I don’t think we will see major or probably any Bethesda games on the PS5 going forward anytime soon(if they are smart), but I don’t know.....the wording seems kind of indecisive about exclusivity from the higher ups. I know they are closing the deal soon, so I’m assuming they can’t confirm anything until everything is finalized.
That's the exact reason; if they came out and said anything about the games and exclusivity as definitive statements, it'd be illegal since backend stuff regarding the deal still need to be done. They've said that should be the case by early 2021, wherein I'd expect much more direct statements regarding plans for Bethesda/Zenimax content.
Having said that, Phil supercedes Todd here and from Phil's words he's basically been hinting as much as possible without breaking any laws, that their intent is to keep Zenimax content to the Xbox ecosystem exclusively.
OP is still in denial phase. Other platforms are those included via Xcloud ie phone, tablet, laptop fire sticks etc. If you read the entire interview, he even talks about how most of their games have been Xbox exclusive and that there would be very little post acquisition content. He says that for a reason...
Certain people just really don't want to accept that it's happened, for various reasons. It's funny because they ask for MS to be more competitive. MS then makes a power move enabling them to be much more competitive, and yet the same people who were "concerned" they wouldn't be able to compete with Sony getting the rumored timed exclusivity deals on big 3P games, are suddenly trying to argue what MS's done is anti-competitive, monopolistic, or that they just have to put those games on PS to recoup the costs (never mind that MS doing that causes them to lose 30% profit, potential console sales
AND potential Gamepass subscription sales, too).
It's like they can't make up their mind, but for me it's more clear: a lot of them simply don't want MS to be competitive at all and want the status quo to remain as it is and has been the past generation, so they dress up their concerns to seem authentic, yet then when MS actually does something bold they try spinning it as the worst of things. Now one of the new spins I've seen has been on Era with several people (including Matt) trying to argue that it's leading to mass industry consolidation that will hurt gaming.
...That's funny, because if you look at Sony's track record since the PS1, they've always had a bit of tendency to buy 3P devs and turn them into 1P studios. One of the first they did that with...was Naughty Dog! When this gets pointed out to people, they then shift the goalpost into "but Sony nurtures their talent". The last time I checked, The Coalition, Turn 10, Playground and even Rare (among others) have been nurtured pretty well by MS over the past few years, and a lot of the recent acquisitions (like Ninja Theory) have been naturally expanding over the years while being allowed to work on projects they actually want to work on, and aren't being mandated to do. So that whole argument dies right there.
The whole fearmongering on industry consolidation is a red herring anyway, because it's usually departments with high redundancy (like HR) which are the ones that get cuts, and understandably so. As games keep growing in scope, that means more teams and larger team sizes, so the actual reality is that the vast majority of the talent that shifts with these acquisitions, stay employed. Very few jobs in the creative and programming fields are being cut. And again, a lot of these same people (like Matt), seem to conveniently forget all of the studio closures Sony's done over the years, some of which simply came down to pure profits. I'm told that closing studios down for not being profitable is corporate greed, does that mean companies like Sony are guilty of this too?
I'm being facetious, but it just goes to show how bad the arguments are getting now in trying to frame MS's acquisitions as a bad thing or being a death knell for the industry, a monopoly or whatever else people want to throw at it. Also goes to show how poor their logic is in thinking MS are willing to give up 30% profit cuts, potential console AND subscription sales just to get to staunched/borderline extremist PlayStation fans when the vast majority of PlayStation gamers are more willing to either buy an Xbox, buy the game on PC, or get it through Gamepass (console, PC, mobile) if they want, especially since a lot of those options are very cheap points of entry.
I wish these "concerned" gamers were concerned for me back in the '90s when I had to buy multiple game consoles to play the exclusives I wanted. Same thing in the 2000's, too. Very funny how
suddenly a lot of the same people who championed Sony for their exclusives this gen and complained about MS on that front (understandably so, in quite a few aspects), now suddenly want MS to...not build exclusives for their own system/ecosystem....and put these games on PlayStation to benefit Sony at the expense of themselves? But didn't these people
just finish saying exclusives matter? Why would you want only one of the platform holders to--...
OH! I get it now. It was never about legitimately wanting MS to improve in the first place, that was just a farce. They just want them gone but don't want to come out and say it
Will say this though; it was refreshing to see a lot of people in that thread on Era call out the concern trolls who were making some of these same arguments after Phil did their recent interview speaking up on the Zenimax deal. It's nice to see more people looking at this from a logical POV that actually makes sense, and dissenting to the increasingly bad faith arguments while keeping it civil and respectful. Over time I expect the fearmongering to die out but that is likely still a ways off.