Support NeoGAF

[SenjutsuSage]

I think he's more referring to games like Plants Vs Zombies, Titanfall, Peggle 2 and the long list of games that Microsoft buys exclusivity to. Games that would have come to other consoles otherwise.

Edit: Or not. Ignore me.

Didn't the recent Geoff Keighley (spelled right?) report on Titanfall's development more or less state that the game was in trouble, and they required someone to step in and help fund the game, and Microsoft did so? I don't know really know how accurate that claim is, but I could have swore I read that somewhere. If that's truly the case, then Titanfall would fall in the category of games that wouldn't exist without their backing.

I don't know, so If I'm not right about this, please correct me.

 

[John Harker]

LTD right?

That's the impact of those strong first party titles. Definitely a plus for MS.

Yup, LTD.

Very successful first party titles, and an edge in shooters.

 

[Cirekiller]

1. Sounds like something they should have done prior to now right?

2. That is the same thing as the first. they should have seen this coming, just look at pc indies have blown up. they thought they were going to be able to dictate things this gen and they greatly overestimated their hand.

3. 343 was build to make halo, but if 343 starts showing halo fatigue, they need to let them do something else to get the creative juices flowing over there. just like sony with ND they could force them to keep churning out uncharted every 2 years, but they let them do something different with TLoU. it helps the devs think outside the box a little.

Agreed with #1 and 2. But look at what happened with Bungie, do you think that Bungie bought themselves out because they wanted to make more Halo games and MS wouldn't let them? It seems obvious to me that Bungie got Halo fatigue and MS wasn't having any of it. Besides that if MS spent as much money on 343 as I remember hearing about when that studio was founded I doubt they would want to spend that investment on something that is not proven to be a HUGE blockbuster hit franchise.

I think for Sony and NDs case, Sony knows that ND's talent is more important than any of their IPs, Uncharted is a good selling franchise but I think the talent making the game sells it more than the name of the game (this is made clear with TLoU selling super well despite not being called Uncharted:Zombie Edition). Also the fact that Sony doesn't have super blockbuster hits is a blessing in disguise, obviously having incredibly selling franchises are great, but it creates dependency on that franchise and forces them to have whoever develops that game to keep doing so forever. It is much better to have many modest-great selling games, then have 1-3 tentpole huge hits.

This is, of course, not to say that MS can't do a two team style studio ala ND with 343, I just don't think they find doing such a thing financially worth it. I guess if they were desperate enough for new IPs in their staple they can certainly do it.

Didn't the recent Geoff Keighley (spelled right?) report on Titanfall's development more or less state that the game was in trouble, and they required someone to step in and help fund the game, and Microsoft did so? I don't know really know how accurate that claim is, but I could have swore I read that somewhere. If that's truly the case, then Titanfall would fall in the category of games that wouldn't exist without their backing.

I don't know, so If I'm not right about this, please correct me.

That is correct. However at the outset, it was only supposed to be a 1-2 year exclusive, but they made a deal afterwards with EA for total exclusivity.

 

[SwiftDeath]

Yup, LTD.

Very successful first party titles, and an edge in shooters.

Forza's got to be doing really well especially as the non-TF XB1 SKUs include it now too although that would be probably be a drop in the bucket for its sales

 

[Daemul]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=491152

Not sure where in that 138 page thread though....

Jesus this thread is amazing, I lost it at this gif.

 

[not_so_special]

Didn't the recent Geoff Keighley (spelled right?) report on Titanfall's development more or less state that the game was in trouble, and they required someone to step in and help fund the game, and Microsoft did so? I don't know really know how accurate that claim is, but I could have swore I read that somewhere. If that's truly the case, then Titanfall would fall in the category of games that wouldn't exist without their backing.

I don't know, so If I'm not right about this, please correct me.

they said that...but devs as anyone can lie too,i dont believe for a second they cant make Ea pay them to make a multiplayer only game from the guys of COD

but alas its just my opinion,maybe im wrong but its no the first time devs lie and people believe with blind faith everything they said

 

[ShockingAlberto]

I'm really hoping Microsoft gets aggressive soon. One, because the Xbox One is the only system I do not own and this bothers me for reasons I can not fully articulate. Two, I got a tax return so I want to make it rain with the money I am not putting back in to student loans. Three, while Sony is doing a lot of things right, there are a lot of places where Microsoft could hit them hard and they seem content to leave them unassailed.

 

[Papercuts]

Didn't the recent Geoff Keighley (spelled right?) report on Titanfall's development more or less state that the game was in trouble, and they required someone to step in and help fund the game, and Microsoft did so? I don't know really know how accurate that claim is, but I could have swore I read that somewhere. If that's truly the case, then Titanfall would fall in the category of games that wouldn't exist without their backing.

I don't know, so If I'm not right about this, please correct me.

Yes, it sounded like a similar case to Bayonetta where the game wasn't actually going to make it without their help.

they said that...but devs as anyone can lie too,i dont believe for a second they cant make Ea pay them to make a multiplayer only game from the guys of COD

but alas its just my opinion,maybe im wrong but its no the first time devs lie and people believe with blind faith everything they said

Why would a developer lie and say they ran out of money, had to delay the game and cut singleplayer? It wasn't exactly coating them in a golden light.

 

[QuantumZebra]

what a sad state all of the next gen consoles are in if that is considered a system seller lineup.
Not saying you are wrong btw.

That + the rest of the launch lineup is a pretty damn solid first year for a console. PS3/360 and before that were rough first years.

 

[Cirekiller]

I'm really hoping Microsoft gets aggressive soon. One, because the Xbox One is the only system I do not own and this bothers me for reasons I can not fully articulate. Two, I got a tax return so I want to make it rain with the money I am not putting back in to student loans. Three, while Sony is doing a lot of things right, there are a lot of places where Microsoft could hit them hard and they seem content to leave them unassailed.

I don't see too many spots that SCE is vulnerable in with regards to PS4 that MS is in a position to exploit. Care to elaborate?

 

[Sobriquet]

Yes so it's worthwhile to indicate that's US only not WW as Sony's previous statement of 20.5M software and 7M hardware sales indicate a 2.93 WW tie ratio for the PS4 which I guess suggests the ROTW has higher than a 2.93 tie ratio to compensate for the USs

Yes, that's why I mentioned NPD.

 

[Amir0x]

We don't know if will be the case on launch.

And there is another factor. It's a Bungie game, Xbox fans may have more natural interest for Destiny.

Even if they matched price with PS4 by Destiny's launch (which is unlikely, unless they drop Kinect), they still have to contend with the stark value proposition that most of the market agrees is an issue. If it matched PS4's price, it's still got the worst version of multiplatform games and still is going to have the worst version of Destiny, if that was a motivation. It's still going to have apps all locked behind a paywall and for hardcore gamers, on top of the power issue, it's got the extremely damaging ID@Xbox policy still in place.

Xbox fans have left the Xbox infrastructure in droves already. If people haven't seen that already, it's only going to become more and more dramatically obvious as this gen goes on. And anecdotally, I was a huge 360 fan, spent 90% of my last-gen time on there online and off, purchased almost all my network/indie games on there, and almost my entire group that I played with religiously on 360 has left (except for my friend Eugene, he refuses to get any Sony system because he had a bad experience with Sony customer support back during the PS2 gen. Even though he had seven Xbox 360's break. Whatevs). This is a story that is repeating over and over again.

Destiny is going to sell the most by a substantial amount on PS4. It is going to be marketing to look -exclusively- PS4 in the same way as Titanfall was marketed to look -exclusively- XBO. They're got a huge deal on the advertising, they've got exclusive content, their version of Destiny is going to look much better. Any Bungie fan is going to want to play Bungie's vision at its best possible quality, and the most convenient thing about that is they don't even have to pay more for the convenience. They have to pay less. No amount of Xbox fanboy Halo loyalty is going to overcome the onslaught Sony and Activision have planned to shroud the Destiny legacy.

i want this

Wow, this one looks fucking hot. Totally want that.

 

[kswiston]

Yes so it's worthwhile to indicate that's US only not WW as Sony's previous statement of 20.5M software and 7M hardware sales indicate a 2.93 WW tie ratio for the PS4 which I guess suggests the ROTW has higher than a 2.93 tie ratio to compensate for the USs

Sony no doubt counts digital software in their total, which explains some of the difference.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

I don't see too many spots that SCE is vulnerable in with regards to PS4 that MS is in a position to exploit. Care to elaborate?

Microsoft could drop Gold for multiplayer tomorrow, if they wanted. It was a system that made sense when they were on the top of the industry, but if they're below the ladder on Sony who keeps kicking dirt on to them, then why even have it?

 

[Papercuts]

Sony no doubt counts digital software in their total, which explains some of the difference.

Wasn't NPD supposed to start tracking digital? Has there been any ETA on what's happening there?

 

[SwiftDeath]

Yes, that's why I mentioned NPD.

Sorry i know you said that. I was more just thinking out loud about what it means for the aggregate WW Tie Ratios

Microsoft could drop Gold for multiplayer tomorrow, if they wanted. It was a system that made sense when they were on the top of the industry, but if they're below the ladder on Sony who keeps kicking dirt on to them, then why even have it?

MS could drop the price of the XB1 to $1 and Nintendo could moneyhat the next GTA

There are many possibilities in this world. Some though are far less likely than others

 

[vpance]

MGSV: GZ =278k, PS4 ~ 54%, XBO ~ 20% (both combined 204k), PS3 ~ 19%

This result throws into question the release of FFXV on the Bone. FF skews even more heavily to PlayStation and on 6m sales with 2m in Japan, the best result for Xbox will be 500-700k sales for FFXV. I don't see that giving SE a decent ROI. If Japanese/PlayStation oriented franchises don't see an improvement on the Bone I could see the ports being cancelled unless MS waive their platform fee and tweak the ROI figure for SE.

Hopefully it also means that Konami will can the last gen versions of TPP and go all in for next gen. By the time it releases the ~26% of last gen purchases will be significantly lower. Full fat next gen please KojiPro!

Sony should just use the cash they got back from selling their SE shares and use it to buy XV exclusivity. Or maybe that is the plan...?

 

[Tigress]

Microsoft could drop Gold for multiplayer tomorrow, if they wanted. It was a system that made sense when they were on the top of the industry, but if they're below the ladder on Sony who keeps kicking dirt on to them, then why even have it?

How is that a weakness of Sony's that MS can exploit though? All that does is make MS not look bad in that regard anymore, and it's reactionary (it makes them not look like they are being generous but had to). It's not really MS exploiting a Sony weakness, that is more MS fixing a weakness of their own.

 

[donny2112]

Year Over Year

            2014  2013  % Change
XB1          311         
360          111   261   -57.47%
PS4          371         
PS3           67   211   -68.25%
WIU           70    67     4.48%
WII           28    91   -69.23%
3DS          159   230   -30.87%
NDS           86    
PSV           10    33   -69.70%
PSP                  8     
                  
Family                  
MSFT         422   261    61.69%
SONY         448   252    77.78%
NINT         257   474   -45.78%
                  
HAND         169   357   -52.66%
CONSOLE      958   630    52.06%

First let me say that I like the charts! That said, the scientist in me is totally balking at taking inputs with 1-3 significant digits and outputting 4 significant digits. :lol

 

[SwiftDeath]

Sony should just use the cash they got back from selling their SE shares and use it to buy XV exclusivity. Or maybe that is the plan...?

Spoiler

Not happening at all imo

 

[ShockingAlberto]

How is that a weakness of Sony's that MS can exploit though? All that does is make MS not look bad in that regard anymore, and it's reactionary (it makes them not look like they are being generous but had to). It's not really MS exploiting a Sony weakness, that is more MS fixing a weakness of their own.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean here.

If Microsoft dropped their Gold multiplayer requirement, then Sony is the only player in the industry with a paywall multiplayer requirement. How is that not attacking a weakness?

 

[Moneal]

Microsoft could drop Gold for multiplayer tomorrow, if they wanted. It was a system that made sense when they were on the top of the industry, but if they're below the ladder on Sony who keeps kicking dirt on to them, then why even have it?

no way they would do that. no way they would drop something that is as profitable as gold. that would be hundreds of millions in revenue a year. xbox division couldn't take that. even if ms could.

 

[Boke1879]

Even if they matched price with PS4 by Destiny's launch (which is unlikely, unless they drop Kinect), they still have to contend with the stark value proposition that most of the market agrees is an issue. If it matched PS4's price, it's still got the worst version of multiplatform games and still is going to have the worst version of Destiny, if that was a motivation. It's still going to have apps all locked behind a paywall and for hardcore gamers, on top of the power issue, it's got the extremely damaging ID@Xbox policy still in place.

Xbox fans have left the Xbox infrastructure in droves already. If people haven't seen that already, it's only going to become more and more dramatically obvious as this gen goes on. And anecdotally, I was a huge 360 fan, spent 90% of my last-gen time on there online and off, purchased almost all my network/indie games on there, and almost my entire group that I played with religiously on 360 has left (except for my friend Eugene, he refuses to get any Sony system because he had a bad experience with Sony customer support back during the PS2 gen. Even though he had seven Xbox 360's break. Whatevs). This is a story that is repeating over and over again.

Destiny is going to sell the most by a substantial amount on PS4. It is going to be marketing to look -exclusively- PS4 in the same way as Titanfall was marketed to look -exclusively- XBO. They're got a huge deal on the advertising, they've got exclusive content, their version of Destiny is going to look much better. Any Bungie fan is going to want to play Bungie's vision at its best possible quality, and the most convenient thing about that is they don't even have to pay more for the convenience. They have to pay less. No amount of Xbox fanboy Halo loyalty is going to overcome the onslaught Sony and Activision have planned to shroud the Destiny legacy.



Wow, this one looks fucking hot. Totally want that.

Can we tweet that image to Shu or Adam? They seriously NEED to do this. Not only does it look amazing but you'll be associating the Destiny brand with PS4 even more so than just a marketing deal.

 

[kmg90]

Microsoft could drop Gold for multiplayer tomorrow, if they wanted. It was a system that made sense when they were on the top of the industry, but if they're below the ladder on Sony who keeps kicking dirt on to them, then why even have it?

Dropping multiplayer? So the only reason to pay for gold is to access services that are free (to access) on every other device that isn't Xbox?

 

[SenjutsuSage]

That is correct. However at the outset, it was only supposed to be a 1-2 year exclusive, but they made a deal afterwards with EA for total exclusivity.

Yea, that's right. I may have the platform the game is on currently, but I can at least admit that if I had a different platform, say, a PS4, and was waiting for the game to arrive, I'd be pretty disappointed to learn that a big exclusive deal was made after the fact. Yea, the sequel is coming, but nobody likes to miss out on that first game on their preferred platform, so I totally get that.

 

[Amir0x]

I think 500k for infamous is pretty amazing. Huge pick-up over the last entry. This can be like a mid-tier franchise now, 3-4MM WW.

I think so too. And I think it'll have decent legs, as it remains one of a handful of really well regarded PS4 retail disc games so far.

no way they would do that. no way they would drop something that is as profitable as gold. that would be hundreds of millions in revenue a year. xbox division couldn't take that. even if ms could.

Yup. Actually the worse Microsoft does, the lower the probability of that happening - XBL Gold is where they make a big chunk of their money, and because of the stern warnings that the gaming division needs to make a profit consistently, they can't take that risk if they are not going to compensate with wild success elsewhere.

 

[Boke1879]

MGSV: GZ =278k, PS4 ~ 54%, XBO ~ 20% (both combined 204k), PS3 ~ 19%

This result throws into question the release of FFXV on the Bone. FF skews even more heavily to PlayStation and on 6m sales with 2m in Japan, the best result for Xbox will be 500-700k sales for FFXV. I don't see that giving SE a decent ROI. If Japanese/PlayStation oriented franchises don't see an improvement on the Bone I could see the ports being cancelled unless MS waive their platform fee and tweak the ROI figure for SE.

Hopefully it also means that Konami will can the last gen versions of TPP and go all in for next gen. By the time it releases the ~26% of last gen purchases will be significantly lower. Full fat next gen please KojiPro!

Also no doubt Sony will have some sort of marketing deal with SE for FF15 and KH3.I just don't see the sales on the Bone being all that worth it.

 

[SwiftDeath]

Yea, that's right. I may have the platform the game is on currently, but I can at least admit that if I had a different platform, say, a PS4, and was waiting for the game to arrive, I'd be pretty disappointed to learn that a big exclusive deal was made after the fact. Yea, the sequel is coming, but nobody likes to miss out on that first game on their preferred platform, so I totally get that.

I still kind of find the later full exclusivity deal a tad odd. I mean if they had a years exclusivity than TF1 would come out on PS4 in 2015. By that time with the larger libraries it's debut would be severely muted in comparison. I can only assume that MS saw informed customers realize that the game was likely coming to PS platforms and wanted to change that?

I mean after March HW numbers I think MS likely would've preferred not going for full exclusivity on it. Maybe it was cheap though, hmm...

 

[donny2112]

Is that from "Death Becomes Her"?

 

[EdReedFan20]

With the Vita numbers, I'm wondering something. 1: Does Sony make profit on each Vita yet (i.e. Does the Vita cost in stores than it does to produce). 2: Do we know how big the shipments are? If Vita is profitable for Sony, maybe they're purposefully producing smaller shipments because of the handheld market in the US. It would be interesting to see how many Vitas are sold compared to those that are shipped to retailers. I wonder if it's closer than we realize. I think if the Vita does produce profit per system sold, Vita won't be going away for a while. Besides, I think no matter what, Sony will always stick to their promise of 10 year minimum support of their systems.

 

[SwiftDeath]

Is that from "Death Becomes Her"?

Google says yes

https://www.google.com/search?tbs=s...w8ogzFehAVIOHUleaJoVaoXr-6KgkLNkq7rGcRkafK4BY

Cool. Thanks!

No worries bud

 

[Garrett 2U]

they said that...but devs as anyone can lie too,i dont believe for a second they cant make Ea pay them to make a multiplayer only game from the guys of COD

but alas its just my opinion,maybe im wrong but its no the first time devs lie and people believe with blind faith everything they said

In your conspiracy theory, is Geoff in on it too? Or was he just bamboozled by all of the 'lying' devs who spoke anonymously?


Also, it wasn't always a multiplayer only game, that was one of the concessions they had to make when trying to find additional funding.
Clearly you didn't read the article and are speaking out of pure ignorance and personal bias.

 

[donny2112]

Google says yes

https://www.google.com/search?tbs=s...w8ogzFehAVIOHUleaJoVaoXr-6KgkLNkq7rGcRkafK4BY

Cool. Thanks!

 

[StoopKid]

Microsoft could drop Gold for multiplayer tomorrow, if they wanted. It was a system that made sense when they were on the top of the industry, but if they're below the ladder on Sony who keeps kicking dirt on to them, then why even have it?

This thread is gold.

 

[kswiston]

With the Vita numbers, I'm wondering something. 1: Does Sony make profit on each Vita yet (i.e. Does the Vita cost in stores than it does to produce). 2: Do we know how big the shipments are? If Vita is profitable for Sony, maybe they're purposefully producing smaller shipments because of the handheld market in the US. It would be interesting to see how many Vitas are sold compared to those that are shipped to retailers. I wonder if it's closer than we realize. I think if the Vita does produce profit per system sold, Vita won't be going away for a while. Besides, I think no matter what, Sony will always stick to their promise of 10 year minimum support of their systems.

Vita is 2 years old and largely made from cellphone components. No way it's not profitable by this point.

 

[ChosenPredator]

Even if they matched price with PS4 by Destiny's launch (which is unlikely, unless they drop Kinect), they still have to contend with the stark value proposition that most of the market agrees is an issue. If it matched PS4's price, it's still got the worst version of multiplatform games and still is going to have the worst version of Destiny, if that was a motivation. It's still going to have apps all locked behind a paywall and for hardcore gamers, on top of the power issue, it's got the extremely damaging ID@Xbox policy still in place.

Xbox fans have left the Xbox infrastructure in droves already. If people haven't seen that already, it's only going to become more and more dramatically obvious as this gen goes on. And anecdotally, I was a huge 360 fan, spent 90% of my last-gen time on there online and off, purchased almost all my network/indie games on there, and almost my entire group that I played with religiously on 360 has left (except for my friend Eugene, he refuses to get any Sony system because he had a bad experience with Sony customer support back during the PS2 gen. Even though he had seven Xbox 360's break. Whatevs). This is a story that is repeating over and over again.

Destiny is going to sell the most by a substantial amount on PS4. It is going to be marketing to look -exclusively- PS4 in the same way as Titanfall was marketed to look -exclusively- XBO. They're got a huge deal on the advertising, they've got exclusive content, their version of Destiny is going to look much better. Any Bungie fan is going to want to play Bungie's vision at its best possible quality, and the most convenient thing about that is they don't even have to pay more for the convenience. They have to pay less. No amount of Xbox fanboy Halo loyalty is going to overcome the onslaught Sony and Activision have planned to shroud the Destiny legacy.



Wow, this one looks fucking hot. Totally want that.

yooooo is that real....i would definitely buy another ps4 just for that lol

 

[Scully Scully Scoo]

Sony should just use the cash they got back from selling their SE shares and use it to buy XV exclusivity. Or maybe that is the plan...?

i dont understand this whole sony should pay se to make ffxv exclusive stuff, what is the point to it? 80% of the sales will prob happen on sony platforms anyway so what would be the point of making it exclusive except to satisfy the needs to fanboys when making list wars?

i hope sony invest that money in new ip

 

[ShockingAlberto]

Dropping multiplayer? So the only reason to pay for gold is to access services that are free (to access) on every other device that isn't Xbox?

Or just drop it as a whole. Or match PS+ services without the multiplayer restriction.

It would be painful, I'm not saying it won't be. But they have to take their lumps somewhere and this would be as good a place as any.

 

[EdReedFan20]

Vita is 2 years old and largely made from cellphone components. No way it's not profitable by this point.

Plus the new model probably cut even more cost. So, maybe in a business sense Vita is not a flop for Sony. If it makes money for them, isn't that all that matters (to them).

 

[SwiftDeath]

yooooo is that real....i would definitely buy another ps4 just for that lol

No fan made

i dont understand this whole sony should pay se to make ffxv exclusive stuff, what is the point to it? 80% of the sales will prob happen on sony platforms anyway so what would be the point of making it exclusive except to satisfy the needs to fanboys when making list wars?

i hope sony invest that money in new ip

Yep, makes little sense from a business or PS4 user perspective

 

[Tamanon]

They'd sooner drop the price than Gold, because Gold at least represents a continued stream of income.

 

[vpance]

Spoiler

Not happening at all imo

At this point buying that exclusivity could arguably be a better investment of their cash instead of continuing having it sit in useless SE shares for over a decade, if it was a choice between the two.

If Sony really wanted to stick it to MS they should look to buy a few more exclusives rather than continuing investing too much into first party, especially after the SSM debacle. Having that two pronged attack of decent WWS output plus a taste of the old days of PS2 3rd party domination would be a formidable strategy.

 

[TheFLYINGManga_Ka]

Bet Type 0 would've sold triple FFX collection, at least digitally.

 

[SwiftDeath]

At this point buying that exclusivity could arguably be a better investment of their cash instead of continuing having it sit in useless SE shares for over a decade, if it was a choice between the two.

If Sony really wanted to stick it to MS they should look to buy a few more exclusives rather than continuing investing too much into first party, especially after the SSM debacle. Having that two pronged attack of decent WWS output plus a taste of the old days of PS2 3rd party domination would be a formidable strategy.

Frankly while I do agree that 3rd Party exclusives can be a big deal, I'm not convinced that PS4 would sell enough more units with FFXV as a exclusive versus not, simply because of how well FF sells on their consoles currently

 

[Amir0x]

Or just drop it as a whole. Or match PS+ services without the multiplayer restriction.

It would be painful, I'm not saying it won't be. But they have to take their lumps somewhere and this would be as good a place as any.

What I want to know is if people just think this is a strategy they should pursue, or if people think Microsoft is actually capable of pursuing that strategy given the internal politics right now. I know it's hard to believe, but despite how much money Microsoft has, every little scrap of detail we have heard from what is going on is that they expect the gaming division to start becoming consistently profitable and not just a neutral or downward weight. Changing XBL Gold pricing or removing it entirely would be hugely damaging to their ability to maintain profitability. What would they replace that profit with? I do not think enough people would hop on board XBO after that action to justify the loss in associated profits, unfortunately.

 

[thebigmanjosh]

How is that a weakness of Sony's that MS can exploit though? All that does is make MS not look bad in that regard anymore, and it's reactionary (it makes them not look like they are being generous but had to). It's not really MS exploiting a Sony weakness, that is more MS fixing a weakness of their own.

I wouldn't even consider that fixing a weakness unless they got rid of Gold altogether. Removing the multiplayer requirement would just decrease the subs value and make them look worse. Why pay 60$ a year just to have the privledge of accessing the entertainment apps you already own? At least now it can be justified to some extent.

 

[Scully Scully Scoo]

Or just drop it as a whole. Or match PS+ services without the multiplayer restriction.

It would be painful, I'm not saying it won't be. But they have to take their lumps somewhere and this would be as good a place as any.

it would probably cost ms less to buy out gta 6 exclusivity then drop the xbl gold revenue stream all together. no way either is happening, they certainly need to make xbl, in terms of value, up to par with ps+. after subbing to ps+ im not going to sub to xbl just for the right to play multiplayer.

 

[ZSaberLink]

Never mind.

 

[astrogamer]

You know, I don't think anyone asked for Yaiba's numbers. I'm going to guess it flopped terribly but I'm kind of morbidly curious for how badly.

 

[SwiftDeath]

What I want to know is if people just think this is a strategy they should pursue, or if people think Microsoft is actually capable of pursuing that strategy given the internal politics right now. I know it's hard to believe, but despite how much money Microsoft has, every little scrap of detail we have heard from what is going on is that they expect the gaming division to start becoming consistently profitable and not just a neutral or downward weight. Changing XBL Gold pricing or removing it entirely would be hugely damaging to their ability to maintain profitability. What would they replace that profit with? I do not think enough people would hop on board XBO after that action to justify the loss in associated profits, unfortunately.

Hmm wouldn't Xbox fitness, Skype subs and Xbox video highly suggest MS is superbly focused on selling subs and therefore it's highly unlikely they want to remove the golden goose of Xbox Gold?

Edit: Upon checking Xbox Video isn't a streaming service but a marketplace. Still MS is focused on selling content and subs after intial hardware and software purchases [Sony is of course as well]