Incoming announcement on Xbox titles future exclusivity and publishing
- Thread starter Bryank75
- Start date
Skype, MSN Messenger, hotmail, their music format, Nokia, Windows Phone...
They were all bought at great price (for their time) and all let go in different ways.
You got me there lol
Honestly, I obviously don't follow this weirdo. I just know he's not a Xbox guy either. He's a fraud.
The man's Rocket League hours versus any other Xbox game is ridiculous.
Interesting
Here's my theory on things; I agree with Icerock on this because the leaked internal memos basically show that Microsoft's strategy with consolidation was foreclosure on PlayStation and cutting Sony off direct contact with many of their strongest 3P partners. That just can't be denied, it's painted in the language of those leaked internal memos and emails, and strategy documents. Like why even look into buying Ember Lab when you have ZERO direct working relationship with them? Oh, because they developed a game with Sony/SIE and could grow into a very capable developer, and a potential asset for PlayStation, so better to take them away before that happens. Without even so much a plan, likely, on how to help foster the studio's growth after acquiring them. Just anything to take potential competitive advantages away from Sony. That's what the consolidation strategy was basically shown to be in those leaked docs.
HOWEVER, I think something changed once they realized the concessions they had to make just to get ABK across the finish line (and even now, it still isn't 100% settled because the FTC are continuing their case). I think if MS were able to get ABK either without any concessions on COD or only doing the 3-year deal with Sony as originally planned, we wouldn't be hearing about any of these multi-console rumors right now. Because while 3 years of multiplat COD would still mean 3 more years on PlayStation (starting this year), that's perfectly fine to free up plans for a 10th-generation Xbox to lock COD down as a console exclusive from Day 1. Which, feel how you want about COD these day, would have been a BIG deal particularly in the US & UK, and a huge advantage for the next Xbox. That possibility would have kept any further plans of doing things the usual way, and best riding out the current gen rebuilding some goodwill, worthwhile.
Instead MS were forced to not only capitulate to keeping COD multiplat for fifteen years, but also had to give up cloud streaming rights to Ubisoft, an entirely different company. AND, I feel, were also forced internally to re-evaluate the Zenimax strat of keeping all those games console exclusive (at best I expect all Zeni games going forward to only be timed exclusives at best, but more and more becoming Day 1 across all available console platforms & PC), because we know this is what pissed off Pete Hines and caused him to leave. In fact, it's probably made more than a few of the talent upset, and MS don't want to risk more key talent departing (Shinji Mikami already left Tango and this strat for all Zenimax games might've been a factor as to why). I'd even say it's at least part of the reason some of the XGS creatives like Mike Brown and co. left Playground Games (among other reasons); hard to see MS bending over backwards to keep ABK same as it ever was, while relegating your own games to a dying console platform and Steam. That's probably demoralizing at some level.
Anyway, you add all that up and I think higher-ups at Microsoft might've just realized "What's the point in playing this console game?". As in, what's the point in pushing Xbox on a traditional console business model. I mean think about it; most of the XGS games revealed years ago are either in dev hell or won't do a lot for bolstering hardware sales or Game Pass sub growth once they do actually release. They might have marketing rights to COD going forward but only for a platform where they've conditioned many players to get games "free" in a sub service (Xbox), so they're always going to have suppressed sales & revenue vs. what it could've been even if PS & Nintendo gamers continue buying them. Which also means, COD is still multiplat, and has to remain that way for 15 years (2039 at earliest before it can be console exclusive), so they can't leverage console exclusivity as a boost for current for future hardware. The next Diablo, Overwatch, etc. are years away but they're also live-service games with HUGE communities on other consoles, so they don't want to risk those customers choosing to play other games vs. getting an Xbox to keep playing them on a console (plus making them console exclusive would be hypocritical when other live-service games are still multiplatform).
And, due to probably rethinking terms on the Zenimax games, they won't even really be able to use most of those going forward as console-exclusive draws for any meaningful duration of time. Oh, and they can't really justify paying for a lot of big 3P AAA exclusives because they both don't have the hardware install base or B2P revenue strengths on that platform to justify it, plus they JUST spent almost $80 billion in gaming M&As to in part specifically AVOID paying for 3P exclusives on a case-by-case basis!
So you look at it from all those angles, and Xbox as a traditional console business model-wise, is fuked. That's over with; MS aren't waiting another fifteen years to maybe finally get big boosts in hardware sales when traditional consoles may have two more generations tops at being market relevant with their current levels (or near current levels) in general. To not only suffer with declines the rest of the Series gen, but also brace for potentially FURTHER declines with a 10th-gen console just to maybe get to an 11th-gen console that could potentially only start to see big returns on these near $80 billion 'investments'? No, they're not going to take that gamble anymore, it's not worth it. Maybe Phil Spencer wants to still give it the good ol' college try, but he's been doing that for 10 years already and it's gotten Xbox nowhere console-wise, in fact it's gotten them in a worst spot than they were 10 years ago!
I'm calling it right now, any shift taking place is coming from people above him at Microsoft; they're reigning him in at long last and he can either play along or take leave, but I doubt it'll be the latter (he's been at the company for like over 30 years) until at least he sees this new transition through, which'll be a couple years or whatever to do in full I guess. And what is that transition? The same thing I've been saying it's going to be, for a long while now. They're likely going to become a fully 3P, multiplatform publisher now, but find a way to keep Xbox gaming hardware around as gaming-centric PC-like NUC/laptop/tablet devices running Windows and having options for Xbox consolized UI "Big Picture Mode" and normal Windows desktop environment.
That's the best balanced path forward for Microsoft Gaming (they could just drop hardware altogether and focus only on publishing, but I doubt they're gonna do that) while having some semblance of Xbox of old around in a way that's actually useful (more PC-like MSRPs but actual profit margins on hardware upfront, justifies lower volumes of production at scale, built-in value with full Windows compatibility, licensable 'base console'-like spec (base perf roughly in line with next-gen Sony & Nintendo systems) with customization options for themselves & OEM partners, etc.). It'd even free them up to focus better on mobile.
The only thing they really give up is the traditional console business model, but that's the thing (and the things that come with it) which some of these console fanatic diehards they've cultivated over the years, are going to have the hardest time giving up. But like I said, that's MS's problem to figure out in how to message it properly, so it doesn't feel that way to them. ..
Good luck
Your theory suggests that mShit had a strategy of consolidating its power in the gaming industry by cutting off Sony from its strongest third-party partners and acquiring potential assets, such as Ember Lab. However, you believe that things changed once they had to make concessions to acquire ABK and realized the difficulties in maintaining the traditional console business model. This, coupled with the need to retain talent and reevaluate the exclusivity of games, may have led mShit to reconsider their approach. You predict that mShit might transition into a fully third-party, multiplatform publisher while maintaining some form of hardware that resembles gaming-centric PC-like devices running Windows. Ultimately, you express the belief that mShit needs to find a way to balance their transition while acknowledging the challenges of letting go of the traditional console business model.Here's my theory on things; I agree with Icerock on this because the leaked internal memos basically show that Microsoft's strategy with consolidation was foreclosure on PlayStation and cutting Sony off direct contact with many of their strongest 3P partners. That just can't be denied, it's painted in the language of those leaked internal memos and emails, and strategy documents. Like why even look into buying Ember Lab when you have ZERO direct working relationship with them? Oh, because they developed a game with Sony/SIE and could grow into a very capable developer, and a potential asset for PlayStation, so better to take them away before that happens. Without even so much a plan, likely, on how to help foster the studio's growth after acquiring them. Just anything to take potential competitive advantages away from Sony. That's what the consolidation strategy was basically shown to be in those leaked docs.
HOWEVER, I think something changed once they realized the concessions they had to make just to get ABK across the finish line (and even now, it still isn't 100% settled because the FTC are continuing their case). I think if MS were able to get ABK either without any concessions on COD or only doing the 3-year deal with Sony as originally planned, we wouldn't be hearing about any of these multi-console rumors right now. Because while 3 years of multiplat COD would still mean 3 more years on PlayStation (starting this year), that's perfectly fine to free up plans for a 10th-generation Xbox to lock COD down as a console exclusive from Day 1. Which, feel how you want about COD these day, would have been a BIG deal particularly in the US & UK, and a huge advantage for the next Xbox. That possibility would have kept any further plans of doing things the usual way, and best riding out the current gen rebuilding some goodwill, worthwhile.
Instead MS were forced to not only capitulate to keeping COD multiplat for fifteen years, but also had to give up cloud streaming rights to Ubisoft, an entirely different company. AND, I feel, were also forced internally to re-evaluate the Zenimax strat of keeping all those games console exclusive (at best I expect all Zeni games going forward to only be timed exclusives at best, but more and more becoming Day 1 across all available console platforms & PC), because we know this is what pissed off Pete Hines and caused him to leave. In fact, it's probably made more than a few of the talent upset, and MS don't want to risk more key talent departing (Shinji Mikami already left Tango and this strat for all Zenimax games might've been a factor as to why). I'd even say it's at least part of the reason some of the XGS creatives like Mike Brown and co. left Playground Games (among other reasons); hard to see MS bending over backwards to keep ABK same as it ever was, while relegating your own games to a dying console platform and Steam. That's probably demoralizing at some level.
Anyway, you add all that up and I think higher-ups at Microsoft might've just realized "What's the point in playing this console game?". As in, what's the point in pushing Xbox on a traditional console business model. I mean think about it; most of the XGS games revealed years ago are either in dev hell or won't do a lot for bolstering hardware sales or Game Pass sub growth once they do actually release. They might have marketing rights to COD going forward but only for a platform where they've conditioned many players to get games "free" in a sub service (Xbox), so they're always going to have suppressed sales & revenue vs. what it could've been even if PS & Nintendo gamers continue buying them. Which also means, COD is still multiplat, and has to remain that way for 15 years (2039 at earliest before it can be console exclusive), so they can't leverage console exclusivity as a boost for current for future hardware. The next Diablo, Overwatch, etc. are years away but they're also live-service games with HUGE communities on other consoles, so they don't want to risk those customers choosing to play other games vs. getting an Xbox to keep playing them on a console (plus making them console exclusive would be hypocritical when other live-service games are still multiplatform).
And, due to probably rethinking terms on the Zenimax games, they won't even really be able to use most of those going forward as console-exclusive draws for any meaningful duration of time. Oh, and they can't really justify paying for a lot of big 3P AAA exclusives because they both don't have the hardware install base or B2P revenue strengths on that platform to justify it, plus they JUST spent almost $80 billion in gaming M&As to in part specifically AVOID paying for 3P exclusives on a case-by-case basis!
So you look at it from all those angles, and Xbox as a traditional console business model-wise, is fuked. That's over with; MS aren't waiting another fifteen years to maybe finally get big boosts in hardware sales when traditional consoles may have two more generations tops at being market relevant with their current levels (or near current levels) in general. To not only suffer with declines the rest of the Series gen, but also brace for potentially FURTHER declines with a 10th-gen console just to maybe get to an 11th-gen console that could potentially only start to see big returns on these near $80 billion 'investments'? No, they're not going to take that gamble anymore, it's not worth it. Maybe Phil Spencer wants to still give it the good ol' college try, but he's been doing that for 10 years already and it's gotten Xbox nowhere console-wise, in fact it's gotten them in a worst spot than they were 10 years ago!
I'm calling it right now, any shift taking place is coming from people above him at Microsoft; they're reigning him in at long last and he can either play along or take leave, but I doubt it'll be the latter (he's been at the company for like over 30 years) until at least he sees this new transition through, which'll be a couple years or whatever to do in full I guess. And what is that transition? The same thing I've been saying it's going to be, for a long while now. They're likely going to become a fully 3P, multiplatform publisher now, but find a way to keep Xbox gaming hardware around as gaming-centric PC-like NUC/laptop/tablet devices running Windows and having options for Xbox consolized UI "Big Picture Mode" and normal Windows desktop environment.
That's the best balanced path forward for Microsoft Gaming (they could just drop hardware altogether and focus only on publishing, but I doubt they're gonna do that) while having some semblance of Xbox of old around in a way that's actually useful (more PC-like MSRPs but actual profit margins on hardware upfront, justifies lower volumes of production at scale, built-in value with full Windows compatibility, licensable 'base console'-like spec (base perf roughly in line with next-gen Sony & Nintendo systems) with customization options for themselves & OEM partners, etc.). It'd even free them up to focus better on mobile.
The only thing they really give up is the traditional console business model, but that's the thing (and the things that come with it) which some of these console fanatic diehards they've cultivated over the years, are going to have the hardest time giving up. But like I said, that's MS's problem to figure out in how to message it properly, so it doesn't feel that way to them. ..
Good luck
Last edited:
And condense your posts to a readable length. Love your work, but boy am I short on time these days.Damnit, now there're AI chats who can automatically translate Microsoft to mShit
No I requested it to.Damnit, now there're AI chats who can automatically translate Microsoft to mShit
I did get it, on my original and replacement but it didn't deter me loving the console. First one was replaced by the store. Second had to be shipped to Germany
I believe Icerock (at least the last part) because it's pretty obvious they wanted to corner Playstation and force them to accept Game Pass or give up on COD, Activision and Bethesda forever. All their moves were about Playstation and Playstation only. Even in the media and with the regulators it was about Sony, the pie charts, the data, the attacks, everything.
Interesting
Google, Amazon, Tencent were all absent from their arguments.
That's a good point. They wanted Ember Lab and Housemarque. Why bother getting these small studios? It's just to take away from Sony. They got Ninja Theory, who were a lot closer to Sony. Hellblade was not even on Xbox at all. They also wanted Square.
It's undeniable all their targets were laser-focused on what could damage Sony.
Last edited:
Correct. That and the very telling tears in Phil Spencer's emails when discussing how they got bent over a barrel by ABK wrt revenue split (I think) - and Phil saying they needed to get to a position where they (MS) didn't negotiate title by title but with their entire portfolio.
You guys give MS too much credit with their strategy, they are reactionary.
What lead them to the Gamepass, to Series S, to acquiring Bethesda, to acquiring ABK, where all difrent reasons that seemed to make sense to them at the moment.
They thought Gamepass was disruptive enough for them to take over the gaming market, they thought Series S was a genius move to corner PlayStation and steal market share, they thought buying Bethesda would be huge and that depriving PlayStation of Starfield would be massive, they figure buying ABK would make them bigger than PlayStation.
They are mostly just idiots with too much money to spend that never understood the gaming market. Phil Spencer was always improvising in an attempt to make up for his latest failed strategy.
I'm not even sure if they understood when they bought Bethesda and ABK that that would force them into going third-party, based on their actions early on I don't think that was the plan despite how obvious the outcome is.
What lead them to the Gamepass, to Series S, to acquiring Bethesda, to acquiring ABK, where all difrent reasons that seemed to make sense to them at the moment.
They thought Gamepass was disruptive enough for them to take over the gaming market, they thought Series S was a genius move to corner PlayStation and steal market share, they thought buying Bethesda would be huge and that depriving PlayStation of Starfield would be massive, they figure buying ABK would make them bigger than PlayStation.
They are mostly just idiots with too much money to spend that never understood the gaming market. Phil Spencer was always improvising in an attempt to make up for his latest failed strategy.
I'm not even sure if they understood when they bought Bethesda and ABK that that would force them into going third-party, based on their actions early on I don't think that was the plan despite how obvious the outcome is.
Iconera party if that happens.
Not because we want the game, just to see the bots malfunction.
Is Jez suggesting that MS is expecting us to buy their games in numbers their fanbase never did so they can use the money to screw us over later?
They are going to bomb about as hard as Sony PC games. People who really wanted those games would've actually paid the $150 for a used Series S or played it on PC.