@Gabrie I don't know if you've seen the latest leaked version of the Xbox PC app on the ROG Xbox Ally, but it's like night and day in terms of performance. And don't forget that you can play Steam games on it as well.

I own one, and I'm really happy with it. It's a beautifully designed machine that's well-built, ergonomic, powerful, and quiet. On top of that, the interface keeps getting better with every update.

Ever since Asha came on board, there have been major improvements, whether on the console interface or the Xbox PC app.

Yes, it's expensive, but not any more than other equivalent handheld consoles when you take a closer look. In fact, it's actually cheaper overall.

@Dodoo Anyway, PlayStation isn't what it used to be anymore.

Basing your interest in a game solely on whether it's included in Game Pass makes no sense. You can be interested in a game without necessarily having the budget to buy it at full price, or the time to play it right away.

Honestly, in my case, it's mostly the latter. I already have too many games in my backlog. But from what I've seen of the campaign, it definitely interests me. I get the impression they've put particular care into the single-player experience, and when Activision really puts in the effort, they usually deliver little masterpieces of Hollywood-style storytelling and set-piece design.

So yes, I'm definitely interested in it... just not right now.

The narrow-mindedness of some people is disheartening. First of all, treating AI as some kind of absolute evil is both childish and simplistic. If I understand correctly, we're not talking here about using AI for creative work, but rather for things like backward compatibility and porting games to other environments (for example, Apple Silicon and WebGL).

In any case, history is already moving forward. There are already plenty of players and aspiring developers exploring AI mods and reverse-engineered games. It seems perfectly natural that Xbox would closely follow these developments.

If I understand correctly, Xbox's main interest here is in porting games to other devices and improving backward compatibility, or even for porting mods. And if new technologies, whether AI-assisted or otherwise, can help achieve that, then that's a very good thing.

gears e-day and plague tale resonance

@RTGX I’d ask you to respect everyone’s opinions — not just mine, but in general. You’re new here, so take the time to get to know people and respect their views, instead of thinking your tastes are absolute truth. As already said above, everyone has their own preferences. And I don’t think I’m the only one who feels this way: the sub‑menus, the navigation, the ads — there are plenty of things that don’t work for me on Steam. That’s just my opinion.

I personally find the Xbox app cleaner and more straightforward, which suits my taste. It’s easier for me to find my games, the Game Pass titles, etc.but I’m not saying it’s perfect either — far from it. In the end, it’s subjective.

@RTGX Don’t talk to me about Steam’s interface, seriously. Maybe you’ve gotten used to it, but honestly the interface has become very cluttered — too cluttered, even — packed with ads everywhere. Sure, there might be some interesting ideas to take inspiration from, but overall I’m not convinced it’s an ideal interface, far from it. Same goes for GOG.

And yes, I regularly use the Xbox PC app. I like the simplicity of the interface — it’s a refreshing change compared to Steam, which I find overloaded. I was simply acknowledging the performance improvements. As for the rest, it’s hard to judge this new version since it’s not finalized yet, so I’ll reserve my final opinion for later.

But everyone has their own taste.

The performance improvements and the simplified interface with all the games in one place are great! However, I'm waiting to see the final version because you can feel that quite a few features are still missing

It’s not just for indies — it will benefit all developers. Sure, small indie studios have tighter budget constraints, but in the end, simpler, faster, and cheaper porting is good for everyone. Plus, better‑suited tools mean more optimization possibilities and fewer bugs overall, since they reduce friction.

The fact that next‑gen console dev kits are closer to PC guarantees far less effort compared to current consoles. The vast majority of games are developed on PC (with dev tools on PC) and for PC — the PC catalog has ten times more games than any console catalog (Xbox, PlayStation, Nintendo).

Basically, a game developed on PC will be ported to Xbox very quickly, and at a much lower cost than today.

This is a huge game changer and a major differentiator compared to the competition. Helix consoles will be able to run far more games than current consoles and than upcoming consoles from any brand. Strangely, I don’t see much discussion about this aspect of the Xbox ecosystem — probably because the next gen isn’t out yet — but it’s a very strong argument for players who don’t want barriers and want to play any game, whether it’s on Xbox or PC, with a much larger catalog than anywhere else.

With Xbox Play Anywhere, Game Pass, and Xbox exclusives, this is part of the quartet of main selling points for Helix. Of course, price, power, and the price‑to‑performance ratio of the next consoles will also remain important purchase arguments.

I think this is the kind of game that would be more fun in third‑person, but as it stands there’s nothing exceptional. And it confirms that the trailer was fake — it has nothing to do with this gameplay segment.

@FraserG Yes, but calling it an “operating system” makes sense technically , it’s not a term you use lightly. Maybe in her words the meaning is a bit different, I don’t know. But in any case, it reinforces the idea of a true dedicated and optimized system for gaming, which goes beyond what’s currently done on my ROG Ally, which is basically just a Windows 11 overlay.

At the end of the day, the foundation will still be Windows 11 — after all, our current Xbox consoles share a kernel derived from Windows. Most likely with Helix, the integration will be even tighter to keep flexibility with PC games, but it seems it will go further than just a “Xbox mode” on PC.

Wait and see, but It seems promising.

A family of devices for the next generation, addressing different audiences and price points. That seems like a very smart strategy given current RAM prices.

"The operating system is starting to look really good" That’s very interesting , so it won’t just be an optimized Windows 11, but a true OS. I think this is the first time Asha, or anyone at Xbox, has described it in those terms. @FraserG ?

@RTGX ok, So still no substance… not very interesting
And yes, I use ChatGPT to translate — I’m not a native English speaker.

Naivety isn’t that. Naivety is seeing things in a black‑and‑white, overly simplistic way — only through a purely positive or purely negative lens. That is naivety, because you miss all the subtleties and nuances of the world. It’s easy to say “evil Microsoft” doing everything only for its own benefit, blah blah — that kind of remark is completely hollow. It’s a company; companies make decisions to make money, surprise !!. But if a company understands that creating a platform to gather player feedback and trying to respond to it helps improve the business while also bringing benefits to players, then where’s the problem?

@RTGX Try to make an argument before falling into easy insults. Your comment has absolutely no substance. Of course the interest goes both ways, but they’ve proven that a win‑win approach works: it helps players, and at the same time it helps them strengthen community loyalty and improve their brand image. As long as it’s win‑win and there’s real feedback behind it, I don’t see the problem. We live in a capitalist world — it’s normal that everyone gets something out of it. I would agree with you if they hadn’t done anything, but honestly, the number of improvements, console updates, progress on backward compatibility, exclusives, Game Pass changes, franchise returns (like Spyro), so why the cynicism?

As for the technical platform, it is what it is. It’s a system that, as I said, would deserve better organization or topic triage. But that’s a matter of form, not substance.

See, that is an exchange — not just calling your interlocutor naïve... Kid

The cynicism in the comments is pretty astonishing. Xbox is literally the only one doing this, and they’ve proven it’s useful — they actually listen to players and have implemented a lot of requests. And it’s not just small, easy fixes like some people claim with cynical bad faith. Just look at exclusives returning, the Game Pass price drop, Mythic Achievement, etc.

Some people are never satisfied — they sound like grumpy old French folks complaining about everything. Honestly, I’m going to look like the resident fanboy again, but I applaud the initiative and all the changes that have come from it so far.

I don’t see any reason to complain. If it were the opposite — if Xbox did nothing and didn’t listen to players — people would complain too. So really, no matter what, some folks will never be happy and will spend their time whining.

The platform is still active and already has plenty of material for Xbox to work with. The issue isn’t its usefulness — it’s more the technical platform struggling to highlight so many requests. Another problem is the lack of moderation, I think, because many topics overlap and cannibalize each other. They should merge identical requests to make things clearer, or have some kind of triage system. It’s really more of an organizational issue.

@GamingGod Because it’s a remaster. Remasters always perform worse than original releases. So yes, it probably would have sold better — but by how much, I have no idea.

@Balaam_ That’s false, it has nothing to do with that. The game objectively had shortcomings — it wouldn’t have sold much more even if it had been released on PlayStation. Ninja Theory is a talented studio, but they lack vision and direction. The game should never have launched with such shaky gameplay. They put everything into aesthetics and technical execution — and on that front, it’s a masterpiece — but the gameplay wasn’t deep enough, the puzzles were terrible. Let’s be honest: it’s not a talent issue, it’s a product‑direction issue.

The studio has enormous potential, but their creativity and talent need proper guidance, that’s all. It’s really a shame they’ve ended up in this situation.

I love Ninja Theory. Xbox, please do something — keep this studio alive.

@Fiendish-Beaver Both sides of the game play a role. What makes people buy the game at launch is the campaign — that’s what brings players in. And then the multiplayer aspect keeps them engaged long‑term. If you don’t have a good campaign, you won’t have a strong launch, and you won’t have a solid player base for multiplayer. So one depends on the other. And yes, in the long run, players spend most of their time in multiplayer. But the launch is essential, and the success of the single‑player mode is crucial to kickstart the game properly. Even with Call of Duty, you can see the cause‑and‑effect relationship: a bad campaign usually leads to a weak multiplayer launch.

And yes, I’ll be playing Horde mode — I already enjoyed the beta.

As for the rest, don’t worry: Gears E‑Day is currently at the top of Steam’s upcoming games chart (even though it’s not out yet).

And sorry to say it, but you’re still thinking short‑term — the same mistake Phil Spencer made back then, with a mindset that was way too “publisher‑first.” And you’re overestimating the importance of PlayStation players. We’ve already seen it clearly in the sales of several Xbox games. Even for the Xbox title that performed best on PS5, Forza Horizon 5, PlayStation sales were still the minority: 7.5 million through the Xbox Store, 6.5 million on Steam, and 5 million on PS5. It’s a solid result on PS5, sure, but we’re talking about the best‑selling Xbox game on that platform — it’s far from representative. Halo CE, Starfield, Gears Remaster, etc. all sold poorly on PlayStation.

The negative impact on Xbox’s image and on its hardware ecosystem was far worse than the revenue gained from selling these games on PS5.

Gears E‑Day would probably perform well on PlayStation, but nowhere near Xbox or PC levels. And the real question is: “Is it worth it?” Are the short‑term sales of the game compatible with strong, long‑term growth of the Xbox ecosystem as a platform? I think Aasha has already made her decision, and the answer is no. Some games must remain exclusive — Gears E‑Day is one of them. There’s no debate about that.

@Bk-XB-360 "One of their worst rated games recently (75) will outsell and probably already has EVERY SINGLE xbox game released in the last decade"

You were saying something earlier about having no factual data, right? And yeah, I admit I exaggerated a bit with the “flop after flop” line — I just wanted to illustrate that they’ve generally dropped in both quality and first‑party output. It’s a more nuanced point, but still an undeniable one.

But again, this is off-topic.

@Fiendish-Beaver E-Day is not a live service game ! because it’s also a single‑player game. And regarding the multiplayer part, it’s absolutely not a live‑service title. The Coalition clearly stated that the game follows a deliberately traditional, “old‑school” approach. No battle pass, no abusive microtransactions.

And you’re contradicting everything you’ve always defended. You’re thinking short‑term now, and that’s exactly what you used to criticize Xbox for — yet here you are making the same mistake. Making a game exclusive always has a negative short‑term impact, but it’s beneficial in the medium and long term. With this short‑term mindset, failure is guaranteed, and we’re heading straight into a wall.

Gears E‑Day cannot be multiplatform. It’s one of Xbox’s flagship franchises. If this game becomes multiplatform, you might as well abandon the entire idea of exclusives. There would be massive backlash from the Xbox community, and endless mockery from PlayStation fanboys. You’re not fully realizing the negative consequences. Actually, I’m contradicting myself — because in the short term, yes, it would boost sales and rapidly grow the player base (even though the core community would remain on Xbox and PC anyway, and PlayStation players would stay a small minority). But sort and long term, the negative impact on Xbox’s image and on the entire ecosystem would be enormous.

Thankfully, Aasha doesn’t listen to people who flip‑flop constantly. And anyway, the majority of Xbox players strongly support exclusives. I didn’t expect us to disagree on this point, and I’m honestly surprised by this sudden change of stance. Gears is absolutely not “just another game,” and it’s definitely not a live‑service title, nor a purely multiplayer game. I don’t understand how you don’t see that.

And about the number of players — don’t forget PC. There aren’t more PlayStation players on a multiplayer game than Xbox + PC combined.

Looks like it’s the week where we disagree on everything. As for Wolverine, it was just a small part of my reasoning. I’ll stop talking about it — some people defend it tooth and nail even though it’s widely criticized everywhere. But it’s off‑topic anyway. Making a whole argument about it doesn’t make sense, sorry — it’s just defending the indefensible.

@RTGX It’s off-topic. I haven’t played it, maybe my opinion would change if I did, but who cares — that’s not the point. I’m not only talking about Metacritic scores, but also about feedback on gaming websites, Reddit discussions, and the gameplay I’ve seen on YouTube. Honestly, I can’t stand corridor games that basically play themselves, where even if you drop the controller or just hold one button, the game keeps going on its own. That’s not my idea of a video game. (That’s exactly what I saw in some sections, like the motorcycle scene.)

What I’m noticing is that some people aren’t addressing the core of the argument — they’re focusing on irrelevant details that have nothing to do with the actual topic.

@Fiendish-Beaver lol, seriously ? When it’s an Xbox game, anything under 85 is already a bad game — and now suddenly a 75 is supposed to be “good”? By that logic, Starfield is a fantastic critical success. And I’m not just talking about Metacritic; it’s almost unanimous across social media: the game is bad. If you enjoy a game that holds your hand so much it treats you like an idiot, fine, no problem. Personally, I don’t play games just for the cinematics. If the gameplay is repetitive and not up to par, it’s not for me. It’s a game made for the masses, for casual gamers with no skill. Sure, there should be games for every taste, but honestly, supporting a game like this is supporting the decline of the gaming industry — generic, soulless games with no creativity, built around formulas tailored to the lowest common denominator of casual players. That’s not what I’m looking for, and it goes against the health of the industry.

I’m not saying games should be overly experimental or “artsy” to the point of losing fun and playability. As always, there’s a middle ground. And with Wolverine, we’ve hit rock bottom. It’s not just me saying it — the press score and user score on Metacritic are terrible (75 and 6.7), and opinions on Reddit, YouTube, and other platforms are almost unanimous. But hey, good for you if you enjoyed it, even if you’re in the minority.

But that’s not even the main topic. Wolverine was just an example to illustrate the disappointing performance of the PS5 generation in terms of games — again, just a simple observation. And it was mostly to highlight that an ecosystem that is too closed forces budget constraints, and clearly Wolverine didn’t get the budget it needed. Having a balanced strategy ensures decent budgets for your games while still maintaining a portfolio of exclusives.

Nintendo is a special case. Their games don’t cost $300 million to make. They rely on simpler, cheaper formulas and have built their own universe with exclusive franchises. But that doesn’t mean Nintendo doesn’t produce a lot of trash too — and they charge a premium for their ecosystem, both in games and hardware. It’s not the same audience either: younger, less demanding. So it’s not comparable, and that’s exactly why you can’t copy Nintendo’s formula.

About what you said regarding Gears or Call of Duty, that’s very subjective. Gears is not primarily a multiplayer game — far from it. I’d really like to see actual numbers comparing how many people play the campaign versus multiplayer, but honestly, I’m not convinced multiplayer dominates. Not at all.

For Call of Duty, yes, multiplayer is probably played more, but the campaign has always played an important role — at least in terms of the franchise’s image — and a lot of people only play the single‑player mode.

I admit it, I’m having a hard time following you. Saying that Gears E-Day shouldn’t be exclusive — coming from you? It’s just incomprehensible. In that case, you’re basically against all Xbox exclusives, and I really don’t get your point.

@Jaxx420 overthinking ? Yes, it’s me — I plead guilty. But between overthinking and underthinking, I’ve made my choice.

@Fiendish-Beaver So basically, you’re saying he’s wrong — and you’re right, it’s not that simple. That exception is a huge one, that completely flips his argument on its head. You’re actually reinforcing what I said earlier: the right approach is doing both, with the right balance — exclusive games and multiplatform games. Not Shawn Layden’s binary, oversimplified vision.

About Gears E-Day: it’s both a single‑player game and a multiplayer game. So sure, keeping the multiplayer part multiplatform could make sense. But not the campaign. The campaign should stay exclusive. In fact, the best solution would be to sell two separate versions. I’m honestly surprised you’re saying this, because you used to be in favor of making everything exclusive.

@Llamageddon I think his comment is ridiculous. He says Xbox should “choose a path,” and his second option is basically to abandon hardware and become like Sega — as if Sega chose that path, and as if it was a viable solution that brought them success.

But that’s simply false. There aren’t two options; there’s only one: being a strong platform, being a strong publisher by selling some multiplatform games, and also offering exclusives. There’s no black‑and‑white choice like he suggests — it’s about finding the right balance.

And it’s exactly this lack of balance that’s killing PlayStation right now. Their ecosystem is too closed, and it’s ultimately hurting the quality of their games. People need to stop making excuses for them. They’ve chained flop after flop, released mediocre titles, and produced very few first‑party games this generation. It’s just a fact. Everyone has noticed that PlayStation is nowhere near PS4 levels in terms of game production — both in quality and quantity. You’re defending them way too much, in my opinion.

Back to Xbox: he’s wrong. Sega didn’t choose their fate — it was forced on them. They lost money and struggled to recover, never returning to the level they once had. So I don’t get his point at all. He’s talking nonsense. It’s more subtle than he pretends. A total pivot in one direction or the other is not the right move. The right move is balance.

Xbox has no reason to make all their games exclusive (at least not yet, given the current install base), but they also have no reason to stop making exclusives entirely. That’s exactly the mistake Phil Spencer and Sarah Bond were starting to make by neglecting the hardware platform and choosing the “publisher‑only” strategy Layden is pushing. And we can clearly see it’s a huge mistake — it’s not a viable path.

There’s only one real choice: do both. But that’s apparently too complicated for Shawn Layden’s tiny brain. I honestly don’t think he knows more than I do — or more than anyone else, for that matter.

@themightyant He’s wrong, and the PlayStation 4 proves he’s wrong. You can be both, like I said in my comment above — one strengthens the other. You can’t be strong as a platform if you’re not strong as a publisher, and the reverse is also true.

You don’t have to choose one or the other — in fact, if you choose only one, it’s guaranteed failure. That’s exactly the mistake Phil Spencer and Sarah Bond were starting to make by focusing only on the publisher side, and we all saw the disaster that followed. This guy clearly doesn’t want what’s best for Xbox. People need to stop listening to him; he’s been talking nonsense for years.

Either he’s being paid by PlayStation to repeat this kind of nonsense, or he’s looking for a job, but whatever the case, it’s ridiculous. And he’s been repeating nonsense like this for years.

It really feels like Shawn Layden is either looking for a job at Microsoft or still getting paid by PlayStation. Either way, Asha and the players don’t care at all about his “advice.” For five years he’s been repeating the same thing: from the very beginning he claimed that AAA games launching day one on Game Pass weren’t viable. Yet Game Pass has already delivered plenty of day‑one AAA titles, while also strengthening its exclusives — the exact opposite of what he kept saying.

Xbox doesn’t have to choose; it can do both. In fact, both strategies reinforce each other. A publisher releasing great games strengthens its entire ecosystem, including its hardware platform. We saw it with Forza Horizon 6: a console exclusive that boosted Xbox console sales (before the price hike). It’s clearly correlated — the two sides work together.

It’s crazy that he says this, because it’s exactly what happened with PlayStation during the PS4 era, back when PlayStation was still making great games. The impact on hardware was obvious. The PS5 just rode that momentum, but the quality has dropped significantly, most recently with the very mediocre Wolverine, which has basically become a meme at this point.

"I noticed a resemblence to Hogwarts Legacy in Fable's combat,"

That's a very good sign. It's one of the things I loved in Hogwarts Legacy and that I think a lot of players loved too.

@Weebleman The game is also number one in the sales charts on Steam in the United States, and number three worldwide.

@Mr-Cage lool ! Ah yes, thanks. I had Resonance in mind, even though I also enjoyed Requiem. I wasn’t thinking about that game in my answer. I also found it strange that Resonance left Game Pass so quickly. But anyway, go play it, and of course I recommend buying it, and even both (which are quite different in what they offer, but both have a very beautiful narrative and excellent technical execution)

Rush to play A Plague Tale: Requiem (or buy it), it’s a masterpiece. It’s probably my game of the year. (I haven’t played Gears E‑Day yet).

The Coalition didn’t disappoint , and I never doubted it, given their talent. The most beautiful and most fun game of this entire generation. They clearly pushed all the sliders to the max — gameplay, cinematics, technology, everything.

It shows that when a studio knows how to code, it’s possible to make something both beautiful and performant with Unreal Engine. And the same is true with other game engines.

‘It is not the hammer that creates the sword, but the blacksmith who wields it.

Can’t wait to get my hands on this huge blood‑red jewel.

Xbox doesn’t need to apologize to PlayStation — it was PlayStation who decided to cancel the game. On the other hand, Kojima can thank Xbox for saving the project, and probably their studio too, given the investment put into Physint

In Asha we trust

a mix between option 1 and 2

Option 1 is basically Campaign Evolved; if it’s too classic, it will only interest the old‑timers. If we want a future for the franchise, it has to meet today’s standards, but without forgetting its DNA, and reconnect with the best entries in the series. The bestiary also needs to be renewed; we need novelty, a strong story, cinematic staging, new gameplay possibilities, new lore. It has to bring freshness, but without forgetting the foundations that made Halo successful. The goal is simply to push the boundaries, embrace the future without forgetting the past.

It’s pretty crazy how many advantages we get for free thanks to disc‑to‑digital: not only do we have both the physical and the digital version, but on top of that there’s Xbox Play Anywhere and Stream Your Own Game — exclusive benefits of the Xbox ecosystem. Add to this other exclusives like achievements, free cloud saves, Smart Delivery, advanced backward compatibility, etc. Honestly, it feels good to have your games on Xbox

Amen, This is the gospel of the fanboy

Cooool ! Thanks Sega ! Another big win for Xbox and another huge setback for the commentators who said SEGA and others wouldn’t join disc‑to‑digital. They didn’t get it , everyone will end up joining, it’s in everyone’s interest, both players and publishers.

I bought the Witcher 3 Complete Edition for Xbox One really cheap, so I get Smart Delivery for free, Xbox Play Anywhere for free (console and PC version for the same price), and the free update. Truly a great deal. And I humbly admit that I’ve never played it before, so I think this is the best time to make up for that unforgivable delay

A fun game to play with the family

I always feel a bit anxious when Satya Nadella starts speaking, because I think he’s a poor communicator and, I don’t know, I just don’t really like his face. I feel like he should take more of a backseat to Xbox, even though I can understand that seeing the big boss speak might reassure shareholders.

Well, this time around, there's not much to complain about. It’s interesting to note that he is clear and explicitly talks about Xbox and PC when he mentions making Xbox games available "to more and more people"—not other platforms.As for the rest, there is nothing really new: just a confirmation of betting big on major IPs and stating that Xbox has a massive portfolio of them.

That being said, to qualify things a bit, there are still some major IPs slipping through our fingers like State of Decay (even though that one will visibly remain in Game Pass); same goes for Psychonauts... they might not be the absolute biggest IPs, but still. And we would really like to hear more about Senua, which to me is a strong franchise that needs to stay with Xbox. We'd also love to get some news on Blade, which is another major IP as well.

@Llamageddon No worries, it’s all good , always nice to have a good chat.

@Llamageddon Yes, we agree — which clearly shows that Tom Warren’s statements are ridiculous. Beyond saying that PS5 sales will be higher, he knows nothing about the rest, especially the proportions of sales.

Regarding Matthew Ball, I’m not trying to defend anyone either, but you know me, I like to be precise. Matthew Ball simply pointed out that Xbox sales were breaking records. There’s no need to know PlayStation’s numbers to say that — he’s relying solely on internal figures he has, which Tom Warren doesn’t. So in the end, he actually knows more than Tom Warren, who is just chasing sensationalism and subscriptions. That’s all I’m saying.

As for the figures I mentioned above, like the famous 60/40 split on certain games, I based them on estimates from Alinea Analytics. My point was simply to highlight that there is no direct cause‑and‑effect link between console sales and game sales. A console doesn’t buy games — a console gathering dust even less so. It’s the players who buy games, and therefore what really matters is the percentage of MAUs on the console base and the purchase rate per player. Those are figures we don’t have, even though some analyses have shown higher engagement rates in the Xbox community. I’m talking in percentages, of course. In terms of volume, the PS5 inevitably catches up, despite having a less active community

@PennywiZe666 @Llamageddon What I’m saying is that the console sales ratio is not correlated with the game sales ratio. And that 60/40 figure is not something I invented — I’m not claiming it’s a general rule, far from it — but for certain games we do see this kind of ratio, such as Battlefield (60% PS / 40% Xbox), Assassin’s Creed Shadows (69% PS / 31% Xbox), and others like Madden NFL or NBA 2K.

So the question is not about who will sell the most GTA6 copies — we already know that, there’s no debate, it’s obvious. The real issue is about the proportion and Tom Warren’s lack of nuance, since he bases his argument solely on console market share, which is a very simplistic way of looking at things.

It is absolutely necessary to properly validate projects. Xbox has suffered too much from poorly calibrated projects at the start, with too much freedom given to different studios. Activision has solid experience in knowing what works commercially and what doesn’t. Activision is not just Call of Duty — it also includes other franchises with commercial success, such as Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, Tony Hawk, Guitar Hero, Prototype, and Sekiro (published by Activision and developed by FromSoftware).

@FraserG I don’t know if you saw Tom Warren’s reply afterward, where he says “what’s the Xbox console market share?” What a childish answer — and what does that even have to do with the topic? We’ve seen many times that game sales aren’t directly proportional to the number of consoles. It’s often around 60/40 — 60 for PlayStation and 40 for Xbox — which is much better than the console sales ratio. The difference is that the PlayStation community has far more casual gamers and generally lower engagement.

In any case, that doesn’t contradict the fact that Xbox is breaking sales records. It doesn’t mean they’re selling more than PlayStation, one doesn’t prevent the other, but that also doesn’t mean that sales on PS5 are "heavily skewed", like he said.

When Matthew Ball says “false,” it’s about the nuance — specifically about the expression “heavily skewed.” Tom Warren is doing pure sensationalism — exaggeration pushed to the extreme. That’s where he’s wrong. That’s his livelihood — all of it just to sell subscriptions.

Honestly, the whole controversy is ridiculous. It just shows that, in my view, Tom Warren isn’t reliable. He claims he’s basing his statements on Xbox sources, yet he gets contradicted in two seconds by Matthew Ball — so you really have to wonder who these supposed sources are. The fact that he replies with “what’s the Xbox console market share?” basically reveals that he’s basing everything solely on that number. It’s a simplistic shortcut anyone with a shallow understanding could make. You don’t need sources to say something like that — and that’s exactly what he’s doing.

He’s been wrong many times before (Game Pass ending, Starfield day one on PS5, Xbox consoles being discontinued, Xbox leaving the European market, etc.).

The thing is, he wraps misinformation around true facts, which makes him look credible — but let’s be honest, it’s business. He sells sensationalism behind his paid subscriptions. He’s clearly both judge and jury, and that’s a conflict of interest.

We’re basically in a world where a simple leaker thinks he has more authority and holds the truth over the actual source of truth. It’s upside down

It’s still crazy how people get worked up over a patent without even asking themselves whether it’s meant to fund the free ad-supported Game Pass version — which is obviously the case, since Xbox already stated there would never be ads in purchased games or paid subscriptions.

If it’s meant to fund the free Game Pass version with ads — which is almost certainly the case , then it’s fine! After all, getting something for free in exchange for ads is the bare minimum.

@Llamageddon @RTGX Thanks, but you didn’t read everything I said. Of course sales matter — that’s exactly my point. I’m talking about potential, about talent, about creating future bangers, not past sales. Ninja Theory is a rough diamond, but clearly they lack a leader to find the right balance toward commercial success, keeping what makes them unique while connecting to what players actually want… gameplay. We agree on that.

But past results are the consequence of a certain laxity and too much freedom left to the studios by the former leadership. That doesn’t change the fact that they have the capacity to do much better — that’s what I’m saying

Arkane and Ninja Theory are studios with huge potential — well managed, they can achieve wonders. At some point, Xbox needs to stop cutting into its studios. Senua and Blade are both potential cash machines; the potential is obvious. Xbox needs video game characters like Senua and Blade.

At some point, you have to stop looking to the past and dive into the future. There was certainly a lack of leadership in the past to chart a path toward commercial success, but with proper management and the talent these studios have, they can achieve wonders. You’d have to be blind not to see it.

@Gabrie I think you’re being very harsh — Hellblade 2 is far from minor, It’s still, even today, the graphical knockout of this generation, unless sales numbers are the only criterion. Compared to Wolverine, for example, Hellblade 2 is a true masterpiece, with a genuine artistic, creative, and original vision. Few studios possess that kind of know‑how. Sure, Wolverine will probably sell better despite very negative reviews: 77 on Metacritic versus 84 for Hellblade 2.

The talent is there — they just need direction, management that understands the recipe for a successful, well‑selling game. The next Senua is exactly the right path: keep their artistic touch, but put gameplay at the center.

It would be a real shame if a studio like Ninja Theory were to close, given their expertise. They simply made poor choices — too avant‑garde, too disconnected from what players actually expect.