I dont understand the end game here. Are they sick of losing money on making hardware? If they really want to go software only like SEGA, whats the reason for getting CoD when they couldve acquired so many other studios for a fraction of the cost?
For a company that makes $40 billion in profits every year, having a gaming division that barely evens out is probably not ideal. I get that part, but why would they double down on software when they are attempting to leave the hardware business?
I think there is a clear lack of direction over at Microsoft. They want to sell subscriptions but they wont be able to without their own consoles. They want to post profits, but are spending $70 billion just to be able to do so. If they go third party it doesnt guarantee higher profit margins because Xbox wouldnt exactly exist. If Xbox exists then the R&D costs on hardware, operation systems and server costs for XBL will eat away all the profits just like its doing today.
I dont think they have thought any of this through.
Your problem is that you have agreed to believe that they are going to stop making console hardware and become an EA-type publisher simply because there is a current that is telling you that it is the only option for MS?
Perhaps you could also add other questions that would lead you to expect the opposite:
If MS's plan was to become a publisher like EA and abandon console hardware....
1-For what reason has it put (and continues to put in danger) the acquisition of ABK by refusing the obligation to release its games to PS5 and Switch beyond COD for 10 years?
2-Why is it that in the FTC appeals it still defends console exclusives today and does so on the basis of differentiating MP vs SP games. "case by case"
3- Why do they "reward" Sarah Bond with the leadership of Xbox hardware if they have decided that there will be no more hardware? Are they trying to humiliate her?
4-Why does MS continue to sign agreements for the arrival of 3rd party games (AAA and indi games) to its console and ecosystem if the plan is to liquidate that ecosystem and its console business and become the same as EA and Take2?
5-The one that seems funniest to me
. Why is SONY still supporting the FTC against the acquisition of ABK by MS if by now they should already know that XBOX is stopping making consoles and all XGS+Bethesda+ABK games will be released on Playstation and will no longer have competition?
I keep wondering what is the reason for the 180° change of opinion of some regarding what was defended during the ABK acquisition thread.
We have gone from "MS buys ABK with the sole objective of annihilating PS", "case by case is a lie to confuse judges and regulators", "the judge cannot believe that COD will come out on PS because it can afford to lose money and also only They sign for 10 years and then make it exclusive as well. "MS is thinking about its next Xbox and making all the games exclusive for it"...
It was simply adjusting the narrative to what is convenient at the moment.... They cannot admit that the situation means that MS must decide on a case-by-case basis what to make exclusive or not. Because supposedly that statement was a lie
.
Now it is "they no longer need console hardware or ecosystem because they must recover the investment".... before it was that "they can afford to lose money to impose their console and the monopoly of their ecosystem...
Anyway. It is easier to wait and see what steps are taken before drawing conclusions. Firstly, because with MS it is difficult to be 100% certain about something. Secondly to avoid being portrayed like many people here that have changed the narrative 180° based on the same facts
twistedvoxel.com
gamerant.com
"innovations" tho.
