Clearly not semantics as clearly it's referring to the console not the studio. Otherwise every other MS owned studio would be mentioned too.Only one getting their knickers in a twist and arguing semantics, is you.
Go smell the fresh air for a short bit.
PR is PR. I have no insight into what they’re doing so I can’t comment on what’s truthful and what isn’t. I’m just waiting for the “Halo is coming to PlayStation and Switch 2” because that’s when shit gets real. Not when Flight Sim gets ported.So then Phil is lying when he said no game is off the table? Also porting isn't something that is just done immediately that way you seem to think it is. There were rumors that Halo MCC was one of the games but is having major issues.
Xbox Games Studios is the publisher. Just like PlayStation Studios. Hence Xbox games and PlayStation games.Clearly not semantics as clearly it's referring to the console not the studio. Otherwise every other MS owned studio would be mentioned too.
Bethesda for example publishes their own games, so Xbox Game Studios publisher doesn't have anything to do with them. Would be the same nonsense call Starfield "PC game".Xbox Games Studios is the damned publisher. Just like PlayStation Studios. Hence Xbox games and PlayStation games.
Why is this so hard for you?
That ship has sailedBecause they know gamers will go all "Xbox is dead" and overreact
Bethesda for example publishes their own games, so Xbox Game Studios publisher doesn't have anything to do with them. Would be the same nonsense call Starfield "PC game".
Indiana Jones has had one of the strangest sagas any game not named Starfield have had:I'd say Indiana Jones already qualified as that 'big' game.
A million would be a colossal disappointment. If it had been day and date, I'd say 7 million is a good number on Bethesda alone.Even though Gears or Halo would potentially have the most sales success, they will be the last to likely come to PlayStation. It makes sense for it to be Starfield. They could likely squeeze a million sales on the PS5 and nobody would care if Microsoft brought it to PlayStation.
If Starfield is such a garbage game, why do you want a port so bad?
I think if it launched day 1 on PlayStation it would have sold 4 to 7 million but the game has been memed to death at this point so only the hardcore Bethesda gamer will likely buy it now if it was on the PlayStation.A million would be a colossal disappointment. If it had been day and date, I'd say 7 million is a good number on Bethesda alone.
Right now, I think it could get 3-4 million.
Halo MCC and Gears Fenix trilogy would easily get 5M each.
At this point, that is almost free money for Xbox/MS. No reason to not do it.
I don't even think it would be that big of a deal at this point. The meltdowns have already occurred and people are basically expecting it at this point.Halo would be hilarious just to witness the melt down and the final nail for Xbox
Ah, I didn't know a console could develop games.
Microsoft considers "Xbox" the brand, encompassing their hardware and software. The slightest bit of context should let you know this was about XGS games.More over than saying that "Xbox" and "Xbox Game Studios" is the same thing.
Microsoft Gaming already englobe XGS and every other studio.Microsoft considers "Xbox" the brand, encompassing their hardware and software. The slightest bit of context should let you know this was about XGS games.
I remember listening to a gaming podcast at work, and in it, MAGG (Middle Aged Game Guy, also known as Colt Eastwood's cohost on XNC) made the point that them going with a prequel rather than a direct sequel to Gears 5 (which supposedly ended with a sequel hook) kinda hints at the fact the new Gears game will be multiplatform day 1. I actually think he's correct in his thinking.Avowed. Ironically, think they ones they keep off ps are halo, Forza, gears.