X/S to play all the EXCLUSIVE upcoming Bethesda Softworks games, I have some great news!

Not only are the 5 Xboxes MS allocated to Finland available apparently there are also unsold Xboxes available in Slovakia.

Don't thank me, thank Daniels, M -- I mean Daniel Jackson for keeping us updated on Xbox availability

I talked with Slovakian friend about how difficult it were to pre-order PS5 here&there, and said that series x/s is still available

ShieldSquare Captcha

And he says it is the BIGGEST retailer there

As you see they still have series x available to get on launch and only around 770 sold total and 110 units today, so it is still there

Same here at Finland, still available for launch. But PS5 orders go to january-march/2021

I guess doing things better than last time didnt really matter on EU, if this is the case on other countries too.

Not trying to start a war, just think it is interesting how much slower xbox sells even after all the game pass hype.

 

[Kagey K]

PSA
If anyone here hasn't yet secured a preorder on a Series X/S to play all the EXCLUSIVE upcoming Bethesda Softworks games, I have some great news!

Not only are the 5 Xboxes MS allocated to Finland available apparently there are also unsold Xboxes available in Slovakia.

Don't thank me, thank Daniels, M -- I mean Daniel Jackson for keeping us updated on Xbox availability

Thank goodness he’s around to keep us all updated. I’d have my flight booked to tiny European countries right now if I didn’t have my preorder already secured.

A true hero that guy is.

 

[nordique]

They didn’t spend 7.5 billion to keep putting games out on PlayStation consoles

This is part of strengthening the Xbox brand

What’s wrong in buying another console or getting the games on PC?

 

[Nikana]

Are people still talking about "recouping" the 7.5billion as a reason for making the games go multiplat? This is a fundamental misunderstanding of economics.

Microsoft don't need to recoup anything, they haven't less than they had before, only the 7.5billion is now in assets, it's simple balance sheet stuff.

You are posting in a thread where the head of Xbox, the buyer, and the founder of Bethesda, the acquisition, both say categorically that these games will be Xbox console exclusive. That right, and that right alone, was paid for at 7.5billion.

There's nothing more to discuss here.

 

[devilNprada]

It is even worse than that. For the sake of argument, let us assume that roughly 50% of a game's development is fixed costs not associated with any platform. And then it costs you 15% or so of the total costs to port it to a specific platform (e.g. PC, Xbox, PS). PS represents roughly 50% of the gaming market for many types of titles. In reality, skipping Playstation means getting rid of close to half your profits for any given title. Or in other words - half the value i.e. 3.75 bn USD. That will not happen.

It is much more likely with times exclusives (3 months or so) to give Xbox a leg to stand on while still getting those Playstation money. I am willing to bet a lot that is how this will play out.

This...

Putting $100+ million dollar budget games to gain subscriptions is not a sustainable business model. Netflix doesn't do it and HBO's only show with that kind of budget was GOT final season. Netflix has 180 million subscribers at about $15 per pop. Average cost per series is about $40 million. $200 million was their entire Marvel series.
VS gamepass 10 million or so subscribers.

Sadly with this kind of model fan favorites get canceled when they get too expensive.

 

[Bernkastel]

I guess Netflix does not care about money, since they dont support other services.

 

[Clear]

I guess Netflix does not care about money, since they dont support other services.

Noone is suggesting that they have to put the titles on PSNow or any other competing streaming service. What we are talking about is not restricting these titles in terms of physical and digital sale past a predetermined period of exclusivity, and simply allowing the value-proposition of availability through GamePass to provide a long-term competitive edge.

That way they get the best of both worlds, and lets face it Playstation isn't going away anytime soon, so why not access that audience while it remains a significant source of potential revenue?

Buying Bethesda and the other studios bolsters their portfolio, but you'd have to be crazy to think its a death-blow to the competition. In fact it could potentially be an act of self-sabotage if uptake on Xbox is slower than anticipated.

 

[CatLady]

Noone is suggesting that they have to put the titles on PSNow or any other competing streaming service. What we are talking about is not restricting these titles in terms of physical and digital sale past a predetermined period of exclusivity, and simply allowing the value-proposition of availability through GamePass to provide a long-term competitive edge.

That way they get the best of both worlds, and lets face it Playstation isn't going away anytime soon, so why not access that audience while it remains a significant source of potential revenue?

Buying Bethesda and the other studios bolsters their portfolio, but you'd have to be crazy to think its a death-blow to the competition. In fact it could potentially be an act of self-sabotage if uptake on Xbox is slower than anticipated.

If they are going to port them to another platform I'd rather they port them to Nintendo. At least Nintendo fans aren't in every Xbox thread port-begging.

 

[devilNprada]

I guess Netflix does not care about money, since they dont support other services.

Lol Netflix has 180 million subscribers, and original content doesn't cost 100+ million to make, but OK.
Edit: Netflix also cancels fan favorite series when they're deemed to expensive to make, while we're comparing.

 

[Bernkastel]

Noone is suggesting that they have to put the titles on PSNow or any other competing streaming service. What we are talking about is not restricting these titles in terms of physical and digital sale past a predetermined period of exclusivity, and simply allowing the value-proposition of availability through GamePass to provide a long-term competitive edge.

That way they get the best of both worlds, and lets face it Playstation isn't going away anytime soon, so why not access that audience while it remains a significant source of potential revenue?

Buying Bethesda and the other studios bolsters their portfolio, but you'd have to be crazy to think its a death-blow to the competition. In fact it could potentially be an act of self-sabotage if uptake on Xbox is slower than anticipated.

Playstation is a competing store front and a competing game console that plays physical copies if it was not obvious to you. Majority of Xbox revenue comes from actual game purchases rather than Game Pass if that was not obvious to you. They made their intentions of keeping the Minecraft IP completely transparent unlike Bethesda.
By your logic games from other studios like Obsidian and Ninja Theory should also be put on Playstation because "You cant ignore the install base of 100 million players"(Starfield and TES VI were not coming to last gen anyway).

 

[Bernkastel]

Lol Netflix has 180 million subscribers, and original content doesn't cost 100+ million to make, but OK.

And Xbox first party content is not offered exclusively on a service. You can also buy them physically or digitally.

 

[devilNprada]

And Xbox first party content is not offered exclusively on a service. You can also buy them physically or digitally.

I get that.. But weren't we promised day one on game pass? How will that pay for a $200 million game budget.. I am only saying that's not sustainable. 10 million subscribers at $10 a pop is $100 million, has anybody even done this math?

 

[Bernkastel]

I get that.. But weren't we promised day one on game pass? How will that pay for a $200 million game budget.. I am only saying that's not sustainable. 10 million subscribers at $10 a pop is $100 million, has anybody even done this math?

Like how every other upcoming Xbox first party game are being funded. Fable, InXile's RPG project and Avowed have a bigger budget than what Bethesda was spending on Starfield/TES VI. 343i/Initiative/Coalition are also spending 100 million+ on their projects.

Gears of War 4 would have cost over $100M to make — and could have killed Epic Games

Ballooning budgets led to change of business model

www.polygon.com

 

[lastmessiah]

I get that.. But weren't we promised day one on game pass? How will that pay for a $200 million game budget.. I am only saying that's not sustainable. 10 million subscribers at $10 a pop is $100 million, has anybody even done this math?

You're the first one to do the math dude. Microsoft hasn't even thought about this. They just invested 7.5 billion in something and now they have to release on Playstation because they didn't do the math!