So you have both:
1-Only played the classic Halo games recently and therefore miss the context of their impacts at the time of their release, and
2-Continue to count games from acquired 3P publishers as if they were Microsoft's in a way where the games simply wouldn't exist if MS didn't own them
...okay then :/
A game being multiplat doesn't suddenly increase its chances of being interesting to you, either. Neither does the amount of games; playing games shouldn't feel like filling quotas.
Cool, as it should be. But what does this have to do with the topic at hand? The thread is predicated on the premise there are people who AREN'T doing what you would do, therein port-begging for a game to come to their platform, rather than just get the platform the game is on.
And, we've been discussing the ramifications of that mentality, plus the consequences of platform holders placating it just to pursue nonsense like non-existent "infinite growth" or fake talking points of exclusives being "anti-consumer" or anticompetitive. What you just said here only shows your personal POV and I can agree with that POV as I share a similar one...
...but I'm also talking about the larger market here, and the industry. It's not just about what you or I may want or care for.
See, now you're showing me something else: you still want the good 'ol 360 days and think the next Xbox will be a return to that. It won't be. You can't see the writing on the wall because by your own admission, your heart still bleeds green.
The next Gears and Perfect Dark will be Day 1 on the next Xbox, PS5/PS5 Pro, Windows Store and Steam, because the next Xbox will very likely be a more PC-like device in terms of form factor/options and business model (even if it's still running Xbox OS). Microsoft aren't going to reverse course on their multiplatform strategy after having so many very public and upfront showings (and words from people much higher up in the company like Satya Nadella & Amy Hood) of games going to PlayStation & Nintendo platforms.
Why would they limit the sales potential of Gears E-Day and Perfect Dark especially? Why, when the only major value proposition in terms of hardware abilities that Xbox could bring to the market, are in being more PC-like? Why would Microsoft pursue a business model for next-gen Xbox hardware mirroring or doubling-down on the current one, which has seen sales tank globally while losing money on hardware, when they as a gaming division want to increase their profit margins substantially?
If you think an Xbox handheld that mainly serves as a Game Pass machine is going to be the magic bullet while retaining that and some home system on the traditional business model, you're also mistaken on that front too. B2P brings bigger potential for profit margins (and certainly revenue) in a realistic fashion than subscription, and Game Pass is specifically a subscription service; Microsoft's chief goal is to increase their margins and market share as a publisher, so how does a new Xbox handheld focused on a subscription fit into that? It doesn't.
So the only real option for that handheld is to be more feature-comparable to a Steam Deck, meaning more PC-like, and if the handheld's going to do that, the "console" might as well, too, just to maintain synergy.
How did this work out for the Xbox Series? Oh wait, it didn't.
Sorry buddy, but simply having "new tech & hardware" isn't a big enough draw anymore, especially when the jumps gen-to-gen are getting smaller & smaller. Meanwhile the baseline of what's "good enough" for most players is already starting to be met with this generation's hardware, so where does the idea new hardware gives Xbox a value proposition all on its own come from?
What you think can happen, only happens with having exclusive games. So then we're right back to the question of: how does making Gears E-Day or Perfect Dark exclusive to the next Xbox benefit the goals of Microsoft Gaming & higher-ups like Satya Nadella and Amy Hood, in growing Microsoft's margins in software? It doesn't.
You're creating dead-ends for Xbox with your fantasies here.
Don't think I need to say anything to debunk the ideas on display here, since I've already done that plenty enough above.
Needless to say, your ideas here are fueled by hopium that ignores market realities or even the existence of alternatives already in the market who can serve the same needs but better, and don't have the brand name damage to them Xbox does.
Nintendo.
Let's go ask Capcom about that, as just one of many examples to the contrary.
Again, let's ask Capcom about that. Or Square-Enix. Or Game Science. Or MiHoYo. Or a number of other 3P.
Honestly we don't know if GTA6 will be Day 1 on Xbox if the Series S presents optimization challenges and Microsoft requires that be supported Day 1.
In fact I'm curious if Series S is part of the reason GTA6 is releasing so...late? R* putting the trailer out two years from release doesn't make a lot of sense when looking at trends in the rest of the market. If it was done to stop leaks, they could've handled the leakers BTS and just saved the trailer until later. I doubt investors were pressuring them to put out a trailer two years from launch.
So is it possible they may've intended for an early 2025 or even late 2024 launch, but delayed it to Fall 2025 because of Series S? Why don't journalists investigate this type of thing (talking about you, Paul Tassi)? I wouldn't say it's a non-zero possibility. Then again, it may also have been delayed to ready a Switch 2 version for a Day 1 launch or get a Switch 2 version going that doesn't release too long after the PS & Xbox ones.
Just a thought...
We both know what "it" is but until you're ready to outright say it, you'll keep pretending it's confusing.
I mean, you've already shown a bit of what "it" is in other parts of your reply here, but I'll leave it to you to pinpoint the what.
Now if only the vast majority of the customer market had the tastes and priorities in gaming as you seem to, maybe Xbox as a console would be in a healthy place. Those darn majority of customers!!
This isn't something you need to be telling me, as I've already come to realize it. However, being a fan also doesn't mean rolling over and just accepting any old thing your favorite team (if we're sticking with the sports analogy) does.
You can and should voice your dissenting opinion, but at the same time, tolerate what decisions that team end up making. You mistake my criticisms and critiques about SIE as if demands for what they must do or else I no longer support their output. You are mistaken. I have my idea on what approaches are best for a platform holder like SIE, and I can only hope some people there feel largely similar, implementing their own versions of those ideas/approaches into practice.
The people who just begrudgingly accept any old thing a company is doing (especially hiding behind the "but the shareholders!" excuse), or contort their own core beliefs to support corporate talking points, are the ones who bring little to the discussion or worst yet, become a detriment to the discussion. Now you specifically, I'd say you're on the whole maybe somewhere between having genuine opinions you voice, and repeating corporate talking points. However at least I feel we can have a discussion, because while you're repeating a ton of these talking points, you at least think they've been shaped by your own actual opinions. IMO, those talking points have coopted your own opinions and twisted them, which is preventing you from seeing inconsistencies and fallacies in some of your logic.
Still though, that's a lot better than some of these other people out there, especially in the media, who have no sense of being a gamer whatsoever, and have no personal opinions of which to speak of. They just talk a lot about what they feel is relevant, don't play many or any games, don't have any appreciation for gaming as an art form or its history, and are mouthpieces for corporate agendas and talking points without any sense of shame. A lot of them tend to be among influencers and the media (including people who feel you don't need to play games to talk about games or gaming!), but there's also a lot of them in the hobby itself as well. And unfortunately (from my POV) for Microsoft, most of them are on their side of the fence, since they conditioned it through through years of astroturfing and using people like Phil Spencer to form a cult of personality.
But I won't pretend there hasn't been a growing number of them within the PlayStation community, or Steam, or even Nintendo. It's just notably less present among them I feel than with the Xbox community. Ideally it'd be nice if that type of stuff went away, but it probably won't, so now we just weed through it as best we can.
