• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Xbox expected Starfield to sell 10 million copies on PS5 but decided it's worth more as an exclusive

GymWolf

Gold Member
What big multiplatform publisher the size of Zenimax or Activision-Blizzard did they buy? How many developers did they buy whose biggest sales were not on PlayStation already?

I fully expected MS to cut off as many games from PS as they could and to do the same for Activision-Blizzard as some j as they legally can (yes even if they lose money, it is just part of the indirect acquisition costs they are planning for 🤷‍♂️)… despite this argument being agreed upon by regulators or not (the EU did not think they would do that, you agree with me they will :)).
Who cares how big they are? The narrative doesn't change, M has every right to do what they are doing.

It is called having competition.
 

mansoor1980

Gold Member
Starfield GOTY Edition coming to PS5 fall 2024.
orig
 

Tomeru

Member
I'll buy it day one. Screw subscription rentals.

$204 per year. Probably around $1,400 for the generation. And at the end you have zero games (except the ones you had to buy, because they aren't part of your sub).

I'll gladly pay the $70 for the game and be able to play for as long as I'd like without paying every month.
Since ms is ditching gold, get ready for

"Requires game pass sub to play".

You know it.
 

KungFucius

King Snowflake
How fucking retarded must you be to think that exclusivity on the least-selling platform will get you more than selling "your" game on the platform with an install base of 40 million users.
That is not what they are thinking. They are experimenting. What does a big game like this do for them? Does it draw people to the platform? How successful is their marketing? That understanding along with any positive results is very valuable. Not trying this would be kind of retarded. They can always release it later on PS5 and sell to all of those who have yet to play it on Xbox or PS5, but they can never run this experiment if they put it on PS5 day one.
 
Strange decision for them to put it on gp day one. But who knows, maybe it's a technical disaster on the xbox consoles so that may help curb the disappointment.
 

SJRB

Gold Member
And 40mil pales to the 200mil PC gamers, and the game is coming to PC.
Why do people conveniantly forget PC exists in these kind of convo's?.

Because Starfield was always coming to pc so it's not really a factor in this specific discussion.

Nothing changed for PC players, aside from maybe the AMD partnership.
 
Those criticizing the move, turn it around towards PlayStation and decide how much Sony lost by not putting Horizon, GoW and TLoU and Spider Man on Xbox.

MS finally understands the importance of exclusives. If you fault MS for doing what Sony and Nintendo have done all along, you're being a raging hypocrite.

Sony not releasing in-house, first party titles on Xbox =/= Microsoft buying an entire third partly publisher explicitly to keep its titles off of PlayStation. Prior to Zenimax or ABK acquisitions, MS had a great many in-house studios, yet produced very few games. Rather than produce first party games to compete with PlayStation, Microsoft buys out publishers to produce games for them, then prevents them from releasing on any platform that isn't Xbox or PC. I don't see anyone whining that Microsoft isn't releasing Halo or Forza or Gears Of War on PlayStation, all games Microsoft actually develops internally.

This moronic and dangerous mindset that internally developing a product for your consumer base and only releasing it on your own platform is the same as buying out a large swath of the independent market and cockblocking it from your competition is the same thing is the reason why there is almost no consumer choice left in the mobile industry. Vertical monopolies are eroding our freedoms everyday. It's good to be able to put a name to one of the people championing them.
 
Last edited:

Stuart360

Member
Because Starfield was always coming to pc so it's not really a factor in this specific discussion.

Nothing changed for PC players, aside from maybe the AMD partnership.
But your post made it sound like you were saying they are idiots for doing this and missing out. Maybe if the game wasnt on PC you would be right, although maybe MS think the potential boost in Xbox console, and Gamepass sales would be worth it for them, even without PC hypothetically.
 

Majukun

Member
by itself it's too little to change anything in the generation run...they should have made actibliz game exclusive as well to have any chance
 

Ozzie666

Member
Big difference between a game that started off multi-platform with expect return on investment compared to an exclusive title developed under the expectations of exclusivity. This was a last minute rugged pulled out from under them moment, just lucky Microsoft likes to burn money and can burn money. Any normal developer would be drowning in debt. Not sure how people can compare any of this to an exclusive developed title. Not to mention losing a significant portion of sales to the gamepass effect. Bethesda definitely didn't see that coming over the past 10 years of development. Because it's a lot of money and sales to lose. This isn't normal by a long stretch, not like Microsoft funded any of these games until the Bethesda purchase, who knows if they ever have.
 

Neolombax

Member
Play it on the PC then.

It's only what PS fans used to tell Xbox fans last-gen and buy a PS console or go without.
I remember needing to buy a SNES to play SF2.

Get over it

I
Mate, I'm not going to lose sleep over a game. It is what it is. Its a shame its not on PS, thats all. There's nothing to get over. Imagine being angry over a video game lol.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Who cares how big they are? The narrative doesn't change, M has every right to do what they are doing.

It is called having competition.
It changes because of the size and the money involved, it is called killing competition.

It matters if we talk about buying a dev who was mostly exclusive to you anyways vs a publisher (with many developers and IP’s) known and popular for multiplatform content (as you attack other companies revenue sources directly).
It matters if you are buying two of the biggest multiplatform publishers in the world today vs a small publisher 20 years ago.

It matters if you have enough money coming from the other business enabling discretionary acquisitions are close enough in value bigger than the worth of your competitors. It matters when that external money pays tactics that destroy value your competitors make by pushing for a business model where everyone including you is losing money but you bet on being able to outspend them all.

If you do not see it as a problem now… wait for the enshittification to start ramping up: https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Yeah, I remember the days when PS users used to tell us Saturn owners to buy a PS to play Tomb Raider 2, FF 7 or like now with Starfield, buy it on the PC.

What goes around comes around.
So this is petty SEGA vs Sony fanboy revenge wars?

At this point just let’s openly state that we do not really care about competitiveness of the market, long term consumer value, and all that. You want someone to smack Sony out like you feel SEGA was… except that in both magnitude and effect of the actions Sony took are in a completely different ballpark 😂.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Making it exclusive provides a ton of advantages.

- Insert the exact same list as for FF XVI here -
FF XVI was projected to sell equally on XSX|S as it was on PS5 or much less? Was Starfield expected to sell much more on XSX|S or not?

Then again single game temporary exclusive vs buying the entire publisher and yanking all of the content you legally can… 🤷‍♂️.
 
You don't sound happy.

It's like you want Sony to die or something similar.

So what happened between you and PlayStation?
I'm very happy. I'm not looking to start threads on how Starfield should be on the PS.
Just happy to point out, what goes around, comes around.

I love karma, makes one very happy.


BTW, If you 'must' know what happened with me and the PS, I just played TR2 on my brother's PS. Not perfect, but that was the way it was. I would have rathered played TR 2 on my old Saturn mind.
 

NeroDaGod

Member
I would have bought it day 1 but I can’t afford an Xbox or gaming PC unfortunately so I’ll be one of those guys that won’t get to play it. It’s a shame really because Elder Scrolls is one of my favourite series so not being able to play this or ES6 is going to be an absolute pain.
 
Last edited:

GymWolf

Gold Member
It changes because of the size and the money involved, it is called killing competition.

It matters if we talk about buying a dev who was mostly exclusive to you anyways vs a publisher (with many developers and IP’s) known and popular for multiplatform content (as you attack other companies revenue sources directly).
It matters if you are buying two of the biggest multiplatform publishers in the world today vs a small publisher 20 years ago.

It matters if you have enough money coming from the other business enabling discretionary acquisitions are close enough in value bigger than the worth of your competitors. It matters when that external money pays tactics that destroy value your competitors make by pushing for a business model where everyone including you is losing money but you bet on being able to outspend them all.

If you do not see it as a problem now… wait for the enshittification to start ramping up: https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/
I have all the platforms, i don't suffer one bit from any of that unless M is capable of making sony and N fail and close (hard to believe)

M is not killing jack shit, let's be real.
 

mansoor1980

Gold Member
Remember...

You can't make a platform or eco system appealing without exclusives. So we've been told.

But, making a game exclusive and taking it away from a platform is not fair and isn't good for consumers.

Both statements are true.

What do you do?
organic IPs are the solution
 
I'm very happy. I'm not looking to start threads on how Starfield should be on the PS.
Just happy to point out, what goes around, comes around.

I love karma, makes one very happy.


BTW, If you 'must' know what happened with me and the PS, I just played TR2 on my brother's PS. Not perfect, but that was the way it was. I would have rathered played TR 2 on my old Saturn mind.

Well you know karma works both ways right?

I wouldn't celebrate anything yet especially if the your hoping for the competition to go away.
 

cireza

Member
FF XVI was projected to sell equally on XSX|S as it was on PS5 or much less? Was Starfield expected to sell much more on XSX|S or not?

Then again single game temporary exclusive vs buying the entire publisher and yanking all of the content you legally can… 🤷‍♂️.
How does this invalidate the usual advantages we can read about ? The fact that PS5 was removed from the equation will lead to a better game day-one, for example. For reasons you know. Bethesda themselves told that it would launch with "less bugs" than previous games. Funny statement, really, but still they seem confident and showing has been quite robust for now.

Game being exclusive helps building the console's identity, another point that is often brought up about modern consoles etc... MS are not a charity, their goal is to strengthen the image of Xbox, so more games associated to the brand, the better for them.

Mario Wonder probably has a lot of potential of selling on PS, yet Nintendo won't release the game on this platform. They might be missing 5 or 10 millions sales as well. Nobody is losing sleep over this.

Making Starfield console exclusive makes a lot of sense now that MS possesses the developer/publisher/license. More than continuing releasing their games on other consoles, obviously. This is the exact logic that has always been applied, and accepted for other manufacturers for 30+ years, and I don't see a reason for it be different for MS.

And yes, I would have loved to play Wipeout on Dreamcast or Xbox back then. I enjoyed both games on Saturn, especially the second one, which was technically very well made.
 
GamePass is on PC as well....
That’s a very good point, but PC gamers in general buy more games than XBOX gamers and the user base is immense. There’s a reason Microsoft and now Sony are jumping on the PC demographic for more game sales. Even though Starfield is on PC Gamepass and it will probably affect sales somewhat, I feel it will still garner noteworthy sales in the end.
 

Mobilemofo

Member
I don't think people will buy pc's to play starfield. I don't see it as a system seller. Will probably flog a few xbox's but there's quite a bit of pressure for the Xbox decision. The numbers after 3 months will be interesting.
 
Top Bottom