• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

LordRuyn

Member
Oct 29, 2017
3,909
This is true; but MS does have an incentive to support Windows as a platform.

Also, if you look at the Forza Horizon 4 thread, many folks are complaining about having to pay $60 for a 'two year old' game. While not saying it out loud, their reference point for pricing is not the Windows Store (where it is $60) but Gamepass (where you can get FH4 for $10 a month.)

I do think them keeping Steam users engaged with the Xbox brand has value

I think you missed the part in that thread where people kept posting that it was literally half the price a couple of weeks ago on the MS store. Also, when games come from a different platform to steam after already being out for a while, they tend to have a steep launch discount. Look at Borderlands 3, Hades, and other games that did the same. Even Horizon Zero Dawn wasn't priced at 69,99€ on Steam. Oh, and the EU MS store on PC has the game cheaper than Steam.
 

Mass Effect

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 31, 2017
16,810
This is true; but MS does have an incentive to support Windows as a platform.

Also, if you look at the Forza Horizon 4 thread, many folks are complaining about having to pay $60 for a 'two year old' game. While not saying it out loud, their reference point for pricing is not the Windows Store (where it is $60) but Gamepass (where you can get FH4 for $10 a month.)

I do think them keeping Steam users engaged with the Xbox brand has value

I suppose, but as of now, there isn't anything special in terms on conversion of Steam users to the Windows Store or Game Pass just because they release their games on Steam. I mean they don't even advertise Game Pass in any capacity on Steam; any user on Steam would have to know about it beforehand. Plus, the Windows Store (which includes Game Pass, yes) being the mess that it is precludes a lot of that potential anyway.

idk, it just seems like some users here are acting like this is some big brain, 5D chess move by MS to magically turn millions of Steam users into Game Pass subscribers somehow. When in reality it's just that the Windows Store probably isn't doing all that hot and Steam is simply too big to ignore. Like just because a Steam user buys a Microsoft game occasionally from Steam doesn't mean they're being secretly programmed to love Game Pass.

Honestly this has way less to do with what Microsoft is doing and far more with how weird some posters here are being about MS games on Steam. The simple answer is they like money and success and Steam is an easy way to get that.

Maybe when/if MS does a massive overhaul of their store or (more intelligently) puts Game Pass on Steam, then we can talk about it. But as of now... they're just another big publisher that came back to Steam when they realized their "ecosystem" alone wasn't cutting it.

I think your last sentence has the most merit: MS doesn't want to be irrelevant again gaming-wise on PC like they were 10 years ago. I think that, along with making money of course, seems to be the goal here -- at least short term.
 

Son of Sparda

The Wise Ones
Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,623
I think it's obvious that most (if not all) unannounced games from Bethesda will be Xbox and PC exclusives. It makes no sense for MS to pay as much as they did and then release their system (or rather Gamepass) sellers on PS5.
 

Babu93

Member
Feb 9, 2021
2,380
This is the fourth Xbox console cycle and Microsoft has failed to build anything nearing "industry leading". Just think where Nintendo and Sony were at this point with their first party studios.

Are we just re-writing history to pretend the 360 and the monumental influence it had on the industry didn't happen?
 

Jaded Alyx

Member
Oct 25, 2017
35,388
I'm sure Bethesda will still put out mobile games like Fallout Shelter and The Elder Scrolls: Blades.

So yeh.
 

AntiMacro

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,141
Alberta
This is the fourth Xbox console cycle and Microsoft has failed to build anything nearing "industry leading". Just think where Nintendo and Sony were at this point with their first party studios.
I think this was the extent of Sony's studio lineup at the PS4 launch - I think BigBig/Liverpool/Zipper all closed down a year or so ahead of the launch:
Bend
Guerrilla Games
Japan Studio
London Studio
Media Molecule
Naughty Dog
Polyphony Digital
San Diego Studio
Santa Monica Studio
Sucker Punch
Evolution
Guerrilla Cambridge

Microsoft's lineup now that the acquisition is finalized:
343 Industries
AlphaDog
Arkane
Bethesda Softworks
Bethesda Game Studios
Coalition
Compulsion
Double Fine
id
inExile
MachineGames
Mojang
Ninja Theory
Obsidian
Playground
Rare
Roundhouse Studios
Tango Gameworks
The Initiative
Turn 10
Undead Labs
World's Edge
ZeniMax Online


I'd put the Xbox + Zenimax lineup against that - it might not win, but it's a whole lot closer than it was prior to this acquisition.
 
Last edited:

Laver

Banned
Mar 30, 2018
2,654
This is the fourth Xbox console cycle and Microsoft has failed to build anything nearing "industry leading". Just think where Nintendo and Sony were at this point with their first party studios.
We are talking about studios, and first party games. Not online infrastructure.
Looking at Microsoft's first party roster, vs Sony at the beginning of 2014, I'd take the current Microsoft any day of the week.
 

Prine

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
15,724
This is the fourth Xbox console cycle and Microsoft has failed to build anything nearing "industry leading". Just think where Nintendo and Sony were at this point with their first party studios.
Hmm selective amnesia once again huh. Console online, services, facilitating greater western participation (thanks to PC APIs and standards) , achievements and now Gamepass has changed gaming, and this was all nurtured and fostered primarly by Xbox through the years .

360 was industry leading with its multiplayer i.ps (halo, gears).
 

gifyku

Member
Aug 17, 2020
2,751
idk, it just seems like some users here are acting like this is some big brain, 5D chess move by MS to magically turn millions of Steam users into Game Pass subscribers somehow. When in reality it's just that the Windows Store probably isn't doing all that hot and Steam is simply too big to ignore.

I think your last sentence has the most merit: MS doesn't want to be irrelevant again gaming-wise on PC like they were 10 years ago. I think that, along with making money of course, seems to be the goal here -- at least short term.

I do agree with you. It is reasonable to believe that the significant majority of Windows store users for games are Gamepass subscribers and there is probably a section of Steam users who are adamantly against the Windows store due to issues or are against subscriptions in general.

But i do think there is a significant market of Steam users who may not even know gamepass for PC exists. Having them set up for Xbox logins etc absolutely has value when they encounter something like 'Get the new Doom for $1 on Gamepass' and they take the deal
 

TheGhost

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
28,137
Long Island
This is the fourth Xbox console cycle and Microsoft has failed to build anything nearing "industry leading". Just think where Nintendo and Sony were at this point with their first party studios.
Whatcha talking about all his first party games are day and date on a subscription service that people won't stop talking about and other companies will eventually copy. Microsoft leads it's what they do.
 

Dunlop

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,479
you-say-goodbye-i-say-hello.jpg


; )

(until exclusivity is confirmed, nothing is known)
 

Bear and bird

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,596
Hmm selective amnesia once again huh. Console online, services, facilitating greater western participation (thanks to PC APIs and standards) , achievements and now Gamepass has changed gaming, and this was all nurtured and fostered primarly by Xbox through the years .

360 was industry leading with its multiplayer i.ps (halo, gears).
XBLA played a huge part in making indie games successful on consoles too. Xbox was the first platform holder to really give the spotlight to them.
 

isahn

Member
Nov 15, 2017
990
Roma
We are talking about studios, and first party games. Not online infrastructure.
In your post you said they didn't build "anything" industry leading in four generations. And I pointed out what I think was a valuable, even uindustry leading, contribution to the advancement of console gaming. Apologies if I misunderstood your post by missing your implicit reference to "first party studios"
 

Scottoest

Member
Feb 4, 2020
11,363
I agree about the treasury, but at this instant Zenimax is now eating at the same table than other XGS studios with their output given on the GP. That's a lot to cover seriously, especially with productions costs growing faster than the price of a sub (and so why music/movie compare aren't accurate, mistaking the distribution for everything).

There's a few key points here though. One, Microsoft still sells these games in addition to GP. Two, the sub price doesn't have to scale with production costs - the subscriber base needs to grow aggressively. And three, there are other mechanisms for Microsoft to make money from specific GP games (expansion, DLC, MTX, etc.)

Microsoft are intentionally burning money on the Xbox division right now, to build that foundation for Game Pass - both the pipeline of content, and the pool of subscribers.

They don't care whether Zenimax is turning a profit for them in 2021 - they care about whether the entire edifice is turning a profit for them a few years down the road. Right now they just want to see sustained growth. Nadella's compensation package is even partly determined by the growth number of Game Pass.
 

defaltoption

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
11,491
Austin
This is the fourth Xbox console cycle and Microsoft has failed to build anything nearing "industry leading". Just think where Nintendo and Sony were at this point with their first party studios.
They have industry leading accessibility regarding controller options, they had and arguably still have industry leading online infrastructure, they at one point had the industry leading FPS franchise, they currently have the industry leading game subscription service. Not to mention that right now they own Mojang who has the best selling game of all time with Minecraft and now own Bethesda who has multiple of the highest selling games of all time.

Are they the best at everything no not even close, but damn man we gotta be able to give them credit once in a while. We shit on these guys like they're Google Stadia sometimes.
 

Prine

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
15,724
XBLA played a huge part in making indie games successful on consoles too. Xbox was the first platform holder to really give the spotlight to them.
Yup, lots more like the inclusion of network card + HDD in the original Xbox that opened up console gaming unlike before, being able to simply LAN game was a revelation in the console space. Such an uninformed and frankly incompetent idea of the past.
 

Trup1aya

Literally a train safety expert
Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,390
gamers should know that Xbox consoles, PC, and Game Pass will be the best place to experience new Bethesda games, including some new titles in the future that will be exclusive to Xbox and PC players.

Pretty much exactly as I expected.

Some of these IPs are simply to big and costly to confine to an exclusive userbase. They'd never be able to maximize the value they extract.

Gamepass will still be bolstered by having Day1 access, even if the game are eventually sold on other platforms.

Xbox users will have perks and benefit of being lead platform and some games will infact be outright exclusives.

But to me, for the biggest Zenimax properties it, it never made sense to assume spend all this money only to cut the market value of the IP off at the knees.
 

Joo

Member
May 25, 2018
3,883
So the way I read the sentence on exclusives was effectively as follows: "We currently have some unannounced games that are contractually obligated to be Multiplatform titles, so we cannot state that all games will be exclusive in the future"

I imagine we'll have a good couple of years or so of Multiplatform releases for titles that already have existing contracts for certain releases (who knows of Deathloop and Ghostwire are the only PS5 exclusive games) or are so far into development (such as the rumoured Wolfenstein 3) that throwing away a version of a game wouldn't be worth it. Then, after those games are out of the pipeline, everything will be exclusive.
Hard to say, but the whole statement is really cautious and just strange regarding Xbox exclusivity. Like the statement reads, some new future Zeni games will be exclusive to Xbox/PC, no way around it. Still, I don't know how "some" means all or even the majority of new titles being exclusive. Isn't the wording at least implying the exact opposite for future releases? "New titles in the future as exclusive" are emphasised, which to me definitely sounds like games that haven't even been announced yet.

There wouldn't be any reason to be this vague if all Zenimax games would be exclusive outside of deals made before the acquisition and games in development. If Starfield is exclusive, I can't think of a single reason why MS wouldn't have announced it now when new consoles have just released and many are still deciding on a console. If all of the games would be exclusive, they'd win nothing by being vague right now when Sony and Nintendo are in such a strong position.

Before MS released the statement, I was sure that 9/10 Zenimax games will be only on Xbox going forward outside of existing contracts, but the statement definitely doesn't read like this is necessarily the case.
 

Nzyme32

Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,245
I think people with PCs and Steam will manage just fine.
Yes which is the ecosystem.
How is Steam their ecosystem? They pay Valve a 30% cut and those sales actively keep people away from Game Pass.
they are contributing to keep PC gaming firmly on windows 10

"Xbox" ecosystem extends anywhere where MS / Xbox can reach customers as part of their own ecosystem (part of why MS measures success by monthly active users in XBL). Steam effectively does that, as MS plop XBL right into the games on Steam - a platform that is effectively agnostic to various ecosystems.

Steam having a colossal audience that isn't engaging with UWP/Win10 store, and happy to stick on Steam, is something MS have demonstrably not been able to challenge, because PC gamers tend to enjoy choice, and the market there is entirely different - highly competitive platforms already exist with established audiences competing openly, with users happy to play in multiple places they prefer, or perfectly happy to ignore what they don't like since there is so much competition.

MS smartly recognise that on PC, they should support all the platforms that are ecosystem agnostic with large userbase, meet them where they are to engage with them. Long term once folks are connected to the Xbox ecosystem this way, they can start with the main goal - serving recurring revenue services such as xcloud and gamepass to this audience too, and whatever else. Long term, by meeting these customers where they are, they have better prospects for reaching this unique group of users and actually retaining them. Right now, its clear a lot of Steam users stick there because they enjoy its services. Clean integration with that is the best way to engage with these users when its clear Steam isn't dying any time soon. EA have done the same thing and others are following. MS will no doubt also do the same in a way that makes sense for EGS users, for example.

"30%" cut (or 20% for the games after they hit usual revenue mark, or 0% for Steam keys with whatever cut they arrange with third parties), is a really trivial cost to pay for the ability to establish Steam users into the XBL services

PC isn't the be all end all either. Xcloud and Gamepass will be on android, iphone, smart TVs etc soon enough, and will also become users that would be part of the Xbox ecosystem - paying customers.

This isn't happening in anywhere near the same way on Playstation since it much more directly competes with MS for console specific users. For those users no doubt MS will have a minority of ports / maybe more late ports, but primarily will push for those users to grab Xcloud / Gamepass if they not interested in another console. It's all about grabbing users wherever they are, and making more money.

There was a threat that has now died down that Valve (and Stadia) would push gaming on Linux via Vulkan and OpenGL.

Really unlikely that this is a specific factor, as Valve will/are continuing to support open solutions because that is best for its business. Their success is built upon the open PC platform, so its in their interest to make sure (at least as back up) open solutions see heavy investment while they are able to do so.

Meanwhile, it is true that Valve contribute significantly to the success of Windows. MS and Valve are still partnering forward looking things including VR. No doubt they'll align on a bunch of different things since Valve's focus is primarily on PC gaming.
 
Last edited:

SaintBowWow

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,085
Hard to say, but the whole statement is really cautious and just strange regarding Xbox exclusivity. Like the statement reads, some new future Zeni games will be exclusive to Xbox/PC, no way around it. Still, I don't know how "some" means all or even the majority of new titles being exclusive. Isn't the wording at least implying the exact opposite for future releases? "New titles in the future as exclusive" are emphasised, which to me definitely sounds like games that haven't even been announced yet.

There wouldn't be any reason to be this vague if all Zenimax games would be exclusive outside of deals made before the acquisition and games in development. If Starfield is exclusive, I can't think of a single reason why MS wouldn't have announced it now when new consoles have just released and many are still deciding on a console. If all of the games would be exclusive, they'd win nothing by being vague right now when Sony and Nintendo are in such a strong position.

Before MS released the statement, I was sure that 9/10 Zenimax games will be only on Xbox going forward outside of existing contracts, but the statement definitely doesn't read like this is necessarily the case.

Has there even been a proper trailer for Starfield? Honestly I don't think saying that a game likely 2-3 years out will be an Xbox exclusive in a press release will move as many units as you think it will. The marketing blitz for all of the future games coming to Xbox from this deal is still to come.
 

Deleted member 23046

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
6,876
There's a few key points here though. One, Microsoft still sells these games in addition to GP. Two, the sub price doesn't have to scale with production costs - the subscriber base needs to grow aggressively. And three, there are other mechanisms for Microsoft to make money from specific GP games (expansion, DLC, MTX, etc.)

Microsoft are intentionally burning money on the Xbox division right now, to build that foundation for Game Pass - both the pipeline of content, and the pool of subscribers.

They don't care whether Zenimax is turning a profit for them in 2021 - they care about whether the entire edifice is turning a profit for them a few years down the road. Right now they just want to see sustained growth. Nadella's compensation package is even partly determined by the growth number of Game Pass.
You made good points but I had no worries for MS. Where I am dubious is in what it could imply for creation and production. Not necessarily for genre or focus but more on scope, size or length. These are constraints for any model, but here it evolves around a main source of income for all, it raises many questions. And sorry for the derail on GP via Bethesda, it was just a response.
 
Last edited:

Joo

Member
May 25, 2018
3,883
Whilst irritatingly vague from MS, if you love Bethesda games and want your only console to be a PS5 you're taking one hell of a gamble.
It would also be a gamble to get an Xbox now if you prefer PlayStation and think that one console is enough, when the statement only says that some future games will be exclusive. I think with a statement as vague as this, it's best to just wait if you're a PS gamer. If some future Zeni Xbox exclusives are so good that they warrant a purchase of a whole console, people can get it then.
Has there even been a proper trailer for Starfield? Honestly I don't think saying that a game likely 2-3 years out will be an Xbox exclusive in a press release will move as many units as you think it will. The marketing blitz for all of the future games coming to Xbox from this deal is still to come.
There's been loads of rumours that Starfield is targeting this year. Teaser was released in 2018 and game has been in development since Bethesda finished Fallout 4. It won't take 2-3 years.
 

Mass Effect

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 31, 2017
16,810
"Xbox" ecosystem extends anywhere where MS / Xbox can reach customers as part of their own ecosystem (part of why MS measures success by monthly active users in XBL). Steam effectively does that, as MS plop XBL right into the games on Steam - a platform that is effectively agnostic to various ecosystems.

Steam having a colossal audience that isn't engaging with UWP/Win10 store, and happy to stick on Steam, is something MS have demonstrably not been able to challenge, because PC gamers tend to enjoy choice, and the market there is entirely different - highly competitive platforms already exist with established audiences competing openly, with users happy to play in multiple places they prefer, or perfectly happy to ignore what they don't like since there is so much competition.

MS smartly recognise that on PC, they should support all the platforms that are ecosystem agnostic with large userbase, meet them where they are to engage with them. Long term once folks are connected to the Xbox ecosystem this way, they can start with the main goal - serving recurring revenue services such as xcloud and gamepass to this audience too, and whatever else. Long term, by meeting these customers where they are, they have better prospects for reaching this unique group of users and actually retaining them. Right now, its clear a lot of Steam users stick there because they enjoy its services. Clean integration with that is the best way to engage with these users when its clear Steam isn't dying any time soon. EA have done the same thing and others are following. MS will no doubt also do the same in a way that makes sense for EGS users, for example.

"30%" cut (or 20% for the games after they hit usual revenue mark, or 0% for Steam keys with whatever cut they arrange with third parties), is a really trivial cost to pay for the ability to establish Steam users into the XBL services

PC isn't the be all end all either. Xcloud and Gamepass will be on android, iphone, smart TVs etc soon enough, and will also become users that would be part of the Xbox ecosystem - paying customers.

This isn't happening in anywhere near the same way on Playstation since it much more directly competes with MS for console specific users. For those users no doubt MS will have a minority of ports / maybe more late ports, but primarily will push for those users to grab Xcloud / Gamepass if they not interested in another console. It's all about grabbing users wherever they are, and making more money.



Really unlikely that this is a specific factor, as Valve will/are continuing to support open solutions because that is best for its business. Their success is built upon the open PC platform, so its in their interest to make sure (at least as back up) open solutions see heavy investment while they are able to do so.

Meanwhile, it is true that Valve contribute significantly to the success of Windows. MS and Valve are still partnering forward looking things including VR. No doubt they'll align on a bunch of different things since Valve's focus is primarily on PC gaming.

This is by far one of the best posts I've read regarding Microsoft's position and strategy on PC gaming. Your thoughts on the matter come from a place recognizing how the PC gaming sphere works, whereas I feel like a lot of Xbox fans here who mostly game on console don't seem to really understand what they're talking about when it comes to how PC gaming has operated when they speak on the topic (no offense to them).

And you definitely did a better job than I did of explaining why Microsoft games releasing on Steam won't magically turn Steam users into Game Pass subscribers. It's going to take time plus a concerted effort if they plan on gaining additional revenue beyond the 70-80% they make from simply selling games on Steam.
 

SaintBowWow

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,085
There's been loads of rumours that Starfield is targeting this year. Teaser was released in 2018 and game has been in development since Bethesda finished Fallout 4. It won't take 2-3 years.

If they do what they did with Fallout 4 and announce it only a few months before release then the time to start the media blitz about the game and how it's Xbox exclusive will still be after it's properly announced. Most people aren't following video game rumors enough to know it's on the horizon, and hell, most people aren't following video game news enough to even know what Starfield is.
 

PS9

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
5,066
Seeing The Evil Within and Prey in that pic and trailer gives me some hope tbh.
Let them do a new game with Id Tech 7 pls.
They don't want to show Ghostwire or Deathloop. They weren't in the video either. I wouldn't get too excited for these franchises, they just needed imagery that represented those studios.

I wonder what games from Bethesda will be on PC Gamepass this week.
 

Vervain

Member
Oct 27, 2017
291
There wouldn't be any reason to be this vague if all Zenimax games would be exclusive outside of deals made before the acquisition and games in development. If Starfield is exclusive, I can't think of a single reason why MS wouldn't have announced it now when new consoles have just released and many are still deciding on a console. If all of the games would be exclusive, they'd win nothing by being vague right now when Sony and Nintendo are in such a strong position.

One thing to consider with this, is that if a marketing contract has been signed with someone like a PlayStation for an unannounced game, Xbox likely aren't allowed to discuss or announce the game without breaching that contract. Given the money splashed for Deathloop and Ghostwire, I wouldn't be at all surprised if there are other games that PlayStation have at least got a marketing deal for.

The other thing to consider is the fact that it's clear that they want Bethesda to still run their own events and make their own announcements. Making any announcements now would be going against that and could be seen as taking control from the studios, which is the sort of thing that can push people out.
 

sensui-tomo

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,629
Phil: "I can't believe I forgot Larian. Hand me the phone."
Just making sure, yall don't think I was serious about the monopoly right? I'm just sad that people say "monopoly" and forget that hey there's like a team that's really fucking good over there lol. But you know what, sure Phil can buy them too lol.
 

gifyku

Member
Aug 17, 2020
2,751
This is by far one of the best posts I've read regarding Microsoft's position and strategy on PC gaming. Your thoughts on the matter come from a place recognizing how the PC gaming sphere works, whereas I feel like a lot of Xbox fans here who mostly game on console don't seem to really understand what they're talking about when it comes to how PC gaming has operated when they speak on the topic (no offense to them).

And you definitely did a better job than I did of explaining why Microsoft games releasing on Steam won't magically turn Steam users into Game Pass subscribers. It's going to take time plus a concerted effort if they plan on gaining additional revenue beyond the 70-80% they make from simply selling games on Steam.

The other thing to note about the PC platform is that very few PC gamers live and die by Steam. Most (like myself) are willing to have different launchers/store fronts etc., especially if there is a deal to be had. Steam is by far the best experience but PC gamers will consider alternatives on a case by case basis (see also the many ways to have a unified game launcher or Steam's ability to add non Steam games)
 

Swift_Gamer

Banned
Dec 14, 2018
3,701
Rio de Janeiro
User Banned (Permanent): Off-Topic Derail, Platform Warring; Long History and Numerous Prior Bans for Both
Care to expound on this unsubstantiated take?


Oh, nevermind. So you've got nothing then.
It's what I believe, but I won't take this any further because it's useless anyway because I know how people get defensive and aggressive when this subject is brought up and it might devolve in platform warring territory.
Since I have nothing to gain by explaining myself further and don't waste my time, I'll just leave it as it is. I still believe in that and it's my choice to do so.🤷🏻‍♂️
 
Last edited:

Darmik

Member
Oct 25, 2017
686
Elder Scrolls (and Fallout as well) is still years away. Probably at least 5 years from release at the earliest. They really don't need to make a decision about that one yet and that's the biggest call for them to make. They can use several Bethesda games leading up to that to make a decision when that game ramps up development.

It'll be Doom or Wolfenstein that will probably be the first franchise game where they'll have to make the call if they have not already done so. Most people seem to think those will be fine going exclusive and if those succeed the question for what that means for the future is answered.

They have no real incentive to make a definitive statement today and even if they did they'd have to talk about games like Deathloop where they probably don't really want to. They'll just gradually announce platforms for upcoming games and go from there.

Safe assumption to take is exclusive to Xbox/PC unless stated otherwise. Most games don't have platforms announced and it's possible games like Indiana Jones have agreements to go multiplat.