Microsoft Still Wants to Put Xbox Game Pass on PS5, PS4

Here we go again 🤣

They’re pretty thirsty

How would it even work? Gamepass would need a first party only tier or something.

I still think this happens in the future and the likes of Elder Scrolls VI come to Playstation. If Microsoft pull out of the console market in particular it will be no different to a service like EA access and Ubisoft plus where Sony take a cut.

@Balosi yeah I think it would have to be a package that consists of all Microsoft first party games only.

I'm not actively against it, but frankly I'd prefer native versions of Microsoft published games, even if they came out a year later.

@colonelkilgore is that you CJ? Lol

Microsoft game studio play + now pass

It will definitely happen at some point, maybe in the next generation. They will still always make their hardware but on top of that they want to also be gaming's Netflix

I think a watered down version of Game Pass, offering first party games only, would be welcome by Sony if Xbox pulled out of the console market altogether, and let’s face it: at this rate they are eventually going to do that.

When Xbox inevitably goes 3rd party and pulls out of the console market then no doubt it will probably happen.

Until that day though, not a chance in hell

Mocrosoft's stable of studios has definitely gotten big enough to support a first (and second party for other titles - Kojima's Overdose) party only version of Game Pass for non Xbox console Platforms. If Ubisoft and EA can have their own subscription services to themselves, why not Xbox, if they really do want to pursue this path of getting Playstation and Nintendo users playing their portfolio - even if it means Halo on PS5.

It feels a bit like an endgame scenario when it comes to Xbox hardware though, what happens there? There's a notable amount of people who have invested heavily into the Xbox console ecosystem.

Me and my mate who are old school gamers both agree this would be pretty decent. I’d go for it tbh

Still not convinced Sony would let them do it unless Microsoft gets out of the console business, which would be bad because it means the "competition" is gone.
Everyone can find the data, Xbox hasn't been close to Nintendo or Sony in a long, long time, but them getting wiped from the "big three" would not be good and with the way everyone besides Used Car Salesman Phil Spencer talks, it sounds like they're headed that way.

Sorry Phil, but I'm not interested.

This would not work considering Sony is doing their own version of game pass but also they wouldnt want the competition on their store.

@Americansamurai1 from San Andreas?

The entire acquisition race is leading to the point where every publisher's games will be tied to their own subscription app.

Want to play Xbox games? Subscribe to Game Pass.

Want to play Nintendo games? Subscribe to Nintendo Online.

Want to play PlayStation games? Subscribe to PlayStation+.

Each for £9.99 per month of course!

EA and Ubisoft are already testing the water. Sega, Konami, Capcom, Take2 will follow suit or be acquired.

Bespoke consoles will be absolutely irrelevant and all of these games will either stream or possibly install to a basic PC set top box. I can see the only bit of original hardware being controllers unique to the likes of Sony and Nintendo.

Only if I can earn trophies in Halo.

lol you know how embarrassed Sony would be if Xbox Game Pass was on PlayStation? Their new PS Plus subscriptions would be pointless

I’ve had every Xbox day one and Xbox Live since the beginning (aside from one year in 2010 when I moved abroad) but it’s time for Xbox to become a software developer/publisher.

This is the advice I would give Microsoft. Just drop Xbox hardware and become a gaming software house. Make native versions of all your games and offer Game Pass everywhere.

@Balosi It's irrelevant because Sony just won't allow it.
Game Pass is mashup of first and third party games. It's direct competition to PS Plus Extra/Premium. Sony don't want to competition on their consoles.

Sony also don't want sub service that will have Call of Duty on it, because they are dependent on 30% from every COD game purchase made on PlayStation.

So this conversation is literally irrelevant. Microsoft is willing to go third party if Sony would allow Game Pass in it's current form on PlayStation. But Sony won't allow it so things will remain exactly as they are now

Never once needed GamePass to enjoy gaming. PS5 doesn't need it, it's doing more than fine without it. Never once have I ever thought to myself do yer know what I need two subs on the same console. Xbox 1st party has never really interested me outside of one or two releases every 3 or 4 years, so it's a why what's the point

I’d be for it. More games available to us would always be good. But this comes across as Microsoft looking for sympathy again. If they wanted to they could have released their games there without gamepass.

Maybe next generation who knows.
But what everyone does not think is.
Maybe after next generation with technology progress so in about 12 ish years time.

MAYBE NO ONE WILL BE MAKING GAMES CONSOLES ANYMORE.

Why bother making a console, as all companies have to heavily invest and keep telling us they lose money, why make the hardware if technology progression allows all the big three game companies just to stream the games maybe in 12 years time.

Just like even Sony haven’t brought out a new blu ray player for years, yes you can still buy their old model but they are not investing in bringing out any new models just like most entertainment manufacturers now.

If what MS really wanted was to get the games on as many screens as possible, they could just publish their games for PS and Nintendo anyway 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

That's not what they want though, is it.

I'd welcome any first party Xbox games being available on PS, even if it meant having some MS/xbox branded service to get it. And if they offered a first party only gamepass sub to other consoles, fine, let's go, even if it's a sneaky high price I'd welcome subbing for Starfield for a month or two, and for Elder Scrolls down the line.

But it is not going to happen, as that is not what they will offer. Unless the Xbox completely goes extinct as hardware

@colonelkilgore yeah

So to have online anything, you’d need PS Plus, then you’d have to pay another exorbitant fee for game pass? No thanks.

Seems Xbox may be realizing that their small base and whatever the PC gaming base is, are not enough to garner a profit. Compared to sales from Skyrim which was shared across everything, to the current limited projections, Microsoft may be admitting defeat.

To early to tell if they relent and allow the exclusivity to end on their part. Brings the hardships of Sega to mind.

@RudeAnimat0r I prefer native versions too.

And Phil, if ya listening, long walk off of a short pier for you my boy!

Colin was right

Third party devs wouldn't allow this, they would lose out on potential buyers from the PlayStation side. Either there's a gamepass tier just for Microsoft first party titles or Microsoft pay third party devs treble what they do now.

Either way I won't be touching gamepass until Microsoft become a publisher only.

@Ravix If what MS really wanted was to get the games on as many screens as possible, they could just publish their games for PS and Nintendo anyway

That's because Sony/Nintendo would take a 30% cut from those games sales but with gamepass Sony/Nintendo won't make any money from it being on their console, yet Microsoft would from in game Microtransactions, Sony ain't stupid.

I'd subscribe for Killer Instinct alone if they put it on there.

Phil, just bring Xbox Studios games on PlayStation. We'll look on it and if it's good, we'll buy it. But we don't need your Game Pass or any of your services on our console. We'll never be a part of your Xbox community, but Xbox games may be a part of PlayStation ecosystem. Just think about it!

@UltimateOtaku91 Sony/Nintendo would take a cut from gamepass subscriptions on their platforms too. They'd prob be happy to negotiate lower than 30% for something that huge though.

To clarify this is nothing new. They have the same desire they had years ago. They will have the same desire in 5 years when GP still isnt on playstation/nintendo.

Until xbox says we don't want to put gamepass on playstation we should just assume that they still do want to put it there.

Hmmm. It’ll be interesting to see if Sony allows this to happen. Money talks. It sure would be weird to see Microsoft Game Pass on a PlayStation.

@UltimateOtaku91 I know, and MS knows lol. Just sometimes we need to cut through Big Phil's lies for the sake of others. They say these things are what they want, and people buy into it and see them being some kind of philanthropic entity. But it is their actions that show their actual intentions.

"We want games available to all"... "check out our new exclusive lineup of games from publishers we bought specifically to remove them from rivals platforms" 😅

This is the best idea Microsoft has come out with. Gears of war on PlayStation, yes please.

All for it. To be honest exclusivity, is growing tired. Sony's first party output, while having top notch production values, are getting really stale in my opinion. So new games aside from the playable movies and simplistic cookie cutter third person gameplay would be awesome.

It would be nice if MS just ditched the hardware front altogether and focused on gamepass as their entire platform and focused on it being offered everywhere. It's the far superior subscription service if you really look at it honestly free from fickle biases.

Possibly wouldn't be bad if did I'm on Xbox as gamepass is pretty sick so carried it on from last gen but wouldn't mind been able to play the ratchet and clank games they were amazing (also jak and daxters😭)😎 could do that easy if everything was on one console. everyone could get the best of both sides🙂 only thing is would they both get lazy with like no other competitor🤔

@somnambulance I don't get the sense that they are exiting the console space. The bulk of their gaming revenue is from sales of 3rd party games on xbox consoles. I dont see them giving up on that easy money. I also don't think they would have such an emphasis on having the two system approach of the powerful and budget models.

Their focus is just not on being the best selling console. They have already admitted defeat on that front. Instead of convincing people to abandon their favorite platform, maybe they can convince them to buy a Series S as well, or gamepass on pc/mobile/cloud, etc. In the future they want to be able to sell a subscription to even more people that they already know do not want to buy their consoles.

I think it's a little bit of a pipe dream to expect it to come to those platforms and xbox probably knows that. I think this is similar to the "they want to buy nintendo" reports where they were basically just saying "boy, wouldn't that be nice."

Yeah, no it doesn't work like that.
Not even a "watered down" version would work.

Sony, Nintendo and MS have services and storeres that works as a closed ecosystem of sorts. Why the hells would Sony or Nintendo let another type of ecosystem invade their own? Just to lose subscribers and revenue?

Unless MS goes full 3rd party it won't happen.
Or better yet, since they seem commited to "put their games on every screen" just release the games then, no GP attached.

If they made a PS5 curated game pass, where it is just Xbox exclusive content then yeah I would probably pay for it. Like how EA and Ubisoft have theirs, just a Microsoft one with all of their devs included, then I would take it.

I'd buy GP on PlayStation in a heartbeat.

I really hope Xbox doesn't exit the console race. We see how lazy Sony is when they're ahead. The latter half of the PS3 when Sony was trying to stand out and catch up the 360 was their best years. And it paid off cause in the end they overtook the 360.

Although it looks like in a console generation from now Xbox may be the next Stadia with online only and on every device thru the cloud

I can see the series x/s being the last Xbox hardware and this an inevitable result

The only way I see this happening is if a hypothetical version of Game Pass on PS5 contains only Xbox first party titles. Sony isn't going to want to lose out on sales of third party games. Basically, I don't ever see this happening (I'm also not interested in it).

Probably their plan all along, but doubt Sony will even entertain the idea until Call of Duty won't be available on PlayStation. And will most likely be a bespoke version of Gamepass, with only game not available on PlayStation.

You can't play xbox games on a playstation. Unless they have magically conjured some PS5 code out nothing, the largest games in the services catalog, like starfield or forza, simply wont play.

That's Microsoft's end game. They want to buy everything they can and then only make it available via Game Pass someday in the future to strong arm competitors into accepting Game Pass into their platforms. Regulators were too stupid (or bribed) to see the obvious game plan.

One thing to remember here is. MS just finished up with the FTC. They have made it known they still want to buy another studios. They can’t come out and say we are locking all these games down to our platform and Nintendo and Sony players can just buy a Xbox or kick rocks. The judge is going to look back on a comment like that and be like no you can’t buy Sega or whoever is next. MS has to continue to allow these games be played on all screens that are willing to accept GP. Just something to think about cause MS isn’t done spending money on studios they said that in court. The next Gen Xbox has already been leaked and consoles aren’t maybe around in the same way we know them today in the next 10-15 years. Sony sells massive amounts of PS’s but their business runs on fairly tight margins. Thats the reason Jim Ryan wanted game as a service, PC ports and Mobile. Before we all get excited about Sony being the only console in town, i would ask yourself can they even afford to be in 10 years time. My guess is probably, but not sure. Sony is in debt as a company. PS business slips or doesn’t bring back the money they need and they aren’t in position to be the only player in town. The long game here is a bit more confusing and unknown than many of us are willing to admit. Gaming and tech is changing fast in front of our eyes and 10 years is a long time to see how players will consume media. Case in point more kids are asking for subscription cards than physical media packaged games.

Sony would get a cut from those that subscribe to Game Pass on a PlayStation though, @UltimateOtaku91. So if Sony were to take their standard 30%, then there would still be money to be made. There is no way that Sony would simply allow a rival service to be on their platform without it financially befitting them...

I imagine all those 1st party games would be streamed, so thats a no from me

Why is the Witcher dude on the picture?

I would appreciate availability of Xbox game sbut i wouldn't subscribe. I buy all games

I've said it a few times recently, this generation is possibly the last that Xbox will have a console. The next generation may only consist of a PS6. Microsoft are way too far behind now to catch Sony in terms of consoles and members, so doing a Sega, and becoming a third-party only publisher is probably the only route they now have. Therefore, as they will be unlikely to be offering third-party (to them) games on the Game Pass, with all titles on the service being first party only, I can see Sony then allowing the Game Pass on the PlayStation, and taking their usual 30% cut in the process...

@Nei You guys are delusional if you think that Microsoft are just gonna stop making consoles and why does that need to happen for Xbox titles to be on the playstation system? It doesn't, this is just Sony once again dragging their feet just like they did with the crossplay thing to the detriment of their players.

@HonestHick You seem to be mistaking this idea by Microsoft as something they would have to "allow", rather than something they actively want. It's not about making concessions and allowing other platform owners to play their games, it's about getting all those people in their ecosystem and getting revenue from them.

This is the entire reason they're making these huge acquisitions, to be able to eventually force their service onto other platforms.

@somnambulance they would still sell enough of them to make it worth while. They have the established ecosystem. People will want their gamerscore, friend list, digital libraries, etc. There are still plenty of people tied up in their consoles to abandon.

They have already acknowledged that gamepass does not reach the entire user base and never will. People will always buy games and they are well aware of that. They will make 100% of the profits of call of duty sales on xbox compared to playstation where they have to give a cut to Sony. They make about 30% off of every 3rd party game that sells on xbox. Isn't that worth spitting out a box for?

They might not give it their full attention but they will always have a box if there is still a market for home consoles.

As a consumer, I would love this and would grab GP on Playstation as a no-brainer move, but, on the other hand, it kind of reads as Microsoft throwing in the towel on Xbox as a hardware platform. I know Xbox has really struggled to move units the past two generations, but it's going to take time to rebuild respect and trust after Xbox One. They have the resources to make it happen, but we just haven't seen much fruit from their vast array of studios. They need truly excellent games to compete with Playstation, not better hardware. The Series X is great, as far as platforms go, but the games just aren't there yet. I really hope they start churning out some excellent titles that make me jealous of the folks that own a Series. Where's Indiana Jones? Where's Fallout? Where's something NEW? Where's virtually anything that isn't developed by Obsidian??

Playstation needs a strong competitor to keep the pressure on and Nintendo isn't playing the same game. I worry for an industry if it really only has Playstation as the viable AAA couch machine.

I would love to have access to Game Pass on my PS5. But my one requirement would be that the games came with a trophy list and not be locked into the Xbox achievement system.

Must have hired some moron from Kotaku to run Microsoft or something. What Incentive does Sony and Nintendo have in providing GamePass on their consoles? ZERO. Gives another company a foothold onto your platform, reducest he amount of money coming in from that division. Even if Microsoft provided a deal for Sony to take the lions share of the gamepass subscription fee that MS typically keeps for it's self, that's still money sony would be leaving on the table with PS+ Extra/Premium. It would hurt Sony, it would hurt Nintendo. Basically creates a loop hole to circumvent the current model of game purchases, which isn't a bonus either, taking us back to the days of blockbuster. Something First Party was never fond of in the first place.

Putting aside the implications of how bad of a deal that is for Nintendo and Sony, how does that benefit the gamer? Forcing everyone to consolidate into one just amorphous ball, were innovation is completely lost. Will I be earning Xbox Achievements or PlayStation trophies? will microsoft even concede on this or unlock both? What if Microsoft pulls out completely? This seems like a sour deal for gamers. If microsoft is interested in becoming a third party developer, it should just become one. I'm not interested in game pass just to play gears, halo, or the many IP they yanked out from under gamers feet to hold them hostage. Couldn't even keep their own games division competitive, now they want to Internet Explorer the rest of the games industry.

As far as camp sony goes, this could put the nail in the xbox console brand, what the hell is the point of owning a Series X at that point when you can just play a PS5. I'm not interested in the xbox eco system.

@Ainu20 well yeah they want that revenue. A $2.3 trillion dollar company runs with ideas as to how to get more money. So of course they want that cut. They have seen a lot of companies sign on for GP and i think it makes sense to bring those titles to as many gamers as they can. Sony’s strategy is to lock their users into PS5 and sell accessories that work with only PS5 and they are good at that and very successful at that strategy. MS’s strategy is active users and player engagement across all platforms trying to reach the billions of players around the world. They are not competing in the same way. So i see both companies doing really well implementing their her strategies. The only reason Sony isn’t doing that is they don’t have that infrastructure yet to branch much further than the PS5, but in time they will to grow their revenue sources as well. Game development is hugely expensive and Sony revealed in court how much it costs to make a AAA single player title and how little return they get back from them. So they will in time at the very least need those to get to PC sooner.

@Fiendish-Beaver No, it's dumb.
Even with 35 studios Microsoft don't have and will never have output to sustain subscription service with first-party only. That's why Xbox Game Pass (and PlayStation Plus) has plenty of third-party games that are filling niche, providing plenty of content on regular basis to keep users subscribed.

Let's say Microsoft will release 1 big game every quarter. Why on earth would anybody subscribe for 1 new game every three months? It's stupid idea and Microsoft would never do it. It's whole Game Pass or nothing. Not "first-party only" crap. And that's why Sony refused it.

Not to say, Sony don't want subscription service with Call of Duty inside that subscription on their platform. Because they rely on 30% cut from every copy of Call of Duty sold. And Microsoft would never agree to a system that you HAVE TO subscribe to Game Pass only through PlayStation so they can provide Sony 30% of every Game Pass subscription. It's just not happening.

All that talk of Microsoft exiting console business is just wishful thinking of players who want to play next Doom/Dishonored 3/TES VI/Fable/Forza Horizon 6, but don't want to buy an Xbox. Current market just don't allow Microsoft to put their games on PlayStation without ruining Xbox business. Because while yes, Xbox is far away from PlayStation in terms of console sales, they are still 16 billion business (without ABK). And Microsoft knows that they can get most money out of their console users. And they just aren't stupid to let it go.

Especially since they don't even know effect of having Call of Duty day one in Game Pass on console sales.

It could happen, but there's an obvious condition: Microsoft would have to go the way of Sega and completely exit console hardware manufacturing.

I actually see that happening as early as next-gen. Let's face it: Xbox has just not been competitive. And they desperately need to put GP on other platforms, because having a subscribers base in the hundreds of millions is the only way the service will be profitable.

Sounds like a win for everyone, even though a less competitive landscape in console hardware might be a concern.

Colin Moriarty said/predicted this years ago and has repeated consistently ever since.

Makes complete sense that it’ll happen.

@get2sammyb It could be a problem if Microsoft would stick to consoles. Having Xbox games on PlayStation could cause some gamers to gravitate to an Xbox console come next-gen.

@Shepherd_Tallon If Microsoft would pull out of the console business, GP on PlayStation could actually be the full-fledged service. It would be no different from other services such as EA's or Ubisoft's.

And if that scenario materialized, Game Pass would surely be a different service by then, adapted to that new reality.

Its smart for sony not to allow it. Why give there competitors revenue , with out sonys user base MS is likely to hit a New subscriber wall sooner then later. If sony holds out MS will eventually have no choice but to make there games natively for sony anyway. There is no way it would be cost affective for MS to keep making there first party games only to have they free on there service. Sony is smart by waiting them out.

I think Sony should allow it. This way , we can play Xbox/PC exclusives on PS5 without having to invest in an Xbox or a PC. More options are always good.

It may be some sort of minefield with many games on Game pass are on PS+ Extra sub as well as many on the PlayStation consoles to buy outright.

@JSnow2 I kind of share your concern, but the market has a way of balancing things out organically.

Think about it: if Xbox is doing so badly, maybe it's because there's no room for a third player. And if there is room for a third player and Microsoft is simply screwing things up, someone will inevitably rise from Xbox's ashes.

You can't "force" competition.

@OldGamer999 I've been hearing that "there will be no next-gen consoles" mantra for a couple of decades now. I doubt it will materialize anytime soon.

And TBH, maybe it's the other way around. The Steam Deck is a hit not only because it's portable, but also because it offers a consolized PC experience.

Consoles just offer an unbeatable experience to the average consumer, from value to convenience.

@somnambulance I really doubt this gamepass on playstation and nintendo is anything more than wishful thinking on xboxs part. I doubt they are having active discussions about it with Sony or Nintendo. It is probably one of those " if the opportunity ever arrives" type of things.

Like technically Sony shouldn't be interested in having disney+, Netflix, etc on their devices but after weighing the pros and cons it makes sense to have them. I know they signed a deal to make content for netflix but they are technically competitors in the movie/tv space. Maybe one day gamepass will make sense too (hard to imagine).

@Deityjester I don’t think Microsoft is going to get out of console business easily, but if their trajectory stays the way it is, they basically have to. And I think Sony would eventually allow GP on their system at that point. Another way would be just publishing on PlayStation as well.

But either way (Microsoft publishing on PS or Sony allowing GP on PlayStation) Xbox consoles would become even more redundant than they appear to be at the moment to the general public.

I think Xbox would be far more successful as a publisher and service provider than just a simple closed fence type console manufacturer.

Logically it would actually benefit Sony. As those who want MS games but also want those PS exclusives could literally have best of both worlds. And Sony keeps those console buyers and subscriptions through Plus. Technically makes a lot of sense.

Whilst I agree with you to some extent, @Godot25, you are not considering just how much they also have in the back catalogue. If they are pushing out one game every quarter, and have an extensive library too, that's not such a bad deal, and bear in mind much of what Sony offers is from their back catalogue too, but without the bonus of new Day One first-party or even third party games...

If they put Gamepass on Sony and Nintendo consoles, as well as day 1 on PC, what would be the point in owning an X-Box. Their exclusives at the moment are not console sellers and not boundary pushing the art form. Their games feel like multi platform games rather than the higher quality normally associated with 1st party games.

It would be the better solution for both companies if MS left the hardware business and put their service on Playstation and Nintendo.
Not that i would sub to it. Gamepass is a bait and switch scheme i am happy to stay away from.
If they sold physical copies or digital copies separate from the service i could be interested though.

@BamBamBaklava89 yeah exactly what I was thinking, why aren't Xbox games coming to PS at all? Not even TES6? Sony would take their 30% and MS get the 70%. And surely selling at full price ($70) would be more profitable than Game Pass? I can't make any sense of this at all. Sounds like stupid PR nonsense

I actually think xbox game pass coming to nintendo's new console in the next year or so will be one of those megaton announcements that come around every few years.

It makes alot of sense as it will give microsoft a foothold in japan given the expected wide adoption of the successor to switch, and access to a handheld device without having to develop hardware of their own.

From nintendo's perspective they already are increasingly developing closer ties with microsoft and perhaps they get support with building out their cloud and online infrastructure, as well as access to microsoft's first party

@get2sammyb something like ubisoft classics

Ms windows is used exclusively on most computers. But they are not making pc hardware. I hope they are not talking about having both profits in the future.

@HonestHick
Keep believing in MS lies bub, if their goal was really to bring titles to as many gamers as they can we would have MS titles on other platforms without GP attached. Their goal is simple:
Get as many suckers they can into GP and push other competitors off the market, basic strategy MS did for years on PC market.

If they really want good faith from real gamers, release the titles without GamePass attached, put them on PS5, Switch, Epic and GoG, make a Linux port so those games run native on Steam Deck. Y'know, be the "pro gamer, pro consumer" company they claim to be.

Microsoft print out those First Party discs to play on the PS5 i will buy them if I like them. 😁

Maybe a GPP, Game Pass Playstation, would work. That subscription would provide only XBox exclusives. Seems a win win for both Sony and MS as both would increase their sub income.

Price is a factor. Too high and some will pass while too low and some Xboxers may feel burned for what Gamepass costs them. That burn may be reduced if new games have a delayed release on GPP or a higher sub fee for no delay of new releases.

Another sub I can afford, but a day will still be only 24 hours.

@CielloArc i mean who knows maybe for some titles they will. Obviously they still need to keep some exclusives to push their services and products, but who knows what will come of it all. The reality is they have some huge IP’’s as does Sony so if either want to leverage PC sales or other services they both can. I don’t buy any of the lies or BS corporate companies do. Look at Sony not allowing others to charge less than them digitally and now possibly heading to court. They all do some shady stuff but it don’t stop me from loving both my Series X and PS5.

@somnambulance idk, I worry about the cost of the next PS console tbh. They charge $500, cuz the competition prices theirs at $500 as well.

If high end option for console is Sony Only. They’d prolly charge $600 or more for the PS6.

I enjoy both of my consoles mind you.

But if high end graphics Mean I have to buy a PC for $1500 or a Console for $500, what’s to stop Sony from charge a ton. Why keep your’e price so dang low, if the other option costs so much. I’d bank on that fact. I’d charge $800 a console, and remind you that “Hey… you’re still saving $700 compared to buying a PC, take it or leave it.

I know it’s silly to imagine, but as a company wanting to make money, why wouldn’t they do that? Any realistic reason?

@CielloArc
MS and Phil most definitely want games on as many systems as possible for the gamers they love so much. Only one requirement, Gamepass.

@Art_Vandelay
I really hope so, I’ve been gaming on consoles for decades and long live the console forever.

@Fiendish-Beaver I disagree. Back catalogue will bring you some players, not nowhere near enough to sustain a sub service.
But okay. For sake of argument let's say, that Microsoft will exit a console race and start being third-party publisher with Game Pass on PlayStation and Switch. They will

• loose all 30% from every transaction on Xbox consoles
• loose every Game Pass Core subscriber
• loose every Xbox Game Pass Console subscriber
• loose majority of Game Pass Ultimate subscribers since those are tied to Xbox console ecosystem
• loose sales of Xbox accessories (which aren't that bad)
• they will gain additional revenue by releasing their games on PlayStation
• they will gain few subscribers for Game Pass on PlayStation

All and all it's insanity and it doesn't make sense. I think that Microsoft would he happiest if console exclusives and consoles did not exist, because then the fight would move towards services where they are strong. But Microsoft isn't in position to dictate terms where market moves. And that's why they will keep making consoles. That's why they will not release majority of their first-party games on PlayStation. Even if they will sell half of what they are selling now. It's still in their benefit to make consoles. Because you are getting 30% from every transaction and it is way easier to monetise users on your platform as oppose to other platforms.

5 months ago Spencer said that they are not third-party publisher. So what exactly changed? Nothing.

"This increased [Game Pass] competition has not been welcomed by the market leader Sony,"
Also Microsoft: We want Gamepass on EVERYTHING & we'll keep buying up AAA thrid party publishers & IP's to force you to get them via Gamepass!" Mwwahahaha! 🙄
Wonder even IF they'd gotten their wish if they'd do so via streaming rather than a native port in any case!

@get2sammyb I'd like the gears series + lost odyssey and infinite undiscovery

You make many good points, @Godot25, and whilst you say that Spencer said they would not be going third-party 6 months ago, things change. Indeed, since that time, they have released Starfield to middling reviews, and will have seen the uptick in both console sales and subscriber numbers, and of course sales of the actual game (which have been pretty good, all things considered). If those figures do not impress, then the situation will be reviewed, and whilst I agree with you that Microsoft will lose money in all the areas you highlight, they will also have to take into consideration:

*The cost of developing a new console

*The likely number of sales of consoles versus that cost

*Just how much money they can afford to lose on each console in order to remain semi-competitive

*The cost of sustaining Game Pass with a dwindling number of subscribers because people have switched to the market leader (PlayStation). Each and every third-party game that enters the service has to be paid for, and that cost is covered by subscribers. There will come a point at which the service is loss making, meaning they are paying more for the games that go on the service, than they raise in revenue from the subscribers. When that happens, the service is no longer viable on their own platform.

*Just how much they will have to pay for each third-party exclusive. News flash: they won't, because it's just not viable to do so. Indeed, Xbox no longer offer third-party exclusives because the cost of paying for third-party on a platform that has fewer than 30% of gamers as opposed to the PlayStation, which, with more than 70% of gamers is likely unrealistic as the return on such an investment is unachievable. Meanwhile, Sony is able to secure third-party exclusives on a regular basis for a much more affordable cost than the Xbox, and is why we see them on a regular basis on the PlayStation.

Thus, if Microsoft do not think they will sell sufficient consoles at a price (likely a loss) that will entice people into the Xbox ecosystem that will then cover the cost of developing, manufacturing, and shipping those consoles, which in turn has a direct corelation to the number of subscribers they can expect to have for Game Pass, making the service less and less viable. On top of that they already know that they cannot afford/obtain third-party exclusives. Then, on the other side, more and more people will be moving over to the goliath that is the PlayStation. People that previously gamed on the Xbox only, will simply give up and move over to the market leader as they do have the third-party exclusives that the Xbox does not (and that's before you start to take into account Sony's first-party output, and their own services).

So, faced with all that, potentially, every one of them being loss making, giving up being a console manufacturer is definitely on the cards. and even more so after the Xbox CFO Tim Stuart said just this week that Microsoft was no longer focusing on consoles, but instead on "content and services". So whilst you rightly list all the things that bring in money, that is not the same as making money. Basically, if all those things bring in less money than they cost, then they become financially unviable, making the move to just offering content (first-party games) and services (Game Pass everywhere) a much better option...

@Fiendish-Beaver I mean yeah. Sure. They can revisit their approach. But they are not.
Mainly because Stuart was talking about Microsoft's position in relation to ABK which many sites including this one conveniently ignore. But whatever.

I would argue that game that has OC Score of 85 can hardly be described as "having middling reviews" but whatever.

My point is that Starfield exactly prove that having exclusive first-party content is a way to go. Because Starfield brought highest uptick of new Game Pass subscribers since service was started and it directly led to more Series X/S sales. So info that Microsoft got from Starfield is "it works, we just need more of it." Which doesn't sound like "we are going third party."

It would be even stupider to go third-party since Microsoft currently doesn't know if having COD in Game Pass day one would not swing things more in their favour. On the other hand if they are undecided they still needs to work on next-gen system because it takes several years to research and make next-gen console. So they basically can't back off from next-gen.

I would still argue that having 30% from every transaction in you ecosystem with 50 million console sold brings more revenue then going third-party.

Goal for Microsoft now should be to finish ***** of first-party games they have in development and then release them and AFTER that decide what to do next. Which won't be sooner than 2027.

i think they'll still make consoles , maybe they'll eventually go towards digital only consoles like the S and skip the disc version , maybe release an add on if you really want to use discs. but i can also see game pass being on playstation , sony would be dumb not to allow this, and it would be a win win for every one , since games like elder scroll would be playable on playstation. i think they would all be cloud gaming based though.

Somehow we keep getting here. Minecraft came up in this and considering how much ABK news was covered this year and Sony and Nintendo signed 10 year contracts for Call of Duty(remember Ubisoft has streaming rights for Cloud games). PlayStation and Nintendo are still getting some legacy content from Bethesda...that should be fine lesson learned
Microsoft is getting 70% cuts as a publisher. They already have a large library of games on PlayStation and Nintendo. That's as close to PlayStation getting Xbox games as they'll ever get.

I would love this 1 of my favourite games was crackdown

We knew this in 2017 when Phil Spencer took Xbox 3rd party on stage at E3.

@NCGhostOfLOWERD Except Xbox is nothing more than a 3rd party publisher since 2017, and Phil Spencer stating he wants more screens not hardware sales on stage at E3 confirms this. Like Thanos, Xbox on Nintendo and PlayStation (because they failed at everything else) is an inevitability. That's why it was naive for any Xbox fan to buy a Series X. Pay more for less is their motto, just look at their controllers since the 360 to see how they enjoy being gouged for less than the competition offers. Simple facts.

I agree with much of what you say, @Godot25, but still I do not see it as a forgone conclusion that Microsoft will make another iteration of the Xbox. That decision may have already been made, if not, it soon will be.

However, I think you are mixing up revenue with profit. They are not the same. Even if Microsoft were making 1 billion a month from everything they do with the Xbox, if it is costing them 1.2 billion a month, it just makes no sense to continue, and we all know that it is currently all one way traffic and that Sony is steaming ahead. If the writing is on the wall right now, even if a new console had been greenlit a year or more ago, the plug can still be pulled. Just as when a game is in development, and then circumstances change, and it suddenly isn't.

With regards to Starfield, take a look at the Steam reviews; the current score is 68 from 81,825 reviews. That is a much more accurate assessment of a games quality than the 83 from the 90 'professional' reviewers. And I would suggest that 68 is a middling review score, particularly when it was a flagship release. One that was potentially make or break for the Xbox brand.

As for CoD, it remains to be seen where people will play it, but seems as the game will be on the PlayStation anyway, it makes absolutely no difference whether Xbox is a third-party publisher or a platform holder, because they will still get 70% of the money from sales on the PlayStation, The only caveat is how many people play the game on the Game Pass instead, and whether people choose to temporarily subscribe to the Game Pass to do so. However, as many people that play CoD on the PlayStation will have a large number of friends that also play the game on the PlayStation, unless they are willing to leave them behind, or they leave en masse, the majority will likely simply continue to play the game on the PlayStation, particularly if they are the ones that play the game for months at a time. When it comes to CoD, there will probably be a small uptick in subscriber numbers on the Xbox, but it will a temporary uptick, just long enough to complete the campaign and maybe try out the multiplayer. I don't think there will be a significant and, more importantly, permanent increase in Game Pass subscribers as if you are really invested in CoD, you will not only have your other PlayStation friends, and the community, but all the skins etc. and that all important Platinum Trophy to get, which are likely to be a greater pull than playing the game on the Xbox (bearing in mind that means purchasing an Xbox or a PC, which is far more costly than simply buying the game on the PlayStation. After all, CoD is not like Starfield, in that it is not an exclusive game, whereby if you don't buy an Xbox or a PC you cannot play it).

Love the idea

Sounds great on paper but I'm not really interested in any xbox exclusive atm (don't care for Kojima).

I share the same sentiment that most do here: If I wanted an xbox I would've already gotten one.