If Xbox games do well on PlayStation do both companies win?
- Thread starter Bryank75
- Start date
I mean, if Microsoft really does put stuff everywhere then it depends on if you personally like their games. I think the whole industry would benefit if Minecraft started doing worse, and not because of anything to do with Microsoft and Xbox, because the game itself has been "complete" for years and the recent additions are just clutter. Meanwhile I'd win if HFR and Pentiment do well because they are, if nothing else, unique and innovative.
As a consumer, if more games that interests me are coming to platform(s) I already own, that's a win.
Having to buy less hardware is a positive thing.
In the end hardware is just a means to access the software that I want to engage with.
Having to buy less hardware is a positive thing.
In the end hardware is just a means to access the software that I want to engage with.
Let's optimistically say Xbox doubles their game sales from now releasing on the platform 2x as big. Even with a 30% loss of paying Sony licencing, it's 40% more in sales than they currently make. You can see people on Resetera getting upset that Xbox would be giving 30% of their sales for nothing, but it's not nothing. Xbox would have access to the leading console user base.
So in this scenario I think it benefits everyone for them to sell well. Go third party > sales increase > Xbox realises it's more profitable to actually make and sell games instead of subscription slop > they cut their losses elsewhere and focus on developing good games.
If they don't sell well I suppose the best outcome is Xbox begins to sell IPs and publishers because they can't sustain them, but the biggest negative with Xbox has been that they're trying to destabilise the console gaming space because they're losing. They could easily have the profit and sales they want with good games on PS, so hopefully if they got that they would stop everything else.
So in this scenario I think it benefits everyone for them to sell well. Go third party > sales increase > Xbox realises it's more profitable to actually make and sell games instead of subscription slop > they cut their losses elsewhere and focus on developing good games.
If they don't sell well I suppose the best outcome is Xbox begins to sell IPs and publishers because they can't sustain them, but the biggest negative with Xbox has been that they're trying to destabilise the console gaming space because they're losing. They could easily have the profit and sales they want with good games on PS, so hopefully if they got that they would stop everything else.
No they don't win per say... they conceded there platform to cover the costs of development and keep Gamepass sustainable.
When they increase subscription prices and there is no value add, watch how they will have create a tier system similar to Playstation to keep the Console players happy....
Nothing shown so far has been mind blowing there is better quality being produced by third and second party partners......
Microsoft loses money on every Series X they sell. Console hardware is low margin even when things are going well. Sony is a lot better than MS at mass producing consoles, but they're doing the razor blade model at the end of the day. They want you buying [digital] games, DLC, subscriptions, etc where the real profit is made.
some of these games are expected to come to PS4 as well, which would make it more like 7x bigger. HiFi Rush is gonna get a payday off PS4 for sure.
D
Deleted member 223
Guest
No. PlayStation wins the most out of that equation.
Anything that lessens the draw of Xbox hardware, and diminishes Xbox hardware differentiation, even in a terminal state of decline is a win for the PlayStation ecosystem/hardware, short term or long term. Don't let anybody tell you different.
A platform holder is always gonna make that 30% cut and be the place publishers, small or large, indie devs, small or large come to sell their products. Being simply a publisher on the other hand is like having a noose around your neck all the time.... you either deliver what the audience wants or you're gonna suffer. Two different businesses, and the platform holder one is infinitely more attractive long term. Just the position of power alone that you hold on the industry is two completely different stratospheres of control. There are many publishers, there are only so many platform holders - I think that says it all really, for a simple mind.
If you're jeopardizing or speeding up the death of your platform business by diminishing software differentiation that's a long term loser. Now MS is obviously at the crossroads where their failure on the console platform business has been a foregone conclusion for a long time now so there is not much to save as they've been trying to save Xbox for close to a decade - at great expense. So now it's more of a "cut your loses" type situation. Still, these cats have yet to pull the plug on Xbox hardware.... and these are the same cats trying to get Nintendo to go multiplatform with their titles via corporate espionage and sabotage - at least the intent is there - the leaks don't lie. There is always some shenanigans afoot with MS. Until they're completely out of the Xbox hardware business, they're in.
Anything that lessens the draw of Xbox hardware, and diminishes Xbox hardware differentiation, even in a terminal state of decline is a win for the PlayStation ecosystem/hardware, short term or long term. Don't let anybody tell you different.
A platform holder is always gonna make that 30% cut and be the place publishers, small or large, indie devs, small or large come to sell their products. Being simply a publisher on the other hand is like having a noose around your neck all the time.... you either deliver what the audience wants or you're gonna suffer. Two different businesses, and the platform holder one is infinitely more attractive long term. Just the position of power alone that you hold on the industry is two completely different stratospheres of control. There are many publishers, there are only so many platform holders - I think that says it all really, for a simple mind.
If you're jeopardizing or speeding up the death of your platform business by diminishing software differentiation that's a long term loser. Now MS is obviously at the crossroads where their failure on the console platform business has been a foregone conclusion for a long time now so there is not much to save as they've been trying to save Xbox for close to a decade - at great expense. So now it's more of a "cut your loses" type situation. Still, these cats have yet to pull the plug on Xbox hardware.... and these are the same cats trying to get Nintendo to go multiplatform with their titles via corporate espionage and sabotage - at least the intent is there - the leaks don't lie. There is always some shenanigans afoot with MS. Until they're completely out of the Xbox hardware business, they're in.
Last edited by a moderator:
Makes it seem spiteful then doesn't it? Xbox could get more sales, gamers could play more games, but oh no Sony gets 30% for facilitating that as the market leader! AhhH!
There is no such thing as “second-party partners”.
The console maker is the first party and YOU are the second party. Any other company is a third party.
Second Party is a Nintendo PR term from their horseshit marketing for N64 to act like their lack of a software pipeline wasn’t so dire by painting third-parties with whom they had a close relationship as not being third parties for some unknown reason.
Regardless of the terminology, the sentiment of my argument is still valid! The 3/5 games that are Xbox console exclusives were mediocre at best (I think i spent more then 8 hours in the Granblue Demo).
I was hoping Hellblade would be God of War esque, but with what little we seen it looks like a tech demo, a POC to determine the xbox capabilities and then extended the scope of the project.....
Right now i would class it as Metal Gear Ground Zero....
Don't know. If I wanted the games on Xbox, I would still have one. If Xbox games come out on PS I am still not going to bother, at least with the current offerings that is ...
MS is already used to this on Android and iPhone. Software megasuccess trumps these petty distribution costs.