That sounds fine with me. I'm sure there are many Microsoft-published games that I would buy on Playstation, if given the option. They're a big company with a lot of studios.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Microsoft has more best-sellers on PlayStation Store than Sony does
- Thread starter Red Kong XIX
- Start date
Why would this be shocking. 3rd Party Publishers have always made up most of the top 25 sellers on PSN every month for years and Microsoft is the number one 3rd Party publisher in the world after spending over $80 Billion to acquire Activision and Zenimax.
This is a pretty unsurprising result given how many acquisitions and multiplatform deals Microsoft has made.
They're a hardware platform holder and absolute gigaton sized publisher. Their potential to reach audiences on any gaming platform is not all that shocking after the ABK acquisition went down the way it did (i.e. Microsoft moving to agreements on multiplatform for key IP to gain favor for the deal).
They're a hardware platform holder and absolute gigaton sized publisher. Their potential to reach audiences on any gaming platform is not all that shocking after the ABK acquisition went down the way it did (i.e. Microsoft moving to agreements on multiplatform for key IP to gain favor for the deal).
New Releases + Fallout show effect + having 2 of the biggest games on the planet with COD and Minecraft
I'm not sure this really proves that going fully multiplatform is success but more so bringing service games over can be a success
For example Pentiment and Hifi Rush didn't chart very well, does that mean single player games wouldn't do very well? They would still need more examples like bringing Starfield over, single player games that get a lot of press and hype around them.
If I was MS I would bring over something like MS Flight Sim and Age of Empires console edition, those are pretty safe bets. But eventually if MS really wants to test the market they need to bring over a prominent single player title and see how everything shakes out.
I'm not sure this really proves that going fully multiplatform is success but more so bringing service games over can be a success
For example Pentiment and Hifi Rush didn't chart very well, does that mean single player games wouldn't do very well? They would still need more examples like bringing Starfield over, single player games that get a lot of press and hype around them.
If I was MS I would bring over something like MS Flight Sim and Age of Empires console edition, those are pretty safe bets. But eventually if MS really wants to test the market they need to bring over a prominent single player title and see how everything shakes out.
If they bring Starfield, Halo and Gears and their upcoming titles like Indiana and Avowed, they will be huge on PlayStation.
Great to see Xbox titles doing well on PlayStation.
Great to see Xbox titles doing well on PlayStation.
The more money MS brings in on PS5, the better it is for both companies.
MS makes more revenue. Sony makes more revenue. Everybody wins.
MS makes more revenue. Sony makes more revenue. Everybody wins.
#2 publisher. Even with ABK, MS is still behind Nintendo for revenue or volume.
Rare was just a bit more than two decades ago.
If we apply the same logic to Sony they also only have one title by a studio they've held on to for longer than two decades, being an annualized license dependent sports series that's also been going since the 90s. Their other games also stem from a publisher acquisition and then several contracted 3rd parties.
The issue with this comparison is that the competitive sector we're talking about (gaming) isn't the sum total of these corps. I mean, it nearly is for Nintendo but it's only a fraction for Sony and a tiny sliver for MS. By revenue last FY:
Nintendo: 96.7%
Sony: 28.9%
Microsoft: 7.3%
Last edited:
-some- people are seeing this like sony and nintendo with barely a 100b dollar market cap cant compete with MS with a 3 trillion dollar market cap, and MS is becoming the number 1 publisher and 3 trillion and 3 trillion etc. etc. yeah, MS is 3 trillion value, but why they are making the multiplatform pivot? the answer is really easy, they need money, they need profit, getting bigger means more salaries, more revenue, and more problems to make profit, in the game industry 95% of the budgets are human related, Xbox just absorved 15k people i believe with ABK? thats why they are pivoting even faster to multiplatform, the need to make profit, the bigger xbox gets, they will depend even more of psn store
I´m reading some comments saying sony should be worried Xbox will become the biggest third party publisher? and I ask, should sony be really worried? tencent is the biggest third party publisher in gaming and all their content is multiplatform anyways, and sony isnt worried, what I think is happening internally in sony (just my opinion and what I think) is that the bigger Xbox gets with all this mergers the better for sony and even the better for Nintendo, because at the end of the day Xbox will depend on PS storefront to make more profit and to finance even more their new games and repeat the cycle, so sooner rather launch their franchises on PS and possibly nintendo if they have a console capable of running those kind of games (and we are possibly seeing a future where just all xbox games are just everywhere including PlayStation)
I always check X/Twitter and forums like this, and I remember very well people arguin against this multiplatform pivot xbox is taking, even I saw and I see daily in X/Twitter some really annoying toxic fanboys harassing the usual big xbox leadership accounts with why xbox is launching games, why they lied, why this and that, but at the same time celebrating the "xbox take over the psn store with many games in the top 25" like some kind of W against the PS Fanboys or a W against Sony but this only is a W for Xbox/Microsoft and a W for Sony because everyone knows the better Xbox does on PS the more they will think into porting more games.
now in my opinion as I said, i really doubt sony is worry about xbox becoming the biggest publisher, in fact I think it benefits them
and something that I have been thinking about, how many times Xbox leadership has said, GAMEPASS will not be on playstation? well, I think it will be, how? if xbox keeps bringing games to PlayStation and we get to a point when there is a huge amount of xbox games on playstation? bethesda games, activision games and xbox game studios games, I think there is a chance that we could se gamepass going to playstation only for the xbox owned games, and not third party games, previously WAS IMPOSIBLE because they didnt own activision and they didnt launch any xbox studio game, but now? they own activision and they are launching actual xbox games studios into psn store, so is not impossible and like many here are saying, xbox is now a publisher so in a way the competition between xbox vs playstation and nintendo is starting to get minimal IMO
I´m reading some comments saying sony should be worried Xbox will become the biggest third party publisher? and I ask, should sony be really worried? tencent is the biggest third party publisher in gaming and all their content is multiplatform anyways, and sony isnt worried, what I think is happening internally in sony (just my opinion and what I think) is that the bigger Xbox gets with all this mergers the better for sony and even the better for Nintendo, because at the end of the day Xbox will depend on PS storefront to make more profit and to finance even more their new games and repeat the cycle, so sooner rather launch their franchises on PS and possibly nintendo if they have a console capable of running those kind of games (and we are possibly seeing a future where just all xbox games are just everywhere including PlayStation)
I always check X/Twitter and forums like this, and I remember very well people arguin against this multiplatform pivot xbox is taking, even I saw and I see daily in X/Twitter some really annoying toxic fanboys harassing the usual big xbox leadership accounts with why xbox is launching games, why they lied, why this and that, but at the same time celebrating the "xbox take over the psn store with many games in the top 25" like some kind of W against the PS Fanboys or a W against Sony but this only is a W for Xbox/Microsoft and a W for Sony because everyone knows the better Xbox does on PS the more they will think into porting more games.
now in my opinion as I said, i really doubt sony is worry about xbox becoming the biggest publisher, in fact I think it benefits them
and something that I have been thinking about, how many times Xbox leadership has said, GAMEPASS will not be on playstation? well, I think it will be, how? if xbox keeps bringing games to PlayStation and we get to a point when there is a huge amount of xbox games on playstation? bethesda games, activision games and xbox game studios games, I think there is a chance that we could se gamepass going to playstation only for the xbox owned games, and not third party games, previously WAS IMPOSIBLE because they didnt own activision and they didnt launch any xbox studio game, but now? they own activision and they are launching actual xbox games studios into psn store, so is not impossible and like many here are saying, xbox is now a publisher so in a way the competition between xbox vs playstation and nintendo is starting to get minimal IMO
Everything balances out, Microsoft struggles to sell consoles but the number one publisher on the #1 console.
That's balance.
Now if Xbox had 60 million series x's out there right now, then that's worrying.
That's balance.
Now if Xbox had 60 million series x's out there right now, then that's worrying.
When would be soon enough for the bolded? Xbox hardware is in a freefall state. It's one thing to rationalise why it might be a necessity for Microsoft to put their games on other consoles after gobbling up two massive publishers has made them more accountable for the growth however they can, but I don't know why some folks are so eager to conflate the decisions of one company with others when the circumstances could not be less similar.
It's for the same reason people insist that Xbox consoles will become PCs and specifically have access to PS Studio games. They're just incredibly hung up on the idea of Sony games on Xbox as a win for the box they've stuck with.
It's also wishful thinking because Sony going in the same direction as Xbox would help vindicate Xbox's strategy as truly forward-thinking, and not a consequence of Microsoft spending several years shooting their kneecaps off.
Bold seems a little sensational. As a consumer you would think we all want all games to be available on whatever platform we own?
As primarily a Playstation player, I am thrilled by this news. I would like MS to see all the money rolling in and devote more resources to making more of their future output multiplatform.
While this is true, these companies have access to far larger sums of money to invest into games at any time. As well as the ability to absorb losses with greater ease. They can take more risks or make massive acquisitions.
**edit**
Also, none of my comments have been made with any insinuation that Microsoft is going to take over gaming or anything. They may become the biggest publisher for a bit with the huge dev purchases they have made recently, but as a company they are going all in on AI at the moment (as are all the other major tech companies). They could turn and drop the entire games division at any point even.
Personally I have no dog in this race whatsoever, I play games from all platforms. The tribalism around this topic is silly to me. Were I to guess as to the future of games in general, I would say that I think as time goes on hardware will become more unified in architecture, and games will be playable on more platforms in order to reach more customers. Software is becoming easier and easier to compile for differing platforms as time goes on, and the value isn't lost on any of these companies. (Well except maybe Nintendo haha)
Last edited:
2023 was a really poor year for Xbox consoles though. They posted their worst November in the USA since 2006 and December had them in 3rd place with $150-$100 discounts on the Series X. No point even talking about the Europe numbers which are worse. Ampere Analysis estimate the Xbox Series consoles were outsold 3:1 by the PS5 world wide in 2023.
PlayStation sales and blockbuster games propel console market back to growth
Sony outsells Microsoft’s Xbox and Nintendo’s Switch as sector recovers from post-pandemic slump
www.ft.com
Because it's where the goal post has been moved to now from people who never thought Phil Spencer would get up in front of a camera and announce that Xbox games will be coming to Switch and Playstation. It's gone from "Xbox is not going third party" to "Okay Xbox is going a little bit third party but so is everyone else just wait!"
There is a loop where exclusive games are funded to attract customers to a platform, platform sales feed back into first party and third party exclusive (marketing, bundle, timed) efforts, which feed back into more platform sales. Sure, as a consumer I would like to have all games on my platform, but healthy competition means businesses are actively engaging in one upping the competition for the sake of their own platform. The only reason we are seeing one of the three platform holders go this route is due to severe declines in their hardware platform, as a result of competition. We are even seeing their sub service in decline due to the former.2023 was a really poor year for Xbox consoles though. They posted their worst November in the USA since 2006 and December had them in 3rd place with $150-$100 discounts on the Series X. No point even talking about the Europe numbers which are worse. Ampere Analysis estimate the Xbox Series consoles were outsold 3:1 by the PS5 world wide in 2023.
PlayStation sales and blockbuster games propel console market back to growth
Sony outsells Microsoft’s Xbox and Nintendo’s Switch as sector recovers from post-pandemic slump
I seriously thought it's on again with the MS acquisitions but the whole thing kinda fizzled out because of it.
No need to wait lol, Sony is right there with Xbox going a little bit 3rd party. Nintendo will continue to do their own thing though.
I remember when it was only a matter of time when Sony would be forced to follow MS and launch all their games on a service day 1. That take was so ubiquitous here that it still feels weird to see no one bring it up anymore lol
I mean what do you expect when they own Bethesda, Activision, and Blizzard…
I'm sure both companies are just fine with this though.
I'm sure both companies are just fine with this though.
Yeah I've been asking this a lot too. It's really funny how the gospel of Phil has sold so many people on this shift, but I don't think it's a model that makes sense for Sony and Nintendo. PC releases are different. It's really a different market in a lot of ways and a lot of people with PCs also have a PS5 or Switch.
Eh, watch them keep Elder Scrolls 6 and Fallout 5 as exclusives for the NextBox
The problem I think a lot of people are having is that the economics of success for games publishers are different from what the hardware manufacturers had back in the 90s/00s
Back then it was all about retail space because there wasn't online distribution so how did you get it? Be the hottest box with the biggest games so you had the best / most shelf space leading to a success spiral as more saw your thing and bought it leading to more money to develop and cultivate more games to get more shelf space etc etc
The 360/ps3 gen kinda shook things up with digital distribution but even so the main distribution advantage was still physical shelf space but it got dominated by the mega publishers taking space for fifa /cod / madden and it became more about placement and other physical merchandising tactics as people still went to the store to buy the new thing
Last gen that went away mostly and was helped by Covid in the bridge to this gen. Now the boxes are more expensive than ever to make and maintain the live storefronts but you get the kickbacks of having the engaged audience (hopefully) spending money and sub service cash on your ecosystem but there's one big detriment. The games that make the most money do so by being the most engaging. That takes hours out of the week to try something new or play a new single player game.
The black hole games are a real phenom and breaking into that space is going to require free and open access to as many potential consumers as possible. That keeps the player base alive and keeps the zeitgeist going which keeps the FOMO going which keeps the spend going.
The future isn't being behind somewhere and drawing people in. It's being everywhere and spreading awareness of your property out. Doubly so when Hollywood is knocking on your door for licensing content deals, the more wide spread the IP the more the license can be worth.
The Fallout TV show will help with the halo (not Halo) effect that Microsoft needs.
The bigger you get (absorving publishers) the most profit dependent you will be, this success of Xbox in the PS Store only will show Xbox that the multiplatform pivot is successfull, and that Satya "non-exclusivity" world is the way to go for Xbox.
And what sony thinks about this? I would imagine they are really happy their closest competitor is becoming their closest third party publisher in their store.
What it means for xbox fans? Like me.. feels weird but we have to move on, period.
And what sony thinks about this? I would imagine they are really happy their closest competitor is becoming their closest third party publisher in their store.
What it means for xbox fans? Like me.. feels weird but we have to move on, period.
Yeah Sony would be happy about this because this may accelerate the chances of Microsofts multiplat pivot. They will market themselves as the console thar gets exclusives and the widest third party content.
For Microsoft it allows them to compensate for their shrinking hardware sales and gets them more money. Win Win all around
For Microsoft it allows them to compensate for their shrinking hardware sales and gets them more money. Win Win all around
This thread is full of salt without a reason. I think it's good that Msoft games are selling well elsewhere.
It's a disappointment. And this is coming from some one who was super excited for the game
(You can look at my history).
I think it's more the gospel of Satya at this point given he telegraphed the 3rd party pivot back in his ABK trial testimony. This makes more sense for Microsoft anyway given how this is how the company operates at large. They support thier own infrastructures (Windows, Azure, Xbox, etc) but they also support competitive markets and ecosystems as primarily a services and software company. Because at their core that's what they are; software and services, not hardware or walled gardens. Xbox basically has to evolve to align with the larger corpo, though the continued userbase/subscriber hurdles and 3rd party acquisitions are also certainly helping speed things along.
At the same time I think "PC is different" rings a little hollow here. Last gen people were pointing to Microsoft's blanket PC support and loss of true Xbox 1st party exclusives as being central to the console's downfall but now I basically never see that rhetoric. Because PC multi has been normalized for console audiences at this point and who knows, maybe in another gen console multi (with similar stipulations; not day and date, targeted titles only, etc) will also become the norm?
Sony says they don't consider PC a competitive platform but over the last two years they told basically every major global regulator (FTC, CMA, CADE, etc), some under oath, the exact same thing about Switch. Would it really be so over the line to see something like old TLOU ports on Switch 2 timed with Seasons 2/3? Or something more likely to succeed in Nintendo's ecosystem versus Sony's own like a new Media Molecule title or Gravity Rush remaster (timed with the coming film)? I wonder how far the line from "PC is different" to "Nintendo is different" really is?
Come on man, this is some big "awkshually" energy, dude. 21 years and 6 months versus me just making a blanket statement with two decades.
I don't care for using the same logic since I don't think anyone other than the writer for this clearly click-bait article cares about the top sellers for the month on the Sony list with a breakdown of who has more titles. When it comes down to it I would rather have Sony and Nintendo do what they do with getting third parties to make exclusive games rather than outright buy the developer (or in MS's case entire publishers) for a swath of reasons.
I mean, the Rare acquisition is ancient history anyway. The fact you're reaching back two decades in the first place to try and make some point is sort of losing the plot. Microsoft didn't even have a console on shelves a year before they bought Rare and imagine if we applied this logic to Nintendo or Sony to single out and separate teams like Naughty Dog, Guerrilla, Monolith, Retro, Sucker Punch, Media Molecule, etc?
Relitigating old acquisitions is pointless now but framing it like Sony and Nintendo are on the same side here is off base too. They're not, they're as incomparable as either is from MS in some real fundamental ways.
I think going forward though the climate for acquisitions is slowing at both MS and Sony for various reasons so hopefully this will be a tired talking point we can leave behind.
It's not losing the plot when one company has so much money they can outright buy developers left and right. Its in no way comparable to the acquisitions Sony and Nintendo have done in the same time frame.
I mean, outside ABK they're not so incomparable to Sony. Zenimax was about double the cost of Bungie, both being AAA pubs, otherwise it's a lot of midsize studios and support devs. And again, I also still see a lot more continuity between MS and Sony than Sony and Nintendo, the framing here is off regarding that. Nintendo's the only one whose acquisition strategy isn't really changing either, because it was so limited and targeted from the outset.
But really, if you have to stretch back two decades to try and make a point, I dunno. It really just feels unnecessary and if anything probably more hurts your point BECAUSE it's such a reach.