Topic: General Xbox Series X|S Thread

Expand

@JaxonH I can see the 'last' MP release just being either supported, updated built upon and eventually free to play.

MS isn't buying Studio's to keep churning out games for anything other than Game Pass platforms with cloud gaming being central to that so they will support any 'Active' game which I think will end up free to play, as they then try and build a CoD online 'team' from those staff amongst the studio's they need to, but then those Studio's will be set free to make Games for Game Pass. Studio's of that Quality free to make what they want with years of experience. That's MS mission statement.

As a company, Microsoft is committed to our journey for inclusion in every aspect of gaming, among both employees and players. We deeply value individual studio cultures. We also believe that creative success and autonomy go hand-in-hand with treating every person with dignity and respect. We hold all teams, and all leaders, to this commitment. We’re looking forward to extending our culture of proactive inclusion to the great teams across Activision Blizzard.

We deeply value individual studio cultures. They want these studio's making 'great' games and, if they want to be 'ambitious' and jump away from the 'CoD' IP, they could come up with some great new IP's - From the makers of CoD, SpiderMan2, Transformers, Darkwatch... PLEASE do something with Darkwatch - so much promise with modern tech. However, they may want to try something 'new' behind the IP - Maybe a Third Person military shooter, Some military co-op squad shooter, maybe even an RTS - no different from Gears Tactics, Halo: Wars, Forza: Horizon so can use the CoD brand, if they want.

Point is, look at what they've done so far with Studio's - I know its a 'small time frame' because their commitment to Gaming really began when they realised they needed to make Game Pass their main platform. Playground had talked about making a big open world RPG, MS then acquires them, helps them build up a 2nd studio and gives them the option to make that a 'Fable' game so people will want to play - got to be hard to get people to want to buy yet another RPG from a studio known only for making racing games on Xbox so Fable gives them a name and a creative freedom to make it.Ninja Theory are all in on the Games they want to make, Obsidian are making the games they want.

MS want them to make the Best games they can, without 'commercial sales' targets or commercial success determining whether or not your 'project' gets green lighted - its all about Subscribers and Players those games bring in, how engaged they are etc not how many copies it sells, those are 'additional' bonuses. They want every studio to have their 'own' identity so that you have 30+ studio's working on games that define who they are as a Studio and the 'best' games they can be so that you have one big 'hit' of a 1st party game followed by 'hit' - and that 'hit' metric won't be in sales charts, it will be in player and/or critical enjoyment. The more people that want to play, the more that will join their ecosystem.

Right now, the choice isn't PS5 for its fantastic Games that will be £70 each so only play a few of their franchises or buy a Series S/X for Game Pass - all the fantastic value and potential this has suddenly unlocked, all those games I can play that everyone else is wanting to play, getting a lot of players playing, dominating social media. And yes you may need a PC to 'benefit' from some of this too because Game Pass for PC is almost a side thing for obvious reasons. But all 1st party games and GPU gives you access to PC, Mobile, Streaming, EA Play and Gold on Console too. But point is, the consoles aren't going to sell because of 'Starfield', because of 'Redfall', because of Forza/Halo/Gears, they are gonna sell because people want Game Pass - hence Primary platform.

They are buying up all these studio's to make games they want with no commercial metrics to meet. The only thing is likely to be 'make great games that people want to play and we'll support you to make those games happen, because we want 'BIG' games coming to Game Pass every MONTH. Ideally they will be Xbox Published (1st party and 3rd party games they want for GAME PASS so most likely 'online' focussed like all the 'co-op' games which also allows their own studio's to make SP games for Game Pass if they want) and ID@Xbox Indies of course as that saves them negotiating deals with others whose focus maybe is 'commercial' to put them on Game Pass. If ALL the Big Games on Game Pass every month are made/published by Xbox, that's a massive financial saving. They also want those games to be games people want to play so you join Game Pass and STAY Subscribed. They don't care if you join on Phones, PC or that people feel you have to now buy an Xbox, don't care if sales of Xbox beat PS5, they only care now about Subscriber and Player enjoyment because that's what's going to keep you month after month.

When MS said they stopped competing with Sony, they were competing with Google/Amazon etc and Game Pass is absolutely fundamental to that because that's the service that ultimately will bring EVERY GAME PASS game to any platform where GP exists. The only way they can bring Starfield to a Mobile/tablet anywhere, not just those with high enough spec hardware reliably. You want the 'same' games on ALL game pass supported device so you can literally play anywhere - not PC For these, console for those. That's what Cloud will offer - those games either streamed, or installable if a version was made for it. Starfield isn't made for iOS/Android,XB1 hardware but could play via Game Pass.

This is why I am so optimistic by this. These deals aren't about 'Xbox vs PS'

This is about not letting 1 company keep games, and/or content, especially in the 'biggest' Multi-platform releases from the rest of the gaming world. If you wanted to play certain modes, maps, missions, characters etc, they are ONLY on Playstation. That statement goes against the MS mantra of play anywhere how you want - hence Game Pass is available 'everywhere' and on any device it can be.

This may stop a few million PS players who refuse to join Game Pass through some misguided Loyalty to Sony but for those studio's, the loss of those is eclipsed by the reach Cloud gaming has...

Expand

@JaxonH I completely agree - the potential 'sales' for Xbox could well set new records and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they exceed over 100m units - the best selling Xbox of all time. However, that would be in part as a consequence of MS drive with Game Pass. Without Game Pass and its 'monthly' cycle as Subs are 'monthly', Xbox could of stopped acquiring studio's when they exceeded Sony's number. They just needed to at least match Sony on quality and quantity for their Console to at least do well.

That 'need' to have big new games each and every month coming into Game Pass. That's at least 12 big games a year and if they are ALL made and/or published by Microsoft, that's going to save them time and money negotiating with third party publishers to try an fill in the 'gaps'. Of course that has a massive knock on effect to the 'average' console gamer who maybe undecided which platform to buy. At the moment, deals like Outriders, MLB21,R6, B4B etc maybe don't tend to 'benefit' Xbox specifically when casually comparing - its games like FH5, Halo, MSFS, Redfall, Starfield vs Spider-Man, R&C, Returnal, H:FW, GoW:R, GT7 - Exclusives out and releasing soon - that the average person thinks about.

As for the idea that Gamers aren't Loyal and a lot of those 'examples' are evidence to support that, but until now, Backwards Compatibility wasn't standard. The XB1 didn't launch with BC, so it makes it 'easier' to start again - hence jumping to PS4. Now if you want to jump from PS4 to Series X for example, you are abandoning all your library of games that could be played on PS5, your Trophies, your PS+ games etc so MS also needs to convince them to 'leave' or at the very least, convince them to sign up to Game Pass on whatever 'device' they have. Its not just 'loyalty', its what they 'lose'. At the end of PS3/360 era, there wasn't a 'lot' to lose for many. There library wasn't playable on PS4/XB1 so had to 'start' again. Achievements and Trophies were 'relatively' new so maybe not too important and people didn't like the direction MS seemed to be headed so willing to change.

A generation on, those 360 gamers who jumped and 'others' who decided PS4 was the 'console' for them now have some of the best games of last gen with sequels and other great games on the way, all those games will come forward via BC, all those trophies and 'years' of PS+ games - that's a LOT to give-up compared to PS3/360 or many of the other generations you mention.

That's also where Game Pass comes in. Its not just about the 'quantity' or 'quality', but also 'value'. We have all heard the Xbox only has '3' games (Forza, Halo, Gears) and MS games 'don't' win Game of the Year. Some even question whether these deals will 'bring' Quality as these Studio's haven't had the 'best' track records in recent years. From a Sony perspective, losing Activision/Blizzard is all about 'CoD' and that can't go 'exclusive' as its too 'big'. All those studio's that used to make 'great' games before being pushed into crunching CoD annually are 'not' really a loss. It won't be until these studio's start making new games - whether CoD, another MS owned IP or a entirely new IP that the 'impact' will be felt - especially if some CoD does remain on PS5.

It makes sense that the 'last' main CoD game to release on PS5 before all contractual obligations end and MS are fully in charge to be 'fully' supported across all platforms. Perhaps going 'F2P' so that everyone can play, bring in seasons and maybe a 'yearly' refresh and treat it more like a 'live' service. I can't see another main entry with MP being made to only release on 'Xbox' thus 'diluting' the player base from the last 'CoD' MP on all platforms and upsetting CoD MP fans on PS. Therefore 'CoD' MP will go F2P, especially with all those other F2P games and having the 'CoD' brand will help. Its basically F2P model MP in a premium priced package nowadays anyway and regular seasons, updates etc will keep those 'happy' and allow those Studio's to work on the games they want to come to Game Pass.

Like I said, most console gamers would be comparing PS5 and its 'exclusives' to Series X and its 'Exclusives'. Which would be FH5, Halo, MSFS, Redfall, Starfield vs Spider-Man, R&C, Returnal, H:FW, GoW:R, GT7. However, when they look at 'value', that's where PS5 will struggle £70 'each' game vs all those games for a 'small' monthly fee. I have seen a LOT say that 'tiny' monthly fee not being worth it for maybe Halo & Forza, not interested in Flight Sim. Redfall and Starfield isn't worth subscribing for as its 'cheaper' to just buy both than spend £132 a year. That's because ALL they see are the 1st party 'Exclusives', forgetting that games like R6, ME:Legendary, Plague Tale, Stalker2, Hitman Trilogy, Warhammer: Darktide, Scorn, Avowed, Forza Motorsport, Fable etc also will be coming to Game Pass as well as all those games in Game Pass already.

Therefore MS want 'Exclusives' so that its one 'big' Exclusive after another, month after month - which obviously benefits the console as that's a big release every month on Xbox whilst their rival maybe has 2 or 3 a year. To have at least 12 'big' games a year, as well as a regular supply of interesting and varied content, takes a LOT of studio's - hence building up their 1st Party. However, that costs a LOT too so why not Publish any Studio that has 'new', interesting ideas perfect for Game Pass that perhaps wouldn't get made due to many publishers wanting immediate 'financial' success on release. That's where Xbox Publishing comes in - Contraband by Avalanche is one of these, maybe that rumoured Cloud Kojima project another. Also ID@Xbox adds to the variety of games/experiences too. Having games like R6, B4B, Outriders etc are 'good' but not going to make you 'leave' Sony to save 'buying' games that weren't high on many gamers list. They are games that once you are subscribed, the fact you can 'try' for free is amazing.

I think many underestimate Game Pass, seeing just the 'big' 1st Party exclusives and thinking that those '1 or 2' they'd play wouldn't make financial sense to subscribe to GP to play and 'cheaper' to buy than subbing - despite the fact that you'd also be paying for 'Gold' too - and the game is 'yours' to keep if they buy. Therefore, they need more than 3 or 4 big exclusives that people want to play to get them in to open their eyes to the 'true' value of Game Pass.

That's why I think Game Pass hasn't grown much over the last year despite the $7.5bn spent on Bethesda and the 'promise' of Starfield. 2021 gave us MSFS (not everyone's idea of a 'fun' game), FH5 (misunderstood 'racing' game) and Halo:Infinite (a disaster waiting to happen, old-gen looking game that actually came together just in time for release -missing key features of course). I know Psychonauts 2 arrived on GP but available on PS and of course GP benefited from a LOT of other new day1 releases but its Day1 Exclusives and 'more' than 2 or 3 great games that will convince people to join.

Long term, we can see this coming and why the 'Console' will be a big sales success - despite it not having any 'exclusives' as they can all be played on PC so 'why buy a console'? Well because the Consoles are the 'best' value with most of the biggest 'new' releases coming 'exclusively' to that 'console'. 2 PS5 games = £140(£70 each), 2 Xbox games £110 (£55 each), Game Pass Ultimate £132 (£11pm x 12) so if they release just 2 games a year people want, its pretty 'even' (I know GP gives more than just Exclusives) but then anymore 'games' releasing, and the 'value' jumps up significantly, 4 PS5 games £280, 6 Xbox games £330, GPU still £132.

Makes sense that a LOT of people look at 'exclusives' after all, that's how they have looked at consoles before - the games that differentiate the two as the 'rest' are playable on both.You don't need to leave PS to play Outriders, MLB21 etc, just have to buy where as GP gets it 'free', but its not a game that they couldn't play.

For all this investment, there is still an 'undercurrent' of chatter from numerous people. Most, if not all, studio's were 'struggling' with not the 'best' track record and/or struggling with funding. Ninja Theory contracted out most of its staff to work on 'other' developers games to allow a 'small' team to work on Hellblade, Obsidian was struggling too with Outer Worlds funding. Bethesda was 'struggling' after Fallout 76 - only Doom and Wolfenstein had been 'successful' recently although that 'co-op' Wolfenstein wasn't well received. We all know that CoD is struggling and Activision/Blizzard as a Company were sinking fast. Add to that, peoples memory of what Rare was compared to now, what happened to Lionhead, Bungie etc and 'fear' that will happen to these studio's.

So right now, that undercurrent is lingering in the background. We know MS is under very different management and has a different Primary platform now that has a very different business model but many are waiting for these 'games' to come, waiting to see if those Studio's get 'screwed' over etc.

The whole business model is NOT centred around basing 'success' on Financial sales, canning projects because the cost vs financial return might not be there. Would a project like Scalebound be cancelled today or Fable Legends - a perfect game for Game Pass. Scalebound may well of 'cost' too much to justify continuing when the XB1 wasn't 'selling' well enough and 'luke warm' reception may have pushed the completion of the Project vs financial return beyond salvageable. Now, its not about 'Financial' success, its about player subscription numbers, player engagement and retention. To do that, they need games 'every' month to attract more and more people to sign up, and importantly, keep subscribed to play the 'next' month, and the next, and the next.

I'm sure that MS would 'sacrifice' selling 100m+ Series consoles for say just 50m if that meant having Game Pass on PS5 and gaining 50m+ extra Subscriptions. However, the longer Sony hold out, more that plays into MS's pocket too. Those PS gamers will start to see '£21' a month for Game Pass Ultimate and a Series S as 'too good' to miss out on as more and more of these studio's start releasing 'exclusives' to Xbox. The legacy games haven't quite finished on PS (Deathloop, Ghostwire etc) and studio's most 'recent' releases came to PS and still supported (Doom, Psychonauts 2, Outer Worlds etc) so the 'impact' has not been felt. Even with 'Xbox' essentially having 2 of the most critically acclaimed games Psychonauts 2, Deathloop), 1 of those isn't even on Xbox yet.

There is also the 'deniers', those that think CoD or Elder Scrolls are too 'big' to go Exclusive, that MS won't want to lose that 'revenue' - BS. They are not 'concerned' about losing '10m+' sales on Playstation, financial success isn't the objective of these - hence they release on Game Pass. The OBJECTIVE is to get people to Subscribe to Game Pass. Even if you 'buy' an Xbox so have 'access' to those games, they want you as a Subscriber. You have just spent £450 on a Series X, great and thank-you but now Subscribe to Game Pass for ALL these games. The Consoles are a stepping stone to Game Pass for MS because their primary platform is Game Pass first and foremost. They are 'constantly' adding 'value' to Game Pass to increase its appeal. Every 1m more subscribers is $10m more a month, $120m more a year. If there are 300m gamers in the world, that's their target hence whatever 'device', hence cloud. Not everyone can afford the latest console or hardware, can't afford to buy a new game every month so Game Pass and because you are in the ecosystem, what money you can spend on gaming (on top of the Subscription) is in their ecosystem.

Expand

@Grumblevolcano Actually I'm not worried at all. Since they switched from the 'Console' gaming side Project that Xbox was to Microsoft, the MS that 'screwed' up with Rare, Lionhead etc and cancelling Fable Legends and Scalebound to Phil Spencer with the FULL support of Microsoft and Game Pass as its main focus, I have NOT been concerned at all.

Game Pass takes away that 'commercial success' viability decision from the equation and now puts the 'focus' on Players. Its not 'which' project could 'sell' more or stifling creative 'freedom' because someone thinks it won't 'sell 'enough, it allows for 'experimentation' - put it on Game Pass and let the Gamers play it - they will let you know if they want 'more' or not.

Game Pass also needs at least 1 big game 'EVERY' month to bring in new Subscribers. They need big games every month so those people want to remain Subscribed. IP's will bring them in, but 'great' games will keep them subscribed. Therefore, these studio's will need to be working on their OWN projects - whether 'new' IP's or games from their 'existing' portfolio of growing IP's. 343 is 'Halo', the Coalition has Gears and Turn 10/Playground have Forza and these studio's will continue to be the 'main' studio's for those games - although another studio may have a great idea for a 'spin-off' project.

Anyway, the point is, they want Studio's making their OWN games with their OWN studio Identity. Ninja Theory, Compulsion, Rare, Mojang, Undead Labs, inXile, Obsidian are ALL making their 'own' games in their 'own' style. When MS bought Bethesda, each of those Studio's have their 'own' games in their 'own' style too - Elder Scrolls, Fallout and Starfield are all 'typical' Bethesda games, Arcane make their own games too. Therefore it stands to reason that MS will want ALL the Game Studio's at Activision/Blizzard making their 'own' games - not ALL now working on CoD. They want to foster and grow great communities around gaming so want to keep 'CoD, Gears, Halo etc communities growing.

One of the reasons I think CoD MP will go F2P is because its all about the 'CoD' community. They don't want to 'split' that Community between Game Pass platforms and Playstation, don't really want to split the Community by those playing the latest, and those still stuck with last years and would want to 'encourage' more to jump in so remove the price point to entry. Of course the F2P model will have monetised 'features' like BattlePass, CoD Points for Cosmetic purchases etc but being F2P on EVERY platform removes ANY barrier to entry and won't split the Community every year as ALL updates, ALL Maps, Modes etc will be available to 'EVERYONE' at the 'same' time. No 'ONLY on Playstation 'modes', or 'early access' to Maps to PS owners...

Maybe one of the 'Activision' Studio's will become like 343, the Coalition - basically in charge of CoD Online to run for the 'CoD Community' - in charge of MP, Warzone and all ONLINE CoD. For example, Raven could take on CoD (or make a Studio staffed by 'ex Infinity Ward, Treyarch etc Devs that want to work on CoD) and then the rest of the studio's/staff will be 'free' to make the Games they want. Treyarch could make a new Zombies game like CoD:Zombies but without having to go the WW2 Nazi Origin route to fit the 'CoD' theme Exclusively for Game Pass. Infinity Ward may want a break from making a Military First Person campaign and make a 3rd Person Action Adventure, Sledgehammer may have an Idea for a new IP, High Moon may want to work on their old Darkwatch IP, Beenox or Toys for Bob could make a Kart Racer/Smash Bros/Party games with characters from Spyro, Crash, Psychonauts, Conker, Banjo, Warcraft, Starcraft, CoD, Doom, Quake, Halo, Perfect Dark, Wolfenstein, Skyrim, Fallout, Fable etc etc

The Game Pass model and MS's own statements is all about giving 'individual' studio's the 'creative' freedom to make the games they want, the financial and expert support to realise those ideas and a platform to reach as many players as they can. Its not about making 'commercially' successful games because SALES are not that important. Its about Subscriber Growth, Subscriber Retention and Player engagement. They don't just want you to subscribe for 1 month but once you Subscribe, you stay subscribed and the only way to do that is to make games that people want to play EVERY month on Game Pass. There is 'NO' pressure to make a 'new' Gears/Halo etc game EVERY year, but those games are still important to the Coalition/343 etc but also not going to 'force' them to make 'new' games - they can take a break and work on some other projects. If those Studio's have a great idea for a 'new' game that may well fit an IP, they will probably be given the opportunity to do so..

Therefore, I am NOT concerned at all. Machine Games are working on Indiana Jones and maybe won't revisit Wolfenstein for a while, but maybe Sledgehammer or Infinity Ward has an idea for a 'Wolfenstein' game instead of 'CoD' so they make the 'next' one - with 'support' from Machine (assets, artwork, lore etc).

Since MS switched focus to the Game Pass model, I have not had any concern about the 'future' of those IP's and/or the future of those Studio's. Its set up so that 'individual' studio's making their 'own' games have a platform that is focussed purely on the 'gamer' so Player 'engagement' and 'Retention' so Subscriber numbers 'grow' is far more important than making a 'game' just because the 'name' sells. 30+ studio's is 30+ new games coming. If a new 'Gears' is 3yrs away, there is games coming from ALL those other studio's, games that Xbox Publishing will bring (like Contraband) and then, if they still have 'months' where NO Xbox Published game (1st or 3rd Party) is due to release, contact other publishers who have a game releasing (like MLB, Outriders etc). Of course they want to be 'self sufficient' - in other words at least 12 big Xbox Published games every year for Game Pass. They want you to Subscribe to play Treyarch, Bethesda, Arcane, Rare etc games - like people buying a PS5 for Naughty Dog, Guerilla, Insomniac etc games as much as subscribing for 'IP's...