All Channels
Popular
240°

Why does Microsoft play ‘me first!’ with cross-platform releases?

If content is obviously superior on Xbox Live, why then does Microsoft feel the need to strong-arm publishers into first-release contracts for their digital releases? There are plenty of justifications for such a policy, and you can be sure that they all center around financial benefits that accrue to Microsoft. But in order to soften the mercenary truth of the matter, Microsoft VP Chris Lewis fell back on some trite and dubious claims about these decisions being in the best interests of consumers.

Read Full Story >>
videogamewriters.com
dangert125378d ago

What microsoft does make sense for them but will actually ruin the game Industry.

They play me first so they can make the sales when there's still hype around the game which will be alot more during Its first release then Its 2nd release on another console as the hype Is not carried on for the other console a new game takes Its shine and you sometimes forget you wanted such and such a game happend to me with bioshock and a few others that are not registering at the moment

OC_MurphysLaw5378d ago

Spot on. Plus its not as though MS will not take games that are on both platforms, they just dont want games coming to the XBLA after having come out on say PSN before. If you look at the sales of games like a Limbo on the PS3 or Outland it tanked on the PS3 because they came out later. Outland was not intentional but rather due to the PSN issue but you can see the effect coming out later has.

buddymagoo5378d ago (Edited 5378d ago )

Just imagine if Nintendo was to use this tactic way back at the start of this generation, scary! Bottom line is, play fair.

darthv725378d ago

back in the genesis and snes days you had several games that would appear on one platform before another. Like SF2 was a huge hit on the snes. A system seller if you will. Genesis got a version some time after and it wasnt as big a seller because people that wanted it pretty much got it for the snes or got the snes to play it.

Playing fair is the usual for many developers/publishers but there will ALWAYS be higher profile games that each side will want to promote as being available first on their platform.

In some cases, the second time around does better than the first so it really shouldnt matter so long as everyone gets a turn.

maniacmayhem5378d ago (Edited 5378d ago )

@buddy

Nintendo was notorious back in the NES day. You had to pay a hefty license fee just to use their system. Not only that but nintendo could refuse to publish your game for any reason they saw fit.
It's part of the reason those illegal games came out and nintendo started using their "seal of quality" stamp.

@danger
I don't understand your logic...
You claim the hype isn't carried over for the other platform because of it being overshadowed by other new games...well wouldn't it be a new game on the other platform especially if your a one console owner?

5378d ago
theonlylolking5378d ago

Limbo sucks. On XBL they had tons of interviews on limbo and kept hyping it.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 5378d ago
Blues Cowboy5378d ago

@dangert12: Your logic makes sense, but it's also very naive. By creating two separate launch dates for a single title, Microsoft's policy effectively doubles the amount of publicity that a game receives and leads to better sales across the board.

To use Limbo as an example: when it launched a year ago, Limbo enjoyed strong sales due to its quality and exclusive status. A year on, it was released on PS3 and PC with an all-new hype campaign. Not only will people now make a *point* of buying Limbo since it's finally available on other platforms, but a small (but important) minority of "fanboys" will buy it *because* it's no longer an exclusive. Plus, the publicity has a knock-on effect of making XBLA consumers aware of the title again.

The PC and PS3 versions also tend to launch with better optimisation and extra content. It's win-win.

Tony P5378d ago

Eh. Doing "what's best" for customers is just a spritz of altruistic perfume on a completely self-serving idea.

WarPonyDestroyer5378d ago

COD is their biggest seller. It's a 2005 console, not much more groundbreaking games coming down the pipe. Of course they want a lock on the sales.

newleaf5378d ago

Whats ps3's highest seller?
Anyway, I don't want sloppy seconds, if a publisher thinks x360 owners aren't good enough to have a game at the same time as ps3 owners then they can keep their game, true story.
PS3 owners don't seem to mind sloppy seconds, evident in their excitement for games like ME 2 and Oblivion coming to their consoles 1 year after their 360 and pc releases so publishers can keep on doing that for them.
Unless its a question of team size and for the sake of good production, don't bring that ish here

darthv725378d ago

"PS3 owners don't seem to mind sloppy seconds, evident in their excitement for games like ME 2 and Oblivion coming to their consoles 1 year after their 360 and pc releases...."

Yeah but the excitement is not from the game coming to PS3 but from the game can no longer be rubbed in their faces as an exclusive. Sales of such titles kind of show that.

If the hold outs were so much inclined to get the game then they would have gotten it when it was finally released. instead they can use the no longer exclusive nature as some sort of ammo in this (stupid) console war.

FFXI1015378d ago

"PS3 owners don't seem to mind sloppy seconds, evident in their excitement for games like ME 2 and Oblivion coming to their consoles 1 year after their 360 and pc releases "

Some people excited because they like the games and they were looking forward to play it and/or they like the developers. What's wrong with that?

So if games like Fallout or Rage or Skyrim somehow came out on PS3 first and 360 later you would not want to play it just because they were release on other console first? You are re****ed and don't call youself a gamer please.

dark-hollow5378d ago

Then why some people gets pissed when an ps3 exclusive gets multiplat??
Isnt that suppose to increase the sales and don't "ruin" the industry?

UltimateIdiot9115378d ago

The only one that I see fan going crazy about is FFXIII. If you read the other article, you would know that if a game is to be release on both console simultaneously, it should be the same otherwise MS reserve the right to refuse it.

Which backs up fans' rage, first MS has hardware limitation namely using DVD. Because it's multiplat, it fails at manly level to take advantage of either console but more so to the decrement of the PS3.

Now, with a policy like this, it reinforces such harm towards consumers.

When consumer is losing out and developer's creativity are being limited, it is ruining the industry

dangert125378d ago (Edited 5378d ago )

@maniacmayhem
what i mean like if bio shock hype for ps3 was built up like the original release it would off attracted alot more attention

Like if they went game shows then showed us the extra content etc remember some games get almost 6mnths hype
were as these new releases of older games on new platforms do not hold so much as a candle to games that have just been revealed and are coming out around the same time causing you to forget its even coming

and yes It would be a new game but like i said the hype/advertising is much less the 2nd time round

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 5378d ago
zeal0us5378d ago

Each of the three company have strict policies
M$ probably being the strictiest
Sony the least and Nintendo right down in the middle.

dangert125378d ago

I don't think sony's is strict...I think theirs makes sense for them on a biz standpoint they do not try to gimp the other formats games etc If i owned one of the big companies EA/Activision I'd say ok no deal I'll just make games for the pc/Ps3/wii u and handheld console and carry on supporting the wii if they want

no fifa ,madden, mass effect mirrors edge battlefield etc watch all them fans scatter across to the ps3/pc and make money from them that way

and shit those cod fans will do anything for cod lol
that would make ms look at there policy

BrightFalls765378d ago (Edited 5378d ago )

If people don't like it then don't support Microsoft, nuff' said. I think it's more than fair. It's their company, their money and their console.

latinalover5378d ago

what will MS do when battlefield 3 comes out because they are PS3 then Xbox 360

Silly gameAr5378d ago

And, totally screws gamers that play other consoles. But hey, it's MS's money, company, and, console, so I guess it's only right for gamers that don't own an xbox to come last on the deal.

UltimateIdiot9115378d ago

I didn't buy a 360 but WAIT! Why is that developer has to hamper and be forbidden to take advantage of the ps3 when making multiplat titles? Why are they not taking more advantage on the PS3?

That doesn't sound fair.

It's like that spoil rich brat on the playground that doesn't want to see anyone getting more attention/better stuff. The moment someone does, he will refuse to talk/do business with them. Thus, ruining the fun and mood.

peeps5378d ago

Pretty simple really... If you really want a new title coming out, and it comes out first on 360 or has timed dlc for 360, chances are you'll buy it for 360 (if you have both consoles).

And for the people getting their first console this gen. Say they really wanted to play COD, and that was the only game they were really interested in. They'd most likely buy a 360 due to getting dlc first.

When people really want something they will get it whenever they can. I know personally I imported UT3 from America because I couldn't wait for the EU release a few months later

latinalover5378d ago

PS3 will get battlefield 3 DLC first

peeps5378d ago

what dlc have they announced or is it just gonna be 1943, a game I bought when it releases over 2 years ago. What I was on about was future dlc, although I do see EA partnering with Sony a lot more with exclusive content, how much content I'm unsure of though

radphil5378d ago

"If you really want a new title coming out, and it comes out first on 360 or has timed dlc for 360, chances are you'll buy it for 360 (if you have both consoles). "

My view on that is different. Many devs now are making it so that those that have to wait later on, get more extra content, than if they went out and got it immediately.

Plus most devs are making it harder to buy games out on Day 1, because of any assortment of either bugs, dlc abuse, revisions, etc.

Cpt_kitten5378d ago

because sony didn't call dibs fast enough?

course sony is paying studios tons of money to develop exclusives for them so all is fair

who really cares anyway

Show all comments (41)
70°

Microsoft Gaming Revenue Drops 7% Year-on-Year, Content and Services Down 5%, Xbox Hardware Down 33%

Microsoft announced its financial results for Q3 of fiscal year 2026, including an update on its gaming Xbox business and more.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
Jin_Sakai17d ago (Edited 17d ago )

Not looking good. Hopefully Asha Sharma is able to turn Phil’s disaster around.

dveio16d ago

To me it's still quite remarkable how they can cash-in 5.3bn in revenue in a single quarter, since their hardware is basically dead.

Jingsing16d ago

The stock mark is what makes Microsoft remarkable, They have convinced every institutional and retail investor to just keep piling money into them. Like many big tech giants they are just a big growing pyramid scheme. As long as people keep dropping money into ETF's that cover the market Microsoft will always be liquid. At the same time it is completely stifling innovation and competition. People need to start being more discreet in how they invest their money as it's killing the system.

Tanktopmaster9216d ago

Once they re-evaluate exclusive all will be fine….

S2Killinit16d ago

Riiiiight because people will just flock back to them for one or two games per year.

Jingsing16d ago

15+ years of bad performance is what they call irreparable in business. It is time for them to sell off the assets and get out of entertainment.

Tanktopmaster9216d ago

These declines are on the back of extra revenue received from releasing games like Forza horizon 5 on PlayStation. So I’m being sarcastic here when I said they should go back to exclusives. Killing off a revenue stream from Ps5 sales will only make things worse

Show all comments (13)
70°

Xbox boss: Memory crisis could impact next-gen hardware pricing

Xbox boss Asha Sharma has discussed how component shortages will impact the company's plans for Project Helix.

Read Full Story >>
gamedeveloper.com
Eonjay18d ago

When does this end? Its killing everyone. Consoles and PC. And for what? AI? The benefits of AI are completely outweighed by the negatives. And the government should have never allowed one company to buy up all the RAM.

Lexreborn219d ago

This kind of proves this is an after thought product, most products like this are in r&d 5 years before they start mass producing. So they typically have the cost of components and things worked out long before assembly starts.

This is an assumption still, but I wouldn’t be surprised if project helix is similar to Scalebound,perfect dark and sod3. They had an idea but no actual execution other than concept stage. Being impacted by the ram shortage likely would also put this device 3-4 years out.

I’m not even sure MS has that endurance with Xbox yet

Fishy Fingers19d ago (Edited 19d ago )

I mean.... what?

We're at a point that Samsung wont even provide their own phone department ram because they can sell it at higher prices to 3rd parties (AI). Its more profitable to sell the ram than make their own devices with it.

You think because R&D starts 5 years ago the 3rd party component manufacturers will honour that price? They'll sell it to whomever is paying the most today, not some gentlemens agreement they made years ago. AI farms will buy more volume at higher prices than any console manufacturer will. It'll be the same for Playstation.

Lexreborn218d ago

Contractual agreements are not the same as “gentlemen” agreements. If you think that they work with their distributors a month before production then their entire business model is trash. They work with companies like nvidia constantly for building the graphics cards they need. They work with companies that build motherboards years in advance. This is what proper business planning does.

They are not buying components on a whim like a consumer. So again, considering the ram isn’t a singular module and is integrated into the motherboard I highly doubt they wouldn’t have a final schematic that they are supposed to be building around.

If they are delaying production another 3 years then it’s obvious again this is an after though project and is just trying to be responsive to their bad execution they had the last 14 years.

It also isn’t far fetched to use their failure to produce first party titles the last 7 years including the highly anticipated games I mentioned all being cancelled. That they would continue to you know… lie

Sitdown19d ago

You don't really know how this works huh?

Profchaos19d ago (Edited 19d ago )

Helix is going to be stupidly expensive

Instead of leaning into smarter upscaling techniques they're brute forcing hardware that will cost them dearly and it remains to be seen if it's genuinely going to provide a meaningful differential

I know in the oc.doace people like to brag about not using frame gen or dlss to get to high on a game but for the majority of players they happily use those technologies without a second thought

That's going to be ps6 vs Helix

Eonjay18d ago

Yeah with FSR 5 they should be able to offer a much cheaper version of Helix.

Eonjay18d ago

While this does seem to be the case, I am encouraged by the statement from Microsoft about wanting to provide affordable options. If this means a Series S style Helix, at least there will be something affordable being offered.

XBManiac18d ago

Series S is what has killed Xbox Series so... Will they dare?

blacktiger19d ago

It's called systematic inflationary. Yes we get it Microsoft, keep raising in the name ofall kinds of stuffs

pwnmaster300019d ago

Honestly if there was thing I learned from this generation is that new consoles arnt day one anymore.
I can wait 1-3 years.

DarXyde19d ago

Another important lesson from this generation: while Nintendo showed us that prices don't necessarily need to ever drop, we've now learned that waiting 1-3 years does carry some risk that prices increase. This generation is just bizarre in all the wrong ways.

LucasRuinedChildhood19d ago (Edited 19d ago )

The factors are largely external. Covid and Russia-Ukraine war causing inflation led to the first price increase in 2022.

Then we get Trump's tariffs increasing hardware prices, AI boom causing a RAM crisis, war on Iran causing a worldwide fuel crisis which impacts the cost of everything.

Gaming doesn't exist in a vacuum. The last few years have been a shitshow and lot of it was definitely avoidable.

DarXyde18d ago

LucasRuinedChildhood,

For sure. No disagreement on the external factors doing a lot of this. Where I have to gently push back however is on two fronts:

1. The pandemic definitely caused some issues: asynchronous development was a big issue and really complicated timelines and affected game quality. At the same time, when it comes to price hikes, it's really difficult to know what was genuine necessity and what was taking consumers for a ride. The pandemic brought about "stag-flation" which was increasing prices and stagnant wages, which was a problem caused by supply chain constraints. There was also "Greed-flation", where companies that were slightly affected or had no issues took advantage of the situation and squeezed everyone citing supply chain issues when there were none.

2. It's definitely true that the tariffs, AI boom, and RAM crisis were all things enabled by tech broligarchs throwing money at this caricature of a world leader, one of them being Satya Nadella. I don't think Sony and Nintendo have contributed much to this problem if at all, but Microsoft's Nadella I feel was instrumental in causing every one of those issues. Microsoft as a company contributed to both candidates (though they gave Harris 4x as much if I recall), but Nadella was all in on letting AI run wild. He paid for unregulated AI, and got a war that's not a war (even though Trump called it that at least five times on television) that screwed up helium access. So for me, I feel that one of the players in the gaming industry is a key architect of these issues, and for that reason I struggle a bit to think of it as "external".

Show all comments (28)
50°

'The big things that we're thinking about'

In an exclusive interview with Game File, new(ish) Xbox boss Asha Sharma and Xbox chief content officer Matt Booty explain their vision for Microsoft’s gaming division

Read Full Story >>
gamefile.news
Agent7520d ago

A good start would be to release games to go with the console. My Xbox Series X has gathered dust virtually from launch. My advice would be to ditch a next console and release games on PC, PlayStation and Switch. Another idea would be a hybrid console based on Xbox Series X tech and go the same route as Nintendo. Another idea would be to pull out of gaming altogether. Plenty of options there.

Reaper22_18d ago

Why would they pull out? They have the momentum. Sony has been getting nothing but bad news lately.