-
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.
Phil Spencer to Tim Sweeney in August 2020: "haven't given up" on xCloud for other consoles
- Thread starter Deleted member 51691
- Start date
So it's 'realistic' for Microsoft to pull a Sega and become a 100% third party developer?
Porting whatever game off their catalog they want on Switch ala Rare Replay means that they are going 100% 3rdParty ? Not even Nintendo has all their games on Switch, ERA always has to be so dramatic.
We had literally a single person posting that they should just port the games if they wnat them on Switch instead of hoping for something that might neevr happen, compared to a dozenz claiming/hoping for GP/xCloud on Switch. I dont have issues with either takes, but the port begging police showing up because of a single remark that was somewhat related to the topic is weird.
This is being uploaded for public view from the trial that's currently ongoing.
As long as the hardware has a browser with the necessary features, yes.
Well, if it happens, it will be the end of consoles as we know it. The business model, that is. It makes no sense to go through all the trouble and expenses of developing a console so anyone can freely explore it financially.
On Switch I could see them giving access to games that otherwise wouldn't be available directly from Nintendo. But case in point, GP on other consoles would have to be a different thing to make sense for all involved.
I think Microsoft plan might be a tad bit more ambitious then just becoming a 3rd party developer...
It's called networking and abusing the relationships you make in business.
xCloud is streaming Gamepass games. Including Microsoft's first party games, which are THE staple of the service.
Asking for native ports of xCloud games to other consoles essentially means PS5 and Switch versions of all their first party games.
And that's what you've called 'more realistic' than just streaming 😂
these aren't leaks, they're court records from the Epic v Apple case
Microsoft didn't publish any of those Bethesda games on Switch. Do you know that?
Your post acts like they put all of those Bethesda games on Switch.
They didn't. They've ported a small handful of AA titles. Mainly the2 Ori titles and Minecraft Dungeons. But they didn't make the decisions or do the work porting stuff like Skyrim or Doom to the console.
Not really, this whole discussion was never about porting or bringing every MS game to Switch since this isnt realistic. Didnt expect that i would have to spell it out though.
In the past they have ported games over to the plattform when it made sense, nothing stopping them from doing the same in the future.
Dude you literally said:
"I mean you can google the numbers MS/Bethesda games on Switch.
Its higher than the number of 3rdParty Streaming Gaming plattforms"
The point you tried to make (that Microsoft has already ported a ton of games to the Switch) relies on accepting/assuming that Bethesda's output on the console was done under Microsoft.
Sure he's holding his breath on this guidance as Last of Us and Mario Galaxy is just right around the corner for Xbox platforms.
Re Ports: People are acting like Microsoft wants their games on other platforms. If they wanted their games on other platforms, they'd be on other platforms. Nothing stopping them from doing it.
What Microsoft wants is their ecosystem on other platforms. They want XCloud, Game Pass, Live and their 30% cut of MTX. Now the Switch is very underpowered compared to even the Series S. Why would MS want to go through the trouble of scaling down their game for a native port and spending a crapton doing it when they could just stream it and execute their vision with no restrictions? Granted, some games are far more scalable than others. There is a massive difference between a Tell Me Why or Ori and a Gears 5 or Forza Horizon 4, but the point being, Xbox wants their ecosystem expanded, not Switch sales of games, and the easiest and cheapest way to do it without remotely limiting developer output is XCloud.
What Microsoft wants is their ecosystem on other platforms. They want XCloud, Game Pass, Live and their 30% cut of MTX. Now the Switch is very underpowered compared to even the Series S. Why would MS want to go through the trouble of scaling down their game for a native port and spending a crapton doing it when they could just stream it and execute their vision with no restrictions? Granted, some games are far more scalable than others. There is a massive difference between a Tell Me Why or Ori and a Gears 5 or Forza Horizon 4, but the point being, Xbox wants their ecosystem expanded, not Switch sales of games, and the easiest and cheapest way to do it without remotely limiting developer output is XCloud.
Not really, MS has a history of bringing their content to Nintendo systems even outside of Bethesda but no point in repeating myself again since it seems like you just wanna continue arguing.
I'm not saying I disagree with you, I just thought I'd point out that the reason port begging isn't allowed isn't just because it's irritating, it's because it derails. So say you've got a piece of news about Game A, or an OT for it. Port begging shifts the conversation from being about the actual game and the platforms it is releasing on, to just a load of people likely not going to play the game, clamouring for it to be on another platform.
If every time there was a gamepass thread we saw loads of people derail and say "bring it to switch" then yes that'd be port begging. But as far as I can tell people only ask for gamepass on switch....in threads already about the possibility of gamepass on switch.
Like what? Minecraft and Minecraft Dungeons?
EDIT: ah yeah also Ori
Except there is a chance it will as time goes on.
How else would people play Starfield on the go with a dedicated console. Microsoft ain't making one
Considering what an absolute smashing success the Switch is, I don't think Nintendo will be interested in allowing XCloud into their walled garden. However, once we are a few years into this gen, the gap between the games on PS5 and Series X and those on Switch will grow considerably, both in terms of visuals and what's possible in gameplay.
Once major third party games stop being ported to Switch because the Teraflop gap is too wide, maybe they will reconsider. But then again, by that time, they might be getting ready to launch the next gen Switch (and I don't mean the mid-gen upgrade here), so who knows.
EDIT: Holy SHIT WAS I WRONG. Phil Stays winning.
Once major third party games stop being ported to Switch because the Teraflop gap is too wide, maybe they will reconsider. But then again, by that time, they might be getting ready to launch the next gen Switch (and I don't mean the mid-gen upgrade here), so who knows.
EDIT: Holy SHIT WAS I WRONG. Phil Stays winning.
As said it before i dont have issues with either form of begging the optics were just funny to me to single out the single - just port the games to Switch - post in a sea full of GP/xCloud on Switch posts. Its just weird to me how you can be okay with the whole sentiment of the thread and still feel the need to call out that single post instead of keeping it moving or at least offer some arguments why this isnt happening.
Im not asking for anything just saying that MS can port whatever game they want to Switch. Thats something in their power like they did with Minecraft Dungeons or Ori.
Its not in their power to have xCloud/GP on Switch.
So yeah...as of today the route that is possible and already been established is more realistic than something that isnt even on the table.
Maybe.. we can play Xcloud, inside Stadia, Inside PSNOW which is inside Geforce now...
Starfield on phones would be virtually identical to a hypothetical streaming Switch version, just with more options, resolution, and 5G capability
PS5 and Switch don't have a web browser in their OS (ok, there is in Switch, but it's hidden). I have always thought that this choice is made precisely to avoid the use of unauthorized streaming platforms.
I think it was always obvious that the only way a Microsoft/Bethesda game would appear on other consoles (outside the exceptions like Minecraft) would be through streaming.
A subscription sold is a lot more valuable to Microsoft.
It also means developers can develop for Xbox hardware and PC and still have their games available everywhere.
A subscription sold is a lot more valuable to Microsoft.
It also means developers can develop for Xbox hardware and PC and still have their games available everywhere.
Here a pre email btw
""Long ago, we talked optimistically about the possibility of subscription-free multiplayer on Xbox"
So the rumors about dropping Gold paywall for multiplayer weren't just rumors. As Sweeney writes, the discourse seems to be general and not only related to F2P. Microsoft has even discussed the matter with its third-party partners. Credits to Grubb.
It's pretty obvious when you look at how the service has been treated over the last 18 months or so.
But, same with Bethesda exclusivity, people get really hung up on "leaving money on the table" and don't necessarily look at the bigger pictjre.
MS is like a fuckin XL tanker no wonder its taken 7 years to recover from XBO
I know this is a joke, but twitter is a viable option to get a response from Phil. He's answered a surprising number of my tweets in the past and he got me into the Insider program right when it released by communicating with him on there.
Phil is a nice guy even in his private emails. I was hoping to see an evil maniacal side of him.
Also shows how fast a company can lose trust, despite past success, and how hard it is to rebuild. Super glad MS has taken this trust first model, and working to rebuild that versus just technology approaches. Big boats sink fast.
100% agreed, not listening to their 360 customers in what made the 360 so successful totally effed them up, xbox was lucky enough to survive last generation and Spencer had enough balls to convince Nadella to go all in or go home.
How am I supposed to beg him, implore him, to not turn Indiana Jones into another generic ass FPS and to make it the 3rd person action adventure they are sorely lacking =(( ?
Once games start being next-gen exclusive, Switch ports will be nigh on impossible unless devs literally make a different game, so sort of like how PC games and console ports were back in the day. Even a Switch Pro might not be much help here unless there is also a big CPU upgrade and that is not even taking into account SSDs.
What's most interesting to me, at least from reading OP, is the question of whether Epic had let Marvel/Disney in on what they were about to do with regard to setting the Apple lawsuit in motion. Seems like Epic had a lot of things lined up to maximize the visibility of this situation, but like, was Disney interested in being a part of that?
I assume that their collaboration must also have just been a set fee or something, rather than like, Marvel getting a percentage of revenues from sales. Otherwise you'd think Epic would get some blowback from Marvel for alienating a large marketplace for the game? Who knows, perhaps we'll see those emails coming up soon too.
I assume that their collaboration must also have just been a set fee or something, rather than like, Marvel getting a percentage of revenues from sales. Otherwise you'd think Epic would get some blowback from Marvel for alienating a large marketplace for the game? Who knows, perhaps we'll see those emails coming up soon too.
Give me a reason that Nintendo will ok that. Unless it's exclusively Microsoft games only.
Real takeaway here is Phil is the only one in all these emails between MS, Epic, Sony, Apple using Calibri font.
I knew this dude was legit lol.
I mean it makes sense that comes across as approachable...he's literally worked his way up from an intern to the face of Xbox during their (what looks looks) redemption arc. The dude worked on god damn Encarta lol.
He didn't just become an exec day one, and that makes a difference. I work directly with C-suite execs and high level govt officials and you can tell the ones who walked in at that level from the ones who have put the time in to get there.
No doubt he is a ruthless businessman, but you can be extremely proficient without being a dick; honey/vinegar, etc...
I knew this dude was legit lol.
Lol not gonna lie, but kinda same...
I mean it makes sense that comes across as approachable...he's literally worked his way up from an intern to the face of Xbox during their (what looks looks) redemption arc. The dude worked on god damn Encarta lol.
He didn't just become an exec day one, and that makes a difference. I work directly with C-suite execs and high level govt officials and you can tell the ones who walked in at that level from the ones who have put the time in to get there.
No doubt he is a ruthless businessman, but you can be extremely proficient without being a dick; honey/vinegar, etc...
