LudicrousSpeed said:
JRPGfan said:

Microsoft and their messageing..... its so damn crappy and all over the place!

Look at this from May:

^ basically everything will now go onto Steam as well.
(Gears + Halo and all Age of Empires I, II, and III: Definitive Editions...)

Also look at most of those game studios they just bought.
Alot of them are working on multi plat games, that will go to PS4 as well (which will be 1st party, since bought studios).

The messageing is horrible... this is basically a "lie".

I mean... why not read the article in the OP? It literally addresses both points you raise. Windows is a Microsoft platform. And they intend to honor the releases already in the works when they bought these studios, but don't plan on releasing future games on other consoles.

Put forth at least a little effort before jumping to a predetermined conclusion.

thismeintiel said:

To me it screams that they don't know what exactly they want to do with Xbox.  A lot of the steps they have taken lately has pointed to wanting to go full streaming, possibly multiplat.  With the top brass at MS barely talking about the Scarlett, instead focusing on their xCloud and GamerPass future, which they will probably try to put on multiple platforms in the end.  Even going so far to say that the main reason for the acquisitions was to increase content on those services.  And MS's Matt Booty said that they would most likely allow them to continue making multiplats if they wanted to. 

If I had a guess, Spencer is trying to convince them to hold off on those plans to help push the Scarlett.  However, if Scarlett enjoys the same fate, or worse, than the XBO, you can bet they'll initiate Project Multiplat real quick.  Of course, Spencer isn't great with his messaging, either.  Just two years ago he was downplaying 60FPS, only now to say it is the most important thing to Xbox going forward.  I wouldn't be surprised if they, and Xbox fans, use that as the excuse as to why Scarlett exclusives don't look as good as PS5 exclusives, especially if it actually does turn out that the PS5 is more powerful.  "Well, of course they don't look as good, they are focusing on what's important, 60 FPS."  With the argument being just 2-3 years ago, "X has more 4K games."

It's also important to note, like you said, that a lot of the bigger studios MS bought all have multiplats that they will be making first before shifting over to Xbox/Windows exclusively.  It may not be til 2021/22 til we see those.  Unless they are smaller games.  Or are rushed and/or lack quality.  With the track record of the last couple of years for XBO exclusives, either one of those are a possibility.

My favorite thing about VGC is reading these interviews and comments from people at Microsoft or their studios and seeing how some here will twist and turn and remove context until they're left with what they wanted those interviewees to say in the first place. For example Matt Booty said if the game would benefit from a multiplatform release in terms of the way the game is designed, it could release on other platforms. Like Minecraft. But big releases would stay off other consoles. Nothing about "if they want to". Why wouldn't any developer WANT their games to be multiplat? You think the guys at Naughty Dog, all things being equal, still being funded by Sony, wouldn't want their art to be experienced by PC and Xbone users as well? Of course they would WANT that.

Another example of removing context and twisting words is this downplaying 60 frames per second nonsense. Never happened. Of course they harped on 4k, just like Sony did marketing the Pro. And always good to see your latest "if X happens, MS isn't making any more consoles" prediction. You're like 0 for 23 or something, but keep swinging for the fences friend lol

I love your ability to read minds.

So every dev would love to have their games on all systems as well? I very much doubt most of Nintendo developers have any high wish that their games release on Xbox or PS. If they were so passionate at their games being in all system they would likely been looking to go to a 3rd party.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"