By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Angelus on 09 March 2021
derpysquirtle64 said:

I also hate to say it, but I think everyone here overestimates the value of Bethesda's IPs. Yeah, Elder Scrolls and Fallout are big IPs, but outside of these two, nothing really is that big out of Bethesda's portfolio. I can be wrong here, but I think every Bethesda game outside of TES, Fallout or Doom has made them lose money in the end in the last decade, which is the reason why they started to search for an investor. Sure, it will give Xbox consoles a boost if the big ones will be exclusive, but it won't suddenly turn things around. Microsoft needs to focus on all their studios delivering on quality, just making Bethesda games exclusive will not suddenly make everyone Xbox their platform of choice.

Who said that it would?



Around the Network
EspadaGrim on 09 March 2021
Ryuu96 said:

Makes sense to me but then, what multiplayer titles does Bethesda even have outside of the MMOs? Lmao.

Really should have ended the article with a confirmation of Starfield exclusivity, would have saved us the annoying PR, if Starfield is exclusive then we can confidently say that Elder Scrolls, Fallout will likely be the exclusive too, the major IPs that can push consoles being exclusive, MMOs that need the userbase being multiplatform, perhaps some smaller titles that aren't really console pushers and need the sales remaining multiplatform.

Indiana Jones everybody can understand why that game won’t be exclusive and Wolfenstein 3 can make the argument that it will release on PlayStation to finish out the Trilogy and that can the same for Doom 3. But that also means that now you have 2 AAA teams that won’t be making exclusives for a long time, those titles at the very least should be timed exclusive for 1 year on Xbox/PC.

I also don’t buy this argument that MS needs to put games that have multiplayer on PlayStation to grow the user base, if that is the case then why isn’t Sea of Thieves on Switch and PS4/5? Why not put Halo MCC and Gears on PlayStation as well?



derpysquirtle64 on 09 March 2021
Ryuu96 said:

Tbf I think that is cause Bethesda simply doesn't release much, Elder Scrolls, Fallout and Doom represent 3/9 of their active franchises, and I would include Quake on the list of success too so that'd be 4/9 which is a decent ratio, considering ES and Fallout aren't just big, they're huge IPs.

Dishonored I and Wolfenstein I did well but their follow-ups underperformed, I would put them on 'moderate' success. I think The Evil Within I did well as well but EW2 flopped, I think Rage flopped? Prey may have under-performed as well but I'd honestly put a lot of these down to Bethesda's management and shitty marketing.

They did become a little risk averse thanks to these titles under-performing but I would say it was their own fault, F76 bombing too certainly didn't help.

Really I'd say only 2 studios of Bethesda's are struggling through, Arkane and Tango. MachineGames will be absolutely fine with Indiana Jones and even better if Wolfenstein III doesn't have garbage marketing.

Quake is dead though. It's a successful franchise in the past but pretty dead these days. The last game flopped badly and I simply don't see the franchise continuing after that. The problem with Quake is that it's very unfriendly to newcomers who jump in and immediately get rekt by veterans and then leave the game forever. It's a bit sad fact but making new Quake multiplayer-only games is pointless from business point of view these days. Because it's simply impossible to make them successful. I would like to see a new single player Quake game though. Has been a long time since we had one.



 

derpysquirtle64 on 09 March 2021

Btw, I don't have much hope for that but I really wish Microsoft would just say id to stop wasting their resources on unneeded multiplayer modes for next Doom games. It doesn't work, nobody needs it, so why waste precious resources which could be spent on something else.



 

Machiavellian on 09 March 2021
smroadkill15 said:
WoodenPints said:

That PR from Microsoft is terrible as usual and if I was choosing between a Series X or PS5 and read that Bethesda article it's nudging you more towards a PS5 than their own console "some new Bethesda titles" is wording chosen to please both fanbases whilst answering nothing. It would of been a powerful PR moment if they closed the article with "Xbox Series X/S are only consoles you can play future Bethesda titles like Starfield and TES 6 on.

Why would this nudge gamers towards a ps5 when there is definitely going to be Xbox and PC exclusives? If you want to enjoy all of Bethesda/Zenimax titles, you'll want an Xbox or PC. 

We were never going to get a black and white answer to this. Xbox isn't going to back themselves into a statement that might not be true later because chances are they still don't know yet how things will unfold. 

Lol, true that.  Gamers are the first to say, "You lied" if a company switches gears based on any particular statement they made in the past.  Its better to be noncommittal in the beginning until you are 100% sure of your direction, then have to come back later and explain why you changed course.



Around the Network
derpysquirtle64 on 09 March 2021
Ryuu96 said:

Yeah, as of right now, hardware is essential to their success, to clarify, when I say Xbox could maybe be like Surface in the future, I mean like, 10+ years away at minimum, where Xbox hardware becomes more expensive but higher quality, less intended for bulk selling but I still think it'd have to reach something like 30m.

But Game Pass would need to grow massive before they can think about that, to a point where it can replace the billions lost in dumping both Xbox Live and losing chunks of that 30% revenue cut (which is again, where console makers make most of their revenue IIRC).

Also...Think we're forgetting something essential to this conversation...We're talking about Xbox supporting PS5, not PS4. We're talking about a console that doesn't yet have even 10m sales, this isn't PS4 with 100m+, it's a console in the very early stages of its life, could PS5 reach 100m? Sure, but as of right now it's only at ~10m, that userbase is irrelevant as of right now, it ain't going to hurt Microsoft to ignore it.

(Providing Starfield and the like are next gen exclusive which I think they will be).

Microsoft can either help Sony grow their PS5 hardware sales which are in their infancy right now or cut some life out of it and bring those potential customers over to Xbox hardware instead. PS5 will outsell Series X again but why should Microsoft assist them on that journey and make it easier for them? As of right now, Series X and PS5 are only a few million apart, there is no better time, from a business standpoint, to take those titles away from PS5, it's literally the start of the gen.

Xbox can never be like Surface. People should stop even thinking about it. Not only Microsoft uses Surface as their way into B2B segment with lots of sales to businesses, but Surface hardware alone makes them 1B$+ per quarter as it is not being sold at loss like Xbox is. Console hardware is just way too niche to even reach such numbers. The only interest for making console hardware for Microsoft is the revenue cut from game sales and subscriptions. That's it. Microsoft will never move away from traditional console hardware approach to selling premium let's say 800$ machines to a small crowd of those who need them. Which realistically won't even be able to pass 20m mark. Given how Microsoft treated their consumer products in the past, they easily get rid of underperforming products without hesitation. If Xbox console sales ever go below 30 or maybe 20m, I think this is it. Having a platform with such low user base is just simply not profitable to continue investing in, even with all potential game sales cuts and subscriptions.



 

derpysquirtle64 on 09 March 2021
trunkswd said:
derpysquirtle64 said:

Btw, I don't have much hope for that but I really wish Microsoft would just say id to stop wasting their resources on unneeded multiplayer modes for next Doom games. It doesn't work, nobody needs it, so why waste precious resources which could be spent on something else.

I'd rather they add a co-op mode to the next Doom game. Actually, I'd be all for Starfield, ES6, etc having co-op. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umDr0mPuyQc



 

Barozi on 09 March 2021

Not even sure if MS would want to bring Game Pass to PS5.
They would get 30% less revenue from the subscription and the 3rd party publishers could demand much more since the userbase will increase by a lot.

Assuming Game Pass would have the same amount of subscribers on Series X|S and PS5, MS gets on average 15% less from every subscriber. And if PS5 sells twice as much as Series X|S and has an aquivalent share of Game Pass subscribers, MS will make 20% less per subscriber. No way Game Pass is that profitable.

Only solution, increase the price for Game Pass as a whole or only for PS5 users.



InkIt on 09 March 2021

They just don't learn, majority of the xbox guys online tried to let them know beforehand and they still come up with ''some'', I'd have a hard time coming up with a worse word than that.

Anyway, time to acquire more studios.



Angelus on 09 March 2021
Ryuu96 said:

These poll results really show how bad Xbox's PR is, Lol.

Actually, they're not as bad as I would have guessed