Support NeoGAF

[Bgamer90]

These bizarre posts which claim that Microsoft is heading towards a unified ecosystem and how wonderful that will be are getting surreal.

Again, why? They talked about doing this before the Xbox One launched and this will indeed give new IPs a chance at higher sales which is a good thing for people who want more of them.

As Durante pointed out, Microsoft is still completely lost when it comes to the PC space and how to appeal to those customers. Why would a PC user want to play on Xbox One? These are totally different segments of the market.

Why would a PC user want to play on a console that's being greatly support by multiplats and/or "console exclusives"?

I guess Nintendo is the best at appealing to PC users then. Why are Wii U sales so bad then though?

Microsoft isn't releasing Quantum Break on PC because they want to start serving those customers. They're doing it because these exclusives are bombing at launch and not creating any word of mouth, and that hurts the value of the IPs and the sales momentum of the game.

So it's impossible to be both?

It's bad for partners like Square Enix when they release a new game and it barely sells any copies. People were not happen with the ROTR launch and this is a way to address that.

I wouldn't call more than one million before its PC launch "barely any". But yes, I'm sure that Tomb Raider sales played a role in the timing of this move -- MS was going in this direction regardless though.

 

[Ghost Slayer]

I said what I said because people are acting as if the Xbox one console sales aren't awesome with the PS4 then Xbox is failing and seeing where MS is going, that's not true. That's just part of the story.

Then what's true? All the things you just said they're just personal opinions. Everyone has their right to determine what they fell about console sales, this isn't a fact or anything. If you're hurt when you see everyone has negative posts about X1 sales, may as well skip sales threads.

 

[Catatafish]

I think the main reason people are having had time understanding MS move is the fact that they are still stuck in the hardware Era.

Selling more hardware doesn't mean you are making more money. It simply means you have a larger install base from which you are able to profit from potential larger software sales/royalties. If the same ecosystem system exists between Xbox one and pc (ie Xbox live) then essentially you already won the install base market.

Xbox one becomes just a mini pc, that is very convenient for couch gaming and a reliable piece of hardware that has access to the ecosystem and doesn't need frequent hardware upgrades.

If are an Xbox one owner then this move gives more options. Cross play, crossbuy, gaming on the go, automatic backwards compatibility for future consoles, etc.

If you are a PS4 owner then this move gives you the option to play a game exclusive to xobox live ecosystem, without having to purchase additional hardware. Again more choices for you, the consumer. Same thing applies if you are a PC gamer.


How is that bad for the average consumer?

 

[Self_Destructive]

There's just too many upsides for MS to unify their platforms for them to not do it. A few crying Xbox fanboys means nothing in the grand scheme of things. This is about making Windows 10 more appealing, and fueling adoption, as was DX12. The 2 go hand in hand, and they can't be touting the glorious praises of DX12 and Windows 10 like they have been without throwing support from their biggest gaming brand 'Xbox' to the PC.

Thus we get the Xbox app, a compainion app for people with Xbox Ones. We get PR about how XO will support DX12, planting the seed that the 2 platforms will be unified by more than just the name MS. And finally, we have Phil Spencer, pledging support to the PC.

It's obvious to see that the way forward for the Xbox platform is through unification of all MS devices. Are they at the point yet where they can do it properly? No. As others have said, the Windows 10 store isn't exactly ready for any real significant market adoption. However, they are taking the first steps. I'm sure there was a high level meeting where it was decided that going forward, all major gaming investments would be PC inclusive to help push the Windows 10/Xbox brands. I'm pretty sure the PC releases being day and date or not will be made on a game per game basis based on reception to news such as this.

It really is the best thing for MS. They know where the console space is going, and building a catalog on PC now is in the best interest of the Xbox brand in the future. The have a unique opportunity here, and the time is right to begin the transition starting with Windows 10.

 

[LukasTaves]

I wouldn't bet money on it. They might as well sacrifice it to align their gaming division to their overall strategy. Which is service, not hardware.

Their oval strategy does revolve around launching reference devices that enables the experiences they build though. The major shift seems to be regarding profit, instead of marketshare. They no longer care about marketshare of the single device, they care if they make money on it, the only marketshare they seem to care now is windows as a whole.

These bizarre posts which claim that Microsoft is heading towards a unified ecosystem and how wonderful that will be are getting surreal.

As Durante pointed out, Microsoft is still completely lost when it comes to the PC space and how to appeal to those customers. Why would a PC user want to play on Xbox One? These are totally different segments of the market.

Microsoft isn't releasing Quantum Break on PC because they want to start serving those customers. They're doing it because these exclusives are bombing at launch and not creating any word of mouth, and that hurts the value of the IPs and the sales momentum of the game. It's bad for partners like Square Enix when they release a new game and it barely sells any copies. People were not happen with the ROTR launch and this is a way to address that.

They are adding a choice: You can have all these games on Pc with a more console like experience. That's not for everyone and it's not what many want from Pc gaming, but that's nothing wrong with it. Since steam and the others won't go away that's not an problem at all, if anything can make Pc even a bigger gaming platform.

Though, I would argue that in many ways a more console like experience is what many consumers want. Steam already does a lot of work to bring the experience closer, and there are on going developments to make that even more of the case.

 

[Pantaghana]

Not sure if this is the right thread, but I'm interested in knowing how MS is gonna duplicate XBLG success on PC. What could they possibly do to make PC gamers purchase live subscriptions?

If they want their store to be competitive, it needs 3rd party support and features that make it worth using.
At the moment it has neither.

And absolutely nothing will make PC gamers buy access to MP, we have free alternatives and a paid subscription can't compete with that.

The only subscription I see people buying is for "free" games, like Games with Gold, but even that is of questionable value compared to how far 50$ goes during a Steam sale.

 

[wapplew]

In theory, this big Eco system is great if everything turn out what MS want to be.
The short term effect I saw on the Internet mostly "why buy Xbox" "Xbox lost value" etc.
I don't know sucess this unified Windows store will be, but I highly doubt MS first party alone is enough to make this Eco system attractive enough.

 

[LukasTaves]

Not sure if this is the right thread, but I'm interested in knowing how MS is gonna duplicate XBLG success on PC. What could they possibly do to make PC gamers purchase live subscriptions?

If I were then I would use it to promote their other services.

Like, subscribe to live and get a few songs every month on groove, a few movies/episodes to watch on the movie store, one or two paid apps, games from the store, avatar clothing, as well monthly deals on all those fronts.

And would try to bundle their subscriptions together. Like Office + Live for less than the combined price of those, Live + Groove Pass, Live + Skype and so on (Which could also be an smart move because if you subscribe to both live and groove the free music you receive is kinda already paid by the sub). All with family plans mirroring office which allows you to share with some people.

And some gold exclusives features, like clan support, save state across devices (not just synced saves, but literally saving your state and continuing somewhere else, like an snapshot in emulators), would work with subscription based games to offer discounts or even chose one game at a time to not pay any sub...

I mean, there are many ways to make gold attractive to anyone, it all comes down to how willing they are to doing that.

 

[Trup1aya]

If they want their store to be competitive, it needs 3rd party support and features that make it worth using.
At the moment it has neither.

I can imagine that to many people, the ability to play games they otherwise wouldn't be able to DOES make it worth using.

It's not like you can't play a Windows 10 games if you have steam on your device

And absolutely nothing will make PC gamers buy access to MP, we have free alternatives and a paid subscription can't compete with that.

Xbox live is free on PC

 

[staticneuron]

What I'm saying is: Steam have console like fees for publishers already, but Ms can offer incentives to make their store more attractive to users, and by not having just the win store, but also the xbone being part of the same ecosystem, they have a big card on their sleeves.

If Ms could guarantee that every single game released on xbone (even 3rd party) would have cross buy with the win store version it would more likely increase the market share of their store, specially if they make it work with retail too (a long shot but who knows). In that scenario, where the extra volume would mean more profit they could lower the fees so more developers supported the store.

On the publisher side, since we are talking about millions of potential sales, a small reduction in fees would more than compensate for the people that double dip, so they would have a financial reason to support cross buy as well.

All I'm saying is, if Ms really wants the win store to be successful, they have all the cards on their hands, they just need to be aggressive and make the store competitive.

We will be finding out really soon though. Ms has many talks on GDC regarding win10 as gaming platform that spans across pc, xbox, phone and holo lens, including one dedicated to the store where they will talk about "innovative new business opportunities that benefit how you want to sell your games and how customers want to buy them".

Again I am not sure how or why you think cross buy would make any third party happy even with a reduction of licensing fees for the XB1. Cross buy is great for gamers, not really third party publishers. I am pretty sure third party publishers are ok with you paying twice for the same content despite the fee they may have to pay on console side.

That's not true, all digital stores on PC takes a fee as well.

I see I need to explain this to you. On the XB1 when you purchase a game, any game, for the system either on disc or digitally you are essentially giving more money to MS. Licensing and possible marketplace fees are included. On the PC, because there are other store fronts games can be sold and played without MS ever seeing that extra source of revenue. Meaning even if MS brings their exclusives to the PC, this doesn't mean they will make more money off of this move because people can just purchase and play the exclusive thorough whatever means MS wants.... then go play the third party titles using any other competing store front.

 

[Zedox]

Then what's true? All the things you just said they're just personal opinions. Everyone has their right to determine what they fell about console sales, this isn't a fact or anything. If you're hurt when you see everyone has negative posts about X1 sales, may as well skip sales threads.

Hurt? No. I don't care for those threads and I don't go in them. Right now, because of what mattered to some gamers in the console space was how many units something sold because it was all about the device, the console. It makes sense. But how MS is positioning themselves, the Xbox one is just part of the story. The other part will be in the future what they get from PC gamers, HoloLens gamers, windows phones (lol) gamers, etc... Basically all the gamers from all the devices that run on Windows 10.

People stated the loss of an Xbox One sale since gamers can use their PCs to buy the game (note, that they'll have to use Windows 10 store for those exclusive games). That loss is meaningless as MS isn't really losing anything.

 

[wapplew]

I think the main reason people are having had time understanding MS move is the fact that they are still stuck in the hardware Era.

Selling more hardware doesn't mean you are making more money. It simply means you have a larger install base from which you are able to profit from potential larger software sales/royalties. If the same ecosystem system exists between Xbox one and pc (ie Xbox live) then essentially you already won the install base market.

Its not hard to fully understand MS move and all, it's not new concept or anything, MS want one App Store to rule them all.
But making Xbox and Windows into one App Store doesn't automatically make you the biggest install base because Windows store is not the exclusive store on PC, it might be the lease used store on PC.
Making MS first party available on it won't automatically make it the top player.

 

[ironcreed]

I can imagine that to many people, the ability to play games they otherwise wouldn't be able to DOES make it worth using.

It's not like you can't play a Windows 10 games if you have steam on your device

That is kind of the way I see it. I mean, they are getting the games and will be able to play them. Is that not better than not getting them at all? They are gaining something.

 

[thekiddfran]

It isn't bad for Xbox gamers but it just lessens the incentive for people to buy the Xbox one.

I wanted an Xbox one for Quantum break and gears 4.

Now I know the two games will most likely come to PC so no need for me to buy one.

I just saved myself loads of money, thanks Microsoft

 

[Zedox]

That is kind of the way I see it. I mean, they are getting the games and will be able to play them. Is that not better than not getting them at all? They are gaining something.

Go look at the "Quantum Break is not coming to Steam" and you'll see how many people aren't satisfied with just being able to play the game. So to answer your question, for some, no, that's not enough.

 

[jelly]

Xbox live is free on PC

That's the problem. It isn't a case of sort of like Xbox Live here and there like GWFL. Microsoft are giving the exact feature set away for free on PC when they charge console owners for the same thing. They can't blur the lines between both platforms and say lol console suckers. Something has to give and keeping online behind a paywall has to be one of them because PC players are unlikely to pay for that privilege. Gold subs need to be something else without online play behind a pay wall.

 

[ironcreed]

Go look at the "Quantum Break is not coming to Steam" and you'll see how many people aren't satisfied with just being able to play the game. So to answer your question, for some, no, that's not enough.

Yes, that is actually where my comment stems from. I have read that thread, I just chose to stay away for the most part as I am a console guy. Being able to just play the game is enough for me, lol. As that is kind of the point to begin with.

 

[Pantaghana]

I can imagine that to many people, the ability to play games they otherwise wouldn't be able to DOES make it worth using.

It's not like you can't play a Windows 10 games if you have steam on your device


Xbox live is free on PC

I'm saying what it needs to have in order to be a successful gaming platform. It has a few exclusives, people will buy those and nothing else.
2-3 games a year will be barely visible from a profit standpoint.

Is Games with Gold part of that free Xbox Live? Does that mean I get free games just because I'm using Win10?

That person asked how can you sell a subscription on PC.

For MP, you simply can't.

If you want to sell a subscription on PC it needs to have something that people will consider to have good value for money.

 

[LukasTaves]

Again I am not sure how or why you think cross buy would make any third party happy even with a reduction of licensing fees for the XB1. Cross buy is great for gamers, not really third party publishers. I am pretty sure third party publishers are ok with you paying twice for the same content despite the fee they may have to pay on console side.

Because they care about money. And the logic is quite simple:

If money from incentives > Money from double purchases they will support it.

It shouldn't be hard for a game with the potential to sells millions to overcome how much they gain from double dipping (because let's be honest, the sales are definitely bigger than 0, but the extreme majority of users only pay for their games once).

I see I need to explain this to you. On the XB1 when you purchase a game, any game, for the system either on disc or digitally you are essentially giving more money to MS. Licensing and possible marketplace fees are included. On the PC, because there are other store fronts games can be sold and played without MS ever seeing that extra source of revenue. Meaning even if MS brings their exclusives to the PC, this doesn't mean they will make more money off of this move because people can just purchase and play the exclusive thorough whatever means MS wants.... then go play the third party titles using any other competing store front.

Okay, I misunderstood you then, but the point I'm making is: Ms is not just releasing exclusive games on Pc, they are releasing them on their platform, and they have all the motives to offer incentives for gamers to purchase content on that store.

What I'm saying is that if they offer cross buy, even for 3rd party titles, the store sales (which Ms does get a cut) will be bigger. I'm not sure they will, but they have every reason to. Offering incentives for users to buy games on their store gets them more money and they have aggressive competition which is year ahead regarding content, so they need to go balls nuts to have a fighting chance.

A strong platform (and by platform I mean the MS store) means more games, which means more sales, and if the platform becomes big enough even hardware sales because people will buy devices that can access that platform.

 

[metareferential]

Not sure if this is the right thread, but I'm interested in knowing how MS is gonna duplicate XBLG success on PC. What could they possibly do to make PC gamers purchase live subscriptions?

Nothing.

Unless the subscription becomes something like a flat-rate that gives you new releases for free.

Which is equivalent to say "Microsoft gives you money". So, absurd and impossible.

The Store needs to open to third parties (both games and other programs/injectors/utilitiess), games should be treated as regular .exe, and we need complete control over our hardware (no SLI? Are you kidding me?), and so on.

It won't happen though; some games will then migrate to Steam, some will be lost and stuck in a limbo forever (Gears pc anyone?).

All they care is their ecosystem, they want it to become an AppStore like Apple's.

But they still don't understand they're 15 years late on that.

It's a shame, 'cause I love Win10.

 

[a.wd]

That's the problem. It isn't a case of sort of like Xbox Live here and there like GWFL. Microsoft are giving the exact feature set away for free on PC when they charge console owners for the same thing. They can't blur the lines between both platforms and say lol console suckers. Something has to give and keeping online behind a paywall has to one of them because PC players are unlikely to pay for that privilege. Gold subs need to something else without online play behind a pay wall.

Even if I had day and date pc games I would still own an xb1. Why? Because it does things my pc doesn't while still playing games. There is no blurring of the platforms, they are all ms platforms just the way they serve you can be different and offer different things.

 

[Bgamer90]

It isn't bad for Xbox gamers but it just lessens the incentive for people to buy the Xbox one.

...If those people are PC gamers. The majority of console gamers are not (again based on multiplats that are available on PC selling so well on consoles) so nothing is really lost here.

I can understand it seeming that way if you are someone who plays on multiple platforms but many console players only see/care about things within the console space.

Also, if more new IPs come to the Xbox thanks to this move causing more game sales, then that would actually increase the incentive for people who only care about console gaming to buy an Xbox.

There's really nothing negative about this move if you are a strictly a console gamer. Either it's going to cause things to remain similar, or it's going to cause an increase in the amount of games to play.

 

[gamz]

The only problem is paying for xbox live. Why would it be free on PC and not on the Console.

 

[Pantaghana]

The only problem is paying for xbox live. Why would it be free on PC and not on the Console.

They tried paywalling multiplayer on PC once, it failed. Miserably.
Trying again would just make them a laughingstock in the PC space. Again.

 

[rakkadakka]

Why would a PC user want to play on Xbox One? These are totally different segments of the market.

Well as a PC user who has an Xbox in his living room I can tell you that the idea of being able to transition between thw two without resorting to streaming is pretty awesome.

Why would I want to have that opportunity for basically no extra cost? Gee I wonder.

Now if its enough to get a PC user to buy a Xbox then who knows. Probably not, but at the very least they're selling more copies of new ips they've invested in.

I swear to god its a minority of people who are looking at this and seeing it as a net positive rather than the worst thing for Xbox owners or some kind of desperate play.

 

[wapplew]

By the way, do we have any success story about unified Eco system across devices with different input method yet?

 

[Atomski]

If this was something Sony truly believed in they would be doing it with their own major IPs and first party studios. I see those PC versions as just concessions made as part of the negotiations.

I think the more accurate way to say this is, Sony doesn't want to buy full exclusivity for those 3rd party games. They see PC as a minor threat to console gaming, for now.

Sony doesn't earn a single cent on those 3rd party PC titles (SF5, Shenmue 3 etc). They just secured console exclusivity to gain potential market share.

Im more saying its a gain for the developer. Sony cant make a sweet enough of a deal to block them from going PC.

That said feel like its just a matter of time. Sony Mobile published Helldivers on PC just recently and it seemed to sell well. Been lots of rumors of Everyone going to the rapture hitting steam to which was co developed by a sony studio.

Yeah i doubt we will ever see stuff like Uncharted but i think many realize smaller indie like titles are dumb as console only exclusives.

 

[LukasTaves]

By the way, do we have any success story about unified Eco system across devices with different input method yet?

The windows 10

It finally gets that one UI to rule them all doesn't really get you anywhere, and instead enables you with minimal effort to create a single application that adapts to the device.

The universal platform is quite powerful in that sense, you can "sense" on which device family you app is running and in which state, and you can either make UI adjustments on each case or even declare completely independent UIs.

And it's not just about screen size and input either, an app for instance can know if it's running on a desktop, or in a phone docked, and offer for instance UI for extra functionality you know that are just present on phones.

And using W10 on either my surface and the phone ever since the preview become available I can tell you this: They nailed the UI on both desktop and phone, it never feels out of place, and the apps themselves are much more capable and fast than their win 8 equivalents.

 

[wapplew]

The windows 10

It finally gets that one UI to rule them all doesn't really get you anywhere, and instead enables you with minimal effort to create a single application that adapts to the device.

The universal platform is quite powerful in that sense, you can "sense" on which device family you app is running and in which state, and you can either make UI adjustments on each case or even declare completely independent UIs.

And it's not just about screen size and input either, an app for instance can know if it's running on a desktop, or in a phone docked, and offer for instance UI for extra functionality you know that are just present on phones.

And using W10 on either my surface and the phone ever since the preview become available I can tell you this: They nailed the UI on both desktop and phone, it never feels out of place, and the apps themselves are much more capable and fast than their win 8 equivalents.

Sound super cool. Shame that Windows phone doesn't take off because MS late to the party.
It's hard to change people habit sometimes. I see a lot of app available on the store but most user just download the win32 programs in other places and never bother to try the store.

 

[Trup1aya]

That's the problem. It isn't a case of sort of like Xbox Live here and there like GWFL. Microsoft are giving the exact feature set away for free on PC when they charge console owners for the same thing. They can't blur the lines between both platforms and say lol console suckers. Something has to give and keeping online behind a paywall has to be one of them because PC players are unlikely to pay for that privilege. Gold subs need to be something else without online play behind a pay wall.

What do you think console gamers are just gonna stop paying for live because they know about what PC gamers are getting?

I think we all understand that depending on the hardware you choose, your costs will vary.

I'm saying what it needs to have in order to be a successful gaming platform. It has a few exclusives, people will buy those and nothing else.
2-3 games a year will be barely visible from a profit standpoint.

Is Games with Gold part of that free Xbox Live? Does that mean I get free games just because I'm using Win10?

That person asked how can you sell a subscription on PC.

For MP, you simply can't.

If you want to sell a subscription on PC it needs to have something that people will consider to have good value for money.

Sure it has a long way to go before it can be considered a replacement to steam, but they don't need to do that to be successful.

They just need people to buy a lot of stuff from their store. Every dollar spent in the windows store is a dollar not spent elsewhere. Origin succesful being the only place to buy EA titles, for example.

No games with gold is not included in free XBL on PC.

 

[staticneuron]

Because they care about money. And the logic is quite simple:

If money from incentives > Money from double purchases they will support it.

It shouldn't be hard for a game with the potential to sells millions to overcome how much they gain from double dipping (because let's be honest, the sales are definitely bigger than 0, but the extreme majority of users only pay for their games once).

If it worked like that and that was a viable option the XB1 would have a ton more exclusives then it already have. The idea that people may not double dip or even triple dip or the idea that mere incentives could offset an entire unit sale then the situation would be the exact opposite with console exclusives and the PS4. The XB1 logically should have more exclusives and all third parties would hop on the cross platform purchase.

I doubt anything like that is remotely true because the publishers aren't doing this for charity. If they found this to be well worth it they would have done it already.

Okay, I misunderstood you then, but the point I'm making is: Ms is not just releasing exclusive games on Pc, they are releasing them on their platform, and they have all the motives to offer incentives for gamers to purchase content on that store.

What I'm saying is that if they offer cross buy, even for 3rd party titles, the store sales (which Ms does get a cut) will be bigger. I'm not sure they will, but they have every reason to. Offering incentives for users to buy games on their store gets them more money and they have aggressive competition which is year ahead regarding content, so they need to go balls nuts to have a fighting chance.

A strong platform (and by platform I mean the MS store) means more games, which means more sales, and if the platform becomes big enough even hardware sales because people will buy devices that can access that platform.

That is backwards. No matter how big the platform is, that doesn't mean you go out and buy the hardware for literally no driving reason. If all people wanted was something that could connect to the TV, they could purchase Alienware alpha and run it in desktop mode or build their own compact gaming PC.

When talking about sales from store you also omitted licensing fees for console. Those simply do not happen on the PC side and there is nothing you suggest to offset those. The truth is, if that were enough and if it was viable then the XB1 simply wouldn't exist. If the brand didn't bring them money with the way it was designed they would have very different financial reports.

I have no idea where you are getting this idea that somehow people will flock to the Win 10 store versus steam, origin or uplay, because of cross buy, if they do not own the XB1. Even if they did own the XB1 again, how can you explain how these magical "incentives" benefit third parties over actual full unit purchase on individual platforms. Short of MS paying these companies for potential unit sales or dropping certain fees entirely, it doesn't make much sense. In the end, someone is going to be on the losing end of this equation.

 

[Black Mantis]

That's the problem. It isn't a case of sort of like Xbox Live here and there like GWFL. Microsoft are giving the exact feature set away for free on PC when they charge console owners for the same thing. They can't blur the lines between both platforms and say lol console suckers. Something has to give and keeping online behind a paywall has to be one of them because PC players are unlikely to pay for that privilege. Gold subs need to be something else without online play behind a pay wall.

Given that GwG exists only on the Xbox, it's not exactly the same thing.

 

[Arzehn]

Sorry OP, I can't agree. There is no positive for Xbox owners.

PC Gamer or not, this is once again a negative narrative that Xbox has to deal with. "Xbox has no exclusives", this is what people will hear on social media, from gamestop clerks, reddits, and from friends.

This narrative doesn't matter for the casual consumer? Tell that to the Xbox One launch. There are people who still think it's an always online box that spies on them. They're still getting over this and now it will be the system without exclusives - might as well go with the other box.

I see some people mentioned this means more money for a potential sequel. That's not the reason they're doing this, the reason is to drive Windows 10 adoption and please Phil Spencer's boss and reassure him the games division is doing their part for the Windows ecosystem. This game will not make meanful revenue on W10 that will greenlight a sequel, it will likely just cover the costs of having a good port. Remember this is Windows 10 NOT Steam.

3rd party devs will want to work on W10 and Xbox exclusives? No, they would much rather work with Sony on PS4/Steam deals. W10 is peanuts compared to Steam at this time.

I'm mostly a PC/PS Gamer but often own other consoles for exclusives. Xbox games on PC is only good news for me, but come on man, good for Xbox gamers? The only good news is that Xbox gamers can transition to PC with their achievements intact.

 

[diaspora]

Sorry OP, I can't agree. There is no positive for Xbox owners.

PC Gamer or not, this is once again a negative narrative that Xbox has to deal with. "Xbox has no exclusives", this is what people will hear on social media, from gamestop clerks, reddits, and from friends.

This narrative doesn't matter for the casual consumer? Tell that to the Xbox One launch. There are people who still think it's an always online box that spies on them. They're still getting over this and now it will be the system without exclusives - might as well go with the other box.

I see some people mentioned this means more money for a potential sequel. That's not the reason they're doing this, the reason is to drive Windows 10 adoption and please Phil Spencer's boss and reassure him the games division is doing their part for the Windows ecosystem. This game will not make meanful revenue on W10 that will greenlight a sequel, it will likely just cover the costs of having a good port. Remember this is Windows 10 NOT Steam.

3rd party devs will want to work on W10 and Xbox exclusives? No, they would much rather work with Sony on PS4/Steam deals. W10 is peanuts compared to Steam at this time.

I'm mostly a PC/PS Gamer but often own other consoles for exclusives. W10 games are only good news for me, but come on man, good for Xbox gamers? The only good news is that Xbox gamers can transition to PC with their achievements intact.

Xbox owners get a free license to play the game on another hardware platform at their convenience.

 

[Arzehn]

Xbox owners get a free license to play the game on another hardware platform at their convenience.

If I'm not mistaken, that is a limited time pre-order bonus is it not?

 

[diaspora]

If I'm not mistaken, that is a limited time pre-order bonus is it not?

Sure, and with it comes AFAIK, cross-saves, again, allowing Xbox owners to play on any Windows machine they want with some level of continuity.

 

[jelly]

What do you think console gamers are just gonna stop paying for live because they know about what PC gamers are getting?

I think we all understand that depending on the hardware you choose, your costs will vary.



Sure it has a long way to go before it can be considered a replacement to steam, but they don't need to do that to be successful.

They just need people to buy a lot of stuff from their store. Every dollar spent in the windows store is a dollar not spent elsewhere. Origin succesful being the only place to buy EA titles, for example.

No games with gold is not included in free XBL on PC.

No but doesn't make it right. XBL across console and PC are more similar than ever. It will be interesting to see if there is any reaction if Microsoft don't change Gold features.

Given that GwG exists only on the Xbox, it's not exactly the same thing.

Lets not kid ourselves, vast majority of people buy Gold to play online. GwG was oh do we have to from Microsoft as they were given customers sod all else for years and laughing. Sony was doing well with PS+ which must have been a factor. If you're going to buy a sub, it looked more of value.

 

[Bgamer90]

Sorry OP, I can't agree. There is no positive for Xbox owners.

More new IPs due to less risk, and free crossplay/games isn't a positive?

PC Gamer or not, this is once again a negative narrative that Xbox has to deal with. "Xbox has no exclusives", this is what people will hear on social media, from gamestop clerks, reddits, and from friends.

1. You said no positive for "Xbox Owners" -- Xbox Owners already own the system so why would they care about what others have to say as long as these owners have games to constantly play?

2. "PS4 has no exclusives" was also a popular saying in those same parts. Heck, Sony even PUBLICLY stated that their 1st party line-up in 2015 was "sparse". It didn't matter though (since again) people who are buying consoles mainly care about there being enough good popular games they want to play -- whether exclusive or not.

This narrative doesn't matter for the casual consumer? Tell that to the Xbox One launch. There are people who still think it's an always online box that spies on them. They're still getting over this and now it will be the system without exclusives - might as well go with the other box.

Heh, this news is causing "controversy" within small circles of people who care far more about gaming (and/or "list wars") than the typical console gamer.

The DRM news hit mainstream media. I don't think CNN is going to report on Quantum Break going from a true exclusive to a console exclusive. Relax.

I see some people mentioned this means more money for a potential sequel. That's not the reason they're doing this, the reason is to drive Windows 10 adoption and please Phil Spencer's boss and reassure him the games division is doing their part for the Windows ecosystem.

Why are some people saying this as if it can't be both (more sales for a new IP on top of getting people into Microsoft's ecosystem)?

This game will not make meanful revenue on W10 that will greenlight a sequel, it will likely just cover the costs of having a good port. Remember this is Windows 10 NOT Steam.

We don't know this yet since the game isn't out yet.

I'm mostly a PC/PS Gamer but often own other consoles for exclusives. Xbox games on PC is only good news for me, but come on man, good for Xbox gamers? The only good news is that Xbox gamers can transition to PC with their achievements intact.

Heh, this is so shortsighted. How is it bad for Xbox gamers when game sales show that many of them (and PS4 gamers for that matter) only care about what's happening in the console gaming space? How does this negatively impact them in any way? If they only care about the console gaming space then these games are still pretty much true exclusives for them.

This move will cause things to be less risky for new IPs. If more "console exclusive" new IPs come to the Xbox from this -- regardless of them being on PC too -- then how is that a bad thing for a large group of gamers who statistically don't even care about PC gaming?

 

[Arzehn]

Sure, and with it comes AFAIK, cross-saves, again, allowing Xbox owners to play on any Windows machine they want with some level of continuity.

Perhaps true for this one game for those who pre-ordered it. What about Recore, Gears, etc?

Also, it's an excellent way to obfuscate the Windows 10 games sales numbers and make it seem like a major success.

 

[Ushay]

Not sure if this is the right thread, but I'm interested in knowing how MS is gonna duplicate XBLG success on PC. What could they possibly do to make PC gamers purchase live subscriptions?

Not a clue.

PC gamers are some of the most difficult to please gamers out there, demanding the best visuals, audio etc which naturally comes with the territory. So whatever it is MS intends to do to ensure this segment remains profitable and grows.. It better be something that impresses and offers phenomenal value for money.

 

[Mulgrok]

I see this as an opportunity for MS to improve controller compatibility and functionality on PCs. Controllers always had spotty support from games until the GFW push to include 360 controller support. A unified ecosystem can only improve upon that.

Not a clue.

PC gamers are some of the most difficult to please gamers out there, demanding the best visuals, audio etc which naturally comes with the territory. So whatever it is MS intends to do to ensure this segment remains profitable and grows.. It better be something that impresses and offers phenomenal value for money.

That is a very vocal minority of PC gamers. Most just want games that play great and are bug free.

 

[balohna]

I agree with the OP, giving more options to buy the same games isn't a bad thing. MS must know console hardware sales will drop a bit due to this, and they must have decided it was worth it.

Plus, console loyalties aren't as iron clad as console warriors think. The next Xbox might be the number one console next gen for any number of reasons, and I don't think having 0 true exclusives would even matter to the average consumer. And even if the PS5 dominates next gen, the W10 store will hopefully keep MS game studios busy and profitable. I don't expect MS to overtake Steam, but I'd be perfectly happy to use an alternate storefront to get a good game. Especially if it lets me not have to buy new hardware to play that same game.

 

[PetulantChild]

I just really hope that MS is smart about their strategy of seemingly fusing PC and Xbox, especially when it comes to cross buy, cross play, and Gold subscription. Also for the love of god let us use KB+M on games on the Xbox and don't listen to the whiners crying that they are getting wrecked online like they did with Shadowrun.

 

[DeepEnigma]

That is a very vocal minority of PC gamers. Most just want games that play great and are bug free.

What? The same "vocal minority" that got them to drop it in the first place?

Come on man, lol.

 

[Pantaghana]

Not a clue.

PC gamers are some of the most difficult to please gamers out there, demanding the best visuals, audio etc which naturally comes with the territory. So whatever it is MS intends to do to ensure this segment remains profitable and grows.. It better be something that impresses and offers phenomenal value for money.

The only thing PC gamers demand are well done ports, meaning graphics options, control remapping and support of arbitrary resolutions and framerates.
Things that would be nice and help the longevity of a game are player hosted dedicated servers and mod support.

Of the things listed, the only thing that is expensive and difficult to implement is mod support.

 

[Trup1aya]

No but doesn't make it right. XBL across console and PC are more similar than ever. It will be interesting to see if there is any reaction if Microsoft don't change Gold features.



Lets not kid ourselves, vast majority of people buy Gold to play online. GwG was oh do we have to from Microsoft as they were given customers sod all else for years and laughing. Sony was doing well with PS+ which must have been a factor. If you're going to buy a sub, it looked more of value.

This has nothing to do with Right or wrong? If people want to avoid paying for Xbox live, they can build a PC...

MS will be happy either way.

Console gamers have more people to populate their online games

PC gamers have more AAA games to play.

This is bad for no one.

 

[Arzehn]

How is it bad for Xbox gamers when game sales show that many of them (and PS4 gamers for that matter) only care about what's happening in the console gaming space? How does this negatively impact them in any way? If they only care about the console gaming space then these games are still pretty much true exclusives for them.

Maybe they have a friend who's a PC gamer that they want to play The Division with on their Xbox, it's easier to justify spending $350 to play with your friend when there's other exclusive benefits.

MS has more to prove than Sony does, their situations aren't that comparable. Perception matters, we might think console/list wars are stupid but those are the type of people who spread a narrative on various websites and social media that can impact the perception of a product.

As for the rest of what you're saying with the new IPs, it sounds like you have more confidence than I do in the sales of Windows 10 games. Will have to wait and see on that one.

I agree that no positives was a bit much, I actually do think there are some benefits. I was mainly thinking about QB when I posted. Specifically, I think games like Killer Instinct will benefit from a bigger playing pool and there's no mouse/keyboard advantage there.

 

[Bgamer90]

Maybe they have a friend who's a PC gamer that they want to play The Division with on their Xbox, it's easier to justify spending $350 to play with your friend when there's other exclusive benefits.

I can understand this -- I don't think it's a big deal considering the top multiplayer console games before this move will more than likely be exactly the same after this move. But yeah, if you are a PC gamer then the "pill to swallow" in buying a console to play with IRL friends is a bit bigger with fewer exclusives.

MS has more to prove than Sony does, their situations aren't that comparable. Perception matters, we might think console/list wars are stupid but those are the type of people who spread a narrative on various websites and social media that can impact the perception of a product.

Well that's the thing, there's a lot of "dirt" on all three current gen consoles depending on where you go.

Sony is in the spot its currently in thanks largely due to the Playstation brand's worldwide popularity and the fact that the Xbox One had an absolutely horrible PR build-up to launch.

It's definitely better to have positive word of mouth than negative word of mouth but when it comes to game libraries, it's obvious that the multiplats are overshadowing the "your console has no worthwhile exclusives" talk.

As for the rest of what you're saying with the new IPs, it sounds like you have more confidence than I do in the sales of Windows 10 games. Will have to wait and see on that one.

Agree about the wait and see. I don't think we will automatically see a bunch of new Xbox IPs but the possibility of that happening is higher now in comparison to if MS didn't make this cross platform push.

I agree that no positives was a bit much, I actually do think there are some benefits. I was mainly thinking about QB when I posted. Specifically, I think games like Killer Instinct will benefit from a bigger playing pool and there's no mouse/keyboard advantage there.

Good point. It's mainly the MP shooters that you have to question when it comes to this. I'm sure they'll have some plans for different lobbies and settings based on input.

 

[Walpurgis]

I have to admit, if I chose Xbone over PS4, I would not be happy about this. For me, the primary reason to own a console is its exclusives. This is the reason why I am extremely disappointed with the Vita. For others, this doesn't matter and that's fine but it matters a lot to me. I would hope that Microsoft does something for their fans acknowledging that this does matter to a lot of people. Some things that they can do are making Xbox Live free and making the Xbox instant game collection better (like the PS3 golden age).

Since I have a PC, this is good news for me. As a PS4 owner there are some good looking Xbox games that I can play now (Scalebound, Crackdown, Gears 4, Halo 5 - assuming they all go to PC). I guess this is good for MS since they will see money that they could never see from me before.

I don't know what Microsoft's plan is and I don't know where they'll go from here but I think their recent announcement that they will no longer provide sales numbers and will only provide "engagement numbers" is a signal that they don't care too much about the Xbox hardware but care more about Xbox as a platform.

 

[Walpurgis]

How is it bad for Xbox gamers when game sales show that many of them (and PS4 gamers for that matter) only care about what's happening in the console gaming space? How does this negatively impact them in any way? If they only care about the console gaming space then these games are still pretty much true exclusives for them.

This is true. There won't be an influx of people who were going to buy the Xbone but aren't anymore because they can just use their PC. I don't believe that there is much overlap between console gaming and PC gaming. In my experience, people either use a console or a PC. And for most console gamers, PC gaming is not an option - it's too daunting and takes too much research and effort to set up and maintain. The biggest negative from this decision is that it hurts Xbone fans on the internet and is a huge blow to them in the console wars.

There are some people that have a gaming PC, and some PC gamers who end up buying consoles at the end of a gen for exclusives, that this effects but their numbers are probably negligible.