[WC] Xbox's platform-agnostic approach has a huge, gaping hole — for the Xbox Ally and future devices, this is Microsoft's next big gaming challenge

MS is just trying to hide the fact they are leaving the console market by pushing the few people that still care towards PC gaming....

They will soon find out that, except for the one-and done Windows license, PC Players give their money to Valve AKA Steam, not to them
 
MS is just trying to hide the fact they are leaving the console market by pushing the few people that still care towards PC gaming....

They will soon find out that, except for the one-and done Windows license, PC Players give their money to Valve AKA Steam, not to them
I mean, if they actually had a functional Play Anywhere program, that might not be the case. Then they would have some 50+ million console users with a digital library waiting for them on the Xbox PC Store.

But that's not the case and at this point I have little faith that Microsoft will manage to do anything correctly.
 
I mean, if they actually had a functional Play Anywhere program, that might not be the case. Then they would have some 50+ million console users with a digital library waiting for them on the Xbox PC Store.

But that's not the case and at this point I have little faith that Microsoft will manage to do anything correctly.

Why would other publishers allow this when MS is now a third-party as well?

If they don't support Play Anywhere now that Xbox is a platform, they will have no reason once the Xbox platform/store dies for good

They will just tell people to buy the PC version via Steam...
 
Last edited:
It's a pretty good article. Me and my work mate who's a steam guy were discussing about the rumoured steam console and how that will make them a big competitor to Microsoft, and how all these years of fighting playstation, it's allowed steam to go about their business.
I'd say if steam starts releasing consoles and more decks all coming with steam os, it could be a big problem for Microsoft. They could also serve as a big problem for playstation too
I'd much rather valve own the pc/console hybrid space than Microsoft. MS have their fingers in everything, they are the dominant os and productivity suite in business. Do we also want them to dominate the living room too?
 
PlayAnywhere is a born-dead initiative because devs and publishers either want to induce double-dipping behavior (which is fucking massive in the industry), or they want to have their launcher be the sole connection between them and their PC gamers.
 
I'd much rather valve own the pc/console hybrid space than Microsoft. MS have their fingers in everything, they are the dominant os and productivity suite in business. Do we also want them to dominate the living room too?
Preferably I wouldn't want any one company to own anything.
More competition is better for consumers.
Hopefully the market is large enough for everyone to thrive
Me personally, a steambox is a more compelling product than another Xbox.
It would compliment my ps5 nicely I think
 
Last edited:
Largely because this next gen Xbox PC hybrid will only have a niche audience.
Why a niche audience? It would be similar TAM to a Prebuilt PC market that runs on AMD hardware.
Next-gen, devs will only need to develop for PC for their games to work on Xbox.
Play anywhere will be limited as a last-gen /old games problem.
No, they won't. Devs will still need to use GDK for Xbox PC and GDKX for Xbox Consoles. They will have to create an Xbox ecosystem version regardless.
Home console
A console that can't play most of the popular live service games....
Maybe devs could charge more for the play anywhere version. Some incentive at least.
There already is an incentive, reduced store cut. MS takes only 12% from MS Store on PC. That applies to sales of Play Anywhere games done via the Xbox app/MS Store. They could simply make it 12% even on consoles if publishers do a Play Anywhere version with xcloud support included.
 
Last edited:
No, they won't. Devs will still need to use GDK for Xbox PC and GDKX for Xbox Consoles. They will have to create an Xbox ecosystem version regardless

Why would they bother?
It'll just cost more time, money, and resources to port something that doesn't need to be ported, as it will still reach the exact same audience without it.
 
Last edited:
With good cause, if Xbox PC doesn't beat Steamdeck and the upcoming Steamboxes then it could be the end of the Xbox brand and lineage.
Do you know the chances of Xbox crawling back on Steam after 20 years of Valve domination and their games in every other system?
Star Wars Statistics GIF
 
Why a niche audience? It would be similar TAM to a Prebuilt PC market that runs on AMD hardware.

No, they won't. Devs will still need to use GDK for Xbox PC and GDKX for Xbox Consoles. They will have to create an Xbox ecosystem version regardless.

A console that can't play most of the popular live service games....

There already is an incentive, reduced store cut. MS takes only 12% from MS Store on PC. That applies to sales of Play Anywhere games done via the Xbox app/MS Store. They could simply make it 12% even on consoles if publishers do a Play Anywhere version with xcloud support included.
or they will just skip the Xbox version because it's a failing console.

If the failure of EGS has shown us anything it's that the cut doesn't move the needle in any significant way.
 
Why would they bother?
It'll just cost more time, money, and resources to port something that doesn't need to be ported, as it will still reach the exact same audience without it.
Why do EA and Ubisoft bother creating Steam and Epic versions of their games? They're all on the same PC platform. Because certain users prefer certain ecosystems, each with their own advantages and disadvantages.

Bold of you to presume that the hard-core userbase that stuck with Xbox, with large Xbox libraries, and only prefers Xbox Console and controller gaming will simply migrate to EA, Ubisoft, Steam, Epic versions of games.

Xbox Store will be the default front facing store. If devs want to sell on that store, they will need a Xbox ecosystem version. If devs want a Gamepass deal at launch or 24 months later, they will need an Xbox ecosystem version. If devs want to have their game on xCloud, they will need an Xbox ecosystem version.

If devs want free MS marketing, they will need Xbox ecosystem version. In case of Rockstar, they are only doing and maintaining Console versions at launch. In case of EA, if EA still wants EA Play to be included within Gamepass Ultimate in the future, their games will need to have Xbox ecosystem versions. They have been included for 5 years now, it's a very lucrative deal for EA.

Publishers also prefer secure, closed platforms that can prevent piracy or cheating.

Just because MS allows third party PC stores, doesn't mean MS would be promoting or selling other Ecosystem games. They made a commitment to being an open platform, not an obligation to improve games and versions for other platforms. Xbox ecosystem versions will have certain advantages the users want and the publishers need.
 
Why do EA and Ubisoft bother creating Steam and Epic versions of their games? They're all on the same PC platform. Because certain users prefer certain ecosystems, each with their own advantages and disadvantages.

That's not an apt comparison, they're just stores, no coding or anything required by the devs.

Completely different to porting games.
I expect the Windows store will be the default.
 
Last edited:
Which is good for Steam.
I am just going to sit back and watch it unfold. Microsoft has taken on Steam before and ended up having to put their games on the service. Adding Steam to their console/PC seems counterproductive unless they believe Game Pass is going to be the great equalizer. I suspect the end game is to go after Sony (and Nintendo??) traditional console walled gardens. We know that battle is still taking place in the phone space.
 
I am just going to sit back and watch it unfold. Microsoft has taken on Steam before and ended up having to put their games on the service. Adding Steam to their console/PC seems counterproductive unless they believe Game Pass is going to be the great equalizer. I suspect the end game is to go after Sony (and Nintendo??) traditional console walled gardens. We know that battle is still taking place in the phone space.
I tend to agree. Xbox is just a pawn in Microsoft's greater efforts to collapse the walled gardens of other platforms, giving them complete access to platforms they didn't create. With that said, it could potentially be good from a customer point of view; buying software once and having it available literally everywhere is quite an attractive value proposition.
 
As good as Xbox Play Anywhere is, it's still indie studios doing the lion's share of the work here. Ahead of the Xbox Ally and OEM Xbox push, this probably isn't good enough.

The Xbox Ally is nearly here, but there's a problem.

Over the past few years, Microsoft has been pushing its Xbox PC platform more and more, leveraging both PC Game Pass and OEM-built PC gaming laptops and handhelds to push the platform. Many Windows 11 OEMs bundle PC or Xbox Game Pass Ultimate with their devices these days, and the Xbox PC app is preinstalled on almost all of these devices too.

For Xbox console users, there's often an added benefit thrown in. Xbox Play Anywhere (also known as XPA internally) is a program which encourages developers to submit games to the Microsoft Store with unified codebases that run across both Xbox consoles and Windows 11 hardware.

Additionally, users who purchase these games receive a license for both versions, complete with cloud saves that run across both platforms. Xbox Cloud Gaming is often also thrown into the mix — allowing you to access these titles from virtually anywhere.

It's an awesome platform, and all of Xbox's modern first-party games support it natively. However, the third-party support has been mixed at best.

Ahead of the Xbox Ally handheld launch and other OEM devices expected to arrive in 2026, Xbox Play Anywhere has yet to really receive any form of organic support from big publishers. That's a huge, and growing, problem for Microsoft's ecosystem efforts.

Xbox Play Anywhere, with caveats

The Xbox Ally is doubtless responsible for an uptick in comments and questions I've received recently about Xbox Play Anywhere.

The Xbox Ally is not an Xbox, despite Microsoft's "This is an Xbox" marketing campaign. It is a Windows 11 PC at its core, which means it will not run a huge portion of your existing Xbox library.

It will only run Xbox console games that have the "Xbox Play Anywhere" branding, found via the Xbox PC app. And yes, there are a lot of Xbox Play Anywhere games, over a thousand as of writing now. But, the quality of this list is another matter entirely.

The Xbox platform is increasingly split in two, between Windows 11 and the traditional Xbox development platform — although the bridges between ecosystems are shrinking. Games built for Xbox consoles are typically unable to run natively on PC, and games packaged for traditional PC environments are typically not able to run on an Xbox console natively either.

Microsoft's Xbox Play Anywhere program allows developers to submit packages for PC and Xbox versions under a single store listing, maintaining save file compatibility across both endpoints.

Microsoft says developers who use Xbox Play Anywhere see boosted engagement. Anecdotally, I can say that I prioritize purchases increasingly based on what games actually support XPA, but it's pretty clear that Xbox users on devices like the Lenovo Legion Go and ASUS ROG Ally represent a pretty niche audience. That audience will likely grow a fair bit when the Xbox Ally drops on October 16.

I've been surprised by how many messages I've received from people who are confused about what kinds of games this system will actually run. But in hindsight, it's pretty clear as to why.

Microsoft has been a strong advocate of backward compatibility for Xbox games, effectively promising backward and forward compatibility for all Xbox games since the Xbox One launch in 2013. Microsoft's next Xbox will also boast full backward compatibility, too. With PC, that's a little trickier.

Many had hopes that Microsoft would build its own Xbox handheld with full compatibility for our existing games, at least the Xbox One or Xbox Series S versions — alas we're getting a traditional gaming PC instead, at least for now. The problem is that a huge amount of AAA games simply don't support Xbox Play Anywhere.

This quarter has been absolutely stacked for high-quality game releases, including games like Cronos: The New Dawn, Hollow Knight: Silksong, and Ready or Not. All of these support Xbox Play Anywhere, too. But what do they have in common?



For some reason, Xbox Play Anywhere seems to have won support primarily from indie studios and smaller teams, and sees particularly strong adoption when Xbox Game Pass is included. Alas, big publishers like EA, Ubisoft, Take Two, and Capcom seem ambivalent.

Capcom brought across Resident Evil 7 and then largely dropped the program entirely — seemingly unconvinced of its worth. Square Enix has been very supportive so far with games like Final Fantasy 7 Remake, but dropped it for Final Fantasy Tactics.

I feel like this is becoming a particularly irritating issue as Microsoft pushes its PC platform more and more. Positioning the virtues of roaming profiles and platform agnosticism is particularly problematic when there's a competing platform poised to potentially do it far, far better ...

With Steam rumored to be eyeing the living room, Xbox is on the back foot

The issues with Xbox Play Anywhere honestly extend beyond simply having blanket access to Xbox games — we can't even get AAA devs to organically support the option to buy a separate copy on the Xbox PC store. Borderlands 4 dropped today, and is nowhere to be seen on the Xbox PC app. Capcom gave up on the Xbox PC store after launching Resident Evil 3 Remake, not even bothering to launch Resident Evil 4 or Village. That's a pretty striking indictment of the platform, in my view.

Microsoft's strategy increasingly seems to be pointing at Steam as a competitor, instead of PlayStation, and that's potentially problematic — Microsoft is positioning its gaming platform itself as a weaker version of Steam in that universe, particularly if Steam begins offering devices that can offer a capable living room experience.

Microsoft isn't stopping at the Xbox Ally when it comes to OEM devices. I've heard increasingly credible rumors that Microsoft could be lining up OEM Xbox-branded "living room" gaming PCs with partners for 2026. But, these devices will end up becoming defacto Steam devices, owing to the lack of native support for the Xbox PC ecosystem.

By pushing me towards PC, Microsoft is increasingly, and ironically, pushing me towards using Steam for a lot of my gaming experiences.

Right now, more than half of my gaming library is locked to my Xbox console, and doesn't support the "This is an Xbox" ecosystem Microsoft espouses.

If I truly want all of my games to be on all the devices I own — which is the ecosystem lifestyle Microsoft says I should want — wouldn't it be smarter for me, and anyone else who finds this idea attractive, to move to Steam fully?

With all the work Microsoft is doing to improve Windows 11 for controller gaming and TV-oriented gaming, without the ecosystem and developer support to back it, isn't Microsoft just enhancing Steam's position rather than its own? Steam is one living room PC away from effectively co-opting Microsoft's vision before it even gets off the ground.

Xbox PC and dev support: How can it be fixed?

A big problem stopping developers supporting the Xbox PC store is the sheer complexity over Steam. Submitting a game to Steam is simple and straightforward with minimal certification processes. Valve leaves it up to developers to manage their own quality, and the community is notorious for blitzing games that aren't optimized out of the gate. Borderlands 4 is falling afoul of poor optimization right now.

Microsoft, PlayStation, and Nintendo are generally more aggressive with ensuring a minimal degree of quality before a game hits the store, but it's not always perfect either.

Right now, developers I've spoken to have been pretty clear: they don't see a huge amount of upside supporting the Xbox PC platform natively, let alone "giving away" a dual license via Xbox Play Anywhere. For devices like the Xbox Ally, Xbox Cloud Gaming and Xbox remote play via an existing Xbox console can only go so far towards bridging the gap. Both are fine when you're at home, I'd have to defer to Steam to access most AAA games launching now and in the future due to the lack of Xbox PC support.



Microsoft needs to do a lot more to boost visibility of the benefits of being in Xbox Play Anywhere, or even the Xbox PC app, from the outset. If there aren't tangible benefits, that needs to be solved too. Perhaps developers supporting Xbox Play Anywhere should get a bigger cut, or direct marketing support. The developer tools need to be improved perhaps too, and the simplicity of doing something as basic as publishing on the Xbox PC app or Xbox console itself needs to be vastly enhanced too.

We live in an era of rapid content digestion. The era of gatekeeping the platform and heavy-handed cert has handed an entire generation to platforms like Steam and Roblox as well, which prioritize access over polish. There's downsides to both approaches, for sure, but Microsoft's Xbox Play Anywhere strategy hinges entirely on having games to actually play.

Microsoft is ironically manufacturing an "app gap" by prioritizing this platform over fighting harder for new users on console ... and we know how that turned out for Windows Phone.



Jez has never been able to master the art of short, concise headlines, but he makes some good points. Seems he is getting hit with a lot of questions about Xbox. Confusion all around.
Yea they should have a mandate that if devs make a next gen Xbox version it must be play anywhere with standard PC.
 
Yea they should have a mandate that if devs make a next gen Xbox version it must be play anywhere with standard PC.
The problem is that they have no leverage. Let's say they have a consumer base of 5 million, that is not enough for 3rd parties to lose the double dip money from getting people to buy the same game again on PC.

Winning the console war means gaining leverage. Losing the console war, however, means losing leverage. Xbox can't force any 3rd party studio from doing anything at all, they don't have anything to threaten with.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that they have no leverage. Let's say they have a consumer base of 5 million, that is not enough for 3rd parties to lose the double dip money from getting people to buy the same game again on PC.

Winning the console war means gaining leverage. Losing the console war, however, means losing leverage. Xbox can't force any 3rd party studio from doing anything at all, they don't have anything to threaten with.
Yeap, curious to see how they'll court support if the next gen Xbox is just a PC (as in it can run PC games natively).
 
Next-gen, devs will only need to develop for PC for their games to work on Xbox.
Play anywhere will be limited as a last-gen /old games problem.
But that implies Xbox would lose business from all the big 3rd party studios who would prefer to sell the Xbox and PC titles separately. Xbox either play hardball mandating it, which cause them to LOSE games on Xbox, or to keep things as they are which means the "everything is an Xbox" plan dies.

GTA6 alone would be a problem. Currently they haven't announced that it would EVER be a part of Play-Anywhere. It might change later as currently the PC version is not yet announced. But if any studio would want to double dip sales of their game it would be Rockstar.
 
The problem is that they have no leverage. Let's say they have a consumer base of 5 million, that is not enough for 3rd parties to lose the double dip money from getting people to buy the same game again on PC.

Winning the console war means gaining leverage. Losing the console war, however, means losing leverage. Xbox can't force any 3rd party studio from doing anything at all, they don't have anything to threaten with.

They would have to money-hat all other publishers to offset the PC sales lost for them

And they won't do that
 
Last edited:
The would have to money-hat all other publishers to offset the PC sales lost for them

And they won't do that
As I mentioned once in the past, the cost to moneyhat is inversely proportional to the size of your console platform. The smaller your console hardware base, the more it costs to money hat. And that cost can approach Infinity if your base is 5 million or less if it comes to Xbox.

Moneyhat is a "Win More" button for someone in the lead. But the losing side doesn't get their money's worth by doing it.
 
Play Anywhere is nothing but 100% win. It has gaping holes, but those are holes that are largely out of their hands to close because its 3rd party games. Even then, they've shown willingness to keep pushing for it with GP deals and developer relationships. It's a huge, huge win for consumers and the only initiative of its kind ever attempted.

Play Anywhere is basically just going to be a concern for the present. Next gen, all games will be windows games only so there will be no need for dual entitlement any longer for future games. You'll also have all the stores. This is about shoring up BC, and they're doing better than anyone ever has, and we know there will be hardware enabled BC as well coming in the future. I expect they would be able to shore up a decent chunk of the old 3rd party stuff in the future too through GP deals. Get a few older games in slow months on GP and suddenly they're PA titles. It's been steadily happening with stuff I bought in the past, and now I have it on PC.
 
Top Bottom