Support NeoGAF

[Daneel Elijah]

The way I see it, Sony's acquisitions add to the industry. None of their acquisitions have taken any games off of Xbox.

On the other hand, Xbox's acquisitions have mainly been about taking games off of PlayStation. That's their way of leveling the playing field. That's not productive or gamer-friendly.

There is no productivity in acquisition.
Just like how Xbox acquisiion takes games from other systems, Sony is denying talent studios from making multiplatform games in the future, in order to boost their talent.

At end of the day, its about keeping talent people to yourself. Money talks, and us consumers get the end of the stick.

Sony acquisitions were either in the PS1/ PS2 era, where it was before the era of massive 100+ teams studios, or the ones that the got more recently, like Insomniac games. Most of Sony early acquisitions were net positives as they were already working for Playstation only. It allowed them to get funding and expand in size to answer the marked demands more easily. Without Sony some of those studios would/could have died in the PS2>PS3 transition. Only studios like Bungie are already so big that they can probably go public if they wanted to, are in my opinion not a net positive for all gamers as there is a risk of Sony limiting their output and twisting them to their own interest( like demanding a VR game even if the studio did not want to) Small studios fundamentaly needed a publisher anyway so they are under that publisher control in a sense. Xbox was in control when it was time to make Scalebound and for us end users there is little difference between a deal between a publisher and a studio, outside of the possibility of that studio to change course in the future.

It is a fact that Xbox took Bethesda games from Sony. It is a fact too that Sony did the same with all the studios they had commandited games from. The difference is that Sony managed to do so when the studios were small and irrelevant compared to their status as a publisher and console maker. And they had worked hard to give them all the tools and cooperation to push those studios to allow them to go highter than they would alone. Xbox on the other hand refused and/or was unable to do the same. Imagine if Xbox got Bioware, maintained good relations with Bungie, Epic and Crytec ? They would have been better positioned now with maybe a few great games that we never got because they didn't try enough. And asking for studios to make games for you is not a problem, it is what is asked of console makers. Give us great experiences. Buying them is the next step. I do not see the problem, unless you are talking of EA who killed a lot of studios over the years.

 

[BabyfaceRe]

Nice little breakdown from OP, but kinda omitted some big questions, the biggest being; Is Xbox profitable? If the answer is yes, then they are not going anywhere.

Comparisons to competition; for some reason ppl dont get business. Just because you are not making as much as your competitor does not mean you are failing and should abandon ship. Pepsi still makes money hand over fist, while not being Coca-Cola.

You also seem to take the ABK deal not going through (for now) as a sign that they are done. But you're doing that by overlooking the fact that MS can still drop $80 billion at a drop of a hat, purchasing power Sony will NEVER have.

Seems like you're mistaking your guess about ABK failing as actual insight. Don't for a second think that MS doesn't have a long list of studio/publisher they want to buy, AB were just at the top of the list.

 

[Badlucktroll]

Another player will fill the gap should one drop out.

Maybe they'll do a better job.

Wouldn't be difficult, let's be honest.

I could see Valve building and selling a mass produced home console

 

[DonF]

Microsoft leaves the hardware division only if a new competitor enters. I would say apple or steam with the deck. I see it as a possibility.

 

[Fredrik]

Don't for a second think that MS doesn't have a long list of studio/publisher they want to buy, AB were just at the top of the list.

It’s one thing to want to buy a studio and another thing to get to buy a studio. Considering how things are going marketwise I doubt studios looking to sell want to sell to MS, I think MS will have to settle for timed exclusives and game pass deals until they show there is a good future for their ecosystem. No everything can’t be bought just because you have a fat wallet.

 

[feynoob]

Sony acquisitions were either in the PS1/ PS2 era, where it was before the era of massive 100+ teams studios, or the ones that the got more recently, like Insomniac games. Most of Sony early acquisitions were net positives as they were already working for Playstation only. It allowed them to get funding and expand in size to answer the marked demands more easily. Without Sony some of those studios would/could have died in the PS2>PS3 transition. Only studios like Bungie are already so big that they can probably go public if they wanted to, are in my opinion not a net positive for all gamers as there is a risk of Sony limiting their output and twisting them to their own interest( like demanding a VR game even if the studio did not want to) Small studios fundamentaly needed a publisher anyway so they are under that publisher control in a sense. Xbox was in control when it was time to make Scalebound and for us end users there is little difference between a deal between a publisher and a studio, outside of the possibility of that studio to change course in the future.

It is a fact that Xbox took Bethesda games from Sony. It is a fact too that Sony did the same with all the studios they had commandited games from. The difference is that Sony managed to do so when the studios were small and irrelevant compared to their status as a publisher and console maker. And they had worked hard to give them all the tools and cooperation to push those studios to allow them to go highter than they would alone. Xbox on the other hand refused and/or was unable to do the same. Imagine if Xbox got Bioware, maintained good relations with Bungie, Epic and Crytec ? They would have been better positioned now with maybe a few great games that we never got because they didn't try enough. And asking for studios to make games for you is not a problem, it is what is asked of console makers. Give us great experiences. Buying them is the next step. I do not see the problem, unless you are talking of EA who killed a lot of studios over the years.

My issue with acquisition is the talent suppression and only making games for a certain platform.

Rare was great before MS buy-out. But after that, they did their stuff and couldn't replicate their past.

Bethesda, bioware and cdpr made exclusive content to Xbox, which could have put them at risk of acquisition. We got Skyrim, fallout, witcher 3, cyberpunk 2077 and bioware games. All these games become huge due to multiplatform.

We wouldn't have gotten these great on other devices had MS acquired these studios early.

Now that MS bought Bethesda, we won't see those games on other platforms, since they will work on exclusive games.

It's a loss for gamers at the expanse of exclusive content.

 

[quest]

I could see Valve building and selling a mass produced home console

Why would apple bother to spend 10's of billions to compete with Sony with no hardware margins like they love. Also they are making bank on games already why compete with Sony losing money for years to build up a user base buy a publisher to get up and running first party ect.

Apple made more money from gaming than Microsoft, Nintendo - Times of India

The likes of Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft because of their consoles and gaming services, that are more relatable to gaming. Analysts, however, estima

m.timesofindia.com

 

[Aaron Olive]

I'm assuming Microsoft's long-term goal (regardless of their M&A activities) is to have Xbox as a pure cloud-based service but I don't think it'll happen until latency is so low (which is a combination of server side improvements and just people all over the world in general having really fast internet, even in slightly poorer countries) that it's barely (or not) noticeable at all.

I kinda started to think there's less and less reason to even have a physical Xbox console if they're going to have so few Xbox exclusive titles that take advantage of the hardware in unique ways. Then again, I don't think it's by design, I think it's just a case of shit management at the executive level and the studio level. I doubt that Microsoft is intentionally tanking its game studios to give itself a reason to kill off Xbox as a physical console (not that you claimed it was, just saying).

So while I kinda agree that Xbox as a physical console will disappear (at some point, probably not for another two generations), I don't think it really has anything to do with the ActiBliz deal (falling through as it looks like will happen).

The moment if and when gaming goes 100% cloud based / Rental, gaming will be dead in my opinion.

Streaming on games will never beat local real time hardware on response, resolution and on enjoyment levels of the experience.

Stadia was already proof of that concept/ experiment.

 

[Daneel Elijah]

My issue with acquisition is the talent suppression and only making games for a certain platform.

Rare was great before MS buy-out. But after that, they did their stuff and couldn't replicate their past.

Bethesda, bioware and cdpr made exclusive content to Xbox, which could have put them at risk of acquisition. We got Skyrim, fallout, witcher 3, cyberpunk 2077 and bioware games. All these games become huge due to multiplatform.

We wouldn't have gotten these great on other devices had MS acquired these studios early.

Now that MS bought Bethesda, we won't see those games on other platforms, since they will work on exclusive games.

It's a loss for gamers at the expanse of exclusive content.

When Nintendo was with the NES on top of the gaming market they forced companies to harsh rules to be able to put games in their consoles. They had to be forced to stop that by judiciary action. In the SNES/Megadrive era the games on each console had nothing to do with each others, and PC were still limited to a few niches. That is why for me multi platform is not that big of a necessity. It was harder back then so we were accoustumed to games being in one console only and not the other. Sony came with consoles that took the market by storm. The PS1 was a excellent entry and the PS2 is considered a golden age of gaming for good reasons by many. A lot of those games were exclusive by default, as Sony consoles were the only ones capable to do what was needed to accomplish the ambitions of the studios, be it from a technical standpoint or just in sales potential. Now Microsoft entered and sadly outside of the 360 was simply not as ambitious and did not gave us as many innovations as Sega, Nintendo and Sony did. So when on top of that they fail to bring games to completion like they did with Rare we see the loss immediatly. When Sony allow studios like Housemarque to go to the next level, where is the harm? When Nintendo allow for Bayonetta 2 and 3 to exist, why should we be sad of the games to be exclusive?
The gaming industry is a little like the cinema industry in the sense that making a film, like making a game, needs capital and is a risky endeavor. So the publisher that shoulder the risk will also have the majority of the benefits. In gaming the console maker are also some of the best publishers. So the price of their superior talent is to be exclusive. Small cost for me, but I can understand that it matters for you. Bethesda is the rare case where a publisher is taken by another publisher. The loss is clear there, and I agree. But once again, normally being taken by a console maker is a good thing most of the time. Only Xbox do not have the same pedigree that Sony and Nintendo have in making their collaborations work out for the good of everyone involved. There is loss, yes. But the gains are most of the time worth it. Special cases are for games like Stellar blade, that Sony simply moneyhatted. The loss is obvious, but this is the name of the game. When Tomb raider got the same treatment people were angry about it too.

 

[Dane]

We get it OP, you want Xbox out of business.

 

[Daneel Elijah]

We get it OP, you want Xbox out of business.

Their brand is weak outside of the US. This is the problem. What you consider being Xbox and what Xbox is outside the US is vastly different. The games and services they offer are either less desirable, harder to find, or even inexistant in some case. The lack of marketing does not help. And Sony and Nintendo success make the fall even harder by contrast. Nobody here want Xbox to go away if they could compete with great games instead. But they have failed to do so for years and now the failling behind seems insurmontable. We know that it is not, that Xbox is profitable too, that Gamepass is great for those that are using it. But the feeling is there for some of us. And we are discussing about it here. Instead of saying it is a OP problem I would like for you to try to see it from the OP perspective and try to answer at least one of their worries, please. That would be a more constructive approach to the discussion.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

We get it OP, you want Xbox out of business.

I know there are the hardcore warriors who actually would want the other team to go under but imo that would be a disaster for us gamers.

No way should anyone want one company dictating our gaming on console without any threat

 

[Fredrik]

I know there are the hardcore warriors who actually would want the other team to go under but imo that would be a disaster for us gamers.

No way should anyone want one company dictating our gaming on console without any threat

I’d love to just have to buy one box to play all games. But I don’t want that to be Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo, there needs to be someone who can do a truly open platform with an open file system and VR capabilities.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Calm down, they have 23 studios and haven't put out shit yet. 2022 was a dud.

Great managing.

 

[Fredrik]

Great managing.

Great trolling.
*ignored*

 

[DeepEnigma]

Great trolling.
*ignored*

 

[XXL]

I know there are the hardcore warriors who actually would want the other team to go under but imo that would be a disaster for us gamers.

No way should anyone want one company dictating our gaming on console without any threat

That's not necessarily true.

When Sega departed the console business Microsoft stepped in, there is no reason to believe that wouldn't happen again.

Just because Playstation and Nintendo need competition doesn't mean it has to be Microsoft. Xbox doesn't deserve its place based on pity, it's should make its place based on output. Like Sony and Nintendo have.

Another company stepping in could be more effective and managed properly, which would create more innovation. That would be the best thing for gamers, not a company that is struggling to even keep up.

Xbox is down 30%
PlayStation is up 60%

That's barely competitive if you're main goal is driving competition.

 

[Banjo64]

I think the ‘PlayStation needs competition’ crowd need to consider that there’s an increasing market for handheld/dockable PCs that are streamlined console like experiences. £310 for the Steam Deck in Valve’s last sale and it plays stuff like Sackboy, Returnal, Horizon and God of War with no pay to play online.

Niche right now but could explode with the right environment and a manufacturer that makes a sexy one.

 

[Dane]

Their brand is weak outside of the US. This is the problem. What you consider being Xbox and what Xbox is outside the US is vastly different. The games and services they offer are either less desirable, harder to find, or even inexistant in some case. The lack of marketing does not help. And Sony and Nintendo success make the fall even harder by contrast. Nobody here want Xbox to go away if they could compete with great games instead. But they have failed to do so for years and now the failling behind seems insurmontable. We know that it is not, that Xbox is profitable too, that Gamepass is great for those that are using it. But the feeling is there for some of us. And we are discussing about it here. Instead of saying it is a OP problem I would like for you to try to see it from the OP perspective and try to answer at least one of their worries, please. That would be a more constructive approach to the discussion.

The question is, is there really a discussion that it was intended to happen in good faith or just to create more clout? It's absolutely fair and necessary to discuss, but when you look how things go around, it is rarely, if ever, happening in a good faith proposition

I know there are the hardcore warriors who actually would want the other team to go under but imo that would be a disaster for us gamers.

No way should anyone want one company dictating our gaming on console without any threat

I've went through several brands over the generations, absolutely that, I went for 360 after Sony did a very expensive machine and removed BC from PS3 and tought people wouldn't care to pay for, then went to PS4 after Xbox One pricing and DRM. I'm loyal to my pocket

 

[BabyfaceRe]

It’s one thing to want to buy a studio and another thing to get to buy a studio. Considering how things are going marketwise I doubt studios looking to sell want to sell to MS, I think MS will have to settle for timed exclusives and game pass deals until they show there is a good future for their ecosystem. No everything can’t be bought just because you have a fat wallet.

I couldn't disagree more. When it comes to making money, money talks. If you're up for sale, you will be bought by the biggest offer. If you want to grow, having one of the biggest corps in the world behind you helps a lot.

Very few studios would trade money for freedom and even fewer have the Kojima-style leverage to even attempt such a thing. Just because every studio that has ever been bought has said "they understand our vision, our relationship is great, they give us complete freedom" does not make it true.

 

[Daneel Elijah]

The question is, is there really a discussion that it was intended to happen in good faith or just to create more clout? It's absolutely fair and necessary to discuss, but when you look how things go around, it is rarely, if ever, happening in a good faith proposition

I've went through several brands over the generations, absolutely that, I went for 360 after Sony did a very expensive machine and removed BC from PS3 and tought people wouldn't care to pay for, then went to PS4 after Xbox One pricing and DRM. I'm loyal to my pocket

I can understand that. But we are in a 10 pages thread. So there should have been enough posts and time to see if the discussion is in good faith or not. But the subject is special so even then I can understand that you didn't feel the need to read them all.

 

[Dane]

I can understand that. But we are in a 10 pages thread. So there should have been enough posts and time to see if the discussion is in good faith or not. But the subject is special so even then I can understand that you didn't feel the need to read them all.

Because the intention is hardly on the good faith when you know the entire conjuncture behind it, i'm not dismissing good faith posts, but its clear to what was intended to do primarily.

 

[T0minator]

I expect them to be more aggressive from here on.

I would've thought after that Xbox One launch debacle they would've been more aggressive... If anything PS got more aggressive since then

For the "Sony doesn't want to compete" crowd. What makes you think Xbox can't compete with all their current studios?

 

[feynoob]

I wonder how this post will age in 5 years from now.
MS isn't going to stop spending because Xbox had a bad console sale year.

As long as MS is ready to spend, I don't see them going out of console business.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

I wonder how this post will age in 5 years from now.
MS isn't going to stop spending because Xbox had a bad console sale year.

As long as MS is ready to spend, I don't see them going out of console business.

consoles are niche and dying.

 

[feynoob]

consoles are niche and dying.

Once cloud hits it's form, Sony and MS will ditch console's slowly.
Smart TVs and controller will be the future.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Calm down, they have 23 studios and most haven’t announced anything yet, most projects should be 3+ years into development by now. The summer events should show where they’re heading.

"Please wait! We promise we have stuff coming!"

Been hearing the same tired shit for nearly a decade now. Its time to put up or shut up. Stop defending shitty management and developers.

 

[Fredrik]

"Please wait! We promise we have stuff coming!"

Been hearing the same tired shit for nearly a decade now. Its time to put up or shut up. Stop defending shitty management and developers.

Wait until the June event before you bury them. I’m not satisfied in their output either and has had my fair share of rants about that, but it’s just over a month until their big summer event. This isn’t about defending the management, it’s just the way it is, it takes time to make games, goes for Sony and Nintendo too if you look into their announced upcoming games list. And MS didn’t announce anything coming further away than 12 months last year so things obviously look bleak right now. Hopefully they give us a better peek into the future this year, and hopefully another year of development means more of their studios have more to show.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

I expect them to be more aggressive from here on.

Buying Activision is MS's way of being more `aggressive`.

I fear MS has a very near-sighted way of looking at gaming in general, an almost reactionary default to every issue. That's why they are where they are and why they continue to be where they are. We could say, the first thing they need to focus on is on getting a steady stream of first-party games, to help define their console and create an identity. But while they could be doing that now, they really should have started that 7-8 years ago. They clearly have the money.

But they didn't, and even with all the time they had coming into this gen, with all the opportunities they had to course correct (so I am talking about since 2017 after the XB1X launched), they didn't... just to put this into perspective, since 2016, sony has made and released 4... you read that right.... four new AAA IPs (not even counting all the smaller indie stuff or remakes). And that is in addition to their staple IPs. In the same timeframe, MS hasn't released a single new AAA IP.

And when they decided to get aggressive, they do so by trying to spend $84B to buy two publishers and absorb all their IPs. Not trying to be funny here, but when it comes to their gaming business, MS is fast becoming the epitome of how not to do it.

I also believe this has got to do with the Xbox fans or supporters, honestly, they should hold MS to higher standards and expectations. Instead of blindly following and supporting them like sheep.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Wait until the June event before you bury them. I’m not satisfied in their output either and has had my fair share of rants about that, but it’s just over a month until their big summer event. This isn’t about defending the management, it’s just the way it is, it takes time to make games, goes for Sony and Nintendo too if you look into their announced upcoming games list. And MS didn’t announce anything coming further away than 12 months last year so things obviously look bleak right now. Hopefully they give us a better peek into the future this year, and hopefully another year of development means more of their studios have more to show.

Trust me, Sony is not far behind on my frustration meter. Nintendo has been the only one of the big three that has managed consistency (at least since the Switch. I was equally pissed with them as I am currently with Xbox during the Wii/Wii U era).

Regardless, we have been "waiting" and told to wait with empty promises for years. I am done waiting for the next big showcase to show us more false/empty promises.

 

[Fredrik]

Buying Activision is MS's way of being more `aggressive`.

I fear MS has a very near-sighted way of looking at gaming in general, an almost reactionary default to every issue. That's why they are where they are and why they continue to be where they are. We could say, the first thing they need to focus on is on getting a steady stream of first-party games, to help define their console and create an identity. But while they could be doing that now, they really should have started that 7-8 years ago. They clearly have the money.

But they didn't, and even with all the time they had coming into this gen, with all the opportunities they had to course correct (so I am talking about since 2017 after the XB1X launched), they didn't... just to put this into perspective, since 2016, sony has made and released 5... you read that right.... five new AAA IPs (not even counting all the smaller indie stuff or remakes). And that is in addition to their staple IPs. In the same timeframe, MS hasn't released a single new AAA IP.

And when they decided to get aggressive, they do so by trying to spend $84B to buy two publishers and absorb all their IPs. Not trying to be funny here, but when it comes to their gaming business, MS is fast becoming the epitome of how not to do it.

I also believe this has got to do with the Xbox fans or supporters, honestly, they should hold MS to higher standards and expectations. Instead of blindly following and supporting them like sheep.

I don’t know what the ABK deal was, maybe gluttony.

I wanted the deal to go through though, for my selfish reasons since I just want more Gamepass games, but I’m not surprised it got blocked. They say they’ll appeal but has that ever worked? Idk

Anyhow I absolutely think we’ll see more aggression going forward, in the form of more exclusivity deals and Gamepass deals, possibly some studio acquisitions too. And I think they’ll sign deals with Activision Blizzard. I guarantee that things won’t just go back to how they were, or end up any better (unless you already have all the plastic and then this was a nothing burger anyway).

 

[Daneel Elijah]

I wonder how this post will age in 5 years from now.
MS isn't going to stop spending because Xbox had a bad console sale year.

As long as MS is ready to spend, I don't see them going out of console business.

It depends on what will happen in this generation. If Xbox get worse then the post will be factually correct even if Xbox do not go third party, as the combo no games in 2022+ failed ABK+ weak sales VS great competitors is all true right now. If Xbox is at it's worse moment today and they get better with Starfield and all of their 2020 showcase games being bangers that arrives on time and regularly until the next gen we will all be happy and look fondly at how they were in a dark spot but fixed it. Few people really hate Xbox, most of us just want them to do better. If they do, then mission accomplished!
The funnies possibility would be for the ABK deal to happen somehow. That would make this thread really ironic to go and reread. As for Microsoft, we know that they are there long term. It is the hardware part that was in question. This will depend on what the alternatives are. For now they will naturally continue a few years more but I would like to see them entering the next gen before the PS6. This would be great but would needs a level of hardware ambitions that they did not have since the 360.

 

[Fredrik]

Trust me, Sony is not far behind on my frustration meter. Nintendo has been the only one of the big three that has managed consistency (at least since the Switch. I was equally pissed with them as I am currently with Xbox during the Wii/Wii U era).

Regardless, we have been "waiting" and told to wait with empty promises for years. I am done waiting for the next big showcase to show us more false/empty promises.

Well yeah I’m frustrated at them all.

Nintendo for not launching new hardware, I’ve been waiting for years.
- Switch 2, Q4 2023, pleeease!

Microsoft for not releasing enough big AAA games, I’ve mostly played on PS5 the last year. And I had a 100% run going on Super Metroid on Retroarch with my kids, thanks for ruining that MS!
- Summer event needs to be awesome.

And Sony for delaying PC releases, so I end up double dipping, and for delaying PS+ Premium uploads, so I end up buying games I could’ve got for free.
- No explanation needed. Just stop, Sony!

And Meta for not launching Quest 3.
- Wake up Zuck!

And I’m frustrated at game devs in general for doing crappy PC ports and for having too much hand-holding.

But I’ll give them all this year to sort things out. If I get nothing worthwhile I’ll probably go back to fiddling more with Cubase than my controllers.

 

[feynoob]

It depends on what will happen in this generation. If Xbox get worse then the post will be factually correct even if Xbox do not go third party, as the combo no games in 2022+ failed ABK+ weak sales VS great competitors is all true right now. If Xbox is at it's worse moment today and they get better with Starfield and all of their 2020 showcase games being bangers that arrives on time and regularly until the next gen we will all be happy and look fondly at how they were in a dark spot but fixed it. Few people really hate Xbox, most of us just want them to do better. If they do, then mission accomplished!
The funnies possibility would be for the ABK deal to happen somehow. That would make this thread really ironic to go and reread. As for Microsoft, we know that they are there long term. It is the hardware part that was in question. This will depend on what the alternatives are. For now they will naturally continue a few years more but I would like to see them entering the next gen before the PS6. This would be great but would needs a level of hardware ambitions that they did not have since the 360.

MS interest in day1 pc and cloud gaming makes it hard for them to focus on their console sales. If they truly care about that, they will have to stop those. This will make people buy Xbox, as that is the only place to get those games.

Aside of improving their first party, MS will also need to improve 3rd party relationship too.

 

[semiconscious]

I expect them to be more aggressive from here on.

'more aggressive'? more aggressive than attempting to buy activision/blizzard? maybe crushing playstation by just giving away xboxs the same way they crushed netscape by just giving away internet explorer way back when?...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars

 

[Edmund]

SenjutsuSage
CatLady
adamsapple

GET HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[adamsapple]

SenjutsuSage
CatLady
adamsapple

GET HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's ok, he shares my home city, I'll give him a pass for this one.

 

[Fredrik]

'more aggressive'? more aggressive than attempting to buy activision/blizzard? maybe crushing playstation by just giving away xboxs the same way they crushed netscape by just gave away internet explorer way back when?...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_wars

The Activision Blizzard deal was nuts of course but I think more exclusivity deals could be seen as more annoying, at least for some, and there will be more Gamepass day 1 deals, and they’ll probably do some new studio acquisitions too. It’ll be noisy. And I think they’ll sign deals with Activision Blizzard, which could end up being super annoying.

 

[CatLady]

SenjutsuSage
CatLady
adamsapple

GET HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get who?

 

[feynoob]

It's ok, he shares my home city, I'll give him a pass for this one.

As long as both of you guys aren't in Ohio, I am good.
We are little bit crazy here.

 

[CatLady]

It’s one thing to want to buy a studio and another thing to get to buy a studio. Considering how things are going marketwise I doubt studios looking to sell want to sell to MS, I think MS will have to settle for timed exclusives and game pass deals until they show there is a good future for their ecosystem. No everything can’t be bought just because you have a fat wallet.

Timed exclusives are a big waste of money because the have to cover a huge deficit for all the games the Studio will be losing because they are taking games away from everyone else and not gaining nearly what it costs them.

I'd much rather see them get Day 1 game pass deals and Marketing deals since they won't be taking anything away from anyone. I would imagine Activision would prefer to deal with Xbox than PlayStation anymore.

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

Microsoft needs to be smart about their console design.

They want it so bad to have the most powerful console for bragging rights, now they sell each console at a loss, people don't buy as much software on their ecosystem thanks to game pass that maybe be great for Microsoft (doubt it), but for everyone else not so much, third-parties have a though time selling their games on Xbox.

Sony have a console that delivers between 80~90% of the XSX performance, in some titles even outperform them thanks to their architecture advantages, all of that with profit, they have a steady output of exclusives that give their console the premium feeling, graphical showcases that almost every year win the graphics of the year on Digital Foundry.

Microsoft needs a new 360, a powerful and cheap console that was easy to develop for and had amazing exclusives. They don't need the most powerful console, they need better games.

The only thing keeping Xbox together is the willingness of Microsoft to bleed money to keep it up. Game pass is great but if it comes at the price of the quality of the games is not worth for me. I think Microsoft tried and is trying to push Sony aside this gen by brute force, and it's failing, and it's both sad and funny.

All of that being said, I really wish Microsoft won't quit the console market. We need the competition to have better products.

 

[begotten]

SenjutsuSage
CatLady
adamsapple

GET HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DarkMage619

 

[DenchDeckard]

I know there are the hardcore warriors who actually would want the other team to go under but imo that would be a disaster for us gamers.

No way should anyone want one company dictating our gaming on console without any threat

This is what warriors like Heisenberg007 don't think about...It's like they cant see how even this generation Microsoft had benefited Sonys fans. Playstation plus extra is pretty damn great and it would never exist if it wasn't for MS. We need competition and even with Microsoft selling 50 to 60 million consoles a generation is enough to keep Sony on their toes.

 

[NahaNago]

Xbox will be fine. They still have Bethesda and all of those studios they bought just a few years ago. They just need to focus on quality. Rather than going for the big guns with the abk deal they should have bought or created 2 dozen smaller studios for gamepass. Xbox managed to sell millions of consoles without a lot of big first party games this gen.

They just need to get their studios in order this gen and go hard next gen.

 

[DaGwaphics]

I know there are the hardcore warriors who actually would want the other team to go under but imo that would be a disaster for us gamers.

No way should anyone want one company dictating our gaming on console without any threat

These people will always use the excuse that they think some other party would jump in and compete at the same or higher level than MS. Which doesn't seem realistic given the 20+ years MS has put in.

Being 3rd isn't the end of the world. This entire acquisition has given them a bit of a black eye at the moment, not just from the CMA ruling but the process as a whole. They can bounce back just fine though, just work on getting games out that are well received and fun to play. Getting back to a strong, positivity driven marketing approach certainly won't hurt either. Along with trying to keep the ABK deal behind other PR talking points for the remainder of that process, if they get a surprise win in the end there then they can jump back out to the front page with that.

 

[Banjo64]

Whilst we are speculating on the future of the business as well I would just like to lay out my thoughts on subscription services like Game Pass.

Basically, they should be a vehicle for quality indie/AA devs to receive funding in exchange for supported and some level of exclusivity. Alongside that, there should be some old (but extremely high quality) AA and AAA games that can be secured on the cheap due to their age.

Keeps cost down for the subscription company, in turn keeps cost down for the consumer, is healthy for the gaming industry because indie devs have a platform to thrive on and secure funding.

Going after $90b worth of studios has always been a head scratcher for me and is just asking for an escalation of everything - running cost for MS and expectation on MS.

Imagine a world where Game Pass was locked in at only £4.99 like Apple Arcade but placed amazing games like Ori and Tinykin front and centre.

There doesn’t have to be 400 games like there is now. There doesn’t have to be 8-10 additions a month.

 

[DaGwaphics]

I'd really be shocked if they suddenly altered the structure of GP, that's the area of their business that is shining the brightest. I'd expect them to continue to double down on that and stick with the goals they've previously set for it.

 

[feynoob]

Whilst we are speculating on the future of the business as well I would just like to lay out my thoughts on subscription services like Game Pass.

Basically, they should be a vehicle for quality indie/AA devs to receive funding in exchange for supported and some level of exclusivity. Alongside that, there should be some old (but extremely high quality) AA and AAA games that can be secured on the cheap due to their age.

Keeps cost down for the subscription company, in turn keeps cost down for the consumer, is healthy for the gaming industry because indie devs have a platform to thrive on and secure funding.

Going after $90b worth of studios has always been a head scratcher for me and is just asking for an escalation of everything - running cost for MS and expectation on MS.

Imagine a world where Game Pass was locked in at only £4.99 like Apple Arcade but placed amazing games like Ori and Tinykin front and centre.

There doesn’t have to be 400 games like there is now. There doesn’t have to be 8-10 additions a month.

The issue with your thinking is that most people aren't a fan of these games.

Doing this will make the service much weaker than the counter part subs and those that will exist in the future.

MS is aiming for the future here. People can make fun of them as much as they want to, but there will be a moment, when they will be huge threat.

I will use my team (arsenal) as example.

2 years ago, we finished 8th 2 seasons. With few changes, we landed on fifth, and were close to 4th. This year, we were almost close to the title. That is a progression. It didn't happen overtime. It was a painful process for the fans, who had to endure those big losses, especially our 21/22 start season with infamous 3 losses.

this is what I see with Xbox and gamepass. They are slowly rebuilding itself. And because it's not showing it's progress as we like to, we are having these type of debates.

there will be a time, when Xbox will show all their fruition. But in order to reach that, there has to be a patience. All those gloom and doom wont achieve anything.

 

[magnumpy]

WRT fears of monolithic monopolies without Micro$oft, I'm sure I don't need to mention Nintendo and PC, and Steam and cellphones and obviously Sony. the video game market is large and profitable and not beholden to a single player.