Next-gen Cross-Platform Strategy [2020]
- Thread starter Shortbread
- Start date
Somewhere in this discussion we need to lay down some assumptions. For me it’s largely been that they like Xbox exclusives and titles anyway, so the debate is whether or not they upgrade at launch or to upgrade later.
If we are working off the same arguments:
- Trade in deals for existing Xbox at launch will be dramatically cheaper than waiting for the price to drop within a year
- They are now given access to the best performance of the new console hardware for new games and old. And critically new games, XBO S can barely play some games well at 720p for instance
- There could be 3P exclusives, who knows.
- Lastly but most importantly, the largest difference between SX and 1X: They know that this path is inevitable for them if they want to be an Xbox gamer. You can totally sidestep X1X. But Eventually you will be forced to get XSX. So get it now with trade in and play many games at much better performance. Or wait forever until all the pricing comes down.
Does definition of launch mean up to 2 years after?
As that is what has been outlined by MS.
Considering tools, engines, work flows, will largely remain the same, a game could easily have been in development for over 2 years by the time the console releases.
And that's having a pretty good outline what the target specs of the console will be. Internal studios will know probably earlier.
A lot of issues people have with launch games are due to the upheaval in architecture that happens during a new gen, this just isn't the case this time.
I don't think there should only be next gen games, I think MS should've stuck to what their moto has been in recent years. Leave it up to the studios.
If they think they can deliver a good next gen only experience, let them. So does it mean they can't make the game, or have to wait for the time limit to pass before releasing it.
The fact is, everyone knew most games would be cross gen, by laying it down in stone like that all its done is got people worked up for no reason and restricted their own devs. Also opens them up for the uturn if they do release one, especially if Sony release an impressive game (not just looks wise) even if some think of it as just a tech demo.
As that is what has been outlined by MS.
Considering tools, engines, work flows, will largely remain the same, a game could easily have been in development for over 2 years by the time the console releases.
And that's having a pretty good outline what the target specs of the console will be. Internal studios will know probably earlier.
A lot of issues people have with launch games are due to the upheaval in architecture that happens during a new gen, this just isn't the case this time.
I don't think there should only be next gen games, I think MS should've stuck to what their moto has been in recent years. Leave it up to the studios.
If they think they can deliver a good next gen only experience, let them. So does it mean they can't make the game, or have to wait for the time limit to pass before releasing it.
The fact is, everyone knew most games would be cross gen, by laying it down in stone like that all its done is got people worked up for no reason and restricted their own devs. Also opens them up for the uturn if they do release one, especially if Sony release an impressive game (not just looks wise) even if some think of it as just a tech demo.
Was it 2 years after, or two years from now? Because I read the two years comment as from the time of the interview, so a year after launch. Here's the original quote by Matt Booty from January this year:
That would imply just 1 year after launch, essentially.
https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/10/...xclusive-games-launch-backwards-compatibility
That would imply just 1 year after launch, essentially.
The others have suggested much the same, but I think this is a bit premature thinking. Microsoft has not really started the marketing for their reasons for upgrading. We have no way of knowing what improvements have been made on the software side other than 1st party titles playing on all Xbox consoles. There is a possibility of second party & third party titles that can offer an exclusive experience. This also doesn't mean that 1st party titles will only be higher resolution and/or higher framerate versions of the XB1 versions. Like on PC they can still offer features like raytracing & SSD load times that's not available on the current XB1. There's still a lot of what we don't know. Give them a chance to get that messaging out. I'm sure they will give them lots of reasons for upgrading. Lack of 1st party exclusives in the first year or so may not be the nail in the coffin that a lot of folks are predicting. Let's see if they make up for it in other areas.
Tommy McClain
They more or less have done exactly that. They've only said that they don't plan to released any 1P titles that are exclusive to XSX in the first year.
I mean, a lot of 3P companies will do the same without making that announcement. The first year is a transition year.
The only thing MS is doing differently is that they are choosing not to launch with exclusive titles to force people to transition immediately.
That minor difference is all the world to some people because it's never been done.
Reality is: whatever. It doesn't even matter. I think people need to understand that gaming is always changing and continues to change. MS focuses so much on 'live' games that this idea of a hard chop will kill those old communities out; and it's clear that they don't want to do that or even encourage it. That's why the focus on BC matters so much. That's why cross-gen/cross-play matters so much.
Ubisoft doesn't want to remake R6 Siege. Just like others won't want to change Minecraft, or Destiny 2 (now that's its moved to a F2P model). How good is your eocsystem going to be if you lose your Fortnites, PUBGs, Apex Legends, SoT, Halos, Gears, etc just because generation you want to hard chop and force people to move. Letting customers play the games where they want to play and keeping those games alive is exactly a consumer focus.
If we looked at the Annual sales quarter thread, both Sony and MS incurred a huge drop because Fortnite sales were winding down. A single F2P game did that, with no exclusivity, no graphics, none of that. People just want to play the game. And if that's what people want to play, then forcing exclusivity is the type of thing that will stop the game from being large.
And while it's absolutely nothing new in the PC space, I guess this coming generation will be the first year of this type of continued playing will exist in the console space.
It's true that the decisions made today to put Halo Infinite on XBO/S and X1X will limit how far they can push the game creatively. Doesn't mean that they can't design a good game with great gameplay elements in a significantly reduced manner (aka, Minecraft, R6 Siege, Fortnite, PUBG, the way the old Halo took off, etc)
People are making heavy blanket statements about how creativity and graphics will >>> gameplay. And honestly, if you look at the titles that are selling constantly all year around, you're going to see more games like Fortnite than you will see games like GTAV and RDR2. And both of those titles have large online spaces.
Last edited:
Although I don't see the point of talking about exclusive games for a console that isn't out (from time of statement) , I'm happy enough to say your right. Just goes to their bad communication as far as I'm concerned.
Still don't see the point in moving away from letting the studios do what they want and limiting them, especially knowing 95% of games probably would've been cross gen anyway.
Have to disagree with you there, and find the let's make it seem like a potentially fan boy perception point of view disingenuous.
That snippet does seem pretty clear, and maybe I read it from a secondary site, who knows.
Point still is, it was a statement that didn't need to be made.
Who does it reassure? The 2 people that will be buying Xbox between now and next gen release?
Pretty sure everyone else who would hear this statement, knew the situation anyway. Are they really more reassured.
All it did was put them in a box that they didn't need to be in.
Having discussions that wasn't really necessary.
I will disagree with you as well. I believe they had these plans from the get go, because their XB1X strategy is a really good indicator. They then were bold enough to announce the name & look of the console in December. So I think this new discussion with Matt Booty was also necessary to announce their 1st party strategy as soon as possible. It helped not just their existing install base(console owners, Game Pass subscribers, etc) & any future owners of said devices & services to make it abundantly clear how they were attacking their launch. It can assure anyone that your investment now is protected. Anyway, better to get that message out front & control it. Had somebody else got a hold of it before they could do it themselves, then they would be in heavy damage control. This discussion mitigated that.
From a personal standpoint, it concerned me a little at first, but then again I realized it was a good thing. Especially as I'm big supporter of Game Pass & that I usually wait a year or so after launch to get the next-gen anyway. Happened on all previous Xbox launches. I like the no-one left behind strategy, but then again I'm selfish.
Might not have mattered to you, but I doubt anything they did would have mattered to you anyway.
Tommy McClain
From a personal standpoint, it concerned me a little at first, but then again I realized it was a good thing. Especially as I'm big supporter of Game Pass & that I usually wait a year or so after launch to get the next-gen anyway. Happened on all previous Xbox launches. I like the no-one left behind strategy, but then again I'm selfish.
Might not have mattered to you, but I doubt anything they did would have mattered to you anyway.
Tommy McClain
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
If by "Xbox exclusives" you mean "game exclusive to nextgen Xbox platforms" (i.e. not XBO/S/X/SAD) then perhaps. The alternative is people jump to PlayStaton 5, PC or some other platform.
This is true, but given the focus of X I'd be surprised if gaming isn't for the foremost feature of XSX and I can't think what software features you could incorporate that is going to sway that large portion who buy a console primarily to game on.
They could. But we are back to the lack of evidence that there is any significant body of console gamers are are willing to spend more for any form improved performance - of any kind. While I would tend to buy the more performant console, TV, car etc, the greater majority are content for "good enough", hence why PS4 outsells Pro and what little numbers we do have suggest the same is true for One X/SAD vs. X. If you give most of these folks a choice to buy a new console, as Microsoft and Sony did mid-gen, the majority were happier with their lower-graphics-settings, lower-load-speed 1.2Tf/1.84Tf launch-spec consoles.
The way to get games to upgrade is cut them off of games, or overwhelmingly incentivise with experiences only possible on new hardware. I for one am very interested in how both companies intend to market the new hardware because I think it's going to be a really tough sell when games like Red Dead Redemption and Spider-Man are being released.
That hasn't been true on tablets (iPad and the like), phones, or DS. Hell, it isn't even true for Switch, which launched a smaller, less featured version that, anecdotally, every person I know who purchased one already owned the original mode. And it hasn't been true on PC. In these examples the new hardware allowed the old software to perform better in most cases, and that is the motivating factor.
So to use your RDR2 and Spider-Man examples, if those games perform or look better on the next generation platforms, wouldn't that motivate people to buy them? Hell, the reason I own an Xbox One at all was because the 360 games run faster and have v-sync, and there were a bunch of titles I already owned on 360 that hit that magical sub 30 FPS mark that makes me physically nauseous. This isn't hyperbole, there is a framerate between 20 and 30 that makes me motion sick. I can play older games like LHX Attack Chopper on Genesis or Star Fox on SNES and I'm fine(20FPS or below), but Killzone on PS2 I can only play for 10 minutes.
Not much motivates me either for those count on one or two hands exclusives in a total life-span of a console, that really push graphics. Its a personal opinion offcourse.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Stating the obvious but phones and tablets are not video game consoles hooked up to a TV. For a lot of people they augment or replace the traditional computer or even a TV. This is not a good comparison.
And nor is Switch. Nintendos own data shows portable mode is used more that home/TV mode.
The Steam hardware surveys shows a lot of PCs are running some pretty ancient hardware specifications. As for running running older software better, Xbox One X has been doing this for three years so why isn't it more popular if this is such a high-demand feature? Ditto PS4 Pro.
That's obvious. The price offering of XB1X was $500 to play your XB1 games slightly better; just not worth it to most folk. XBSX is $500 (?) to play your XB1 games much better. The value is far greater in the new console than the mid-gen refresh, so more people will be willing to pay for XBSX to play improved 'XB1 games' than were willing to pay $500 for XB1X.
Last edited:
Doesn't say whether those are first party or not, nor what 'launched for' period covers. We'd expect the majority of titles including third parties to be cross-generational because the market for exclusives is so small. Perhaps of those 'many games', the few that are PS5 exclusive are Sony first party exclusives? It also wouldn't be unrealistic to expect the likes of TLoU2 to have PS5 flavours at launch for the console. This doesn't tell us Sony's strategy for the following year, whether they are developing PS5 exclusives or not. We really need an official comment to confirm as much.
I expect the most accurate description is that a portion of Sony's first-party output at and in the period following the PS5's launch will be PS5-exclusive. We really have no idea how significant of a portion this is, but we have word from credible insiders that there will be some. We also have Sony stating that they have the desire to move people onto the new generation more quickly than has happened in the past and you can make a logical conclusion that exclusives are one of the levers they will use to accomplish this.
Third parties for both Xbox and PlayStation will make platform choices for their upcoming titles based on what makes the most financial sense for them as always.
Edit: Another thought. It will be interesting to see if MS chooses to throw it's money at getting 3rd parties to support GamePass instead of at the type of co-marketing and deals that could incentivize 3rd parties to support next-gen exclusively instead if going cross-gen. Conversely, maybe we will see Sony spending money to incentivize developers to move on to next gen with maybe not PS5 exclusives (which would be more expensive), but next-gen console exclusives that may be timed exclusives for PS5 and/or have platform bonuses.
Third parties for both Xbox and PlayStation will make platform choices for their upcoming titles based on what makes the most financial sense for them as always.
Edit: Another thought. It will be interesting to see if MS chooses to throw it's money at getting 3rd parties to support GamePass instead of at the type of co-marketing and deals that could incentivize 3rd parties to support next-gen exclusively instead if going cross-gen. Conversely, maybe we will see Sony spending money to incentivize developers to move on to next gen with maybe not PS5 exclusives (which would be more expensive), but next-gen console exclusives that may be timed exclusives for PS5 and/or have platform bonuses.
Last edited:
That was their desire, but they're anticipating otherwise according to the article.
they anticipate the transition to be a gradual one, said people familiar with its day-to-day operations.
Similar threads
- Locked
