Microsoft Releasing Exclusive Games on PC Is Great for Xbox Owners
- Thread starter dancrane212
- Start date
Yeah, I was referring more like a steam, where all the big publishers will put their games there.
therealbigrich
Member
I got to be honest with you I'm reading a lot of speculation that without current hard facts its hard to really believe. You could be absolutely right or absolutely wrong with out hard facts its hard to know. I am sure the return on investment on windows phone has been much worse and they haven't dropped support yet . Add to the fact that they are matching what they did with 360 with out nearly the disaster .I'm sure the higher ups can see the are getting better at creating a system that has a chunk of the living room .
I agree the X1 is coasting along but mainly because I don't think there is anything they can do to improve its position drastically . They will be getting the same games they would of gotten if not more . I would have to say doing this increases the chance they try again an a console that's more windows integrated with less risk taking but I definitely see them trying again. I think they had the blueprint with the 360 and decided to go a different direction . It wouldn't be hard to make a console that would sale imo
Well, I doubt EA or Ubisoft will ever publish games there because they have there own PC stores. and currently, there isn't too much incentive for large third parties to jump in.
But if the next Xbox is simply a cheap Win10 dx12 box, and MS' "code once" vision materializes, developers will be putting their game into the Win10 store by default.
I'm going to try to get on your terms looking at this, so here it goes.
Any business analyst would look at three things in the context of a business: Revenue, Profitability, and Risk. For MS you could say their core business of Windows (one of the major three pillars) is about increasing revenue, maximizing profitability, and reducing risk in the OS market.
Knowing they are trying to grow Windows, having at least some awareness of the proliferation of Android and iOS, with the foresight to imagine those OS and the devices they're on will continue enabling richer experiences across more screens, are you really suggesting they will give up a screen where they are seeing moderate success? A screen which both Apple and Google, their two biggest rivals, are increasing investments to grab more consumers to increase the revenue of their App Stores to the tune of tens of billions per year, marketplaces we've seen grow in consumer demand, with high margins. You also know, because you're a smart analyst, that gaming is the biggest category in terms of time spent and revenue for those respective marketplaces.
We know Microsoft is not hurting for cash and they just started a new push for their UWA platform. They're trying to get as many people into their Windows Store and they have a built-in audience of about 200 million PCs/laptops/tablets and 20 million Xbox Ones once they unify their stores with the upcoming Redstone release. You also know from the PS4's recent success that there is still a very healthy console market, seemingly driven to record heights early on without any compelling exclusive software but a huge vehicle for third-party games. You also know there is a growing market for digital licenses, which have an even higher margin over their physical counterparts.
Knowing all of that you'd recommend they dump the console market?
You wouldn't even explore the opportunities of how to make a console work in the Windows family. Just walk away?
Really?
Given these things MS now knows:
- Consoles are extremely capital intensive
- For that capital it has a low ROI
- The market is not tolerant of things which may change the low ROI
- Momentum of one generation is easily lost
- Being #2 #3 is substantially less profitable
I think they'd opt to do what Google and Apple are doing rather than what Sony and Nintendo are doing.
Consoles have low profitability, low growth, and high demands. They can take their lessons and have a head start on Google/Apple vs trying again with Sony/Nintendo.
Good businesses know when to walk away.
I mean does opening up the platforms of their first party is not a positive development for the XB1 (for MS it's tough to say, they will likely make more money).
Will that translate to a future lack of support? That's were we're both speculating and I don't think it a positive sign.
Good post and agreed on all points for consideration. Thank you.
I believe that what Google and Apple are doing leads to them getting the same third-party support Nintendo and Sony are getting inside of the next 15 years.
I think if MS plays their cards right on the next console and with UWA then they can still come out a big player in the console market, have their OS growth, and a healthy Windows Store. The most telling signs will be how much traction they get from devs for the Windows Store over the next 2 years as they try to close in on 1 billion Windows installations by summer 2018. If that doesn't translate to more Windows Store revenue and developer support then I think there will be some big changes at MS, but I highly doubt they retreat back to the console only market.
Bitch Pudding
Member
"Price", "convenience" and "online friends" , that pretty much sums it up. People who think "exclusive games don't matter (anymore)" will soon learn their lesson.
Can't wait to see QB numbers. Let's see if it bombs because most are switching to PC.
Let us see.
Bitch Pudding
Member
It's hard to tell with QB, next to Forza this is one of my most anticipated XBOX One games and I hope they are rewarded for coming up with a new IP.
GHG
Member
No, what you should be looking at is console sales from here on out more than anything.
What do you mean, QB is the perfect example. Big AAA with massive appeal. It's the perfect storm. A game that everyone wants releasing on PC in addition to a platform that seemingly so few want.
You're not trying to discount it, are you?
Bitch Pudding
Member
It was my impression that QB failed to build up a significant pre-sales momentum on "perfect storm level" when it comes to news, articles and especially positive feedback from the community so far. With the end of the NDA this may change now, a lot of people on youtube for example liked the cemetery trailer.
I for one think that QB on XBOX One will sell more copies than any other Non-Halo exclusive so far (on XBOX One alone, that is), but I also heard voices saying that it might not meet expectations (sales-wise).
I wonder what sales expectations on Xbox one were/are. The short, linear single player experience is a rarity in the console space these days and I think a lot of that has to do with perceived replay value.
Still, I think the xb1 version has the potential to be the best selling non-halo title so far this gen (until uncharted 4 drops).
Still, it looks like it was damn expensive to make. That might be where the high expectations stem from. With PC sales included, we'll here some PR about how it's the biggest new exclusive IP of the generation.
DRM was good for X1 owners due to developers making more money until it wasn't.
$500 was good for X1 owners due to MS making more money and not being a loss leader thus more money can go to exclusives like Ryse and DR3 until it wasn't.
Bundling Kinect was good for X1 owners because that meant developers could use it in all their games since it was standard until they didn't.
You can analyze any situation and come up with a positive outcome that doesn't mean it will happen.
MS wants their store to be big and profitable like Google, Apple and Valve. But when I look at those stores the owners don't make very many games. Yes in the short term releasing games on x1/PC probably makes more money than just X1 but letting others sell games on your store front without any investment from the first party holder is even more profitable long term. Letting third parties take the risk and just collecting your share is the ultimate play. We could even see that in the later years of 360's life.
$500 was good for X1 owners due to MS making more money and not being a loss leader thus more money can go to exclusives like Ryse and DR3 until it wasn't.
Bundling Kinect was good for X1 owners because that meant developers could use it in all their games since it was standard until they didn't.
You can analyze any situation and come up with a positive outcome that doesn't mean it will happen.
MS wants their store to be big and profitable like Google, Apple and Valve. But when I look at those stores the owners don't make very many games. Yes in the short term releasing games on x1/PC probably makes more money than just X1 but letting others sell games on your store front without any investment from the first party holder is even more profitable long term. Letting third parties take the risk and just collecting your share is the ultimate play. We could even see that in the later years of 360's life.
http://www.windowscentral.com/quantum-break-coming-pc-good-xbox-brand
Basically sums up a lot of what some people have been saying here.
Basically sums up a lot of what some people have been saying here.
How do any of those examples compare to more people having the ability to play games though? Kinect was a big cause of the $500 price, and DRM was not good for many -- especially people who didn't have solid internet connections.
These two examples held console gamers back from being able to play games. This Xbox/PC push does not do that in any way.
Not sure if I completely understand where you are coming from (I may be missing the point) but yeah, all console makers want more people tied to their digital stores. They realize that more people will have the ability to give them money directly this way.
It will be seen as a negative either way:
* Big PC numbers & Low Xbox numbers = Console Forsaken, MS PC Only Future, Time to sell Xboxen
* Low PC numbers & Big Xbox numbers = MS store is a flop, PC is Steam, MS hates PC gamers
I am sure MS only cares is Xbox + PC sales = increased sales, but it will make for an entertaining thread non-the-less.
My point is that those initiatives were argued by many to be positive for X1 owners. Turns out in reality they weren't. Maybe they could of been but you never know how different plans will turn out.
To your second question the point is that MS would rather not have to make any first party games if they didn't have to. The premise of the thread is that this will lead to more 1st party games but looking at Google apple and valve that doesn't appear to be the case. The only picture being painted is the idea that hardware cost money so MS makes more money selling software but software also cost money and cost more and more each generation. The ultimate profit scenario is always less investment more returns. I don't see why a successful MS store guarantees more game investment when looking at the storefronts that are already successful.
To your second point...competition. Sony, Nintendo, Steam, Google, Apple, Amazon, etc...they are all not standing still. 3rd parties will be yours up until something else great comes along...that's basically what happened with Windows and Windows Mobile. Standing on your laurels and not producing good content, as soon as the next wave comes and you have nothing to show for it...yea, you will slowly drift away.
PooBone
Member
Because the initial investment for an Xbox is a fraction of the price of a PC that gets better graphics.
That's just about it, I guess.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Initial investment? How about TCO! Monthly fees for online playing, more expensive games, all that adds up over the course of time, especially for Day 1 buyers of a console who stick to their console until the start of a new gen, or even longer. Don't get me wrong, I am not in team "PC is cheaper than a console!", I am well aware how much a proper rig including peripherals cost these days, but just comparing hardware costs is a little bit short-sighted these days.
Ohrenberger
Banned
Then why don't people just buy gaming PC's instead of consoles right now? it can't just be exclusives. There are a lot of people who only play multi platform games on their console of choice. Why do they bother and not just buy a PC?
Bitch Pudding
Member
There are a lot of reasons why certain people play certain games on a certain platform, as we all know.
Yea, but it won't include multiplayer. It will probably be the same cost as XBL (as it will be one subscription) and include something that's good for PC gamers. I don't know what it is or what it could be...MS has to figure that out. MS wants to get those subs on PC but they definitely have to do something that gamers would be willing to pay for.
Because reasons. Why does nobody buy Nintendo consoles?
The simple answer: competition. People have to spend their cash on many things nowadays. TVs, Smartphones, tablets, cars, subscriptions, etc. PCs don't seem to be on the top of the wishlist for the general public. The fact that there is no big PC company brand or a PC conglomerate to do a huge marketing campaign to raise mindshare doesn't help either. If you think about it...MS failed really hard with the PC market. Instead of doing their software business + console/home enterteinment + phones + XXX they should have went for total domination on their own turf- PC first. They missed out on the Steam idea. Nobody will argue that a console is easier to use than a PC. Why? because especially MS was lazy and ignorant as fuck. Nobody buys our phones, nevermind, we will put our phone's UI into our new OS (W8). Why, in gods name didn't they think this through like I've suggested many pages ago: A dual OS with the usual Windows surface on the one hand and an entertainment/gaming mode (that could have looked exactly like the 360 UI) on the other hand- with a simple remote control to boot it from the get go and voila. Now it's too late. Satya, give me one billion dollars and I will tell you where your peers exactly fucked things up. Kind regards, Kanye
Lister
Banned
I think that's precisely what he's trying to get across.
I think that QB will sell a lot more copies digitally than what is the expected norm just because of the win10 store free QB code. So numbers will be skewed either way.
And even then it won't matter because they are most likely roping in win10 and Xbox gaming together for the foreseeable future. Aka next gen release will be a win10/xbox system and not actually labelled a console and prob will not have to abide by certain power limitations/restrictions.
------
Eventually NPD will have to track digital sales as with every Gen more and more people switch to digital as I feel that with each Gen BPD is becoming less and less relevant until they do so. Every physical copy people buy requires a decent time sync for the install, not to mention the sizeable day one patch in the gigabytes range.
Convenience in ordering something at work or online and having it pre downloaded before release DOES play a factor. I mean look at amazons business model
It's not NPD's fault if game companies refuse to share their digital number ^^.
SteamyPunk
Member
If the next XBOX only had a Windows store(all games have to be available for PC), would big publishers like EA boycott and not release their games on the platform?
Or the cost will be absorbed into the cost of the game somehow.. Aka no real deals. Being able to use your xbl on the console to cover the crossover with pc will be a definite, but I wonder if there will be a separate yearly sub fee for MP servers that one would have to pay if they did not have an Xbox sub... ($30/yr with no free games would not be too hard to swallow for pc gamers) but then again origin, GoG and steam don't charge for mp use, its on the game dev/publisher to make that happen I thought.
Microsoft isn't going to force devs to have all games be available (they are already on record for saying that...they don't even force it for mobile/PC) to be on PC. It will be an option for 3rd parties as it currently is. I see devs doing what SE did and some like EA just releasing some games (Madden) on both PC and XBO to see numbers of people playing on PC and then start moving it to their store.
Ol No Bones
Banned
What the hell? How did you get there? Lol. Microsoft doesn't see PC as a direct competitor to Xbox so they are expanding first party games to THEIR OWN platform. Windows is their own damn platform. It makes sense and it's surprising that they are so slow to do it honestly. Imagine if MS only released Office on surface and not 3rd party Windows Device manufacturers. That would be an arbitrary divide between their own OS. It's not so dissimilar here. It's good for Xbox owners simply for the reason it's good for devs. If devs can easily develop a game for Xbox and have millions of other potential customers on Windows than developing a game may be more desirable. It's not that difficult to understand. It may even save some IP from laying dormant after a first installment.
I don't think MS would FORCE publishers to make every game in the store also available on PC, the CHANCE of running of a publisher would apply downward pressure on the consoles sales potential.
That said, if MS did this, I doubt EA would boycott...
Console software sales make up a huge portion of their profits. I'd think they'd run the numbered and see that there's still be plenty of people using origin and they'd still be getting plebt of console revenues.
Chobel
Member
Good luck with that, because I doubt it's gonna beat Titanfall. Heck I don't think it will beat Bloodborne.
Here are some things to think about:
- A platform holder declining to make exclusives for their platform is unprecedented.
- PC is not a MS controlled platform, licencing is not paid to them in the same way.
- The primary reason to be a platform holder is to take licencing from other game makers
- The secondary reason MS is in the business was to control home computing. They lost this reason when smartphones and tablets became a huge fraction of home computing needs.
- Vast proportion of game sales on PC do not pay MS anything (Bnet, Steam, LoL, Origin, GoG are the majority players)
- Exclusives add to the value proposition of consoles, a lack of them detract from it in a difficult to calculate way
- XB1 already has value proposition problems being the less powerful machine at generally slightly lower price
- So far the whole Xbox initiative has been huge money pit after huge money pit and only profits a small amount in the over all ledger.
- Windows 10 store is a priority, they want an Apple app store for themselves. However this is neither positive nor negative for XB1.
- The industry players like Valve and Blizzard are wary of MS closing the platform off, any attempt to do so would get a strong negative reaction from game consumers, the publisher and game makers, and even the hardware makers. None of the ecosystem arguments are valid without them closing the system off.
All that adds up definitively that this is a negative development for XB1 owners. Reading more into it I'm speculating it means they've adjusted their priorities and Xbox as a console isn't one of them.
Others have other conclusions but it's a big shake up and it has implications and none of them positive for XB1 owners. It does ask the question why MS is doing it all because you don't make sweeping changes when things are going well.
Ol No Bones
Banned
Wow ok. I'm not going to spend a lot of time responding point by point but almost everything you typed is completely irrelevant. Windows 10 is their platform. They aren't abandoning the Xbox platform they are expanding it. They aren't releasing games on PC across the board, they are releasing on their platform Windows 10. They now have Xbox service across win 10 devices including the Xbox console. Your reasoning isn't based on what is actually happening. You are speculating based on things MS hasn't indicated they are doing at all. I'm not sure why people don't get it.
Also, of course Xbox isn't where they want it to be at this point. They have acknowledged many missteps and put new leadership in place. If people payed attention they would know this was coming. This wasn't some big surprise. Phil talked a lot about this when he took on the job. They want gaming to be part of their platform among a diversity of devices. This isn't a move from complete desperation but simply a shift in direction. A good one at that.
Non-halo title?
So, better selling than GTA V, Minecraft, Call of Duty: Black Ops III, Fallout 4, Madden 16?
I don't think that's a very realistic expectation.
The key problem is you presuppose (you do) that the Windows 10 platform is the same as the XB1 platform which they aren't. The argument isn't sound. 3rd parties pay to be on the XB1 platform; They do not for the Windows 10 one.
The upside for MS is just the revenue for those games and a hope the Windows 10 store takes off. The change does not bode well for the XB1.
As I noted, the reasons to be a console platform holder is to make money off licencing. W10 has no such thing. The repeated sentiment XB1 = W10 is not reasonable.
Ol No Bones
Banned
I didn't say XB1 and Windows 10 are the exact same.. Even when you try to point that out its irrelevant. Ok so not all 3rd party games are going to be on the windows store... And??? What does that matter to my points hell that doesn't even matter to your point. Your argument is essentially that things are changing so it must be bad. Nothing. Nothing has changed for an XB1 owner. There are PC gamers that are going to pay for QB, Sea of Theives, Gears etc. That doesn't hurt XB1. Almost every point you have made is irrelevant to your claim that this spells doom for Xbox hardware, gamers etc.
How much did Titanfall sell on xb1?
You really don't understand the market that you are commenting on.
MS is not looking to trade their xb1 customers for PC customers... sacrificing licensing money in the process.
They are looking to compliment the revenue they make from the console business with additional revenue that they WILL make from selling games on PC.
The idea that PC gamers ever represented a significant opportunity for licensing revenue on Xbox makes no sense if you have any knowledge of gamers buying habits.
The idea that significant number of console gamers will buck their console of choice and become primarily PC gamers also doesn't make sense of you have a knowledge of how people choose hardware
And just stop saying MS needs to 'control' the PC market when it's already been proven that publishers can thrive on PC simply be selling their own IP.
But if you were only buying the console to play gears, and you still end up buying gears on PC anyway, they haven't lost anything. The console sale wouldn't have made them anything, and you weren't gonna use your xb1 for third parties.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Nah, we were talking about exclusives only.
AmaterasuOni
Banned
I'm with you on this one. It seems that MS has abandoned the sinking ship and are in a damage control mode trying to maximise the sales potential of their (original) Xbone purchases. They need every dollar they can milk out from gamers if they want to assure the shareholders that the console version of Xbox is worth their investment. I'm guessing it's getting really hard to tell those Xbone numbers to the shareholders, thus MAUs and other spins.
{insert code here}
Member
It hurts xbone in the sense that I no longer need an xbone to play Gears. That's a -1 for MS in console sales and I'm sure I'm not alone in that regard.