• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Microsoft is finally clarifying the situation regarding future Bethesda games

MonarchJT

Member
Sep 25, 2020
2,234
3,260
375
dan marino holy shit GIF
Sad but absolutely true. Under no circumstances, during all the years on Gaf and then on Era have I NEVER seen Matt say anything in the slightest positive about Ms or Xbox in general. One becomes biased only to have to counteract such a lot of negativity spread by a few elements who have always had the power to ban or silence entire discussions.
This Zenimax+Trump is the latest idiocy written by a fanboy (Matt) who stands (unfortunately for those who believe it) as an impartial observer. Nothing could be more false.
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
Dec 29, 2019
3,988
5,329
540
Have they blocked Stadia or Luna?

I don't think they'd dare do it. The anti-trust interest there globally would be off the charts. Probably the most they would do would be to tweak the default browser to ensure it couldn't work there, but it might require Chromium/Edge anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LordBlodgett

Greggy

Member
Nov 7, 2020
303
498
280
Was busy yesterday so thought I'd catch up with this thread this morning. Oh man. It's virtually unreadable :messenger_tears_of_joy:

I don't understand being this upset about something that's easily fixable. Just buy an Xbox and look forward to playing great games on both systems, instead of contorting yourself over contracts and perceived vagueness and desperate hopes that Phil Spencer is being duplicitous. Even if you can't afford it now, save up. Put 20 of whatever your currency is away a week and you'll have one by the time these games hit.

I'd rather not own a PS5, but have one because I know there will be things I want to play that I would feel sad to miss out on. Not many, but enough for me to fix the problem and have a better day.
You sir, are a rational person.
 

pasterpl

Member
Feb 8, 2020
1,911
3,641
540
MS loses money on hardware.


This is why they invested in a SOFTWARE company. To sell SOFTWARE.

MS doesn't care "who runs their games better" they just want to sell more copes of those games.
Isn’t this always the case at new gen launch? Platform holders selling hardware at loss for the first 1-2 years and only then hardware becomes profitable? Most money is being made on software sales.
 
Feb 13, 2019
156
202
255
Everyone who thinks exclusivity is a good thing is in denial. It’s a good thing for the companies, so I understand it business wise, but it’s not a good thing for gamers. Sure this time perhaps you have a XBox and feel happy about it, but what happens if Sony feel they need to react by buying another studio.
 
Feb 13, 2019
156
202
255
I have something else to play when I eventually get a PS5 mid-gen. 🤷‍♂️
But you only want to buy a PS5 because of the exclusive games. Many people are not fortunate enough to be able to afford all consoles. I am able to afford both but I always think about other people as well.
 

Batiman

Danger: male feminist
Feb 11, 2020
2,550
3,016
590
Everyone who thinks exclusivity is a good thing is in denial. It’s a good thing for the companies, so I understand it business wise, but it’s not a good thing for gamers. Sure this time perhaps you have a XBox and feel happy about it, but what happens if Sony feel they need to react by buying another studio.
Exclusives were always a thing. Your always gonna miss out on something in life. Nobody can have everything. That’s life. If a console I don’t own has something to offer me, then I’ll open my wallet. When I was a kid I got my first job just so I could buy a ps1. People have to decide for themselves what they’re willing to spend to have what they want. Always
 
Feb 13, 2019
156
202
255
As I mentioned I know that it will always be a thing, because I understand the business side of it, what I meant to say is that it is not a good thing for gamers, but only the companies profit from it. So I think it is not a thing a gamer should be happy about.
 

Alright

Banned
Mar 5, 2021
1,274
2,239
450
All games exclusive to where gamepass is?

This is another signpost that the road map of the Xbox division is to get gamepass on as many devices as possible.

"Play TES 7, exclusive to gamepass*"

*gamepass available on xbox, nintendo, Sony, PC devices and Smart TVs, mobile phones and tablets with Xcloud compatibility.
 

Alright

Banned
Mar 5, 2021
1,274
2,239
450
Listen to what he says:

If the game is there - we will continue to support it on other platforms
If the game is already promised with contractual obligations - we will continue to support it on other platforms
If there is a game franchise with legacy - we will continue to support it on other platforms

But you should know that this is about delivering exclusive content to Xbox.

So that means....Starfield will be Xbox exclusive? And of course other new franchises with no legacy?

Still a lot of questions if one listens to what he says.
The contracts for TES 6 will have been settled during the early production of the game, or even before if the gaming industry is similar to the manufacturing industry.

That seems to suggest that TES 6 will be on more consoles than just Xbox. Which makes sense
 

reksveks

Member
Jun 4, 2020
2,467
2,336
340
The contracts for TES 6 will have been settled during the early production of the game, or even before if the gaming industry is similar to the manufacturing industry.

That seems to suggest that TES 6 will be on more consoles than just Xbox. Which makes sense
A contract for multiplatform games?

Interesting to see your analogy for manufacturing industry
 

Bernkastel

Member
Mar 8, 2018
7,666
16,237
960
All games exclusive to where gamepass is?

This is another signpost that the road map of the Xbox division is to get gamepass on as many devices as possible.

"Play TES 7, exclusive to gamepass*"

*gamepass available on xbox, nintendo, Sony, PC devices and Smart TVs, mobile phones and tablets with Xcloud compatibility.
Is this the next goal post?
The contracts for TES 6 will have been settled during the early production of the game, or even before if the gaming industry is similar to the manufacturing industry.

That seems to suggest that TES 6 will be on more consoles than just Xbox. Which makes sense
Why would there be any contract for TES 6 or even Starfield? Why would Bethesda sign a contract for games with platform holders if they are not exclusive?
 

Hitchyhero

Member
Oct 23, 2020
616
1,557
515
The contracts for TES 6 will have been settled during the early production of the game, or even before if the gaming industry is similar to the manufacturing industry.

That seems to suggest that TES 6 will be on more consoles than just Xbox. Which makes sense
Sony has a contract for a game that was previously multiplatform, to stay multiplatform? For a game thats years away from being completed and not even in a playable state? I doubt they even have 25% of this game completed.

I very much doubt it mate. Still in the denial stage.
 
Last edited:

Redlight

Member
Feb 5, 2014
1,352
2,872
655
All games exclusive to where gamepass is?

This is another signpost that the road map of the Xbox division is to get gamepass on as many devices as possible.

"Play TES 7, exclusive to gamepass*"

*gamepass available on xbox, nintendo, Sony, PC devices and Smart TVs, mobile phones and tablets with Xcloud compatibility.
Biff, how do you imagine that Xbox games will be playable on 'PS5 Gamepass'? All MS games would have to be ported specifically to run on the PS5, pretty sure Halo won't run on PS5 natively.

What your fevered mind is imagining is just Xcloud, not Gamepass at all. Game streaming and Gamepass are very different beasts.

That said, none of those games are coming to PS5, whether they be on Gamepass, Xcloud or the, no doubt incredible, Biffimagine.
 

reksveks

Member
Jun 4, 2020
2,467
2,336
340
Biff, how do you imagine that Xbox games will be playable on 'PS5 Gamepass'? All MS games would have to be ported specifically to run on the PS5, pretty sure Halo won't run on PS5 natively.

What your fevered mind is imagining is just Xcloud, not Gamepass at all. Game streaming and Gamepass are very different beasts.

That said, none of those games are coming to PS5, whether they be on Gamepass, Xcloud or the, no doubt incredible, Biffimagine.
Can you imagine Microsoft swapping out the DirectX library for Vulkan for PS5?
 

Clear

Member
Feb 2, 2009
12,732
7,812
1,365
You're not wrong, but you're taking a very absolutist view here.


Microsoft are trying to create an ecosystem where MTX and DLC, plus subscription fees, plus reductions on digital titles, bring in more money than they do naturally. They're doing that across consoles, PC and mobile (and eventually television apps). There are more PCs, TVs and mobile phones capable of running these games today/eventually than there will be any console in the next generation.

That's not to say Nintendo and Sony are doing it wrong, but it's a new approach with the potential to do extremely well.

Keep in mind that NIntendo - and to a much lesser extent Sony - are very much tied to the two smallest triangles in that pie chart.

As I've been saying forever, the distribution method will ultimately shape the nature of the product. The reason why the MTX/DLC segment is so lucrative is because a significant proportion of the revenues generated also come from FTP titles with immense userbases but no other means of direct monetization for Sony.

If MS seeks to utilize a variant of this model for its GP offerings then loading them with MTX is the inevitable outcome.
 

Mmnow

Member
Jun 16, 2020
1,025
1,712
360
As I've been saying forever, the distribution method will ultimately shape the nature of the product. The reason why the MTX/DLC segment is so lucrative is because a significant proportion of the revenues generated also come from FTP titles with immense userbases but no other means of direct monetization for Sony.

If MS seeks to utilize a variant of this model for its GP offerings then loading them with MTX is the inevitable outcome.
I wouldn't say it's inevitable at all. If all MS wanted to do was make money from the subscription, they could do that very easily. That would be shortsighted, but they could.

How much is 100m times £10.99? How much is a billion times £10.99? That's revenue per month.

And obviously that's just big numbers for big numbers sake. The point being, with enough subscribers, Gamepass is successful even if every single member fails to pay a penny extra. What's the tipping point? I haven't done the maths recently, but at about 40m subscribers Microsoft is potentially making the equivalent of some of Sony's most successful games every single month.

But it doesn't seem likely they'll completely ignore DLC and MTX. People like additional content, bonus characters and, yes, stupid costumes. Not me, but they sell for a reason. Some games will have them, some won't, but there's no need to force them anywhere they won't fit.
 

Clear

Member
Feb 2, 2009
12,732
7,812
1,365
I wouldn't say it's inevitable at all. If all MS wanted to do was make money from the subscription, they could do that very easily. That would be shortsighted, but they could.

How much is 100m times £10.99? How much is a billion times £10.99? That's revenue per month.

And obviously that's just big numbers for big numbers sake. The point being, with enough subscribers, Gamepass is successful even if every single member fails to pay a penny extra. What's the tipping point? I haven't done the maths recently, but at about 40m subscribers Microsoft is potentially making the equivalent of some of Sony's most successful games every single month.

But it doesn't seem likely they'll completely ignore DLC and MTX. People like additional content, bonus characters and, yes, stupid costumes. Not me, but they sell for a reason. Some games will have them, some won't, but there's no need to force them anywhere they won't fit.

They still have to pay for every item included in GamePass, its a constant expense that is only going to increase the higher quality the product the put on the service. What's more as the service grows they will need to pay proportionally more for any third party offerings in order to cover them for loss of sales for their segments of the market.

The only workaround is secondary monetization streams.

I know you guys want to believe GamePass is some sort of magic formula that allows you to get loads of games for cheap whilst making Xbox dominant and MS even richer than they are already, but it really isn't!

If it was that simple, everyone would be doing it. Hosting costs, which are MS chief advantage, aren't a deal-breaker.

There are questions of scalability in all areas that need to be answered, and the imperative to turn as much profit as possible is never going to go away.
 
  • Triggered
  • LOL
Reactions: Riky and Bernkastel

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
8,902
9,763
940
I'm back on the fence because the closest thing I've seen to a definitive statement was a twitter joke about someone making Phil laugh by figuring out the plan. Sorry not sorry, but MS has yet to publicly state anything that firmly contradicts first or better from the fall. When everyone is busting out dictionaries to figure out what the newest statement means, when the statement could have been simple and concise, that means we are getting spin. Spin does not guarantee anything at all in terms of exclusivity, but it does guarantee that MS is leaving itself options. And with the time it takes to make AAA games, the cost to buy the studios, the cost to fund continued development post-purchase of studios, it just seems a little unlikely (IMO) that MS cares about message board talking points more than massive profits. The aborted gold price hike further suggests that MS is looking to profit off games much more than the people who claim otherwise.
 

Shmunter

Member
Aug 25, 2018
9,297
21,522
775
I'm back on the fence because the closest thing I've seen to a definitive statement was a twitter joke about someone making Phil laugh by figuring out the plan. Sorry not sorry, but MS has yet to publicly state anything that firmly contradicts first or better from the fall. When everyone is busting out dictionaries to figure out what the newest statement means, when the statement could have been simple and concise, that means we are getting spin. Spin does not guarantee anything at all in terms of exclusivity, but it does guarantee that MS is leaving itself options. And with the time it takes to make AAA games, the cost to buy the studios, the cost to fund continued development post-purchase of studios, it just seems a little unlikely (IMO) that MS cares about message board talking points more than massive profits. The aborted gold price hike further suggests that MS is looking to profit off games much more than the people who claim otherwise.
Spin? From Phil!?! How dare you!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickFire

reksveks

Member
Jun 4, 2020
2,467
2,336
340
They still have to pay for every item included in GamePass, its a constant expense that is only going to increase the higher quality the product the put on the service. What's more as the service grows they will need to pay proportionally more for any third party offerings in order to cover them for loss of sales for their segments of the market.

The only workaround is secondary monetization streams.

I know you guys want to believe GamePass is some sort of magic formula that allows you to get loads of games for cheap whilst making Xbox dominant and MS even richer than they are already, but it really isn't!

If it was that simple, everyone would be doing it. Hosting costs, which are MS chief advantage, aren't a deal-breaker.

There are questions of scalability in all areas that need to be answered, and the imperative to turn as much profit as possible is never going to go away.

Sony gets you AAA games (with a small amount of profit) to sell you service and mtx
Microsoft gets you a 'free' library (with unknown amount of profit/cost) to sell you mtx.

That's basically the state of play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bernkastel

quazy

Neo Member
Oct 25, 2015
32
31
260
They still have to pay for every item included in GamePass, its a constant expense that is only going to increase the higher quality the product the put on the service. What's more as the service grows they will need to pay proportionally more for any third party offerings in order to cover them for loss of sales for their segments of the market.

The only workaround is secondary monetization streams.

I know you guys want to believe GamePass is some sort of magic formula that allows you to get loads of games for cheap whilst making Xbox dominant and MS even richer than they are already, but it really isn't!

If it was that simple, everyone would be doing it. Hosting costs, which are MS chief advantage, aren't a deal-breaker.

There are questions of scalability in all areas that need to be answered, and the imperative to turn as much profit as possible is never going to go away.
Wow some true business experts here.
Sometimes, you just need to be the first. I really wanna believe that platforms like Netflix, Spotify or Steam are advancements which took us into new technological spheres and might even look magic to certain people. But maybe it just took someone with a hands-on mentality to shake the industry.
 
Mar 18, 2020
1,273
3,290
535
I'm back on the fence because the closest thing I've seen to a definitive statement was a twitter joke about someone making Phil laugh by figuring out the plan. Sorry not sorry, but MS has yet to publicly state anything that firmly contradicts first or better from the fall. When everyone is busting out dictionaries to figure out what the newest statement means, when the statement could have been simple and concise, that means we are getting spin. Spin does not guarantee anything at all in terms of exclusivity, but it does guarantee that MS is leaving itself options. And with the time it takes to make AAA games, the cost to buy the studios, the cost to fund continued development post-purchase of studios, it just seems a little unlikely (IMO) that MS cares about message board talking points more than massive profits. The aborted gold price hike further suggests that MS is looking to profit off games much more than the people who claim otherwise.
You can sit and spin on that fence till your head turns blue. Doesn't change the fact that they were crystal clear about their intentions.

The deal was done to strenghten Xbox first party studios. The fact that they have a lot of multiplat games and services in the pipeline is the reason why he didn't outright say that everything is exclusive. That is literally what he said during the roundtable.
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
8,902
9,763
940
You can sit and spin on that fence till your head turns blue. Doesn't change the fact that they were crystal clear about their intentions.

The deal was done to strenghten Xbox first party studios. The fact that they have a lot of multiplat games and services in the pipeline is the reason why he didn't outright say that everything is exclusive. That is literally what he said during the roundtable.
Your definition of clear dramatically differs from the normal usage of the word.
 

CatLady

Member
Jun 12, 2018
4,307
14,108
700
I'm back on the fence because the closest thing I've seen to a definitive statement was a twitter joke about someone making Phil laugh by figuring out the plan. Sorry not sorry, but MS has yet to publicly state anything that firmly contradicts first or better from the fall. When everyone is busting out dictionaries to figure out what the newest statement means, when the statement could have been simple and concise, that means we are getting spin. Spin does not guarantee anything at all in terms of exclusivity, but it does guarantee that MS is leaving itself options. And with the time it takes to make AAA games, the cost to buy the studios, the cost to fund continued development post-purchase of studios, it just seems a little unlikely (IMO) that MS cares about message board talking points more than massive profits. The aborted gold price hike further suggests that MS is looking to profit off games much more than the people who claim otherwise.

I'm pretty sure if Xbox tattooed on your forehead, "All Bethesda games Exclusive to Xbox/PC" a lot of you SonyBros would still try to rationalize how all their games are coming to PS5
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
8,902
9,763
940
I'm pretty sure if Xbox tattooed on your forehead, "All Bethesda games Exclusive to Xbox/PC" a lot of you SonyBros would still try to rationalize how all their games are coming to PS5
Are you kidding with the SonyBros label, or just so far down the rabbit hole that anyone who speculates before a simple statement is made gets labeled a bro?

Edit: I see you lol'd at the reaction, but seriously, what exactly makes me a Sony bro? There's a good chance I was playing Xbox games when you were still in diapers. So what makes me a Sonybro for speculating as to MS intent?
 
Last edited:

johnjohn

Member
Dec 7, 2019
497
818
285
You guys are wasting time explaining this over and over and over again to these *cough cough* alts... errr i mean neo members.

Just let them be. Yes ES VI, Fallout 5, and all those games will be on Ps5. Can't wait
I assume you'll be getting a Series X for Starfield this Fall lol.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Concern

Mmnow

Member
Jun 16, 2020
1,025
1,712
360
They still have to pay for every item included in GamePass, its a constant expense that is only going to increase the higher quality the product the put on the service. What's more as the service grows they will need to pay proportionally more for any third party offerings in order to cover them for loss of sales for their segments of the market.

The only workaround is secondary monetization streams.

I know you guys want to believe GamePass is some sort of magic formula that allows you to get loads of games for cheap whilst making Xbox dominant and MS even richer than they are already, but it really isn't!

If it was that simple, everyone would be doing it. Hosting costs, which are MS chief advantage, aren't a deal-breaker.

There are questions of scalability in all areas that need to be answered, and the imperative to turn as much profit as possible is never going to go away.
You've kinda brought us into an area that's too complicated to debate in forum posts. Experts in their fields are still working this stuff out, and we have a tenth of the information they do.

Is it better to sell 5m units while aiming at 120m Playstation owners, or get the eyes of 20m Gamepass subscribers? I don't know, but I don't think it's as clear cut as "they'll make more from sales on PlayStation."

We know third parties seem pretty happy with Gamepass, and you can presume the worst and say MS has just been writing cheques, but that doesn't stand up. There is more to it.

Square ported the best version of Nier to PC, first on Gamepass. Outriders and Octopath Traveller will be on day one on Gamepass. Sega is big on Gamepass. EA are all-in on Gamepass - they basically destroyed their own competing service to be in Gamepass. There's not enough money to convince a rival company to do that.

These guys aren't viewing it as missed sales. They're seeing the potential that the service can offer. And yes, some of that is DLC and MTx. Some of it is exposure and marketing. Some of its getting in on the ground floor of something that's growing exponentially.

But, like I say, we don't have the basic information needed to do anything but talk about the certainties. There are rumours of something Xbox related at Square Enix tonight and it wouldn't surprise me if it's an official confirmation of a deeper partnership. If there were deeper issues showing up on the horizon, it wouldn't be doing this well with fans, with MS and with third parties.