@Recover20 I agree. But my point was more about people bitching about Microsoft "being exclusionary" when it's Sony that is way more "exclusionary"
Which is not a bad thing of course. Every company has their own strategy and they are trying to make it work. But at least people should stop being hypocrite.
@Northern_munkey It's nowhere near exclusionary as Wolverine/Spider-Man 2. Because while yes, PlayStation 5 is selling way better then Series X/S, Sony is still ignoring PC market with day one releases. Microsoft is not. So looking at it only through optics of "Xbox is selling worse" is really disingenuous.
So let's say it through numbers Sony with Spider-Man/Wolverine is ignoring 300+ million PC users, 130 million Switch users, 25 million Series X/S users Microsoft with Indiana Jones is ignoring 50 million PlayStation users and 130 million Switch users. So who exactly is more exclusionary?
Indiana Jones and Blade are just about fact that PlayStation users aren't used to being overlooked with AAA releases and they are used to play everything from JRPG games to big named licensed IP's.
@get2sammyb Yeah. Bungie was always at it's best when they have knife to their necks.
Halo 2
Destiny The Taken King
Destiny 2 Forsaken
and now.
But there is no "winner" in this situation. Contrary to popular belief, Sony "taking over" Bungie will not be a win, because Sony don't have a clue how to run live service studio. That's why they bought them in the first place. And let's not pretend that Bungie are clueless since they are running one live service game for 10 years.
Sony spent 3,6 billion, so if Bungie is not successful, they effectively "blew" the money. They will save part of 1 billion retention bonuses though. And if they will take over Bungie, it could lead to many devs wanted to go out, since culture of Bungie is based on "***** all of them, we are Bungie" attitude. And it's not like they will have a problem getting a jobs since Seattle is pretty competitive place in terms of gaming studios.
Stuart was talking about games and services in relation to Activision Blizzard specifically. But in age when every non-story have to be turn to shocking story, this is where we ended up. People latched on 50% YoY sales drop of Xbox consoles in Europe, tied this to Stuart's statement taken out of context and suddenly Game Pass is coming to PlayStation and Microsoft is exiting console business.
@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.
@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.
@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.
@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
To think that Destiny 2 was at best when Bungie was under Activision is really crazy. Everybody thought that it was Activision that was forcing Bungie to make bad decisions but it really seems like biggest enemy of Bungie is Bungie.
@Ainu20 Grubb said "I just want to clear it up, this game is not being worked on right now,” says Grubb, as spotted by Insider Gaming. “Just full stop. This game is not being worked on in any way, at any studio.”
After Schreier posted his "game is not dead" he said: "I'm happy to hear this. Like I said — this game is very unlikely to happen without a partner like Sony. And Sony seems to want nothing to do with it now. Maybe someone at Saber gets this together to pitch to someone else."
@DonaldMcRonald Yeah. But Grubb is hardly someone with bad track records.
Or I'm sure it's coincidence that Sony deleted KOTOR remake announcement from their official YT channel, social media and their own blog, right? And CEO of Embracer refused to comment on status of the project. It really sounds like everything is going smoothly.
@DonaldMcRonald Grubb said the project is dead and Sony wants out from it based from his source from Sony. He just wrongly assumed that project is dead because Sony have no interest in funding it anymore.
Schreier's sources are from Saber Interactive (developer). And they are still working on the game.
So, who will fund the development if Sony is out? Hardly Embracer (owner of Saber) since they have huge financial issues themselves.
So basically Sony wants to have nothing to do with this project anymore, but Saber is still keep working on it in hope that they will secure new publisher.
Avowed, Hellblade 2, MFS2024 and Towerborne all had trailers during june's showcase with 2024 "release year" Jesus. Microsoft Flight Sim even has year in it's name. It's hardly coming out in 2025.
Hellblade 2 was part of marketing push for Xbox so it's clear that they are ramping up for release. Towerborne was playable during Gamescom so it's also clear that game is close to release. ARA: History Untold is already in testing with players.
Stalker 2 is also pretty much given for 2024 since devs moved to Prague from Ukraine. Call of Duty is for sure coming in 2024. Only question marks are 33 Immortals and Ark 2.
And as I said, XGS boss hinted for more AAA games for second half of 2024.
So at least try to get your fact straight instead of playing dumb.
@ChrisDeku I would consider it with regards of pricing.
Helldivers 2 is 39,99€ on Steam
Hellblade 2 does not have a pricetag yet but there is no doubt it will be in 59,99€ - 69,99€ range.
I would not look at first Hellblade game and pass a judgement. Because while first game was budget title (and was sold for 30 bucks) made by 20 people, Ninja Theory currently has more then 140 employees. So I really doubt it's remotely comparable.
@MrMagic currently Stalker 2 ARA: History Untold Hellblade 2 Avowed Towerborne Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 Call of Duty 2024 Ark 2 33 Immortals
WoW is getting expansion and so is Diablo 4.
But XGS boss hinted at 4 big first-party games (1 per quarter) and since only big first-party games (not counting COD) are Hellblade 2 and Avowed, it seems like there will be more in second half of 2024. My hunch is Indiana Jones since according to the Bethesda FTC leak it was supposed to be out in 2022. So...reveal at TGA and release in october-november 2024?
2024 was always wishful thinking in my eyes. Wolverine leads are same guys who worked on Miles Morales, which was only finished at the end of 2020. So they basically started their work on Wolverine in 2021. Even as impressive as Insomniac devs are, 3 years for AAA game is just too short. Especially since it is not a "sequel"
It took 5 years for Spider-Man 1 team to create a sequel.
Honestly. I'm fully expecting 2025 "bait" during next year showcase but game will slip into 2026.
@somnambulance But the goal of those companies are to earn more money. ROI for successful live service game is just incomprehensibly higher then for single-player games.
Apex Legends came out in 2019 and earned EA more than 2 billion dollars. I really doubt that if you counted every Naughty Dog game (for example) in last 3 gen all together you would get 2 billions in revenue
@PixelDragon Yeah. It's almost like Jim Ryan have not said: "Our Business Would Never Recover' If Microsoft Degraded Call of Duty on PlayStation," right? Luckily we have his statement in writing
@Kevw2006 But Game Pass is not only about first-party games, as you for sure know. And I really doubt that Sony would allow Game Pass on PlayStation even if it was "first-party games only" because that would include Call of Duty. And Sony pretty much relies on 30% cut from Call of Duty sales.
Game Pass with only first-party games is nonsensical. Nobody would subscribe for service that is providing 1 game every three months. And it's hardly imaginable that it would be sustainable for Microsoft to provide that kind of service. You need third-party content to sustain subscription service. Otherwise you are cooked.
EA Play is allowed on PlayStation because they are not including "third-party" games in their service. It's just their own games. And if you remember, Sony even had a problem with that for a long time.
@PixelDragon Microsoft tried to pretend that they are nobody, so they can own ABK. ...same as Sony pretended that PlayStation would go bankrupt if Microsoft will own Call of Duty.
It's almost like every company tried to pursue hyperbole to "win." Shocker. I know.
@somnambulance Nah. They very much know it. But they also know that if they transform that IP into live service game successfully, they will earn significantly more money. Risk is higher of course, but payout is just not comparable.
@Kevw2006 No.
Because if you stop making consoles you are at the mercy of others. Sony could refuse to put Game Pass on PlayStation and then you are basically *****. And I have huge doubts that you can offset all lost Game Pass/Gold revenue by releasing your games on PlayStation. Especially since you need to let 30% of your revenue to Sony. And I don't think Sony would allow GP on PlayStation even if Microsoft was not making consoles, because Game Pass directly competes with their own service.
There is no doubt that Microsoft is already working on next Xbox and they will release it. Even if Series X/S will sell less than Xbox One.
@Kevw2006 It's not that hard to understand
They care about sales, but their business strategy is not dependent entirely on sales of console. They are growing their business despite selling less consoles. Unlike Sony and Nintendo. They go only as far as sales of consoles will let them. You could saw that perfectly during WiiU era.
If they cared only about sales of console, they wouldn't release first-party games on PC day one (like Sony). But they see PC (especially Game Pass on PC) as a growth vector for their subscription service. But on the other hand if there is a guy who wants to game on console, they have Xbox for him. That's why Starfield (for example) is not on PlayStation.
@Kevw2006 Nah. Because console is easiest way to monetise your audience. That's why Microsoft won't stop making them.
Because you are getting 30% from every purchase on your console, and you can easily sell Ultimate tier of GamePass because you are bundling Gold and Game Pass (Gold does not exist on PC). You will be loosing all of that.
Also. Majority of Game Pass subs are still on Xbox console and not on PC. And since Sony won't allow Game Pass on PlayStation it's not like they have a chance to not make consoles.
But the point of Xbox's business strategy is that they are not "entirely" reliant on sales of consoles as PlayStation or Nintendo. In last quarter 30% of all PlayStation revenue came from sales of hardware. On Xbox it was only 19%.
@DonaldMcRonald But that's the goal for Microsoft. Not how many consoles they sold, but how many MAU they have in their games.
And you can see that pretty clear if you look at their financials. Without ABK of course. Xbox had 3,16 billion during last quarter from "Content and services." PlayStation had 4,3 billion from "Contend and services" segment. While having twice of addressable target audience on consoles and outselling Xbox sometimes more than 2:1. Strange, isn't it. It's almost like a pivot of Microsoft to broaden their service outside of their own ecosystem works in their favour.
But general public just wants to drag them into "who sold more consoles" despite the fact that with ABK Xbox is more profitable division the PlayStation while selling less then 50% of what competition is selling.
And it's absolutely irrelevant if they created Minecraft, since they are profiting from it for last 10 years. And they are getting 70% of all revenue of Call of Duty (and other ABK games) on PlayStation. Who even cares if they are selling less consoles tbh?
And let's not pretend like Starfield was not impressive. Game was instantly 6th best selling game in US despite the fact that it ignored PlayStation as a platform and it was available to subscribers of Game Pass. And it also contributed to highest one-day addition of Game Pass subscribers in history of service.
@BrettAwesome 25 millions consoles sold during 3 years is "being stuck to the PC market" since when?
Jesus. I have a feeling that some users around here wants Xbox consoles to be failure, so Microsoft will ditch them and starts releasing XGS/Bethesda games on PlayStation.
But I have a news for you. That won't happen unless Sony will allow Game Pass on PlayStation. And we all know Sony won't allow it.
@Flaming_Kaiser I'm not defending state of MW3, but I understand why ABK management pushed for it's release, especially since buyout by Microsoft was in real danger.
What I was criticising was implication, that Modern Warfare 3 is trend moving forward. Which is not.
Wow. Are they dumb? If this device is not generating profit then I really don't understand why it exists in it's current form. If it supported cloud streaming you could theoretically earn new customer and earn money on subscription that would not be possible without this device. But since you are required to have PS5 to use it, you are already PlayStation customer.
No wonder PlayStation division margins are so slim.
Big difference is that while Xbox One was at that point "closed ecosystem" with Microsoft pushing that device, Series X/S is really one of the options to enter ecosystem ie. you can subscribe into Game Pass without owning an Xbox console and Microsoft will still have your money. PlayStation is still all about selling consoles.
And after ABK whole point of comparing console sales is pretty much irrelevant since Xbox division is on par with PlayStation division in terms of revenue, while Xbox division has higher margins.
in TOP 20 most played games on PlayStation during october there were four games that Microsoft owns.
@Jswift56 Talking about overreaction, right?
People are delusional if they think that this is some kind of trend. Remember, Sledgehammer had 16 months to make this game in times, when AAA games takes 4-5 years to make. All because ABK execs were terrified what will happen if regulators would block ABK deal and they would be without Call of Duty.
2024 will have Treyarch's new Call of Duty that has usual 3-years dev cycle.
Not to mention fact that despite low scores, game is selling like hotcakes.
But it is clear that moving forward (after Treyarch's COD), doing annual releases is unsustainable. And I hope that Microsoft will realise that and they will switch to bi-annual releases with longer support for existing COD games.
@Swirly No, it does not. It did in one month (april 2022 if I remember correctly), but that was because of Series X shortages. But some websites took the info and extrapolated it to the whole three years for some reason.
@UltimateOtaku91 Xbox has way higher digital copies ratio than PlayStation. It's well known fact. Also you have to realise that MW3 copies bundled with PlayStation 5 are counted as physical copies despite fact that there are codes inside boxes, not game discs.
It's Modern Warfare 2 all over again. That game in physical was 71% PlayStation, 29% Xbox. When counted digital it shifted 57% PlayStation, 33% Xbox, 11% PC. So it's pretty clear that Xbox is performing better when you include digital and Xbox platform is skewed more towards digital distribution.
Let's not forget that Series X and Series S has +- 50/50 split and Series S is digital only console. PS5 vs PS5 DE is split of 80/20.
@Grumblevolcano Taking paycut is more about being compassionate, but it's hardly revelant to the economics of running a business.
If you take Bungie for example. Considering median yearly salary of one developer in Seattle (where Bungie is located) is 134k dollars per year. Not counting expenses that you as a employer have on your employee (health coverage etc.) No cutting of execs pay will match that, because it's not like there is 1000 Bungie execs that can cut their salary. There are just a few of them. Same thing for Epic.
Nintendo survived WiiU era because they had huge amount of money in reserves from Wii success (they also had 3DS). Not because Iwata cut his salary. As I said. It was more about "gesture" and not about real economic policy.
@nessisonett Thing is... Companies like Epic, Microsoft, Sony are successful and profitable in part because they know when and where to "cut the fat." It is cynical, but it's also making sense.
@themightyant Well, their game Matter is supposedly cancelled (in December 2020) and Marathon doesn't look so hot according to people who attended Marathon summit at the start of this year.
And I agree that it takes many people to sustain GaaS game, but still 1200 people with one game with declining popularity is just recipe for disaster. And while technically Destiny 2 is new game, it was basically forced upon Bungie by Bobby Kotick. It is two, but at the same time it isn't...
@themightyant Yeah. Nobody is saying that Destiny 2 is dead or anything. But it is clearly not enough to sustain 1200 employees of Bungie. 1200 employees is just ridiculous number for studio that haven't released new game in almost 10 years. If Bungie already got Marathon out I could see that working for them.
For comparision, Blizzard has 5000 employees, but they have hugely successful (albeit hated) Diablo Immortal and live services with World of Warcraft, Diablo 4 and Overwatch 2. And they will probably announce their survival game (Odyssey) during the weekend.
@ROTTIEMAN16 Nope. There was a talk about Bungie purchase by Microsoft for much of 2020 and 2021. That's why was kinda surprising when Sony announced that they are buying Bungie.
It was such a "talk" that even Bungie CEO had to comment on them. He said that they are not in talk with anybody about acquisition. Which proved to be ***** because they sell to Sony few weeks later.
And even Microsoft internal documents had Bungie on the "shortlist" of what to buy.
@RadioHedgeFund Nope. According to rumors, Bungie was willing to sell to Microsoft for less then Sony bough them, but dealbreaker for Microsoft was fact that Bungie has requested too much autonomy and Microsoft did not liked it.
And when Microsoft went heels deep into ABK stuff, it was clear that they would not buy Bungie.
And yet, Xbox had their best Q1 quarter in history of division.
It's almost like they are not relying on sales of hardware as much as Sony. Which is kinda obvious if you are releasing your first-party games on PC at same time as on Xbox consoles.
But I fully expect that people just won't get it for sake of console wars. Same as they did not get that ABK purchase was mainly about gateway to mobile and not about Call of Duty...
I would prefer if Insomniac stopped being Marvel company and start making something original.
I would rather have Sunset Overdrive 2 then Spider-Man 3/Venom/Wolverine.
But I'm probably in minority, so I'm not gonna hold my breath.
I would not be surprised if even that GAAS game that Insomniac is making would be with Marvel IP.
Comments 775
Re: Disney Doesn't Think It Was 'Overly Exclusionary' to Cut Planned PS5 Version of Indiana Jones
@Recover20 I agree.
But my point was more about people bitching about Microsoft "being exclusionary" when it's Sony that is way more "exclusionary"
Which is not a bad thing of course. Every company has their own strategy and they are trying to make it work. But at least people should stop being hypocrite.
Re: Disney Doesn't Think It Was 'Overly Exclusionary' to Cut Planned PS5 Version of Indiana Jones
@Northern_munkey It's nowhere near exclusionary as Wolverine/Spider-Man 2.
Because while yes, PlayStation 5 is selling way better then Series X/S, Sony is still ignoring PC market with day one releases. Microsoft is not. So looking at it only through optics of "Xbox is selling worse" is really disingenuous.
So let's say it through numbers
Sony with Spider-Man/Wolverine is ignoring 300+ million PC users, 130 million Switch users, 25 million Series X/S users
Microsoft with Indiana Jones is ignoring 50 million PlayStation users and 130 million Switch users.
So who exactly is more exclusionary?
Indiana Jones and Blade are just about fact that PlayStation users aren't used to being overlooked with AAA releases and they are used to play everything from JRPG games to big named licensed IP's.
Re: Lead Bungie Staff Fear 'Total Sony Takeover' After Layoffs, Delays
@Art_Vandelay Lol. Bethesda was never promised "freedom." Just that they will keep operational structure.
Re: Lead Bungie Staff Fear 'Total Sony Takeover' After Layoffs, Delays
@get2sammyb Yeah. Bungie was always at it's best when they have knife to their necks.
Halo 2
Destiny The Taken King
Destiny 2 Forsaken
and now.
But there is no "winner" in this situation. Contrary to popular belief, Sony "taking over" Bungie will not be a win, because Sony don't have a clue how to run live service studio. That's why they bought them in the first place. And let's not pretend that Bungie are clueless since they are running one live service game for 10 years.
Sony spent 3,6 billion, so if Bungie is not successful, they effectively "blew" the money. They will save part of 1 billion retention bonuses though. And if they will take over Bungie, it could lead to many devs wanted to go out, since culture of Bungie is based on "***** all of them, we are Bungie" attitude. And it's not like they will have a problem getting a jobs since Seattle is pretty competitive place in terms of gaming studios.
Re: Just One Day Later, Microsoft Has 'No Plans to Bring Game Pass' to PS5, PS4
People maybe should read more properly.
Stuart was talking about games and services in relation to Activision Blizzard specifically. But in age when every non-story have to be turn to shocking story, this is where we ended up. People latched on 50% YoY sales drop of Xbox consoles in Europe, tied this to Stuart's statement taken out of context and suddenly Game Pass is coming to PlayStation and Microsoft is exiting console business.
Re: Microsoft Still Wants to Put Xbox Game Pass on PS5, PS4
@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.
Re: Microsoft Still Wants to Put Xbox Game Pass on PS5, PS4
@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
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.
Re: Microsoft Still Wants to Put Xbox Game Pass on PS5, PS4
@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.
Re: Microsoft Still Wants to Put Xbox Game Pass on PS5, PS4
@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
Re: Destiny 2's Latest Microtransaction Is So Bad Bungie's Already Removed It from PS5, PS4
To think that Destiny 2 was at best when Bungie was under Activision is really crazy. Everybody thought that it was Activision that was forcing Bungie to make bad decisions but it really seems like biggest enemy of Bungie is Bungie.
Re: US Children Want Subscriptions and Currencies for Christmas, Not Games
@BetaRabbit64 I mean. You have new games included in subscription. So you are kinda asking for new games.
Re: Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic PS5 Remake Reportedly Not Dead, Actually
@Ainu20 Grubb said
"I just want to clear it up, this game is not being worked on right now,” says Grubb, as spotted by Insider Gaming. “Just full stop. This game is not being worked on in any way, at any studio.”
After Schreier posted his "game is not dead" he said: "I'm happy to hear this. Like I said — this game is very unlikely to happen without a partner like Sony. And Sony seems to want nothing to do with it now. Maybe someone at Saber gets this together to pitch to someone else."
Re: Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic PS5 Remake Reportedly Not Dead, Actually
@DonaldMcRonald Yeah. But Grubb is hardly someone with bad track records.
Or I'm sure it's coincidence that Sony deleted KOTOR remake announcement from their official YT channel, social media and their own blog, right? And CEO of Embracer refused to comment on status of the project. It really sounds like everything is going smoothly.
Re: Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic PS5 Remake Reportedly Not Dead, Actually
@DonaldMcRonald Grubb said the project is dead and Sony wants out from it based from his source from Sony. He just wrongly assumed that project is dead because Sony have no interest in funding it anymore.
Schreier's sources are from Saber Interactive (developer). And they are still working on the game.
So, who will fund the development if Sony is out? Hardly Embracer (owner of Saber) since they have huge financial issues themselves.
Re: Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic PS5 Remake Reportedly Not Dead, Actually
So basically Sony wants to have nothing to do with this project anymore, but Saber is still keep working on it in hope that they will secure new publisher.
Re: Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic Remake Reportedly Deader than Alderaan
@Torque
Avowed, Hellblade 2, MFS2024 and Towerborne all had trailers during june's showcase with 2024 "release year"
Jesus. Microsoft Flight Sim even has year in it's name. It's hardly coming out in 2025.
Hellblade 2 was part of marketing push for Xbox so it's clear that they are ramping up for release. Towerborne was playable during Gamescom so it's also clear that game is close to release. ARA: History Untold is already in testing with players.
Stalker 2 is also pretty much given for 2024 since devs moved to Prague from Ukraine. Call of Duty is for sure coming in 2024.
Only question marks are 33 Immortals and Ark 2.
And as I said, XGS boss hinted for more AAA games for second half of 2024.
So at least try to get your fact straight instead of playing dumb.
Re: Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic Remake Reportedly Deader than Alderaan
@ChrisDeku I would consider it with regards of pricing.
Helldivers 2 is 39,99€ on Steam
Hellblade 2 does not have a pricetag yet but there is no doubt it will be in 59,99€ - 69,99€ range.
I would not look at first Hellblade game and pass a judgement. Because while first game was budget title (and was sold for 30 bucks) made by 20 people, Ninja Theory currently has more then 140 employees. So I really doubt it's remotely comparable.
Re: Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic Remake Reportedly Deader than Alderaan
@Torque What?
All of those games are confirmed to be out in 2024. Barring a huge delay of course. Which in case of Ark 2 is possible.
Re: Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic Remake Reportedly Deader than Alderaan
@MrMagic currently
Stalker 2
ARA: History Untold
Hellblade 2
Avowed
Towerborne
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024
Call of Duty 2024
Ark 2
33 Immortals
WoW is getting expansion and so is Diablo 4.
But XGS boss hinted at 4 big first-party games (1 per quarter) and since only big first-party games (not counting COD) are Hellblade 2 and Avowed, it seems like there will be more in second half of 2024. My hunch is Indiana Jones since according to the Bethesda FTC leak it was supposed to be out in 2022. So...reveal at TGA and release in october-november 2024?
Re: Rumour: Marvel's Wolverine PS5 Release Date Reportedly 2025, Not Next Year
2024 was always wishful thinking in my eyes.
Wolverine leads are same guys who worked on Miles Morales, which was only finished at the end of 2020. So they basically started their work on Wolverine in 2021. Even as impressive as Insomniac devs are, 3 years for AAA game is just too short. Especially since it is not a "sequel"
It took 5 years for Spider-Man 1 team to create a sequel.
Honestly. I'm fully expecting 2025 "bait" during next year showcase but game will slip into 2026.
Re: Single Player Wonder Woman Game May Still Have Live-Service Elements
@somnambulance But the goal of those companies are to earn more money. ROI for successful live service game is just incomprehensibly higher then for single-player games.
Apex Legends came out in 2019 and earned EA more than 2 billion dollars. I really doubt that if you counted every Naughty Dog game (for example) in last 3 gen all together you would get 2 billions in revenue
Re: The Last of Us 2 PS5 Remaster Announced, Has a Brand New Survival Mode, $10 Upgrade Path
Naughty Dog this gen
2 remasters
1 "remake"
0 original games
simply brilliant...
Re: PS5 Is Now Above PS4 in USA, While Its New-Gen Rival Flounders
@PixelDragon Yeah. It's almost like Jim Ryan have not said: "Our Business Would Never Recover' If Microsoft Degraded Call of Duty on PlayStation," right?
Luckily we have his statement in writing
Re: PS5 Is Now Above PS4 in USA, While Its New-Gen Rival Flounders
@Kevw2006 But Game Pass is not only about first-party games, as you for sure know. And I really doubt that Sony would allow Game Pass on PlayStation even if it was "first-party games only" because that would include Call of Duty. And Sony pretty much relies on 30% cut from Call of Duty sales.
Game Pass with only first-party games is nonsensical. Nobody would subscribe for service that is providing 1 game every three months. And it's hardly imaginable that it would be sustainable for Microsoft to provide that kind of service. You need third-party content to sustain subscription service. Otherwise you are cooked.
EA Play is allowed on PlayStation because they are not including "third-party" games in their service. It's just their own games. And if you remember, Sony even had a problem with that for a long time.
Re: PS5 Is Now Above PS4 in USA, While Its New-Gen Rival Flounders
@PixelDragon Microsoft tried to pretend that they are nobody, so they can own ABK.
...same as Sony pretended that PlayStation would go bankrupt if Microsoft will own Call of Duty.
It's almost like every company tried to pursue hyperbole to "win." Shocker. I know.
Re: Single Player Wonder Woman Game May Still Have Live-Service Elements
@somnambulance Nah. They very much know it.
But they also know that if they transform that IP into live service game successfully, they will earn significantly more money. Risk is higher of course, but payout is just not comparable.
Re: PS5 Is Now Above PS4 in USA, While Its New-Gen Rival Flounders
@Kevw2006 No.
Because if you stop making consoles you are at the mercy of others. Sony could refuse to put Game Pass on PlayStation and then you are basically *****. And I have huge doubts that you can offset all lost Game Pass/Gold revenue by releasing your games on PlayStation. Especially since you need to let 30% of your revenue to Sony. And I don't think Sony would allow GP on PlayStation even if Microsoft was not making consoles, because Game Pass directly competes with their own service.
There is no doubt that Microsoft is already working on next Xbox and they will release it. Even if Series X/S will sell less than Xbox One.
Re: PS5 Is Now Above PS4 in USA, While Its New-Gen Rival Flounders
@Kevw2006 It's not that hard to understand
They care about sales, but their business strategy is not dependent entirely on sales of console. They are growing their business despite selling less consoles. Unlike Sony and Nintendo. They go only as far as sales of consoles will let them. You could saw that perfectly during WiiU era.
If they cared only about sales of console, they wouldn't release first-party games on PC day one (like Sony). But they see PC (especially Game Pass on PC) as a growth vector for their subscription service. But on the other hand if there is a guy who wants to game on console, they have Xbox for him. That's why Starfield (for example) is not on PlayStation.
Re: PS5 Is Now Above PS4 in USA, While Its New-Gen Rival Flounders
@Kevw2006 Nah. Because console is easiest way to monetise your audience. That's why Microsoft won't stop making them.
Because you are getting 30% from every purchase on your console, and you can easily sell Ultimate tier of GamePass because you are bundling Gold and Game Pass (Gold does not exist on PC). You will be loosing all of that.
Also. Majority of Game Pass subs are still on Xbox console and not on PC. And since Sony won't allow Game Pass on PlayStation it's not like they have a chance to not make consoles.
But the point of Xbox's business strategy is that they are not "entirely" reliant on sales of consoles as PlayStation or Nintendo. In last quarter 30% of all PlayStation revenue came from sales of hardware. On Xbox it was only 19%.
Re: PS5 Is Now Above PS4 in USA, While Its New-Gen Rival Flounders
@DonaldMcRonald But that's the goal for Microsoft. Not how many consoles they sold, but how many MAU they have in their games.
And you can see that pretty clear if you look at their financials. Without ABK of course. Xbox had 3,16 billion during last quarter from "Content and services." PlayStation had 4,3 billion from "Contend and services" segment. While having twice of addressable target audience on consoles and outselling Xbox sometimes more than 2:1. Strange, isn't it. It's almost like a pivot of Microsoft to broaden their service outside of their own ecosystem works in their favour.
But general public just wants to drag them into "who sold more consoles" despite the fact that with ABK Xbox is more profitable division the PlayStation while selling less then 50% of what competition is selling.
And it's absolutely irrelevant if they created Minecraft, since they are profiting from it for last 10 years. And they are getting 70% of all revenue of Call of Duty (and other ABK games) on PlayStation. Who even cares if they are selling less consoles tbh?
And let's not pretend like Starfield was not impressive. Game was instantly 6th best selling game in US despite the fact that it ignored PlayStation as a platform and it was available to subscribers of Game Pass. And it also contributed to highest one-day addition of Game Pass subscribers in history of service.
Re: PS5 Is Now Above PS4 in USA, While Its New-Gen Rival Flounders
@BrettAwesome 25 millions consoles sold during 3 years is "being stuck to the PC market" since when?
Jesus. I have a feeling that some users around here wants Xbox consoles to be failure, so Microsoft will ditch them and starts releasing XGS/Bethesda games on PlayStation.
But I have a news for you. That won't happen unless Sony will allow Game Pass on PlayStation. And we all know Sony won't allow it.
Re: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (PS5) - Bloated, Undercooked, and Outdated All at Once
@Flaming_Kaiser I'm not defending state of MW3, but I understand why ABK management pushed for it's release, especially since buyout by Microsoft was in real danger.
What I was criticising was implication, that Modern Warfare 3 is trend moving forward. Which is not.
Re: Sony Says PS Portal Wasn't Designed to Make a Profit
Wow. Are they dumb?
If this device is not generating profit then I really don't understand why it exists in it's current form.
If it supported cloud streaming you could theoretically earn new customer and earn money on subscription that would not be possible without this device.
But since you are required to have PS5 to use it, you are already PlayStation customer.
No wonder PlayStation division margins are so slim.
Re: PS5 Is Now Above PS4 in USA, While Its New-Gen Rival Flounders
Big difference is that while Xbox One was at that point "closed ecosystem" with Microsoft pushing that device, Series X/S is really one of the options to enter ecosystem ie. you can subscribe into Game Pass without owning an Xbox console and Microsoft will still have your money. PlayStation is still all about selling consoles.
And after ABK whole point of comparing console sales is pretty much irrelevant since Xbox division is on par with PlayStation division in terms of revenue, while Xbox division has higher margins.
in TOP 20 most played games on PlayStation during october there were four games that Microsoft owns.
Re: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (PS5) - Bloated, Undercooked, and Outdated All at Once
@Jswift56 Talking about overreaction, right?
People are delusional if they think that this is some kind of trend. Remember, Sledgehammer had 16 months to make this game in times, when AAA games takes 4-5 years to make. All because ABK execs were terrified what will happen if regulators would block ABK deal and they would be without Call of Duty.
2024 will have Treyarch's new Call of Duty that has usual 3-years dev cycle.
Not to mention fact that despite low scores, game is selling like hotcakes.
But it is clear that moving forward (after Treyarch's COD), doing annual releases is unsustainable. And I hope that Microsoft will realise that and they will switch to bi-annual releases with longer support for existing COD games.
Re: A Whopping 80% of Modern Warfare 3's Physical UK Sales Were on PS5, PS4
@Swirly No, it does not. It did in one month (april 2022 if I remember correctly), but that was because of Series X shortages. But some websites took the info and extrapolated it to the whole three years for some reason.
Re: A Whopping 80% of Modern Warfare 3's Physical UK Sales Were on PS5, PS4
@Jay767 Unless they can get Game Pass on PlayStation/Nintendo that would be dumb as hell...
Re: A Whopping 80% of Modern Warfare 3's Physical UK Sales Were on PS5, PS4
@UltimateOtaku91 Xbox has way higher digital copies ratio than PlayStation. It's well known fact. Also you have to realise that MW3 copies bundled with PlayStation 5 are counted as physical copies despite fact that there are codes inside boxes, not game discs.
It's Modern Warfare 2 all over again. That game in physical was
71% PlayStation, 29% Xbox. When counted digital it shifted 57% PlayStation, 33% Xbox, 11% PC. So it's pretty clear that Xbox is performing better when you include digital and Xbox platform is skewed more towards digital distribution.
Let's not forget that Series X and Series S has +- 50/50 split and Series S is digital only console. PS5 vs PS5 DE is split of 80/20.
Re: A Whopping 80% of Modern Warfare 3's Physical UK Sales Were on PS5, PS4
And Microsoft is thanking all of them for their purchase
Re: PS5's Install Base Closes on 50 Million As Sony Gets Increasingly Aggressive
@OldGamer999 There will be a promo for Series X during Black Friday for 399€. That's aggressive enough if you ask me...
Re: PlayStation Users to Be Considered 'Part of the Xbox Community', Says Xbox Boss
Considering fact that Minecraft is consistently in TOP 10 best selling games on PS4 Store and considering Microsoft now owns ABK, he is not wrong...
Re: In Show of Dominance, Fortnite OG Draws 44.7 Million Players in One Day
@Grumblevolcano Taking paycut is more about being compassionate, but it's hardly revelant to the economics of running a business.
If you take Bungie for example. Considering median yearly salary of one developer in Seattle (where Bungie is located) is 134k dollars per year. Not counting expenses that you as a employer have on your employee (health coverage etc.) No cutting of execs pay will match that, because it's not like there is 1000 Bungie execs that can cut their salary. There are just a few of them. Same thing for Epic.
Nintendo survived WiiU era because they had huge amount of money in reserves from Wii success (they also had 3DS). Not because Iwata cut his salary. As I said. It was more about "gesture" and not about real economic policy.
Re: In Show of Dominance, Fortnite OG Draws 44.7 Million Players in One Day
@nessisonett Thing is...
Companies like Epic, Microsoft, Sony are successful and profitable in part because they know when and where to "cut the fat."
It is cynical, but it's also making sense.
Re: Bungie Layoffs Reportedly Impacted Around 100 Staff, Revenue 45% Below 2023 Projection
@themightyant Well, their game Matter is supposedly cancelled (in December 2020) and Marathon doesn't look so hot according to people who attended Marathon summit at the start of this year.
And I agree that it takes many people to sustain GaaS game, but still 1200 people with one game with declining popularity is just recipe for disaster.
And while technically Destiny 2 is new game, it was basically forced upon Bungie by Bobby Kotick. It is two, but at the same time it isn't...
Re: Bungie Layoffs Reportedly Impacted Around 100 Staff, Revenue 45% Below 2023 Projection
@themightyant Yeah. Nobody is saying that Destiny 2 is dead or anything. But it is clearly not enough to sustain 1200 employees of Bungie.
1200 employees is just ridiculous number for studio that haven't released new game in almost 10 years. If Bungie already got Marathon out I could see that working for them.
For comparision, Blizzard has 5000 employees, but they have hugely successful (albeit hated) Diablo Immortal and live services with World of Warcraft, Diablo 4 and Overwatch 2. And they will probably announce their survival game (Odyssey) during the weekend.
Re: Bungie CEO Laments 'Sad Day' for Sony Studio Following Layoffs
@ROTTIEMAN16 Nope. There was a talk about Bungie purchase by Microsoft for much of 2020 and 2021. That's why was kinda surprising when Sony announced that they are buying Bungie.
It was such a "talk" that even Bungie CEO had to comment on them. He said that they are not in talk with anybody about acquisition. Which proved to be ***** because they sell to Sony few weeks later.
And even Microsoft internal documents had Bungie on the "shortlist" of what to buy.
Re: Bungie CEO Laments 'Sad Day' for Sony Studio Following Layoffs
@RadioHedgeFund Nope. According to rumors, Bungie was willing to sell to Microsoft for less then Sony bough them, but dealbreaker for Microsoft was fact that Bungie has requested too much autonomy and Microsoft did not liked it.
And when Microsoft went heels deep into ABK stuff, it was clear that they would not buy Bungie.
Re: It Sounds Like PS5 Is Handily Outselling Its New-Gen Rival in France
And yet, Xbox had their best Q1 quarter in history of division.
It's almost like they are not relying on sales of hardware as much as Sony. Which is kinda obvious if you are releasing your first-party games on PC at same time as on Xbox consoles.
But I fully expect that people just won't get it for sake of console wars. Same as they did not get that ABK purchase was mainly about gateway to mobile and not about Call of Duty...
Re: Venom Spin-Off Game an Option for Insomniac, If Fans Want It
I would prefer if Insomniac stopped being Marvel company and start making something original.
I would rather have Sunset Overdrive 2 then Spider-Man 3/Venom/Wolverine.
But I'm probably in minority, so I'm not gonna hold my breath.
I would not be surprised if even that GAAS game that Insomniac is making would be with Marvel IP.
Re: PS5's Dead Space Remake Floats onto EA Play Later This Month
@MagisterMagi Which is funny, because Ubisoft games are still in Game Pass. Just not under "Ubisoft+" banner