Bethesda's Indiana Jones Game Confirmed As An Xbox Exclusive

The FTC is claiming Microsoft could repeat the same patterns with Activision Blizzard games - essentially locking the company's titles to Xbox, PC and the Game Pass subscription service if the deal is passed.

This is very illogical, someone at Disney might end up having to testify, but an amendment to the licensing agreement is not something a single party can do unilaterally.

Similarly, the Xbox cant back out of the deal they signed with Nintendo, or any deal Sony signs (if they decide to sign it) to keep CoD multiplatform. Thats not to mention that Jim Ryan himself was quoted as stating that he has no worries about exclusivity and that CoD will remain multiplatform.

Well good for them, hopefully its for multiple games.

Good. Also, good

Also I'm surprised the FTC hasn't quit after that email where Jim Ryan said: “It is not an exclusivity play at all,” said Ryan. “They’re thinking bigger than that and they have the cash to make moves like this. I’ve spent a fair amount of time with [Phil] Spencer Bobby [Kotick] and I’m pretty sure we will continue to see Call of Duty on PlayStation for years to come.”

This is regrettable for sure, keeping the game multiplatform would have backed up Microsoft's claim of bringing more games to more people, it would have helped with the takeover too. Not wholly unexpected but regrettable nonetheless.
I'm sure PS gamers only will understand, just like Xbox players understand the Sony-Squeenix FF7R/FF16 shenanigans😂.....(spoiler) we'll all be outraged😉.

@Zoidpilot4

that email where Jim Ryan said: “It is not an exclusivity play at all,” said Ryan. “They’re thinking bigger than that and they have the cash to make moves like this. I’ve spent a fair amount of time with [Phil] Spencer Bobby [Kotick] and I’m pretty sure we will continue to see Call of Duty on PlayStation for years to come.*”

That is quite the admission, I'm surprised at the lack of reporting in the gaming media of this.

@Sol4ris same. He even said if xbox did take away cod that PS would be more than okay

@Zoidpilot4 somehow more people aren’t talking about that email. That right there from the start shows Sony was playing a very shady hand of cards to the FTC, CMA and others. That email was before this case even started to gain attention by the powers that be.

@Green-Bandit he also said if xbox took cod away they would be more than okay. That alone should have sunk their argument.

I bet FTC are seeing a different side now, they must be ticked off with that email at least.

If MS wins this court case I hope they go ahead and close the deal regardless of FTC and CMA. Enough is enough now. Ryan trying to do what Sony did to dreamcast cannot be accepted

Microsoft need Sony. Like Coke needs Pepsi
We are defined by what we are not, just as much as we are defined by what we associate, align with and represent.
Companies like Disney and other IP owners/game developers know this and can use it to their product and marketing advantage. Xbox might have Indiana Jones but not the MCU characters like Spider-Man and Wolverine for example, or Pixar or Star Wars which are with other unaligned developers and publishers.
It's not a simple binary either/or scenario. Sony and Microsoft aren't in full control here. Other forces are using every opportunity to raise their profile and improve their social and market presence

@Zoidpilot4 you would like to think that Email carries some weight in all of this. If the FTC passes the deal, MS will look to close and deal with the CMA accordingly. Just to get the deal closed would be a huge deal for the Xbox brand and let all this distraction free them back up to deliver big games.

I've gotta say I enjoyed listening to the hearing yesterday , the ftc came out looking really bad imo , the best part was it seems the judge seems interested in game pass cause she didn't have to spend $70 on a game ,there are afew memes about it

https://twitter.com/SnapBlastPLAY/status/1671957483454078989?t=yHhWxaOD_Umaw1QItQ7oaw&s=19

@Kaloudz sorry yeh I didn't notice I put CMA , I'll edit now ,
As far as I know no way to listen again as it's illegal to record , and it has a max of 1000 listeners but luckily I got in

Thing that get's me about this is that Indiana Jones is likely another 5 years away. The only thing that has been shown to date was an illustration of his hat and whip, and some very iconic music! So now people over on Push will be annoyed that a game has been 'taken away' form them, when little more than the licencing agreement was likely completed.

7 years is apparently now being seen as the industry standard for these AAA(+) games to be made, particularly one that is being developed from scratch (so there being no existing assets that can be reused from a previous game). Therefore, if the game were to come out in say, 2028, then Microsoft would have owned Machine Gun Games for 7 years.

It is my personal opinion that firstly, you cannot take a game away from a platform that never physically had it in the first place, but secondly, that an idea for a game (or indeed a licencing agreement) is far removed from actually development commencing, and certainly years away from it being out in the public domain.

I can understand the disappointment of PlayStation gamers in not being able to play the game on their chosen console, but given the likely release window, I think that a little perspective is in order. This game was announced, but is far from release, whereas you can bet that a number of games that were being developed by studios bought by Sony will now be exclusive, but may have been initially intended as multi-platform. The difference being that they weren't publicly announced. The only reason Indiana Jones was announced so early is that is such a massive IP.

I think it is is also important to remember that the FTC is doing their very best to paint Microsoft as the 'bad guys' in this scenario. Microsoft, as far as I am aware, could not simply decide on their lonesome that the licencing agreement would be changed to the exclusion of Sony. Therefore it seems likely to me that Disney had a hand in this decision. I guess there could have been some sort of opt out clause that meant that Sony could do noting about being excluded, but it seems to me that the only way for this matter to be abundantly clear is for Disney to give evidence too...

Sony/PlayStation already have lots of great exclusives, no harm in Xbox having some more.

@Moonglow Of course PS owners oppose the deal. Like anyone would if they were having the biggest selling games taken away from them. The issue for Sony is that MS have bought Zenimax and buying ABK so are obviously taking out the competition using their gazillions of $. That is actively monopolising the gaming industry so it would be criminal if Sony didn't fight it. Even if its not for this round, but for when MS try to buy Take Two, EA, Ubisoft they can refer back to the ABK deal and further strengthen their case to stop it happening.

Other than getting ABK games with GP I can't see anything positive about MS buying all these studios. Who knows what it means for those franchises going forwards. Things like CoD are AAAA level games because they sell so many games on PS and Xbox but once they go single platform who knows what happens. For arguments sake if 50% play on PS and stop playing CoD, will MS still put the same budget into those games? Will they remain at the quality people expect? Who knows? Maybe GP numbers go up, but the general consensus is the numbers are plateauing. Will people move from PS to Xbox? Maybe?

@Kaloudz yeh gonna be a major rush to get in there with everyone wanting to hear Phil

@Moonglow this is it I will admit I prefer Xbox and they buy exclusives and Sony buy exclusives ,that's the way of the world ,but I won't say it ok for Microsoft and not Sony like most of Sony fans are doing at the moment with Sony , like Indiana Jones for example they say it's bad , no one knows if Disney offered spider man to sony and it was Sony who said we want it to exclusive which is what Microsoft has done with Indy , and chances are we will prob never find out if that was the case , all this Microsoft shouldn't do this complaints is like KFC saying McDonald's can't have big macs cause they can't sell em

All company's are in it to make money and they all say you can only get this item here etc ,it's the way they get customers

@Nightcrawler71 but Sony exclusives are made by Sony devs. What new games have we had from Xbox acquired devs? None!! There’s Starfield an Redfall but they were already in the works wen MS bought Bethesda, they were being made as multi platform games.

@Lastatopiny not sure what you mean by this? Final Fantasy XVI isn’t made by Sony devs; neither would KOTOR be. And Pentiment, Grounded, Minecraft Legends, Psychonauts 2, Forza Horizon 5 and Halo Infinite have all come from Xbox devs (excluding Zenimax/Bethesda devs) recently but not sure how far back you want to go… we all know 2022 wasn’t a good year for Xbox. There was also As Dusk Falls from Xbox Publishing (which everyone loves counting as 1 of the 23 studios) and Mighty Doom on mobile from Alphadog (which everyone loves counting as 1 of the 23 studios). Also the Age of Empires series hitting Xbox from World’s Edge and Goldeneye from Rare.

Oh, I absolutely agree, @Kaloudz. First off, pulling existing games that were already being enjoyed by thousands/millions would have been a very, very bad idea and look, and I think would have given Microsoft's already pretty poor standing with the PlayStation crowd a proper, and justifiable, battering. As you say, the fact that they continue to support those game, speaks volumes, as does the fact that they honoured agreements in relation to Ghost Wire Tokyo and Deathloop.

Regardless of these facts, and whether we like it here or not (not, obviously!) the FTC is there to do a hatchet job on Microsoft. They will paint them in the absolutely poorest of poor lights, and won't let the truth stand in the way of them doing so. Unfortunately, those disinclined to like Microsoft will latch on to these details, and perhaps choose to ignore that which might be untrue or overegged, in favour of using as ammunition with which to shoot Microsoft and Xbox. It is one of the main reasons I want this whole saga to settle down as some of the vitriol on display has been completely eye-opening for me. Truthfully, I think the damage has been done to Microsoft in the eyes of the PlayStation community. If the deal goes through, I cannot see that changing much. If the deal fails, then I think the PlayStation ire will remain, whereas I think there will be a great deal of resentment on the part of team Green, plus many will take great joy in seeing Microsoft fail, which will add to the overall rivalry, but not in a good way. So, in many ways, in the interest of bringing some harmony to the industry, I think that the deal going through would now be the best outcome because, providing Microsoft stick to their publicly stated commitments, as it will bring in some much needed calmness to both sides (well, until the next big acquisition, anyway!)... 🤣

"XBOX exclusive", comes to XBOX and PC.

Yeah, you guys don't know what the word exclusive means, don't you?

This game better have the Indiana Jones theme song or I'm never playing it

@Solidchief Of course it will have the theme. Why wouldn't it?!

@Sol4ris maybe they were slow to post knowing how heavily they would need to moderate the comment threads lol. Trolls will jump on their own interpretations of it as usual and the handbags will come out.

Similarly with Sarah Bonds admission that they were worried Xbox would lose COD by Bobby asking for more revenue share. Slightly less of a headline but seeing nothing of that either besides a small tidbit on Sky news here in the UK. Probably for the same reason.

Congratulations Xbox on getting your own Disney owned IP exclusive! Too bad its for a franchise that very few people will care about by the time the game comes out. Phil sometimes seems to be chasing for equivalents to big PS exclusives he likes. For example, I see him thinking/hoping that Hellblade 2 will be Xbox's God of War and its just not gonna happen I bet. And in the same vein Indy won't be their Spider-Man.

@K1LLEGAL i never claim FF16 to be a PS exclusive. Forza H 5 an Halo Infinite are the only Series exclusive we’ve had. Games like Minecraft are games that MS simply bought. Like if COD was made exclusive i wouldn’t refer to it amongst Xbox exclusives. MS devs didn’t make it, they bought it. MS have more devs than Sony yet look at the comparison of new ip’s in the last 6 years lets say. Playstation is way ahead!!

@Kaloudz the games you mention, Silent Hill, FF, etc i don’t class as PS exclusives. As you say Sony devs don’t make them. Games like Deathloop already had a contract to be timed on Playstation. MS honoured the contract as i’m guessing that was easier than maybe being dragged to court by Sony an likely losing.
I’ve just read a story about the Call of Duty thing ya mention, it said Activision forced MS to pay more for COD. Playstation split takings 70/30 with Activision, Activision quoted MS 80/20 an stopped them using COD at showcases, nothing to do with Sony.
Also Xbox fans complain bout timed exclusives all the time. Do ya not think Xbox would have timed exclusives if they could? Playstation sells over twice as many games as Xbox, no dev is gonna go exclusive to Xbox for a year an give up 70+% of their customers. Back in the Xbox 360 days the player base was close an Xbox had numerous timed exclusives. PS43 sold about 2 million more consoles than 360. PS4 sold about 75 million more than Xbox One.

I've been told exclusives matter. Don't hate the player, hate the game. Keep feedin' me, MS. Feed me more.

@Kaloudz MS being the giant they are. I love it.

@Kaloudz was it anti competitive when Xbox 360 did it? Would it be anti competitive if Series consoles an PS5 sales were equal and the Series X had timed exclusives? Like i’ve said before, Atari 2600 was the first to have timed exclusives. It’s always been a thing. It’s only considered a problem now because Xbox can’t do it. It’s the same as people kicking a stink an starting petitions to get Starfield on Playstation. It’s business, being exclusive will make ya system more popular.

@Lastatopiny i still dont get it. You said Sony exclusives are made by Sony devs which is true but they are also made by devs who are not part of Playstation Studios like Square Enix. Also Sony purchased Insomniac so I assume you won’t be counting theirs either? Also you don’t have to consider FFXVI to be exclusive but so far it is.

And you say only Halo and Forza have come from Xbox devs but I just listed others. Not really sure if you’re just trolling or what but it’s not making sense?

We have just had the Xbox showcase which literally showcased the games coming so yea.

Edit: Also in the “best Xbox exclusives” thread you have listed a bunch of playstation exclusives and you have included FFXVI there. As well as 3 Insomniac games.

@Kaloudz If Machine games Indiana Jones does Alien Isolation type numbers than it'll be a flop more so than the new movie looks to be. The fact that they were able to write Playstation out must mean Disney got all its money upfront and the lost sales aren't going to hurt how much money they make by going only Xbox/PC which means strictly Gamepass. If Gen X folks like me are over Indy I don't think the franchise is going to catch fire with the younger generations.

Maybe it will be Xbox's Uncharted, Phil has been chasing after that Sony franchise forever whereas Naughty Dog/Sony has moved along.

@K1LLEGAL FF16 is currently exclusive to PS, it isn’t made by PS devs tho. Sony bought Insomniac and Insomniac produced arguably their best game, a new ip, Spiderman. Wen Playstation bought Naughty Dog, Naughty Dog made games for Apple 2, Sony invested an we’ve had TLOU 1, 2 an Left Behind, Uncharted 1-4 an Lost Legacy. Wen have Xbox devs done this???
Minecraft wasn’t made by Xbox devs, it was bought, Psychonauts 2 is on Playstation, Forza an Halo are true Xbox exclusives, i said that.

@Serpentes420
A good game will be a good game no matter what franchise it is based upon. The jury is still out on whether it will be a good game.

People buy the Spider-Man game because it is a good game. For literally years their were Spider-Man games that never delivered a good game and didn't sell all that great. Sony made a great Spider-Man game, then it sold well.

Personally, I don't see Hellblade II and God of War as very comparable franchises. They are in the genre, but very different themes to the games. Just like I wouldn't compare Halo and Killzone. Again, same genre but two very different approaches and themes to the games.

@Kaloudz i really think Xbox fans intentionally miss the point. Sony acquired devs release brand new, incredible games. Microsoft devs don’t. Buying a dev, giving them money and having them release a brand new game is a bit different feom buying a dev an turning 3rd party games exclusive.
With regards to Deathloop all MS did was honour a contract. It was prob easier than the risk of being dragged to court. Playstation did a deal with the dev an paid for timed exclusivity. Like Xbox used to do wen their sales competed with Playstation sales back in the 360 days.

@Lastatopiny you’re asking when Xbox has done that but like examples include Rare (Kameo, Viva Pinata, Sea of theives), Obsidian (Pentiment, Grounded, Avowed), plus the new games shown from Compulsion and Inxile… they might not all be award-baiting third-person action games but in my opinion that is a good thing.

@Kaloudz paying for 3, 6, 12 month exclusivity and buying a game an blocking it from intended platforms is totally different! Like i said, Xbox 360 did it too. Which game have Sony paid to keep off Xbox? I heard a story bout them offering/paying to keep a game from Game Pass but not Xbox.

@K1LLEGAL i’m talking AAA, massively expensive to make games. TLOU 1 an 2, Uncharted 1-4, God of War Ragnarok, Ghost of Tsushima, Horizon, Spiderman, Miles, Days Gone, games like that. Not Tetris 2023!!!

Microsoft bought machine games so they csn do what they want regards to it being an exclusive same as Sony with their studios don't get why fanboys moan either these companies have no loyalty to anyone it's pathetic

@Kaloudz how are those two statements different??? They paid to have a timed exclusive deal meaning the game came to Playstation but Xbox had to wait a year.
They paid to keep the game from Xbox for a year.
It’s the same thing!!
Wat about Bio Shock on the Xbox 360? Did Xbox pay for timed exclusivity or did they pay to keep Bio Shock off Playstation for a while?

@Kaloudz FF16 is only on PS5. If they pay for timed exclusivity they pay to keep the game to themselves for a while.
If they pay to keep a game off Xbox they pay to keep the game to themselves for a while.
I’ll ask again, did MS pay for timed exclusivity of Bio Shock on 360 or did they pay to keep Bio Shock off Playstation for a while???

@Kaloudz i can’t comprehend wat you’re sayin. It’s the same thing. Timed exclusives are just that, exclusive to that console. Name me one game that Sony paid for exclusivity an the game released elsewhere an only skipped Xbox.

@Kaloudz it doesn’t matter who typed wat i read, paying for 1 year timed exclusivity an paying to keep a game from other consoles for a year is the same thing. If i give you £50 but want paying back or i borrow you £50 but want paying back is that the same thing???

So which game has been timed, Playstation exclusive that also came to Switch? Why aren’t Nintendo kicking a stink too? Like i’ve said, Xbox 360 did the exact same an they would now if they could. They can’t so instead they spend billions buying whole studios to keep games from Playstation, not for 6 month or a year, forever!!

@Kaloudz so which games have been exclusive to Playstation an refused to Xbox? Other than FF latest games i know of none. With regard to FF there are various stories as to why the new games don’t seem to be coming to Xbox. One is Sony, one is Square Enix, one is Square Enix and Microsoft. But if it was because Sony paid for it to skip Xbox why wouldn’t Phil just say that? Why would he stick up for Sony an say it’s because of business deals? Just say Sony paid Square Enix to skip Xbox! We have thus proof of this!!

@Tharsman The FTC and CMA are using a flawed, incorrect premise and sticking to it, regardless of validity and inability to prove anything. When MS says otherwise, acts otherwise, and provides proof otherwise, the regulators simply ignore or discount it and repeat themselves.

The EU had it right when they said the greatest incentive is for MS to keep CoD multi-plat, however, before we go there, it doesn't matter if MS makes CoD console exclusive in the first place. Still, everyone is putting way too much emphasis on CoD, as if it is the key to "cloud gaming," where it would perform poorly in MP.

So what is the difference??? If a game is timed exclusive to Playstation it doesn’t come to Xbox. Or Switch. Like Bio Shock an Ninja Gaiden 2 didn’t hit Playstation on release. Was that because Xbox got timed exclusivity or was it because Xbox paid for it not to be on Playstation? Wat’s the difference???

But the outcome is the same??? Either way Xbox doesn’t get the game. Simply answer my question, did Xbox 360 pay to keep Bio Shock, Ninja Gaiden 2, etc, off Playstation? Was that not the same?
Also in a post on here today Phil says the Square Enix thing has nothing to do with Sony paying them.