Yo! I never thought of it like this, but you're right. They got Halo mostly right and Forza Horizon was awesome. But it's the same cadence for 10 straight years now. It makes total sense as to why they spent $75 Billion on Bethesda, Zenimax, Activision, and Blizzard.
They've done some great stuff with 3P devs too: the Ori games, Cuphead, and Flight Simulator specifically. Issue is they basically didn't seem to know what to do with those IP going forward so they've ever become disassociated with the Xbox brand (Cuphead, Ori to a lesser extent) or the original devs are no longer interested in working with them on the IP (Moon with the Ori series).
IP retention is just as important as getting quality IP in the first place.
Games have stagnated. Devs have stopped innovating. That isnt on Microsoft, Sony or Ubisoft. It's the devs. They need a kick up the ass, not nurturing.
There's so much wrong in this take, like sooo much (the comment in general, I just truncated most of it). You can feel what you want but just because a lot of games are crossgen doesn't mean new games AREN'T being released! What you want to say is that there's little current-gen only games from 3P and the Big Three. Fair enough.
But you're ignoring the fact a large reason for that is because of the very real console shortages for Series X and especially PS5, which are resulting from chip and wafer shortages and now certain logistics issues due to the Russia/Ukraine conflict. You can't just complain about a situation without acknowledging why that situation exists the way it does.
I'd also suggest you step back and realize a game doesn't need to be AAA to be quality, and not all AAA games need to follow the exact same template to be considered good. You can think Metroid Dread is overrated (out of the 2.5D action-platformer releases that have been released or shown so far I thought Replaced looked more impressive, but that game could be stuck in dev limbo infinitely), but it being 2.5D doesn't make it a "lesser" game than a 3D open-world. Just because 2.5D games might share design lineage with side-scrollers from the '90s doesn't mean they're worth being suggestively labeled in a way that implies they're "lesser"; some of those side-scrollers are still among the best games ever made.
It sounds like you think games have stagnated out of laziness and lack of creative inspiration, when that isn't actually the case for the majority. Maybe some developers in AAA, sure, but not all of them. You can't just have that opinion and not take into consideration residual complications from adjusting around COVID, logistics issues from a developing conflict, and most importantly the lack of systems due to chip & wafer shortages affecting everyone across the industry.
Whoever owns the publishing rights of the game has the final say on which platforms it goes to, Phil was able to make a deal here with Todd to make it an Xbox console exclusive & got him bring it to XGP day one in return for the acquisition & full support of MS.
If you want an example of this in practice, just look at Bethesda TBH; the recent Skyrim release was not put in GamePass Day 1 (and to my knowledge, still isn't there). Special Edition is in GamePass and you can upgrade to Anniversary Edition for a fee, but Anniversary Edition still brings new content and features not in Special Edition.
If Zenimax/Bethesda were under XGS, that game would've gone into GamePass (or at least, it's additions) Day 1 for no added cost. But it didn't, because it's just as you said: they are treated as their own label under Microsoft Gaming, which Phil Spencer now runs. Phil said that all Xbox Game Studios games would be going to GamePass Day and Date, but that doesn't seem to extend to Zenimax/Bethesda nor will extend to ABK games if/when they are acquired, since they retain their own publishing labels managed under Microsoft Gaming separate from XGS.
Because of that I'm actually NOT expecting new COD games to go into GamePass Day 1, outside of probably the next Warzone (which is F2P anyway so Day 1 in GP wouldn't matter). I DO expect certain skins, weapons, maps etc. to come alongside GP subscriptions at no additional cost, whereas you'll need to pay for them on other platforms like PlayStation, but otherwise I don't see any business sense for them to put new mainline, standalone COD campaigns into GamePass Day 1 when those tend to sell ridiculously well on every platform with the current model, and possible GamePass subscription number growth wouldn't be enough to offset adding those new campaigns to GP Day 1, to make it worth doing.
At least, that's my read on their strategy WRT Zenimax and ABK content going forward; it'll most likely be a case-by-case (likely limited to new IP) as for which of their non-F2P games go into GamePass Day 1. Meanwhile, all XGS games will go into GamePass Day 1.
Did you just skip over the part where Todd Howard and Pete Hines apologized to Playstation fans that they are sorry that their games are no longer going to Playstation for the big releases? Likely only specific MMO type stuff will ever see Playstation release again.
That doesn't invalidate 3liteDragon's statement of not
all Zenimax or ABK games going into GamePass, though. It's entirely possible Bethesda could make TES6 exclusive to Xbox/PC, but
not put it in GamePass Day 1. That decision falls into Pete Hine's hands, as he's managing that label.
Meanwhile, Matt Booty manages the XGS studios and those studios are the only ones that have official statements of
all of their output going to GamePass Day 1.
Phil Spencer made it clear. The deal was about bringing exclusives games to platforms where Game Pass exists. I don't see Playstation getting Game Pass anytime soon.
Exactly, 100% correct here. But again, this doesn't, nor did that roundtable, prove anything indicative of ALL of Zenimax (and by extension, ABK)'s games going into GamePass Day 1.
Because we already have examples of this happening with Skyrim: Anniversary Edition and Doom 3 VR Edition.
news.xbox.com
