Support NeoGAF

[ChorizoPicozo]

-Backwards compatibility.
-Forwards compatibility.
-A company that isn't frugal about their servers
-A game company that doesn'thave their president trashing their games from generations ago "who'd want to play that?"
-free enhancements for old games
-free cloud saves
-competition
-quick resume for multiple games

Gamepass

so... nothing.

 

[JTCx]

-Backwards compatibility.
-Forwards compatibility.
-A company that isn't frugal about their servers
-A game company that doesn'thave their president trashing their games from generations ago "who'd want to play that?"
-free enhancements for old games
-free cloud saves
-competition
-quick resume for multiple games

Gamepass

Fuckin terrible ad lmao

 

[Crayon]

Yeah, a company taking care of their legacy games is such a non issue right? Oh and forward compatibility is a non issue when building a gaming library, right?

So glad this deal went through and all of you can come kicking and screaming along for the ride while saying you don't want old games.

Bet none of you are buying the Metal Gear Solid Remaster Collection then.

Haha it's awesome how you forgot to put gamepass. Hi five.

 

[93xfan]

Fuckin terrible ad lmao

Forza horizon
Halo MCC (5/6 games with really good to amazing MP)
Perfect Dark n64
SSX3
Sea of Thieves
Ori games
Gears of War Series
Timesplitters 2 and 3
Beyond Good and Evil HD
Prince of Persia :sands of time
Metal Gear solid 2,3, PW and Revengeance
Ninja Gaiden 1-3 (better than the remasters
Dead Space 1-3
Kameo
Jade Empire
Morrowind
Oblivion
GTA4
Red Dead Redemption
Sonic Adventure 1, 2, generations and racing transformed
Virtua Fighter 2
Tekken Tag 6, Tournament Tournament 2
Soul Calibur 1 and 2
Braid

The list goes on and on. Sorry some of you fail to enjoy the classics

 

[JTCx]

Tekken Tag 6, Tournament Tournament 2

A.I algorithm worked overtime and fucked itself.

 

[lh032]

-Backwards compatibility.
-Forwards compatibility.
-A company that isn't frugal about their servers
-A game company that doesn'thave their president trashing their games from generations ago "who'd want to play that?"
-free enhancements for old games
-free cloud saves
-competition
-quick resume for multiple games

Gamepass

-You didnt mention about awful management from their first party output (without zenimax Microsoft has basically nothing)
-Awful pricey Elite controller that still drifts (at least you can replace the stick with Edge)
-Meh games.

The other pros you mentioned above is just....ehhhhhhhhhhh, seems pretty forceful to me.

 

[Liamario]

I think the majority of people who are classified as against MS, actually want to see MS succeed in a more creative ways (as opposed to brute force), and simply detest and push back against nonsense PR and what occasionally appears to be outright lies.

Exactly. We want Microsoft to compete, not simply buy all the other teams.
It's apparent that they feel they can't or won't compete and would rather just buy their way to the top, removing all competition.

 

[93xfan]

A.I algorithm worked overtime and fucked itself.

It forgot to add in 6 classic CoD games. Xbox, the true home of CoD

 

[93xfan]

-You didnt mention about awful management from their first party output (without zenimax Microsoft has basically nothing)
-Awful pricey Elite controller that still drifts (at least you can replace the stick with Edge)
-Meh games.

The other pros you mentioned above is just....ehhhhhhhhhhh, seems pretty forceful to me.

120FPS for Hollow Knight.
60 FPS for Sonic generations, Sonic all stars racing transformed, Oblivion, Far Cry 4, Dragon Age Inquisition, Fallout 3, etc.

I know many here don't respect the classics, but I find them deeply valuable, and Sony used to as well.

Sony being frugal with servers is probably why they don't want a Socom 2 remaster. They know we'll never let them shut down that server.

Gears MP is good.

Halo 3 MP in MCC is sublime. Except for Halo 4, the MCC offers so much that is still fun today. I won't lie and say infinite is not a notable step down, but Halo 5's MP proves they can do MP really well.

And the constant surprises on Gamepass keeps gaming fresh.

 

[Silent Viper]

We've also not become an economic superpower by letting aggressive monopolies develop and run roughshod over markets. Sure sony would if they could, but they can't. MS can and that is at the center of all of this. It is not very persuasive to say sony does it too. They don't. They won't. They can't. Even if they would. It would make more sense to say google and apple do it, too. Even with those companies not in the conversation, it would still logically make more sense.

America became economic super power by destroying other countries economy. It will get political, so i should stop but you know what saying m

So MS is doing what America does best . You stopping American company from being American

 

[Heisenberg007]

-Backwards compatibility.
-Forwards compatibility.
-A company that isn't frugal about their servers
-A game company that doesn'thave their president trashing their games from generations ago "who'd want to play that?"
-free enhancements for old games
-free cloud saves
-competition
-quick resume for multiple games

Gamepass

We should allow Microsoft acquisitions because of ... quick resume.

 

[Hudo]

I swear to god, many of the fucking headlines that gaming bloggers (IGN, Polygon, Schreier et al.) shit out makes you think that Phil Spencer is Hitler and Jim Ryan is Stalin.

 

[twilo99]

Lol you don't want to go there .

From naughty dog to insomniac.. they were all bought. They only have like 2 or 3 studios only that were formed. Including polyphony or whatever the gt team is called

It's just somehow its OK for Sony to do. But if MS does it? It's Armageddon

But why is that?

I think back then it wasn't that big of a deal and obviously people have forgotten how Sony gained market share.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Lol you don't want to go there .

From naughty dog to insomniac.. they were all bought. They only have like 2 or 3 studios only that were formed. Including polyphony or whatever the gt team is called

It's just somehow its OK for Sony to do. But if MS does it? It's Armageddon

Buying studios is not a bad thing. Making multiplatform titles exclusives is.

Can you list a few multiplatform games that Sony made exclusives after these acquisitions? Because then you'll have a point.

 

[twilo99]

This is a disingenuous question as the Xbox brand launched over 20 years ago. This is not part of them launching Xbox, but rather paying to make up for their failures.

I don't see the difference, in both instances a company is trying to gain traction by acquiring studios.

Are you saying they are allowed to do it only one time when they launch their brand and then it's a no go after that? How long do they have?

 

[twilo99]

Not sure if you go back top the PS1 era but over the last decade it is basically only Bungie that is a straight acquisition. All others are organically grown - either at arm's length where Sony is their key partner that eventually become an acquisition (e.g., Housemarque) or as an internal daughter company from the start.

What I think people have been mostly annoyed at are the timed exclusive deals that Sony has made - but people forget that such deals are done during development which means that Sony takes product development risk and finance part of the development (i.e., Sony takes risk off the books of the developer).

MS has chosen a very different path than Sony and Nintendo for some reason.

To the very beginning, I'm just trying to understand how they built their brand because from how some of their fans sound it would see like they did everything internally and grew their market share organically without purchasing studios.

I know GT was huge for them me I don't think MS has an equivalent achievement

 

[//DEVIL//]

Buying studios is not a bad thing. Make multiplatform titles exclusives is.

Can you list a few multiplatform games that Sony made exclusives after these acquisitions? Because then you'll have a point.

Emm. What are you talking about bud ? Naughty dog was the developers of Crash before they were bought and made Jax and Daxter? Insomniac made games on other platforms before they were bought ?

The difference is Sony focusing on single player games ( till recently they were anyway before they switch the GASS with their recent bungie purchase ( whom could be developing that rumored Sony exclusive as well )

Honestly people come and say oh but MS is buying whole publisher. Yeah as if Sony wouldn't do the same move if they had the money to do so. And 100% lock their games on Playstation platform too unlike the current case with MS and call of duty or any multi-player game from their studios.

It's common sense to keep single player games exclusive and multi-player on all platform.

Also, I do not agree with you about buying studios is a good thing ( buying publishers is even worse ), but honestly MS need something big like that . They have lots of teams that are getting paid and not delivering. Lots of these guys needs to get fired. They are just parasites that are feeding in the name of wokness. They need to keep Sony in check and competitive. Sony is same stage of arrogance as it was during the pre ps3 release Era. They need to be always under pressure to be Pro consumer.

And watch when this deal goes through ( I think it will anyway ), nothing will be changed in terms of sales for the Playstation platform.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Emm. What are you talking about. Naughty dog was the developers of crash before they were bought and made Jax and Daxter? Insomniac made games on other platform before thrmey were bought ?

The difference is Sony focusing on single player games ( till recently they were anyway before they switch the GASS with their recent bungie purchase ( whom could be developing that rumored Sony exclusive as well )

Honestly people come and say oh but MS is buying whole publisher. Yeah as if Sony wouldn't do the same move if they had the money to do so. And 100% lock their games on Playstation platform too unlike the current case with MS and call of duty or any multi-player game from their studios.

It's common sense to keep single player games exclusive and multi-player on all platform.

Also, I do not agree with you about buying studios is good thing ( buying publishers is even worse ), but honestly MS need something big like that . They have lots of teams that are getting paid and not delivering. Lots of these guys needs to get fired. They are just parasites that are feeding in the name of wokness. They need to keep Sony in check and competitive. Sony is same stage of arrogance as it was during the pre ps3 release Era. They need to be always under pressure to be Pro consumer.

And watch when this deal goes through ( I think it will anyway ), nothing will be changed in terms of sales for the Playstation platform.

Crash is a multiplatform game. Jak and Daxter was always a Sony-owned IP and game, like Forza is for Xbox.

I'm asking if there are any multiplatform games that were made exclusives because of Sony's acquisitions?

 

[//DEVIL//]

Crash is a multiplatform game. Jak and Daxter was always a Sony-owned IP and game, like Forza is for Xbox.

I'm asking if there are any multiplatform games that were made exclusives because of Sony's acquisitions?

No one has an answer to that. But don't you think these studios that Sony bought at one point were just rubbing one out while waiting to be purchased or they were making multiplatform games and then canned other versions once they became with Sony?

We only knew about COUPLE of games from MS that got the ps5 version cannedbecause if trial dirty laundry. One of them is Red fall lol. They kinda did Sony a favor lol

 

[Chukhopops]

How many of Sony's studios were acquired when they launched the PS brand and how many were.. "organically" grown within the company?

Well there's a reason it was so difficult to get a good library when the PlayStation mini was released: most (if not all) the games people liked on it were third party games.

Sony really started ramping up the acquisitions in the early 2000s for the PS2: ND, Bend, Guerrilla, Evolution, etc.

They get props for (mostly) succeeding at turning those acquisitions into success stories though.

 

[Heisenberg007]

No one has an answer to that. But don't you think these studios that Sony bought at one point were just rubbing one out while waiting to be purchased or they were making multiplatform games and then canned other versions once they became with Sony?

We only knew about COUPLE of games from MS that got the ps5 version cannedbecause if trial dirty laundry. One of them is Red fall lol. They kinda did Sony a favor lol

There is no answer to that because there are no multiplatform games that Sony made exclusives after their acquisitions.

The studios that Sony acquired were already pretty much in bed with Sony and making games based on Sony IPs. There were not primarily multiplatform developers and, more importantly, did not own major multiplatform games that Sony made exclusives.

That's the major difference. Those acquisitions did not hurt Xbox gamers and did not minimize Xbox's game library.

Bungie is the only notable multiplatform developer with multiplatform IPs that Sony has acquired. And all their future games will be available on Xbox.

On the other hand, from Hi-Fi Rush, Starfield, and Redfall to Hellblade 2 and The Outer Worlds 2, Xbox has gone about it with a very negative and anti-competitive approach. That's why you see people criticize Microsoft's acquisitions.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

Lol I love the original Xbox but that Xbox is dead. Taken over by GaaS and Xbox live.

The days of Shenmue and Ninja Gaiden are long gone.

 

[//DEVIL//]

There is no answer to that because there are no multiplayer games that Sony made exclusives after their acquisitions.

On the other hand, from Hi-Fi Rush, Starfield, and Redfall to Hellblade 2 and The Outer Worlds 2, Xbox has gone about it with a very negative and anti-competitive approach. That's why you see people criticize Microsoft's acquisitions.

Yet all the games you listed are single player games aside from red garbage . Kinda going against your point here..

While minecraft and many other MS games are on Playstation. How many Sony games on Xbox? ..

 

[twilo99]

They get props for (mostly) succeeding at turning those acquisitions into success stories though.

GG.

This is also where Xbox (mostly) failed where they couldn't turn their initial investments into successful endeavors, so now the question is are they allowed to try another round?

People seem to be really upset about that as if you only get one go at this.

 

[ActusReusJB]

Microsoft's true ambitions are always pretty clear for anyone, I ask me why just some few journalists talked about it. And why just now IGN is talking about it?

The ambitions for Microsoft and Sony have always been the same. Be the number one console in terms of sales/revenue. The Xbox On documentary made that very clear. Anyone else who believed/still believes anything else is delusional. The big thing is Microsoft is now finally swinging instead of just taking the beating. Hopefully this brings out an even better Sony.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Exactly. We want Microsoft to compete, not simply buy all the other teams.
It's apparent that they feel they can't or won't compete and would rather just buy their way to the top, removing all competition.

Sony locking down big AAA releases for 1-2yr periods is also a way of buying your way to the top, and removing competition.
Sony already snapped up two big Bethesda exclusives and tried for Starfield. Microsoft responded by taking Bethesda off the table.

Both are competing by throwing their money around to lock games away from each other. Sony got to where they are today by locking games down to their platform, so people would choose their system over the competitions .

Nintendo is the only console maker that competes solely on the strength of their first party games. Sony isn't some white knight underdog. They're another Microsoft with less money to spend.

 

[FunkMiller]

You would hope that this entire debacle is enough to show console warriors how these major corporations actually behave... and that casting your allegiances towards any of them is a fucking idiotic thing to do. They lie, cheat, dissemble, and manipulate, all in the name of increasing profits, and they have absolutely zero loyalty to you, or the health of the industry that they are a part of.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Yet all the games you listed are single player games aside from red garbage . Kinda going against your point here..

While minecraft and many other MS games are on Playstation. How many Sony games on Xbox? ..

The argument is about making multiplatform games exclusive. Single-player or multi-player does not matter.

There is no big multiplatform game that Sony acquired and made exclusive from Xbox. If there are such games, please feel free to list them.

 

[ActusReusJB]

Crash is a multiplatform game. Jak and Daxter was always a Sony-owned IP and game, like Forza is for Xbox.

I'm asking if there are any multiplatform games that were made exclusives because of Sony's acquisitions?

There wouldn't be any examples of this because most of the games made during the time these studios were acquired didn't release on Xbox or GameCube. The third party exclusive for either Microsoft or Nintendo during the PS2 era was extremely rare. PlayStation had the much larger install base and almost everything was released on it.

 

[darrylgorn]

Still find it hilarious that people are upset over a corporation acting like a corporation.

 

[Liamario]

Sony locking down big AAA releases for 1-2yr periods is also a way of buying your way to the top, and removing competition.
Sony already snapped up two big Bethesda exclusives and tried for Starfield. Microsoft responded by taking Bethesda off the table.

Both are competing by throwing their money around to lock games away from each other. Sony got to where they are today by locking games down to their platform, so people would choose their system over the competitions .

Nintendo is the only console maker that competes solely on the strength of their first party games. Sony isn't some white knight underdog. They're another Microsoft with less money to spend.

Sony has high quality first party games, Microsoft has less focus on that. Microsoft bought exclusives as much as Sony did. Sony bolstered those exclusives with high quality first party games, Microsoft didn't.
Rather than Microsoft investing in creativity and curating games of it's own, it has now decided to buy whole publishers.
Microsoft know they can't compete on the same terms as Sony and Nintendo, so they've decided to change the game and that change is anti competitive.

 

[Solidus_T]

I don't see the difference, in both instances a company is trying to gain traction by acquiring studios.

Are you saying they are allowed to do it only one time when they launch their brand and then it's a no go after that? How long do they have?

You specifically asked about organic growth and launching a brand. We can go back and read your question:

How many of Sony's studios were acquired when they launched the PS brand and how many were.. "organically" grown within the company?

Directly addressing your question, 20 years is enough time for plenty of organic growth - rather, what MS is doing is trying to spend money to make up for their failures and cut others out. It seems like you asked your question facetiously since you suddently "don't see the difference" despite the question being about organic growth. For example, Pokemon got to where it is today after plenty of investment and time. In comparison, Microsoft hasn't handled Halo favorably recently.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Sony has high quality first party games, Microsoft has less focus on that. Microsoft bought exclusives as much as Sony did. Sony bolstered those exclusives with high quality first party games, Microsoft didn't.
Rather than Microsoft investing in creativity and curating games of it's own, it has now decided to buy whole publishers.
Microsoft know they can't compete on the same terms as Sony and Nintendo, so they've decided to change the game and that change is anti competitive.

Sony bought their developers as well. They didn't create Naughty Dog, Insomniac or any other internal studio of theirs. They bought them.
The difference is Sony bought most of their teams generations ago, so it's all forgotten. Microsoft I would argue is pretty late to the buying developers game. What they had was lacking to Sony and Nintendo, because they spent so much time buying timed exclusives instead of bolstering their own internal studios.
Hence the reason they were the Forza/Gears/Halo company. They needed more internal teams in order to compete.

 

[Liamario]

Sony bought their developers as well. They didn't create Naughty Dog, Insomniac or any other internal studio of theirs. They bought them.
The difference is Sony bought most of their teams generations ago, so it's all forgotten. Microsoft I would argue is pretty late to the buying developers game. What they had was lacking to Sony and Nintendo, because they spent so much time buying timed exclusives instead of bolstering their own internal studios.
Hence the reason they were the Forza/Gears/Halo company. They needed more internal teams in order to compete.

They've had plenty of time to get their shit together. And plenty of time and money on buying developers. Now they're not buying developers, they're buying whole publishers.
They've no excuse.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Sony bought their developers as well. They didn't create Naughty Dog, Insomniac or any other internal studio of theirs. They bought them.
The difference is Sony bought most of their teams generations ago, so it's all forgotten. Microsoft I would argue is pretty late to the buying developers game. What they had was lacking to Sony and Nintendo, because they spent so much time buying timed exclusives instead of bolstering their own internal studios.
Hence the reason they were the Forza/Gears/Halo company. They needed more internal teams in order to compete.

And as I explained earlier, buying studios is not bad. Making previously multiplatform games exclusives is.

Did anybody complain when Microsoft acquired Playground or Undead Labs? No. So why would anyone complain if Sony acquired Naughty Dog or Insomniac or HouseMarque?

It's disingenuous to compare HouseMarque and Naughty Dog with Zenimax and Activision.

 

[SmokedMeat]

They've had plenty of time to get their shit together. And plenty of time and money on buying developers. Now they're not buying developers, they're buying whole publishers.
They've no excuse.

I agree that they should've done this years ago, but they're doing it now. It is what it is.

I think Bethesda should be more than enough. That gave them a lot. They shouldn't get their hands on Acti-Blizzard or any other publisher.

 

[SmokedMeat]

And as I explained earlier, buying studios is not bad. Making previously multiplatform games exclusives is.

Did anybody complain when Microsoft acquired Playground or Undead Labs? No. So why would anyone complain if Sony acquired Naughty Dog or Insomniac or HouseMarque?

I don't recall the conversation being about people complaining? You didn't hear it from me at least, so take it up with those people.

Buying up an entire publisher and gaining ownership of their franchises is going to mean no more multiplatform. It sucks, but that's just how it is. Microsoft is playing catch up, and they've got very deep pockets.

Wasn't there some stat that 80% of PlayStation owners don't own an Xbox? Microsoft obviously wants and needs to change that.

 

[Heisenberg007]

I don't recall the conversation being about people complaining? You didn't hear it from me at least, so take it up with those people.

Buying up an entire publisher and gaining ownership of their franchises is going to mean no more multiplatform. It sucks, but that's just how it is. Microsoft is playing catch up, and they've got very deep pockets.

Wasn't there some stat that 80% of PlayStation owners don't own an Xbox? Microsoft obviously wants and needs to change that.

I wasn't saying that you were complaining. Was more of a rhetorical thing.

I agree, they are trying to be competitive and are trying to change the market share. They have every right to do that; it is just that their methods are anti-competitive. And I'm glad that regulators are stopping their attempts.

As I said earlier, acquiring a Playground or an Undead Lab should have been their way forward. That's also how Sony did it. But acquiring a Zenimax or ABK is just anti-competitive and should not be allowed.

 

[SmokedMeat]

I wasn't saying that you were complaining. Was more of a rhetorical thing.

I agree, they are trying to be competitive and are trying to change the market share. They have every right to do that; it is just that their methods are anti-competitive. And I'm glad that regulators are stopping their attempts.

As I said earlier, acquiring a Playground or an Undead Lab should have been their way forward. That's also how Sony did it. But acquiring a Zenimax or ABK is just anti-competitive and should not be allowed.

I hope it doesn't happen.

I also feel like others that Microsoft does a piss poor job of managing their studios. There needs to be a shake up over there.

I'm sure Bobby Kotick doesn't give a shit, but we certainly care about these franchises and don't want to see them locked down, and run into the ground.

 

[Liamario]

I agree that they should've done this years ago, but they're doing it now. It is what it is.

I think Bethesda should be more than enough. That gave them a lot. They shouldn't get their hands on Acti-Blizzard or any other publisher.

Bethesda is enough, but it won't be.

 

[Heisenberg007]

I hope it doesn't happen.

I also feel like others that Microsoft does a piss poor job of managing their studios. There needs to be a shake up over there.

I'm sure Bobby Kotick doesn't give a shit, but we certainly care about these franchises and don't want to see them locked down, and run into the ground.

TBH, I don't really care about ABK franchises as much as I rarely play their games. It is just that these purchases set the wrong precedence because of their anti-competitive nature.

And apart from the studio shakeup, there are a ton of other things that are eating the Xbox division day by day: Game Pass has done more harm than good, third-party support is drying up because of lower console sales, lower console sales are because Xbox is focused on Cloud and does day-one PC releases, lower market share makes it difficult to get third-party exclusivity and marketing deals, poor localization in non-NA regions, poor marketing of their games, 18-month contractors in all studios to save money ...

There are just a lot of issues that they will have to fix first. And they refuse to resolve those issues and then complain about the low market share as a justification to buy more publishers. I hope the same as you -- that it doesn't happen because Xbox's current position is Xbox's own fault.

 

[ActusReusJB]

TBH, I don't really care about ABK franchises as much as I rarely play their games. It is just that these purchases set the wrong precedence because of their anti-competitive nature.

And apart from the studio shakeup, there are a ton of other things that are eating the Xbox division day by day: Game Pass has done more harm than good, third-party support is drying up because of lower console sales, lower console sales are because Xbox is focused on Cloud and does day-one PC releases, lower market share makes it difficult to get third-party exclusivity and marketing deals, poor localization in non-NA regions, poor marketing of their games, 18-month contractors in all studios to save money ...

There are just a lot of issues that they will have to fix first. And they refuse to resolve those issues and then complain about the low market share as a justification to buy more publishers. I hope the same as you -- that it doesn't happen because Xbox's current position is Xbox's own fault.

Just curious, if you were in the exact position that Xbox was, would you buy ABK if you could? It seems a bunch of people in this thread share your sentiments that MS screwed up in the past and/or don't have the capability to build the quality games that Sony is known for. I honestly look at this as MS is just doing what most if not all of us would do.

From my perspective they don't have the time to organically catch up to Sony. They need to do something to disrupt the market. GamePass failed to move the needle, so did the acquisition of Bethesda. So they are going even more drastic.

I think MS expected the Bethesda deal to influence sales more than it did. I look at the testimony where MS CFO indicated they had modeled some future Zenimax games being also available on PS and the decision to make them entirely exclusive would change their forecasts.

 

[Syphon Filter]

-Backwards compatibility.
-Forwards compatibility.
-A company that isn't frugal about their servers
-A game company that doesn'thave their president trashing their games from generations ago "who'd want to play that?"
-free enhancements for old games
-free cloud saves
-competition
-quick resume for multiple games

Gamepass

It's not real backward compatability since it requires online(drm) to use, which defeats the purpose of preserving games. Gamepass is awful and anti consumer since it devalues games and you dont own those games. xbox doesnt offer anything anymore like before with xbl and any franchise hey have is ruined by now.

 

[KXVXII9X]

This is the cold hard truth that a lot of people have been saying for a long time but get called console warriors or Sony ponies or whatever the hell else.

People have been warning about how Microsoft and their business practices are a danger to the video game industry. Game pass the best deal in gaming? No, it's a race to the lowest common denominator, keep people subscribed at all costs, push out mediocre content as fast as possible service that will devalue video games and dissuade developers from making great games with great effort.

Buying publishers? Promising multiplats? Anyone with a brain can see through that nonsense as being purely anti-competitive and trying to force their competitors out.

Microsoft should go third party themselves, or even better, dissolve Xbox and piss off right out of the industry before they ruin it forever.

I remember when I first came to these forums and there was this heavy push for Xbox and Phil Spencer and felt it was so odd and cultish. Same with the gaming media.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Just curious, if you were in the exact position that Xbox was, would you buy ABK if you could? It seems a bunch of people in this thread share your sentiments that MS screwed up in the past and/or don't have the capability to build the quality games that Sony is known for. I honestly look at this as MS is just doing what most if not all of us would do.

From my perspective they don't have the time to organically catch up to Sony. They need to do something to disrupt the market. GamePass failed to move the needle, so did the acquisition of Bethesda. So they are going even more drastic.

I think MS expected the Bethesda deal to influence sales more than it did. I look at the testimony where MS CFO indicated they had modeled some future Zenimax games being also available on PS and the decision to make them entirely exclusive would change their forecasts.

I honestly would not buy ABK. This won't move the needle for Xbox, just like Zenimax did not.

There are other things that Xbox needs / needed to do. For some of those stuff, they have moved so far in the opposite direction that they have simply missed the train.

 

[93xfan]

It's not real backward compatability since it requires online(drm) to use, which defeats the purpose of preserving games. Gamepass is awful and anti consumer since it devalues games and you dont own those games. xbox doesnt offer anything anymore like before with xbl and any franchise hey have is ruined by now.

No, it doesn't require online for using BC. Maybe to authenticate a non primary console. I'd have to ask for proof of what you're saying as that has not been my experience.

Side note: Surprised by how many other people don't care about BC here. Maybe it's people being defensive. Wouldn't surprise me

 

[FunkMiller]

I honestly would not buy ABK. This won't move the needle for Xbox, just like Zenimax did not.

There are other things that Xbox needs / needed to do. For some of those stuff, they have moved so far in the opposite direction that they have simply missed the train.

Making some actual fucking games would be a good start.

Honestly, that really is the only thing that matters. Everything else is gravy.

 

[graywolf323]

I honestly would not buy ABK. This won't move the needle for Xbox, just like Zenimax did not.

There are other things that Xbox needs / needed to do. For some of those stuff, they have moved so far in the opposite direction that they have simply missed the train.

at this point they've made it clear the intent isn't to move the needle in the short-term but instead content starve their competition in the long-term

 

[ActusReusJB]

at this point they've made it clear the intent isn't to move the needle in the short-term but instead content starve their competition in the long-term

Which shouldn't work. People constantly attest that PlayStation's strength is their first party. So even if another ABK game didn't come to PS they should be fine, and they will be. The difference is there is now a reason for people to an Xbox (or a gaming PC).

 

[Heisenberg007]

at this point they've made it clear the intent isn't to move the needle in the short-term but instead content starve their competition in the long-term

That is true.

As it was just revealed that Minecraft revenue is 2x higher on PlayStation and 4x higher on Nintendo Switch than Xbox, yet Phil was frustrated with Minecraft Dungeon's multiplatform existence and wanted his team to find a way to make it exclusive.

He was ready to lose all that revenue to starve competitors in the long-term.