Status
Not open for further replies.

thecaseace

Member
May 1, 2018
3,337
My current plan is as follows:

  1. If they announce that games won't be exclusive, then I'll point to that interview with the dude who said "first or better or best" just like Tom is here.
  2. If they announce everything is going to be exclusive then I'll point to the Phil interview where he said "no" to the idea of playstation being required to make the math work
  3. If they don't announce anything concrete or stick to "case by case basis " talk, then I'll point to the interviews that said "we will evaluate on a case by case basis".
In all 3 scenarios, I'll say it was incredibly obvious, and that everyone who thought differently was a huge idiot for not seeing these completely clear, unambiguous signals that were sent out by Microsoft.

To me its kind of obvious that at least some games will appear on PlayStation. Sometimes I think people just say none will to be contrarian and actually have something to argue about.

In my mind 'case-by-case' means more than zero, they definitely would've given thought to what properties they get from the deal before making the deal. If they were going to make zero available on PlayStation they would've said 'we bought Bethesda for the purpose of expanding the Xbox platform', The fact that both executives, when asked haven't just dismissed the idea to me says they have at least one or two properties they believe they'll release. In all likelihood they just release later, like much later.

But yeah, when the time comes you will see threads go from 80% of posters saying "MS will lock up all the content, they clearly bought Bethesda for exclusives" to the same 80% saying "Sony is outselling MS 2-1, MS would've been foolish to overlook that user base of course they weren't going to make everything exclusive".
 

CottonWolf

Member
Feb 23, 2018
1,880
What has more impact? Microsoft now saying right now that all games will be exclusive to the Xbox Ecosystem? Or, when Starfield (or any other game) is shown at E3, it has a big fat "Exclusive to Xbox" message on it.
The longer they wait, the more people who might have been convinced to buy an Xbox this generation buy a PS5. I can't see a good reason for waiting. The people who were going to be convinced by a stunt like that won't be any less convinced if they announced it now.
 

AshenOne

Banned
Feb 21, 2018
6,561
Pakistan
Steam is a storefront, not a platform (unless you mean the short lived SteamOS). Windows has GP.
It IS a platform. It USED to be storefront in the past. STEAM is one platform, it has its components like STEAMVR, its own Linux based component that makes windows game run on Linux and they're in the severals of 1000s. It has his own Community Market Place with its own community run economy, its own game input system with STEAM Input.

One thing that is i would say is that the storefront on STEAM is a critical component of the platform/ecosystem however you cannot simply call STEAM simply a storefront anymore. A platform doesn't need to be hardware necessarily either.
 

Hyun Sai

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,562
The longer they wait, the more people who might have been convinced to buy an Xbox this generation buy a PS5. I can't see a good reason for waiting. The people who were going to be convinced by a stunt like that won't be any less convinced if they announced it now.
Yep ! In fact the best way to announce this would be before a generation launch. They'll be ready for the next !
 

Ricky_R

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
4,002
Now focus some of those studios on high quality single player games and I'll buy your box down the line.
 

idioteque

Member
Nov 8, 2017
613
The longer they wait, the more people who might have been convinced to buy an Xbox this generation buy a PS5. I can't see a good reason for waiting. The people who were going to be convinced by a stunt like that won't be any less convinced if they announced it now.

Fair comment. I'm also inclined to agree to a certain extent but I'm not sure how much Microsoft actually care about pushing Xbox specific hardware. Of course they care, but with PC's & Xcloud, people don't need to rush out and buy an Xbox console to take advantage of their services.

Though, it's going to be interesting to see how they play this. I could be completely wrong.
 

Mister_X

Member
Aug 22, 2020
1,516
My current plan is as follows:

  1. If they announce that games won't be exclusive, then I'll point to that interview with the dude who said "first or better or best" just like Tom is here.
  2. If they announce everything is going to be exclusive then I'll point to the Phil interview where he said "no" to the idea of playstation being required to make the math work
  3. If they don't announce anything concrete or stick to "case by case basis " talk, then I'll point to the interviews that said "we will evaluate on a case by case basis".
In all 3 scenarios, I'll say it was incredibly obvious, and that everyone who thought differently was a huge idiot for not seeing these completely clear, unambiguous signals that were sent out by Microsoft.
Lol they really have been all over the place. When they do go public with their plans that thread is gonna be an event. Will be very fun to watch lol.

My thinking has shifted that most of the games will be multiplat eventually. Just feels like something Microsoft would do
 

Marano

Member
Mar 30, 2018
4,893
Rio de Janeiro
My current plan is as follows:

  1. If they announce that games won't be exclusive, then I'll point to that interview with the dude who said "first or better or best" just like Tom is here.
  2. If they announce everything is going to be exclusive then I'll point to the Phil interview where he said "no" to the idea of playstation being required to make the math work
  3. If they don't announce anything concrete or stick to "case by case basis " talk, then I'll point to the interviews that said "we will evaluate on a case by case basis".
In all 3 scenarios, I'll say it was incredibly obvious, and that everyone who thought differently was a huge idiot for not seeing these completely clear, unambiguous signals that were sent out by Microsoft.
I have seen a lot of gold posts today but yours takes the cake, would you copyright strike me if I stole it ?🤣, jk.
 
Last edited:

Fiery Phoenix

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,091
So assuming Starfield is exclusive. It probably is. Are the people expecting it to be out this year just expecting them to throw out the almost finished PlayStation version and throw away all that money?
It's not guaranteed a PS version was ever worked on in the first place. My understanding is these games tend to be developed for PC first, then ported over to supported platforms.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 10737

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
49,774
It's not guaranteed a PS version was ever worked on in the first place. My understanding is these games tend to be developed on PC first, then ported over to supporting platforms.
i assume porting and optimizing to consoles would be done very late into development in this case. it'd make the dev's job easier if they have less platforms to worry about, if anything.
 

Bosch

Banned
May 15, 2019
3,680
I think Microsoft will continue the "case by case basis" rhetoric in relation to exclusivity. I also think if any games aren't exclusive to the Xbox Ecosystem, it will be incredibly rare. There's no need for them to come out now and say it's going to be one way or the other. Doing so closes doors for them and isn't the smart play imo. All they need to say is that every game will be available on Game Pass day 1.

What has more impact? Microsoft now saying right now that all games will be exclusive to the Xbox Ecosystem? Or, when Starfield (or any other game) is shown at E3, it has a big fat "Exclusive to Xbox" message on it.

Personally I think the latter but maybe that's just me.
I think it will be exactly like that. It will depends of the game. But in the end 12-24 months later they will bring a version to other platforms from every game.
 

TheGhost

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
28,137
Long Island
So assuming Starfield is exclusive. It probably is. Are the people expecting it to be out this year just expecting them to throw out the almost finished PlayStation version and throw away all that money?
Throw away what money?
Every person buying a console and subbing to Gamepass just to play surely has to equal more money down the line.
 
Oct 29, 2017
812
I think Microsoft will continue the "case by case basis" rhetoric in relation to exclusivity. I also think if any games aren't exclusive to the Xbox Ecosystem, it will be incredibly rare. There's no need for them to come out now and say it's going to be one way or the other. Doing so closes doors for them and isn't the smart play imo. All they need to say is that every game will be available on Game Pass day 1.

What has more impact? Microsoft now saying right now that all games will be exclusive to the Xbox Ecosystem? Or, when Starfield (or any other game) is shown at E3, it has a big fat "Exclusive to Xbox" message on it.

Personally I think the latter but maybe that's just me.

I think saying case by case is the best way honestly. Seeing how any seemingly different stance is met with anger why even make a hard stance. Things change so they can say games will be exclusive but put out a game and ppl will be mad. No exclusives and if one comes then anger while come.
 

GrrImAFridge

ONE THOUSAND DOLLARYDOOS
Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,737
Western Australia
Didn't Microsoft say much the same thing about Switch ports only to later imply Ori 2 would be the last (Minecraft stuff aside, of course) by way of commenting that such case-by-case decisions were "unsustainable"? I really wouldn't read too much into any non-committal language at this juncture.

Edit: Also, if memory serves, the Ori games are literally the only non-Minecraft titles MS has willingly released on a competing console.
 
Last edited:

dglavimans

Member
Nov 13, 2019
8,540
Nice, glad it went through! What a time to be a multi platform owner. Every Bethesda game on Gamepass is huge for me!
 

Deleted member 10737

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
49,774
Didn't Microsoft say much the same thing about Switch ports only to later imply Ori 2 would be the last (Minecraft stuff aside, of course) by way of commenting that such case-by-case decisions were "unsustainable"? I really wouldn't read too much into any non-committal language at this juncture.
they didn't even publish ori 2 on switch themselves (iam8bit did). i think that was a clear signal about the future.
 

watdaeff4

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,451
And when you buy your next ARM powered Mac, you'll be able to play all these games via Rosetta.
as another Mac user but doesn't keep on top of all this - i'm curious - is this going to be a feasible/easy way to play? because right now the workarounds aren't worth it for me.

*btw this isn't in regard to bethesda games as I have the means to play them, but thinking about PC gaming in the future
 

Tobor

Died as he lived: wrong about Doritos
Member
Oct 25, 2017
31,433
Richmond, VA
as another Mac user but doesn't keep on top of all this - i'm curious - is this going to be a feasible/easy way to play? because right now the workarounds aren't worth it for me.

*btw this isn't in regard to bethesda games as I have the means to play them, but thinking about PC gaming in the future

Using Rosetta, no. Rosetta does not emulate Windows apps.

What is possible is running Windows Arm in Parallels and then emulating X86 games inside of Windows Arm. How well that would work is not known.

The easiest option for Mac users will be Xcloud.
 

Pancracio17

▲ Legend ▲
Avenger
Oct 29, 2017
20,545
I dont think MS plans to say a particular statement about Bethesda exclusivity. Theylll just release games and 99% of them will be exclusive. Making blanket statements isnt something a company as big as microsoft usually does.
 

Sydle

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,667
it's really simple. if sony was the one who made the acquisition, no one would be having this discussion. it would have been accepted months ago that the games will be ps-exclusive (with maybe a two year old pc port here and there). the fact that all this talk about money on the table and whatnot is being repeated ad nauseam shows that people are just mistaking what they want with what makes business sense.

Phil saying things like first, best, or better on Xbox/PC, then also saying he doesn't need PlayStation to make the Bethesda deal work, makes it all a bit confusing.

I am curious to see how they handle it because it could signal how they handle the next acquisition or two.
 

Bessy67

Member
Oct 29, 2017
12,689
Phil saying things like first, best, or better on Xbox/PC, then also saying he doesn't need PlayStation to make the Bethesda deal work, makes it all a bit confusing.

I am curious to see how they handle it because it could signal how they handle the next acquisition or two.
If they were just looking for games to release day one on game pass they could get them for a lot less than $7.5 billion without needing to add multiple studios to their payroll. I don't see how this deal makes any sense if the games still launch on Playstation and all MS gets is a day one release on game pass.
 

Governergrimm

Member
Jun 25, 2019
7,118
So dirty math here:

One Xbox Game Pass Ultimate subscriber for one year is literally worth twice as much as somebody who buys two games.

Let me explain:

14.99 X 12 = 179.88

$70 (Launch Day Price) X 2 = 140.00.

That's not even counting add-ons such as MTX, Season Passes, etc.

If somebody bought both Deathloop and Ghostwire at $70 full-price day one, they still wouldn't be as worth as much to Microsoft as a person who buys a full year of XGP Ultimate.

So it would take at least TWO customers + MTX/DLC/Season Pass before Sony's cut to equal the amount of money for 1 year-long Xbox Game Pass customer before even adding on additional content sales for said XGPU customer.
You didn't add in the 30% platform holder fee. So they would make ~ $50 on that $70 sale on PS.
Also how does Sony make money off GP being on PS?
 

obin_gam

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,388
Sollefteå, Sweden
70f5434216f0fb0a45c4d75d83f41b5b.jpg
 

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,919
Seattle
Didn't Microsoft say much the same thing about Switch ports only to later imply Ori 2 would be the last (Minecraft stuff aside, of course) by way of commenting that such case-by-case decisions were "unsustainable"? I really wouldn't read too much into any non-committal language at this juncture.

Edit: Also, if memory serves, the Ori games are literally the only non-Minecraft titles MS has willingly released on a competing console.

Yeah but them buying an entire publisher is sort of unprecedented.

And they have a lot of talent to keep happy; does every company under the Zenimax umbrella really want to abandon PlayStation?

Does Zenimax as a publisher want to?

I don't think Microsoft is as predictable as people think they are; they could be keeping Zenimax as a separate publisher BECAUSE they don't want to make them all Microsoft exclusive. It'd be kind of odd to keep an entire publisher in tact, and then have them only release on GamePass, PC, Xbox..

(granted, they'll likely leverage this purchase for SOME exclusivity, not saying they won't, but I also would not be surprised if we really did see a big mix of exclusive, timed exclusive, and not at all exclusive in the Zenimax umbrella)
 
Jul 10, 2020
3,598
Yeah but them buying an entire publisher is sort of unprecedented.

And they have a lot of talent to keep happy; does every company under the Zenimax umbrella really want to abandon PlayStation?

Does Zenimax as a publisher want to?

Those aren't there decisions anymore. While I'm sure Phil and Satya will talk to Todd, Pete and others, when Zenimax decided to sell to Microsoft, they kind of left the decision making up to the new boss.

They clearly sold to Microsoft for a reason or reasons that will be unknown to us for sometime.
 

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,919
Seattle
Those aren't there decisions anymore. While I'm sure Phil and Satya will talk to Todd, Pete and others, when Zenimax decided to sell to Microsoft, they kind of left the decision making up to the new boss.

They clearly sold to Microsoft for a reason or reasons that will be unknown to us for sometime.
Read my edit though.. why even keep them around as a publisher, only to have them release only on the platforms MS already is publishing too?

And Zenimax, iD, etc are a collection of people.. with connections, talent, and everything else, they can take elsewhere. I'm not suggesting they won't have Microsoft overlords as a company, but as a group of human beings they can choose to go elsewhere.
 

Sydle

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,667
If they were just looking for games to release day one on game pass they could get them for a lot less than $7.5 billion without needing to add multiple studios to their payroll. I don't see how this deal makes any sense if the games still launch on Playstation and all MS gets is a day one release on game pass.

I agree with you that it's a lot of money to keep the status quo and something will change. Just trying to make sense of what Phil said.

They could make certain games timed exclusives where it's only Xbox and PC for 6 months or 1 year. Diehard Bethesda fans aren't going to want to wait.
 

GrrImAFridge

ONE THOUSAND DOLLARYDOOS
Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,737
Western Australia
Yeah but them buying an entire publisher is sort of unprecedented.

And they have a lot of talent to keep happy; does every company under the Zenimax umbrella really want to abandon PlayStation?

Does Zenimax as a publisher want to?

Oh, I didn't mean to suggest there's no chance of future Bethesda games being multiplatform (although, as far as personal opinion is concerned, I am on the side of the fence that believes they won't be). My point is just that it's too early to infer anything from the little that's been said thus far.
 

Bessy67

Member
Oct 29, 2017
12,689
Read my edit though.. why even keep them around as a publisher, only to have them release only on the platforms MS already is publishing too?

And Zenimax, iD, etc are a collection of people.. with connections, talent, and everything else, they can take elsewhere. I'm not suggesting they won't have Microsoft overlords as a company, but as a group of human beings they can choose to go elsewhere.
That many studios is a lot for one person to oversee. Plus letting Zenimax keep a familiar structure without laying off a bunch of redundant people will make for a smoother transition. And sure, if they are Xbox exclusive it may rub some employees the wrong way but I'd assume having financial stability is more important than making games for Playstation for most of them.
 

Hope

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
2,065
If they were just looking for games to release day one on game pass they could get them for a lot less than $7.5 billion without needing to add multiple studios to their payroll. I don't see how this deal makes any sense if the games still launch on Playstation and all MS gets is a day one release on game pass.

And all the ips, engines and cloudtech. It wasn't just too cut out ps. No matter what some fanboys want to belive.
 

Dineren

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
3,526
Phil saying things like first, best, or better on Xbox/PC, then also saying he doesn't need PlayStation to make the Bethesda deal work, makes it all a bit confusing.
To be fair, I'm pretty sure he said at one point, that until the sale was complete he legally couldn't make any definitive statements about the company's future.
 

Josh5890

I'm Your Favorite Poster's Favorite Poster
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
25,295
it's really simple. if sony was the one who made the acquisition, no one would be having this discussion. it would have been accepted months ago that the games will be ps-exclusive (with maybe a two year old pc port here and there). the fact that all this talk about money on the table and whatnot is being repeated ad nauseam shows that people are just mistaking what they want with what makes business sense.

Stop it. You are making too much sense!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.