• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

Rumour Xbox First Party going third party/multiplat - Discussing and Summary Thread (UPDATE: 4 Xbox exclusives are coming to Nintendo Switch and PS5)

Can’t say I will feel bad if the Xbox brand shrinks in the hardware space. They made their own bed with that one.
 
The writing was on the wall once we found that PS5 is outselling Xbox three to one.

Gamepass is a good source a recurring revenue, but the service has done jack shit to improve Microsoft’s console sales. And that's with a budget model console that in theory should have helped them keep pace with Sony. It didn't.

The realities of modern AAA development makes what Microsoft is doing unsustainable. A gamepass subscriber would have to stay subbed for at least 6 months in order to "equal" the sale of the game at $70. And that's only factoring in one AAA game.

Sony has an install base that is three times as large. If Bethesda hadn't been bought out by Microsoft they would have access to that install base. Instead, they cut out a huge swath of the PS5 market for very little in return. Someone must have done an estimate of how much money was "lost" skipping a multiplatform launch on PS5.

The fact is gamepass isn't moving the needle in terms of console sales. It's not convincing a lot of people to skip the PS5 and get an Xbox. Heck, it's not even convincing a large swath of PS5 users to pick up an Xbox.

This is the least surprising announcement I've ever seen if I'm being honest. I was already skeptical of gamepass as a business model years ago. All this does is confirm my initial skepticism. AAA games simply cost too much money to make and gamepass as a subscription service is not generating the revenue to make up from lost retail sales. Couple that with Microsoft making the decision to make multiplatform games that obtained healthy sales across multiple platforms, console exclusive to Xbox, further exasperated this issue.
 
Forks said:
Can't believe Microsoft spent countless billions acquiring Bethesda and Activision only for nothing to change - only than accelerating the irrelevancy of the Xbox brand. Yikes! I guess Nintendo and Sony actually understood how the gaming market worked after all!
Click to expand...
On the other side of the coin, they now control some of the most valuable IPs and can leverage them for subscriptions devices or premium purchase with recurring revenue in the future. This was always the Microsoft play in my opinion if the Xbox console couldn’t get back to 360 levels.
 
Thank god I didn't buy a Series S.

I almost did this November for Starfield, but I figured I didn't want to justify buying a whole console for this game alone, and with the Switch 2 on the horizon, I would rather keep my money for it.

That means that by the time that The Elder Scrolls 6 finally release, it'll most likely be releasing day on date on Playstation. We are so back 🙏🙏

Will be fucking weird when the day arrives that the likes of Halo, Forza, Gears... Will be on Playstation though. I was a huge Xbox 360 fan (only gen in which I think that Xbox was clearly much better than Playstation), so that will definitely feel weird when that will happen. The Halo on Switch rumors from 2019 never felt as weird, Halo on Playstation really will be the end of an era.

I know it's really not the same situation as Sega back in the day, and that the comparison can feel a bit overplayed, but this'll definitely feel like the Sonic on Gamecube/GBA of this era.
 
vIoCXXd.jpg
 
Hocot8 said:
I don't think so. I think it could lead to interest in the game lasting longer than it normally would or restarting. It comes out on an Xbox system with plenty of interest. Most sales are front loaded and then 6 months later it comes to the Switch 2 or PS5 and gets reinvigorated interest. It's a win win especially with the Switch 2 cause of the handheld mobility. People double dip all the time.

And what's to stop Microsoft from putting their games on sale the day it comes out on the other systems? There are plenty of times when I'm reminded of a good game when it comes to the switch and then I look it up and see it's prices elsewhere and buy the cheapest version.
Click to expand...
I haven't checked any Xbox engagement metrics or anything of the sort, but isn't the lack of "plenty of interest" in the Xbox ecosystem kind of what's motivating this move here? They're fishing for interest elsewhere because people are just not buying what they're selling. People do double dip if the game is worth it, that's true. I just question how many of Microsoft's games will benefit from this, and if the tradeoff is worth it.

Plus, they're making less from every sale on say, the Switch, compared to what they would make on their own system due to having to pay the platform holder 30%, do they not? Putting the game on sale on top of that doesn't sound like a sound strategy to me.
 
Last edited:


Edit.

From my own sources, I heard similar information, but involving Nintendo:

Multiple Microsoft Gaming / Bethesda / Activision Blizzard games expected to land on Nintendo console(s) in addition to PlayStation versions

I'll publish it soon on Nintendo Universe.
 
Last edited:
ohlawd said:
oof that Starfield post. when that's getting ported everything is fair game

I bought Xbox for 20 years so they can use that money to fund games and services and build up the platform. Use that money on a remastered Lost Odyssey or an Xbox port that didn't already exist such as Fallout 1 or 2 which are PC only currently from one of their first party studios or from a 3rd party like Falcom and Ys games. Nope, what I'm paying for is early access and beta test games like Sea of Thieves and Hi-Fi Rush so they can port them to the other platforms

I think they'll keep making consoles for Game Pass people. a large number of the subs come from the console space still.

damn we're really losing an ecosystem lol. now the only choices are Steam, PS, and Nintendo. I was doing really well with just Xbox and Nintendo but since non-Steam gaming is not viable I'm down to buying things only on Nintendo's platform. that's so great.
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity, what's your issue with Steam?
 
0
Part of me wonders if this was the main goal of recent M&A, or is perhaps a kneejerk response to declining console sales.

In any case, this does feel like the right move. If games continue to become more expensive to produce, there will likely be a point where Game Pass can't subsidise the cost of development for all Microsoft titles (plus third-party deals, which cost about 30% of Game Pass revenue) on its own; even now, a regular Game Pass subscriber only "pays off" a full-priced AAA game after 6 months, assuming they play only a single game. Full-priced sales (minus platform holder cut) would certainly ease the burden, with the visibility of games on other storefronts providing some much needed marketing for Xbox (a particular sticking point anywhere outside of the US).

Of course, the consequence of this is that it'll probably further hit Xbox sales. Rumours around Xbox offering a 3DO-esque approach to hardware manufacturing and distribution sound like a terrible idea, though - what if a company releases a poorly manufactured "Xbox"? Although, it would take the monetary burden off Microsoft for hardware manufacturing to some extent... I can understand the frustration of some Xbox owners (imagine buying one for Starfield late last year!) though, especially Xbox fans for whom the presence of a physical box - same as for Nintendo and Sony fans - is a source of pride which will surely be diminished over time as a result. Alas this just means the discourse around this topic will be quite awful going foward, I suspect.

EDIT - I'd totally buy a port of Hi-Fi Rush, though. Always thought that game was better suited to anywhere but Xbox.
 
MarcelRguez said:
I haven't checked any Xbox engagement metrics or anything of the sort, but isn't the lack of "plenty of interest" in the Xbox ecosystem kind of what's motivating this move here? They're fishing for interest elsewhere because people are just not buying what they're selling. People do double dip if the game is worth it, that's true. I just question how many of Microsoft's games will benefit from this, and if the tradeoff is worth it.

Plus, they're making less from every sale on say, the Switch, compare to what they would make on their own system due to having to pay the platform holder 30%, do they not? Putting the game on sale on top of that doesn't sound like a sound strategy to me.
Click to expand...
Yeah saying "plenty of" was dumb on my part lmao. I knew it after I posted and was too lazy to edit it out haha.

What's the tradeoff if the hardware business is failing? Xbox owners still have gamepass. Other platform holders have to pay a (full?) price.

And that switch money is still money. That's money they weren't making. They weren't gonna make the full possible revenue either way if the consumer isn't buying the xbox platform. Yes, 70 bucks is better than 50. But 50 is better than 0 and that's what matters. And I said sale for their own platform. So you mentioned 30% that Microsoft would have to pay Nintendo or Sony. Just do a 30% sale on xbox.

So for instance how many switch owners would buy Hi-Fi Rush but they don't have an xbox and don't plan on it? That can be viewed as a missed opportunity for MS. But now it'll come out on switch and people will buy it that may never have. Same for the PS5. You can't say "well we're gonna have to cough up 30% of our revenue to another platform holder" when that revenue was never coming in. Money is money and that seems to be what MS cares about to a large extent right now. They are trying to recover from the failure that was the xbox series x/s with software and gamepass sales
 
HockeyBird said:
Can someone translate for us filthy monolingual Americans who only speak American?
Click to expand...

Ojoloco said:
Click to expand...

Translation (Google) :

Necrolipe :
From my own sources, I heard similar information, but involving Nintendo:
Multiple Microsoft Gaming / Bethesda / Activision Blizzard games expected to land on Nintendo console(s) in addition to PlayStation versions
I'll publish it soon on Nintendo Universe.
 
Forks said:
Guys we're ignoring the REAL important discourse: you gotta think this helps Master Chief's prospects for showing up in Smash 6 right???
Click to expand...
The only thing that'll be holding Chief back is what holds most western third parties back: lack of popularity in Japan.
 
It's actually crazy this is all coming out now tbh. A little suspicious so it may actually be true there are internal politics being had here.
 
0
The point of no return was when they announced day-and-date on PC and GamePass imo.
Dinoman96 said:
The only thing that'll be holding Chief back is what holds most western third parties back: lack of popularity in Japan.
Click to expand...
they'll survive having a few characters they don't care about
 
Rareware said:
This is all happening because Microsoft wanted to bring Nintendo and Rare together again. I’ll accept no other explanation.
Click to expand...
We're already getting NSO games but the next big thing should be the ports of Xbox/Xbox 360 games. I wouldn't say no to a Viva Piñata collection on Switch!
 
9-Volt said:
We're already getting NSO games but the next big thing should be the ports of Xbox/Xbox 360 games. I wouldn't say no to a Viva Piñata collection on Switch!
Click to expand...
This is the most “Nintendo” of their older games so should already have been on the system
 
Hocot8 said:
Yeah saying "plenty of" was dumb on my part lmao. I knew it after I posted and was too lazy to edit it out haha.

What's the tradeoff if the hardware business is failing? Xbox owners still have gamepass. Other platform holders have to pay a (full?) price.

And that switch money is still money. That's money they weren't making. They weren't gonna make the full possible revenue either way if the consumer isn't buying the xbox platform. Yes, 70 bucks is better than 50. But 50 is better than 0 and that's what matters. And I said sale for their own platform. So you mentioned 30% that Microsoft would have to pay Nintendo or Sony. Just do a 30% sale on xbox.

So for instance how many switch owners would buy Hi-Fi Rush but they don't have an xbox and don't plan on it? That can be viewed as a missed opportunity for MS. But now it'll come out on switch and people will buy it that may never have. Same for the PS5. You can't say "well we're gonna have to cough up 30% of our revenue to another platform holder" when that revenue was never coming in. Money is money and that seems to be what MS cares about to a large extent right now. They are trying to recover from the failure that was the xbox series x/s with software and gamepass sales
Click to expand...
If you just give up on hardware, then there's no tradeoff, that's fair. I'm not sure that's exactly what they're doing, going by what's rumored. Their overall strategy remains as confusing as ever, lol

I guess they've run the numbers and come to the same conclusions as you have, but from what little information we have and the over lack of confidence in the brand, it feels like a hail mary.
 
buildz said:
Part of me wonders if this was the main goal of recent M&A, or is perhaps a kneejerk response to declining console sales.

In any case, this does feel like the right move. If games continue to become more expensive to produce, there will likely be a point where Game Pass can't subsidise the cost of development for all Microsoft titles (plus third-party deals, which cost about 30% of Game Pass revenue) on its own; even now, a regular Game Pass subscriber only "pays off" a full-priced AAA game after 6 months, assuming they play only a single game. Full-priced sales (minus platform holder cut) would certainly ease the burden, with the visibility of games on other storefronts providing some much needed marketing for Xbox (a particular sticking point anywhere outside of the US).

Of course, the consequence of this is that it'll probably further hit Xbox sales. Rumours around Xbox offering a 3DO-esque approach to hardware manufacturing and distribution sound like a terrible idea, though - what if a company releases a poorly manufactured "Xbox"? Although, it would take the monetary burden off Microsoft for hardware manufacturing to some extent... I can understand the frustration of some Xbox owners (imagine buying one for Starfield late last year!) though, especially Xbox fans for whom the presence of a physical box - same as for Nintendo and Sony fans - is a source of pride which will surely be diminished over time as a result. Alas this just means the discourse around this topic will be quite awful going foward, I suspect.

EDIT - I'd totally buy a port of Hi-Fi Rush, though. Always thought that game was better suited to anywhere but Xbox.
Click to expand...
Honestly, it was probably a possibility they always kept in mind. The acquisitions were probably meant to build the Xbox portfolio, but at some point it just didn't move the needle enough to make up for the losses in revenues from these purchases. And Activision being the hardest fight Microsoft had to make probably cost Microsoft so many benefits from the acquisition deal that this is just them realizing it wouldn't be worth it at this point.
 
Jbone916 said:
If anything this just further shows how miraculous the success of Switch was for Nintendo.
Click to expand...
Even then Nintendo was sitting on a ton of capital from the success of the Wii/DS and their portable line has always been very strong. They'd have to probably have another couple of Wii U-level bombs before approaching actual Nintendoomed status.
 
Mekanos said:
Even then Nintendo was sitting on a ton of capital from the success of the Wii/DS and their portable line has always been very strong. They'd have to probably have another couple of Wii U-level bombs before approaching actual Nintendoomed status.
Click to expand...
Don't forget Nintendo made the smart choice focusing primarily on 3DS development over Wii U. While it pissed off many of us, it ultimately made more financial sense to focus on the cheaper to develop for handheld over the expensive home console. Wash hands of the whole thing and move the majority of development to the next machine.
 
0
MarcelRguez said:
If you just give up on hardware, then there's no tradeoff, that's fair. I'm not sure that's exactly what they're doing, going by what's rumored. Their overall strategy remains as confusing as ever, lol

I guess they've run the numbers and come to the same conclusions as you have, but from what little information we have and the over lack of confidence in the brand, it feels like a hail mary.
Click to expand...
Well idk if they're giving up on hardware but have accepted the fact that it's not going to do well this gen. So now it's "how do you make the most of it" mode for them. Gamepass is a success and they still have lots of subs. But it's expensive to pay for. Selling their exclusives on other platforms can help with that cost. The only thing we know for certain about their plans is to expand gamepass. It's the only success story they got haha.

I could be too optimistic about it all though. I probably am.
 
0
Curious if we'll see more smoke around Xbox Game Studios titles (Halo, Gears, Forza etc.) coming to other consoles. Most of the rumors/leaks we're seeing revolve around Bethesda titles.
 
0
Barely Able said:
This is the most “Nintendo” of their older games so should already have been on the system
Click to expand...
Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey also are VERY Nintendo games released on 360. So "Nintendo", Blue Dragon's sequels got released only on Nintendo DS lol. And Mistwalker went on to work with Nintendo instead.
 
In the end I don't care one way or the other what happens (I play all Xbox and PS exclusives I can get on PC) but I was kinda looking forward to seeing how the Xbox vs PS battle would turn out now that Xbox has the advantage of owning all those huge IPs/studios as potential exclusives. "Everyone wins when everyone plays" or whatever their new strat is just doesn't sound nearly as fun or drama-filled to me :p
 
0
Rareware said:
This is all happening because Microsoft wanted to bring Nintendo and Rare together again. I’ll accept no other explanation.
Click to expand...
Clearly, Banjo & Kazooie in Smash and also on NSO along with GoldenEye and Jet Force Gemini were all mere dominoes and red flags that were leading us all to this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom