I feel like ya'lls argument shouldn't be that Microsoft has exclusives because of X or Y but that they no longer have exclusives and that's a good thing and consumers should be pushing other platforms to do the same.
-
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.
Next generation: the end of the "xbox has no exclusive'' problem?
- Thread starter fireflame
- Start date
Not it makes them PlayStation exclusive, they are multiplat though.
I'll discussion the topic at hand. If pretending something is exclusive makes you happy, ignore me. I truly couldn't careless. I'm not going to pretend something is exclusive to a single platform or platform brand when it's not.
What a ridiculous discussion on semantics this is.
It's quite simple. They invest in developers to put out content for Game pass, much in the same way Netflix invests in their original content. More first party studios, the more software to keep people subscribed to Game Pass. If console gamers want Game Pass, they'll have to buy an Xbox. Those people will subscribe to Xbox Live, be introduced to Mixer (even if they don't particularly want too...) and a host of other MS services.
If you want Game Pass without a console, you'll need a Windows PC, which makes it likely you'll use MS Office or even better Office 365, use Cortana, and other MS related services. And yeah, it's a good argument that most people already have these things, but Game Pass gives you more reason to stick with Windows and its ecosystem and not make the jump to Apple and its ecosystem for instance.
Gamers get a pretty good deal out of it, getting to play lots of game through a quite well priced subscription service which gives Microsoft a nice, predictable, stable income instead of relying on specific quarters to become profitable.
The question isn't: which consoles has the best exclusives. The question is, when the next-gen arrives, which choice will people make when they have to decide between being able to play those Sony exclusives or paying 99 dollars a year for a steady stream of okay-to-pretty-good games.
It's quite simple. They invest in developers to put out content for Game pass, much in the same way Netflix invests in their original content. More first party studios, the more software to keep people subscribed to Game Pass. If console gamers want Game Pass, they'll have to buy an Xbox. Those people will subscribe to Xbox Live, be introduced to Mixer (even if they don't particularly want too...) and a host of other MS services.
If you want Game Pass without a console, you'll need a Windows PC, which makes it likely you'll use MS Office or even better Office 365, use Cortana, and other MS related services. And yeah, it's a good argument that most people already have these things, but Game Pass gives you more reason to stick with Windows and its ecosystem and not make the jump to Apple and its ecosystem for instance.
Gamers get a pretty good deal out of it, getting to play lots of game through a quite well priced subscription service which gives Microsoft a nice, predictable, stable income instead of relying on specific quarters to become profitable.
The question isn't: which consoles has the best exclusives. The question is, when the next-gen arrives, which choice will people make when they have to decide between being able to play those Sony exclusives or paying 99 dollars a year for a steady stream of okay-to-pretty-good games.
I guess no one remember how Fable TLC, Halo, Gears of War 1 had a Windows release... and ho gamers threw a fit, when it was announced that Gears 2, Fable II and Halo 3 won't be ported. And it continued when it was announced that Mass Effect and GTA IV's DLC would be exclusive to Xbox 360 for a year before moving to PC.
But now the fact that Microsoft removed those restrictions is deemed stupid?
But now the fact that Microsoft removed those restrictions is deemed stupid?
No Steam is a complete gaming platform in itself with it's own features and even devices. Or do I also need to explain what a gaming platform is too?
Maybe for League of Legends or Warcraft.
"Most people don't have gaming PCs" also means "most people don't have gaming laptops." An MX150 or Vega 11 can scrape by in some of the Microsoft exclusives, but the experience isn't going to be as good as on the $250 XB1S.
The casual gamer who wants to play the new Halo is probably going to buy an Xbox rather than grind through the campaign on 720p all-low ~30FPS while their note-taking laptop melts. If they have a capable DGPU then they're already in the minority of laptop owners.
lol
Steam is a service. (a free service) on a hardware (platform).
The point of all the console war discussions (which is really the only point of any debates about "exclusives") is justifying the VALUE of hardware necessary to play particular games.
in 95+% of cases, computer hardware is associated with Microsoft's OS, which is why "PC is considered to be an inherent part of Microsoft's ecosystem"- because "when you buy a PC, you still pay Microsoft money", which is essentially equivalent of buying a piece of hardware to play games from Microsoft- in either case, you are paying Microsoft for the ability to have access to the ability to play and purchase their games.
The (sad) reality is that Microsoft appears to have been the last ones to realize that PC Gamers are inherently, by default their customers. And have (recently) decided not to treat PC gamers as second-class customers, but rather make playing their games on PC more convenient, because *gasp* this leads to better sales.
But for all intents in purposes, in an overwhelming majority of cases, The PC is Microsoft's platform-as far as base cost of participation is concerned. . One that they are (only now) capitalizing on with regard to their games for additional revenue.
In theory, Microsoft is already making money off 95+% of PC gamers, simply by the virtue of them using PCs that run Microsoft's OS. By alowing them to play Microsoft's first party games, they are simply increasing the revenue they get from people who are already (by definition) their customers.
Which is why, when it comes to gaming, Sony and Microsoft are nowhere near the same weight category when you get down to it. It just took Microsoft the better part of 3 generations to realize that instead of competing between "its" PC gaming audience and the potential home console audience it would be more luctrative to offer quality service to both groups. Which is what we are starting to see with its new moves in PC space. It's taking a more proactive role with "its other" platform that it neglected for so long.
Windows 10 is the platform and it's owned by Microsoft. I guess if you really wanted to you could stick it to Microsoft by being one of the 0.4% of steam users who boots into GNU/Linux and pays for Microsoft's gaming products that way.
Console-only gamers exist, therefor console exclusive is a useful term for them. The only reason this could possibly bother someone would be if they were upset that the "other team" was getting "fake console war points" by saying they have ""true exclusives"". Yes you're never going to have to buy an Xbox ever again if you have a reasonably capable Windows PC. If you're an MSFT stock holder and are legitimately worried about the gaming division's profitability then you have my sincere condolences.
Console-only gamers exist, therefor console exclusive is a useful term for them. The only reason this could possibly bother someone would be if they were upset that the "other team" was getting "fake console war points" by saying they have ""true exclusives"". Yes you're never going to have to buy an Xbox ever again if you have a reasonably capable Windows PC. If you're an MSFT stock holder and are legitimately worried about the gaming division's profitability then you have my sincere condolences.
You are confusing computing platforms (Windows, Linux, Apple, Android) with gaming platforms, Steam is as much a gaming Platform as PlayStation is.
While Steam provides a gaming ecosystem comparable to that of PlayStation or Xbox, it has no upfront associated hardware cost that Valve directly benefits from. So I don't consider the comparison relevant, when the whole semantic debate is really about "who would you rather give money to for the best value when it comes to gaming".
I can buy a new PC (whereas Microsoft will get my money for the OS), make a new Steam account and populate it entirely with games i buy from 3rd party retailers- gaining full access to all the benefits of Valve's ecosystem, while paying them nothing.
It has nothing to do with who you give money too. But a lot of goal moving from pretty much everyone trying to argue what a exclusive is, pretty telling on this subject.
oh?
so what's the point of debating which console manufacturer is better then?
Disclosure: I never owned a console in my life, so i have no stakes in this, aside from seeing LESS exclusives overall. So I'm openly supporting Microsoft here, because, well, they're making moves that benefit me directly.
All it is telling you is that the ecosystem is changing. PSNow, Xbox on Windows, Xbox on Steam, xCloud, Stadia, it's all changing. If PSNow releases games day and date with the PS5, it's possible that there will be no Playstation 5 exclusives anymore, either.
And if it gets these games into more peoples' hands, it is truly a good thing.
It will probably be better with the new acquisitions, but they are far, FAR behind Sony in terms of 1st party AAA.
I haven't once said who was better.
I don't dispute or disagree with any of that. Hell Streaming will eventually (decades probably) reduce them all to apps too, but they'll still have exclusives and multiplat games (well I hope anyway, wouldn't be surprised if every publisher had their own streaming platform with their stuff exclusively on them), but that's a different topic all together.
As I mentioned above, the ONLY point of discussing exclusives is arguing which ecosystem is better. By engaging in discussion about exclusivity, you will always be perceived as advocating for one system over another. That's the definition of console war arguments.
I honestly can't conceive of another reason to even bring this up.
Nah, as I've went over time and time again, "Xbox One has no exclusives" isn't people saying "Xbox/MS has no games" the later would be console warring, the former is just pretty much true and will continue into the future based on what MS themselves have said. The question in the title is will that go away when talking about Xbox Consoles in the future, my answer is no, that is where all this spawned from.
You only get consoles wars if you approach it that way, exclusivity is not really a vague thing, neither is what makes something multiplat, but that's not my problem, as I can keep shooting those who approach the discussion with that mindset all day, they very rarely address what I said, just what they wanted me to say or something completely different.
The console Xbox S/X does not have exclusives and I have 0 incentives to buy their consoles BUT I have all the reasons to stick with W10 and sub Gamepass, so that is that.
I hope they can put good games in the service, being their own or third party
I hope they can put good games in the service, being their own or third party
You ARE arguing semantics, though.
"Xbox exclusives" of this gen will be replaced by "Microsoft console exclusives" across the board. I don't think any reasonable person will argue beyond that, or try to dispute that.
This marketing will be targeted at people deciding which console to purchase, who are not interested in gaming on PC. Those who are, will already know that Microsoft's games are coming to PC.
Trying to point out that these are not "real exclusives" at this point becomes either an attempt to diminish the value of microsoft's games or just meaningless pedantry and borderline trolling (imho)
I use Mac's, so gaming outside of consoles is a no go ATM. Having more exclusive games is a selling point for me. So Gears 5 is totally exclusive to Xbox, in my case.
Plenty tried to.
Also in a thread asking the question will something that will only be more true as time goes on, with the answer no and why, is borderline trolling, then everything is. Unless arguing your point is boring trolling too.
I don't understand why we care if something is exclusive or not.
And if we do. Isn't the lack of exclusives a positive thing?
And if we do. Isn't the lack of exclusives a positive thing?
yes. If Sony and Nintendo see Microsoft make more money by putting their games on PC and decide to put their games on PC, I will be very pleased (and might even give them money for games I find interesting).
Hmm, i'm not sure that is 100% true. They just revamped their publishing group (Xbox Game Studios Publishing) with the old guy that used to lead the game publishing division in Warner Bros. I think that they want to own the IP's, but i'm sure we'll still see the publishing arm doing a lot of work in the near future.
LOL, you seem to care. You appear rattled with the multiple grammar errors in this post above. You care and you are arguing vehemently for the last 9+ hours about how the Xbox doesn't have any exclusives. The question is, why do you care so much?
You really need to work on your reading comprehension, it's getting embarrassing now. I couldn't careless if he ignores me. Projecting as usual?
I wonder what there original plan was regarding exclusives?
I suppose it was quite similar to the 360 in a way but 360 had more 3rd party exclusives, however like the x1 the 360 also had a lot of exclusives at the start but they became less about half way through the gen.
I think they thought they could spend big the first few years, then rely on there staples (halo, gears, forza)
Thankfully, I think they have realised that this approach is not the best.
Competition is just so dam strong these days, platforms can't rely on franchises and gameplay formulas they need to be like shawn laydens "first, best, must" strategy, having the best quality but also being fresh and exciting.
I suppose it was quite similar to the 360 in a way but 360 had more 3rd party exclusives, however like the x1 the 360 also had a lot of exclusives at the start but they became less about half way through the gen.
I think they thought they could spend big the first few years, then rely on there staples (halo, gears, forza)
Thankfully, I think they have realised that this approach is not the best.
Competition is just so dam strong these days, platforms can't rely on franchises and gameplay formulas they need to be like shawn laydens "first, best, must" strategy, having the best quality but also being fresh and exciting.
My reading comprehension? Huh? Your grammar is terrible. I can comprehend what you're trying to say, but I'm just saying you need to improve your grammar. But this is off topic. Take this to pm if you want to know more
Obsidian, NT, Playground...
The next game from all these studios and more will not be on PS4
Ori 2 wont be on PS4 or ps5...
Outer Worlds had a contract with private division to keep it on ps4, same with psychonauts 2
Going forward MS will not be putting games on PS...
***Unless Sony allows gamepass on Playstation which they never will.
I love when this comes up and of course Forza Horizon is always ignored and now Gears 5 is a great hit now too.
I think quality will keep increasing in MS's first party.
I think they've had exclusives all around this generation, some good, some bad. If the current effort is enough? I don't think it is. Personally I don't even think even Sony has enough at the moment either despite having a greater output than MS throughout the generation.
Nintendo is currently killing it in terms of exclusives output. I don't enjoy some of the games they output at certain times but they've continously releasing something for the audiences at the very least.
Sheer breadth of titles matters because not everyone is going to enjoy every title each publisher releases. Example, I absolutely love Days Gone one of my favourite games this year but reading through, a lot of people are down on it or didn't share any interest towards the title and if you didn't enjoy it, there was really not much else from Sony.
MS have been delivering quality titles. Gears V is a very solid game, Forza horizon 4 is one of the best arcade racers you can play especially now Sony doesn't really have an offering, Cuphead and Ori are excellent and Sunset was a very incredible new I.P.
Nintendo is currently killing it in terms of exclusives output. I don't enjoy some of the games they output at certain times but they've continously releasing something for the audiences at the very least.
Sheer breadth of titles matters because not everyone is going to enjoy every title each publisher releases. Example, I absolutely love Days Gone one of my favourite games this year but reading through, a lot of people are down on it or didn't share any interest towards the title and if you didn't enjoy it, there was really not much else from Sony.
MS have been delivering quality titles. Gears V is a very solid game, Forza horizon 4 is one of the best arcade racers you can play especially now Sony doesn't really have an offering, Cuphead and Ori are excellent and Sunset was a very incredible new I.P.
It's arguable that steam is its own platform. Could go either way.
But the fact that you don't need Windows to play a Windows game anymore should make it evident that PC at-large is not Microsoft's platform. They don't get a cut, they don't get a say, they just sell a game and gain a mau.
This situation wasn't their first choice, either. They wanted uwp so they could have a cut of everything sold and control over everything.
I don't understand why people are trying to pin down what exclusive means still. When I say "still", I mean today alone LOL. Call it a night and resume tomorrow, guys.
It's clearly a very wooly definition. Actually been that way for a long time although it's getting more so. You got madden 93 on both Genesis and Super Nintendo, but the good version was exclusive to Genesis...
Right. It's pretty disingenuous when people say "Microsoft don't care, as long as you're playing their games, it doesn't matter what device you use".
If you buy an Xbox to play MS games on it, you will also buy a bunch of third party games/DLC that MS get a sizable cut from.
If you buy a PC to play MS games, you buy MS published games on the Windows App Store or Steam, they make money from that sale, but then you'll buy the rest of your games from Steam, which MS don't see anything from.
MS would obviously prefer users to be fully immersed in their ecosystem, that doesn't happen on Windows, but it does on Xbox.
No you weren't saying that. You were clear on what you were trying to say and it's only like the 5th time you completely failed understanding something in the thread and tried arguing against it. Work on your reading comprehension.
y'all need to knock it off. This thread is not about who has better reading comprehension. Cool off and either come back to to topic at hand or don't post.
Honestly this whole thread just seems to pointless arguing over semantics. At the end of the day Microsoft doesn't gauge their success based on exclusive software to sell boxes, they may have in the past but don't anymore. They gauge their success based on active users in their ecosystem, regardless of platform. How this relates to their competitor's using more traditional exclusives, and whether PC counts as exclusive seems so pointless to talk about. Microsoft doesn't care and you shouldn't either, they're going forward with their new metrics.
At the end of the day... Unless you have a PC to play those Xbox games... It doesn't fucking matter. You will need their console or stream from xCloud to play their games. Otherwise the "exclusive" banter is just bullshit. It's not a "problem" either because it's not a "problem" for Microsoft as their main focus is getting people on GamePass and everything else is extra.
Microsoft has about 270 billion in cash just laying around they bought a open source repository for 7.5 billion they should buy SEGA and or Capcom for around 5-8 a piece or they can buy take two for around 15 billion then they won't have to worry about lack of exclusives anymore.
And sony will respond with their own big purchases nobody wants to go down this road.
