You guys like what you are hearing?? They are LITERALLY saying they are taking focus OFF consoles. This is their end game.

And there is nothing wrong with multi-platform.

There is no logical argument for a gamer to only want to play on one device and have a gaming company tell you what device that has to b because it only has certain exclusives.

@Neogamer
Im sorry buddy im not going down this path with you without kicking and screaming. I grew up on consoles, I LOVE console gaming, always have. This WILL be the path that destroys console gaming as we know it. So dont expect me to celebrate this “option” with you... smh

Seems like they're talking going mobile, I assume via streaming. I don't think they're talking about releasing Xbox games on other consoles, right?

@s2, Why do you assume so much?

They are opening up live services for easier integration of cross communication and cross play and other social features. They arent giving up on consoles or gaming so you dont have anything to worry about.

@frOsty

"Going multi-platform"

With Nintendo, yes. Sony, i don´t think so. ;)

@darth
“Assume”? Its right there in the description. Its out of Microsoft’s mouth.

It would be great if PlayStation jumped on board and offered Xbox Live too.

Yeah! Games like Crackdown... :)
We all can play this "Xbox" games Day1 on PC and thx. "Streaming" (Xcloud) we dont need +1000$ PCs...

The future is bright?
Xbox is Worthless.

Not multi-console platform. Like Sony, "when everyone plays" only refers to when people play through their service. Game Pass benefits everyone, so that's just included for the heck of it, but still requires the the approval of the other console makers.

@Captain

XBL API has been multiplat for quite some time now. They've had ways to enable XBL features on quite a few platforms since last gen. They're expanding it now though.

@S2K

It's not about trying to get everyone to switch to other platforms, although they may have plans for that kind of thing. It's more about bringing in more players through more means. For the time being, the console is still part of their plans, and to remain relevant in all of gaming, they need to have a console. They don't have a big enough place in PC gaming right now to rely on it to grow to where they want to go.

That's good, this way they will get your money no matter where you play there games

Sony never should've allowed crossplay with MS, i knew they just wanted to leach off the success of the PlayStation brand. It has nothing to do with benefitting gamers and everything to do with making money and using PSN to inflate their MAU numbers.

I'm personally torn on what to do with the Xbox brand.

On one hand, I was going to completely skip out on the next Xbox. If I have a device that can play the handful of games I'll probably want in the future, cool. I will not, however, buy into any of these services if there's a recurring price that I need to play.... which brings me to the other hand: I am developing an absolute loathing of them if they succeed in peddling this GaaS crap.

The day that Nintendo and Sony get on board is the day I become a retro gamer exclusively, but as long as options exist, I'll keep an open mind.

Microsoft as a company is making good with their business strategy, but I can't stand their "we're losing market share, so we're going to get what we can from everyone, indefinitely" attitude-- they began losing market share to Google Docs, so they made all new versions of Office online only via OneDrive and they've lost market share to Sony and Nintendo and now they're creating partnerships with device makers as vectors to spread their online infrastructure. They're welcome to do that, certainly, but I dread the idea of this spreading and becoming the sole means of consumption.

I have no real qualms about this, provided that this does not affect the other platform holders to the point that our newcomers the only way to play.

@lxeasy
Oh Im so scared of a bad console! Oh no! lmao

That's a stupid comment considering Xbox has the best multiplayer games out of the consoles.

Sony has the best Singleplayer but again Xbox has the co op and multiplayer experience and that's why the Xbox is the most competitive place to be.

The whole infrastructure around the Xbox is designed to keep competative gameplay going with people finding better players all the time, clubs, clans it's all there.

@ least- how do you work out less online players when in fact the Xbox has more subscription users than what PlayStation does, that says alot that does. Don't may of sold more consoles but that doesn't translate into online players, most Sony owners are to busy with Singleplayer exclusives..

Put the elite multiplayer bunch in a battle on multiplayer games from both PlayStation and Xbox and I put a bet that Xbox wins it and by a far margin to.

Xbox Players hate facts.
Metacritic.... Gotypicks/blogspot... Microsoft´s Games are Sh*t.

Gotypicks/Blogspot (2008-2018):
- Sony: 1008x GOTY-Awards
- Nintendo: 385x GOTY-Awards
- Microsoft: 68x GOTY-Awards
.... facts.

@ImGumbyDammit

"Microsoft is number 4 in worldwide brand rankings. Sony is not even in the top 50."
"Microsoft is number 4 in brand value. Sony isn't even in the top 100. "

Brand rankings are based on brand value. You listed the same thing twice.

"Microsoft is number 6 is most powerful brands. Sony sits at 26th."

Congrats on having Windows.

"Microsoft is number 7 in most admired companies. Sony isn't even in the list."

Most admired in a business sense. Big difference. This isn't about personal admiration.

"Xbox is number 51 on most valuable US brands, PlayStation is not in the list of 100."

PlayStation and Sony are not US brands.. Kentucky Fried Chicken wouldn't show up on a Japan's restaurant brand list, lol

Xbox is number 82 for top 100 brands for millennial's, PlayStation is 40. Shocker -> GameStop is 36
Xbox is number 33 in brands loved by kids, PlayStation is 36"

Okay. Lets be more broad, while maintaining focus on the U.S.

Top 50 Prophet Brand Relevance Index U.S.(ranked by U.S. consumers).
PlayStation - 13
Sony - 21
XBox - 25
Microsoft - 33

Yes. Microsoft, maker of Windows which everyone knows and uses. Got less than both consoles, and less than a Japanese company in their home territory. This is ranked by consumers since the prior topic was about disliking the company. And, to be realistic. If almost everyone uses Windows and has it..Then it's actually disappointing that it is only at the 33rd spot. Which is telling.

Bull Sh!t !! , You seem scared

Darxyde

"I have no real qualms about this, provided that this does not affect the other platform holders to the point that our newcomers the only way to play."

Too late, Nintendo is actively working with them to the point that I can see them
restructuring or even abandoningg their online platform in favor of Live as a 3rd party solution. As for Sony they have already conceded to MS when they agreed to allow cross play on Fortnite, now that they opened the floodgates there's no stopping the inevitable.

This was MS's plan all along and I have to give it to them. Ther PR/marketing planning and market manipulation is impeccable.

@thexman

Hold my hand XD

@sampson... for what it's worth... the phrase is 'canary in the coal mine'.

And what Phil said about SP games and profits is true to some extent. Any business would like to have a continued stream of revenue. That is nothing new. And in the example of SP games you basically have the sell through to the initial base but then a trickle effect to those who opt to buy into them later. In some cases they even go the route of buying 2nd hand instead of new because some of the initial sales are then traded in upon completion. I dont trade in games, but I do buy traded in games. When you beat a SP game, you can either play it again or play something else.

Now take a game that can generate a more continuous stream of revenue. The more people that buy into that, the greater the chance of getting more potential revenue. And a MP game is never the same game twice no matter how many times you play the same map. It is the human variable that can't be replicated by a SP game. So from a business perspective (and yes he was being asked to speak from a business perspective) he is right that SP games dont generate the same revenue stream that MP games do.

He didnt say that SP games are pointless or useless or a waste of time and resources or that nobody should ever play them again. Yet many seem to take his comment (from a business pov) and try and twist it to fit their own narrative (from a consumer pov) and make it out to be something it wasnt. context is key and many just dont know how to keep things in context as it it presented and to what source it is being presented to.

Have a nice day.

I know they haven’t! It’s almost as if there should be no hype! But there is! Artificial hype! Then they will announce a few games and Xbox fanboys will proclaim them gods😂 join us in 20 years when Xbox game studios reach the high level of quality of Sony’s first party

@darthv72: "And what Phil said about SP games and profits is true to some extent. Any business would like to have a continued stream of revenue. That is nothing new. And in the example of SP games you basically have the sell through to the initial base but then a trickle effect to those who opt to buy into them later. In some cases they even go the route of buying 2nd hand instead of new because some of the initial sales are then traded in upon completion. I dont trade in games, but I do buy traded in games. When you beat a SP game, you can either play it again or play something else. "

what i am saying in all my other comments is they will make A and AA mp games and sp games for profit because almost all the AAA games they've made haven't had the support from xbox gamers and that is why he made that statement. so making A and AA mp games with MT's they think makes more business sense. and it might for them, but for xbox gamers that want AAA single player games, that aren't the big three gears being one of them, they are out of luck.
I not only agree with you but you just made my point way better than i did. thanks.

@darthv72: "And what Phil said about SP games and profits is true to some extent. Any business would like to have a continued stream of revenue. "

"Now take a game that can generate a more continuous stream of revenue. The more people that buy into that, the greater the chance of getting more potential revenue. And a MP game is never the same game twice no matter how many times you play the same map. It is the human variable that can't be replicated by a SP game. So from a business perspective (and yes he was being asked to speak from a business perspective) he is right that SP games dont generate the same revenue stream that MP games do."

"He didnt say that SP games are pointless or useless or a waste of time and resources"
after all that you said above this last statement, talking about profit and resources and how he thinks it's important, you are contradicting yourself all in one posting.

what i am saying in all my other comments is they will make A and AA mp games and sp games for profit because almost all the AAA games they've made haven't had the support from xbox gamers and that is why he made that statement. so making A and AA mp games with MT's they think makes more business sense. it might for them, but for xbox gamers that want AAA single player games, that aren't the big three gears being one of them, they are out of luck.
I not only agree with you but you just made my point way better than i did. thanks.

I still find it hilarious that all them xbox haters think xbox has no games, they forget that M$ also make windows so they support pc as well, pos4 fanboys with their one and done exclusives, I just love that I can play on my X1X for hours, then when it needs a break, can just get on my pc and play the same game.

You mean 3 AA games and a TON of CCC games.

Ori AAA !?!? Dude, realy!? Ori is a great game, but still an indie game, AA at best.