Support NeoGAF

[JohnnyFootball]

Oh yeah developing a AAA game every few years, pouring in time, work, money and resources to develop the assets and hope the game is good and sell enough to recoup investment costs and start generating revenue is much better than maintaining an already released product, updating it, releasing content incrementally while it generates revenue via MTX or Subs.

Rare right now after finding out they're not "Premiere AAA developers" anymore

Again never run a business, you just suck at it.

Poor baby, someone's feelings are hurt because they are losing an argument.

I actually looked at numbers for Sea of Thieves and it turns out I made the mistake of taking what you said at face value. The only thing they have said is that it had reached 30 millions players. Meaning that over the course of 7 years 30 millions people have logged into play it. They have said NOTHING about about how much revenue that is actually generated. According to Steam, they haven't averaged over 15000 players since April 2022. Not bad actually, but not exactly the money printing machine you are claiming. Lets assume they get what? 3X that on Xbox? where I'd wager most people are playing it. Call of Duty MW2 on the otherhand has over 7 million players per month. Not a fair comparison, but it doesn't scream runaway success that you claim.

Never argue with about business, you suck at it and clearly can't read between the lines. Have fun.

 

[mckmas8808]

Wrong, its software. It always comes back to software.

No it's BOTH! Software "AND" Hardware. Some of us has said all these things Jez just typed up years ago. But some didn't want to listen.

 

[analog_future]

What a braindead article.


Horizon Forbidden West runs on PS4 and arguably looks better than any other game in existence.

And whether the Series S exists or not, Microsoft first party titles all also come to PC day one, and have to run on PCs specced significantly lower than the Series S anyway.


It's an asinine argument.

 

[gothmog]

I would not be surprised if Microsoft is reconsidering Xbox as a hardware platform. Seems so much easier to become the biggest third party publisher in this climate than to try and boost hardware sales.

 

[LordBlodgett]

Hard Disagree! I think they would be even further behind without the Series S. I have several family members and friends who chose the Series S for their kids console, several of them with Gamepass for the same reason (kids have access to a bunch of games and monthly cost is acceptable). I think the only reason they haven't been completely blown out of the water this gen is by being the budget console.

Their biggest problem, stretching into the last gen is that they are barely giving people a reason to buy their hardware instead of a Playstation. Most of their exclusive games in the last 5 years have not been must have games. People who play a lot of multiplayer games will also go to the system their friends are playing on (network effect). As Sony became more dominant last gen the network effect helped Sony and hurt Microsoft. I'm thinking back to Halo 3 days, and how many Xbox 360 consoles were sold just because it was must have, and you needed a 360 to play it. They have a software problem, and I'm hoping that their purchases will help kickstart them with system sellers like Starfield.

 

[Red5]

Poor baby, someone's feelings are hurt because they are losing an argument.

I actually looked at numbers for Sea of Thieves and it turns out I made the mistake of taking what you said at face value. The only thing they have said is that it had reached 30 millions players. Meaning that over the course of 7 years 30 millions people have logged into play it. They have said NOTHING about about how much revenue that is actually generated. According to Steam, they haven't averaged over 15000 players since April 2022. Not bad actually, but not exactly the money printing machine you are claiming. Lets assume they get what? 3X that on Xbox? where I'd wager most people are playing it. Call of Duty MW2 on the otherhand has over 7 million players per month. Not a fair comparison, but it doesn't scream runaway success that you claim.

Never argue with about business, you suck at it and clearly can't read between the lines. Have fun.

On one hand we have Rare enjoying the success of Sea of Thieves so much they don't care to develop another game on the other hand we have you . Facts trump your fantasies kid, go play Video Game Dev Tycoon.

 

[mckmas8808]

What a braindead article.


Horizon Forbidden West runs on PS4 and arguably looks better than any other game in existence.

And whether the Series S exists or not, Microsoft first party titles all also come to PC day one, and have to run on PCs specced significantly lower than the Series S anyway.


It's an asinine argument.

Some of you guys just don't seem to "get it". The bolded IS THE PROBLEM. Their whole hardware strategy was bad from the beginning. It's why Nintendo was smart to change their hardware approach to only making games for the Switch and not having a console and then a separate handheld gaming system.

Sony too. They have two different skus, but the only difference is one has a blu-ray drive. The system is the exact same outside of that one thing. Too many skus is bad!

 

[Senua]

MS flight sim close second

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Phil has made a lot of desperate moves to try and push hardware, it’s all been a disaster

Consumers aren’t that price conscious. They just want a great platform to play great games

Series S was a massive strategic blunder, but even that pales to how they’ve managed their studios

How Matt Booty has a job is beyond me, the guy sits around all day thinking of how to outspend the competition rather than addressing real root cause problems that can’t be solved with money

 

[Skifi28]

The hardware at launch should have smelled like cheetos, now it's too late. Those pizza controllers don't have much of an impact on their own.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Why can't Microsoft make Xbox revision like Sony keeps doing ? There is already 6nm PS5 and now disc less version, PS5 Pro and 5nm PS5 Slim rumor also recently. Why there is no such rumor going on with the Xbox ? Microsoft are happy to buy a 70billion $ company but cannot hire guys to make Xbox revision ?

Contracts. Everything that follows is just an example of how it works.

When you set out to make a console, you get into a contract with your chip OEM. You lock in a contract for say... 30M chips on a 7nm process. Or more specifically, x number of wafers that can get you 30M chips. There is scale, if you are asking for 10M chips, it would cost you significantly less than if you were asking for 5M.. or 3M. And when a new node is released, demand on that node is always higher and yields may not even be that great, so wafers on that node is going to cost a lot, especially if you want a small number of chips. Basically, to get the best deals, you have to order a lot of chips.

See how it becomes a problem?

Sony can go in and ask for 30M chips and get a great deal on those because they know they will sell all those chips. And when a new node is running, Sony can go and ask for 20M chips, then when 5nm comes along, ask for 30M chips on that.

How can MS go to 5nm, when they still have not sold through the 7nm wafers they already are in contract for? They still have to pay for those chips even if they use them or not.

 

[Thief1987]

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

D DestinRL

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Thats pretty good.

This thread is going to be golden I can feel it

 

[HeWhoWalks]

I'm a playstation fan, but I'm desperate for xbox to make a serious come back and go toe to toe against sony like they did in the ps360 era. You can't have a situation where playstaion just completely dominates the home console space like they have done these past 2 gens. Look at the amount of anti consumer crap sony are pulling, overpriced games, overpriced peripherals, over emphasis on GAAS, nickle and diming the consumer base and so on. I wish xbox hadn't completely shit the bed these last two gens or else we would have had a much more healthier console space . There's no way sony would have made some of these decisions if they had microsoft breathing down their neck. I hope xbox makes a comeback but I'm not convinced about Phil Spencer at all, especially the way he has managed the xbox first party studios, the lack of successful new ips should be worrying to any xbox fan.

Oh my...

"Overpriced games" - Compared to?
"Overpriced peripherals" - Again, compared to?
"Over emphasis on GAAS" - Um, how?
"Nickle and diming" - In what way?

The PS2 is still regarded by many as Sony's finest hour and it was their most dominant. Stay on point - Xbox's issues. They have to solve them before even looking at Sony, who's clearly doing something right as the consumers have spoken.

 

[Captain Toad]

How come there are so many gamepass subscribers who's lying here??

There's about to be a ton more. Of course, that's because they changed the name of Xbox Gold to GamePass. Hey, worked for Sony.

 

[Rentahamster]

article "it isn't software, it's hardware"

goes on to write about skipping software, 'visuals' etc al of which is software.

wat ....

I think the point is that when you trace back the trail of decisions that led to these software problems, many of them come back to the hardware issues. As in, having two different SKUs, having to make sure everything runs on the Series S too, etc, precipitated in a lot of these software issues they're seeing now.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Especially because they sell consoles at heavy losses, and then their userbase doesn't buy enough games for the whole thing to make a lot of financial sense.

Also, Phil's idea (leaked by emails) to shut down Xbox and pivot more towards mobile gaming wasn't a bad one. Xbox has gone nowhere despite 20 years. MS can make interesting AA games. They can excel at mobile gaming.

That's why they want the courts to open up the Apple & Google storefronts. It's all for that mobile store.

They could avoid so much hassle by just focusing on mobile & PC. And not arbitrarily withholding their games from other console platforms that can otherwise run them perfectly fine. They don't even need to cease Xbox hardware; just turn it into a line of NUC mini-PCs optimized for gaming.

Contracts. Everything that follows is just an example of how it works.

When you set out to make a console, you get into a contract with your chip OEM. You lock in a contract for say... 30M chips on a 7nm process. Or more specifically, x number of wafers that can get you 30M chips. There is scale, if you are asking for 10M chips, it would cost you significantly less than if you were asking for 5M.. or 3M. And when a new node is released, demand on that node is always higher and yields may not even be that great, so wafers on that node is going to cost a lot, especially if you want a small number of chips of chips. Basically, to get the best deals, you have to order a lot of chips.

See how it becomes a problem?

Sony can go in and ask for 30M chips and get a great deal on those because they know they will sell all those chips. And when a new node is running, Sony can go and ask for 20M chips, then when 5nm comes along, ask for 30M chips on that.

How can MS go to 5nm, when they still have not sold through the 7nm wafers they already are in contract for? They still have to pay for those chips even if they use them or not.

MS basically set themselves up for failure. Again. This dual-console approach has screwed them over so badly, I don't think the full ramifications can be appreciated until around a couple years out.

I feel that's when the rot will become most evident. Right now, it's just some of even the most diehard of Xbox fans starting to realize "Hey, something about these Xbox sales numbers isn't right.". Thankfully now, without trying to outright lie and say the numbers are higher than reality, when literally every major source is reporting the same low numbers.

Poor baby, someone's feelings are hurt because they are losing an argument.

I actually looked at numbers for Sea of Thieves and it turns out I made the mistake of taking what you said at face value. The only thing they have said is that it had reached 30 millions players. Meaning that over the course of 7 years 30 millions people have logged into play it. They have said NOTHING about about how much revenue that is actually generated. According to Steam, they haven't averaged over 15000 players since April 2022. Not bad actually, but not exactly the money printing machine you are claiming. Lets assume they get what? 3X that on Xbox? where I'd wager most people are playing it. Call of Duty MW2 on the otherhand has over 7 million players per month. Not a fair comparison, but it doesn't scream runaway success that you claim.

Never argue with about business, you suck at it and clearly can't read between the lines. Have fun.

I'd actually say Sea of Thieves is probably 50:50 between PC and Xbox. IIRC the game got an extremely slow start on Xbox consoles but the PC community took more kindly to it, alongside the price cuts for it on Steam.

So if average player counts are around 15K on Steam, they are at best 50% higher than that on Xbox consoles. A 3-4x or more player ratio increase, would probably better apply to games like Halo Infinite (which, considering how dead it is on PC, isn't saying much).

 

[ADiTAR]

If people really cared about visuals Switch would have been dead in the water by now.

Xbox is lagging because they have no killer apps, awful delayed launches that end up meh to bad, and no brand hype.

Starfield alone won't be enough, with the amount of studios they own they can release a game every month. And someone there needs to organize budgets and plan in advance for that to happen.

 

[mckmas8808]

Look at what some posters said over 2 years ago about the Series S.

It isn't going to last and I think its a waste of money

Once games start being made natively for the PS5 and Series X you will start to see the power gap of the Series S

So for $100 less you are getting a weaker console with no disc drive = waste of money. You might as well have just saved up and got the Series X, I understand that it isn't easy to find right now but to be honest there isn't any point of rushing to own any of these consoles right now because of the lack of native games.

By the time you can walk into a store and buy a series X it will have more native games that will make your purchase worth it.

It's not supposed to last long. It was always a half measure.

You’ll see much better looking exclusive games on PS5 than on XSX, because of the series S. That’s going to Vite Microsoft in the ass in the future. They think that people will only care about 60 FPS, but when Sony begins to bring their stunning exclusives, even if they are 30 FPS, people will love them like they did with PS4.

Of course XSX is capable of much more, but Microsoft will not be able to utilize it the way they should, and will never be able to get a game like Sony will. You already see this with how they are struggling with Halo Infinite, and this is just the very beginning.

The Series S is a misunderstanding of the market by MS. The console audience might be price conscious, and most people don't jump in at launch, but rather when the price is lower.

However, most of the console market don't want gimped versions of consoles. They might take a while to buy a PS5, but they don't want to buy a half powered PS4.5, they want the real deal. That's why the Series X sells much better than the S.

it will be useless in the coming years. it sure is a great bargain right now, but it wont be able to keep up when ps5 are blowing minds with the games only possible on there because series s will hold the series x back.

we will see soon

I'm not going to argue MS motivations other than it is about money just like everyone else. I'm saying as a consumer that a $400 XSX DE is a much better value than $300 XSS. For a lot of folks I'm sure XSS is just fine. For others, like me, it doesn't make sense.

Because of limited RAM. Some engines are more RAM-heavy than others. RT specifically is very RAM intensive and idTech 7 was already quite heavy on VRAM, add RT to that, and there you go.

For DOOM, Billy Khan said in the interview they omitted RT from the S because of "differences in the hardware". And in fact, he was the one that was vocal about its RAM situation along with Mr. Axel (another engine programmer at IdSoft) before MS acquired Bethesda.

Remedy explicitly mentioned "hardware limitation" as the reason for omitting RT from the S for Control.

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/can-i-be-honest-here-i-don%E2%80%99t-think-the-xbox-series-s-is-going-to-last-very-long-into-the-generation.1602176/

Gaffers knew this was going to happen. Why didn't Microsoft?

 

[Gamer_By_Proxy]

At least the UI has ads. They got that down.

 

[Shane89]

Actually, it's both

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Probably just reading a little too much into this stuff but...

Between this article and the removal of that video on Jason Ronald talking about Series S (I guess it could also just be removed temporarily for some reason) it's almost as if something is going on.
Maybe they plan on loosening on some requirements regarding parity between the two models versions or something.

I'm curious how MS pull that off without facing a class-action lawsuit. Remember, they publicly sold the Series S as a system that would play all the same games as the Series X, at the same framerates, just at a 1440p resolution. No one forced them to make that pitch to the public; they did it themselves.

The only way Microsoft can loosen requirements for 3P to release games on the S, is if they are phasing both it and the Series X out of the picture, or shifting them to a non-console business model. Series S owners likely purchased that system expecting it to receive all the same content as Series X for the duration of the generation, but if MS phase out Series X with a mid-gen refresh under a different name, then they can also phase out the Series S and drop the mandate.

Would it suck for people who expected their Series S to last a good 7-8 years? Of course, but it is a legal backdoor they could take. Otherwise, the only other option is to completely move the Series S & X off the traditional console model, which would mean positioning them more as PC devices, and opening them up for full-on Windows support. At which point, the prior marketing promises for Series S can be rendered absolved since those were done under it being sold as a "home video game console"; a shift to a new business model would position it as a cheap NUC-style gaming PC instead.

Those are the only two real options Microsoft have here, IMO.

 

[Three]

You are welcome to think that and I hope that is true, but what has MS done that gives you faith that will happen?

Granted your fears aren't unwarranted but I think Bethesda will continue to operate well if MS have the sense to not interfere too much and just provide good funding to the already successful devs. Whether that happens I'm not sure, it's more blind faith from me.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Maybe, just admit they fumbled with games this gen. Bring the games and the people will come.

Great hardware, great service with game pass. Fumbled the games...3 years....and halo infinite and forza horizon...and Hi Fi Rush...Like WTF?

I know theres titles like Flight Sim that are great for the niche...but man MS...you fucked a great opportunity with this gen.

 

[Flabagast]

Phil everytimes he thinks about the Series S

 

[JohnnyFootball]

If people really cared about visuals Switch would have been dead in the water by now.

Xbox is lagging because they have no killer apps, awful delayed launches that end up meh to bad, and no brand hype.

Starfield alone won't be enough, with the amount of studios they own they can release a game every month. And someone there needs to organize budgets and plan in advance for that to happen.

I would immediately become Xboxes biggest fanboy if they told me that they had a Fallout game in development, Fallout 3 and New Vegas being remastered, and another Doom game. Put smaller studios on the remasters. Sadly, MS doesn't have a Bluepoint or Nixxes.

If I trusted that MS had the competence to properly leverage the IPs they now own, I would be OK with these acquisitions. I am not against exclusive software.

Never have been.

 

[CrustyBritches]

It has nothing to do with hardware. It all started with 343i botching the Halo Infinite release, then sinking the franchise. Xbox has a lack of consistent 1st-party releases.

They have Starfield and FM8 coming later this year that should help right the ship. From there on they need to have a quality 1st-party release every quarter, and probably even 2 for the holiday season.

 

[ByWatterson]

"My restaurant is failing not because my food sucks, but because the plates are bad."

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Look at what some posters said over 2 years ago about the Series S.

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/can-i-be-honest-here-i-don%E2%80%99t-think-the-xbox-series-s-is-going-to-last-very-long-into-the-generation.1602176/

Gaffers knew this was going to happen. Why didn't Microsoft?

MS confided with bean counters, suits, and astroturfers. Not gamers, developers and publishers.

It's the second time in two generations they've made that mistake.

It has nothing to do with hardware. It all started with 343i botching the Halo Infinite release, then sinking the franchise. Xbox has a lack of consistent 1st-party releases.

They have Starfield and FM8 coming later this year that should help right the ship. From there on they need to have a quality 1st-party release every quarter, and probably even 2 for the holiday season.

Their brand is damaged beyond simply having or not having 1P games. The PS5 hasn't seen a big 1P release from Sony this year up to this point, and is still setting records.

Xbox has a horrible brand image problem and dead momentum. Starfield will be the equivalent of getting the engine started again from parking, FM8 is like adding in a cup of gas while the tank is still almost empty. If they can't fill that tank up quick enough with consistent 1P AAA & AA releases, big 3P grabs for Xbox & Game Pass, some big 3P marketing deals, an actual marketing campaign, improving their distribution outside of US & UK and more, then you still have a dying brand.

And FWIW, neither Hellblade II nor Avowed look to be big deals for 2024, certainly not enough to keep going whatever momentum Starfield gives. In fact all efforts will somewhat limited by PC Day 1 availability.

 

[ADiTAR]

I would immediately become Xboxes biggest fanboy if they told me that they had a Fallout game in development, Fallout 3 and New Vegas being remastered, and another Doom game.

If I trusted that MS had the competence to properly leverage the IPs they now own, I would be OK with these acquisitions. I am not against exclusive software.

Never have been.

Maybe they are working on them. But someone there needs to manage all these studios and lead, do a gantt chart, when things need releasing and appropriate budgets for it. I know people hate Nintendo for the lackluster content in their sports games or quick remasters, but they have someone who leads and oversees all of these and allocates when they need a product done and how much they wanna spend on it.

They're like, Super Mario Strikers, we will prob sell 3m of it, so we can budget it for 30m in order to make the profit we need, and we need it in June so you have a 2 years. Go.

 

[xHunter]

So, for third-party developers, not only is developing for the Xbox Series X|S lineup more expensive (having to test and maintain two separate versions)

Wait, didnt people say that this is not the case? I remember reading people say that it would so easy to do.

So, for third-party developers, not only is developing for the Xbox Series X|S lineup more expensive (having to test and maintain two separate versions), it also comes with poorer margins, since you're obviously going to sell far less on Xbox Series X|S. The "S" version will also showcase games at their worst, which is not something developers would want to do ideally, making it easier for PlayStation to land marketing deals.

And now he is saying that the Series S is the real reason Sony gets all the marketing deals. I thought it was Sony abusing market power? What happened to that?

 

[envyzeal]

Go third party and you won't have a hardware problem

 

[Dcr1d3r]

Peter Moore...where art thou?

https://images.app.goo.gl/9daeHaR3MAhftveUA

 

[Optimus Lime]

The day that Microsoft decided to make their games available on PC was the day Microsoft's console division shat the bed.

Regardless of whether or not there are actually millions of gamers taking advantage of the situation, it altered the perception of value that the Xbox line retained. It doesn't feel special anymore, in the way that the PS5/Switch do.

And, I know. Sony has a PC intiative too. It's vastly, vastly different. That's got nothing to do with an olive branch to PC players and everything to do with brand extension and customer conversions. They want you to play The Last Of Us on Steam... and then want to play the sequel. Real bad. So bad that you buy a PS5. Sony on Steam is a marketing opportunity. Xbox on Steam is a core part of their strategy, and it was a stupid one that devalued their hardware.

And I'm primarily a PC player, but I own all of the consoles, and I wish Microsoft would give me a compelling reason to turn the Xbox on. But, they seem utterly disinterested in doing so.

 

[Gaelyon]

Contracts. Everything that follows is just an example of how it works.

When you set out to make a console, you get into a contract with your chip OEM. You lock in a contract for say... 30M chips on a 7nm process. Or more specifically, x number of wafers that can get you 30M chips. There is scale, if you are asking for 10M chips, it would cost you significantly less than if you were asking for 5M.. or 3M. And when a new node is released, demand on that node is always higher and yields may not even be that great, so wafers on that node is going to cost a lot, especially if you want a small number of chips. Basically, to get the best deals, you have to order a lot of chips.

See how it becomes a problem?

Sony can go in and ask for 30M chips and get a great deal on those because they know they will sell all those chips. And when a new node is running, Sony can go and ask for 20M chips, then when 5nm comes along, ask for 30M chips on that.

How can MS go to 5nm, when they still have not sold through the 7nm wafers they already are in contract for? They still have to pay for those chips even if they use them or not.

But certainly an entire chips factory doesn't cost more than $69 billions so why can't MS just buy all these factories and, you know, stop Sony at the same time ?

/S

 

[ZoukGalaxy]

You reap what you sow, and Microsoft sowed only lies promises year after year.

 

[Victor Omega]

Sony doesn't sell 40 million PS5 hardware because it can acquire a big gaming developer/publisher. Sony also doesn't sell 40 million consoles because that acquisition comes with one of the most popular franchises, which by acquiring said developer/publisher may or may not hurt their competitor.

Sony sold 40 million PS5 consoles because of their exclusive 1st and 2nd party game software. Period.

Let us not move the goalpost or metric every time numbers or sales do not meet Microsoft or Xbox's favor.

If Microsoft sees Xbox as a service like Netflix, treat its goals as such.
If Microsoft sees Xbox as a console brand like Sony, understand they can't redefine a 30+ years gaming industry because they have "no love" for exclusive games.

Apple knows IOS sells iPhones, HBO and Disney know Original Content brings subscribers, and Nintendo/Sony knows Exlcusive games sell hardware.

Microsoft has to choose one but understands BOTH require Original /exclusive content. Period.

 

[Neo_game]

Contracts. Everything that follows is just an example of how it works.

When you set out to make a console, you get into a contract with your chip OEM. You lock in a contract for say... 30M chips on a 7nm process. Or more specifically, x number of wafers that can get you 30M chips. There is scale, if you are asking for 10M chips, it would cost you significantly less than if you were asking for 5M.. or 3M. And when a new node is released, demand on that node is always higher and yields may not even be that great, so wafers on that node is going to cost a lot, especially if you want a small number of chips. Basically, to get the best deals, you have to order a lot of chips.

See how it becomes a problem?

Sony can go in and ask for 30M chips and get a great deal on those because they know they will sell all those chips. And when a new node is running, Sony can go and ask for 20M chips, then when 5nm comes along, ask for 30M chips on that.

How can MS go to 5nm, when they still have not sold through the 7nm wafers they already are in contract for? They still have to pay for those chips even if they use them or not.

You may be right reagrading the contracts and I think that is reason there are such low SX numbers also because out of 30M I guess the placed the order for SS and SX as 15million each . Before SS was released they did sell the One X for 300$ and were ready to take a hit. So the worst case scenario would be to sell the current model for a discounted price to clear the stocks for the new model or have both on sale.

 

[Banjo64]

All I know is I play my series way more than my ps5

what do you play?

 

[JohnnyFootball]

The day that Microsoft decided to make their games available on PC was the day Microsoft's console division shat the bed.

Regardless of whether or not there are actually millions of gamers taking advantage of the situation, it altered the perception of value that the Xbox line retained. It doesn't feel special anymore, in the way that the PS5/Switch do.

And, I know. Sony has a PC intiative too. It's vastly, vastly different. That's got nothing to do with an olive branch to PC players and everything to do with brand extension and customer conversions. They want you to play The Last Of Us on Steam... and then want to play the sequel. Real bad. So bad that you buy a PS5. Sony on Steam is a marketing opportunity. Xbox on Steam is a core part of their strategy, and it was a stupid one that devalued their hardware.

And I'm primarily a PC player, but I own all of the consoles, and I wish Microsoft would give me a compelling reason to turn the Xbox on. But, they seem utterly disinterested in doing so.

Yes, I play most 3rd party games on Xbox, because...well...I need something to play on it and they're typically better on Xbox than PS5. Weirdly, the difference hasn't been as substantial as I would expect.

Starfield will be the first exclusive game I will be playing only on PC and not xbox. As much as I LOVE playing on my PC, I still prefer the comfort of my couch in my living room.

My only concern right now is how well Starfield will run. I don't trust MS claims that this will be the most stable Bethesda Day 1 release and given how piss poor PC ports have been this year.

We will see.

 

[chromatic9]

Perhaps we were meant to buy it as living room decor then?

 

[havoc00]

what do you play?

halo MCC, Halo Infinite, exoprimal, a lot of stuff i stumbled upon on gamepass like high on life Ni no Kuni II Eiyuden Chronicle: Rising, gears

 

[ecentre]

This will be all over when the PS5 pro happens!
Believe it

 

[onQ123]

Storms

 

[Banjo64]

halo MCC, Halo Infinite, exoprimal, a lot of stuff i stumbled upon on gamepass like high on life Ni no Kuni II Eiyuden Chronicle: Rising, gears

Halo and Gears were big time sinks for me but Infinite and Gears 5 (p2p ranked/no dedicated servers) just made me realise that Xbox are just producing replicas in an attempt to chase the high of their 360 counterparts.

 

[ByWatterson]

Their brand is damaged beyond simply having or not having 1P games. The PS5 hasn't seen a big 1P release from Sony this year up to this point, and is still setting records.

Xbox has a horrible brand image problem and dead momentum. Starfield will be the equivalent of getting the engine started again from parking, FM8 is like adding in a cup of gas while the tank is still almost empty. If they can't fill that tank up quick enough with consistent 1P AAA & AA releases, big 3P grabs for Xbox & Game Pass, some big 3P marketing deals, an actual marketing campaign, improving their distribution outside of US & UK and more, then you still have a dying brand.

It's also starting to occur to me that Gamepass is actuality a pretty bad value proposition over time - unless you buy zero games.

Actual, full-tier Gamepass is about to be $17/mo, or $204 per year. That's about three full-priced games. Almost no one needs all of a publisher's titles, so even in MS did release three-four big drops per year, I'd have to really want that back catalog to stay in Gamepass.

The problem with THAT is those older titles are all cheap as hell. I'm planning on dropping Gamepass when my deal expires in January, so I just picked up Age of Empires II, Halo MCC, and Skyrim (which along with the F2P Halo Infinite comprise about 99% of my Xbox play time) for a total of....$35.

And then I buy full price games on Playstation, because I HAVE to have them. The only way to truly make Gamepass worth it is what publishers won't allow - BIG third party releases day and date. Resident Evil. Star Wars Jedi. Dead Space.

But that isn't going to happen.

So I'm good.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

halo MCC, Halo Infinite, exoprimal, a lot of stuff i stumbled upon on gamepass like high on life Ni no Kuni II Eiyuden Chronicle: Rising, gears

I like this post. As someone who thinks it is a huge long term mistake for Gamepass to have Day 1 AAA games. Yes, I get it many people who have Gamepass locked in for 3 years using $1 conversions etc, think it's absolutely great. I get it. Long term I don't think Gamepass has a prayers chance of being successful unless there is a massive influx of subscribers who pay $14.99 a month. There has been no evidence of that happening. If Starfield doesn't move the needle even slightly then it dead in the water.

I think there should be be a 6 month minimum window.

Where Gamepass I think would be amazing is if they made the core $9.99 and month $60 a year with games like the one you mentioned and bundle a years worth in new console purchases.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

I h

It's also starting to occur to me that Gamepass is actuality a pretty bad value proposition over time - unless you buy zero games.

Actual, full-tier Gamepass is about to be $17/mo, or $204 per year. That's about three full-priced games. Almost no one needs all of a publisher's titles, so even in MS did release three-four big drops per year, I'd have to really want that back catalog to stay in Gamepass.

The problem with THAT is those older titles are all cheap as hell. I'm planning on dropping Gamepass when my deal expires in January, so I just picked up Age of Empires II, Halo MCC, and Skyrim for a total of....$35.

I'm good.

I plan to sub for 1 month whenever the big AAA releases drop

Beat them, then cancel my sub

 

[ByWatterson]

I h


I plan to sub for 1 month whenever the big AAA releases drop

Beat them, then cancel my sub

Yep, exactly. Service games that I love, I'll just buy. Cheat to win on the others.