Topic: Official Push Square Xbox Thread

Expand

I can understand that Playstation Fanboys are not happy. Some of the games they 'enjoy' will no longer be on their platform and CoD on PS in recent years has had more and/or earlier access to content 'ONLY on Playstation' so I can understand their upset.

CoD MP ain't going anywhere and its most likely to go 'Free to Play' on ANY platform - inc Playstation. The free to play model - apart from the fact most Online MP games are going or are F2P so difficult to 'charge' for a new game - means that 'everyone' can play on any device with NO barrier to 'entry' - also NO exclusive maps, modes etc to ANYONE...

Making a 'new' game - whether 'Exclusive' or NOT 'splits' the CoD Community. Its either going to split them between platforms (new on Game Pass vs old game on PS) or between 'generations' (CoD 2022 vs CoD 2024). Therefore, it makes much more sense to create a F2P MP CoD game with Seasons and maybe a 'refresh' every few years - Start with a 'Modern' era for a few years, maybe then refresh Warzone and MP to a more historical setting etc - point is, everyone is getting the 'SAME' Content at the SAME time and keeping the CoD: Online Community 'Happy'.

Raven could basically become like 343 to Halo, Coalition to Gears, Raven to CoD Online to maintain and update both MP and Warzone. Have access to 'every map' ever made to 'remaster', remake etc. Maybe make a CoD Online Hub where one mode could be a 'retro' playlist that this month is CoD4 so you have CoD4 maps and Loadouts, next month maybe BO3 MP. They could have a 'Community' section for creating 'new' modes or perhaps let you play Advanced Warfare maps but with say CoD:MW2 weapons, movement and killstreaks (no exo-skeletons) which could be interesting in BO3 as the Water and wall running opened up new routes but can't with CoD:MW2 movement as you'd drown - making those maps 'feel' and play different. Point is, they have a LONG history they can use to 'keep' the future of CoD fresh without needing 'new' games every year or two splitting the Community between those that bought the 'new' CoD and those still left on the 'older' game(s) The F2P model keeps CoD MP available for 'everyone' with all the same modes, maps etc.

CoD: Zombies will 'exist' on Playstation because those games with 'CoD: Zombies' will continue to 'exist'. Want to play Mob of the Dead or whatever maps are on PS will 'remain' on Playstation. Treyarch however could make a 'brand new' Zombies game that is basically the same 'Game-play' and structure as CoD: Zombies, with a whole new cast (maybe get Horror actors as lead characters to play), completely 'new' origin story (not WW2 Nazi's to 'fit' the CoD name) - a 'spiritual' successor if you like, that will be 'exclusive' where Game Pass exists. PS CoD: Zombie fans may well be left out and 'annoyed' that no more CoD:Zombies games will come and have to 'make do' with replaying all the existing games or sign up to Game Pass.

Infinity Ward could make a 'new' first Person shooter campaign to bring all those PS fans of Infinity Ward 'Campaigns' to Game Pass, or maybe want to try a 3rd Person Action adventure after decades of CoD only. Sledgehammer may have their own IP's they want to make, High Moon could revisit their 'Darkwatch' IP (PLEASE), and Beenox could make a Kart Racer/Smash Bros type game with characters from Spyro, Crash, Banjo, Conker, Psychonauts, Halo, Perfect Dark, Doom, Wolfenstein, Quake, Hexen, CoD, Fable, Hellblade, Skyrim, Redfall, Gears of War, Fallout etc EXCLUSIVELY to Game Pass.

Regardless of what you 'feel' about the subscription model, the fact it 'exists' and is MS's primary platform (if you buy an Xbox, they still want you to subscribe to Game Pass) changes the entire outlook of MS as a Game provider. They need 'BIG' Games every month - not 2 or 3 a year, particularly around Holiday to sell 'consoles', because they want to bring people into Game Pass every month. Not only that, they want to 'keep' you subscribed 'every' month - not sign up for 1month, blast through their biggest games released over the 'year' and cancel. They want to keep you 'month' after 'month' with 'big' games people want to play...

That also feeds into another point about Game Pass - Games aren't built/greenlighted etc because the 'Publisher' thinks they will be the 'best' selling game - hence so many sequel or big licence tie-in (marvel, star wars, harry potter etc) games or sudden trending games like Battle Royale. Now its about Subscriber 'growth', player enjoyment and engagement, subscriber retention. That also means they have more creative freedom to 'experiment' as 'Sales' risk isn't part of the conversation.

They 'can't' just be mediocre or average games - they have to be the games that people WANT to play first and foremost, have to be 'great' games otherwise you don't get 'gamers' wanting to 'subscribe' and stay subscribed. Forza Horizon 5 is a 'Great' game and won many critics and peoples 'Game of the Year', Psychonauts 2 and of course Deathloop, which with MS's money and commitment helped Arcane polish and add more to BOTH these, are 'Great' Games. Even Halo, which in 2020 looked AWFUL ended up a 'Great' game (yes its not the 'next-gen' visual treat we expected but still a great game, MSFS on Console is a 'Great' game - all critically acclaimed, all with 'high' player praise etc.

MS have stated (since they moved to a 'different' model and under NEW management) that they want Studio's making the games they want (not games they are 'forced' to for commercial reasons) and giving them a platform to reach 'everyone'. Ninja Theory had to pimp out most of their staff to work on 'others' projects to fund a 'small' team to make the game they 'wanted' - Hellblade. MS Acquired them and now their 'whole' studio is working on 'Ninja Theory' games. Undead Labs are making Undead Labs games. Playground wanted to expand and make an open world RPG - MS acquired them, offered them 'Fable' (which really 'helped' as that instantly got hype and attention on a Studio know only for Racing - and certainly going to help attract people into Game Pass over a 'new' RPG from a Racing game developer), Obsidian struggled with Outer Worlds funding but can now make 2 and a 'new' RPG they wanted to make 'Avowed'. The Initiative may have taken 'Perfect Dark', not only because it has 'great' potential, but also because they are a 'new' unknown so having a known IP makes people 'excited' and hyped but all these are 'games' they want to make.

Its more important to have 30+ studio's all making their own games to have 30+ 'new' games on Game Pass. If they can make 5 or 6 great games a year, that's 6-7 great games they 'need' to find for those month's a First Party game can't fill. That's where Xbox publishing also comes in - Contraband by Avalanche (Mad Max, Just Cause) is one of these and maybe that Cloud based Kojima project that was rumoured could be another. ID@Xbox adds the variety of 'independent' games too. Any other months that Xbox Studio's and/or Xbox Publishing can't fulfil, then you'll get a 'multi-platform' Day 1 game because they 'NEED' at least 1 BIG game per month to get you to Subscribe and KEEP you subscribed. They don't really want you paying your tiny 'monthly' fee to subscribe for 1month a 'year' to 'binge' play their 2 or 3 'exclusive' games and then cancel. That's something Sony will need to consider with their SP games - being able to play Uncharted, R&C, Last of Us1&2 etc stories for £10 a month (for example) and cancelling until Sony's next 'couple' of exclusives you want to play are on their service instead of paying £70 each. FH5 isn't a 8hr campaign, Halo I expect 'could be' but Sea of Thieves is ongoing, Psychonauts maybe could be played, but MSFS is too big and 'growing' too, Starfield is likely to be 'massive' and good luck completing everything in a month, Redfall looks like it will not be a one and done type game...

I don't know that Fable Legends would be cancelled today - it would be perfect for Game Pass but too risky to 'sell'. I don't know if Scalebound would be cancelled today but with 'escalating' costs and 'poor' hardware sales, the risk vs reward becomes an issue. With 'Game Pass', those projects may of made more sense as Commercial success isn't the metric anymore, its Subscriber growth, satisfaction and keeping them subscribed month after month.

Sony is in a 'great' position with its 'sales' focussed model. The 'risk' vs 'Reward' is a lot lower as a platform holder, publisher and developer of games. Getting them into PS leads to more 'revenue' too but 3rd Party Publishers lose revenue to platform holders (using their Trademarks, losing retailer revenue etc) so 'risk vs their 'reward' is a lot more of a factor. That's why Sony can spend 'extra' time on Polish, take 'extra' creative risk and with a 'large' loyal fanbase buying 'services, other games etc, the 'risk' is significantly lower than with EA, Ubisoft etc. That shows their 'business' model, the same model most, if not all console had before, is a 'great' model too BUT that's not the same model MS have now.

The Xbox is a MS platform but also a 'Game Pass' platform. People are buying Xboxes because of Game Pass, not because the want to play Starfield OR Halo specifically - like buying PS5 because of H:FW, GoW and Uncharted for example - but because of Game Pass. All those deals, like R6: Extraction, Hitman trilogy, ME:L edition, MLB21, Outriders etc etc are NOT made to 'benefit' Xbox owners, they still have to buy those like every Playstation owner, they are for 'Game Pass subscribers' only. MS don't really care if you buy a Series X to buy Starfield or buy Forza, they want you to Subscribe to grow their Subscriber base and to do that, they need 'big' games that people WANT to play first and foremost - not games which may/may not be 'Commercial' successes.

That's why MS don't tell you how many Series S/X consoles have been sold or how many copies of FH5 were sold, they are telling you 'Subscriber' numbers over 25m), telling you how many players played in the first week (over 10m played FH5). R&C took a while to reach 1m sales but FH5 was played by over 10m in its first week - NOT saying 1 is better than another but when less than 600k played 'Returnal' (however good, bad etc) in the first month, that's not 'great' for the developer who put their heart and soul into the project, critically loved by most, but then have so few play and experience it - they can't control how much it cost and whether or not that severely impacted its 'reach' and no doubt may find new appreciative players when Sony drop the price or it comes to PS+/Spartacus.