No, It makes more sense to buy the publisher instead of doing one off deals considering Xbox's main goal. Xbox wants to grow game pass as much as they can and in order to grow any content subscriptions you need a consistent stream of content to get new subs and keep old subs. Buying the publisher guarantees them content now and in the future.
IMO it's the "run before you walk" saying just playing out IRL. Microsoft's had major issues in the past properly managing just five internal 1P teams; soon they're going to have 30+ 1P developers to manage. It could end up being too much on their plate and at that point, it doesn't matter if they want to buy publishers and developers because if management is insufficient you're still going to run into the same issue: lack of content.
Sony has a bigger install base and mindshare so they can't compete with Sony when it comes to getting the one off deals because Sony has more leverage in those negations because they have a bigger install base. MS/Xbox is using their biggest strength which is their endless pocket book lol.
1: It's not an endless pocket book. They're still bound to budgets, operating costs etc. as any other company and their market cap can fluctuate just like any other company's
2: It's not Sony's fault they built up their PlayStation brand over four generations in order to have a larger install base that effectively allows them to get lower prices for exclusivity deals than Microsoft. That's a result of their efforts over 20+ years.
Now, COD is very important to Sony because that game alone makes sony more profit in 1 year than God of war, TLOUS and GT7 can combined because sony doesn't have to spend money to make COD but playstation is the biggest platform for COD so if they lose COD they would lose billions of profit.
COD brings in a lot of money but not THAT much; PS as a division brings in around $3.5 billion - $4 billion annually in net profit. COD accounts for much less than 25% of PlayStation's total division revenue, same with their net profit.
Not saying it's insignificant; it's just not as much as you're making it out to be.
This is why they are fighting so hard to expand the rights to keep COD on PlayStation. Xbox claimed they will always keep it on Playstation publicly but Jim Ryan come out and said Phil told him it will be exclusive for at least 3 more years behind closed doors, hence the fall out that is now happening from that conversation.
Well that's part of it. The other reason is because the talks Jima and Phil were having were behind closed doors, as you said, but Microsoft have been making references to those discussions in public court proceedings hinting the IP will stay on PS platforms in perpetuity, which is causing a point of contention between Phil and Jim in their other discussions.
At the end of the day, once Xbox buys activision they don't need to let sony keep COD because they will own the IP and can do whatever they want with it but I would think it would make more financial sense to keep it on Playstation so they can continue to generate that revenue from PlayStation and reinvest it back into the development of the new COD games.
I agree; once the deal closes MS is free to do with COD (and in fact ALL ABK IP) as they see fit. However, since Phil's on record saying they'd want to bring COD to Nintendo platforms, and bring it back to Steam (which they've already started there IIRC), it would seem absolutely odd on MS to have COD on pretty much all platforms BUT PlayStation, without it looking as if they engaging in a targeted campaign against just one particular platform holder.
I think Xbox is placing a lot of trust in Game pass and I don't see how AAA games can stay sustainable with the service but we will see how this all plays out.
Agreed; IMO they have rushed aspects of their GamePass strategy too quickly. All 1P games Day 1 to the service should've been eased into. Tying pushes for Xbox content to GamePass should have been a lot more selective early on. GamePass as a service should've been rolled on top of XBL Gold instead of made as a competing value service. And some acquisitions geared to GP should've been tempered out better so they could get some results from earlier purchases to see if the strategy works well on a smaller scale before expanding so rapidly (hence why I think MS should chill on further acquisitions after ABK for a good five years).
However, it's the strategy and implementation of the strategy Microsoft have chosen, and we just have to wait and see how it shakes out.
Just throw more money at it until the install base hits over 100 million.
To do this, they could buy up another smaller publisher. Possibly somebody like Capcom for example.
They've already thrown $80 billion at it so far and have very little to show for it at this point. What good does buying another publisher (funny calling Capcom a "smaller" publisher; they may be in terms of market cap but in terms of fandom cache, especially among enthusiasts, their IP carry a lot more value than anything from ABK) do besides put even more food on their plate that's spilling over with food as-is? Plus they theoretically already have enough studios internally for regular GamePass content, so if this rapid spending for growth is really for Xbox and GamePass so they can "compete", as Satya's put it, then they should be good.
Unless that was a lie and it's really about hoarding up AAA resources and IP in the industry, starving out other platform holders and making them forcibly accept GamePass on their platform lest they lose out on once-3P content, and squeeze out other companies from being able to realistically enter the industry. In which case, hey go ahead and rush into buying Capcom. Go buy Square-Enix and Sega, too. Don't forget about EA and Ubisoft!
Next, start making Ganepass exclusive games. Want to play Elder Scrolls VI, which will be one of the biggest games of all time? Then you need to sign up to Gamepass.
They will probably do this (I think Sony should consider this for PS+ as well for smaller releases to test the model), but it will absolutely not be for the big AAA releases like TES VI. Too risky, and too much potential loss in software revenue.
After that, throw billions at third party publishers and get them to release all their games on Gamepass on day 1, with the guarantee the game never leaves the service.
So you want MS to basically do Sony's approach of timed exclusivity (which MS technically perfected with the 360 gen and inspired Sony to follow suit, FWIW), just on steroids? Even while also buying up publishers? Again, if this is about "competition" as Satya Nadella just said, why go to such extremes?
Because at that point, it isn't competition. That's just starving out options for your competitor at that point, the opposite of fair competition.
If they do that, Ganepass will be the biggest money maker on Earth. They could easily hit over 200 million subs.
Now you're just being delusional.
Of course, it would mean an increase in price, but with that service I'd pay whatever they demanded and I'd still beg to pay them more.
This has to be a rick roll post now, I'm sure of it.
Apple would spank them so hard they would have to come back begging on their knees to let them into their ecosystem.
