Support NeoGAF

[Clear]

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).

Your view of this is so childish and simple-minded. They (MS) can do whatever they choose with product and IP that they own. Including putting titles like Ori on Nintendo platforms which are just as competitive as Sony's!

Do they do that day #1? No, of course not because they want to get the max impact in marketplaces where they don't have to share revenue with anyone and the long term benefit of association as the main place to play that product.

However, after sufficient time has passed and interest has faded, pushing it out onto a competitor is pretty good business. They get additional income, expand awareness of the IP (useful if its an ongoing franchise), and get to put their logo on the opposition's storefront.

If nothing else its a bargaining chip to get reciprocal concessions from a rival.

Just think it through. This is business not a playground game of one-upmanship.

 

[Andodalf]

Your view of this is so childish and simple-minded. They (MS) can do whatever they choose with product and IP that they own. Including putting titles like Ori on Nintendo platforms which are just as competitive as Sony's!

Do they do that day #1? No, of course not because they want to get the max impact in marketplaces where they don't have to share revenue with anyone and the long term benefit of association as the main place to play that product.

However, after sufficient time has passed and interest has faded, pushing it out onto a competitor is pretty good business. They get additional income, expand awareness of the IP (useful if its an ongoing franchise), and get to put their logo on the opposition's storefront.

If nothing else its a bargaining chip to get reciprocal concessions from a rival.

Just think it through. This is business not a playground game of one-upmanship.

By that same logic, why would they not have put Halo on other consoles already? Why has Sony not done the same?

Just think it through.

 

[DaGwaphics]

MS goes all out and actually do not care about how/where you play

And when they say that they are referring to playing on Xbox 1, or XSX, or Windows PC, or GP via streaming on mobile. Notice a trend. Did people actually think that Fable, Forza, etc. were coming to PS5 just because MS says they don't care where you play?

 

[Clear]

By that same logic, why would they not have put Halo on other consoles already? Why has Sony not done the same?

Just think it through.

Because its been their flagship title since day#1, MC is the closest thing they have to a mascot, its built on proprietary tech, and as such there is literally no proven audience for it on Playstation or Nintendo.

Sony are doing the exact thing I described with PC.

Try again.

 

[devilNprada]

By that same logic, why would they not have put Halo on other consoles already? Why has Sony not done the same?

Just think it through.

The business model is changing.. Past is not as relevant as you may think it is.
Halo is coming to gamepass not Xbox the device exclusively. When Sony and Nintendo decide it is in their interest to offer game pass on their devices. Halo will be on Playstation.

 

[wolffy71]

Because its been their flagship title since day#1, MC is the closest thing they have to a mascot, its built on proprietary tech, and as such there is literally no proven audience for it on Playstation or Nintendo.

Sony are doing the exact thing I described with PC.

Try again.

This is pretty dumb post tbh.

How would halo have a proven audience on a olatform they've never been on?

Wouldn't halo sell on these unproven platform. I wonder if it would sell in pc. Hmmm.

Why only mention halo, the flagship? Why not address gears, forza, or even SOT.

Why mention sony is doing that on pc. Ok well now all sony has to do is release them on xbox and Nintendo.

 

[Bernkastel]

Your view of this is so childish and simple-minded. They (MS) can do whatever they choose with product and IP that they own. Including putting titles like Ori on Nintendo platforms which are just as competitive as Sony's!

You call me childish and simple minded, it you are making fantasies they have never done.

Do they do that day #1? No, of course not because they want to get the max impact in marketplaces where they don't have to share revenue with anyone and the long term benefit of association as the main place to play that product.

However, after sufficient time has passed and interest has faded, pushing it out onto a competitor is pretty good business. They get additional income, expand awareness of the IP (useful if its an ongoing franchise), and get to put their logo on the opposition's storefront.

If nothing else its a bargaining chip to get reciprocal concessions from a rival.

They have only done this with platforms like Steam and Nintendo that they dont consider as competition(I would assume so based on how they treat those platforms). If they have not put their games on a platform(with the exception of the Minecraft IP, in which they made their stance pretty clear and things that were announced for the other platform before acquisition like Wasteland 3) it means they see more benefit in not promoting the other platform.

Just think it through. This is business not a playground game of one-upmanship.

It is upto Microsoft to decide whether they see benefit in being a first party or third party. This is not determined by assessment of some hastily done reply in a internet forum relying on a platform promoting narrative.

Because its been their flagship title since day#1, MC is the closest thing they have to a mascot, its built on proprietary tech, and as such there is literally no proven audience for it on Playstation or Nintendo.

Sony are doing the exact thing I described with PC.

Try again.

Its true for their other first party titles too. Where is Forza on other platforms where they usually dont put their first party titles(mind you this series sells a lot)? Why are Avowed, Hellblade II, Everwild and Fable only announced for Xbox Series X|S and PC? Unless Microsoft changes their stance on first party content and what it potentially sees as overlapping audience, we will assume Starfield and TES VI will be treated like their other first party projects.

The business model is changing.. Past is not as relevant as you may think it is.
Halo is coming to gamepass not Xbox the device exclusively. When Sony and Nintendo decide it is in their interest to offer game pass on their devices. Halo will be on Playstation.

 

[Gavon West]

If Sony bought Zenimax all of the IP would be Playstation exclusive and all titles currently on Xbox and PC would be delisted from the digital stores they currently reside in. Sony would not honour previous exclusive agreements nor would they port over or support ESO or F76 to Xbox Series X/S as well as actively blocking backward compatibility for all Zenimax IP on Microsoft consoles.

But on the flipside xbox users have to be cucks and accept the first party crown jewels being developed, published and supported on Playstation lest feelings get hurt?

C'mon man.

Gamers just arent used to Micrsoft having their own super successful IP because its been Sony who's basically dominated this entire generation with critically acclaimed, 10 million sellers. Now they feel as if Microsoft is obligated to share Bethesda games on their platform because thats where all the hugely successful games have been. Thats changed BIG TIME! They arent taking the news too well either. Its been almost a week and their still in denial.

 

[wolffy71]

The business model is changing.. Past is not as relevant as you may think it is.
Halo is coming to gamepass not Xbox the device exclusively. When Sony and Nintendo decide it is in their interest to offer game pass on their devices. Halo will be on Playstation.

Why would xbox want to be on Playstation tho? Serious question. Think it thru all the way. How does it work in totality.

Do you think this is about ecosystem or just the 10$ sub? Imo its ecosystem. Although i would like to know how much these guys make from the ecosystem minus online fees, gp, and physical sales. Just digital games and dlcs. And what percentage it is.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

The business model is changing.. Past is not as relevant as you may think it is.
Halo is coming to gamepass not Xbox the device exclusively. When Sony and Nintendo decide it is in their interest to offer game pass on their devices. Halo will be on Playstation.

Sony already has Game Pass on PS. PS Now.

The only key differences are:

1. No day one launch first party games (they come later at random times)

2. Certain generation games (like PS3) and PS Now on PC are stream only

The rest of the core service which is tons of games coming and going, and a monthly sub fee are the same.

 

[KaiserBecks]

Ok Phil.

Exclusives Are 'Completely Counter To What Gaming Is About,' Xbox's Phil Spencer Says

Xbox boss Phil Spencer has spoken out against Xbox Series X exclusive games, ruling them exclusionary for gaming communities.

www.kotaku.com.au

I wish he would pick one.

But, Xbox doesn‘t have exclusives because everything is on PC?! At least that‘s been the tenor here for quite a while, no?

 

[lastmessiah]

Gamers just arent used to Micrsoft having their own super successful IP because its been Sony who's basically dominated this entire generation with critically acclaimed, 10 million sellers. Now they feel as if Microsoft is obligated to share Bethesda games on their platform because thats where all the hugely successful games have been. Thats changed BIG TIME! They arent taking the news too well either. Its been almost a week and their still in denial.

The denial will remain even when Starfield is announced with a release date on Xbox platforms and nothing else.

 

[CatLady]

The denial will remain even when Starfield is announced with a release date on Xbox platforms and nothing else.

The denial will remain 10 years after it's been released on Xbox platforms only and I'm sure the mantra "Xbox has no games' will still be chanted by the cult of Sony.

 

[Sleepwalker]

Some money will be gamepass, some money will be purchases (people will buy discs still, just to have them, and Collectors Editions), another chunk will come from MTX and DLC depending on the game. There's different avenues to profit other than gamepass, that do not involve the playstation.

 

[devilNprada]

Why would xbox want to be on Playstation tho? Serious question. Think it thru all the way. How does it work in totality.

Do you think this is about ecosystem or just the 10$ sub?

Yes MS wants gamepass (not their games) on PS and Ninetendo devices. They have said over and over again "Every device and reaching everybody". It is most definatley about eco system. Physical consoles won't be around forever. At this point they need to get some kind of leverage on the Amazon\Google eco systems that already exist in almost every household on most devices.

 

[Clear]

How would halo have a proven audience on a olatform they've never been on?

It wouldn't, its already synonymous with Xbox. At this point why would anyone interested in it as a franchise not already have bought an Xbox?

This is the difference between that and Bethesda's franchises which have had multiple entries already on Playstation, there's actual proven evidence of interest. You never get 1:1 crossover when you force buyers to switch platform in order to play the newest installment of a franchise, some people will inevitably reject it because very few are so attached to a single property that it overrides interest in an ecosystem as a whole.

Next time please reference the convo and not just my reply, because it looks like you got the wrong end of the stick. It wasn't me who put forward Halo as an example.

 

[DaGwaphics]

They have only done this with platforms like Steam and Nintendo that they dont consider as a competition

The Nintendo releases have just been limited to 2nd party software published by MS, right? Or have they put first-party over there (excluding Minecraft)?

 

[Bernkastel]

The Nintendo releases have just been limited to 2nd party software published by MS, right? Or have they put first-party over there (excluding Minecraft)?

So far only Ori(Cuphead is not a Microsoft IP). Hellblade was already multi-platform.

 

[yurinka]

The denial will remain 10 years after it's been released on Xbox platforms only and I'm sure the mantra "Xbox has no games' will still be chanted by the cult of Sony.

How many AAA exclusives (even if crossgen or console exclusives instead of full exclusives) has Xbox announced for 2020 and 2021 other than Halo Infinite?

The denial will remain even when Starfield is announced with a release date on Xbox platforms and nothing else.

Phil Spencer said they will study console exclusivity on a case by case basis after their already agreed PS5 timed exclusives with already announced game. This means some future Zenimax games will be Xbox console exclusives while other ones won't.

 

[Kagey K]

How many AAA exclusives (even if crossgen or console exclusives instead of full exclusives) has Xbox announced for 2020 and 2021 other than Halo Infinite?

That means there’s obviously none coming. Right?

 

[kyoji]

That means there’s obviously none coming. Right?

I dont think thats the point he was trying to make, also what happened to the fake outrage of announcing games to far out in advance? Sony use to get clobbered over this. I guess announcing games 2-3 years away with no game-play is back to being acceptable now? Nice.

 

[Explosive Zombie]

They're still not wording it very clearly.

 

[Salty Popsicle]

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

Unfortunately, Sony seems to only be focused on making games with the same old recycled "over the shoulder" cinematic view and multiplayer as an after-thought. When was the last time Sony released an in-house RPG game or a first person shooter?

 

[NoMoChokeSJ]

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?

Lol.. a month. $100 million a month. Plus MS says they have 15 million subscribers and ultimate runs $15 a month. It'll add up. If 15 million turns into 30 million that is $300-$400 million A MONTH. That's $3.6-4.8 billion a year. This doesn't count sales, DLC, ect.. I think they'll be ok.

 

[Maybe It's Medicine?]

Porting their games to PS5 never did make very much sense and reeks of PS fanboy hope. How exactly is Xbox making more money spending extra on dev costs so a few million folks can buy their games on Playstation. Wouldn't it be even more profitable to withhold those games from PS5 so the people who want to play the next ES or Starfield buy an Xbox and the game or sign up for game pass? I feel that is what is being underestimated here, people who really want to play these games will do so one way or the other. Putting these big games on PS5 sends the message that players don't need to join the Xbox ecosystem to enjoy the games they want, and that's the opposite of what microsoft wants. They are after that 100+ million game pass subscribers, and I think they can get there with exclusive content like the stuff they will get from Bethesda studios.

They do leave some money on the table. Inevitably. Theoretically. But Sony is also leaving theoretical money on the table by not porting their games to Xbox. They also just paid I would assume an outrageous sum of cash for FF16. Why? The game would have launched on PS5 anyway. It's because exclusives are not about game sales, they are there to draw people to your services.

As for a case by case basis. I think it's safe to say Xbox is fine with your Fallout 76, Fallout Shelters, or ESO type stuff going to Playstation. But there is more long term profits to be made by keeping their big guns exclusive than they would ever make off of a few million measly game sales.

Tldr, why sell people a 70 dollar game when you can sell them so much more by getting their foot in your shop.

I would also like to add that I think the reason you aren't getting a "all Bethesda games are exclusive to Xbox" crystal clear message is because it's not true. What makes the most sense is to put your Prey, Dishonored 1+2, Elder Scrolls collection etc on ps5,/nintendo then release sequels to those games only on Xbox platforms. From that pov, there are lots of old ports they could do for Playstation and nintendo but if you want the latest entries, I don't think you will find them on competitor hardware. That's the proper way to get people on other platforms excited for your exclusives and how xbox can profit off of other hardware. All without destroying the value that future exclusive games will offer Microsoft.

 

[wolffy71]

Yes MS wants gamepass (not their games) on PS and Ninetendo devices. They have said over and over again "Every device and reaching everybody". It is most definatley about eco system. Physical consoles won't be around forever. At this point they need to get some kind of leverage on the Amazon\Google eco systems that already exist in almost every household on most devices.

Well if its definitely about ecosystem then either MS has to not care about it or sony has to be ok with MS incorporating some sort of ecosystem into gamepass beyond just the 10$ fee.

 

[Clear]

Porting their games to PS5 never did make very much sense and reeks of PS fanboy hope. How exactly is Xbox making more money spending extra on dev costs so a few million folks can buy their games on Playstation. Wouldn't it be even more profitable to withhold those games from PS5 so the people who want to play the next ES or Starfield buy an Xbox and the game or sign up for game pass? I feel that is what is being underestimated here, people who really want to play these games will do so one way or the other. Putting these big games on PS5 sends the message that players don't need to join the Xbox ecosystem to enjoy the games they want, and that's the opposite of what microsoft wants. They are after that 100+ million game pass subscribers, and I think they can get there with exclusive content like the stuff they will get from Bethesda studios.

They do leave some money on the table. Inevitably. Theoretically. But Sony is also leaving theoretical money on the table by not porting their games to Xbox. They also just paid I would assume an outrageous sum of cash for FF16. Why? The game would have launched on PS5 anyway. It's because exclusives are not about game sales, they are there to draw people to your services.

As for a case by case basis. I think it's safe to say Xbox is fine with your Fallout 76, Fallout Shelters, or ESO type stuff going to Playstation. But there is more long term profits to be made by keeping their big guns exclusive than they would ever make off of a few million measly game sales.

Consider it doesn't have to be all one way or the other, its not impossible to pursue a strategy that mixes the two.

I really do not understand why people act like behaving in absolutes is the natural and expected course of action. Its like the assumption that the balance of cross-gen and next gen only titles on both Xbox and Playstation for the launch window is going to be the norm for the duration. There's a process of transition in play and at each stage the relative competitive balance changes making some things that were formerly unlikely, even impossible, become possible.

 

[wolffy71]

It wouldn't, its already synonymous with Xbox. At this point why would anyone interested in it as a franchise not already have bought an Xbox?

This is the difference between that and Bethesda's franchises which have had multiple entries already on Playstation, there's actual proven evidence of interest. You never get 1:1 crossover when you force buyers to switch platform in order to play the newest installment of a franchise, some people will inevitably reject it because very few are so attached to a single property that it overrides interest in an ecosystem as a whole.

Next time please reference the convo and not just my reply, because it looks like you got the wrong end of the stick. It wasn't me who put forward Halo as an example.

The entire concept of "proven audience" is nonsense. Its makes no difference if fallout is proven or not. Cyberpunk is unproven, wanna take a stab at whether its gonna have an audience or not?

So by ur point halo must not have sold anything on pc because everyone who wanted to play it would have already bought an xbox? You point is illogical really

 

[GetemMa]

I hear Bethesda games are indeed coming to the PS5.

They will release on the western ice wall first then make their way to NA, then Japan, then the Eastern Ice wall, the finally the EU and latin america. Donald Trump sealed the deal with MS just last week as he was saving trafficked children in the Seattle area from being vaccinated by Bill Gates. If you doubt me you're probably just a stooge, schilling for the deep state which indeed includes Phil Spencer and co.

TRUE Story.

 

[wolffy71]

Xbox game streaming goes hand in hand with GP. Id agrue that GP is basically a necessity for streaming to ever take off. When MS thinks about game streaming they are thinking globally, Asia, Africa, India, south america, really just globally. To compete in this space they are gonna need exclusive content or people will be able to use other platforms. This really isnt about lost sales on sony, its about lost customers to whatever FANG or the like pop up. A couple dozen million lost games sold on sony isnt gonna move the needle imo.

 

[freefornow]

Sony already has Game Pass on PS. PS Now.

The only key differences are:

1. No day one launch first party games (they come later at random times)

2. Certain generation games (like PS3) and PS Now on PC are stream only

The rest of the core service which is tons of games coming and going, and a monthly sub fee are the same.

3. Treats regions other than NA, JPN, EU and UK as Tier 3 afterthoughts.

 

[devilNprada]

Xbox game streaming goes hand in hand with GP. Id agrue that GP is basically a necessity for streaming to ever take off. When MS thinks about game streaming they are thinking globally, Asia, Africa, India, south america, really just globally. To compete in this space they are gonna need exclusive content or people will be able to use other platforms. This really isnt about lost sales on sony, its about lost customers to whatever FANG or the like pop up. A couple dozen million lost games sold on sony isnt gonna move the needle imo.

Totally agree... It's a long term investment to combat the larger eco systems out there, because physical consoles won't be around forever.
Question is will the big games go to the other consoles?
I wouldn't bet against it.
Minecraft currently generates a lot of Xbox accounts and I suspect the big Zenimax games will also.

Yes, I do have XSX on preorder regardless.

 

[DavJay]

Spencer saw the roadmap for Bethesda and said it was the decision for the purchase. Starfield must look like a game changer because TESVI and Fallout 5 is ways off. Either that or they have many other stuff going on.

 

[Redlight]

Your view of this is so childish and simple-minded. They (MS) can do whatever they choose with product and IP that they own. Including putting titles like Ori on Nintendo platforms which are just as competitive as Sony's!

Do they do that day #1? No, of course not because they want to get the max impact in marketplaces where they don't have to share revenue with anyone and the long term benefit of association as the main place to play that product.

However, after sufficient time has passed and interest has faded, pushing it out onto a competitor is pretty good business. They get additional income, expand awareness of the IP (useful if its an ongoing franchise), and get to put their logo on the opposition's storefront.

If nothing else its a bargaining chip to get reciprocal concessions from a rival.

Just think it through. This is business not a playground game of one-upmanship.

They could've purchased timed exclusivity on all of these titles for a good deal less than $7.5 billion, if that's all they wanted.

Microsoft buying this publisher and then not making the games exclusive would be revolutionary.

Not impossible, sure, but those claiming that the Zenimax games will come to PS5 are making an extraordinary claim.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

 

[lastmessiah]

Spencer saw the roadmap for Bethesda and said it was the decision for the purchase. Starfield must look like a game changer because TESVI and Fallout 5 is ways off. Either that or they have many other stuff going on.

What do we know about Starfield, if anything? I missed all the brouhaha when it was teased. Or is it hush hush until Todd says so?

 

[quest]

Spencer saw the roadmap for Bethesda and said it was the decision for the purchase. Starfield must look like a game changer because TESVI and Fallout 5 is ways off. Either that or they have many other stuff going on.

Sony wanted starfield badly also. The closed door showings must of been damn good to get both Microsoft and Sony hot to trot.

 

[Based Department]

If you can't produce great games, just buy a huge part of the multi-plat industry. I hope Xbox fans won't flip out when Amazon does the same.

like spiderman ?

 

[DavJay]

What do we know about Starfield, if anything? I missed all the brouhaha when it was teased. Or is it hush hush until Todd says so?

We the public don’t know but Phil did and apparently it is worth 7.5 billion. That alone is reassuring about its fate. He said he saw ALOT of good stuff both announced and unannounced. Xbox fans should be excited for sure.

 

[Gavon West]

How many AAA exclusives (even if crossgen or console exclusives instead of full exclusives) has Xbox announced for 2020 and 2021 other than Halo Infinite?


Phil Spencer said they will study console exclusivity on a case by case basis after their already agreed PS5 timed exclusives with already announced game. This means some future Zenimax games will be Xbox console exclusives while other ones won't.

Dude, seriously, stop! You really think Phil and company are going to announce something like this and disappoint its fanbase later on by announcing that Starfield or any other Bethesda title is multiplatform? Even a couple of them? I agree you may still get ESO and Fallout as those are already multiplatform.

They would look weak and probably lose more potential sales by doing so. The backlash from their own base would be extensive at this point. They released the information like this for Playstation only fans to get used to the idea. If it were multi platform, the news has circulated enough to where they'd come out on the record to set expectations before the idea set in with its base. Its a wrap, broski. Let it go.

 

[Darlingcognito]

You know what, MS should give Sony the middle finger and I hope they do. Never met a more arrogant or entitled fan base. Really have to bring them back to Earth.

 

[Redlight]

If you can't produce great games, just buy a huge part of the multi-plat industry. I hope Xbox fans won't flip out when Amazon does the same.

What's the point in flipping out? The games will still be available, consumers will just have to make adjustments about how they get them. Like anything, some things will be better, some worse.

Amazon will only be successful if they offer something compelling. It might be the best thing that could happen, who knows?

Amazon doesn't have any hardware, so maybe the medium-term future is having an Amazon app on your Xbox/PS5 and playing their games that way.

I wouldn't have a problem with that.

 

[DaGwaphics]

^ Fairly sure you'd get a big "Hell Na" from both Sony and MS on that.

You stream Amazon's service, so no need for dedicated hardware.

 

[longdi]

Wont the new consoles need comparatively higher wattage due to additional components attached through USB 3.0 like VR, external HDD, WiFi 6 and mainly they need to also account for external SSD and also additional cooling for that external SSD.

Doubt so. I didnt check but for wireless, newer version are usually more efficient. PS4 already has USB3.0 and external HDD. SSD are lower power than HDD too.

The zen2 cores in the APU are extremely low power, and PS5 has a lower clocked version than SeX.

So it is down to the graphics cores and PS5 extra i/o processors.

I will bet its really the graphics cores of PS5 that resulted in its higher PSU ratings. Makes you wonder why bothered with the weaker small die if you still end up eating more power and hence more heat wastage and outlets, unless...

 

[dano1]

Doesn’t look like 8 Billion worth to me! I did like wolfenstien though!

 

[Dacon]

I don't see why people think there isnt going to be any exclusivity when they literally spent 7 billion dollars on the company and its IPs.

 

[Iced Arcade]

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

Actually they are saying exactly the same thing they did when they acquired the studio's over the last year or so

 

[Gavon West]

Actually they are saying exactly the same thing they did when they acquired the studio's over the last year or so

Exact same things. Yep!

 

[yurinka]

Dude, seriously, stop! You really think Phil and company are going to announce something like this and disappoint its fanbase later on by announcing that Starfield or any other Bethesda title is multiplatform? Even a couple of them? I agree you may still get ESO and Fallout as those are already multiplatform.

They would look weak and probably lose more potential sales by doing so. The backlash from their own base would be extensive at this point. They released the information like this for Playstation only fans to get used to the idea. If it were multi platform, the news has circulated enough to where they'd come out on the record to set expectations before the idea set in with its base. Its a wrap, broski. Let it go.

Phil Spencer said twice that they will honor the timed console exclusive deals they had with PS5, and after that they will consider exclusivity of the Zenimax games in a case by case basis instead of saying that once these couple of timed exclusives are done, all future Zenimax games will be console exclusive:



Here is 3:44 https://ca.movies.yahoo.com/xbox-series-x-most-powerful-170813309.html

They also paid a ton of money for Minecraft and it's already multiplatform, and allowed Ori or Cuphead to be released somewhere else. Sony also allowed some of its 2nd party games to be released on PC, and even a 1st party AAA game (Horizon). It isn't being weak, they just try to get more revenue from their investments. In terms of marketing, they can make all future Zenimax console exclusive, and just a few ones (Elder Scrolls VI, Fallout 5, Starfield) timed console exclusives. They can announce them for Xbox only, to release it and keep quiet about a PS5 until a year later and release it on PS5. That would mean that during a couple of years of promotion and a year -or half a year- with these games in the market they would look as Xbox exclusive, but later would come to PS. Something similar to Ori or Cuphead, nobody got mad when they announced them for other platforms even if MS paid these games.

It's like Disney with Star Wars or Marvel: many of these movies or tv series are or have been in many other tv channels or streaming platforms of the competitiion. They own platform(s) are a 'small' portion of the market so they kept in the other ones at least until they get their money back, moment where it could make sense -or not- to make them exclusive to their platform(s).

 

[Forsythia]

This just keeps on going. Want MS games, buy an Xbox, PC or use xCloud. That's more options than Sony gives you with their first party games. But no, they have to keep their games locked to the PlayStation and even moneyhat almost every third party developer for exclusive content. That's fine I guess, because it's Sony. The double standard just keeps on giving and goalposts are being moved with every step MS takes. If Sony bought Bethesda you'd bet they'd keep everything exclusive to PlayStation, and fanboys would be cheering as well.

 

[Panajev2001a]

This just keeps on going. Want MS games, buy an Xbox, PC or use xCloud. That's more options than Sony gives you with their first party games. But no, they have to keep their games locked to the PlayStation and even moneyhat almost every third party developer for exclusive content. That's fine I guess, because it's Sony. The double standard just keeps on giving and goalposts are being moved with every step MS takes. If Sony bought Bethesda you'd bet they'd keep everything exclusive to PlayStation, and fanboys would be cheering as well.

... and there would be massive “anti-consumer” concern threads and you know it .