Expect Microsoft To Host Bethesda Event Sometime In Mid-March, Says Industry Insider

I think Starfield is highly likely a timed exclusive.
If the game launches within the next 12 months, PS4/5 development will already be very deep and it would be rash from MS to just throw that away at this stage.
Wouldn't be a shock to see them shift focus 100% to the Xbox version to release end of the year, and then maybe 6-12 months later on PS4/5.
Same with Wolfenstein 3, and then probably going forward, games will be mostly Xbox exclusive, bar live service style games.

Would have thought they would keep the games Xbox etc exclusive, no PS5 or Switch.
Depends if they want console sales, game pass or game sales.
I guess it depends on cost break points and cross over.

Honestly, skulli's predictions sound like what everyone been guessing so I dont believe there is any inside info there, just a compilation of guesses.

I dare bet Starfield and TES 6 will be only available on Windows, Xbox and XCloud.

@Tharsman
If MS want to be ruthless, they could just tell Bethesda to scrap the PS4/5 version of Starfield, and then they've secured themselves a huge exclusive IP only available on Xbox platforms.

That's what I'd personally do if I was in Phil Spencer's position.
Just look at how aggressive Sony have been securing timed exclusives. Why should MS play the nice guy when you can still play these games on Xbox consoles, PC or Cloud?

@Tharsman I don't know to what degree timed-exclusive is actually effective (sales figures and numbers). I still remember how in the last gen Microsoft made some noise when they got Rise of the Tomb Raider as a timed exclusive. But I don't know how much it actually helped them sell their console back then.

I understand the idea of a transition period (where initial games may be timed exclusive and later games are full on a case by case basis). This is rational and still would lead people to gamepass.

The internet me, though, wants exclusivity because I’m just tired of seeing complaints and pushes for answers to exclusivity whenever Sony people (who are the loudest voice on the internet) feel threatened. Every base, including Nintendo and Xbox, has it’s whiners, but man they seem to come in large numbers whenever PS is threatened with possibly not having something go it’s way. You see thousands of articles analyzing, questioning, or complaining,

But that’s just the internet me who wants to spite lol. The normal everyday life me who has friends who mainly play PS just will be happy to get these on gamepass lol

@xMightyMatt14x I'm the same as you. I play on all consoles so it doesn't matter to me that much whether or not Bethesda games will be exclusive to Xbox. But I want them to be just so that there's more of a reason to invest in Xbox. I do also find it annoying how people complain that Xbox doesn't have many exclusives, and when it gets more exclusives these people then complain that they should grow the IPs organically instead. And when Microsoft does that, people just complain that the exclusives are mediocre because they are on Game Pass. I feel like people are complaining just for the sake of it, lol.

But yeah, I've been playing Horizon Zero Dawn the entire weekend and it's a brilliant exclusive. I'm starting to understand why PlayStation fans value exclusives so much, these games are just so good. So I do want Xbox to have these kinds of games as well, such as Elder Scrolls. Because it feels more special that the games are exclusive (even if they are on PC).

I don't really expect Microsoft to say much about upcoming games until June, we already know getting hold of Series X is going to be a gigantic mess until at least 2nd half of the year and xCloud is still on the XB1 blades so announcements are kind of wasted hype potential. Instead you end up with a large angry rant of "make more consoles" especially with the scalper situation.

So the most I think we'll see from Bethesda before June is Ancient Gods Part 2 DLC for DOOM Eternal and a bunch of legacy games for Game Pass.

Nice, Looking forward to it..

@blinx01 I don't think that would be ruthless at all. That would be the most obvious thing to do after an acquisition.

@Medic_Alert contracts like this are always just between the developer studio and the publisher.

In this case, MS acquired the publisher, so they can do whatever.

Only case where the platform holder has a say is if they themselves paid for an exclusivity, like Sony did with Ghistwire Tokyo and Deathloop. Those won't just still have to ship to PS5, they will need to be exclusive for as long as the contract mandated (likely a year from launch, but there are rumors some of the deals for PS5 exclusives were just for 6 months.)

I think it's fairly clear that Sony didn't get an exclusivity deal on Starfield, but there are reports they were trying to negotiate such a deal. I think Sony is legit scared Xbox will be a real market share threat this generation.

@LtSarge Sony has some fantastic exclusive titles - which is why I will always have a Sony console in my home (Nintendo console as well).

Sony and Nintendo are my "exclusives" machines. Xbox is my multi-platform machine (and I do like the exclusive titles as well). I do hope that these studio acquisitions lead to some great content on Xbox - especially Game Pass, which I love (I haven't paid for a game on Xbox in a long time and it has gotten more play than any of the other systems combine - well, until I got Xenoblade Chronicles Definitive Edition and Age of Calamity for Christmas LOL).

Any shade thrown towards Microsoft is, in my opinion, fan-boyism. We both know that if either Nintendo or Sony had the pockets to make such an acquisition, it would be all for the company itself. Microsoft is the only one of the "Big 3" that has released IP's it owns to other consoles (note, consoles, I know Sony has done some PC releases)

I foresee the games/series that have a legacy of being multi-platform titles staying multi-platform titles (because a sale is a sale that ultimately favors Microsoft's profits), where as some of the smaller or newer IP titles will be exclusive on a case-by-case basis.

No way these titles come out on PlayStation unless they were fully baked and contractually signed before the deal closed. Like was the case with Psychonauts 2 and Outer Worlds ect.

Sony didn’t buy Insomniac, say “you did so great with sunset overdrive why ditch those dev skills” and release Spider-Man for Xbox because it would make more money.

Typing that seems ludicrous but that’s the logic everyone is applying to Microsoft here for some reason. 🤷‍♂️

@Scenes yeah, for some reason when Sony buys a developer and makes all of its future games exclusive no one bats an eye, yet when there's even a whiff of Microsoft doing the same thing, everyone goes apesh*t.

@VenomousAlbino I KNOW right? It’s crazy and I really don’t understand the double standard.

@Medic_Alert those deals for psyconaughts outer worlds. Were not do to contracts but due to them already announcing it publicly what platforms it would come to.
There is no contract to bring a game to a platform unless sony is giving them money or a marketing deal ala deathloop and tokyo.
So at this point outside of the 2 mentioned or if sony and bethesda had any other agreements not already announced (say they already gave bethesda a cheque for marketing rights for starfield or say wolfenstein 3) outside of this microsoft can do whatever they want.

On the recent wpcentral gaming podcast jez said he heard from multiply sources that xbox was looking to lockup all bethesda game as 100% exclusive going forward. He is usually pretty reliable with his information

@VenomousAlbino this is exactly what annoys me as well. No one bats an eye when Sony does it. But the internet flips out and dozens of articles, podcasts, and everything else are filled with outrage anytime Microsoft might do the same. It’s the inconsistency that bugs me.

@xMightyMatt14x @Scenes Yeah and it's the same with third party exclusives: Sony snaps up Street Fighter V exclusivity and it's fine; Microsoft does the same thing with Rise of the Tomb Raider and it seems like the only way it could've been worse would be if they'd also denied the Holocaust ever happened.

Well if they are full exclusives then they have just lost out on the bigger part of there potential sales, last gen all third parties sold best of playstation by 3 to 1 and if that continues this gen then Bethesda games will miss out on a LOT of money

I expect most Beteshda games timed exclusive for 2-3 years. MS still can earn the most money in that way.

My gamer colleagues, the future is software not hardware. Microsoft knows this and one day Microsoft studios will be on every platform, games sold single or through gamepass.
This is just the beginning.

@UltimateOtaku91 but that's because PS4 outsold Xbox One 3-1 didn't they? So that means that they have the same purchase base then doesn't it? It's been said a million times now, MS does NOT need to be on PlayStation to make money. Their entire set of KPI's are based around gamepass and Xbox ecosystem engagement....so exclusive games are the best way of getting people into Xbox/gamepass. I have a series x so it being exclusive or not won't effect my enjoyment but from a business sense it makes NO sense to be on PlayStation. If you only have a PlayStation and want these games start looking for a series X/S or PC.

@Dezzy70 true. So having gamepass on all systems is the goal then isn't it? Once it's browser based what's stopping anyone from playing this on a Switch or PS5? There were murmurs of their not being a browser on the PS5...is that true? Sony knew this was coming and co*k blocked gamepass?

@Medic_Alert I am not going to argue this.
But if you mean the standard developer/publishing release saying you will send for cert, and agree to the breakdown of the sale proceed goes (standard) then sure yes there is a contract but at no point in those contracts do you sign saying yup I gurantee to release insert title in platform, unless a platform holder says hey we want this exclusive and release it here.
If you want a good example of this go look at metro exodus on steam where they took preorders and said hey it's coming here but then switched to a timed exclusive for epic and pulled anyone preordering anymore.
My ex significant other worked for a small game publisher house and would casually talk about this stuff that if there was no payment for timed exclusive until the very end you can just decided to not release on the platform.
As if you did it any other way no one would even risk putting your games on the platform

@Krzzystuff
Yes I think will be overall in the future for Microsoft. 110 million PS4 and 80 million Switch.
Imagine the potential moving forward.
Disney now have loads of IP, Marvel, Star Wars etc. They don’t make Blu ray players, they don’t make streaming devices, they don’t make cinema.
They make loads of money without making the device their media is watched on.

@Krzzystuff
Let’s have game pass on all devices and consoles I say.
So everybody can enjoy Microsoft Studio games.
The money is in software, dlc and add ons etc.
The analysis shows us that, and that’s where Microsoft are heading and I don’t blame them one bit.

I wouldn't mind the games being on other consoles. I am a multi console gamer myself, but the sheer fanboy petulance of some Sony fanboys does make me sadly want to see them squirm with a full Xbox exclusivity...
I'd love for Starfield to come to Switch but not PS5!

@Medic_Alert there is usually an agreement to allow a publisher to publish on the platform (be it Xbox, Nintendo or PlayStation) but those agreements are not obligations.

Non exclusive games are canceled all the time, for any reason, and the platform holder has zero say on that. The only thing a platform holder can do is block the release of a game, something Sony has done a lot to Japanese games in the last few years over censorship.

I'm not even sure how much I care about any of the Bethesda stuff being "exclusive" to be honest. People make such a big deal about PS exclusives and frankly, they always feel like much the same game over and over to me these days. Insert third-person X in a single-player adventure with some button mashing and the occasional QTE sequence. Add some DLC. Let it bake for 45 minutes at 350. They've definitely had some winners, don't get me wrong, Day's Gone is still one of my favorite games of the last generation, but I'm sitting here with a PS5 and maybe 60 minutes of Miles Morales under my belt and I'm bored to death with it. PS players need Bethesda games as much as Xbox at this point. Stuff like Dishonored needs to be made available to as many people as can get their hands on it. I think you'll see Microsoft continue to let Bethesda publish wherever they want and let the money roll right in.

Isn 't Starfield from the makers of Fallout 76? Maybe let's temper expectations a tad here.

I call fake news. Too many mentions of this "E3" thing...must be cobbled together information from years ago.

@Dezzy70 Even Sony doesn't really care about selling consoles. It not only doesn't make them money, it loses them money. Only Nintendo profits on the hardware because they're selling the best that 2015 has to offer! lol

Sony only cares because the install base metric for the hardware helps them gain power and influence with third parties and gives them a controlling position in the industry by being able to flash numbers that show they have the biggest number of users. MS has 3 platforms (console + PC + cloud) with PC arguably curbstomping PS in potential (not current actual) market, so they don't have to worry so much about pushing their platform and getting that install base figure. They have an "install base" in the billions if you count every Windows desktop and mobile device in the world, let alone adding every mobile device to it.) Not all of those are really potential game buyers, but the idea holds. They already got the platform in front of everyone's noses, now they have to sell the games. Sony needs to work to get the platform under people's noses, so their strategy revolves around making the machine appealing on its own via exclusives.

I do think they want to create an appealing first party environment, and it's not like Halo and the like are going to PS, but with Bethesda games, I can see them mostly bolstering cash flow with such a wide umbrella to stablize their finances, and arguably use their appeal to have PS players basically subsidize Game Pass for Xbox players. PS fans love to say it's unsustainable....but what if their purchases of $70 Starfield basically funds Game Pass?

But it's a hard call, it's a good opportunity to quickly build exclusives. The question is does their strategy really benefit from exclusives like that just because Sony and Nintendo have done that since the 90s/80s?

@NEStalgia I think Halo Infinite will be the last 1st party Xbox game that isn't $70. Microsoft is desperate to push everyone onto Game Pass as perfectly shown by the Gold price hike mess that they'll resort to price hiking game prices given the Gold price hike didn't work.

Increasing the price of Game Pass would just mean fewer people subscribe so of course they're going to use a strategy which keeps Game Pass at the current price.

@Grumblevolcano I can't tell. I'm inclined to agree. "The industry" has pushed that narrative. The CFO at MS has been pushing that narrative. And the cash grab for gold was just bizzarre, though still think it was about forcing people to GP to boost subscribers more than making more revenue off Gold.

BUT they have to be careful. For Sony they're locked into the woes of physical retail and used games and I get the feeling the $70 pricing has more to do with used games than about actually setting $70 pricing (a reverse psychology of the Matrick solution - his was charge people for buying used. The Sony/industry solution is charge the original buyer more so there's less loss in the used channel.)

Ubisoft is on the fence. They're focusing on digital more and more. They have their day 1 gold editions with the pass. They refused to comment on this year's games prices and dodged investor questions back in last quarter. I think they're gauging reaction before raising prices. Ubisoft will be a good weather balloon for the industry.

MS is all about digital all the way around. They're less caught on that physical mess. Yes, they want to force people into Game Pass, but, they also want to use Game Pass to drive full-fat sales, including the discounts. It's symbiotic. There's something to be said for paying $15/mo AND buying the $60-10% 1st party game versus trying to charge $70. If anything, I think maybe if they raise prices to $70 that will come with the caveat that GP subscribers get it for $60. Or less. Driving sales of full licenses is a massive tentpole of GP's model. They don't want to tamper with that formula too much, so I think there will be some kind of price break involved (there already is, 10%, but if they did that they'd probably sweeten the pot.)

(Edited, I said physical where it wasn't intended to mean physical.)

@themightyant is it any different though than Sony locking Final Fantasy away? Hmm?

And also, if the buzz was true they were going after Leylou the publisher for Splash Damage and Digital Extremes which would have included Warframe and the Devs of Gears Tactics, but we’ll forget that because Tencent beat them to the punch.

Don’t get me wrong it’s all part of the game I’m not upset either way, but people tend to forget Sony might not be in the exact situation as MS but they can and do lock IPs away.

@mousieone I see this dreaded future of gaming where "gaming" means Microsoft vs. Beijing, plus AmaGoogazon as distribution partners, plus Nintendo making mobile games for $70.

@NEStalgia Aren’t we already there?

@themightyant I’m not sure 16 is timed based on “console exclusive” tag. The only evidence we have that’s it’s not timed is a “insider leak” and trailer mess up. FF VIIR hasn’t been announced for Xbox, the year exclusivity is up in April. Seems like now would be the time? Then there is 14 that had to “wait until they have resources”. Granted, FF was one example. There is a lifetime exclusivity on MHW in Japan. Of course, there is Spiderman in general. Are they as large as locking down Doom or Skyrim? On their own no, but if you take all the IPs together, yes they are. But that’s the game.

Granted until Bethesda; most of the studios they bought had one or two IPs for people to care. And we don’t even know what’s exclusive. For all we know MS might not make anything exclusive, and just do TIMED.

Although I do think you and I are on the same page ultimately. It’s an unfortunate that content is king and this is how it works. But it’s not really new nor unique.

@mousieone So.....we got the bad ending. Didn't we? Can we fix that in NG+?

With FF16 I really think it's unlikely that it's a permanent exclusive. FF costs too much to make to lock it away, and Sony's payouts are big, but I'm not sure they're that big.

Yeah, it was an "insider leak" that said it was 6/mo exclusive 12/mo console exclusive (meaning the "console exclusive" text is accurate...it just omitted that it was for 1 year..) But when the media followed up with S-E about that, they stated that they could not comment on whether 16 would be on other consoles or not.

If it was actually an exclusive, they could comment on that. The answer would be "no, it's exclusive, can you not read?" - the fact that they "can't comment" on it being on other consoles is an admission that it is, in fact, definitively not a permanent Sony obligation, otherwise there would be no gray area to not comment about, it would be a lock, and that's that.

So 16 is not bound to Sony. Neither is 7R. We'll see when it comes to XB.

The lifetime exclusivity of MHW in Japan is kind of hilarious. Like, it can't run on a Nintendo console and will be obsolete by the time the next console comes out (MHR is coming out in 4 weeks....). I mean did Sony actually over Capcom money for that?

Sony: "Hey Capcom, pssst, over here......if you keep your Japanese-centric game off Xbox in Japan, we'll give you $20M...."

Capcom 1 to Capcom 2: "I don't know about this.....think this will offset our potential losses on sales? How many sales do you think we might loose"

Capcom 2 to Capcom 1: Well, Igunorantu-san, if we look at the total install base of the Xbox platform in Japan.....let's see, add column b through row 12.....carry the one...... we stand to loose about four hundred seventeen sales......"

Capcom 1 to Sony: "Sure, deal, hand over the check before you walk out please...."

Netflix....Disney....subscription exclusivity...... I really really really wish we could uninvent the internet. It's ruined absolutely everything, and the positives it offers does not offset all that was lost. It was nice on dialup in the 90s, but broadband was always a path to misery.

@NEStalgia Here's the thing with that. I think FF 16 is currently timed Exclusive with an option to extend the time as much as Sony/Square-Enix wants, same with FFVIIR. Meaning that if Sony feels like dropping more money that way, it extends even more. And techinically "Console Exclusive" is wrong, it's "Timed Exclusive" or as MS is fond of "Console Launch Exclusive".

MHW does make sense from a Capcom prespective until you consider up until then the PS4 was selling horribly as well at that time. The Vita outsold it at that time frame. but the advent of MHW suddenly made the system relavent again. Yes, there was a good reason for Sony doing that. And also, the Switch runs PSO2 and RE2 REmake. MHW makes sense for cloud gaming so when you think about that from perspective... Well it changes things doesn't it?

Uninvent the internet? I don't know about that but maybe uninvent regular people having access and move it back to governments, militaries, and school

@themightyant MS is paying Remedy to make a Single Plater Mode for Crossfire and paying for the console version. I don’t think the Dev was going to do either had MS not suggested it m. It’s a wee bit different ? Kind of like Sony helping Capcom by finding SFV which I made a point of not mentioning. Anyway...

About FF, MS announced DQ11S in July and the exclusivity was up in September. Call it my gut but seems a bit odd Hmm? They announced KH collection for Epic and that’s not due out until end of March. Who knows. It’s not really an issue but is what it is.

I think the bulk of existing IPs will be released multiplatform with some timed exclusivity perhaps, but not a full exclusive. I do, however, believe MS will expect Bethesda to create new IPs for MS solely and those will be full exclusive.