Support NeoGAF

[ChuckeRearmed]

No. What it signals is that the next battleground will be the ecosystem and cross-platform (PC + mobile + console) gaming. Ecosystems will compete with their content and platform holders will compete for the content even more aggressively than now. Even Steam with Steam Deck - it is essentially an ecosystem based on Steam.

 

[SteelCurtain 59]

I mean there will definitely be several games released on 3rd party platforms, but they're not going to stop making consoles or start making most of their games multiplatform. Getting people into their ecosystem is still worth a ton, which is why things like every future Bethesda and XGS games are almost certain to stay exclusive, and even Activision it's probably only going to make the live-service/multiplayer games multiplat

 

[Kvally]

We already know Game Pass subscriber numbers have stagnated in the past couple of years and they no longer care about their consoles sales. We might see GP get a massive influx of subs if they throw all AB games on the service, but that is a massive gamble which I doubt there is any appetite for when GP is only 15% of Xbox's overall service revenue and I personally think it's not going to move the needle enough to justify the $69B investment. In essence, MS tried to play nice with the industry and be a team-player, but due to their failure in cultivating a strong game lineup, their grand "Netflix-ification" of gaming gamble has failed and they're now switching game plan to the scorched-earth strategy.

It has been cited that the recent turmoil within ABK is what gave MS the opening to be able to make an acquisition, but money talks and I think whether it $68.9B or $100B+, MS could have purchased them at any time in the past if that's what they wanted to do. It's my theory that the ABK acquisition signals a pivot away from subscriptions, consoles and exclusivity into a 3rd-party publisher role within the industry. Their actions suggests this to be the case. Their ultimate goal is to be dominant player within gaming by any means necessary. So while I suggest that they are becoming a "3rd-party publisher", this is only an interim transitional position for them and eventually it is still their goal to become grand baron overlords of all of gaming.

No

 

[Hudo]

I think the signal rather is that Microsoft would like to be the "only-party" publisher.

 

[Astray]

The big challenge for Microsoft is turning their IP hoard into actual console sales. If they can make it happen then they will have reached the promised land. Their talk right now is about MAUs and other things that aren't console sales, but that wasn't what we were hearing in 2020 when those sales were going well.

This is why Sony are now trying extremely hard to widen the sales gap between them and MS (not only does that make it harder for Microsoft to convert customers next gen, it also makes them money now) and make it so they have to be considered indispensable revenue for Microsoft.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

All of those combined are probably $1.5bn max.

+ development and wages...i mean, where is Hellblade 2 or state of decay 3 for example?.

Are you seriously saying MS expect console hardware sales growth from Cloud infrastructure investment?

Im saying XCloud infrastructure is a expense MS is making for Xbox.

An investment designed to get people to play away from consoles?

look at my first statement:

Xbox hardware is conterproductive to MS's true videogame vision

We are in agreement. Remember Nadella's quote:

"I dont have love for that world"

he was taking about exclusives. A videogame console NEEDS exclusives as a differentiator factor.

MS has a videogame vision that clashes with the console philosophy.

for the console to justify its existence it needs to grow, otherwise it will be a burden for this vision. And as i noted before, a console consumer is as valuable as 10PC Users or 100 mobile users (as a way to exemplify how important is to have your own store front) and the fact that a console user was willing to pay for a dedicated plastic box to play videogames in the first place.

These are amply covered by software sales, though.

and isn't Game Pass counter productive to software sales.
plus:

conclusion:
MS and Xbox want their cake and eat it too. they want everything: Console, mobile, PC, streaming.

for that to happen they need to fulfill the idiosyncrasies of each of those platforms. This is not a case one coca-cola to rule them all, otherwise you will delute your brand (which is already happening).

IF MS needs to kill Xbox hardware to achive the maximum growth/revenue/MAU/Engagement. They will do it.

This is why the next financial report is going to be the most important so far. It will set the tone for the future.

 

[Thirty7ven]

It all depends on whether or not they can rescue momentum for the second half of the generation, and if they find a way to sustain GP on their own and bring it to other consoles.

There comes a point where they will do the math on growth. If the math doesn’t add up they will probably turn Xbox hardware into a more niche product for their hardcore fanbase.

So who knows, a lot can happen.

 

[yurinka]

We already know Game Pass subscriber numbers have stagnated in the past couple of years and they no longer care about their consoles sales. We might see GP get a massive influx of subs if they throw all AB games on the service, but that is a massive gamble which I doubt there is any appetite for when GP is only 15% of Xbox's overall service revenue and I personally think it's not going to move the needle enough to justify the $69B investment. In essence, MS tried to play nice with the industry and be a team-player, but due to their failure in cultivating a strong game lineup, their grand "Netflix-ification" of gaming gamble has failed and they're now switching game plan to the scorched-earth strategy.

It has been cited that the recent turmoil within ABK is what gave MS the opening to be able to make an acquisition, but money talks and I think whether it $68.9B or $100B+, MS could have purchased them at any time in the past if that's what they wanted to do. It's my theory that the ABK acquisition signals a pivot away from subscriptions, consoles and exclusivity into a 3rd-party publisher role within the industry. Their actions suggests this to be the case. Their ultimate goal is to be dominant player within gaming by any means necessary. So while I suggest that they are becoming a "3rd-party publisher", this is only an interim transitional position for them and eventually it is still their goal to become grand baron overlords of all of gaming.

MS already is a 3rd party in Sony and Nintendo consoles since years ago, they released multiple games on them.

The "day one on GP" already meant huge loses per year, now with ABK will be bigger. On top of that they release all their games on PC day one, meaning less people need their console and will get a gaming PC instead, so over time the relevance of their console gets smaller.

GP growth has been stagnant for a long period even with the recent Bethesda & others acquisitions. CoD will continue on PS and now the ABK catalog will be available in multiple clould gaming services including -pretty likely- PS+. So I assume there won't be a big increase of consoles or GP sales.

MS would need to compensate the loses from the GP strategy and some day they'll want to recoup the almost $100B they spent on acquisitions, so pretty likely they'll focus more on being 3rd party and will continue moving their focus away from their own console to focus more in PC, the other consoles and mobile.

I think that this or more likely the next gen will be the last one with MS being a 1st party.

 

[Lunarorbit]

Can't see Sony or Nintendo ever allowing Gamepass. Things would need to change where MS is already dominant and the competition is shattered already.

I'm not talking about a pride thing. It just makes absolutely no business sense for them to have GP. What is MS going to do, give them a portion of the sub fee? Why would they want to split a sub fee with Microsoft so you get a whole collection of games to play on your Nintendo? Every time you'd play using GP on Switch, N sees it as a lost opportunity to sell you a game, often times the same one.

They would NEVER allow gamepass, perhaps as a normal third party and bring Halo as its own game with its own royalty fee (going SEGA)

Edit: This has already happened, see Minecraft

I could totally see MS coming hat in hand in a decade and offering gp to both. They really need to get their shit together cause eventually MS gonna have a ceo/cfo who actually looks at Xboxs books and doesn't like what they see.

 

[BlackTron]

I could totally see MS coming hat in hand in a decade and offering gp to both. They really need to get their shit together cause eventually MS gonna have a ceo/cfo who actually looks at Xboxs books and doesn't like what they see.

MS wants to offer GP on both yesterday. They don't want it because it's bad for them.

 

[Neofire]

Nope because I'm pretty sure that 95% of their titles will only be on xbox/pc only. Last i checked MS only sid contracts for CoD That defeats the 3rd party narrative.

 

[ahtlas7]

Kind of already were, right?

 

[FF:Enhanced_Reality]

It depends on your definition. You mean they're going to drop hardware and focus entirely on software? Well, if that was the case I'd understand them buying publishers. However, given they still have a vested interest in their own hardware, then no.

Microsoft want to obviously have the best console and they now want to do anything to be first place. So no.

 

[rodrigolfp]

Both MS and sony are 3rd-party publishers now releasing games on multiple platfrorms PC/Consoles.

Just Nintendo left (officially).

 

[L*][*N*K]

Yeah, if you are still stuck in 1997.