NeoRatt

This really stinks for the people that will lose their jobs. That should be what people are concerned about first.

But you have to look at the performance of the games these studios have released. Double Fine with Kiln (66 on MC), Keeper (80), and Psychonauts 2 (87).... Compulsion with We Happy Few (62) and South of Midnight (77).... Ninja Theory with Hellblade II (84).... Arkane with Wolfenstein Youngblood (69), Deathloop (88), and Redfall (56).... Out of the lot Pyschonauts 2 and Deathloop were the highest rated. And the theme was every single one under performed in game sales. And finally many of the games took many years to develop.

You don't have to look hard to see why XBOX would target these studios. They have all been money losing studios for 5-8 years. XBOX has been patient with these studios but they simply have not produced.

It is always bad when studios close. And there are probably a few more that could've been targeted. It is not good but it was probably necessary to save a bunch of other studios. And hopefully they offer the most talented people jobs at one of their other studios.

I would love to see these studios stay but frankly, if I was paying the cash to keep them open, I would be doing the same. You can't bleed money forever. At some point they have to earn their way.

I hate to see people lose their jobs first and foremost. This kind of stuff is never good. I feel for all people and studios involved.

@Elbow
You have to remember that Rockstar has a previous engine that they have been building on for GTA and that the studio size is probably about 10x that of Compulsion so this is probably not the best comparison, but I think the jist of your point still sticks.

It is not good that there are lay-offs, but at the same time I think it is important that XB makes some major course corrections to keep the platform relevant.

Personally, I like the delay. There are very few games that will be able to sell well along side GTA. And RPGs typically are not one of them. I expect Fable will do really well moving to February 2027.

XB gamers can't really complain anyhow. We just got Forza Horizon 6 in Japan, and wre getting Halo and Gears before the end of the year. Along with GTA and the typical CoD game. Fable would've made that lineup more epic, but as an XB gamer I have no complaints about the 25 year anniversary lineup.

@Fiendish-Beaver
Then that could be an ultimate tier perk that you get the games from every region. It is all in how they work with partners, sell, market, and bundle with the perceived value players think they get.

@Fiendish-Beaver
I do think GamePass needs to change. There are some fundamental bundling and marketing problems.

A few suggestions:
1) Base price of GamePass simply for network access. Nothing more.
2) If they make something XB concole exclusive it doesn't come to GamePass. With the exception of future CoDs which stays out due to its business model.
3) Have Games Pass tiers offering only XB 1st party games and indie games, and third parties that don't have their own subscription service.
4) EA Play and Ubisoft+ Classics have separate services. Keep XB GamePass Ultimate but market it as a discount on bundling to all the services: GamePass highest GamePass tier, EA Play, and Ubisoft+ Classics.
5) Also XB may want to consider regional content in GamePass to appeal to different places more.

If it is not shipping in the next year, there is no sense showing it because it is vaporware. They had plenty of content shipping in the next year at the show.

Changes like these are always difficult. And ieven sadder because there have already been rounds of changes previous that resulted in job loses.

But something needs to change to turn things around. Let's hope this is done right and the right things happen after.

I think these are all fair points. Everything already known.

I find point #5 about infrastructure and M&A the most interesting. What infrastructure are they talking about?

Asha has said many times lately that they are increasingly looking at XB as a platform. She hasn't said "gaming platform". She just says "platform". Windows is a platform. iOS is a platform, Android is a platform. What this usually means is there are many varying devices that us the platform.

This can mean that XB may license the platform to OEMs as well. It could also mean many varying devices with different specifications. Platforms have one thing in common. They are the basic building blocks that a hardware spec sits underneath and software and services are on top.

I could see gaming OEMs like Alienware, Omen, ROG, etc.moving away from Windows proper and booting to XB full screen experience. If all I did on my PC is game, why would I not want it to boot to the XB full screen experience?

And I know a lot of people have critized the capabilities of XB Series S but I think the idea was correct and they learned from that so why can't they make a cheaper device that is similar but fixes Series S issues next generation?

People keep looking at this in the current view of the console box. But, I think next generation, XB is going to get very bold and change what can be called a console a lot.

@Fiendish-Beaver
People have said this every generation MS has been a console vendor and every generation they come back and every generation they have invested more in gaming. Over and over the same arguement and over and over XB keeps coming to the next generation.

Again, there is absolutely no evidence they will only sell 2-3 mln consoles next generation. They have 30 mln gamepass subscribers (just a rough estimate). It is likely they sell at least that many consoles next generation. At least I have some evidence to back my estimate up. Not sure what evidence you have that XB will only sell 2-3 mln consoles next generation.

@Sindayl
One potential innovation would be for XB to put CPU/GPU/NPU/Storage/Memory all on one chip or chip package. You can't change these in an XB anyhow, so putting them altogether may reduce the size of the device and lower costs through not having to source things from other vendors. Would also probab

@Fiendish-Beaver
So after 25 years of XB and XB committing to the next generation that is an issue? I don't exactly trust companies, but there is zero evidence that XB is shutting down its console business anytime soon.

@Fiendish-Beaver
Why as consumers do we care about any of this? When you buy a car do you ask how many cars the manufacturer sold last year? Do you ask them if their business model choices are damaging long term brand impression? etc.

First and foremost I care about the games and services they provide. And their long term commitment to making that happen.

I am not a huge fan of exclusives, but the other console manufactures are not putting their games on XB (willingly), so why should gamers on those platforms get the benefit while XB gamers don't get any benefit? I say, I am all for putting XB exclusives on any console platfor, but the console platform holder has to put their first party games on XB as well then.

To me, this is all coming down to what they do with some of their future really big games like the next Elder Scrolls, the next Doom, the next Wolfenstein, the next new Halo, the next Forza games, etc.

They start making these console exclusive to XB and there will be a shift. I was disappointed Senua and Spyro were not announced as console exclusive.

@RegnumSolipsi
Hellblade was really good. Hellblade II I think spent too much effort trying on the mental side of the game rather then the game side. Since they have named the next project Senua, I think this is really a re-invention of the franchise going forward as a game series. In that sense this is a new game.

But, I do totally see your point. This team is creatively talented. They should do more.

@Fiendish-Beaver
Who do you think is the primary target audience for the 25th anniversary XB Limited Edition? Probably long term XB fans. The room looked like it had about 200 people. I bet most wanted the console when they saw it. I have been on XB the entire way and I will probably get it and if I was there I would have been ecstatic to get the console for free. This is entrenching loyalty in their base. Nothing wrong with that.

I am super glad it has co-op on day one. That was a super downer with Infinite.

I like this a lot but without a 2TB or higher hard drive I am out. Would be willing to significantly pay more to have a 4 TB drive. But at 1 TB it is a bit of a let down.

Lots of great games announced and gone into with more information. Was a little disappointed that some XB related studio world premieres were not XB exclusive though (Spyro and Senua specifically). But they have taken a step in the right direction with both Gears and Clockwork being XB console exclusives.

I am kind of interested in the limited version Series X... But I have to see more on its storage specs.

@Tasuki
Everyone likes to feel good about their purchases. I buy all three consoles because I like to be able to play some exclusives on the different devices.

What is my incentive to buy an XB console when there isn't a single game that stays on XB solely given PS is getting pretty much every XB first party game? I can skip XB and just buy PS and Switch next generation.

Don't get me wrong. I primarily game on XB. But, it is because it became my primary gaming device in the 360 era, and I like my gamer tag history in one place. But if it was a content discussion now-a-days I would be better off on PS or Switch if I was assessing based on games I could play. Literally there does not seem to be a reason for me to buy and XB from a content perspective.

@Balaam_
I disagree. AI can and should be used to help speed up content creation. The line I draw is when AI is used to replace or come up with the story and content ideas. If you have ever spent time with graphic artists you will see that creating a character and its details can take a lot of time. If AI can help them do that faster and quicker that is great. But to me the human factor is the ideas and the stories.

@Tasuki
I do agree fully.

But, don't you think that if XB is publishing their first party games on PS or Switch, should XB owners not get the same benefit. I am totally fine with what you are saying but XB owners should get the same benefits that the other console owners are getting otherwise you are in the discussion that if I want to play Uncharted then I need a PS, and to play Mario games I need a Switch and XB becomes a console where some of the biggest exclusive games can't be played on it and it has no exclusive games itself.

@AI-Generation
I disagree. There are many ways to innovate. One of things consoles have done is put CPU and GPU on a single chip to lower the cost of production. Maybe they can come up with ways to combine other elements of the system physically to make them less costly? They can also give price points. I think X and S were great ways to cater to different needs and ability to afford (XB may not have executed perfectly this generation, but they can learn from that). Also, bundling... GamePass 3 year subscription lock in to the console may allow them to reduce price knowing they have a fixed revenue stream, etc. Innovation isn't only specifications.

I would label it more creavity then innovation though.

@Tasuki
I don't think this is as simple as just "making money"... I think there is a reality that the number of sales on just XB may not be enough to "fund the development" of some of the titles period.

That is what makes the discussion complicated. Just because MS makes games exclusive to XB does not mean that people will magically go and buy an XB. And now-a-days every genre has a bunch of really good games both multi-platform and exclusive.

Exclusive content is an easy and obvious way to make people buy your platform. I am not sure if there is anything else that can drive platform sales, but if they can find something else to drive platform sales that would be the ideal scenario.

I also think though that MS should make bringing games to other competing platforms a reciprical thing. Meaning the other platform must bring their exclusives to XB.

People were really negative in the forums when she started because she wasn't a gamer running a gaming company...

Things have turned around pretty quickly...

But I still feel the big decisions are still incoming that will have the largest effect on XB in the go-forward. Most of what she has done to date are the quick wins. She has to start getting some of the hard wins.

@PennywiZe666
I think the key to putting games on other platforms going forward should be that the other platform first party games also come to XBOX. It is good for gamers for games to be on as many platforms as possible so that they get the sales to fund further evolution and development of the current and next games.

But, for XBOX platform owners it is only good if we can also get the other platform's first party games on our platform. As well having all games on all platforms allows me as a consumer to only one device and one set of services saving me money.

To your point though, if the XBOX device and services can't play all games by all platform holders then there is zero advantage to be an XBOX owner. To me games should be like CDs and Blu-Ray. I can buy any CD or blu-ray device and play any CD or blu-ray. It should be the same with games OR XBOX should make games exclusive.

@LaurenceJ1987
I think this is all about console game marketing norms and about how the competitors play in the marketplace.

XBOX has been the first to multi-platform their games of the major three console vendors. PS also does multi-pplatform games too, but they don't acknowledge the other platforms in their showcases. And Nintendo just avoids multi-platform period. Therefore I think XBOX should do the same until all three console vendors agree to put other platforms in their showcases.

I also think that XBOX should not ship a game on other platforms unless the other console vendor reciprocate. The other console vendors get benefits from XBOX games coming to their platforms. XBOX gamers should also get the benefits.

So far Sharma is doing great and making good moves to bring more fresh blood into XBOX with different ideas. But, there are still the biggest decisions still pending. She needs to do the right things on the biggest decisions.

Smart move. The only game that can sell well beside GTA VI will be Call of Duty. Every other major release will probably wish they hadn't released near GTA.

@Lanmanna
As a company you make choices. If amount of consoles sold is part of your goal you do what it takes to make that happen. Whether that is subsizing the cost, rearranging costs, etc.

If the goal is solely to make profit on everything you do, do something else.

XBOX has to decide what they are trying to do. You can't have cake and eat it too.

@abe_hikura
They can't get around the costs of making the device. To make the next generation a leap forward the physical hardware is expensive. You need faster more RAM, high end GPU, higher end processor, more storage, etc. The Bill of Materials of that is not cheap.

I would like to see them come out with a minimal, slightly above average, and high end configuration along with a portable to start next generation. I think that they really need to appeal to the masses, and that is going to be through cost. A big advantage consoles have had is they are cheaper then a good gaming PC. Hopefully that stays.

@BigRedPaper
You do realize you could buy apparel online for years with XB and first party games? This site is exactly the same. All they have done is make it more public with its own site DNS.

@Fragslayer
We do not know who made the decisions that XB made over the past few years. Suffice to say a lot of them did not help XB. And since Phil executed them, he must have agreed. I am sure if he quit and tried to get a job elsewhere he would've been scooped up quickly.

@Tasuki
I don't see Asha as just a mouthpiece. She is simply a different type of leader and sometimes you need these types of changes. Time will tell.

@Tasuki
Phil Spencer was a gamer leading a gaming organization.

Asha Sharma is a technology leader leading a gaming organization.

Both have their pros and cons, but honestly, I think they have chosen the right leader to lead XB at the right time. Still too early to assess her long term effect on XB though. But, I like what I have seen so far.

To me, Forza Horizon is the top arcade racer and no other arcade racer comes close. It is the perfect release window as well. My typical game of choice in the summer months is racing games because they are pick up, play, and progress in short periods of time. I stay away from a lot of game genres in summer simply because they require too much time and effort when I am spending a lot more time outside.

@Balaam_
But probably the only reason they wouldn't release date and day is that would affect console sales adversely, and if they did date and day once helix is out XB users would be getting Sony exclusives day one.

Date and day may be the primary reason but the root problem. The root issue console sales. And Sony can't afford to have smaller PS install bases. They need 100 mln consoles sold each gen to remain viable as their own platform with the cost of game development continuing to rise.

@Elbow
Ya, that wasn't their best PR move. But XB in the past was really good at shooting itself in the foot. It seems Asha has reversed that in pretty short order.

I know a lot of people liked Sarah Bond, but personally, it seems like she was a big part of the problem.

@Elbow
Nothing is ever free from companies. I don't know why people even thing free is a thing from companies. The other things on the list I agree with.

Running servers for your ID, achievements, and online capabilities all have costs (both networking and physical server environment costs). No company will give them away for free unless the cost is hidden elsewhere. In the console purchase, other subscriptions, store royalties, etc. The cost will be there somewhere.

Companies don't give away anything free in the long term. Anytime something is free, it either doesn't have a significant cost, or they are doing it in the temporary to improve their marketshare and push out competitors so they can later make it a cost item again.

@Daniel1221
Forcing is an interesting word. Forces can come from different places. For example, MS paid $70+ bln for Activision-Blizzard-King. Shareholders want to know how that money is going to come back to them plus a return on that investment. Therfore that could've "forced" them to go multi-platform with the games. And in CoD's case the regulators were "forcing" them to keep CoD multi-platform to gain approval. So forcing is not their sole choice.

But, my proposal is that XB should honor their existing contracts, and once they have choice they should be pressuring other platforms that in order to keep seeing XB games on their platform, they have to reciprocate with their first party games. To me, that is fair.

I don't know how costs of hardware play into exclusives. To me, if you want to game you need to buy hardware. And as a consumer I would prefer to buy only one device to game on. But right now, because of exclusives, I am pressured to buy PC, PS, XB, and Switch hardware to play every game I like. To me, that is not consumer friendly. It is like telling me to drive from town A to town B you have to use car 1, but if you want to drivefrom town A to town C you have to use car 2. Why can't I use the same car to drive to both towns? It doesn't make sense. CDs, DVDs, and blu-rays all use standard hardware. And streaming devices use the same standard apps for the most part. Why does gaming require exclusivity? It is dumb.

@Daniel1221
I just think that XB should be treated fairly. Sony and Nintendo are getting benefits, but XB is not. I have no problem and want every gamer to experience every game on their device of choice. But, it is hard to justify shipping games on those devices if XB is not getting their first party games in return as well.

As for Sony not shipping their SP story driven games on PC anymore, that is probably because XB OS is going to flip to the PC OS next generation. Sony doesn't want their games being able to be played on XB.

@AverageGamer
To me, unless Sony commits to putting their exclusives on XB, XB should cancel any exclusives currently on their way to PS and future exclusives to PS.

While I am a huge fan of XB games being multi-platform, I also think that all games should be on all the major gaming platforms... PS, XB, PC, and Nintendo. Skipping one of them or many of them I think is just not consumer friendly.

I would like to see better handling for story completions, full completions, and getting any achievement where less then 3% of game players have gotten the achievement.

I like all suggestions. But am not much of a fan on a celebration for full completion. I like the idea of discounted DLC, backgrounds, highlighting completions in your achievements list, XB reward points, completion badges, game hall of fames, etc. Spending the time to complete games fully should be rewarded. Especially, if the completion is a significant amount of play time.

I would love to see MS remake both Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey for next generation.

@Shinato2024
I think the reality is that XB games will go to Console and PC simultaneously since the OS will essentially be the same. It is not financially practical for XB to only ship games on console. And why would they if PC has 100's of millions of players and XB only has 40 mln? You cannot develop AAA games and ship them to only 40 mln gamers and expect to make money. The investment to AAA games is equal to how many you expect to sell. The more you think you will sell, the more you can invest. They are a company like every other. Shareholders demand profit.

I think shipping games on other platforms is more optional. But, if I was running XB, after current contracts are up (aka CoD 10 year contracts), I would make further shipping of XB games on other platforms contingent that the exlusive first party games of those platforms ship on XB. That is only fair.

The console focus is fair and it should become a first class citizen again. I think it is already starting.

I used to buy a lot of games day one. Then, all the publishers and developers decided to ship games that were essentially betas. Then, they upped the prices and kept upping prices. So now, until a game reaches a reasonable price and has about a year of patches under its belt I typically don't buy it.

If they want me to buy games day one I have to have the following:

1) One price to make all the game's content available to me.
2) The price has to be reasonable.
3) The game has to only need minor patches and no game breaking issues or feature incomplete.

Nice, now if MS would only bring back Films & TV purchasing! A console is an entertainment device. I own a lot of Films & TV stuff and would continue to buy more.

I will judge this new team by what they do, not their past titles/jobs.