We do know why Sony wouldn't put XBL on PS4 and probably won't also for PS5.

Sure PS4 and X1 are direct competitors, still if talking about were they would get more revenue on the games it would be on PS4.

PC would be an even more dire competitor to X1 since people already having a PC when MS games go there have no reason to choose the console version, still that is the first place they gone.

And we are talking about port of older games. So hardly one would expect someone to decide to buy PS4 instead of X1 because Halo 1 launched on PS4 when if they want to play any other Halo they would need to have X1. Most gamers buy consoles to play the most current games and not the older ones. Reason why BC have been of very little impact to the sales of consoles so far, also reason why people buying new consoles will usually buy more recent games than the older ones on that console. Sure all of these points have exception, but as general occuring that is how it goes.

If MS could get XBL on PlayStation, I think we agree they would put some content on PlayStation. So I guess that would suggest MS wants more than just software revenue.

MS want revenue. And want to push their conditions and still look like the good guy.

A significant portion of the PC gaming audience doesn't necessarily care much about consoles for various reasons, its also an audience all over the world. While Xbox primarily just sells in western countries, so a great way to reach them is putting games on PC. Also, they run their own store on PC, they can get people to use XBL and they can push services like Gamepass.

Yes Xbox doesn't reach much outside of USA and UK, so putting their games on PS4 would also make their games appear to many more people similar to how they do with PC and now start to do with Switch.

Xbox consoles might lose sales by sharing games with PC, but its also worth considering they're making Xbox games available to the massive PC audience whether it be on Windows Store and sometimes Steam. This is very likely boosting their software revenue without supporting a direct competitor like PlayStation.

Considering the shared library PC is very much a direct competitor.

We can't really quantify the impact BC has had on Xbox One, but according to MS its a popular service. A notable exclusive might help sell millions of units, maybe that's the impact BC had.

Yes we can. PS3 didn't lose sales when cutting BC, but won a lot of sales when cutting BC allowed to reduce price. PS4 didn't lose the record breaking streak by releasing without BC (done much better than PS3 that was full BC, and is still ahead of PS2 that had BC). Sales of X1 didn't improve significantly after release of BC, in fact it more likely stayed flat while PS4 was increasing.

So BC and just ports of old games don't move HW. A remaster or collection (like Halo MCC) can move some, since the game will look closer to modern, but still won't impact much the sales of the console. So launching Halo 1 port or remaster on PS4 wouldn't impact sales of X1 as long as the current Halo are kept only on X1 even more because the MP would be very small on PS4 due to low sales of old games ported on a platform that doesn't have a strong following of the IP.

Look like the good guy? I dont think thats the goal.

Again, you seem to miss the point the point that PS4 is a direct competitor. The goal is not simply boosting software revenue, they also use major exclusives to move hardware and encourage people to use Windows Store. The Switch support thus far has been limited but they managed to get XBL on it.

And putting Halo on Switch would move HW or encourage Windows Store

I think youre saying PC has the library of a direct competitor? But I wont argue with that unless you choose to clarify your point.

Nope, I'm saying that PC competes with PS and Xbox for a public, it isn't a 1:1 competition. But there are plenty of customers that doesn't buy X1 because they are able to buy the MS games on a PC.

You just made an argument about PS3 sales not being hurt by removing BC, then you add the minor detail it came with huge price cuts. Also, 7th gen BC is more popular then 6th gen BC because there was a larger quanity of notable games, some still have active online populations.

Every single gen have had notable games, huge sellers and whatnot. Still people want to play the new shine thing. You may love BC, I may like it from time to time. But on the grand scheme of things BC doesn't break or make a deal for most customers. You just see that when X1 got BC the sales didn't move at all.

PS4 also had a reasonable price compared to PS3 at launch, thats partly why PS4 has done very well. Your arguments are terrible.

Let me put it this way. Did the X1 lose sales because BC? No. Did it gain sales? Very possible. Hence, we cant quantify it. The BC feature has been used by much of the audience, so its not crazy to assume it sold some hardware.

If you can quantify how much BC brought of sales to X1 please do it. We have the sales curve of both PS4 and X1, and with that we can see the increase in sales of a console without BC (PS4) and the how the curve changed because of BC on X1 (pricecuts shall be considered as well between both systems to see what is BC and what is price cut). Now please show how much did the sales increase because of BC.

I think putting old Halo games on Switch could boost interest in the series, revenue, and have more people sigining up on XBL. Hence, the goal isnt just selling a game on Switch in that scenario.

Why do we see Playstation sharing exclusives with PC? Because Sony also agrees its not a direct competitor and it reaches an audience that may not buy Playstation consoles.

I agree that each generation has notable titles. But the 7th gen had a massive library of notable games. I think Xbox BC added about 500 Xbox 360 games, many are notable and people are still begging for more.

I said multiple times we cant quantify how many units BC could have sold. I think you have a reading comprehension problem.

The same can be again said that putting the old Halo on PS4 would boost interest in the series. But then you will circle back to say that Switch and PC aren't competitors of Xbox.

The only Sony game I remember being on PC was first released on PC or like that. Anything else is just that would be cheaper to pay the cost of exclusivity if PC also had the release and those aren't Sony IPs anyway.

We can quantify and is neglible. You say it can't be quantified so you can pretend it matters. If you can't show it matters it is more likely than not that it doesn't matter at all.

Maybe they should put old Halo games on PS4. But only Switch would allow XBL and its not a direct competitor.

None of Sony's IPs are on PC as far as Im aware, they sold that stuff. But Sony is open to sharing exclusives with PC because they dont see it as a competitor, just simply pointing that out.

Okay, quantify it. Then quantify the exact number every exclusive sells. Then lets make assumptions of how much revenue selling BC content generated.

At least this gen I do think XBL wouldn't come to PS. But with Sony working with MS to improve their streaming service it is possible that XB and PS streaming services show on both platforms then XBL on PS could happen (if MS also allow PSN on Xbox probably).

They aren't exactly open to sharing exclusives with PC. Most of the exclusives also on PC Sony haven't paid anything to have the exclusive. And the very few they may have paid probably costed less when having on PC as well. And they aren't the flagship games of Playstation, so kinda moot.

Every exclusive you can check the bump week over week on the 2 or 3 weeks after a game release, this have been bread and butter of VGC during gen 7. BC itself we haven't seem any significative bump, this is the reason I'm telling you it's neglible. And during the first six months or so of the BC on Xb1 we did get figures on how much BC was used, and was like 15-30min per user on like a full year or something like that.