HeresJohnny
Member
Trillion dollar company that could buy four Sony companies?
Psh! Hahaha!
A completely irrelevant point.
Trillion dollar company that could buy four Sony companies?
Psh! Hahaha!
What suicide button? Putting the players first? Yeah such a bad idea...
Oh you meant this gen, my bad I thought the coming gen. Yeah they really fucked it up last timeSo now forced Kinect, the always online DRM and the no used games thing was just Microsoft putting players first?
That's a new one.
Since it is only 1 year, I simply don't believe them. There is no decision, they just couldn't make the games fast enough to meet the deadline. And that is why the lack of Scarlet exclusives is only one year and not anything longer that could have actually benefitted the people waiting for a price drop.hey are just saying that the decisions they took, for which gamers wanted answers, were taken because they want gamers to play on every device possible.
They knew they were launching in 2020, and they are launching Halo, their biggest franchise. If they really wanted to, don't you think they would've made Halo solely for XSX as an exclusive? It doesn't make any sense that they "couldn't make games fast enough", if Halo and the XSX were in their plans since the beginning...Since it is only 1 year, I simply don't believe them. There is no decision, they just couldn't make the games fast enough to meet the deadline. And that is why the lack of Scarlet exclusives is only one year and not anything longer that could have actually benefitted the people waiting for a price drop.
I would have believed them if it was at least 3 years. But just one year smells rotten. There was no decision, just marketing a bad situation and pretend it was intentional.
Halo Infinite was a cross gen game from the beginning, No one ever said it was ever a Scarlet exclusive. But the decision to do this was years before the issues of Scarlet exclusives not making their deadline ever surfaced. So your argument makes no sense.They knew they were launching in 2020, and they are launching Halo, their biggest franchise. If they really wanted to, don't you think they would've made Halo solely for XSX as an exclusive? It doesn't make any sense that they "couldn't make games fast enough", if Halo and the XSX were in their plans since the beginning...
Haha, why is Halo Infinite a cross gen game from the beginning but their decision to do this for every first party game the first 2 years not? It just doesn't make any sense. Halo Infinite was in development with the idea of it being a launch game for the next new console. If they really wanted exclusive games for the XSX at launch, then Halo would've been one.Halo Infinite was a cross gen game from the beginning, No one ever said it was ever a Scarlet exclusive. But the decision to do this was years before the issues of Scarlet exclusives not making their deadline ever surfaced. So your argument makes no sense.
Haha, why is Halo Infinite a cross gen game from the beginning but their decision to do this for every first party game the first 2 years not? It just doesn't make any sense. Halo Infinite was in development with the idea of it being a launch game for the next new console. If they really wanted exclusive games for the XSX at launch, then Halo would've been one.
What you are basically saying is that IF Microsoft would have a different game finished on time, let's say Hellblade 2, that Hellblade 2 would be exclusive to the XSX, but Halo Infinite wouldn't... Why? What's the logical reason that one first party game would be cross-gen, but the other one wouldn't. It has nothing to do with games not being ready on time, but more with having people buy your software on as many systems as possible and keeping them in your ecosystem.
Trillion dollar company that could buy four Sony companies?
Psh! Hahaha!
Why would only Halo need that install base? I think you are correct in saying that Microsoft wants as much people as possible to play Halo, but they want that for every game. Hence the reason they don't want to start with next-gen exclusives. The idea is to get people to buy new games on their platform (One S/X, Windows, XSX) and stay there. Let them spend their money however they would like, but the more people that do this, are less likely to switch towards Nintendo/Sony/Google because their games are at Xbox.Halo Infinite is a GaaS game the budget isn't even on the same planet as Hellblade i.e. Destiny clone. Halo has to sell and have 10s of millions of users playing the game. Basically, what they are saying is they is no way between Xbox Sexy and the Microsoft Store they are ever going to have the install base needed. This is could go for other smaller titles but there is no way they have an install base to carry Halo Infinite, they probably won't even have that with Xbone, Xbox Sexy and the MS Store.
At this point they are running out of users, if Sony/Nintendo were in the same position, they would probably have to do the same thing to a degree.
Why would only Halo need that install base? I think you are correct in saying that Microsoft wants as much people as possible to play Halo, but they want that for every game. Hence the reason they don't want to start with next-gen exclusives. The idea is to get people to buy new games on their platform (One S/X, Windows, XSX) and stay there. Let them spend their money however they would like, but the more people that do this, are less likely to switch towards Nintendo/Sony/Google because their games are at Xbox.
I mean we won't know, but for me it doesn't make sense that they don't have new games ready. It's just about keeping players within the Xbox ecosystem.
If Sony would allow Gamepass on PS4/5 Microsoft would put it there.
And, of course, Microsoft would put their store, subscription service on PlayStation. Why wouldn't they? They'd be getting the money from PlayStation gamers instead of Sony on Sony's own platform. Now why the hell would Sony allow that?
Maybe there is just a lot more Sony fans on here than Xbox fans. Whatever the reason is, it sucks, and is tedious.
Question about this: Couldn't Sony kill Xbox by allowing GP on their system? I'm talking about the same full catalog (all Xbox exclusives free, Day 1) GP that MS offers on Xbox, not a stripped down version. If Sony allowed that, doesn't that eliminate the main reason why people would buy a next gen Xbox? People could get everything on a PS5 (minus Nintendo and PC exclusives, of course).
he is not the head of the company, but a division of it. you are acting as if Microsoft has achieved everything because xbox?Trillion dollar company that could buy four Sony companies?
Psh! Hahaha!
Question about this: Couldn't Sony kill Xbox by allowing GP on their system? I'm talking about the same full catalog (all Xbox exclusives free, Day 1) GP that MS offers on Xbox, not a stripped down version. If Sony allowed that, doesn't that eliminate the main reason why people would buy a next gen Xbox? People could get everything on a PS5 (minus Nintendo and PC exclusives, of course).
As a gamer, what i care the most is good games, and those are the only reason that matters when i think about what hardware im going to buy, and that is what MS should be focusing. Couldnt care less about gamepass or xcloud or whatever else.
The cash reserves, they probably wish, I'm sure.Nobody wishes they were in last place.
Nobody.
I like how people are pretending PC overlaps with Xbox enough to cut console sales when the Xbox One will sell over 50 million units and the Xbox 360 was near 90 million.
Saying that the XSX will have no exclusives for a year because of cross-gen implies that after that year it will have exclusives, but Microsoft won't stop releasing on PC anyway so there were no exclusives to begin with.
They simply want to sell the games that are close to being finished to as many people as possible.
If the true intent was to sell as many games as possible and that was the real goal above all ... they wouldn't be selling on the MS Store.
Nintendo's intent isn't to sell the most games.
That's not what you said.Of course it's Microsofts (and any other studios) intent to sell their games on as many Microsoft devices as possible. Xbox One, Xbox Series X, Windows Store and now also Steam.
I don't understand what point you're trying to make.
They simply want to sell the games that are close to being finished to as many people as possible.
Which is why their games are now also on Steam.If the true intent was to sell as many games as possible and that was the real goal above all ... they wouldn't be selling on the MS Store.
Only some.Which is why their games are now also on Steam.
They should go back and fight the same way they did with the first xbox and the 360, make great hardware and have great games for it. Right now i couldn't care less that the xbox one x has better specs than the ps4 pro, the games on pro don't run or look bad compared to the x, and it has exclusives that people actually care about.
Right now, why should i be excited about the series x? Because it has better hardware? Ok, now show me the games. Oh, Halo infinite, another game from the studio that had no idea that everyone considers Master Chief as the most important character in the franchise.
Hellblade 2? Ok there's more hope for that.
Forza will probably be good too, unless they fuck it up with microtransactions at the start like what happened to the last one (? can't remember)
Gears of war 5 was a good game, hopefully they continue to get better with the next games.
On this gen, outside of Sunset Overdrive, Ori and cuphead, every other exclusive was mediocre, and 2 of those games i mentioned arent even exclusives anymore.
As a gamer, what i care the most is good games, and those are the only reason that matters when i think about what hardware im going to buy, and that is what MS should be focusing. Couldnt care less about gamepass or xcloud or whatever else.
That's not what you said.
Also, most of their games are not going to Steam, Halo Infinite has only been announced for MS Store.
That is exactly what I said, they want to sell their games to as many people as possible on their devices. If that's for some reason not the intent, then please, tell me what the real reason is.
Also, all of their games are going to be on Steam, that is what they said, it hasn't been announced for Steam yet because the game didn't even get a proper trailer yet. It also doesn't have a MS Store page yet.
They simply want to sell the games that are close to being finished to as many people as possible.
Jesus, that is not what you said the first time.
I do not believe that is the goal, hence my comment. You clarified, we're all set.
And Microsoft doesn't make anything off of games sold on Steam (aside from their own first-party games, of course) just because of Windows.
People who think PC gaming = Microsoft are ignorant.
Why would anyone buy Series X if there were no new games for it? Seems like a really odd strategy to me.
IMO, he’s lying. I think you’ll see exclusive Series X games by the end of 2021. If he’s not lying and sticks to this, it’ll be worse debacle than the Kinect.
How is that not what I said? What are you even talking about? You don't make sense and you don't have a point.
They want to sell their games to as many people as possible. What is it that you don't get? That I said "close to being finished"? That's because of Matt Booty saying they'll have cross-gen releases for about 1 year.
Now, go ahead, and tell me the real reason why evil evil Microsoft is making games for a platform with an installbase of 50m people.
No no, go ahead and tell me what the goal is because I can't think of anything else. Selling games to more people = more profit. That's what a company wants.
In this case i would prefer to wait to see what these studios release than to buy the console right away. We don't know how MS management might influence the work of those studios.I prefer Xbox for the hardware, UI, and services. Don’t care for a majority of MS or Sony games. But I’m actually very excited about the studios they bought because they’ve made franchises I actually do care about. I’m pretty optimistic about the games they’ll have coming next gen.
Double Fine, Obsidian, inXhile, Ninja Theory. Their games have never lit up sales charts but they’ve been good. Playground has made the best racer probably ever in Horizon 4. Good things should be coming. I think we’ll see a return to some quality games. After all they need them to sell people on GamePass and xCloud.
What is Xbox? Depends on what you think Xbox is or gaming is to Microsoft.
Satya doesn't give two shits about plastic, very much the opposite - services. Xbox as a Hardware has been in decline for about a decade and that's not from very high levels. For them to rollout services like Satya likes, which would be following his mobile strategy. The hardware has to be sacrificed, meaning the services have to be expanded to other devices/os/markets. Right?
So, at this point you have a declining install base and now you are making the hardware meaningless to the underlying software, games and service. Right?
So, the closed eco-system is being sacrificed for the services, which is what Satya wants. Right?
The problem with this is... Phil didn't just promise Satya just Microsoft software/games on other devices/os/markets/etc. but the services that 3rd party publishers/developers would use i.e. use Microsoft as a middleman. This is where Xbox as a Service Platform comes in. Right?
The issue with that is three fold, and this is where the problem comes in
1. The closed eco-systems (iOS, Nintendo devices, PS devices, etc.) already have non-competing stores on their own devices, furthermore, even Sony has all the services MS wants to rollout for many years. These closed systems make money thru royalties i.e. licensing for access to the device. So, competing stores makes very little sense, it would be like me having my own store on Xbox hardware. Right?
2. On the open-systems (Windows, Linux, Mac, etc) the large publishers have no real use for Microsoft. They all have their own store fronts, services and subscription models.... unlike Microsoft ones they are actually successful in the open system world. This is why the large publishers generally don't publish to Microsoft's digital storefronts i.e.Games for Windows Live(RIP) and Microsoft Store... they serve no real purpose to them.
3. As the install base of the hardware craters even further, those publishers will start to pull back on support as its obvious Microsoft is moving to the other devices/os/markets for their own software and services. In turn the Xbox games will no longer be needed, at this point we're talking about PC games and any game deployed to the other closed systems.
So, is it doom and gloom for Xbox. I would say if you believe in Xbox as a Hardware, those days are long gone. I would say if you believe in Xbox as a Service Platform for large publishers/developers to use on other devices/os/markets, that isn't going to work. I would say if you believe in Xbox as a Service for Microsoft developed games as a traditional publisher/developer.... I see nothing wrong with that, the problem is that isn't what Phil is promising Satya.
The only future I see for Microsoft is as a large publisher like they were in the 90s, but that isn't going to fly with Satya.
Doom and gloom - I think it depends on what you want from them. If you want Microsoft published/developed games.... well, in theory that can continue... the rest not so much. There simply is limited opportunity outside the closed system called Xbox as a Hardware for Microsoft to roll out services, and rolling out the services will inflict the death blow to the hardware.
Xbox as a Hardware
Xbox as a Service Platform
Xbox as a Service for Microsoft published/developed games - maybe
Microsoft as a Game Publisher/Developer ☑
WOW. BRUH... you need to chill. You're gonna bust a blood vessel in your forehead.
Xbox is going to be fine.
Reread what you original wrote, okay, slow down. You said nothing about MS devices, you clarified, we're good to go.
To sell services, that is their (MS) goal now.
Also, the goal isn't always to sell more games but some other strategy. Sony's top goal isn't to sell the most amount of Sony games, their top goal is to have a close system where others sell games... and they collect royalties.
This is the dumbest thing I've read this month.
We are talking about why Microsoft is releasing games on the Xbox One too, about this specific situation and you want to use Sony, who aren't in the situation, as an example? Of course they have other goals, you genius. This is about Microsoft selling games on Xbox One and not Microsoft in general.
New narrative: As the xbox has no exclusives, exclusives are anti-consumer
This shows you Xbox fanboys will defend anything.
I remember Xbox One DRM always-online was defended at the start of last gen, it was good for developers apparently.
What next, MS announces Series X won't get any first-party content after 2 years, we'll be told 'most people play COD and GTA anyway, so it doesn't matter'![]()
That shit didn't take off or stay.So now forced Kinect, the always online DRM and the no used games thing was just Microsoft putting players first?
That's a new one.
Of course they are talking about releasing games, the games will be there to support the services.
Satya would take your piece of stupid plastic and throw it in the trash bin if he could.His arms are very skinny though so not sure he could lift the new one.
This shows you Xbox fanboys will defend anything.
I remember Xbox One DRM always-online was defended at the start of last gen, it was good for developers apparently.
What next, MS announces Series X won't get any first-party content after 2 years, we'll be told 'most people play COD and GTA anyway, so it doesn't matter'![]()
This shows you Xbox fanboys will defend anything.
I remember Xbox One DRM always-online was defended at the start of last gen, it was good for developers apparently.
What next, MS announces Series X won't get any first-party content after 2 years, we'll be told 'most people play COD and GTA anyway, so it doesn't matter'![]()
I only play on PC, so what is "my piece of plastic"?
And you still got no point but I guess that's to be expected from a Sony fanboy who thinks GamePass is a bad deal.
We are talking about why Microsoft is releasing games on the Xbox One too
GamePass is a bad deal.
These companies take losses on hardware because they make all the profits selling games. They can't have another company making the money off of games instead of Sony.
The goal is royalty fees, not selling hardware, the selling hardware is really there to make a closed environment to get... royalty fees.
So, what you are saying is.... Bethesda Software makes say a Prey PS4 version, agrees with Microsoft to put it in Game Pass as a rental.... Microsoft than has some type of app/tie in with PS devices. People subscribe to Microsoft not Sony to rent the game which is a PS4 game which is available on the PS Store and PS Now as a rental.
What you are describing is very inefficient, why is Microsoft needed? You've actually added another layer which isn't needed, and in theory increases costs.... why is Microsoft even involved?
What Sony might do, maybe, doubtful, is Microsoft limits the games to Microsoft only games, so like EA Access, I'm assuming some percentage of revenue would have to be handed to Sony. But in your example, it doesn't make sense to any of the parties to do what you suggest, imo.
All of this will be coming to a sudden end... in due course.
This is the problem with what Phil sold Satya, nobody really wants or needs Microsoft outside of Xbox as a Hardware, and now he is sacrificing the hardware. Their will be no place for MS to go except if they want to get in line and become akin to normal publishers. Microsoft can sell games today on PS today and they can rent games on PS today if they wish.... but that is not what they want... they want to be the middleman. Well, I would like to have wings but that probably isn't going to happen either.
All these "services" really don't make sense outside of the closed eco-system, generally speaking, meaning as a middleman.
Meh. It goes with ways. There are plenty of threads that are on here looking to tear down anything MS does.
Thanks for the response. That makes sense. I did mention that I was assuming a contract could be signed that would give Sony a substantial cut of GP sales, so they'd be recouping a lot of that lost revenue -- enough to justify doing it, in light of the reward of killing off MS hardware once and for all (which would be in their interests, of course).
But I think that the contract I'm imagining is just that -- imaginary, and not realistic. I suspect that, if it were set up in the way I imagine (where Sony gets a big cut), MS wouldn't sign it.
You're right that Sony would probably be fine with a version of GP that included only MS exclusives, but I doubt MS would offer that. They're interested in selling ongoing subscriptions, and people wouldn't maintain their subscriptions just for the occasional MS exclusive.