BAMozzy

They wouldn't be 'fully' exclusive like Games were in the OG and 360 Eras because Microsoft decided that they wouldn't ignore their Microsoft PC gamers which they neglected to establish the Xbox brand name and a PC is 'DirectX' in a 'Box' Hardware which was the design criteria for the Xbox.

Therefore, I doubt making games Console Exclusive would see a dramatic increase in Hardware Sales to boost their revenue enough to make it worthwhile. I can't see Sony gamers with generations worth of games, trophies, friends etc built up on their Playstation wanting to give up all that to start from Scratch.

Unlike the OG/360 Era, there is fewer games releasing as the time it takes to get a game out has increased. You'll be lucky to get more than 1 or 2 entries of their big games these days when Gears for example had 4 releases (Trilogy and Judgement) and Halo had multiple releases too (3, ODST, Reach, 4, Wars etc) just on the 360. Add in games like Mass Effect, Bioshock etc and of course a decent head start on the competition as well as a 'relatively' low cost entry for its hardware, it had a lot more reasons to be successful.

You won't get PC gamers buying Hardware to play Forza, Gears, Halo etc as they can play on their PC, won't see a plethora of games from an IP/Studio due to the time it takes to make games (not every game, IP will appeal but if you liked Gears in the 360 era, you had quite a few releases, or Naughty Dog on the PS3 with Uncharted Trilogy and Last of Us).

With Hardware costing more and more, Games increasing in price whilst fewer games per Studio release, games releasing on PC regardless and Digital Libraries and bringing them forward, I can't see the needle moving much regardless of whether they decide to make them Exclusive or not. It will cut off additional Revenue and lets not forget that Game Pass Too will have an impact on Sales...

Gears 6 seems somewhat complicated with the storyline and ending. I also think 4 and 5 feel more like a Spin off from Gears of WAR anyway and don't really care about that story line but I do think they should have maybe released a DLC mission or two to give it a better and more complete ending so we aren't in this position years later.

The fact its not on Game Pass doesn't bother me but the fact that MS promised ALL their games would be Day and Date on Game Pass and then took CoD out whilst keeping in Subscription for Fortnite that's not even required to play the game and doesn't add 'games' to a Game Library service does.

If they can break that promise and keep CoD out of Game Pass, what IP will be next? Fallout? Elder Scrolls? Games that take 'years' and a LOT of money to make so would rather sell only to recoup costs before they come to Game Pass.

As for CoD, I wasn't that impressed by the Beta and haven't enjoyed an Infinity Ward game for many years - probably since West and Zampella were fired. MW2 needed MW3 to fix the movement and map design and based on the Beta, MW4 may need Sledgehammer to make MW5 to do the same. Maybe DMZ will save it as the DMZ Beta in MW2's Warzone was the highlight of that years CoD for me...

And yet the Studios known for making varied titles were shut or let go whilst those known for making the same few IP's are being kept.

Its still Forza, Halo, Gears, Minecraft with CoD, Doom, Fallout, Elder Scrolls will also be included in that list now - but IP's like Hellblade, Psychonauts, State of Decay etc and the Studio's behind them and lets not forget that Prey, Dishonoured, Evil Within etc have all gone and those studios that remain have been gutted too. Turn 10 (Forza) and Halo/343 Studios have been gutted and what's left, merged into other studios

The Studios at Activision making CoD haven't had the opportunity to work on 'other' projects so how will Halo and/or its side projects (Wars for example) fit in or will that just be a 'TV/Film' IP?

They've gutted their Studios they have left whilst also getting rid of the more 'creative' studios and cancelled 'new' games and IPs in development. I don't have much faith that they'll keep the Studio behind a Clockwork Revolution once that releases.

They've even pulled out of a few 3rd Party deals to make new IPs - although have picked up Physint after Sony pulled out of that project - but overall, they've significantly cut down on Studios and most notably those Studios that created 'New' games whilst also reducing the staff teams at the studios they kept who are known for working on their 'big' IPs which would indicate they are focussing on their 'few' big IPs they own and don't have the Studios or staff to make new IP's or even deliver the '4' big games a year they promised for Game Pass.

I doubt things will drastically improve that would deliver a big price drop. Waiting another year or more with specs designed and prototyped, maybe even in the hands of a few internal Devs already is also just going to look 'less' impressive against the specs and capabilities offered in the PC space - particularly around AI/ML features. RT feels more like a 'token' effort than a robust feature this gen and FSR is very limited compared to DLSS and how much that has evolved since 2020.

Point is, things may not change for the better and then you are releasing hardware at a high cost that now looks a bit less impressive - even if it is a step up from current Hardware that's still 'expensive' too.

Releasing as planned in say 2027, maybe at a 'higher' price than they'd have ideally wanted due to the state of the world and current pricing, would then allow for prices to drop if and when circumstances allow. If things do change for the better, the Hardware can 'drop' and become 'more' affordable instead of going up and up over the gen like current gen hardware.

Absolutely NO interest in ANY of these Areas - I am interested in Gaming and Hardware and have NO affinity to 'Xbox' as a Brand. Its just the tool I use to play the Games I want and I certainly don't 'care' who published the games I want to play. I don't care that MS publishes Gears of War anymore than I care about who publishes Tomb Raider or the Witcher or whatever other game I want to play, just that I can play it.

My interest in Forza Horizon has diminished after it peaked around FH3 and FH4. FH5 and FH6 are just more of the same in a new setting to me which doesn't make me want to jump in when I can play FH3 or FH4 as I prefer those two settings.

Its almost like getting a new DLC Map to play on, a new map to start the SAME grind and game-play loop etc and feels like they like lack any creative freedom to evolve the game or bring something new, change the 'format' a bit to freshen it up etc...

I'd be very interested in upgrading my Elite V2 to an Elite V3. I've used an Elite Controller since the day the V1 launched and its been my controller of choice on Xbox and PC.

The biggest issue I have with the Elites have been the Rubber grips as they tend to peel. My First Elite also had the Bumper bar break after a few years and replaced the Grips with 'Scuf' made 3rd Party options which lasted far better than MS's own. The Only issue I've had with my Elite V2's though is the Grips but I do know that others have issue with Stick Drift so switching to the TMR/Hall Effect modules should eliminate that.

If they can't find a way to stop the Rubber from peeling, I'd rather they designed the controller without them, a textured plastic option rather than a glued on rubber option would be preferable as it would never peel away.

Xbox can still have a Platform and Publish games on other platforms too - it just depends on what the Priority is and/or what determines success.

Sony only has their Console Platform which means that their own games ONLY release on their Playstation Console and therefore if you want to play Sony's games, you must buy their Hardware.

Microsoft don't just have the Xbox, they have their Windows PC too - both are Microsoft powered devices, both have Microsoft gamers and customers and so PC gamers don't 'need' to buy Microsoft Hardware to play Microsoft games. That alone will stop the Console being 'competitive' in terms of sales with Playstation even if its 'competitive' with users and their own software sales, even if they are competitive on revenue etc.

MS could have more Game Sales and users across PC, Console and their Cloud enabled devices, brining in more revenue from Gaming without 'competing' on Console sales, without losing as much on those sales as console are often sold at a loss or certainly with little profit margins.

For Xbox to 'compete' with Playstation on Console Sales, Microsoft would have to ditch their Microsoft customers on PC and Cloud , make their games exclusive to just their Console (like they did to try and get Xbox to be popular when they launched their own hardware) - basically abandon the Platform they started on and made their name on - the Platform that Bethesda too made its name on before MS helped bring them to Consoles with their Xbox - a DirectX in a Box machine to bring 'PC' Games to the mass market.

They can have a 'top-tier' console that doesn't sell as well as a Playstation because Gamers have a PC so don't need to buy the Console - even if they made all their Games exclusive to their platforms, it won't sell as well as Playstation - the ONLY platform/hardware Sony has so the ONLY hardware their users are on...

A handful at most - I have never been a Completionist with Achievements or Trophies and consider a game finished when I've had enough. I won't play games, modes etc just for Achievements and won't play games a specific way or keep attempting a certain thing over and over again so I don't have many games with ALL achievements.

I don't play games for Trophies/Achievements.

I've had this pre-ordered for weeks and is the campaign that's the most important part for me. I don't really enjoy Versus and I'm not sure I'll like this version of Horde either so I'm glad the Campaign seems to be reviewing well.

@Nakatomi_Uk Cool - but as I stated, the Majority (so not everyone) will still buy games the way they normally do and for Series S and PC owners, its pointless buying Physical so they won't bother. The majority of Series X owners will continue to buy how they normally do so if you 'normally' buy Physical, you'll continue to do so. A few will buy Physical that used to buy Digital because they can sell their Licence but most will likely use disc to digital to convert their already owned Physical games to Digital.

I still expect next gen to stop releasing games on Physical media and to bring existing libraries forward, Disc to Digital will be the perfect option. Series S owners will automatically have their Digital libraries available and to stop Series X physical owners having to leave their libraries behind, they can convert to Digital.

PS6 is expected to have a Handheld option as well so Digital again will enable owners to download their Digital library on whatever Playstation Hardware they want to play it on. With a Disc, they could be limited to only PS5 because both PS6 and its handheld version are digital only.

My point was that this function won't suddenly see a MASS of Xbox owners rushing out and buying up all the Physical games as was implied - as if this was the miracle to save Physical sales when only the Series X owners would even be interested in buy on disc. Most Series X owners would already have the games they want to play, the games they would convert to Digital in their Collection so won't need to rush out and buy. Many others would already have the games digitally so again won't need to buy - and no one is going to rush out and buy games they never wanted to play anyway - especially not in the current economic climate.

Therefore a few will go out and buy a few extra Physical games but not enough to clear the shelves of stores. Most of those that wanted 'digital' features likely already bought those games at some point so won't need to go hunting the used market for them.

I know that some, like yourself and a few others will buy a few extra physical games, but most would have bought those games Physically at some point anyway because they prefer Physical so not really increasing the sales. So its only those on Series X that 'normally' buy Digital that would and could have an impact on the Physical market and I don't think enough will - that's NOT saying no-one will, but that its a 'small' group (Series X owners that haven't bought the games they wanted to play on any format, normally buy games digitally anyway and now choosing to buy Physical) so you see a big increase in the amount of shoppers buying Physical Xbox games, enough to clear the shelves which I think is unlikely.

@Rimebreaker Yes - if the Physical release returned to offering Physical content like Artbooks for example instead of Digital codes in the case to download digital versions of those and the game has Play Anywhere so I don't have to buy a game twice to play on my PC too, then maybe I would be tempted to buy a 'Physical' collectors edition - but nowadays, you don't really get 'Physical' goodies in the box - all you get is the disc with codes to download the 'Collectors Edition' Digital content - some in-game Cosmetics, a digital version of the Artbook and/or Soundtrack so I'd probably still buy 'Digital' anyway.

I wouldn't buy those 'used' because the bonus/collectors content isn't included because the first owner already redeemed those codes and its probably cheap on the Digital Storefront.

My point was that IF they released a Collectors Edition with an Actual Artbook or some other 'Physical' goodies included that you'd ONLY get by buying Physical (maybe the Digital Collectors edition provides the Digital version of Artbooks, soundtracks etc but you ONLY get the Physical Artbook by buying Physical) - then I'd buy a Physical game - otherwise I may as well just buy the Digital and get the benefits of Digital (like Play Anywhere). I wouldn't buy Physical just because it offers the exact SAME Digital content as buying Digital would - Physical would have to offer something that Digital doesn't - which would likely be Physical Collectors content that obviously Digital wouldn't supply.

I still wouldn't buy Physical just to get the same benefits of buying Digital - unless I wanted to sell/trade my games - which I don't tend to do. I appreciate that some will buy Physical because they can sell their game and 'lose' access to their game - but they'd buy it Physically regardless because they'd want to trade

I've never said that this will 'hurt' Physical sales, I only said I don't think you will suddenly see this clearing shelves of Physical. As I said, the majority will already own the OLD games if they wanted to play so won't need to buy again - and used is because gamers already moved on from them. Digital owners are unlikely to buy the disc to get Digital functionality they already have. As for 'new' releases, yes I can see a 'few' more opting for the Physical - but those that buy Physical would still buy the Disc so again not moving the needle dramatically. A few extra percent buying discs - but its still ONLY the Series X owners as Series S and C gamers are ALL-Digital customers anyway.

I still think the majority of Disc to Digital conversions will be made by gamers who bought those discs years ago, not rushed out to buy Discs just because they can now convert to Digital. It will be those legacy own Physical games that people already own in their collection that they already play to get Play Anywhere or not have to keep putting the Disc in to prove they still own that bit of plastic - I don't think it will make a 'massive' difference in the Physical stores as the majority already own the games they'd convert and most will still buy the way they always buy - a handful that 'normally' buy digitally may well return to buying Physically because they can sell but the majority will still buy Digitally as their hardware limits them or convenience or whatever reason they've switched to Digital anyway....

@RTGX And ALL the Physical zealots are ignorant and can't comprehend that the version on Physical is NOT the version you end up playing several months after release, let alone a year or more later so its NOT the version that's worth preserving.

Physical zealots still think that the game needs the disc to 'run' when its only using the disc to check that you still own the Licence and that they can still stop you playing your 'Physical' games (or some component part you paid for), stop you from accessing the content you bought because you don't have a certain subscription anymore - that Physical will make them 'exempt' from being blocked or not being able to play in 20yrs time because their hardware is turned 'off' from the internet. Even if they can 'download' the content from disc, it will be missing all the patches, fixes, content etc they added post release - and even single player games often receive post release features and content like new game+, photo modes, challenge maps etc.

If Physical had the final build with ALL the content etc, then I could see why it maybe worth preserving but if you 'need' the internet to get the 'best' and final build, may as well just have the Digital version as that will always deliver the latest, most complete and most stable build - the version I'd want to preserve, the version I'd want to play. I've bought MANY games on Disc in recent years and many of them I felt I had to wait until they fixed, patched or added something that was broken/missing at launch - including the terrible performance - not the version I'd want to play EVER - but its 'playable' to some.... LMAO

@Rimebreaker I still don't think that there will be a rush to buy Physical discs because the majority will already own the games they want to play regardless of how 'positive' this is. The majority of Digital owners aren't going to go out and spend money on a disc version. Those who want that game on disc already have it on disc so again not buying it again

And yes I know what you mean - Game in the UK was notorious for selling Used games literally £1-2 cheaper than the brand new sealed version - often the same day those games released too which always puzzled me as to how they got so many 'used' versions. When used just saves a £1-2 and doesn't come with some Digital content the OG had (Gold/vault edition for example with DLC code in the box), it doesn't make sense. But Digital also has extremely cheap games in sales too so don't need to spend money on fuel and parking just to get to the nearest shop or Postage and Packaging costs to get it mailed out which pushes prices up.

From my perspective, I'd be more inclined to buy something Physically now if I know that I'll get the Play Anywhere digital licence too. I do miss buying the Collectors edition with Physical goodies - not DLC junk. I still have all my Physical Collectors editions - inc my GTA4 safety deposit box version for example and Falllout Lunchbox Tin version and the OG Mass Effect collectors tin version - but you don't see many games releasing with 'Physical' goodies - even Artbooks and Soundtracks are supplied Digitally these days. I miss looking at the 'Physical' Artbooks and never downloaded a Digital version

@badboidre And Hardware will break down if used enough regardless. Nothing lasts forever and wasn't built to last. I probably had more hours on my PS3 than you've had on your PS2 and you still can't play your PS2 discs on modern hardware, can't buy a brand new PS2 replacement WHEN yours fails and it will because they ALL do eventually...

ALL my CDs work on my CD Player from the 1980's but if that CD Player fails, I can easily buy a modern day brand new CD Player that will play ALL my CD's - doesn't have to be the same brand or model that my 1980's model is because CDs, like Vinyl or Blurays are 'universal', Games are locked to a specific Hardware and/or Brand. You can't play your N64 games on a Switch because you bought the Cartridge, but you can play a Vinyl on ANY record deck, play CD's on ANY CD Player etc...

It doesn't matter how well you look after your Hardware, it will fail at some point. It was not built to last forever so you will need to repair at some point. I could get my PS3 Phat repaired (although my PS3 Slim still works so never rushed - but none of the Controllers work 'wirelessly' anymore so have to use wired - until Stick drift or something else 'fails' on them) but ALL my PS3 discs are locked to obsolete hardware that's no longer made so can't buy a 'new' replacement should I need

@Rimebreaker As I said, I can imagine a 'few' people that may buy 'new' games Physically because of this and those that buy Physical may pick up a few more 'used' games, but I still don't see that the vast majority will suddenly rush out and start buying up all the Physical games they can to the point that shelves will be empty as was implied by the initial post - that suddenly all those Physical games that have been sitting on the shelf for years will suddenly become desireable.

Those that prefer and/or have Physical games will already have the games they want to play, want to convert to a Digital Licence and the vast majority of Digital owners aren't likely to go out and buy the disc when they already have the game and digital licence.

At most, it will shift a 'few' extra discs, a tiny fraction of the Xbox gamers will buy Discs but the vast majority will continue to buy games the way they always have. If you prefer discs, then you'll still buy discs which won't 'increase' the number of discs sold as you'd have bought on disc regardless. As for 'old' games, most people have bought the games they want to play, already own those games in a 'format' they prefer and so won't rush out and buy AGAIN just because of this.

The majority will use disk to digital for their existing Physical Library and only the games that they may still play (or to test it) to get 'Digital' features/bonuses. If they own a RoG Ally (as I do), converting a disc to digitall lso you can play without rebuying is awesome - but if you bought digitally, you already have that

@badboidre Stuff breaks down with age - the fact is, things like a Controller breaks through wear and use - my PS3 controllers don't work because they won't hold a charge anymore and stick drift on a couple.

I still use my CD system from the early 90's and it works fine - the difference between CD Players and an N64 and controller is that CD Players are still available today where as they stopped making N64 and Controllers decades ago so you cannot buy 'new' replacements should things 'break'. Hardware was never built to last 'forever' however well you look after them and, unless you never use them, which defeats the purpose, then wear and tear ill play a part.

There are MANY that have to replace controllers on their PS5 or Series X because of Stick drift and rechargeable battery packs will eventually stop charging.

My Music system still works and even if they did 'stop' working, my entire Physical Collection of Music would still work on modern replacement hardware - unlike my N64 Cartridges which only work on an N64 with N64 Controllers, unlike PS3 discs which only work on PS3 Hardware and rely on PS3 controllers - none of which are made anymore. It doesn't matter how well you look after a PS3, chances are it will 'stop' working at some point - my 60GB has YLOD so unless I find someone that can repair, it stops me using ALL my PS3 discs.

your petty pathetic insults won't change the fact that Gaming is very different from other media when the Physical media isn't 'locked' to specific Hardware that will become obsolete, when the code on them is 'early/gold' versions, not the best, latest, most complete and fixed version that you'd get if you bought Digitally.

I've never bought a CD and had to wait for the rest of the Album to be delivered via the internet and them to patch glitches and issues with the playback, the music not playing at a consistent rate because the Publisher wants to push it out and know they can fix and patch later.

If you actually gamed and used your hardware instead of just collecting it, then it too will stop working at some point - they don't last forever and weren't built to last forever either...

@RTGX I too have a massive collection of Physical Music on CD and quite a collection of Vinyl too - it takes up so much shelving space and I keep adding to it. I ONLY buy Music, Movies and Books Physically so I am NOT a Digital zealot

There is a BIG difference between Physical that plays directly from the Disc and doesn't require a Specific brand of Hardware to run - unlike Physical games. My CD's work on ANY CD Player and never need to be updated, downloaded to hardware etc just to play - unlike Games.

Games do NOT run from Disc and haven't for over a Decade - that makes them nothing but a Distribution device. You can't play Your Xbox or PS discs on ANY brand of Hardware and in some cases, they are locked to a specific generation and brand - My PS3 discs only play on PS3 Hardware which makes them useless on my PHAT PS3 with YLOD and none of the Controllers I have hold a charge anymore but can't buy 'new' replacements. Yet my music Discs from the 80's are still playable on ANY CD Player today.

ALL 'software' has to be downloaded to the Hardware to run - you've never had to wait until the Album or Film is downloaded from disc to the hardware before you can watch/play and then have to keep putting that bit of plastic in slot to prove you still own the right to listen/watch - yet you do with games.

Its the fact that discs are not adequate for gaming anymore rather than the aspect of Physical. The Game doesn't run from, its just distributed by disc - just like it doesn't run from, its just distributed by Server with Digital. The ONLY difference is that one has a Licence you can sell, the other doesn't - but NO game runs from Disc and its barely adequate as a delivery method as games exceed the capacity.

Its betting than being a Physical zealot defending something for dumb and uneducated reasons, thinking that its somehow more than just a distribution method these days, that's its exactly the same as CD's, Blurays or Books which are NEVER Hardware/Brand limited, never rely on downloads to fix, patch and/or supply content, never 'rushed' to disc knowing they can fix and add the missing features post launch via the internet.

If Physical had the complete, most up to date and finished version, ran from the Physical media so were simple 'plug and play' - like other media then Physical would be the better option - but it doesn't. In 20yrs time, you may not be able to use the disc regardless because your hardware needs to be repaired as you can't buy a 'new' replacement. I have a LOT of N64 Cartridges but not a working N64 Controller - doesn't make those games playable. I had thousands of games on Cassette from the 80's but the Hardware they ran on no longer works making my 'Physical' collection useless yet my CD's and Vinyls still play...

@dskatter I understand your Perspective its just that I don't agree that it will suddenly make Physical so popular that shelves will be empty

You made a statement that insinuated gamers would suddenly rush out and buy all these games on disc just because of Disk to Digital - so much so that GameStop shelves would be empty.

I merely replied that MOST gamers would have bought the games they wanted already - either on disc or more likely Digitally as that is the most popular format. There won't be this 'sudden' rush to buy Physical and those that frequent the 'used' stores would still be buying the used games regardless.

I do understand that a handful of gamers will buy used games, but I expect they've been doing that for years and Disc to Digital may increase their purchases 'slightly', but certainly not enough to clear shelves. The 'majority' of gamers already own the games they want to keep and would convert 'disc to digital' and 'few', like yourself will continue to buy Physical to play those 'few' games you haven't got round to yet...

If that's too 'long' for your concentration span - the TL:DR is that I doubt Disk to Digital will make a big difference in the Physical stores - because the vast majority of gamers already own the games they'd want to convert and those that buy Physical, won't suddenly buy 100's of games they wouldn't have bought just because of this.

@dskatter I just don't understand why you didn't buy those games before if you wanted to play so I don't see why this suddenly changes the desire to play or buy those games just because of Disk to Digital.

If you wanted to play them, you'd have bought them regardless of this. Those 'used' games were still playable on your Xbox and many people would have bought them if they wanted them before, probably own them digitally already as that's by far the most popular method of owning games so I really can't see why this will suddenly see those old games flying off the shelf.

As I said, I can see a handful of people, like yourself maybe picking up a few games - but chances are, they'd be the ones buying 'used' Physical games anyway. I can't see the 'majority' of Xbox gamers going to a store to buy discs just because of this, enough to make the shelves empty.

Those games are old, used and most gamers that wanted them already played them, already finished with them and traded them in to GameStop so people like you could buy them.

I see it more as not needing to re-buy the Physicall games I own to get the benefits of Digital or to carry games forward, maybe even play them on 'digital' only hardware like a Series S in the bedroom or PC with Play Anywhere - benefits that most people would have bought the game digitally in the first place if they wanted.

I just can't see gamers suddenly rushing out and buying discs just because they can convert them to get the benefits of Digital ownership when they likely already own the games they want to play and would convert those discs or already own those games digitally anyway. A few will buy used discs, but they would be the ones that buy Used discs anyway and the shelves have remained pretty well stocked of most games.

I just don't think it makes those games worth playing so much more now that gamers will rush to the shop to buy the Disc when they haven't bothered before. Disc to Digital isn't going to make gamers want to play those games any more than they did before and if those games were so great they wanted to 'keep', chances are they already have the game....

@dskatter I doubt it - its no different to buying the game Digitally on sale too and if you sell the disc, that digital licence will transfer to the new owner and you'll lose access.

I see it more as being a way to bring your old games forward or get the benefits of Digital (Play Anywhere, Quick Resume, stream your own) that Physical doesn't offer or work well with.

I doubt gamers will rush out to buy Physical to convert to digital when they could just buy digital anyway for cheap without wasting money on travel and parking...

I'm sure some will, but I doubt they'll clear the stocks off the shelves. If they wanted to play, they'd have bought them before and Disc to Digital won't let them sell the disc and keep a digital version to get it 'free' or even cheaper...

Some big IP's but fewer Studios and Staff left to make them....

But he'll still get a $100m a year pay!

It maybe breaking records, but when you have a 'small' console user base because Hardware sales weren't that strong over the generation, when Sony have sold more double, maybe 3x as many units and continue to sell more units every month than Xbox does, the Sales of GTA will probably be lowest on Xbox regardless.

If it sells to 20% of the users on both Consoles, It will sell a LOT more copies on Playstation because there are significantly more gamers on PS5 - and I know quite a few gamers that are buying PS5 Pro in readiness for GTA.

PC gamers aren't buying an Xbox to play 'exclusives' as they all release on PC where as they will buy a PS5 just for exclusives they can't play on PC. No point spending money on hardware to play games your hardware can play and likely at higher frame rate and/or graphics - but can spend that same money (or less) on a PS5 for exclusives they can't play on their preferred hardware

I doubt I'll bother with a new Fallout or Elder Scrolls, let alone Starfield. I doubt Bethesda will make a game that doesn't feel 20yrs old in its design, animation, game-play etc, that doesn't feel like the 360 games just with higher res that modern hardware offers. The Animations, the NPC interactions, the structure, inc the structure of missions and side quests all feel like they've been copied from their old games and 'tweaked' and 'reskinned' for whatever Bethesda RPG it is.

I'd be more interested if they built a game that felt 'new' and fresh, something that set the bar like Fallout 3 or Oblivion did, but I feel they've been using that exact template, copy and pasting with just a new setting skinned in whatever 'IP' aesthetic this game is for which to me is dated and not what I want from RPG's these days.

@Runex2121 I know its not hard to cancel but what really annoys me is that I still 'need' Game Pass Core or I can't play many of the games/content I still enjoy playing on a regular basis - that I'd lose access to online Gaming and the Online Games/content that I paid to play.

Take games like Battlefield, Arc Raiders etc for example - even if you paid full price at launch and enjoy playing those frequently with family or friends, they require at least Game Pass Core to play and if you cancel, you can no longer play those games online.

Its not the Game Pass games, its games I've bought and still own a valid licence to play, games that aren't even Microsoft owned or Published games, games that if I had bought on PC, I could play every day without having to pay for a Subscription too.

If I cancelled completely, I'd lose access to the majority of the games I'm currently playing and whilst I do enjoy Single Player games, once I've beaten the story, I don't replay it again and again. I don't really want to render most of my Games unplayable.

And yes I know if I jumped to PC and cancelled Game Pass Core, most of my Xbox games would be unplayable but my 'main' Gaming platform would be PC rather than just the occasional game on my RoG Ally with Xbox as my Main. I cancelled PS+ a while back and now haven't played on my PS5 for months but I have a LOT more Online games on Xbox and not ready to lose access so have to keep Game Pass Core for now - which angers me as I feel I'm being held to ransom - pay for GPC or lose access to a large percentage of my games that I bought. I don't care about the 'Game Pass' Games, I never purchased them and only felt like I was borrowing for a limited time anyway so don't miss GPU but begrudge having to pay for GPC to play the games I bought to play!

The more I hear, the more I'm convinced that I'd rather game on a PC as I can install Adblockers and not have to pay a Subscription to play Online, supporting these money grabbing big corporations that really don't care about Gamers, Games and the developers behind them, they only care about money and using them to extract money.

When Nadella is getting rid of Studios, staff etc and considering adding adverts on a 'Premium' product with Premium priced Games, interrupting Gamers gametime just so they get 'more' money, despite earning nearly $100 MILLION, despite MS making 'BILLIONS' in Profit every year, I really don't want to 'support' Xbox, support MS and would rather just play on a PC, buying the Games I want to play though the variety of retailers so I'm not being Blackmailed into paying for Game Pass just to play Online and not to lose access to my library of games/content that require Game Pass Core to play on Console.

@GuyinPA75 Yeah, its difficult to discuss as Politics plays a big part but that system allows the 1% to give themselves massive Pay rises, bonuses etc whilst also able to 'dispose' of people with no repercussions. They won't get rid of Nadella because there isn't anyone really to fire him and save MS $100m+ a year on the Salary and likely has Tax Breaks too for the rich

MS had a net Profit Margin of 40% for year ending June 2026 and a Gross Profit of $225.5 Billion - that's with those studios and staff teams that they recently decided to get rid of.

Nadella and Sharma aren't gamers and whilst there is a 'business' side to gaming I don't think hey appreciate the creativity, the 'art', the passion etc it just a product they can monetise and try and milk their Consumers. They maybe won't put Game Prices up to extract more money from 'less' products, they'll just make Game Pass Core more expensive and put prices up on peripherals, on Cosmetics and in-game currency packs etc just so Nadella can pay himself $100m or more this year....

Still more jobs and closure to go whilst Nadella received nearly $100m in Salary in 2025 and MS was extremely profitable too.

Of course if you want to have a bigger profit margin this year and increase his salary even further, best sacrifice a few Studios and get rid of 100's of staff - just think if he was on a $5m a year Salary, how many studios they could have kept.

Asha too is no doubt on a Massive Salary and not a Gamer either. Gaming is our Passion but its just a 'product', just something to get Consumers in and extract revenue from.

As MS will support the PC and no doubt Steam too will sell their games, I just don't think I want to be an 'Xbox' customer anymore, don't want to have to keep paying a Subscription fee just to keep playing the games I bought (or at least paid for the Licence to play). Gears of War isn't just $70 on Series X, its $70 for the Licence and you need a Game Pass Core Subscription to keep playing it online, same with CoD, Halo, Forza etc and stop paying that Sub fee and lose access to those games (or at least Online parts) but buy on PC and (or play there if you get the 'Play Anywhere' Digital version), you can play it 'forever' at no extra cost.

I do wonder if Phil, a Gamer, was 'pushed' out because he would have fought for the studios, the developers etc but Nadella wants someone who only cares about Money and doesn't have 'passion' for the Products and staff creating them - just wants someone to milk IP's in the Cheapest, fastest way - even if that leads to little/no creativity, to making the same game over and over with a different skin or setting...

All the Studio's that likely had or would have created 'new' IP's, new ideas, new Creative games are being closed or leaving MS - will Halo just be CoD with a Sci-fi skin and all the Monetisation too?? With MS owning all those Studios, they should have been able to support each other, be able to discuss ideas, share their experience etc. In other words, Halo Studios could have spoken with CoD studios or id Software for advice and/or ideas to have made a better Halo game than they would had MS not acquired those Studios bringing that experience and knowledge into 'Microsoft' Gaming.

They bought studios as they needed 1st party games to make Game Pass and their Hardware a more appealing and stronger Product for Gamers to buy into, but they are reducing their ability to make a variety of games and reduced the frequency by which they can bring games to market so reducing the appeal of the Hardware and Game Pass service. I'd rather just buy the games on Steam as and when they release something that appeals and play all the 3rd Party releases through steam as they too won't require Game Pass core to 'keep' playing month after month, year after year etc...

@Black-Rott READ what it says!! It uses 50GB for Gaming even if it can read 100GB for Movies.

@Nakatomi_Uk I did a search on Google 'How much data can an xbox series x disc hold' and it gave me that answer pulling from Reddit and Facebook as its source (depending on exactly how I phrased the question) but the typical answer I kept getting back was:

An Xbox Series X game disc can hold up to 50 GB of data.
While the console features a 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray optical drive capable of reading dual-layer 66 GB and triple-layer 100 GB movie media, Microsoft sticks to standard 50 GB dual-layer Blu-ray disc formats for Xbox Series X game software. This ensures cross-generation compatibility and matches the physical media limits carried over from the Xbox One era.

But as I said, they'll only use 1 Disc regardless as the purpose is to supply a physical licence as the game code has to be installed on the SSD to run. The game code is not running from disc so they could supply just a downloader on the disc to install the entire game code from the internet.

Indiana Jones is a bigger game than the capacity of a single disc so that has about 20GB on the disc with 100GB download required.

Key Details on Xbox Disc and Download
Incomplete Disc Data: Xbox Series X optical discs are capped at 50 GB, whereas the total install size for the game exceeds 130 GB. (From Doesitplay/ResetEra as source from Google search)

I search Google and that gives me the information with sources and articles linked to check. I just copy and pasted the information I could find on it - the text in italics above was Copied directly from Google and pasted - it won't copy the various sources linked in each - but in general they are giving various sources that say the same thing

@RTGX Again - being 'playable' doesn't mean that's going to be the experience you'd get day 1 with a LOT of games due to patches and fixes and certainly NOT the same game or experience you'd get if you bought it digitally a year or more after launch - the version they'd sell you then.

Doesitplay only tells you if that 'gold code' can be accessed without having to 'download' additional content etc - but you still CANNOT play games from Disc. It;'s only telling you if they supplied 'enough' code to access and play a version of that game IF you download it from Disc without access to the internet - its not telling you that games are 'playable' from disc - NO game is as they require installation to the Hardwar because the disc and disc drive are FAR TOO SLOW for modern games to run and have been for over a decade. That's why ALL games have to be 'downloaded' and 'installed' on the SSD so the Disc has NO Purpose other than to deliver that 'pre-release' version and a licence to the customer. The ONLY reason you need to keep putting the disc in is to unlock access to the software on the SSD NOT the Disc.

You are the one being ridiculous and can't seem to accept that discs ONLY supply an 'early version, not the latest, most up to date and/or complete version (even if that very early version is Playable).

As I said, in 20yrs time, you may have access to that 'pre-release' build of a game - but without the patches, the fixes, the content etc they added post launch, its not the game I'd want to play or 'preserve'. The ONLY version worth preserving and playing is the 'final' build with all the post release content included - and I don't mean DLC that you had to pay for, I'm talking about the 'free' content they added post release with new updates and fixes to the previous build version.

If you are happy to keep a 'gold' pre-release version that required patches, updates and additional content 'post release' delivered via the internet, that's up to you - but there have been many games that have 'Game Breaking' bugs, Missions that won't complete or some bugs/glitches that affect the playability or 'performance issues' because he game wasn't well optimised on release etc etc etc..

The fact is that whilst you maybe able to play some pre-release code they delivered via disc, that code was updated, patched and improved on time and time again over its life via the internet and the Final build you'd buy at the end of its life digitally is the Build you'd want to play 20yrs later, not the 'pre-release' buggy code they supplied on disc

And doesitplay still counts being able to 'play' buggy code with game breaking issues that required updates to fix as 'Playable' because the entire 'pre-release' code was supplied and in theory, you can play it without updates, but may encounter bugs, frame rate issues, missing features etc that were all fixed/added post release!!!

@RTGX The vast majority of games ALL receive updates, patches and/or content drops and like I said, just because you can play that Pre-release (gold, beta, or whatever YOU want to term it as) doesn't mean that its the 'best' version of that game and the more time that passes from Day 1, the more updates, fixes, post release content etc that arrives.

Yes you may be able to play the version they supply on disc, in theory you could probably play the 'version' of Cyberpunk too that they supplied on Disc Day 1, but no-one would want to play that today and if you bought it digitally today, you'd have a VERY different version.

EVERY game receives Updates, patches, fixes etc so you can keep playing that 'gold' version if it makes you happy but I much prefer to play the most up to date version, the version that I'd want to 'preserve' playing, not the buggy Day 1 version.

Name me 5 games that NEVER received a single update or post release patch, fix or content drop. You can't - so the disc version is the most basic and buggy version where as everyone that has internet connection or 'buy' it digitally today would get the most up to date and fixed version of the game whilst those without internet and playing from the disc have the worst and most dated version possible - even if it is 'Playable'

The defenders of 'Physical' media are so idiotic they'll defend a 'gold' (beta) pre-release version sent to manufacturers weeks before release that may well be 'playable', but within weeks, its been updated and improved on because of the 'internet'

Discs still are ONLY a delivery method for that 'pre-release' code - you still have to download it from the disc and install to the SSD to 'play' the game and the only reason you put that bit of plastic into the slot on the hardware is to verify you still own it, that you haven't traded, lost or damaged it, that you still have a valid Licence Key to unlock access to that software now installed on the Hardware.

Whether you want to play the latest, most up to date and most fixed version or not, you still NEVER play games from the disc, you play them from your SSD. The disc is not an adequate delivery method because it doesn't supply the 'latest' version, only the 'Gold/Beta/Pre-release' (whatever you want to call it) code and if games are over a certain size, will require the internet to supply the rest anyway.

You maybe happy to play that 'gold' version on disc, but as a Gamer, I'd want to play the latest version, the fixed and updated version, the 'best' and most complete version with all the modes/features that were added post release due to gamers requesting them like New Game+, 60fps mode - not on the disc version.

Being able to play from disc doesn't make it the 'version' you'd want to play in 20yrs time, the version you'd want to 'preserve', the game that you'll remember playing if you had connection to the internet as that fixes a lot of the issues the 'gold' version had at launch!!!

@RTGX If you 'think' differently then you are very much misguided and I find it hilarious that people like you think that you play games from a disc in the modern era.

The fact that games REQUIRE SSD's to Load quickly, to provide 'fast' travel and instantaneous texture streaming is why the Disc is 'obsolete' in Gaming - its just used to deliver a Licence key to access the 'software' installed on the Hardwarre.

All games basically do require internet downloads - NO game is supplied on disc and never received a single update, a single patch or fix, a single bit of post release content or feature. Yes you may be able to 'play' whatever 'pre-release' code they distributed on disc, but that is NOT the version that people are playing with internet access, not the 'complete' and updated version they'd buy or download today digitally. The disc still has the 'pre-release version - bugs, glitches, performance issues and/or missing post release content too...

I think it wasn't cancelled because they'd invested a LOT of time and money into it and it was significantly closer to being finished, that they could see it recouping some, if not all the costs back.

If it was as far off as Perfect Dark or Everwild had been at the same point in time, I doubt that they'd have decided to keep ploughing money into it. At least with this, they saw a relatively close release date and it would be foolish to write off all that time and all that work when it was so near to release, so near to market to start selling and bringing in revenue.

Perfect Dark looked like it was still years away and Everwild seemed like they had no idea what to do with that art design and concept, what 'game' they wanted to make with it. Fable at least was expected to release this year, until it was delayed out of GTA's window. That likely means that the vast majority of the game was complete and in the final stages of production. It would be such a waste of money to cancel when it was this close to finished and will generate revenue.

I bet if Fable flops, not saying it will but if it did, MS wouldn't greenlight another one for a wile and maybe even reduce the staff team at Playground to focus only on Forza Horizon. It wouldn't be 'vital' if they don't make enough money back and I don't think its 'vital' to current Xbox leadership - its just that it made more sense to keep Fable as it was so close to release, much further along its production and with a visible release window in sight where as Everwild and Perfect Dark looked like they wouldn't release for several more years and would require a LOT more work and investment which wouldn't necessary result in more revenue - better to cut losses now than throw more and more money at these with no end in sight...

@Sindayl Actually the majority of games are NOT the same game you get Day 1 - if you buy digitally and/or are connected to the internet as the vast majority do have patches - but for 'preservation' purposes, the more time that passes, the more updates and additional content/modes etc that get added post launch, the worse it makes the version on disc.

Those that buy digitally a year or more later for example get a far newer build and often with more content too that disc owners would NEED the internet to get. There are many games that whilst may not have 'game breaking' bugs, glitches, still play worse than the day 1 version and/or have various issues that are resolved on day 1 or within the first month or so.

The vast majority of games are significantly improved - Performance, less bugs/glitches, more content/modes etc that buying Digitally would give you but you'd have to download from the internet with the disc version.

You need to be connected to the internet for the best version of the vast majority of games for the best experience. They all have multiple patches, updates etc which improves and fixes many of the issues as well as adds content they didn't have at launch.

And just because you choose to collect on an outdated and inferior delivery method because Discs have limited capacity and only supply the 'pre-release', doesn't mean that 'flawed and buggy' games are worth preserving or going to offer the SAME experience as the one you can play with all the updates and content supplied over the internet. Most games are not that 'great' Day 1 regardless and then spend the next 6-12months getting updates and fixes, getting the content they 'cut' or didn't have time to add pre-release. Very few, if any, never once had any updates, bug fixes, performance improvements etc and whilst you maybe able to play those games to some degree, the updated versions are significantly better and improved.

I'd hate to try and play the vast majority of my games had I not been connected to the internet to receive the patches, the fixes, the updates, the missing content that was drip fed over the year or so it was supported etc etc. The Day 1 experience, whilst playable was often extremely rough - not as rough as Cyberpunk was, but not great and a lot of those were after Day 1 patches too. But I'd happily play the 'final' version, the version you'd get if you bought digitally today whilst the disc version is 'unplayable' with performance issues, bugs etc and missing content/features that the digital version has, that you need the internet to get for the disc version to bring it up to date and up to the same quality...

@Sindayl typical ignorance!!

I keep it simple for a simple minded person - Beta code can be playable but that doesn't mean its the SAME game/version you'd get from being connected to the internet on Day 1 or buying Digital. Doesn't men its the 'full, complete and best version you'd get if you buy digitally years later or are connected to the internet. Its still the 'beta' pre-release code that maybe just about playable, but not the 'best' or version you'd want to play 20 yrs later.

And having the 'pre-release' code on disc doesn't mean the game plays from disc - it still needs to be downloaded and installed on the SSD because it won't play from disc!! the disc is JUST a Licence key to access the Software installed on your Hardware. Its a barely adequate distribution tool to get the software on your Hardware to play and without the internet, its always going to be the 'pre-release' version that's worse than the digital version you can buy today!

@Sindayl NO game is playable from disc regardless - they ALL require downloading and installation and unless you are buying a remaster that's been ported forward or released on disc much later than its release date, they all are 'early' builds whether you can play them or not. Those builds are still not the build that released 'day' 1 and not the build that after6mnths or a year have fixed the bugs, glitches etc and added the rest of the 'post release' content you would get as STANDARD if you were to buy digitally a year or more later.

If you don't have any internet access at all and had to rely on just the disc content, many games may well 'play' to some degree, but that doesn't mean that's the 'same' experience Day 1 Digital owners or Disc owners with the internet had, the same content that those gamers had when the devs finished supporting it, the same features, the same content, the same modes, the same performance and same amount of Bugs/Glitches etc.

You could argue that ANY game that distributed the entire pre-release software code on disc is 'playable', but that doesn't mean that is the version you'd want to play if you had NO internet to add all the post release content and updates, fixes, patches, optimisation etc that came 'post-release' and as I said, just because the 'pre-release' beta code is 'playable' - its likely the early version Reviewers got to checkout and report back any 'bugs/glitches/issues' they encountered to 'fix' with the Day 1 patch - doesn't mean that's the version you'd want to locked to.

Doesitplay ONLY documents whether the game is distributed on disc or whether you need to download some/all from the internet - not including any Day 1 patches/fixes or 'post release' content they added - things like new game+ or Photo mode or 60fps mode etc. That's ALL missing on the Disc and all the bugs/glitches etc that may have been fixed, the post release optimisations to fix frame rate or visual issues etc etc are there instead. If you buy Digitally today, the 'version' you'd get is a much more recent and more complete version with fewer bugs and better optimisation.

Most 'beta' builds are playable, but that doesn't mean that you'd really want to 'keep' that version or would be the version you'd play 'Day 1' with Internet access to fix/patch/update that build, not the version you'd get at the end of the developer support, the end of 'life' of that game, the 'version' that you'd want to play in 20yrs time....

@Nakatomi_Uk It doesn't matter what the 'highest' capacity discs that they make, its thev highest capacity of discs the drive can read that matters and the Xbox doesn't have the highest capacity for gaming use - I believe its 50GB dual layer discs for Cross-Gen Compatibility: Sticking with 50GB capacities allows Microsoft to use a single unified disc SKU that works across both the Xbox One and the Xbox Series X via Smart Delivery (what I could find about it)

The 'more' discs, the more it costs to manufacture and ship, increasing the number of copies a game must sell to become profitable and justify the costs of making all the parts, case, cover, discs, etc and sealed, the extra weight adds to shipping costs etc and the disc is purely a delivery method to get the 'licence' to the Customer. The 'software' doesn't run from disc so doesn't matter if none, some or all of the game code is distributed on disc - it has to be downloaded and installed on the SSD to be playable, to 'function' as discs/disc drives are far to slow for modern games to run.

Games haven't run from disc since the 360 era and have required installation on internal storage. With games now designed around the data transfer speeds of SSD's to ensure Loading and texture streaming are virtually instantaneous instead of minutes, the only reason you put a disc in the slot is to prove you still own the licence to play, the key to unlock access to the software on your hardware.

Virtually ALL games require internet downloads because the code they do supply is the 'beta' code, the pre-release version they had to send to the manufacturer months before to put 'something' on the disc that they can update to version 1.0 (or better) on Day 1 and then add the rest of the content, fix the other bugs/glitches the community of gamers encounter etc.

With only 50GB Capacity, they certainly will rely on Online to distribute the rest of the Software. The point of a disc is to 'distribute' a Physical Licence that you can sell or lend to a friend, but unlike the 360 (or earlier) days, you've not been able to put physical media into the hardware and play that game without installing it first and often requiring updates too.

I can't see it having a Physical disc drive because I can't see Games (or just Licences) being sold on disc with all the additional costs involved in manufacturing and distributing discs - it would ONLY be for existing disc libraries which would likely be converted to Digital to play. A Disc Drive would add to the cost of hardware and of course the shipping as it adds unnecessary weight.

I cannot see Publishers wanting to add extra costs to manufacture and distribute 'licences' to the few million that will buy a Helix Console and even less that would buy their game Physically. I doubt they'll sell 1m discs Globally as the majority would buy Digitally anyway so why would they go to all that extra cost when both PC and Playstation are Digital Only so only a 'handful' of gamers would be buying on disc?

I also bet that ALL these people who say no Disc Drive (even though no 'new' games will likely be releasing on disc anyway) no purchase so it would only be for Backwards Compatibility - and its not as if you don't have a Bluray player in your current Series X anyway to watch movies and convert 'old' games to Digital for Xbox Helix, would still buy some Hardware to play the 'new' releases they want. They will buy the Hardware to play the new games they want, whining about having to buy it digitally, but still buying it because they really want to play that game....

If you have a PC already, then maybe you won't need to buy a Helix as you can play ALL new releases on your PC and keep your Series X for your OLD Physical Games and Bluray movie collection...

I still expect a Helix to be a better price han you could likely build a PC for and no doubt it will have the UI and convenience of a Console as Standard, be designed for the living room etc and be a 'fixed spec' device that Devs will 'optimise' games for specifically instead of you having to optimise the game for your specific hardware configuration of a PC because the devs don't know what hardware spec you have so give you all those options to 'optimise' yourself for Graphics or frame rate...

Kojima Productions - founded in 2015 - first game released in 2019 with the follow up arriving in 2025 - 2 games in 10yrs so I don't expect to see OD or Physint in the next few years or so so I doubt they'll be released for Series S/X hardware.

I've not enjoyed a Kojima game so I don't expect that these will appeal to me - but the genres (Action Espionage and Horror) haven't put me off. Maybe these will be the Kojima games that do appeal...

Game Pass should have ALL First Party games day and date - they 'needed' more games to make Game Pass successful so bought Studios and publishers like Bethesda and ABK to have a steady stream of Games and IPs to add to their own service.

I still don't understand why they include a $12 Subscription to 'Epics' Fortnite Crew that doesn't add games to a Game Library service and isn't even required to play Fortnite. Its only going to appeal to Fortnite gamers and would probably be better as a 'perk' to offer Subscribers a cheaper and combined payment but also reducing the cost for the MANY gamers that don't or won't play Fortnite. At least with EA Access and Ubisoft+, they do add numerous games to the Library and likely have some games that will appeal to most subscribers.

Without Day 1, why pay so much for the option to play games that will likely be on sale in the near future - if you haven't already bought them to play when the game was new, was the current big game with all the buzz and hype surrounding it, before its been spoiled and discussed in depth online?

Day 1 was the big selling point and the reason I subscribed. Without it, I'd rather just buy the games I want to play as when they on sale rather wait and wait until they eventually come to Game Pass and I'm not subscribing for a few 'indies' Day 1. The more they keep devaluing it from the 'Ultimate' I once subscribed to, the less likely I am to resubscribe. I'm more inclined to move to PC so I don't have to Subscribe just for Online access. At least when I was subscribing for ALL MS 1st Party Day 1 Games, I felt I was getting 'something' of value but paying just so I can play Online and play the games I've paid to play, games that would be blocked if/when I cancel Game Pass Core really annoys and feels extremely anti-consumer these days.

With PC, I don't need a Subscription to play online so unless MS go back to making ALL their games Day and Date available in Game Pass - the whole selling point of Game Pass, I can't see myself ever rejoining at that tier. I know 'Core' is technically Game Pass these days but if I cancelled that, I'd lose access to large portion of the games I bought to play so feel 'blackmailed' into keeping that tier just so I can keep playing the games I've paid to play.

The big selling point of Game Pass was the Promise of ALL Microsoft First Party games being playable from Day 1 - that is what they sold Game Pass as with 3rd Party and Indie games supporting the Library - some of which would also arrive Day and date in that Library service.

They also knew and promised at least 1 big Microsoft game a Quarter (on Average) which would be at least 4 a year and only a few years ago, they were aware they were failing to bring games - with 2021 a particularly 'bad' year for them.

Now it seems they are reducing their Games again - it started by taking CoD out so breaking their promise of ALL 1st Party games in the service whilst keeping Epics Fortnite Crew (a Subscription in a Subscription that adds NO games to a Game Library service and isn't required to play Fortnite) as well EA Access and Ubisoft+ (which do at least add games to the Library increasing the number of titles available to play) as well as Closing down or letting Studios go which will also reduce the quantity of 1st Party Games MS will be making.

I dropped Ultimate a while back and the value proposition has only got worse and worse since then. Nothing I see or read makes me think that Game Pass Ultimate will be worth Subscribing to in the near future and I'm not even sure I want a Helix if I have to pay for Online Play, pay to play games I already paid money to Play but unless I pay Microsoft a Subscription, my online games/modes will be 'blocked' regardless of the fact I paid for a Licence to play that game/content. If I buy that SAME game on PC, I never have to pay to keep playing that game. CoD isn't just $70 for example on Console, its $70 + Game Pass or PS+ every month otherwise that game you paid $70 to play will be locked behind a sub pay wall.

MS (or Sony) can choose to make their 'Online' access more expensive and hold your Online games to ransom - make you pay the higher fee or lose the ability to play the games you bought. Even if you do own the Disc, you can't play online without paying MS - unless you buy on PC....

Because Microsoft charged a LOT more than Netflix did, raised their price significantly by putting in Fortnite Crew which added an extra 50% to the monthly price which made it too much for many to justify.

$360 a year for a Subscription is why they lost the gaming community for what is nothing more than a curated Library service allowing subscribers to borrow games, a way to play before the games were on sale, a way to try before you buy...

So not only did they raise the price too high for the market, they also promised that ALL their games would be Day and Date, but now have broken that Promise too so not only got too greed, they broke promises and lost their Subscribers trust too.

Now they have also got rid of many Studios - even if they didn't shut them down completely - that devalues the service further. Games from the likes of Ninja Theory, Double Fine, Compulsion and Undead Labs that had added value to Game Pass - even if they weren't 'big' sellers will no longer be in Game Pass Day 1 and they've removed CoD too whilst also limiting the amount of Streaming time subscribers get.

So in the last year or so, its gone from the best value in gaming with a LOT of praise and growing subscribers to what it is today. I'm sure it still has appeal to some, but I bet many that left or at least downgraded from Ultimate when the price jumped up haven't bothered rejoining. They are happy to wait for the few games they played to come to their tier (Premium/Core) or to buy the games at some point than paying for Ultimate

If you are paying 'extra' to limit the availability of a Game and not making that game to ALL gamers for maximum sales potential, its not going to 'reach' everyone and many won't buy a £500 console just to play that game. Delay it for a year or more on other platforms and you also lose a lot of potential sales from gamers that moved on, lost interest whilst waiting etc...

No doubt it would cost more to limit the sales to just your platform, to limit the game to just the gamers on their Platform and also likely to increase the time it takes for them to make their money back, for the game to be profitable enough to justify the investment.

As Publisher, it maybe better to sell to ALL the Gamers you can, reach them ALL on the Platforms they prefer to play on to maximise your revenue. Yes you may sell 'some' hardware with Exclusivity, but its hard to prove just how much that 1 game contributed to Hardware sales, hard to prove how much the Hardware sales helped recuperate the investment costs of paying for its development, marketing and exclusivity window....

We are unlikely to know the truth!

I wouldn't be surprised though if Sony wanted at least a year if not 2 or more years of Exclusivity and as such, probably felt that the budget and potential sales would not bring enough revenue in to justify that cost - especially not in the first few months or so. It could be 'years' before it becomes profitable 'enough' for them.

Microsoft may not be so bothered about a quick return and/or likely to make the game exclusive for as long so much more likely to see a return sooner. MS willing to sell on PS much sooner than Sony would for Xbox maybe opens up a bigger audience to buy.

Kojima himself too may have been reluctant to want his game locked away from gamers for as long as Sony were trying to dictate and maybe Kojima was charging Sony quite a fee for that length of time where as MS may not be wanting more than 6months (or maybe no Exclusivity at all) but as publisher will prefer to sell to as many gamers as possible Day 1 to maximise their Profitability instead of exclusivity. As Publisher, its their name on it too, PR for them and of course the marketing and promotion will be 'Xbox' focussed.

@dskatter I've owned every Playstation Generation and Xbox too, but this Generation has been the most 1 sided of them all in favour of playing on Xbox whilst my PS5 has been hardly used since launch and just for exclusives - which aren't as numerous anymore due to the massive jump in time its taken to make games.

Back in the PS3 era, Naughty Dog released 3 Uncharted Games -inc a full MP suite with the 2nd/3rd games as well as the Last of Us and its MP game yet since then, we've had Uncharted 4 and Last of Us 2 and no MP with LoU2. We also had the Resistance Trilogy, Killzone 2 & 3, Motorstorm Games, Infamous Games etc etc and now we are lucky if we get 1 or 2 games a year.

If I didn't own a PS5, I'd find it hard to justify buying one today. Whilst I know Xbox is 'similar' in a number of ways, its things like Play Anywhere so I don't need to buy the same game multiple times to play on my RoG Ally or PC. You also have better Backwards Compatibility going back to the OG Xbox where as PS5 only goes back 1 generation and numerous games charged '£10' to play the exact same game with the exact same content and exact same Game-play, story etc just boosted by newer hardware. Its like charging £10 extra because you have the X/Pro hardware that runs games at higher res/frame rate than base hardware.

I know Sony is cancelling their PC releases but I don't think I can justify spending £500+ on hardware and £60+ on PS+ Essential just to play 1 or 2 Exclusives a year - especially when those Exclusives seem to be more about the way they look than engaging 'game-play' and Story.

Each to their own of course, but I can't see myself buying a locked platform that also limits my games to that Platform. I expect MS to continue releasing their games as Play Anywhere games so I can play on Open PC platforms, play on Handhelds, tablets, laptops, desktops, console etc.

I wonder if this is also to try and stop those who pre-ordered and played the Beta from cancelling their pre-order after playing that as MANY have said they are or will be doing...

@Scummbuddy NOPE!!! Far too busy playing proper games like Halo, PGR, CoD, Mass Effect, BioShock etc

Always thought these were a pointless thing to sell cosmetics and to try and extract more money from the gamer. I don't miss them at all.

I'd convert 100% of the games I can - not that I have many, if any I still play as I've been buying Digitally for the past few years and can't the last time I played one of my disc based games.

Disc based games don't come with Play Anywhere and don't really work well with Quick Resume if you have to get up to swap discs just to jump between games. Also don't work with Stream your Own games , not that I do but its another reason I haven't bought Physical for years and I bought a few Digital versions of games I had on Disc in various sales because of Play Anywhere or not having to put a bit of plastic in a slot just to prove I still have that bit of plastic when the entire game is installed and runs from the SSD anyway