I thought it was because of employee overlap that happened because of the merger?
Didn't they say it was because there was overlap due to the merger? Now it's just business?
"*except when the business is PS related, they get a pass."
Let me guess your response when Sony hiked prices compared to when Microsoft did it...
@Lightning
This is the exact approach they did with PC initially. Didn't bring everything at first until it eventually became day one.
"I think If Xbox was so keen on going full multi-platform, Halo Infinite, Starfield, Forza and Flight Simulator would have been announced as multi-platform in place of the 6 year old Sea of Thieves and 3 smaller titles (Grounded, Pentiment and Hi-Fi:Rush)."
The backlash would be huge if they had done that. Slowly but surely is the approach they are taking
Publishers should just put their games day one on gamepass. Many experts on here tell me that's it's very profitable.
@GamerRN
"They make no money because they were already paid an upfront fee. So they MADE money, but make no additional money."
So it's a good thing that they make no additional money despite their game having continued success well after the initial payment?
***"moot point if MS keeps releasing games on other platforms though."***
Consolidation is never good. The first words of your post "less innovation and competition" applies regardless of whether the games release on other platforms.
***"There's a difference between Sony or MS buying a studio and a company not releasing hardware period."***
I'm not going to pretend that removing a publisher off the ...
I don't understand what you are saying here. This is the exact argument people have been saying about GP for years now. In the short term the upfront cost is good, especially if your game is either trash or was never going to be popular in the first place, but long term and if your game exceeds expectations then it's not as good. Also if your game is AAA and is a sure fire going to sell millions day one, people want those titles day one on GP as well and think it's sustainable for...
Can make the same argument for buying up publishers which many supported ironically, but wouldn't support this.
I've been told that this is an outlier and 99% of devs feel the opposite of what moon studios is saying right here.
"The push to online/gaas is for a reason, sustainability."
If every game was online/gas would every game be successful/sustainable?
As long as it's from Microsoft, I doubt it'll be possible for you to be disappointed with any game from them.
The moment Kill The Justice League was shown to not be single player, it was never going to be purchased by me. Shame that Rocksteady went that route.
Earning 30% without spending a dime on dev costs, marketing, etc. Don't think anyone is complaining besides HezbollahHuns deep down inside 😂
"Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo don’t give two shits about you or your console war" Mr HezbollahHuns
Shadow announcement drop?
The next Xbox should be more powerful than the Pro, no? Seeing how it's next gen vs current gen...?
***"There's 2 sides this though, who hyped exclusives to be the end all be all in the first place? Which fanbase bragged to death and back about having exckusives? You can't talk about one with out the other. Only difference is PS fans are way more vocal about those things and sets these standards themselves. They need to be 1st party, they need to be built from the ground up, it needs to be new IP every once in awhile, it needs to be high meta, sell X, Y, Z amount. I've hear...
"Keeping a game exclusive helps who exactly? Keeping the potential of an IP helps who exactly? It helps few platform fanboys feel good inside while the reality of doing business is to have a wider reach"
Crazy how you would NEVER EVER see a post like this from ANYONE prior to Phil's business update. 3 weeks back you wasn't saying this Kiryu. Phil is a master manipulator, I'll give him that.
Gaming god?