/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19822258/xcloud.jpg)
Microsoft hints at turning Xbox into an app for your TV
An Xbox app for your TV in 2021.
www.theverge.com
Not sure if this is what you meant but
-
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.
Daniel Ahmad (ZhugeEX) on the MS Xbox Live Gold situation: Gamepass biggest focus moving forward and MS looking to acquire IPs to bolster the service.
- Thread starter Marano
- Start date
- Status
www.theverge.com
Not sure if this is what you meant but
So long as there is a market for consoles, there will be consoles sold.
I for one hope that this never happens. We need an environment that is competitive, because it is that competition that brings in innovation.
Today, all three console manufacturers are doing their own thing, and all of them have found success in their endeavors. The moment we lose that differentiation is the moment we stop seeing innovation at the top end. You already see this happening in the AAA space where some players are doing pretty much what they did the previous year with a new coat of paint i.e. less risk.
Microsoft is somewhat changing the game, and it will force other players to adapt. Whether Sony likes it or not, they will have to think about investing in RPG's and shooters, and this is not a negative. Whether Microsoft likes it or not, they will have to invest in third person action adventures which is a market segment that they have not done so great at. Competition is something that pushes companies to think and adapt; and in future, you will see Sony and Nintendo going the subscription route too with competition evolving.
yeah we will. why wouldn't we? I ain't against acquisitions in any way. don't care if it is Sony , Nintendo or Google doing it. It is just business as usual for these companies and somehow I always find a way to play the games I like irrespective of platform.
Last edited:
They think they can tap into the console sphere beyond xbox by simply buying up stuff, conveniently forgetting that nintendo gamers buy nintendo for nintendo software, and sony gamers buy sony hardware for sony games. All this buying up is doing is pissing off people, and making the industry less stable.
I would be totally behind this. I really wish all 3 major players would work together.
Microsoft hints at turning Xbox into an app for your TV
An Xbox app for your TV in 2021.
Not sure if this is what you meant but
Yep, but I meant the infrastructure would be adequate enough for this to fully replace offline hardware.
We're still a bit off that
They don't care if you buy a PlayStation or Switch. They want you to subscribe to Game Pass. This isn't an either or thing.
So the price increase is your evidence? Well, I guess PS first party's, Activision and 2K games weren't sustainable, because now the games cost 10$ more. /S
This will never happen. Hardware helps to drive subs, and retail sales makes a pretty good chunk of cash for MS. Additionally, not all games are on Gamepass, and MS gets a decent cut from sales of blockbuster 3rd party games.
Source on the 'burning billions' part?
I think you misunderstand.
Most reasonable people are gamers. Not 'Sony gamers' or 'xbox gamers' or 'Nintendo gamers'. People buy hardware that allows them play the games that appeal to them.
acquiring exclusive content makes their services and hardware much more attractive to prospective buyers.
I NEED to eat lunch for me to function and work...do I really WANT to pay for another entertainment subscription service?
OP
OP
Nintendo? Absolutely and these days portability.
Sony? Not so much, their strength has always been strong third party support, as much as sonys games sell they cant stand on their owm and third party sell the most on playstation.
Maybe bethesda isnt the difference maker but playstation cant survive if they keep losing third parties because sonys first party is not nintendos.
Regardless playstation has a cap in terms of users and MS is looking beyond that, I am sure they will like getting some of those 1 platform console people but it isnt the end goal.
People buy Playstation and Xbox consoles for third party mostly and the exclusives are a secondary thing for the vast majority of the "mainstream audience". The hardcore audience, even if it's small, is the one buying consoles for exclusive.
Sony and MS relay way too much on third party games than Nintendo, while it's true people buy Nintendo consoles mostly for Nintendo games it's not true for Sony or MS, 150+ million PS4/Xbox One consoles were sold because that's where you get your FIFA/NBA/Madden/GTA/COD etc....
PS and Xbox consoles can never be successful without the 3rd party games.
Yeah this is where I'm kinda at with it. It's great value for those who make it their primary subscription, but for me I can't afford it on top of the other ones I have. You can argue that I spend more than that on games a month anyway but I spend it on games I want to play rather than choosing from a curated catalogue.
Obviously this is why MS want to make more acquisitions to make that catalogue bigger, more enticing and all encompassing but that $15 price tag for entry ain't going to remain long - and now they've even put doubt in consumer minds with trying to double the price of gold.
It's something that Microsoft is going to have to navigate - to find a place for it in people homes and having the right balance of games and value but considering the cost and length of big games, people's attach Ratios to software etc it's going to be difficult to strike that balance. Think it's works as a tool to play older games and smaller games but to make that jump to new AAA titles will be tough.
Nobody needs to like the acquisitions, but it's important to note that the studios were either struggling or had a history with Microsoft. The "it's different, if there was a 100 year history" crowd must be pleased with that.
You know I can understand the anger about Bethesda and I think I've said 100 times that I wanted them to stay independent. But that's not something Zenimax was looking for. They wanted to sell and talked to different partners. So my question is would you rather have Google buying them? Sony buying them, because they aren't dominating enough?
You know the irony is with all the possible options (Google, Amazon, Sony, Microsoft), the one which is the closest to being third party is literally Microsoft. The second irony is that people always say "ah if there is a history it's fine", but who of those four has the most history with Bethesda? Microsoft.
So they should've just listened to Zenimax and their "we want to sell" talk just to let the opportunity slip fully knowing Zenimax will then be bought by Amazon, Google or Sony. That's sounds like a reasonable approach for a business /s
I say that because 90% of the library is the same already, save for first party titles. Buttons on the controller the same and these systems are almost identical already on the inside; ones a lil faster, the other a lil stronger. Both plays the same games.
I'm just tired of it all.
Just a friendly jab at you, nothing more.
I still think there would be competition amongst both companies, just not as feral and nuclear as we have now. And great leadership and cooperation can also drive innovation. I know it won't happen anytime soon, or ever, but I'm ready for it now. I have a PC it it's just not the same.
Most people are. Gold comvertion didn't exist when they got to 10 million subscribers.
The million dollar question. I think it the short term it would be safer to bet on console and PC but the success of the switch shows there's a market for a more premium mobile gaming experience. They need to insure a good experience for streaming gamers and also be trying to push it onto every smart TV they can this year
Kinda, but who's fault is that partially? The consumers, because we want more all the time and back in the day you could develop games in your garage... Nowadays you need a 100 million budget for AAA games. Who has this kind of money and who is willing to spend so much without owning the IP and/or studio.
Microsoft's goal is to disrupt the market and make their Gamepass at the center of whatever world we will be after. They don't care if they lose money now, because in the end their model will be the only sustainable one and the competition will be forced to adopt it. And since Microsoft will have gotten a head start, they will dominate this space.
We are seeing this taking place already with EA Play joining Gamepass. They figured that it is better to join Xbox rather than keeping their own subscription. Ubisoft is next, they will realize that it's better to join Gamepass than trying to hype up UPlay as if somebody cared. Other big publishers will follow.
This is the same type of "race-to-the-bottom" strategy we saw in the mobile gaming space. When F2P gacha games started to come out, they destroyed any other form of mobile game because the very idea of paying for a compete game became obsolete.
We are seeing this taking place already with EA Play joining Gamepass. They figured that it is better to join Xbox rather than keeping their own subscription. Ubisoft is next, they will realize that it's better to join Gamepass than trying to hype up UPlay as if somebody cared. Other big publishers will follow.
This is the same type of "race-to-the-bottom" strategy we saw in the mobile gaming space. When F2P gacha games started to come out, they destroyed any other form of mobile game because the very idea of paying for a compete game became obsolete.
on point 1 I would love to see MS buy dead IPS that make sense for revival that while not big sellers on their own would make a compelling buffet of titles for game pass
kotor , deus ex , tomb raider for example
When has Microsoft ever released a single game that was "tied" to a subscription service?
In reality, since gamepass has been a thing, microsoft has been more keen on releasing titles outside of their platforms. Yea, There attempt to raise prices was shitty, but your "worried" about a scenario that shows no signs of being a thing.
How in your mind is gamepass anything like a race to the bottom? The games that make it into the service are the exact same games that exist outside of the service. There's no shift in design strategy, development cost, or sale price. The only thing that changes is their is an additional distribution model that devs and consumers can choose to engage with.
Last edited:
I'm honestly a bit baffled by how well this 'We'll have an awesome catalogue because we acquire IPs!' thing seems to work. Gamers even all seem to love it, but think about this for a moment... It shouldn't be about the IPs, it should be about the TALENT behind the IPs. And that's where I hope that MS will do a good job by recognizing the talent behind the IPs and making sure that they'll stay after their studio has just been sold and their management teams cashed out. It's nice and all if you own the 'Mass Effect' IP, but it makes a huge difference if you release Mass Effect 2 or Mass Effect Andromeda.
It doesn't matter one iota if you own the 'Beatles' name if you didn't also sign up Lennon and McCartney as part of the acquisition. For GamePass to ultimately work, Microsoft needs the talent, not the brand.
It doesn't matter one iota if you own the 'Beatles' name if you didn't also sign up Lennon and McCartney as part of the acquisition. For GamePass to ultimately work, Microsoft needs the talent, not the brand.
Or you can look at it in reverse. PC is the main gaming platform in China, Russia and Eastern Europe. Having your games on PC means a lot there, meaning Xbox will be bigger than Sony in those countries if Sony doesn't doesn't support PC.
So basically we should absolutely expect Xbox to increase the price of gamepass in the future. How utterly shocking.
The good thing about gamepass though is it's not really tying you to an ecosystem, especially if you enter via Smart TV. If the price goes up and you decide to unsubscribe, it's not like you own any of the games. So you're not losing anything except maybe some gamer points.
The good thing about gamepass though is it's not really tying you to an ecosystem, especially if you enter via Smart TV. If the price goes up and you decide to unsubscribe, it's not like you own any of the games. So you're not losing anything except maybe some gamer points.
That's a horribly naive idea, unfortunately. I know, because I had it when I was younger. Without competition, we arguably wouldn't have these benefits at all.
There's no PS4-generation without the initial fuck ups of the PS3-generation (and the amazing success of the 360).
There is no Game Pass and all the recent acquisitions without the initial fuck ups of the X1-generation (and the amazing success of the PS4).
Oh, and we'd probably have lesser console's at more expensive pricing. Again, them constantly trying to one-up one another is the reason we have these benefits in the first place.
Yes they are going to lose sales but when it comes to Bethesda PC is way bigger than PS. Also in general this is why MS buying big 3rd parties makes more sense then PS and Nintendo as they not only get it for Xbox/gamepass but also on PC. For example I see a lot of post that suggest Sony should buy Kadokawa and From Software however by doing that and making From games exclusive you are losing on more than 50% of sales by not putting those games on PC which essentially means that the value of the company that you just bought drops significantly, you essentially are overpaying for content. This is also a problem MS has to face but on a much smaller scale as they service more than one platfrom and it's less of an issue if we are talking about growing a subscription service.
Fact of the matter is in a traditional businnes model Sony and Nintendo are follwing making big acquisitions is risky, cost too much and doesn't make much sense. You will not see them matching whatever MS is doing when it comes to spending on acquisitions. The organic growth Jim Ryan was talking about makes more sense if you do not want to change the business model but make more content. The only thing you will see from Sony or Nintendo is either buying some studios like Insomniac or that Luigi Mansion dev and making exclusive either full or timed deals with 3rd parties for games (MH: Rise, FFXVI). You will not see them matching or even coming close to the Bethesda deal or whatever Tencent is planning now.
Last edited:
I agree, it's less of an issue for MS since their platform is on many devices so the loss of sales is less drastic. If Sony were to acquire a publisher, the losses and cost will be much higher since Sony relies on the traditional game model and making a third party publisher exclusive to 1 device is much more damaging.
Yep, the idea sounds good on paper. But not in reality, because MS and Sony combined could get away with greedy decisions, since there would only be Nintendo as a strong competitor. And as you alluded to many innovations and so on were made, because they were competition and learned from each other.
In that era, 2001 to 2007, they bought (in brackets, the most well known game they made before acquisition): Bend Studios (Syphon Filter), Guerilla Games (Killzone), naughty dog (Crash Bandicoot), Bigbig Studios, Evolution Studios (WRC), Incognito Entertainment (Twisted Metal) and Zipper Interactive (SOCOM)
True but there are creators who have never been able to reproduce the success of the game that put them in the spotlight.
This approach is standard for Microsoft. They did the same thing a couple of years ago when they raised Office 2019 prices to force companies onto Office 365. They want regular, predictable, ever increasing monthly income from their customers, and they'll take away everything you have the second you can't make that monthly payment.
Trouble is, that's just not how I game. I don't pay any kind of monthly fee for video gaming. I pick my games up sporadically and very cheaply in the digital sales on Steam and PS4. With harder times ahead financially thanks to the pandemic I'm looking to reduce the existing music and movie service subscriptions that I already have; not add yet another one, especially for an activity that I hardly do at all some months.
Trouble is, that's just not how I game. I don't pay any kind of monthly fee for video gaming. I pick my games up sporadically and very cheaply in the digital sales on Steam and PS4. With harder times ahead financially thanks to the pandemic I'm looking to reduce the existing music and movie service subscriptions that I already have; not add yet another one, especially for an activity that I hardly do at all some months.
I'm sure you'll be fine to keep on patient gaming as long as you want. The store front isn't going anywhere
Seriously think the biggest problem people have here is the fomo like "I don't engage with gaming this way who would engage with gaming this way" attitude.
I'm a huge fan of the Gamepass model so this makes me happy to hear. I used to buy games at $60 at launch a lot last gen on both PS4 and Xbox One. Gamepass had scratched so many itches that I barely buy games at launch anymore (outside of first party Nintendo because they never drop on price). I've also discovered so many franchises I never thought I'd play. My only hope is Gamepass grows so we can get more niche Japanese games onto Xbox.
I really like gamepass but I don't think Xcloud will be a big service as Microsoft is hoping. Yes there are millions of players on mobile especially Asia is huge market but they are invested in mobile IP. They are not interested in paying a subscription fee to play console games on phone.
On this note, I also think MS should make xcloud also a standalone service. In its current form its really a bad value if you are an only a mobile player.
On this note, I also think MS should make xcloud also a standalone service. In its current form its really a bad value if you are an only a mobile player.
That won't happen if exclusivity deals like this (supposedly) happen
Reddit - Dive into anything
www.reddit.com
I get FF isnt a niche product but if the big hitters avoid the platform then the niche ones will absolutely follow suit
Then its good. I still think the reach of the cloud was limited.
I strongly disagree.
- We know, via mobile games and channels such as Facebook Instant games that the gaming segment is far bigger than the 200 to 300 million max who are willing to pay for the entry cost to consoles or PC gaming.
- We know even amongst the current console segment that there's very poor rates of cross-platform ownership between Sony and Microsoft platforms, and that the median console player value is low with revenue heavily supported by the top 10% of spenders.
For these more 'dedicated' and 'enthusiastic' segment, the ability to try out by streaming Microsoft exclusives through their TV for €15 a month and get a satisfactory experience, rather than needing to spend €300/€500 in addition to the cost of a game is an easily reachable prospective segment. Without the cost of a console needing to be factored in, at the current costs it would take almost two and a half years of subscription for that to become a 'worse deal' than just buying the console (even ignoring the cost of games and Xbox Live Gold).
Ultimately, I think you're vastly underestimating how many of the mobile gaming segment could be easily converted to a console gaming streaming service with minimal barrier to entry, but even within the console sphere there is a non-negligible audience of people interested in games across both platforms but who aren't dedicated enough to be able to afford to buy multiple platforms (but would happily play games on both at a comparatively low cost even if it's not the 'best' experience).
Last edited:
It'll be interesting to see if the creative people within Microsoft's newly acquired studios stay put. Something I've been wondering, is if developers will like creating games within that subscription model environment, in the longer term. I look at people like Chris Nolan - completely rejecting the idea of making movies within the HBO Max model.
On a slightly different note - holding IP is one thing, but having the right people making the games, is another. Look at what's happened to Halo; or Companies like Bioware, or Konami, more broadly. Microsoft need to ensure they keep the talent around.
I might be overthinking it - no doubt Microsoft will be fine. At the end of the day I really hope they can make it all work, as I'm enjoying Gamepass quite a bit at the moment.
On a slightly different note - holding IP is one thing, but having the right people making the games, is another. Look at what's happened to Halo; or Companies like Bioware, or Konami, more broadly. Microsoft need to ensure they keep the talent around.
I might be overthinking it - no doubt Microsoft will be fine. At the end of the day I really hope they can make it all work, as I'm enjoying Gamepass quite a bit at the moment.
OP
OP
That post is false like a lot of what is posted on that subreddit.That won't happen if exclusivity deals like this (supposedly) happen
Reddit - Dive into anything
I get FF isnt a niche product but if the big hitters avoid the platform then the niche ones will absolutely follow suit
zhuge actually said the complete opposite with regard to xbox hardware in another one of his threads. xbox will still be very important for them and has the majority of game pass subs. the hardware isn't going anywhere.
Weren't all of These basically making PS only Games? This is like MS buying moon studios or Sony buying Blue point.
MS buying Bethesda who publish games on PlayStation since PS3 is completely different.
I Don't think anyone cares If MS buys Asobo, MS buying publishers or studios that release games on PlayStation Is the shitty part.
Sony buying Take2 would be similar.
- Status