• 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.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

Phil Spencer on exclusivity, monetisation and game development

cdthree

Member
Jan 30, 2018
266
85
295
Not sure why playing an established franchise every generation is a problem for Phil. Goes against human nature to constantly try something new every time, especially when it cost 70 dollars a pop. That's why Coke and Pepsi are still a thing.

GAAS will evolve and be the future. A hardcore fanbase willing to pay to play their games on the phone. Except that instead of paying to win like it is now it will be about them signing up to gamepass to get those extra perks or "pay to win". Gotta get those engagement numbers and eyeballs locked in you're ecosystem. These games are fast and cheap to produce and insanely profitable. Microsoft needs a buying spree on some mobile game companies, or a couple of big ones. Buying T-Mobile to get around downloads caps, would be helpful for Xcloud, though. They could go either way.
 

ChuckeRearmed

Member
Jan 31, 2018
2,058
1,836
415
"Minecraft" is a little special case, and I think it should be considered separately from the platform called Xbox. The idea is that "Minecraft" is itself a platform. It's also used in educational institutions, and by the time we acquired Mojang, it was already on various platforms. "Minecraft" is a unique platform, and it is a sample of how to create a community, and in the TGS presentation, we showed a video focusing on the "Minecraft" community. Xbox has a slightly different idea from "Minecraft". Since Game Streaming and Game Pass are already compatible with mobiles and PCs, I feel that there is not much need to support other devices.

I love that last little sentence there too. So very final.
Exactly. Minecraft is its own world with the potential bigger than Fortnite. It will be everywhere - from schools to consoles. Because it is Minecraft.
Which is not the case for TES - I mean how many TES games there were on playstation? Skyrim & Oblivion?
 
Apr 19, 2019
9,180
15,106
780
Away with the fairies
I see your Minecraft and raise you Jeremy Hinton, head of Xbox Asia;


"Minecraft" is a little special case, and I think it should be considered separately from the platform called Xbox. The idea is that "Minecraft" is itself a platform. It's also used in educational institutions, and by the time we acquired Mojang, it was already on various platforms. "Minecraft" is a unique platform, and it is a sample of how to create a community, and in the TGS presentation, we showed a video focusing on the "Minecraft" community. Xbox has a slightly different idea from "Minecraft". Since Game Streaming and Game Pass are already compatible with mobiles and PCs, I feel that there is not much need to support other devices.

I love that last little sentence there too. So very final.

Nice reply, i like it!

Is that final sentence saying they don't need to support GP - service- on other platforms or that they don't need support from other platforms to help with Gamepass?
The goal is to bring more GP subscribers. You won't get them by selling the games on PS. In fact - as you can see - a lot of PS owners still believe that games will come to PS eventually. And the best way to make people join GP is not to give the games to PS. That's how you do it.

Long term subscribers will generate more profit. Not to mention - there is PC, so unlike Netflix there is an additional revenue stream anyway.

I agree, if MS were offering their full suite of exclusives to Sony and Nintendo. I just think the scale and scope of TES and Fallout going exclusive would be a big miss revenue wise. But, it's not the first time we've seen this kind of move in the industry. So, i suppose we will just wait and see

People keep coming back to this short-term perspective when it comes to this acquistion. Phil already said they can make the deal work without leaning on Sony's fanbase for it. They literally have consoles, PC, Steam and Android devices with potential GP sticks in the near future. This isnt a short term, hurry-up-and-make-the-money-back-as-soon-as-possible investment. Its $7.5 billion dollars. This is long term. They lose money and subs by giving their games to Sony without GamePass. What you're suggesting isnt going to happen. Read the interview... Seriously.

Like i said above, Fallout and TES launching exclusives i believe would be a big revenue miss. Launching the entire MS 1st party suite on other platforms would be financial suicide.

I read the interview, it had too many inconsistencies and corporate waffle for me to take it on face value. Plus, Spencer has been known to do a bit of flip-flopping.
 

Sparhavoc

Member
Sep 4, 2020
657
1,255
480
I can't fault him for turning around the Xbox brand but fucking hell he's an open book to games journalists. Less talk and more exclusives I say
 

ChuckeRearmed

Member
Jan 31, 2018
2,058
1,836
415
I agree, if MS were offering their full suite of exclusives to Sony and Nintendo. I just think the scale and scope of TES and Fallout going exclusive would be a big miss revenue wise. But, it's not the first time we've seen this kind of move in the industry. So, i suppose we will just wait and see
Any Playstation game will bring a lot of revenue on other platforms - PC, Xbox whatever. But Sony won't port them - because exclusives bring people to ecosystem. It is not about making big bucks short-term. It is about the ecosystem and subscribers.
 

Hix

Banned
Jul 24, 2011
4,071
7,117
1,030
Belfast, NI
Exactly. Minecraft is its own world with the potential bigger than Fortnite. It will be everywhere - from schools to consoles. Because it is Minecraft.
Which is not the case for TES - I mean how many TES games there were on playstation? Skyrim & Oblivion?

Oblivion came late and missed features too. The Elder Scrolls is more associated with PC and Xbox.

Not that it matters, as anyone thinking MS will publish their big first party IPs on PlayStation, especially because somehow a 1.5 trillion dollar company plans for PS attach rate sales, are out of their goddamn minds.

About Minecraft, there's one further distinction...


 

ChuckeRearmed

Member
Jan 31, 2018
2,058
1,836
415
Just tell me about the goddamn games. Make me feel good as an xbox fan. Make me look forward to something beyond the launch droubt.
MS has just bought Bethesda and a lot of sony fanboys will have sleepless nights contemplating whether the games will come to their platform or not and create a lot of topics regarding exclusivity etc. You should feel good :messenger_tears_of_joy:

As a mainly PC gamer even if Sony buys Capcom or SE I won't be sad at all - their games haven't hit PC until the latest years anyway - I lived without them just fine.

Oblivion came late and missed features too. The Elder Scrolls is more associated with PC and Xbox.
Oh I did not even know about missing features as I played them on PC only - heavily modded of course because Bethesda's games are designed to be finished by the mod community :messenger_tears_of_joy:

I can't fault him for turning around the Xbox brand but fucking hell he's an open book to games journalists. Less talk and more exclusives I say
Well he is constantly asked about the same thing over and over again - I bet he already tired of hearing the same question, which he cannot answer for now.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Slings and Arrows

martino

Member
Apr 25, 2013
6,040
3,854
705
France
I think you're conflating two distinct elements to the conversation, to be honest with you. He can't go into details about the way the two specific companies will be working together, but nothing is stopping him making a general remark about how Microsoft owned studio games will be exclusive or not.

Also, it's extremely SMART not to rule out Bethesda games on Playstaion, because it makes business sense not to at this stage. Spencer gets a lot of flak about what he says a lot of the time, but keeping things nice and open, for future consideration is the right play here. He doesn't know how the landscape will lie in the next few years.
possible but he said nothing for you to think that here....
it's only you interpreting that nothing as being what you wish it to be.

Any Playstation game will bring a lot of revenue on other platforms - PC, Xbox whatever. But Sony won't port them - because exclusives bring people to ecosystem. It is not about making big bucks short-term. It is about the ecosystem and subscribers.
One of the many dissonant cognitive opinion that is brand dependant for some people.
 
  • Strength
Reactions: CatLady

Jigsaah

Gold Member
Jan 31, 2018
5,614
5,663
740
I actually read the whole thing and there's some interesting tidbits. I didn't know the Zenimax deal wasn't officially done yet. I really wanna know what The Initiative is working on since he's played it.
 
Apr 19, 2019
9,180
15,106
780
Away with the fairies
This turned in another "XbOx Needs PS5 ReVeNuE so BeTHeSdA gAmEs WoN't Be Exclusive!! 11!!!!1!1!" thread very quick 🤣
No it didn't. Nobody is saying or implying that.

Microsoft don't need revenue. My line of thinking was "will they leave it on the table" some say yes, with very good evidence to back it up.

So fuck off with your fanboy drivel
 

Jigsaah

Gold Member
Jan 31, 2018
5,614
5,663
740
"We believe in exclusives, but also that the most people should be playing the game as possible" - what a non answer that was.
I know this seems contradictory, but it really isn't. For the longest people have been saying none of the games Microsoft releases first party are not exclusive because they are all coming to PC. People laugh when it's explained that Microsoft is PC and is Xbox. This has only become a concern now that Bethesda is in the mix. All of a sudden, exclusives are a bad thing for Microsoft an them doing this is "not pro-consumer". These same people celebrate Xbox and PC players not being able to play an awesome game like Ghosts of Tsushima or God of War.
 
Last edited:

Sethbacca

Member
Jun 20, 2013
762
1,630
745
I know this seems contradictory, but it really isn't. For the longest people have been saying none of the games Microsoft releases first party are exclusive because they are all coming to PC. People laugh when it's explained that Microsoft is PC and is Xbox. This has only become a concern now that Bethesda is in the mix. All of a sudden, exclusives are a bad thing for Microsoft an them doing this is "not pro-consumer". These same people celebrate Xbox and PC players not being able to play an awesome game like Ghosts of Tsushima or God of War.

Like I said before. I have a gaming pc too. No skin off my ass. I'll be one of those guys who buys a single month of gamepass and plays the game. They'll make less money off folks like me from this. That's their choice as the owner of the property. I have a hard time seeing them recouping 7.5 billion dollar purchase with the XBox console base tho, so they better hope pc gamers pay up.
 

FritzJ92

Member
Jul 19, 2020
260
399
270
He said sitting down with Todd would be illegal, then sat down with Todd.

Instead of saying "the deal will be finalised in January, and when it is, do we have some exciting news to share". But instead he waffles on, presupposing that the reader/listener/viewer has an idea of how corporations and business partnerships work.

Just tell me about the goddamn games. Make me feel good as an xbox fan. Make me look forward to something beyond the launch droubt.

Sorry for the thread derail, it wasn't my intention. I just really, really dislike 'corporate' xbox, when it has failed longer than 'good guy xbox' succeeded.
Read the whole quote, he said sitting down and dictating what to do with their portfolio isn't his job...
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Slings and Arrows

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
948
1,278
420
It's a bet then.

Microsoft wouldn't throw away a shit load of revenue over console wars. It would be the smarter decision to put the games on PS5, take a chunk of the profit to pay for more games on gamepass.

No. This makes no sense. You don't need to put it on PS5 to have your subscriber base grow. It's going to happen narurally at this point with their model.

The only threat to Microsoft in the gaming sphere right now is the potential for Luna or Facebook to actually put out a good product and give them competition in the subscription sphere.
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
8,599
9,403
940
Another day, and another complete lack of quotes from MS to support any argument as to whether Fallout 5 will or will not be released on PlayStation. Time will tell.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: octiny
Apr 19, 2019
9,180
15,106
780
Away with the fairies
No. This makes no sense. You don't need to put it on PS5 to have your subscriber base grow. It's going to happen narurally at this point with their model.

The only threat to Microsoft in the gaming sphere right now is the potential for Luna or Facebook to actually put out a good product and give them competition in the subscription sphere.
I appreciate the interaction but i'm not questioning if the subscriber base will grow, of course it will, as you say, naturally.

The threat to MS is Amazon and AWS. I didn't get what they meant when they said "Sony is not their competition" but they're bang on the money. AWS rental services, Prime video and 'streaming' will kick Microsoft right in the nuts.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Wizz-Art

Valued Gamer

Banned
Oct 26, 2020
489
1,055
385
I think the fact that Phil is playing semantics keeps speculation raging and keeps Xbox in the conversation.
 

Forsythia

Member
Aug 7, 2011
2,231
1,478
1,005
The Netherlands
There have been quite a few interviews after the announcement which make it clear the plan is to have Bethesda games exclusive to the Xbox ecosystem. He wants everyone to be able to play the games: on Xbox console, PC and xCloud. He doesn't want exclusives for just the Xbox console but somehow people interpret this as Xbox games being released on PlayStation. It is clear why Phil can't come out and just say "yes, Bethesda games will not release on PlayStation" because the deal isn't done yet. And somehow pointing all this out is "fanboy drivel". 🙄
 

Eternal21

Member
Nov 14, 2013
329
699
580
I don't need to read it, to know that all those games will be coming to PS5 (timed exclusives at worst). Why? Because if Xbox planned on keeping them exclusive, it would be screaming about it from the rooftops now, when people are deciding between XSX and PS5, and yet they aren't.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: NickFire

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
948
1,278
420
I don't need to read it, to know that all those games will be coming to PS5 (timed exclusives at worst). Why? Because if Xbox planned on keeping them exclusive, it would be screaming about it from the rooftops now, when people are deciding between XSX and PS5, and yet they aren't.

If you bothered to read, you would have read that doing that would be silly. They are in the "intent to buy" phase. It won't be until next year that they could officially say they own Zenimax due to passing of regulatory approval.

Never start a sentence with "I don't need to read..." That rarely ends well.
 
Last edited:

quest

Not Banned from OT
Jul 17, 2004
6,004
2,856
1,695
We went from PS players saying Xbox had no games to begging for MS to keep their games on PS. Funny how that works out. No fucking way will any Bethesda games come to Switch or PS5.
Pretty much but Microsoft can't say anything until the deal is legally closed. Notice starfield is not announced for a reason so platforms are not stated until the deal is done. Then Phil can go out like Vince McMahon and announce starfield xbox and PC exclusive holiday 2021.
 

Riky

My little VRR pleasure pearl goes vrrrooommm.
May 11, 2013
3,087
5,564
905
England
Like I said before. I have a gaming pc too. No skin off my ass. I'll be one of those guys who buys a single month of gamepass and plays the game. They'll make less money off folks like me from this. That's their choice as the owner of the property. I have a hard time seeing them recouping 7.5 billion dollar purchase with the XBox console base tho, so they better hope pc gamers pay up.

You don't "recoup" balance sheet items as has been said many times, very basic accounting.
 
Apr 19, 2019
9,180
15,106
780
Away with the fairies
Care to elaborate on this? That's a pretty definitive claim.
Microsoft want to own the living room. One box to rule them all. That's been the vision since the 360 days and targeting "girl gamer" to reach "1 billion gamers".

Right now, Microsoft have a console and a game streaming service. To compete with Amazon, or to fend them off, Microsoft need a streaming service and need to migrate companies to Azure asap. AWS makes $100 million a month renting out their server space to the likes of Apple, Netflix and other streaming companies.

If MS don't move outwards from gaming, Amazon will move inwards and squeeze MS, hard. By that i mean, it's easier for Amazon to add a 'Gamepass' to prime and dominate the streaming space in the living room, than it is for Facebook, Google or Amazon to make a console.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Wizz-Art

Clear

Deer/Dur
Feb 2, 2009
12,385
7,159
1,365
Lots of weird logic here, why don't Sony make Spider-Man multi-plat, lots of missed revenue there... whatever answer you pick is the same reason MS won't put Bethesda games on PS5

No, the logic is based on precedent. In the case of the Zenimax acquisition its a publisher that formerly was multi-platform, and as such its valuation was based on the revenues of a multi-platform operation. A change in business plan as drastic as dropping future support for other console platforms is certain to impact turnover negatively in the short to medium term.

By getting ownership of Zenimax, MS put themselves in a position to be able to pick and choose the path ahead. We already have an example with Mojang of a scenario where they chose not to change the publishing model drastically, just shape it in a way that made sense to them. Leaping to the assumption that they'd definitely opt for exclusivity with Zenimax just was a bit of fanboy wish-fulfilment because it was no more or less likely than them taking a business-as-usual or some sort of mixed strategy in the short term based on precedent.

Evidently they've judged that taking the short-term hit is justified for the long-term benefit of their platform. Which is perfectly reasonable, as is the careful way that they are suggesting that exceptions may be made in future if they deem it strategically worthwhile to do so.

Its basic owner's prerogative.
 
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: Slings and Arrows

Eternal21

Member
Nov 14, 2013
329
699
580
If you bothered to read, you would have read that it doing that would be silly. They are in the "intent to buy" phase. It won't be until next year that they could officially say they own Zenimax due to passing of regulatory approval.

Never start a sentence with "I don't need to read..." That rarely ends well.

"We'll be making these games exclusive to our platform if the sale goes through". Not really that hard to say, is it (except they can't, because it's not true). I'll be here 4 years from now when Bethesda's jank will be playabe not only on PC but also on PS5.
 
Feb 18, 2013
11,513
1,107
755
As much as I’ve been unimpressed and disappointed with his reign, I think this is one of the best interviews he’s given.

It came to a point where I couldn’t even listen to him a lot of the time i was that disappointed and found myself slightly in contempt of those who think he’s great. That’s wrong and a bit silly admittedly letting my passion for stuff get carried away.

I say it’s one of the best interviews because he actually acknowledges the clear lack of investment in the most important aspect of a platform , the games. Bizarre for a platform I know but it’s happened.


Ok he couldn’t exactly dismiss it as it’s clear first party has been shocking for a while with a handful of exceptions but he has acknowledged it, so good for him.

As much as I haven’t liked him , the XB1 generation and the build up to XSX/S, I want him to do well, for Xbox to do well , good healthy competition benefits us all as gamers. Bring on The Initiative game announcement.

Shout out to the interviewer, good questions
 
Last edited:

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
948
1,278
420
Microsoft want to own the living room. One box to rule them all. That's been the vision since the 360 days and targeting "girl gamer" to reach "1 billion gamers".

Right now, Microsoft have a console and a game streaming service. To compete with Amazon, or to fend them off, Microsoft need a streaming service and need to migrate companies to Azure asap. AWS makes $100 million a month renting out their server space to the likes of Apple, Netflix and other streaming companies.

If MS don't move outwards from gaming, Amazon will move inwards and squeeze MS, hard. By that i mean, it's easier for Amazon to add a 'Gamepass' to prime and dominate the streaming space in the living room, than it is for Facebook, Google or Amazon to make a console.
You make this sound so easy when it really isn't. Amazon is playing catch-up. Although, at least Amazon isn't using linux based backend which was a horrible move by Google. They signed a deal with... you guessed it Microsoft to provide the backend tech.

Also there is room in the space for more than one big dog. They can both be successful here.

We'll see, so far Gamepass has been an overwhelming success and Amazon has yet to show anything successful in this space.
 
Last edited:

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
948
1,278
420
"We'll be making these games exclusive to our platform if the sale goes through". Not really that hard to say, is it (except they can't, because it's not true). I'll be here 4 years from now when Bethesda's jank will be playabe not only on PC but also on PS5.

That's most likely illegal to say when a sale is pending (or at the very least puts it in jeapordy). You don't speculate. That's why nobody comments during these things.
 
Last edited:

quest

Not Banned from OT
Jul 17, 2004
6,004
2,856
1,695
No, the logic is based on precedent. In the case of the Zenimax acquisition its a publisher that formerly was multi-platform, and as such its valuation was based on the revenues of a multi-platform operation. A change in business plan as drastic as dropping future support for other console platforms is certain to impact turnover negatively in the short to medium term.

By getting ownership of Zenimax, MS put themselves in a position to be able to pick and choose the path ahead. We already have an example with Mojang of a scenario where they chose not to change the publishing model drastically, just shape it in a way that made sense to them. Leaping to the assumption that they'd definitely opt for exclusivity with Zenimax just was a bit of fanboy wish-fulfilment because it was no more or less likely than them taking a business-as-usual or some sort of mixed strategy in the short term based on precedent.

Evidently they've judged that taking the short-term hit is justified for the long-term benefit of their platform. Which is perfectly reasonable, as is the careful way that they are suggesting that exceptions may be made in future if they deem it strategically worthwhile to do so.

Its basic owner's prerogative.
If they wanted to just let the games be on the playstation they could of just let EA, buy them and not wasted time being a publisher and Sony making most of the money slowing slowing down development time
 

FritzJ92

Member
Jul 19, 2020
260
399
270
No, the logic is based on precedent. In the case of the Zenimax acquisition its a publisher that formerly was multi-platform, and as such its valuation was based on the revenues of a multi-platform operation. A change in business plan as drastic as dropping future support for other console platforms is certain to impact turnover negatively in the short to medium term.

By getting ownership of Zenimax, MS put themselves in a position to be able to pick and choose the path ahead. We already have an example with Mojang of a scenario where they chose not to change the publishing model drastically, just shape it in a way that made sense to them. Leaping to the assumption that they'd definitely opt for exclusivity with Zenimax just was a bit of fanboy wish-fulfilment because it was no more or less likely than them taking a business-as-usual or some sort of mixed strategy in the short term based on precedent.

Evidently they've judged that taking the short-term hit is justified for the long-term benefit of their platform. Which is perfectly reasonable, as is the careful way that they are suggesting that exceptions may be made in future if they deem it strategically worthwhile to do so.

Its basic owner's prerogative.

First your assuming they valued the brand off of the muli-plat operation and not the value of the IPs themselves (which makes more sense if they are taking ownership).
Second, developers aren't going to mass quit because they have to work less, reducing a console platform literally means he devs can focus on two platforms instead of three, so more resources are readily available.

I'm not aware of any business, that makes a purchase without doing the math to account for the return on their investment, and how long it will take. I'm very positive MS did not consider losing 30% of sales to a competing platform when doing their revenue forecast.

Mojang is a poor comparison to this as Mojan had 1 IP that was Minecraft and the game was already available on various platforms, the only example Mojang can prove is that MS isn't going to remove support for existing platforms that the IP has already launched on. Another reference to this is MS honoring the 1year exclusivity deals made before the purchase. Also, Minecraft dungeons could be an example, but they don't even attach the Xbox branding to Minecraft, they have left it to operate on its own. The Bethesda deal had a big ass XBox logo right next to it.

There is no history to use as an example for this purchase, so Phil's words have to be taken directly in context to predict the future, and we know 2 things he has said that is relevant.

1. They can make their return without needing competing platforms user base
2. They will honor existing deals, but future games are case by case

You can put them together and realize he isn't supporting anything other than Xbox/PC/Gamepass, and if they launch a game on the PS5 there must be a very specific reason why (Gaas/Low budget game for high return, idk?)
 
Last edited:

Hix

Banned
Jul 24, 2011
4,071
7,117
1,030
Belfast, NI
I don't need to read it, to know that all those games will be coming to PS5 (timed exclusives at worst). Why? Because if Xbox planned on keeping them exclusive, it would be screaming about it from the rooftops now, when people are deciding between XSX and PS5, and yet they aren't.

They are. You're just in denial.

Here's Phil saying just that


"In terms of where games will show up, our commitment is that our games will show up on Game Pass, PC, console and xCloud. In terms of other platforms we'll take it on a case by case basis but as the Xbox community, what they should feel is a huge investment in the experience they're going to have in the Xbox ecosystem, and we want the Xbox ecosystem to be the absolute best place to play and we think game availability is absolutely part of that."

Game availability = exclusivity

How about the founder of Bethesda when asked if their IPs would be exclusive?


"I do not think it is any accident that this announcement occurred so close to Sony’s PS5 announcement. There are only a limited number of proven creators of AAA. What Microsoft owns, Sony cannot get."


Beyond all that, it's fucking obvious. There is no precedent for Microsoft sending it's big IPs to PlayStation, none. The burden of proof is on you and all you've got is "I want to believe"
 

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
948
1,278
420
First your assuming they valued the brand off of the muli-plat operation and not the value of the IPs themselves (which makes more sense if they are taking ownership).
Second, developers aren't going to mass quit because they have to work less, reducing a console platform literally means he devs can focus on two platforms instead of three, so more resources are readily available.

I'm not aware of any business, that makes a purchase without doing the math to account for the return on their investment, and how long it will take. I'm very positive MS did not consider losing 30% of sales to a competing platform when doing their revenue forecast.

Mojang is a poor comparison to this as Mojan had 1 IP that was Minecraft and the game was already available on various platforms, the only example Mojang can prove is that MS isn't going to remove support for existing platforms that the IP has already launched on (that the only similar example with Mojang). Another reference to this is MS honoring the 1year exclusivity deals made before the purchase.

There is no history to use as an example for this purchase, so Phil's words have to be taken directly in context to predict the future, and we know 2 things he has said that is relevant.

1. They can make their return without needing competing platforms user base
2. They will honor existing deals, but future games are case by case

You can put them together and realize he isn't supporting anything other than Xbox/PC/Gamepass, and if they launch a game on the PS5 there must be a very specific reason why (Gaas/Low budget game for high return, idk?)

Good stuff. I hate the Mojang comparison because it's not really a good one at all.
 

Clear

Deer/Dur
Feb 2, 2009
12,385
7,159
1,365
We'll see, so far Gamepass has been an overwhelming success and Amazon has yet do show anything successful in this space.

Its not been an "overwhelming" success at all. Its gotten off to a strong start for sure, but the objective reality is that part of its success has been facilitated by their relatively low install-base because it'll have kept buy-in costs down.

MS recent spate of acquisitions is primarily intended to offset the inevitable spike in buy-in cost should their marketshare increase as substantially as they hope.

A clear-eyed assessment of the situation is that GamePass has not provided a massive reversal in the fortunes of the Xbox division. It has not derailed Sony, it surely hasn't prevented Nintendo from surging forwards, the status-quo in the PC market seems unchanged. All that's happened is that MS have sunk a fuckton of money into this new strategy both in upfront and ongoing costs.

If everything was so rosy the Series X/S launch line-up would have the competition quaking in their boots, but that's not the case at all. They still have a lot of work to do, and it appears to me that a lot of the root issues that have plagued Xbox since the start of this gen are still in play. Forza aside, their first-party output has not been a paragon of smooth development and I seriously doubt adding a slew of new teams to the roster is going to make things easier and/or better.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Gavon West
Apr 19, 2019
9,180
15,106
780
Away with the fairies
You make this sound so easy when it really isn't. Amazon is playing catch-up. Although, at least Amazon isn't using linux based backend which was a horrible move by Google. They signed a deal with... you guessed it Microsoft to provide the backend tech.

Also there is room in the space for more than one big dog. They can both be successful here.

We'll see, so far Gamepass has been an overwhelming success and Amazon has yet to show anything successful in this space.
If there is room, there needs to be a new battle-field, because VR, Streaming (games and video), local hardware (fire sticks and consoles) are taking up a lot of space! One box to rule them all is MS' strategy.

Gamepass is amazing, and i'll defend it down to the last Microsoft Point (remember them? the original console digital currency). There's more room that Microsoft needs to expand in to vs AMazon.

But yeah, nobody knows for now and it will be interesting to see how it plays out. Who knows? Maybe a new competitor will step in and rock the boat just like MS did
 
  • Like
Reactions: Edgelord79

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
948
1,278
420
Its not been an "overwhelming" success at all. Its gotten off to a strong start for sure, but the objective reality is that part of its success has been facilitated by their relatively low install-base because it'll have kept buy-in costs down.

MS recent spate of acquisitions is primarily intended to offset the inevitable spike in buy-in cost should their marketshare increase as substantially as they hope.

A clear-eyed assessment of the situation is that GamePass has not provided a massive reversal in the fortunes of the Xbox division. It has not derailed Sony, it surely hasn't prevented Nintendo from surging forwards, the status-quo in the PC market seems unchanged. All that's happened is that MS have sunk a fuckton of money into this new strategy both in upfront and ongoing costs.

If everything was so rosy the Series X/S launch line-up would have the competition quaking in their boots, but that's not the case at all. They still have a lot of work to do, and it appears to me that a lot of the root issues that have plagued Xbox since the start of this gen are still in play. Forza aside, their first-party output has not been a paragon of smooth development and I seriously doubt adding a slew of new teams to the roster is going to make things easier and/or better.
It's not rosy-eyed at all. They have over 10 million subscribers and growing. They now have one of the largest collection of studios in the world.

I don't agree at all with this.
 
Last edited:

quest

Not Banned from OT
Jul 17, 2004
6,004
2,856
1,695
Its not been an "overwhelming" success at all. Its gotten off to a strong start for sure, but the objective reality is that part of its success has been facilitated by their relatively low install-base because it'll have kept buy-in costs down.

MS recent spate of acquisitions is primarily intended to offset the inevitable spike in buy-in cost should their marketshare increase as substantially as they hope.

A clear-eyed assessment of the situation is that GamePass has not provided a massive reversal in the fortunes of the Xbox division. It has not derailed Sony, it surely hasn't prevented Nintendo from surging forwards, the status-quo in the PC market seems unchanged. All that's happened is that MS have sunk a fuckton of money into this new strategy both in upfront and ongoing costs.

If everything was so rosy the Series X/S launch line-up would have the competition quaking in their boots, but that's not the case at all. They still have a lot of work to do, and it appears to me that a lot of the root issues that have plagued Xbox since the start of this gen are still in play. Forza aside, their first-party output has not been a paragon of smooth development and I seriously doubt adding a slew of new teams to the roster is going to make things easier and/or better.
Actually adding a slew of teams will make things easier and better in the future. The issue is the teams were added to late to contribute to the launch. Going forward from late 2021 - early 2022 they should have a steady output of first party games. Shit takes time unless everyone wants obsidian, playground rpg, inexile second team, ninja theory ect to cut games short or make them less scope to get them out sooner. This is a problem that was not going to be fixed overnight. Even buying studios most were nearing releases of games putting them 4-5 years from another AAA game.
 

wolffy71

Member
Feb 19, 2014
642
589
555
Y
Then by definition you don't believe in making the game available to as many people as possible. He should just say that their games will be playable anywhere XBox is is and stick to that instead of talking out both sides of his ass.
Like literally almost everyone has a phone or pc so the game is available. It may not be on ps5 but its available on something you own. And if those two dont cover everyone they are further working on smarts tvs, notebooks, etc.
I think people are misreading what he means when he says "available to everyone".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Forsythia