@Hardi,

It’s hard to say PS4 has the numbers it has because of games mostly due to the fact there are regions such as North America where console sales are pretty even between the two despite the “games on lock”. If the sales disparity was the same in each region, then it would be a little easier to say it’s the games. It would be just as easy to conclude exclusives have no impact since sales of PS4 and Xbox One in North America are pretty close.

Sony’s reputation in North’s America has translated to similar sales to Microsoft.

The rest of the world appearantly doesn’t care for Xbox or America or both. Maybe the exclusives make a difference in other regions, but I think it has more to do with nationalism and distribution networks.

i just want games. Not game pass.

I think people think there is still some other secret sauce they can come up that can make up for not having what the product was designed to do. Play games.

@Death
"The rest of the world appearantly doesn’t care for Xbox or America or both."

Xbox ≠ America! People do not eschew Xbox solely out of a desire to avoid American products, nor is it a duty for Americans to support Xbox out of pride for their country!

@Colonel I'm glad you said something cause his comment about Xbox being tied to America as a reason it doesn't sell in other regions is insane!

If Xbox did more things like NIntendo and Sony(make good and NEW SP games) it would sell more then this Game Pass would be icing and not the main course!

@chiefJohn117

I see what you're saying, but PlayStation isn't successful because they are worrying about Microsoft is doing. PlayStation is in the position it's in because of it's library of unique, amazing, and graphically impressive first party games, which is the reason why that title and that article are ridiculous.

Exactly Sony are past reacting now they are so far ahead. They have no worries or major problem with competition no matter what lies crapgamer, dealer, colt Eastwood tell.
This generation was over a while back.

@Godmars

"2. Returns to the issue that the Xbox offers few true exclusives. That what few they do are online multiplayer."
So Halo, Gears, Forza, Cuphead, Crackdown, State of Decay, Ori etc. are online only MP? Huh, Those campaigns were cleverly disguised then...

@GodMars290

1. That has nothing to do with Netflix of Games. It's all about GaaS and the initial investment being lesser means people are more likely to invest more in GaaS. The cost to download games is already existing. Switching from an upfront single point of sale on a game versus moving to an open-ended business structure with other ways to get people to spend money (while at the same time allowing many to spend a lot less). The costs behind this aren't traditional and already exist, the cost is in marketing the right amount of GaaS or just getting enough people to subscribe who don't utilize the content at a value that costs them more than $12 a month.

2. No, it doesn't. And I love the idea that because of Forza, Halo, and Gears of War, we totally forget about the mostly SP focused exclusives (Oni, Cuphead, Quantum Break, Ryse, Rare Replay, Sunset Overdrive, etc.). I can literally list more SP focused exclusives for XBO than I could MP focused exclusives.

3. Nope. It's an option. And you make it a 'fanboy' thing and to say that 'brand loyalists tout it as the best thing' is the same as saying 'brand loyalists tout PSNow as the best thing'. It's a lazy response that focuses on a story to keep things about fanboys rather than the industry of video games. And I think turning it into a 'loyalist' thing benefits other 'loyalists' just as much those who are being touted in a negative manner here. It's all just ammo to feed a desire to belittle other 'loyalists'.

@Christopher:

Your direct reply has nothing to do with my comment.

And this is directly about creating - furthering - a tread that will reduce if not remove the value of physical media. If not make a platform that would be far more favorable to the games are done on mobile.

***Your direct reply has nothing to do with my comment. ***

Yeah, it absolutely does and you denying it doesn't change it at all.

@Jinger:
What are you even talking about?

Either the games you bring up weren't directly commissioned by MS, were in development indies they picked up, or their SP campaigns where nothing worth talking about. Quantum Break especially.

@Christopher:
One: the Netflix of gaming is and has been called Steam. Only they don't charge a monthly fee for all access. If they did they'd likely have to ask for $100+ to make it viable.

Two: Is Xbox were to become the Netflix of console gaming, that $10 a month would only go up as library access increased - if it ever did. My main issue with services such as these is the amount of control it gives a company.

Three: I make it a fanboy thing because that's your only perspective. You don't regard the quality of titles you bring up, how they were reacted to, sold or accessible, its only that you can say MS has a connection, that that's all I need to dismiss them, that you see any value or weight. You see nothing regarding gaming much less consumer rights.

***One: the Netflix of gaming is and has been called Steam.***

Wrong. That's just a complete digital storefront. This is a monthly subscription to access a library of games that you have no rights to other than monthly access to what the provider dictates, games can be removed/altered at any time, and is actually like Netflix. A licensing change can remove the game from being capable of being played entirely via Game Pass, a licensing change only removes the game from Steam's storefront, not your personal library if you purchased it.

***Two: Is Xbox were to become the Netflix of console gaming, that $10 a month would only go up as library access increased - if it ever did. My main issue with services such as these is the amount of control it gives a company.***

Not necessarily true if the GaaS allows them to make up the costs that you can't make with Netflix. You have movies, not supplemental/optional content per movie. Games have grown into the additional content business for a decade now.

And, to target this from the article's stand point that Sony would benefit from it, the issue of control is absolutely no less in regards to PSNow, which Sony already operates. The issues with the company control isn't new and isn't an argument as to why it wouldn't be beneficial to Sony when they already have such a platform with that problem going for years now.

Those who do not want the company to have more control over their content will not utilize Game Pass, nor with the same type of people on Sony platforms utilize it if that's of concern to them as well. But, gamers already utilize such a system on the Sony side via PS Now, yet having it for new releases and not streamed it suddenly becomes an issue for Sony?

Remember, this discussion isn't about your opinion of Netflix of Games, it about whether it matters to PS4 and Sony as a business decision for their consumers.

***Three: I make it a fanboy thing because that's your only perspective. You don't regard the quality of titles you bring up, how they were reacted to, sold or accessible, its only that you can say MS has a connection, that that's all I need to dismiss them, that you see any value or weight. You see nothing regarding gaming much less consumer rights.***

My perspective is fanboy? I'm not the one who brought up loyalists as a main point. I'm not the one who made it about number of exclusives as a arguing point, again. Please point me to where I brought up anything but business in this topic until I responded to you.

This discussion is about a service and whether it would be beneficial to Sony as an option for their gamers as it might be for Microsoft. The resounding answer is that their differences in number of exclusives or market reach has no bearing as the real divide here is in those who want a Netflix for Gaming and those who don't. Gamers who want a Netflix of Gaming exist on all platforms.

meh.

This "discussion" is about Sony copying something that MS has yet to do much show to be any level of successful. As such has only been touted as a game changer when the Xbox's one real success was based on Sony messing up with the PS3. And that's arguable.

***This "discussion" is about Sony copying something that MS has yet to do much show to be any level of successful. As such has only been touted as a game changer when the Xbox's one real success was based on Sony messing up with the PS3. And that's arguable.***

IF you have no interest in discussing the business of this, then you probably should stay out of submissions discussing such a thing.

What business? Nothing has actually been done yet. More than that, until and unless there are significant numbers to report MS isn't likely to report anything. Just spin it.

The way Sony has with PSNow.

"It isn’t."

Oh yes, it is. You can bet your life that both companies cares about their money and investments.

The simple fact that Sony continues to pay multiple publishers to keep games out of Xbox forever, is nothing but a reaction to Gamepass.

Imo, Sony now fears that once their timed-exclusive contracts ends, those games will be available on Gamepass the moment the said games hits the Xbox platforms.

Sony fears the scenario where gamers realize that it´s not worth to invest in every single game released on Playstation at full $70 once they´ll be getting it for "free" on Gamepass eventually, just like Yakuza, Dragon Quest, Octopath Traveler, Nino Kuni, Persona series and more.

ARK 2 (exclusive on Xbox consoles), S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2( exclusive on Xbox consoles), Flintlock, Wo Long, Atomic Hears, Lies of P, Eiyuden Chronicle, Hollow Knight: Silksong. Minecraft: Legends, MLB 23...

Those are just some of the games that Xbox players will be getting for "free" day one while Playstation gamers will have to pay for all of it.

So at least you´re rich or something, Xbox players will be getting way more NEW games to play than you. That´s just facts.

@Obscure_Observer

I can bet that one company brings actual competition, isn’t afraid to share losing numbers, and doesn’t buy huge publishers due to said weaknesses. That’s what I can bet.

As a fan of theirs, you should want them to do better and offer more than subscriptions services and unfulfilled promises.

Both? Im just saying.

@obscure. Well Sony can't control 3rd party games quality, but their 1st party certainly trounces MS's. Spiderman 2 is going to a absolutely dominate the holiday season, just like ragnarok did this past holiday season. Sony easily has the best gaming studios out of the big three. It's.not Sony who has to worry about their 1st part output, it is MS.

@Obscure: what AAA games would I buy an XsX today to play?

I own a ps5 and XsX, and I don’t know of one game that would have motivated me to buy an XsX ( I bought it to appease my dumb Xbot friends).

I bought a ps5 for Demon Souls (best looking game on consoles), Returnal (top 10 game of all time for me), and Dualsense upgrades for shooters (completely changes R6 for me).

So, can you illustrate how XsX is competing? I liked HiFi Rush a lot, High on Life too, but neither make we happy about the $500 I sunk into the hardware to play them.

Obscurer, you're saying an awful lot without talking much sense at all.

VR isn't a distraction, neither does it take games away from playstation. Sony have been building and harnessing studios just for this while working on their 1st party none VR titles.

Microsoft is fully committed to gamepass and that's fine for them and those that like to game that way. It will be an even better product if Microsoft can nail their 1st party games.

What I'd hate to see are more moves like the Activision and Bethesda purchases and attempts because it destroys the gaming ecosystem. I'd say the same for Sony as well because once the ball is rolling, they'll all start buying and diving gaming.

"I can bet that one company brings actual competition, isn’t afraid to share losing numbers, and doesn’t buy huge publishers due to said weaknesses. That’s what I can bet."

Unfortunately for you, MS or Nintendo aren´t forced to play by yours or Sony´s rules. Fyi, Sony used to buy publishers back in the day. The only reason they aren´t doing it now is simply because they can´t.

As it is, Sony already owns 14.09% of Kadokawa´s shares while Tencent acquired 16% of the company's shares, which means 1/3 of the entire company ownership.

The only reason why Tencent owns more than Sony is because Sony couldn´t pay more for it. So spare me from this "victim complex" bs defense for Sony.

Phil acted as the "nice guy" for too long. To the point where stupid fanboys were all happy when Xbox acquired new studios and publishers, because the idiots were under the illusion that all future Xbox games would become multiplatform and be released on Playstation.

Yeah, they were stupid to the point of thinking that MS would turn into a third party developer for Playstation.

Reality hits hard and here we are. Now that they KNOW those games aren´t coming to Playstation, all that they can do now is cry and moan over games paid and developed by Microsoft to not be on their platform of choice.

They think they´re entitled to have anything and everything otherwise it´s not good competition.

Phil Spencer won´t stop. Be the Activision/Blizzard deal approved or not, he can just go after a single studio like CDPR for example and you´ll be here crying all the same.

I don´t care if Sony or Nintendo buys SquareEnix, From Software or even SEGA tomorrow. Because I have no problem buying products from those companies if they have the games I want. I care about games first and foremost. So don´t expect me to be on your sad place complaining about big a$$ companies running their business as they see fit.

"You should want THEM to feel enough heat to actually do better."

But when they do attempt to do better ppl complain about it.

@Lightning77

What genuine attempts have people complained about?

With the whole Bethesda thing. There was article on here not too long ago talking about how Bethesda investment will pay off for MS. The whole comment section everyone was whining about how MS was taking games away. So when MS competes everyone here complains on here. No matter what MS hurts feelings. It's quite funny actually.

@Lightning77

In other words, outside of publisher acquisitions, they have not really attempted to compete.

And "whining" happens on both sides, so I hope you are just as entertained when people bitch and moan about moves Sony makes.

Some are going ape shit over Hi-Fi Rush but completely forgot about the Tokyo Wire dud the same developer last released. My point being there are hits and misses.

" It's all about value with you guys and not quality"

Lol. Your false narrative didn´t aged well.

All Metacritic scores for day one first party games
.
Ori and the Will of the Wisps 92 on Metacritic
Flight Simulator 90 on Metacritic
Forza Horizon 5 92 on Metacritic
Halo Infinite 87 on Metacritic
Grounded 85 on Metacritic
Pentiment 87 on Metacritic
Age of Empires II: Definitive Edition 87 on Metacritic
Hi-Fi Rush 88 on Metacritic

And that´s only from first party games/IPs on Xbox series consoles.

So much for your "quality vs quantity" BS narrative.

Oh, and we "Gamepass Lovers" also love old quality games as well. I also can give you a large list of high quality third party on Gamepass. Just ask. ;)