Xbox Business Update Podcast | Xbox Everywhere Direction Discussion

[rntongo]

The advertising is for folks who don’t have ann Xbox already. That means they are trying to get some % of people to cross over into the Xbox ecosystem with as little friction as possible. The console is a massive friction point and the only people buying a console generally means they are already invested into what is being offered.

Not entirely, its targeted to people that were still on the Xbox One, PS4, those who had moved to PC, plus those you've mentioned and others. Its very simply telling consumers you dont need to buy our hardware to experience Xbox. Which if they can implement would be impressive, but I have my doubts.

What is the likelihood that someone who is fully vested into PlayStation will buy into Xbox games if they had to buy a Console? What if they already have a PC and a mobile device? Very cheap bar to entry. Get them to try it and let them determine if they want to go further and get a better experience.

The key is to get people to engage with Xbox. That is the challenge they are trying to solve.

I'm not sold on the idea that there was no growth for Xbox's hardware. I'm more convinced disappointing hardware sales were caused by external and internal factors. External factors were chip shortage and global pandemic which led to supply chain issues and SDLC challenges. Internal factors were related to complicating the hw product line up with two SKUs launched at once, management's focus on acquisitions instead of the quality and consistency of Gaming software. So now they're simply pivoting completely away from their own hardware.

What makes me a supporter of the Xbox console is the simple greatness, convenience and gamepass provided by the console, the fact is that I also like MS games.

However, if they give me all the convenience and quality gaming experience in the Gamepass subscription system so that I have to buy an XboxPC, I'm fine with it. Actually, it wouldn't bother me if there was only one game version in the future, that is, the PC version of the games would run on the next Xbox console. I say, if all of this is paired with a gaming experience similar to the one I have now, I'll buy it.

I used to have a theory that it would always hold up. If a sufficient quantity and quality of games were made exclusive again, it would be a success. An example: imagine the debut of the next Xbox console with the following exclusive games, Elder Scrolls 6, Forza Horizon 6, Quake next gen, Gears of War, Spyro, they own AAA GTA clone. All of these were released exclusively for the console at launch and only a year later for PC. I'm sure those titles would make that console like candy. Then to continue the one-year exclusive strategy with similarly big titles every year. They have the development capacity for it. In fact, the formula would be that simple, people would simply not be able to resist such an offer.

But the management does not have enough confidence to do so. However, they would have nothing to lose, in fact, it would be the best way to multiply Gamepass subscriptions for a new console. Who would be a fool to avoid this? Seeing the aforementioned game titles, which you can get all at once, packaged in an affordable box for an $18 subscription, you'd be well on your way to becoming part of the subscription system.

Interesting take, and I especially agree that a sufficient quantity and quality of games made as timed exclusives would help Xbox tremendously. But the brand has been atrophied so much that they need to launch on other platforms almost immediately after launch for a large number of games. The strategy under Phil is pushing Xbox towards being a third party publisher.

Because it's not the same experience anywhere else. I would (and do, check my post history lol) that PC isn't that hard to work and most gamers could probably figure it out, but Xbox still provides a console experience you won't find on PC or any handheld (save for maybe Steam Deck but even then not really). Really good example of this: try using a PC or handheld as a way to watch videos and movies without spending all day reading guides on the home theater PC subreddit lol.

I agree with you 100% but MS Gaming thinks they can actually make it work without the need for a console. Where you dont need a console to experience Xbox. Of course you as a gamer know this isnt quite accurate. But the marketing is a clear signal to where they are driving things at the moment. Maybe they can pull it off?

My problem with this is these are all washed up has-been franchises from has-been developers. I'm sorry, and this might be overly harsh, but ES6 is going to be dampened by how bad Starfield was, FH6 will be damped by how every new title in that franchise is a location reskin of the old, Quake is good but isn't going to sell consoles (alas, this has always been a more PC oriented franchise), GoW hasn't been relevant for years (same for Halo although you didn't mention it), I can't even remember the last time I thought about a Spyro game. A new franchise would be nice but if its a generic 'GTA clone' nobody is going to play it over the real GTA6/Online.

I feel you 100% I get what you're saying. The reason for this imho is the focus from management has been on acquisitions and pivoting Xbox into some sort of Gaming service, cloud gaming, third party publisher type company. Thats the new strategy for growth. At the start of the Xbox One gen, there was still a lot of people from the OG Xbox and the Xbox 360 who helped create a spectacular launch line up but thats not the case anymore. Other goals took over. Never know there may be a change and at least one of these new upcoming titles will have that refreshing feeling you and others(including myself) seek.

 

[QPlayer]

Because it's not the same experience anywhere else. I would (and do, check my post history lol) that PC isn't that hard to work and most gamers could probably figure it out, but Xbox still provides a console experience you won't find on PC or any handheld (save for maybe Steam Deck but even then not really). Really good example of this: try using a PC or handheld as a way to watch videos and movies without spending all day reading guides on the home theater PC subreddit lol.


My problem with this is these are all washed up has-been franchises from has-been developers. I'm sorry, and this might be overly harsh, but ES6 is going to be dampened by how bad Starfield was, FH6 will be damped by how every new title in that franchise is a location reskin of the old, Quake is good but isn't going to sell consoles (alas, this has always been a more PC oriented franchise), GoW hasn't been relevant for years (same for Halo although you didn't mention it), I can't even remember the last time I thought about a Spyro game. A new franchise would be nice but if its a generic 'GTA clone' nobody is going to play it over the real GTA6/Online.

Thanks to Starfield, it's doing well, it received a great critical reception and millions of people are still playing this year's updates (check the official download data for creations mods if you don't believe it).
The Elder Scrolls 6 =/ Starfield. I am convinced that if anyone were to release a console with an exclusive ES6, everyone would buy it for this game alone. Even a year later, many people couldn't wait for the PC version, which is so popular, see the popularity of Skyrim today!
Forza Horizon 5 is the most popular car game ever made, it is played by more than ten million people, it still has millions of video views in various media, and is constantly on the daily agenda.
Gears of War can move a lot of fans, this year's Xbox Game showcase showed that.
Continued Etc.

I don't agree with you on almost anything, but this is a forum, everyone comments from their own point of view, but the facts about the games mentioned above are real.

 

[Cappuccino]

Thanks to Starfield, it's doing well, it received a great critical reception and millions of people are still playing this year's updates (check the official download data for creations mods if you don't believe it).

Starfield was hyped for half a decade and was the first Bethesda title since FO4 (76 was a satellite studio) and it received a whopping 83 on Metacritic and a 6.8 for user scores. A huge blockbuster from one of the most well known developers receiving what is essentially a B- is not good critical reception.

 

[rntongo]

Thanks to Starfield, it's doing well, it received a great critical reception and millions of people are still playing this year's updates (check the official download data for creations mods if you don't believe it).
The Elder Scrolls 6 =/ Starfield. I am convinced that if anyone were to release a console with an exclusive ES6, everyone would buy it for this game alone. Even a year later, many people couldn't wait for the PC version, which is so popular, see the popularity of Skyrim today!
Forza Horizon 5 is the most popular car game ever made, it is played by more than ten million people, it still has millions of video views in various media, and is constantly on the daily agenda.
Gears of War can move a lot of fans, this year's Xbox Game showcase showed that.
Continued Etc.

I don't agree with you on almost anything, but this is a forum, everyone comments from their own point of view, but the facts about the games mentioned above are real.

I think you have some good points but Capuccino as well has some good points. ES, Skyrim Gears of War and Forza have been consistently great IPs, and if anyone was to bet those would be some of the ones you'd expect to continue pushing out great titles. But there is a lack of general innovation of a new title that represents this gen. Otherwise I still think those are going to do well and much better than Starfield.

 

[rntongo]

Starfield was hyped for half a decade and was the first Bethesda title since FO4 (76 was a satellite studio) and it received a whopping 83 on Metacritic and a 6.8 for user scores. A huge blockbuster from one of the most well known developers receiving what is essentially a B- is not good critical reception.

I wouldnt give it anything above 60. Couldnt believe how bad it was when I played it. It felt like I was transported to 2014. I hear its much better now with mods and stuff though

 

[rntongo]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1861514604716700013

https://twitter.com/x/status/1861515681805521255

This is the early stage of a major business change for MS Gaming away from hardware being a core part of the business. I strongly suspect there may be attempts to have the MS Gaming store/Service on any computing device be it a Playstation or Nintendo device. Of course the competition wont like this or will challenge it.

 

[iroboto]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1861514604716700013

https://twitter.com/x/status/1861515681805521255

This is the early stage of a major business change for MS Gaming away from hardware being a core part of the business. I strongly suspect there may be attempts to have the MS Gaming store/Service on any computing device be it a Playstation or Nintendo device. Of course the competition wont like this or will challenge it.

You can’t force yourself into other people’s stores lol. Why do you go on this tangent. Consoles are sold at a loss to allow the ecosystem to thrive.

They are not required to host MS. MS is every bit as incumbent as Sony. They would not be allowed.

 

[rntongo]

You can’t force yourself into other people’s stores lol. Why do you go on this tangent. Consoles are sold at a loss to allow the ecosystem to thrive.

They are not required to host MS. MS is every bit as incumbent as Sony. They would not be allowed.

I think eventually they may take this route. Thats a risk even though it seems quite remote at the moment but over the long term its not out of the question.

 

[iroboto]

I think eventually they may take this route. Thats a risk even though it seems quite remote at the moment but over the long term its not out of the question.

This is only a thing if Xbox was trying to break into the industry. They are an incumbent. I understand Netflix, Amazon, Google and new entrants needing to break into the space. But Xbox is already rooted. There are only 3, console manufacturers, 2 if you look at non mobile.

It will never happen. Ever. We’ve never seen a duopoly where they could force their own stuff onto another platform and break into their customer base. I don’t think there is any precedent for this in any industry.

 

[rntongo]

This is only a thing if Xbox was trying to break into the industry. They are an incumbent. I understand Netflix, Amazon, Google and new entrants needing to break into the space. But Xbox is already rooted. There are only 3, console manufacturers, 2 if you look at non mobile.

It will never happen. Ever. We’ve never seen a duopoly where they could force their own stuff onto another platform and break into their customer base. I don’t think there is any precedent for this in any industry.

IIRC MS tried framing themselves as 3rd place or even worse during the FTC/ABK trials. I wouldnt put it past them to push their gamestore/service onto platforms such as Sony's playstation or Nintendo Switch if things dont go well with the move out of hardware. But you're right its a stretch at this point.... Unless they start releasing "This is an Xbox" ads showing a Nintendo Switch or Playstation device.

 

[iroboto]

IIRC MS tried framing themselves as 3rd place or even worse during the FTC/ABK trials. I wouldnt put it past them to push their gamestore/service onto platforms such as Sony's playstation or Nintendo Switch if things dont go well with the move out of hardware. But you're right it’s a stretch at this point.... Unless they start releasing "This is an Xbox" ads showing a Nintendo Switch or Playstation device.

Regulatory would never approve of it.
The goal of regulatory is to promote competition, this move would be anti competitive you may as well allow MS to acquire Sony.

 

[rntongo]

Regulatory would never approve of it.
The goal of regulatory is to promote competition, this move would be anti competitive you may as well allow MS to acquire Sony.

Dont be so sure!! Look at this that came out today(MS to bypass Android app store). I strongly believe this is MS Gaming business strategy to ride on the Epic case and force Android, iOS, Playstation, Nintendo to allow the Xbox gamestore/service on their platforms. They can simply ride on the precedent set by the Epic case.

 

[iroboto]

Dont be so sure!! Look at this that came out today(MS to bypass Android app store). I strongly believe this is MS Gaming business strategy to ride on the Epic case and force Android, iOS, Playstation, Nintendo to allow the Xbox gamestore/service on their platforms. They can simply ride on the precedent set by the Epic case.

Yes. That’s because MS is not a player in the mobile space. The incumbents are Apple and android. There are no other stores.

MS didn’t force their way into android. A law was passed that requires android to not block other stores on android, the exception of course would be apples. Google displayed anti competitive behaviour while having a monopoly. Many stores despite how large they were, failed to make any headway into the android market due to googles polciies


They want more players in the space to bring competition. MS would be a new competitor in the mobile space.

WRT consoles; MS, Sony and Nintendo should not be able to deny new entrants like EA and Ubisoft should they want to deploy in their ecosystems.

If you look carefully, both EA and Ubisoft have sub services in Xbox. And i don’t think any incumbents are showing anti competitive behaviour right now. Even then in court epic did not go after consoles, probably because there’s no way to win on those platforms.

 

[rntongo]

Yes. That’s because MS is not a player in the mobile space. The incumbents are Apple and android. There are no other stores.

MS didn’t force their way into android. A law was passed that requires android to not block other stores on android, the exception of course would be apples. Google displayed anti competitive behaviour while having a monopoly. Many stores despite how large they were, failed to make any headway into the android market due to googles polciies


They want more players in the space to bring competition. MS would be a new competitor in the mobile space.

WRT consoles; MS, Sony and Nintendo should not be able to deny new entrants like EA and Ubisoft should they want to deploy in their ecosystems.

If you look carefully, both EA and Ubisoft have sub services in Xbox. And i don’t think any incumbents are showing anti competitive behaviour right now. Even then in court epic did not go after consoles, probably because there’s no way to win on those platforms.

See this is what I'm talking about! I remember buying Watchdogs when I had just bought the Series X and as soon as I downloaded the game I was required to now register myself for the Ubisoft store for a game I had bought from the MS gaming store. I complained so hard on Resetera (this was back in late 2020) the requirement was removed. I'm not about that life tbh. I dont want another recursive step into another game store and I'm sure a lot of consumers dont want this. It makes sense on PC, but when I buy a playstation or an Xbox I want one game store, not the convoluted mess that MS gaming and Epic may be coming up with. Same thing with my iPhone, I dont want to be forced to deal with multiple app and game stores. It may be lucrative for certain companies but clearly its not what a large amount of consumers want. Its a slippery slope from there on where Xbox could request that all games on Playstation from their publishers be accessible through a cloud subservice on the Playstation platform. But this is early days.

Dont forget MS framed themselves as underperforming underdogs in the console gaming space. They could frame Sony and Nintendo as anti competitive since MS's whole new business angle is software stores must open up. The target is companies that have established a unifying game store and well functioning hardware/software ecosystem.

 

[Nisaaru]

See this is what I'm talking about! I remember buying Watchdogs when I had just bought the Series X and as soon as I downloaded the game I was required to now register myself for the Ubisoft store for a game I had bought from the MS gaming store. I complained so hard on Resetera (this was back in late 2020) the requirement was removed. I'm not about that life tbh. I dont want another recursive step into another game store and I'm sure a lot of consumers dont want this.

Can't recall I had to do that with Watchdogs but I have to do that for freaking Activision now to try BlackOps6 which is just ridiculous.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

That's the downside for cross-platform multiplayer. All these different backends need to be sync'd, so you need another account to do that, meaning accounts with every publisher and even for different games, completely reversing the move of Xbox Live to consolidate everything into one login. Progress. Yay!

 

[iroboto]

They could frame Sony and Nintendo as anti competitive since MS's whole new business angle is software stores must open up.

How can you frame them when they are part of the big three? Only new entrants could make the argument that there is a monopoly that they cannot break into.

I think you’re missing the point of my argument and I will repeat it. It is incredibly difficult to force your way into a market, you have to make some extremely well argued points, epic failed on Apple but succeeded on Google.

There’s no way that MS, an incumbent in the industry, would be successful in pushing their way into a closed ecosystem. They are the only ones in a position to compete with Sony.

Laws would never allow it under any circumstances. Even if MS left the industry they would not. That had fair chance to compete.

 

[rntongo]

Can't recall I had to do that with Watchdogs but I have to do that for freaking Activision now to try BlackOps6 which is just ridiculous.

Oh I went ham on Resetera hounding the people that were working at Ubisoft who had accounts at Resetera. Had a nasty back and forth with one of them who kept on replying back about it but I think they got my point. I refused to play the game. IIRC about a month later the requirement had been removed. You no longer needed to have an account to play the offline mode anymore, dont know if its still the case.

That's the downside for cross-platform multiplayer. All these different backends need to be sync'd, so you need another account to do that, meaning accounts with every publisher and even for different games, completely reversing the move of Xbox Live to consolidate everything into one login. Progress. Yay!

Hmm I can see that angle. Cant they just have some sort of join table handle this? It doesnt sound technically complicated to me. But well for offline play really you shouldnt be forced to set up an account for another gaming service.

 

[rntongo]

How can you frame them when they are part of the big three? Only new entrants could make the argument that there is a monopoly that they cannot break into.

I think you’re missing the point of my argument and I will repeat it. It is incredibly difficult to force your way into a market, you have to make some extremely well argued points, epic failed on Apple but succeeded on Google.

There’s no way that MS, an incumbent in the industry, would be successful in pushing their way into a closed ecosystem. They are the only ones in a position to compete with Sony.

Laws would never allow it under any circumstances. Even if MS left the industry they would not. That had fair chance to compete.

Well it wont stop them from trying the legal angle if they see a business advantage from it especially if their current pivot doesnt work out as expected and starts making losses. Fundamentally its about closed vs open software stores.

MS is fundamentally moving away from any Gaming model which requires it to have a closed software store like it does on its current Xbox hardware. They want to create their software store and have it available on ANY piece of hardware. They just havent yet overtly disclosed this to the most die hard Phil Spencer fans but this is the direction. And the implication is ANY hw system is an Xbox. ANY means ANY not "ANY but not Nintendo, Valve and Sony hardware systems". I think I even recall Phil suggesting their new Xbox game store should be made available on the Steam Deck and vice versa. Its a gradual process of MS trying to redefine the gaming industry.

Thats why you have the "This is an Xbox", This is an Xbox" ads. Its to gradually normalize the idea that ANY hardware system can/should/MUST run their gaming store/service. Its part of a strategy to change the rules of the game, whether for good or bad, its the direction being taken. And its purposefully moving the business away from their own hardware as well.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Hmm I can see that angle. Cant they just have some sort of join table handle this? It doesnt sound technically complicated to me. But well for offline play really you shouldnt be forced to set up an account for another gaming service.

Every game/platform has to have its account and link it (via table) to other accounts. So you might have an EA account, and under that have registered XB, PS and Steam accounts so you can support cross-progression etc. Every service has its own protocols too, so connecting between PS and XB for chat and whatnot adds complication. It's no longer difficult per se, but it still is a requirement to have an overarching account to handle other accounts.

The only solution is a Gaming Passport; an open protocol agreed by everyone. I expect there's too much legacy baggage, plus no incentive (locking people to your account helps lock them to your ecosystem), plus different requirements, for that to ever happen.