Support NeoGAF

[pixelation]

But for real, if the new XB ends up being as expensive as its been rumored. Then they will sell even less consoles, so if they end up returning to exclusivity they'll sell less games because on top of that, XB fans don't really buy games as they expect most new games to be included on their GP sub... so how do they plan to not lose even more money? Are they in it to perpetually lose money? And why would they go back to exclusivity? To appease to a vocal minority of butthurt XB fans?

 

[mayham2199]

But for real, if the new XB ends up being as expensive as its been rumored. Then they will sell even less consoles, so if they end up returning to exclusivity they'll sell less games because on top of that, XB fans don't really buy games as they expect most new games to be included on their GP sub... so how do they plan to not lose even more money? Are they in it to perpetually lose money? And why would they go back to exclusivity? To appease to a vocal minority of butthurt XB fans?

Well to be clear they are just looking at it and seeing what they want to do. That's why I believe the best they could come up with is not doing day and date. The data does support that older games will still sell. Starfield appearing on the charts next month would further support that.

 

[slrbomber]

But for real, if the new XB ends up being as expensive as its been rumored. Then they will sell even less consoles, so if they end up returning to exclusivity they'll sell less games because on top of that, XB fans don't really buy games as they expect most new games to be included on their GP sub... so how do they plan to not lose even more money? Are they in it to perpetually lose money? And why would they go back to exclusivity? To appease to a vocal minority of butthurt XB fans?

You're right but, and a big but, all the scarcity in memory and chip manufacturing could significantly ease by 2030, so they could do extremely well thereafter. I think the whole console industry is going to significantly benefit once the supply crunch eases possibly by 2030. Smart thing for them would be to do timed exclusivity but keep all titles multiplatform until Xbox has large sales again, because as you rightly pointed out, they would get even fewer sales as things stand today

 

[Deficit]

If you paid more attention to the state of both platforms then why that is would make more sense.

This is why I called you a Sony fanboy . The PS5 gen is the most profitable ever for Sony, PSN has more new users than ever, but it makes sense for Sony to double down on excluisves. Meanwhile, Xbox has barely 50-60m consoles sold, but it makes no sense for them to get exclusives again? Remember you parade around "exclusives sell consoles". And "Xbox needs reasons to buy their console".

 

[Brucey]

While content is the most crucial asset, Microsoft already possesses its own hyperscale cloud infrastructure. This raises the question: why continue to maintain a hardware business that has historically been a massive financial drain?

Yet the xcloud streaming experience is significantly worse than the competition....

 

[Brucey]

This is why I called you a Sony fanboy . The PS5 gen is the most profitable ever for Sony, PSN has more new users than ever, but it makes sense for Sony to double down on excluisves. Meanwhile, Xbox has barely 50-60m consoles sold, but it makes no sense for them to get exclusives again? Remember you parade around "exclusives sell consoles". And "Xbox needs reasons to buy their console".

50-60m series consoles? Maybe 30 million if lucky.

 

[Topher]

This is why I called you a Sony fanboy . The PS5 gen is the most profitable ever for Sony, PSN has more new users than ever, but it makes sense for Sony to double down on excluisves. Meanwhile, Xbox has barely 50-60m consoles sold, but it makes no sense for them to get exclusives again? Remember you parade around "exclusives sell consoles". And "Xbox needs reasons to buy their console".

You can call me a fanboy all you want if it makes you feel better, but you are the one waltzing in here with the console warrior rhetoric so it really just makes you look silly.

Regardless......why are you pushing arguments I didn't make? The only thing I've said in favor of exclusives for Sony is that they need to focus and get their first party in order because this gen has been Sony's worst in that regard, profits by damned. You know......standard "fanboy" stuff, right? But if Sony decides to keep porting to PC then that's fine by me otherwise. The fact of the matter is that Xbox needs port revenue a hell a lot more than PlayStation does. Their need for PlayStation port revenue was clearly expressed by Phil Spencer when he first announced the "just four games" to be ported. Now if Microsoft is fine taking the hit in revenue to help bolster their Xbox console then I'm all for that. I've said many a time on this forum that we need strong competition from Xbox consoles. But as things are, I just don't see how Xbox can operate as a business and throw away revenue streams, especially one where they seem to be doing well and hitting the best sellers in PS land. Can Sony say the same about ports to PC? Nope. So why are you pretending this is same exact situation for both that people are treating differently when it just isn't?

Why don't you try not generalizing everyone's arguments to whatever console warrior rhetoric you dream up and actually reply to what people say? Either way, there is really no reason to be so dang combative

 

[demigod]

You can call me a fanboy all you want if it makes you feel better, but you are the one waltzing in here with the console warrior rhetoric so it really just makes you look silly.

Regardless......why are you pushing arguments I didn't make? The only thing I've said in favor of exclusives for Sony is that they need to focus and get their first party in order because this gen has been Sony's worst in that regard, profits by damned. You know......standard "fanboy" stuff, right? But if Sony decides to keep porting to PC then that's fine by me otherwise. The fact of the matter is that Xbox needs port revenue a hell a lot more than PlayStation does. Their need for PlayStation port revenue was clearly expressed by Phil Spencer when he first announced the "just four games" to be ported. Now if Microsoft is fine taking the hit in revenue to help bolster their Xbox console then I'm all for that. I've said many a time on this forum that we need strong competition from Xbox consoles. But as things are, I just don't see how Xbox can operate as a business and throw away revenue streams, especially one where they seem to be doing well and hitting the best sellers in PS land. Can Sony say the same about ports to PC? Nope. So why are you pretending this is same exact situation for both that people are treating differently when it just isn't?

Why don't you try not generalizing everyone's arguments to whatever console warrior rhetoric you dream up and actually reply to what people say? Either way, there is really no reason to be so dang combative

 

[DenchDeckard]

This is why I called you a Sony fanboy . The PS5 gen is the most profitable ever for Sony, PSN has more new users than ever, but it makes sense for Sony to double down on excluisves. Meanwhile, Xbox has barely 50-60m consoles sold, but it makes no sense for them to get exclusives again? Remember you parade around "exclusives sell consoles". And "Xbox needs reasons to buy their console".

Tioher is a fan of Sony and maybe that does sway his thoughts process sometimes. Nothing wrong with that.

But yeah, you can't have exclusives work for Sony but not MS when you are a customer or end user.

If MS has to love a few hundred million spread out over the years to build a fan base then so be it.

You can't say exclusivity is good for one and not the other. No matter the excuse.

 

[Topher]

Tioher is a fan of Sony and maybe that does sway his thoughts process sometimes. Nothing wrong with that.

That's you, me, everyone. That's how opinions work

You can't say exclusivity is good for one and not the other. No matter the excuse.

Sure, but we can look at the financial situation of the platforms and determine which needs the revenue more. That's the argument that has typically been made from most from what I've seen.

 

[Knucklepux]

Just talking out loud here and I have zero clue which way this will go but the only thing I could think of holding it back from being full bore Windows PC will be the license agreements with all those console only games

"Talking out loud"???

I think you mean "thinking out loud"

 

[Merline]

I'm just wondering. if they're not going back to exclusivity, then what's the point of all this noise? Why build up hope among Xbox fans just to pull the rug out from under them by announcing something like Gears E-Day for PlayStation? That wouldn't just be illogical, it would be outright self-sabotage. The backlash would be massive, and they know it.

 

[Tobimacoss]

I'm just wondering. if they're not going back to exclusivity, then what's the point of all this noise? Why build up hope among Xbox fans just to pull the rug out from under them by announcing something like Gears E-Day for PlayStation? That wouldn't just be illogical, it would be outright self-sabotage. The backlash would be massive, and they know it.

Halo and Gears should be multiplatform. All multiplayer games should be multiplatform, especially to increase the controller input based multiplayer pools. Even Sony understood that with Helldivers 2 and Marathon.

ABK games need to remain multiplatform, Bethesda games from established franchises should also remain multiplatform. Only thing that makes sense for Xbox is Xbox Game Studios (1st party) or Xbox Global Publishing (2nd party) games can be timed exclusive for 6-12 months, NEW single player IP.

Most users don't really care about single player games after the awards season is over, and especially if a game doesn't do well at the awards.

So 6-12 months timed exclusivity gives them a test run to see how good a game is and how well it performs commercially. Plus most sales happen within the first 6-12 months unless it's a 9/10 game. So use that timed exclusivity window to see if a game is worth extending timed exclusivity or making it permanently exclusive.

 

[Negotiator101]

I'm just wondering. if they're not going back to exclusivity, then what's the point of all this noise? Why build up hope among Xbox fans just to pull the rug out from under them by announcing something like Gears E-Day for PlayStation? That wouldn't just be illogical, it would be outright self-sabotage. The backlash would be massive, and they know it.

I think this talk is probably about the next generation, to sell the new hardware without console exclusive games would be more difficult. It would probably be a 6 to 12 month window anyway so it wouldn't be like before and eventually it would go to PS and Switch 2 etc.

 

[MrTired]

I'm just wondering. if they're not going back to exclusivity, then what's the point of all this noise? Why build up hope among Xbox fans just to pull the rug out from under them by announcing something like Gears E-Day for PlayStation? That wouldn't just be illogical, it would be outright self-sabotage. The backlash would be massive, and they know it.

They need to generate excitement for the brand because they're releasing hardware as soon as next year.

They're possibly seeing through their telemetry that their biggest spenders are not engaging with the ecosystem as much and may be leaving to other ecosystem (Steam, PSN, etc) and want to stem the bleeding.

It wouldn't be the first time Microsoft have thought only about the short term "gain" at the expense of the medium to long term ramification cough cough *only four games*.

I don't believe exclusive for Xbox strategy will change because they're locked into next gen hardware. Even with a suite of devices that range in price won't allow them to maintain their current market share around 35 million how do you expect to keep console exclusives when owners Helix would be lucky to hit 15 million.

IMO in this climate with A.I even if they had the belief they can become the no.1 ecosystem I don't believe they required time it would take to achieve that if it was even possible.

As others had mentioned Steam OS/Linux is more of an existential threat to Microsoft overall business than PlayStation. So when we're talking about exclusives that would have to include the Windows store as well.

Do you believe that the PC store can get to close to Steams level in the next 2 years when it couldn't in the last 10?

 

[Minari]

Playstation money vs exlusives but no sales cause everyone will play in sloppass

Tough choice knowing how Microsoft is all about money...

 

[DEAD ORIGINAL]

There are tons of people that Microsoft has lost that went to PlayStation, PC, or Nintendo that they'll never get back. If they want to make less money by making exclusives again, it's their funeral. It didn't move the needle during Xbox One or Series X/S, and it won't move it now.

The only exclusive series that's a worth a dam is Forza Horizon, I've had every Xbox console, but left after being disappointed in Starfield and Halo Infinite.