By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Update: Microsoft Changes Statement - Play Anywhere Confirmed for ALL Future Microsoft-Published Titles

CosmicSex on 05 July 2016
Puppyroach said:
kowenicki said:

About time this kind of response was moderated. Its so so stupid.

And its only purpose every time seems to be to derail threads.

I disagree. I feel like Microsoft understands that folks with PCs no longer have a pure barrier to purchasing their software.  You do not need to buy and Xbox One and thats not a bad thing.  It is not stupid to Microsoft and its not stupid to consumers. If all of Sony's games came out on PC there would be a group of people that would not need one anymore.  Of course different people will have different motives but in absolute terms you do not need an Xbox One to play their games going forward... and thats fine. Why are people freaking out?



Around the Network
Puppyroach on 05 July 2016
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Puppyroach said:

And Sony wanted to take advantage of Nintendo´s position to get into the Video game market which was an important image factor for that company at the time. They all do it for their own selfish reasons, and I am pretty sure MS wouldn´t be in the hardware business if their OS had been on those platforms. That doesn´t change the fact that they ARE in the hardware business now and has realized how important the XBox brand is for reaching out to different demographics and expanding the Windows 10 platform. I do think they want to go the Steam route, where XBox is the platform, while the hardware is made by different producers.

I agree that Microsoft would not have entered the console race if Sony and Nintendo wouldve just come quietly and allowed them to create their OS. Nintendo was using Sony R&D behind their back and instead of becoming enemies Sonys board was talked into creating a relationship instead of firing Yamuchi (father of the playstation). Sony expressed their terms in contract to Nintendo before CES in the 90's and Nintendo walked out on it before they revealed it. Sony wanted to scrap the playstation but was talked into keeping it. Sony's advantage with the gaming industry came from using hardware to sell their formats and thus serve to sell hardware for not just their platforms but their hardware competition outside of the gaming realm (Many people would not have been able to buy DVD or Blu Rays had Sony not sold their consoles at a loss) . They evolved into a legitimate game developer (Something Microsoft still struggles to do). Sony's battle with Nintendo was a legal one.

At the end of the day, Sony and Nintendo's bread and butter are still consoles. This cannot be disputed in any way shape or form. This has always separated them from Microsoft because at the end of the day its about consoles for them. Microsoft is now firmly a cloud/OS game publisher.

Microsoft is still making consoles now, but the question remains whether they will still be interested in making consoles after this gen.

MS has been a "legitimate" game developer since the 80's. And yes, Nintendo did some foul play behind Sonys back but stop painting such a rosy picture of Sony. They obviously wanted to use Nintendo's position for their own benefit, since video games where a very small part of their own structure back then. The reason why video games is such an integral part of Sony business today is, for a large part, their huge success in the segment. But it is also, for a very big part, because of their failures as a company in other segments, leaving video games to be one of the largest assets they have.

 

I do think Sony is starting to look beyond standard console generations, just like MS, since they know it is within software and services where the money lies. They are very much needed in the video game market.



S.T.A.G.E. on 05 July 2016
Puppyroach said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

I agree that Microsoft would not have entered the console race if Sony and Nintendo wouldve just come quietly and allowed them to create their OS. Nintendo was using Sony R&D behind their back and instead of becoming enemies Sonys board was talked into creating a relationship instead of firing Yamuchi (father of the playstation). Sony expressed their terms in contract to Nintendo before CES in the 90's and Nintendo walked out on it before they revealed it. Sony wanted to scrap the playstation but was talked into keeping it. Sony's advantage with the gaming industry came from using hardware to sell their formats and thus serve to sell hardware for not just their platforms but their hardware competition outside of the gaming realm (Many people would not have been able to buy DVD or Blu Rays had Sony not sold their consoles at a loss) . They evolved into a legitimate game developer (Something Microsoft still struggles to do). Sony's battle with Nintendo was a legal one.

At the end of the day, Sony and Nintendo's bread and butter are still consoles. This cannot be disputed in any way shape or form. This has always separated them from Microsoft because at the end of the day its about consoles for them. Microsoft is now firmly a cloud/OS game publisher.

Microsoft is still making consoles now, but the question remains whether they will still be interested in making consoles after this gen.

MS has been a "legitimate" game developer since the 80's. And yes, Nintendo did some foul play behind Sonys back but stop painting such a rosy picture of Sony. They obviously wanted to use Nintendo's position for their own benefit, since video games where a very small part of their own structure back then. The reason why video games is such an integral part of Sony business today is, for a large part, their huge success in the segment. But it is also, for a very big part, because of their failures as a company in other segments, leaving video games to be one of the largest assets they have.

 

I do think Sony is starting to look beyond standard console generations, just like MS, since they know it is within software and services where the money lies. They are very much needed in the video game market.

Sony realizes PC sales are rising as opposed to the beginning of the PS3 era where PC devs were jumping ship to consoles. As the multiplats kept coming back to PC the more popular PC gaming got. I used to be a PC gamer and I'll say it now that Xbox conference got me psyched to build rig sooner than later. Sony's done some foul things in the gaming industry and so have Nintendo and Microsoft. The difference is at the end of the day Sony will always be a console company because their bread and butter is consoles and the same goes for Nintendo. Microsoft is the only odd man out. As Eurogamer stated in a post E3 article, it seems like the Xbox was always a trojan horse for WIndows 10. It doesnt matter which platform you're playing the games on as long as you're playing on Microsofts OS. If Microsoft decided to drop the Xbox they have something to fall back on. I personally, hope they do not become deluded enough to think they can beat Steam though, because thats just crazy.



S.T.A.G.E. on 05 July 2016
jardesonbarbosa said:
I would try Halo 3 and Sunset Overdrive. Other MS games? I couldn't care less. But that's a good move. Xbox becoming a service is the way to go.

Xbox Live is a service. Xbox is now a brand that works on apps across your cellphone to your pc or console.



Soundwave on 05 July 2016
S.T.A.G.E. said:
JoeTheBro said:

Microsoft already publishes Minecraft on PlayStation. With a decreased interest in pushing XBOX hardware through exclusives, why wouldn't they port other games too?

They wanted to put their OS on the Playstation from the very beginning. Nintendo and Sony both told them no. He is onto something. If Sony and Nintendo both let Microsoft have their OS they would probably drop the console division all together.

Nintendo should've taken that deal and ran quite honestly. Maybe expanded it so that Microsoft Game Studios would operate as a Nintendo 2nd party. 

Just build clause into the contract that MS can't attempt any type of a take over and it would've worked out OK. Who gives a shit what OS the GameCube would've ran. 

With Sega out, Nintendo would've been a defacto no.2 at minimum and would've sold at least 40 milion GameCubes IMO. It was a better system than the PS2 in a lot of ways (better graphics, easier to program for), these advantages would've been heightened if it was the only alternative to PS2, instead XBox kinda ruined that by doing the same thing divided up the no.2 pie. 



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 05 July 2016
Soundwave said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

They wanted to put their OS on the Playstation from the very beginning. Nintendo and Sony both told them no. He is onto something. If Sony and Nintendo both let Microsoft have their OS they would probably drop the console division all together.

Nintendo should've taken that deal and ran quite honestly. Maybe expanded it so that Microsoft Game Studios would operate as a Nintendo 2nd party. 

Just build clause into the contract that MS can't attempt any type of a take over and it would've worked out OK. Who gives a shit what OS the GameCube would've ran. 

Lets just say what you're saying is true and it did happen. Microsofts in house development teams (that theyve created) are not creative enough to be Nintendo second party. Hate to say it but they could scrap everything the day they say goodbye to the industry. The Coalition is pretty much the remnants of Epic Games, Halo was purchased (IP and company) from Microsoft and have you seen Microsoft put out a hot new IP without paying third party? LOL....The only favor they could do for Nintendo is loan them money and build their OS.

I wish I could say Microsoft could be a good second party, but that probably would've only worked with Sony.



Soundwave on 05 July 2016
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Soundwave said:

Nintendo should've taken that deal and ran quite honestly. Maybe expanded it so that Microsoft Game Studios would operate as a Nintendo 2nd party. 

Just build clause into the contract that MS can't attempt any type of a take over and it would've worked out OK. Who gives a shit what OS the GameCube would've ran. 

Lets just say what you're saying is true and it did happen. Microsofts in house development teams (that theyve created) are not creative enough to be Nintendo second party. Hate to say it but they could scrap everything the day they say goodbye to the industry. The Coalition is pretty much the remnants of Epic Games, Halo was purchased (IP and company) from Microsoft and have you seen Microsoft put out a hot new IP without paying third party? LOL....The only favor they could do for Nintendo is loan them money and build their OS.

I wish I could say Microsoft could be a good second party, but that probably would've only worked with Sony.

Nintendo wouldn't need them to do shit really, I mean Nintendo had a ton of second party partners at that time, MS would've just been one of another. 

MS doesn't like the Playstation, and wants to help stake us in the game console business? Great. Sign me up if I'm Nintendo. 

Signing a deal with MS to use Windows would've been worth it on the basis of not having to compete against another multi-billion dollar conglomerate. 

Once XBox entered the business, Nintendo effectively got shut out of the traditonal console market because you have too many brands. People just want one central brand and maybe one alternative and that's it. 

GameCube would've done a lot better had they just swallowed their pride and agreed to use Windows, what difference really would it have made? The Dreamcast apparently used Windows CE or some such and I never gave that even one thought in tons of play time. If you're willing to work with IBM and Silicon Graphics, which Nintendo was willing to do, then why not Microsoft too. 



S.T.A.G.E. on 05 July 2016
Soundwave said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Lets just say what you're saying is true and it did happen. Microsofts in house development teams (that theyve created) are not creative enough to be Nintendo second party. Hate to say it but they could scrap everything the day they say goodbye to the industry. The Coalition is pretty much the remnants of Epic Games, Halo was purchased (IP and company) from Microsoft and have you seen Microsoft put out a hot new IP without paying third party? LOL....The only favor they could do for Nintendo is loan them money and build their OS.

I wish I could say Microsoft could be a good second party, but that probably would've only worked with Sony.

Nintendo wouldn't need them to do shit really, I mean Nintendo had a ton of second party partners at that time, MS would've just been one of another. 

Signing a deal with MS to use Windows would've been worth it on the basis of not having to compete against another multi-billion dollar conglomerate. 

Once XBox entered the business, Nintendo effectively got shut out of the traditonal console market because you have too many brands. People just want one central brand and maybe one alternative and that's it. 

GameCube would've done a lot better had they just swallowed their pride and agreed to use Windows, what difference really would it have made. The Dreamcast apparently used Windows CE or some such and I never gave that even one thought in tons of play time. If you're willing to work with IBM and Silicon Graphics, which Nitnendo was willing to do, then why not Microsoft too. 

True. Microsofts entrance into the market pretty much solidified that Nintendo wasnt even a second option.



Goatseye on 06 July 2016
Bandorr said:
Here is an interesting change I saw someone bring up.

Xbox on their blog has changed "Every new title published from Microsoft Studios will support Xbox Play Anywhere and will be easily accessible in the Windows Store."

to "Every new title published from Microsoft Studios that we showed onstage at E3 this year will support Xbox Play Anywhere and will be easily accessible in the Windows Store"

Why the change you think?

Crackdown was not shown on stage but confirmed to be a Play Anywhere title. 

However, it can also mean a shift in some future titles as well.



think-man on 07 July 2016

This is good news, the more exclusives it has the more reasons to buy one.



 

How to Make friends In Dark Souls 3