-
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.
Phil Spencer on If Microsoft Will Ever Launch AAA Titles on Steam Again
- Thread starter dancrane212
- Start date
RiccochetJ
Gold Member
I can't but help feel that you're disregarding what EA did with Origin. They knew they were going to eat it with sales and still they went forward. I think MS is doing the same thing. Do you really think that they didn't think about revenue loss by doing this? Everyone knows about Steam. To think they are just in their own little bubble is foolish.
True, it's impressive, but Alan Wake was already a "cult classic" and a fan favorite during it's 360 release. I really, really liked Quantum Break, but it didn't achieve this with Remedy's fanbase and i don't think it would have legs like Alan Wake did.
I could be wrong, of course. But i get the impression that QB's budget was quite bigger than Alan Wake's, especially because Remedy team was bigger and because of the live action stuff.
RiccochetJ
Gold Member
That's one way to view it. I think you dropped your tinfoil hat over here. I'll leave you to ignore all the whale things that valve has done in the past couple years.
Captain Zyrain
Member
That was a great interview. (The whole thing)
I think Phil works better when you actually listen to him vs reading statements. He kind of rambles, so his point may be in a few different sections before he finishes off his thought.
I think Phil works better when you actually listen to him vs reading statements. He kind of rambles, so his point may be in a few different sections before he finishes off his thought.
Basically. It's a classic Phil answer, lot of sound and noise signifying nothing. MS want to push their app store, and that's all that matters to them.
But at least he used the word meme, so everything's alright.
That's how I read it too... But I am rather cynical.
We have to be careful about conflating various events, and ignoring others. One of the joys of PC gaming is long-tail sales and promotion, and Steam seems to be wonderful for that - new Resident Evil game announced + mid-week sale on Resident Evil games isn't a coincidence, it's a marketing strategy. Does Winstore have the same possibilities? It doesn't even have a Wishlist feature, right, so I doubt it. Maybe in the future, but that's the future, so we can't base anything around that. I imagine that when QB is finally released on Steam (no doubt it'll happen at some point), there'll be a promotion and discount on Alan Wake, not that Alan Wake will be given away free.
A secondary factor with Steam is eyeballs - 12m concurrent users. Ignore, say, half, because of card idling and alt accounts, so that's 6m people who could potentially buy your game straight away if they have "Notify me about new releases when Steam starts" ticked on... Relating this back to
Is that long-term sales and promotion can only help a developer. I've not played Quantum Break, so don't know if a sequel could even be produced, but the fact that the IP has only been seen by a small subset of PC users can't help it. MS can - of course - release Winstore exclusives if they want, but we shouldn't ignore the fact that Remedy (and other developers) will be hurt by this. Less people playing your game means less people aware of your creativity, less people aware of the IP, less people looking forward to your next game. People give Valve shit for not curating their store, but it gives developers a chance to be seen and to make money - the fact that MS are actively stopping a developer's work from being seen is pretty sad. Yes, I know I could go to Winstore and buy it, but not getting a game you worked on in front of 6m people must be dispiriting, and certainly affects sales.
*shrugs* Would management structure remain in place? Would support for Steam Controller remain in place? Would marketplace cut still only be 5%? Would Valve still be a Skunkworks company? The question assumes people hate MS and love Valve - perhaps we don't love the company so much as we love what Valve does?
Crayon
Member
That's how I read it too... But I am rather cynical.
We have to be careful about conflating various events, and ignoring others. One of the joys of PC gaming is long-tail sales and promotion, and Steam seems to be wonderful for that - new Resident Evil game announced + mid-week sale on Resident Evil games isn't a coincidence, it's a marketing strategy. Does Winstore have the same possibilities? It doesn't even have a Wishlist feature, right, so I doubt it. Maybe in the future, but that's the future, so we can't base anything around that.
A secondary factor with Steam is eyeballs - 12m concurrent users. Ignore, say, half, because of card idling and alt accounts, so that's 6m people who could potentially buy your game straight away if they have "Notify me about new releases when Steam starts" ticked on... Relating this back to
Is that long-term sales and promotion can only help a developer. I've not played Quantum Break, so don't know if a sequel could even be produced, but the fact that the IP has only been seen by a small subset of PC users can't help it. MS can - of course - release Winstore exclusives if they want, but we shouldn't ignore the fact that Remedy (and other developers) will be hurt by this. Less people playing your game means less people aware of your creativity, less people aware of the IP, less people looking forward to your next game. People give Valve shit for not curating their store, but it gives developers a chance to be seen and to make money - the fact that MS are actively stopping a developer's work from being seen is pretty sad. Yes, I know I could go to Winstore and buy it, but not getting a game you worked on in front of 6m people must be dispiriting.
*shrugs* Would management structure remain in place? Would support for Steam Controller remain in place? Would marketplace cut still only be 5%? Would Valve still be a Skunkworks company? The question assumes people hate MS and love Valve - perhaps we don't love the company so much as we love what Valve does?
Well that was an excellent post all around.
they really, really don't.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
No, I know they know this--they made a conscious decision that their 1st party software is not as important as their SaaS ecosystem, just as GFWL was making the decision that their 1st party software was not as important as ???? and just as during the years where they didn't release anything on PC they were making the decision that their 1st party software was not as important as selling toasters.
But in the context of whether Quantum Break could do better for Remedy and for MS, the answer is categorically yes, and maybe to a magnitude large enough to make the difference between losing money and making money. But they decided that was less important than The Mission. Cool.
GHG
Gold Member
They do have the money for it.
It's just that GabeN would laugh them out the door.
Yeah, that really sucks. I can understand it from a business point of view, but it must really suck for Remedy. =/
therealbigrich
Member
I would say the store getting better would be better than it just failing but thats just me
Eh, I see it differently.
There's a large contingent of PC gamers out there who are never going to make the jump to PC. And there's a large contingent of PC/Console owners who are only interested in Nintendo/Sony who are never going to make the jump to PC. These two camps are potentially interested in some Xbox titles, but due to them never being Xbox owners - they're never going to become a part of the revenue stream.
On the flip side, there are a lot of people out there who are never going to be PC gamers. They have absolutely no desire to deal with the intricacies of PC gaming, and thus - they're never at risk of being lost as potential customers. There's also those who are PC gamers, but may play games like Dota 2, League of Legends, CS:GO - and not necessarily the latest and greatest due to the fact that their machines lag behind the spec curve. These two camps probably make up the bulk of console gamers, and are completely unaffected by a blurring of the boundaries between console and PC gaming.
Microsoft is losing some potential high end PC/Xbox owners who'll see little reason to purchase further Xbox consoles, while potentially gaining non-Xbox owners who are purchasing Xbox/Xbox 360/Xbox One titles - and feeding into DLC revenue. I don't know if that trade off is worth it if they're only getting 70% of first party revenue, and 0% of 3rd party revenue.
Ultimately, Microsoft is going to have to incentivize gamers to buy into their PC storefront. One of the easiest ways to do that is to make the titles you have control of (first party, second party and third party exclusives) available only to your storefront. Microsoft is obviously doing a terrible job outside of that first step (lack of parity between UWP and Win32, potentially anti-consumer 'features,' etc.), but even if none of that were true and everything were peachy - gamers would likely chose Steam over Microsoft's store 9 times out of 10 if a respective title were available on both storefront's simultaneously.
Crimsonclaw111
Member
You are right. But even with the store improving a million times over, the games are still UWP and shit.
There is literally nothing stopping MS from just creating free Steam keys for their games, keeping 100% of the revenue anyway, and only offering the game for sale on their own store. Well, there is one thing - they don't have control that way.
justsomeguy
Member
Brilliantly self depreciating and very respectful to valve overall.
mocolostrocolos
Member
That's the reason DR4 isn't exclusive to Xbox One & W10, it also releases on Steam.
At the point you release all your major content on Steam there is literally zero reason to Xbox as a platform (on PC or as a console). There would be no unique reason to invest into Microsoft's ecosystem. People have been saying that MS doesn't care if they lose an Xbox sale to PC because they own Windows. But Microsoft isn't interested in the success of Windows 10 as a gaming platform because thats all but guaranteed already (mainly through Steam). Where they don't care is if that sale is on Xbox or their own PC platform, ie. if they are getting the revenue for their own titles and a cut of third-party profits.
So I really don't think there is much more than talk on this front. If their current Windows 10 store initiatives fail, if the XBOne project can't be jump-started with the S or the Scorpio, then that might change. But that would be preceded by a massive restructuring and wind-down of MS gaming operations. Xbox, essentially, wouldn't exist in its current form, and MGS would be a mid-tier publisher at best.
Its obvious for the same reason they won't publish their titles on PS4.
So I really don't think there is much more than talk on this front. If their current Windows 10 store initiatives fail, if the XBOne project can't be jump-started with the S or the Scorpio, then that might change. But that would be preceded by a massive restructuring and wind-down of MS gaming operations. Xbox, essentially, wouldn't exist in its current form, and MGS would be a mid-tier publisher at best.
Its obvious for the same reason they won't publish their titles on PS4.
dragonelite
Member
Its a company dont tell me your This naive to think there are big companies not out for more profit?
wait what? did I miss something?
Twin Tails
Member
Microsoft is publishing but it is exclusive for a year only. So steam version, like Dead Rising 3, will come eventually.
Can't you just add them to steam as non-steam games? Works for GoG games.
Crimsonclaw111
Member
Microsoft even managed to fuck that up. You have to do all sorts of crazy shit to add it to Steam like that.
One main thing they can control having QB exclusive to their store is the price. It's £44.99 here, which is higher than almost any other standard edition PC game I can think of (some have an RRP of £50 but because they're sold through various stores and retail, you never have to pay more than £40 at most).
Because it's only sold through the store, no other sites and no retail, it will be £44.99 until MS decide to discount it. Most games, both PC and console here are discounted within a couple of weeks and about half price within a couple of months. There are exceptions, but the majority of games follow this trajectory.
Because it's only sold through the store, no other sites and no retail, it will be £44.99 until MS decide to discount it. Most games, both PC and console here are discounted within a couple of weeks and about half price within a couple of months. There are exceptions, but the majority of games follow this trajectory.
Which is, interestingly, the thing about Steam and "competition", and why talk of Steam's dominant market position isn't clear-cut.
Because the publishers set the prices, and because Steam sales are pervasive - Weeklong, Mid-Week, Weekend, Daily + random + Event Sales (Summer, Winter, Halloween) - Steam acts as its own competition in terms of pricing. It's not like Steam needs Humble Store (as an example) to compete against in terms of price, because the publishers set their own prices there, too. Within the Steam ecosystem, the competition comes from all the different publishers trying to get your money, competing on a level which isn't seen elsewhere in games retail.
Which is why talking about Steam's "monopoly" and why Winstore is competition is flawed reasoning. QB's pricing is kept high by MS, with 100% of revenue going to them - they're disregarding the digital retail ecosystem by not allowing GMG, Humble, etc. to sell codes. And the lack of competing third-party titles on Winstore ensures there's no reason to drop the price - MS aren't competing with EA (as an example) for your cash, so why be competitive?
Obviously, they need to bolster their store in order for it to be worthwhile to compete on features against Steam. But then it becomes a chicken/egg scenario - Why would I use Winstore when Steam is more fully-featured, and because I'm not using Winstore, MS have no reason to improve it. This is, essentially, why GFWL died (that, and internal apathy from MS regarding PC).
(apologies if slight tangent to the OP)
I think Microsoft is talkinig with Steam to reach an agreement like, "we'll put our game on Steam too if you allow us to use Xbox features in your games" it means unify the two platform. Though my question is how much is Steam worth right now? Microsoft just spent 26 billion dollars to buy LinkedIn, if they bought Steam instead unifyinfg it into Windows 10 Store that would be them taking the PC market
At which point you have MS's almost-monopoly on the OS market coupled with the dominant market force in digital games retail, and competition regulators in both the US and EU go "Helllllls no!" Even if MS didn't package a Steam installer with Windows (and you know they'd love to), it would still be too much.
One of the upcoming Windows updates is UWP bundles that can be distributed outside of the Windows store. It's likely any future MS Steam release will just be a UWP bundle wrapped in Steam DRM.
darkinstinct
...lacks reading comprehension.
Phil Spencer, here is an idea: Let people connect their Steam accounts to their Live account (changeable once a year) and give them a free Steam version of every game they buy on the Windows 10 store.
darkinstinct
...lacks reading comprehension.
Microsoft has no monopoly in the OS market anymore, there's Android, iOS, macOS, Linux. And they would not have one for digital either, because there is choice. There are multiple players on PC plus PSN plus Play Store plus iTunes.
This is what I don't get about their whole store. Why are their games so damn expensive?
GHG
Gold Member
Because it's the only place you can buy the games.
Hence "almost-monopoly".
Depends what you're talking about, notsomuch in raw numbers, but usage. For instance, for gaming and general family use, the vast majority of PC installs are Windows (because they're bought in a store and have an OEM version of Windows on them). Just like, for media businesses, most people use Macs and OSX (or whatever). I still think the US and EU wouldn't approve it, especially considering the FTC have been cracking down on mergers recently. But it's all a hypothetical/what-if, which none of us really could know for sure. Steam belongs to Valve, which is not valued on any stock market exchange. You can not buy it.
You can buy it. Or, rather, it can be sold. It can't be taken-over or bought in a hostile fashion, since those avenues use stock and/or share-holders to exert control over the board of directors and the company (see: Vivendi-Gameloft-Ubisoft). But if Gabe chose to, he could sell it.
(Which sounds pedantic, and I know you didn't actually say the contrary, sorry.
)Ultimately, badly optimised UWP games, high prices and lack of consumer trust will be the end of Microsoft's plans. I completely refuse to spend almost £50 on a game that's digital only, held within such a locked down, anti consumer service.
Steam, and to a lesser degree Origin and GOG, took years to gain customer confidence. With Microsoft flip flopping constantly this generation, they might not stick to this plan long enough for that confidence to grow.
Steam, and to a lesser degree Origin and GOG, took years to gain customer confidence. With Microsoft flip flopping constantly this generation, they might not stick to this plan long enough for that confidence to grow.
wapplew
Member
Fixed for you.
Visualante2
Member
Really respect Spencer's candor. I'm becoming okay with the idea of the Windows 10 Store as long as it is a long term commitment, not something that will be shut down and forgotten about come Windows 11. However, I think it's just dumb putting multiplayer titles, particularly shooters on there. That audience is on Steam and won't budge. You're sending games to fail in the hopes that a store gains traction, it's selfish.
Microsoft should release their games on multiple gaming platforms. As a Steam user i try to collect all my games there and try to avoid other platforms. I haven't used Origin or GOG and will most likely never do. Same goes for that weird Windows 10 store.
I'm probably not the only person who thinks that way...
If they release their games on Steam, they can have my money.
I'm probably not the only person who thinks that way...
If they release their games on Steam, they can have my money.
Dream_Journey
Member
BibiMaghoo
Member
Other than withholding titles from markets not their own, they have no other means, give no other incentive for someone to actually buy a game from their store instead of Steam / Origin / Uplay. It's an impossible task.