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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Xbox Empire - Game Pass Surpasses 18m Subscribers

derpysquirtle64 said:
Machiavellian said:

I believe you are setting yourself up to be disappointed.  I highly doubt any of the big hitters will go exclusive any time soon if at all.  Anything currently in development that was already cross platform will stay that way.  The only thing in the short term you will see is a commitment to bringing all those games to Gamepass and probably day one release for the current things that are not behind some exclusive deal with Sony.

Just having those games day one on gamepass which is the ultimate goal is enough in the short term as far as MS strategy is concerned to gain more subs.  Lets just say if Startfield release this year, day one gamepass and it becomes a huge hit.  Pay 70 bones for the PC/Console or drop that into half the cost of gamepass.  Each successful game grows the service which is the ultimate goal.  

While exclusive would also do the same, it also will take a way huge sales away from those titles which in the short term will help to pay the cost of the acquisition.  A purchase this big still needs to keep the investors happy by showing huge profits or they get skittish.  MS is a huge business and most times they are not going to move at the speed gamers and fans believe they should.  Their plans probably is a more controlled burn then a brush fire.

I agree with this point, but when it comes to Starfield, it doesn't really make much sense to make it multiplatform because it is a new IP. As for the games like Fallout and TES which are guaranteed to sell tons of copies on Playstation, they will most likely stay multiplat

I agree that MS could make one power move and lets say make Starfield exclusive for 1 year on the PC/Xbox while still leaving the other big hitters like Fallout, Elder scrolls, Doom multiplat.  People tend to forget that development, QA licensing deals and other stuff that comes into play for releaasing a game has a huge cost.  I am sure that the PS development of Starfield is playable just like the PC and Xbox versions and thus a lot of money has been spent making that version.  To just throw away that investment is very pricy even for MS.  Making the game 1 year exclusive and day one purchase on GP could still have a net gain effect and also still sell huge on Sony console if Starfield end up being a huge property.



Around the Network
Machiavellian said:

Satya is giving his weight behind the Xbox division because Phil sold him on Gamepass as a service that can reach a billion devices which lines up with Satya goal of turning MS into a service oriented company.  I hate to say this but everything MS is doing isn't really Xbox or even gamer centric but instead service centric.  This is why everything rides on Gamepass and how Phil will reach those billion devices.    Investors have been pushing for MS to get rid of the Xbox division for a very long time, do you believe they just suddenly lost interest in their efforts. If anything, Gamepass has shut them up for a bit but they will still rise up every now and then when they believe MS is on the wrong course.

Exactly, Phil sold Satya on Game Pass so why would they half ass it with Bethesda exclusivity? Why not make Halo multiplatform? You don't make a successful streaming service if your content is easily accessible outside of its ecosystem.

Investors pushing Microsoft to get rid of Xbox is for the most part a meme, as far as I can find, only two called for it, one of which is no longer with us (RIP) but it was his wealth manager who called for it and they were clearly ignored. Investors are very happy with Microsoft right now, that is a fact, Xbox's impact on Microsoft as a whole is tiny.

Xbox suffered billions in losses for OG Xbox, Xbox 360, and likely suffered some losses during Xbox One and yet it is still here and just reported its most successful quarter ever IIRC.

Machiavellian said:

One key point is that MS never really do things the way gamers feel is the correct course.  Lets not forget what Matt Booty stated about MS allowing their publishers doing cross platform games.

“I think we would,” Booty said when asked in an interview with Game Informer if Microsoft would allow cross-platform publishing of their games. “I think that the question is less binary about ‘should it be on Switch? Should it be on PlayStation?’ and more ‘does it make sense for the franchise?’ In other words, is it a kind of game where it would benefit from the network effect of being on a bunch of different platforms? Or is it a game where we can best support it by putting resources and making sure that our platforms – things like xCloud and Game Pass and Xbox Live, we’re really leaning in to support the game.”

Matt was asked if they'd let their newly acquired studios make multiplatform titles, he never gave a concrete yes or no, he said "does it make sense for the franchise?" which is just PR nonsense Tbf, actions speak louder than words, everything XGS are working on, with the exception of prior publisher obligations and Mojang, is exclusive to Xbox ecosystems.

To me, Matt is more saying, if Playstation/Switch allowed xCloud, Game Pass and Xbox Live then they would port their games over cause it would make sense, but those things (with the exception of Xbox Live) aren't allowed.

Machiavellian said:

As for Development studios, when has MS just canceled a project that already has been in development for a long time

On the items still in development, you have to remember there is a cost to development.  The developers who worked on the projects is no small amount of cash, especially if they have been working on those projects for years.  You have license agreements, QA, marketing etc.  Everything continue to be done until the deal is final so those people, contracts and etc are all wrapped in the cost of the project.  Its not just making those devs unhappy that is the problem, its basically throwing away millions of dollars.  Writing that money off isn't always a good thing which would be a short term goal.  We throw away all that development effort, contracts, license agreements we signed and turn the page.  There would need to be a serious net gain on Gamepass subs in order to justify such a move, especially when pitching it to the MS board and investors.

We're not talking about cancelling a project, we're talking about cancelling a single port, the majority of games are developed on PC first then ported to Consoles, Elder Scrolls for example will still be on Xbox and PC but it would simply be cancelling a Playstation port, which would be an easy write off in terms of costs.

The license agreements, marketing won't suddenly be lost due to cancelling a Playstation port, QA would be cause that is specifically focused on different platforms.

Also these costs weren't Microsoft's costs so again, why would Microsoft care? Lol.

Machiavellian said:

At best you may get extra content or a 6 month exclusive window but I just do not see MS making that type of move with Phil running the ship.

Could see timed exclusivity for Starfield so that they aren't tossing away developers work, full exclusivity for Elder Scrolls though (it has barely entered development).

Machiavellian said:

What I have seen time and again is that MS is never in the same hurry state that gamers are.  They do not seem to rush to decisions and have basically run their gameplan according to their rules and how they view the market.  I do not get the feeling that MS is in any rush to make Bethesda an exclusive publisher with any of their studios but that doesn't mean any new content will not be exclusive.  The heavy hitters will not go exclusive at least for whatever current iteration coming within the next 2 years.  Anything on a longer plan I can see getting the exclusive treatment but I would also believe positioning of that product will play a role in that situation. 

I personally would love for MS to publish Starfield, know it will be a huge hit and give Sony the shaft and make it exclusive.

I just believe that MS gave Bethesda a lot of autonomy and they are not going to cancel anything.  I believe for main AAA franchises, they will all be multiplatform because Bethesda will continue to want them to be.  I believe that MS will have first say in any new projects for sending work to Bethesda studios with new projects, existing IPs etc.

Well, Microsoft as a whole, not really, they aren't a consumer company, but Xbox in only 2-3 years have acquired an entire publisher and almost a dozen individual studios, I'd say that's pretty quick, Game Pass is growing very quickly too, they need to keep that push up, although game development takes time and Covid doesn't help.

Machiavellian said:

I personally would love for MS to publish Starfield, know it will be a huge hit and give Sony the shaft and make it exclusive.

I just believe that MS gave Bethesda a lot of autonomy and they are not going to cancel anything.  I believe for main AAA franchises, they will all be multiplatform because Bethesda will continue to want them to be.  I believe that MS will have first say in any new projects for sending work to Bethesda studios with new projects, existing IPs etc.

Bethesda will publish Starfield either way I believe, but at the end of the day, Zenimax's boss answers to Phil, they're separate from Xbox Game Studios but not Xbox, they're a division under Xbox and Phil is their boss.

And Tbh I don't really know if Bethesda will care much, Bethesda has always been primarily a PC developer and were an Xbox developer before Playstation, as long as they're getting paid I doubt they will care (I mean, they took money-hats from Sony for multiple exclusives), the developers might care but they don't really have a say.

Imo I think Elder Scrolls/Fallout will be exclusive, Starfield I'm leaning towards exclusive but could be timed exclusive (They were close to giving Sony exclusivity as early as last year for Starfield), I think anything new from Tango/Arkane/RoundHouse will be exclusive, I think Wolfenstein III could be multiplatform, not sure on Doom, all the MMOs will remain multiplatform.

We'll hopefully find out soon.



Lol.



Ryuu96 said:

Lol, if there is any truth to this then it would be some next-level shitty marketing from Xbox, it would mean they knew it wasn't ready to be shown, knew they were delaying it before the gameplay trailer and yet still decided to show it and receive that massive PR backlash, what for? To give them an excuse to delay it? Definitely not worth it, 343's rep has taken yet another hit.

Hope it isn't true but Microsoft marketing is extremely bad sometimes.

But is it really shitty?. Lets look at it from another prospective.

Phil: So how are we going to break it to the fans that Halo wont be a release game for XSX??.

343 dev: Well ya know they are going to go ape shit crazy about the delay right?.

Phil: I know if only the was a way to make "Them" want us to delay the game.

343 dev: Well we could always show a shitty build of the game, that would make them want it delayed hahaha.

Phil: *Light bulb clicks* THAT'S IT!!, we show a bad build of the game, Think of the Sonic movie!.

343 dev: I was just joking you know that's going to piss off the fans too right?. And whats this got to do with the Sonic movie?.

Phil: They are going to be pissed anyways. At least this way when we say we are delaying the game to improve it they will be happy. Its what they will want us to do. The Sonic movie's used a shitty trailer with a shitty Sonic design to show it off, Fans hated it and the backlash was real, expectations for the movie where low. But then when they showed the redesign fans loved it even more it was a huge success.

343 dev: I still dont get it?...

Phil: Pretty much that bad first trailer helped market the movie. It got people talking, If they didnt show that first trailer and just showed the proper one the movie wouldnt of got no where near the levels of hype. We are going to do that with Halo and when we show the fans the final game they will thank us for the delay and the hype will be real.



Now that's a weird selection of GwG titles.
At least I don't own any of them which is rare.



Around the Network

^ Alright, that'd be funny, Lol.

Still feels a bit shitty to do but I guess it has lowered expectations and made it look like the delay came from a place of "See, gamers wanted the delay, we're the good guys for listening" but it has hit 343's rep again which is already low.





My thoughts on the overnight news and thread discussions:

  • ESO is pretty legit, watched his Bethesda videos for awhile now and he seems to have good Bethesda sources, so this Bethesda event is likely happening.
  • MS would be utterly stupid on so many levels to release Bethesda games as multiplats. 1. It's bad for Xbox console growth (exclusivity will drive extra Xbox console sales both this generation and next), 2. it's bad for Gamepass growth (while having multiplat Bethesda games on Gamepass would drive some Gamepass growth, Bethesda exclusivity would drive even more Gamepass growth), 3. It's bad optics with your loyal Xbox fanbase (the Xbox fanbase is tired of seeing Phil play Mr. Nice Guy while Sony is continuing to be a predator going for Microsoft's throat with timed and full exclusivity deals galore), 4. MS still gets some Playstation revenue from Elder Scrolls Online and Fallout 76, which are both still pretty popular and bring in a good amount of revenue, as well as Deathloop and Ghostwire Tokyo, that early PS revenue would help to soften any blow with MS investors that exclusivity might cause while the extra revenue from hardware and gamepass growth from exclusivity kicks in.  
  • The Gran Turismo 7 delay in some ways puts MS into an even more awkward position with Forza Motorsport than they already were imo. Now they have a choice between 1. Rushing it out in 2021 without anywhere near enough content which will result in poor reviews like Forza Motorsport 5 got for releasing without enough content, 2. Releasing it in 2022 alongside GT7, a game which will have mountains more content than Forza Motorsport reboot thanks to a decision to reuse GT Sport cars and tracks, which will look bad in side by side comparisons between the two, or 3. Pushing Forza Motorsport reboot all the way to 2023 so that they can have enough time to have as much content at launch as GT7 had at it's launch in 2022, but causing the Forza Motorsport franchise to go 6 years between games. 
  • MS badly needs to get a VR headset for Xbox Series to compete against the just confirmed next-gen VR headset for PS5
  • I see that after MS walked back their Xbox Live Gold price increase, we're back to poor Games with Gold months again
Last edited by shikamaru317 - on 23 February 2021

Honor the heroes of Gears, operation 6 next week :).






Machiavellian said:
derpysquirtle64 said:

I agree with this point, but when it comes to Starfield, it doesn't really make much sense to make it multiplatform because it is a new IP. As for the games like Fallout and TES which are guaranteed to sell tons of copies on Playstation, they will most likely stay multiplat

I agree that MS could make one power move and lets say make Starfield exclusive for 1 year on the PC/Xbox while still leaving the other big hitters like Fallout, Elder scrolls, Doom multiplat.  People tend to forget that development, QA licensing deals and other stuff that comes into play for releaasing a game has a huge cost.  I am sure that the PS development of Starfield is playable just like the PC and Xbox versions and thus a lot of money has been spent making that version.  To just throw away that investment is very pricy even for MS.  Making the game 1 year exclusive and day one purchase on GP could still have a net gain effect and also still sell huge on Sony console if Starfield end up being a huge property.

Earlier, I also posted that I believe that MS will not throw away any work they did on Starfield for PS4, but seems like they decided otherwise. There is no reason not to trust insiders at this point. There is no smoke without a fire you know.