A new analysis claims that Microsoft's Xbox has become the top games publisher in the world

[Windows Central]

An analytics firm has handed Microsoft the games publishing crown. With almost half a billion in spending, Microsoft's multiplatform strategy is paying off for Xbox, at least according to this analysis.

A new analysis claims that Microsoft's Xbox has become the top games publisher in the world : Read more

 

[fatpunkslim]

An analytics firm has handed Microsoft the games publishing crown. With almost half a billion in spending, Microsoft's multiplatform strategy is paying off for Xbox, at least according to this analysis.

A new analysis claims that Microsoft's Xbox has become the top games publisher in the world : Read more

Where did you see that FY25 Q2 is a post-exclusive game world? Xbox has been making multiplatform games for years. Xbox's good results have nothing to do with a 'post-exclusive game world'; it's simply because of the acquisition of ABK and especially because of Call of Duty, which has always been multiplatform.

There is absolutely no correlation; it's not games like Pentiment, Grounded, Hi-Fi Rush, or Sea of Thieves being available on other platforms that have made Xbox a top publisher.

Do you understand what I'm saying? Or are you too stubborn to admit that you are clinging to nonsensical ideas associations?

When Destin asked, 'Are all Xbox games going to PlayStation?' he said no, neither for all old games nor for all future games ('the things will look at how they do' = case by case). Why didn't he just say yes to such a simple question?

1. Yes There will be more Xbox games on Nintendo and PlayStation
2. No. It won't be all Xbox games
3. Many games will launch on Xbox first, and then MS will decide if they port them to other consoles OR NOT

To return to the topic, yes, of course, it's a good strategy to move towards more multiplatform games, but one doesn't prevent the other. There are also benefits to keeping exclusive games, they know it, and that's exactly what they are doing. Just look at the 2025 lineup, which is full of exclusive games (temporary or not, and even temporary, it's still an exclusive game).

It's not just 2025 games, but here's a short list of exclusive games: South of Midnight, Stalker 2, Contraband, Avowed, Fable, Gears, Perfect Dark, State of Decay 3, Replaced, Everwild, Clockwork Revolution, 33 Immortals, ARK 2, Project Mara, .... And I forget many others. We're still waiting for the rumors that have been around for a year about Forza Horizon 5, Halo, Starfield, etc., supposedly coming to all platforms. Lots of rumors for not much in the end!

Is this a post-exclusive game era? I don't think so!

In reality, it's the platform with the most exclusive games in 2024-2025 behind Nintendo, and also the manufacturer with the most multiplatform games. They lead both strategies simultaneously; it's just that the media and even you like to repeat the same thing and see things always from the same angle, without looking at the other.

 

[fjtorres5591]

Where did you see that FY25 Q2 is a post-exclusive game world? Xbox has been making multiplatform games for years. Xbox's good results have nothing to do with a 'post-exclusive game world'; it's simply because of the acquisition of ABK and especially because of Call of Duty, which has always been multiplatform.

There is absolutely no correlation; it's not games like Pentiment, Grounded, Hi-Fi Rush, or Sea of Thieves being available on other platforms that have made Xbox a top publisher.

Do you understand what I'm saying? Or are you too stubborn to admit that you are clinging to nonsensical ideas associations?

When Destin asked, 'Are all Xbox games going to PlayStation?' he said no, neither for all old games nor for all future games ('the things will look at how they do' = case by case). Why didn't he just say yes to such a simple question?

1. Yes There will be more Xbox games on Nintendo and PlayStation
2. No. It won't be all Xbox games
3. Many games will launch on Xbox first, and then MS will decide if they port them to other consoles OR NOT

To return to the topic, yes, of course, it's a good strategy to move towards more multiplatform games, but one doesn't prevent the other. There are also benefits to keeping exclusive games, they know it, and that's exactly what they are doing. Just look at the 2025 lineup, which is full of exclusive games (temporary or not, and even temporary, it's still an exclusive game).

It's not just 2025 games, but here's a short list of exclusive games: South of Midnight, Stalker 2, Contraband, Avowed, Fable, Gears, Perfect Dark, State of Decay 3, Replaced, Everwild, Clockwork Revolution, 33 Immortals, ARK 2, Project Mara, .... And I forget many others. We're still waiting for the rumors that have been around for a year about Forza Horizon 5, Halo, Starfield, etc., supposedly coming to all platforms. Lots of rumors for not much in the end!

Is this a post-exclusive game era? I don't think so!

In reality, it's the platform with the most exclusive games in 2024-2025 behind Nintendo, and also the manufacturer with the most multiplatform games. They lead both strategies simultaneously; it's just that the media and even you like to repeat the same thing and see things always from the same angle, without looking at the other.

Last I heard, pre buyout, the poorly managed ABK was either the first or second games publisher in revenue depending on how you bookkept Tencent. Add Bethesda, Mojang, and XBS/XWP and it is hardly a reach to see XBOX as the top games publisher by revenue. If not now, within the next three years, assuming teams started after the acquisition take 5 years to deliver. A hundred properly managed studios, most of which have "always* been multiplatform, can literally flood the market beyond what any single platform can support.

There was never a chance XBOX was going to drop 12 console exclusive games a year. On the other hand, Spencer has been quite clear they intended to provide 4 console exclusive per year and that is where we stand.

He just said not all XBOX exclusives are going elsewhere.

The man is open enough, why not take him at his word?

He suddenly is a liar because he denies youtube clickbait?

And that $500M number? Spencer and co must be risking laughter induced injury at the idea that $500M estimate for Dec is even a pale reflection of their reality.

Seriously; december is traditionally the top selling month for games so even if the rest of the year matches it, you're only capturing $6B a year. XBOX is running at $15B! ABK alone used to do $7-9B. Plus Mojang. Plus ZENIMAX.

As somebody once said, that number "doesn't mean what you think it means."

And neither does the $500B number.

Guys, you need better sources than some random leaking "industry insider" on the internet.

The funny thing is the real storyline in gaming is being downplayed as Japan is purging the PlayStation upper ranks of the (mostly) European cadre that has been steering it into the ground. New Sony CEO, new PS CEO and CFO, all Japanese.

4% profit margin (a third of " dying" XBOX, a quarter of ABK, and a sixth of NINTENDO) speaks loudly. The real fight for survival is not console counts but the profits. And Sony is lacking there.

Just remember how announced they wanted to buy KADAKAWA only to find they didn't have the cash (or, surprisingly the credit!) for a $3B deal that made all the business sense in the world. Not after wasting $3.6B overpaying for Bungie. That is serious loss of face. No wonder today Sony has a new CEO.
But that isn't news.
Just like XBOX sucking money out of the PS installed base to fund their investment in XBOX games isn't news, somehow.

No. The headline goes to an "analysis" that fails the test of publicly know data.
Because internet memes trump hard news.

Come on guys! Read the financial sites once in a while!

 

[Jez Corden]

bro, this is ampere, not some random "industry insider"

 

[CrashTest]

>Xbox Game Pass remains the best deal in gaming, Xbox Series X is the most powerful console, and Xbox Series S is the most affordable entry into current gen gaming. But, for whatever reason, consumers have so far shrugged their shoulders.

We know why. Exclusive games. People buy gaming consoles for games, not bells and whistles. The Switch 2 will sell well, not because of the hardware or NSO, but because of Mario, Pokemon and Zelda exclusivity

 

[fatpunkslim]

@fjtorres5591 : "He just said not all XBOX exclusives are going elsewhere.

The man is open enough, why not take him at his word?
He suddenly is a liar because he denies youtube clickbait?

You said it all! If we don't fit into the narrative decided by some, then we're ignored. Everything is good for clickbait, even if it means combining things that make no sense. We're not in the post-exclusive era, but in the era of misinformation, that's for sure!

 

[fjtorres5591]

bro, this is ampere, not some random "industry insider"

Oh, really?
100% accurate? Always?
Then why not sell his "news" like Pachter?

Just a rumormonger spreading the same old FUD.

Now when are you folks going to address the *reason* for the ongoing industry reshuffling?

What's it going to take? TENCENT buying out UBISOFT?
SONY closing INSOMNIAC?
$100 Games that aren't GTA?

 

[Lurking_Lurker_Lurks]

>Xbox Game Pass remains the best deal in gaming, Xbox Series X is the most powerful console, and Xbox Series S is the most affordable entry into current gen gaming. But, for whatever reason, consumers have so far shrugged their shoulders.

We know why. Exclusive games. People buy gaming consoles for games, not bells and whistles. The Switch 2 will sell well, not because of the hardware or NSO, but because of Mario, Pokemon and Zelda exclusivity

You might want to tell that to the Wii U. Actually literally every OTHER Nintendo console. If the Nintendo Switch 2 performs well, and I think it will, it will actually break a terrible trend Nintendo has of literally every other home console being an absolute flop.

You know now that I think about it, why has Nintendo never gotten the treatment Xbox does in the news? I mean was there an article every other day about how Nintendo was dead after the GameCube sold a measly 21 million? The GameCube sold less than the ORIGINAL Xbox (as in when Xbox first entered this already mature market) and in a longer time as the Xbox 360 came in 2005 and the Wii came in 2006. The Wii U was a MASSIVE failure having only sold 13 million units in its lifetime (and for both the GameCube and Wii U I was one of those measly purchases (I happily bought every console until this gen when I saw no reason to buy anything other than Xbox (well that and it's a big difference when you're buying for yourself and your family is buying for the whole family))). I mean seriously yikes. The Wii U also had FIVE years on the market before the Nintendo Switch released in 2017. Both the GameCube and the Wii U had the usual stacked lineup of exclusives and beloved Nintendo IP. The Wii U went REALLY hard with their first and third party exclusives. Like the Wii U had an insane exclusive lineup. Still no one bought it (well, not NO ONE, but you get the point).

Bringing it back to my original question why is Xbox "dying" now and Nintendo wasn't before? Or were people saying that about Nintendo back then? Idk, I was a happy kid who didn't have a phone with internet connection and frankly better for it. Now I do and am subjected to internet gamer nerds dealing in constant absolutes about the business financials of corporate brands all of which just see them (consumers) for their wallets. Back on topic, I guess it was the 3DS? Nintendo was saved from humiliation by their handheld... which had also dropped to like HALF the sales of the previous iteration (the DS which sold over 150 million) and the Gameboy (sold close to 120 million). But still the 3DS sold 75 million and the WiiU sold 13 million that's a respectable 88 million all together and we can even round up to 90 million. That's more than Xbox's peak in the 360 era. Okay, you've convinced me. Xbox needs a handheld.

Okay, but seriously, I wouldn't recommend bringing Nintendo up in this conversation about home console unit sales and the impact of exclusives on them. There is a very clear reason why the Nintendo switch is a "hyrbid". Nintendo has only consistently sold well with handhelds. The Nintendo Entertainment System was their last home console to break 50m (it sold about 60m) and that was in the 1980s. In the 90s the SNES almost sold 50m. The N64 barely broke 30m. Then GameCube again continued this trend doing far worse than ever and the Wii was the first to raise Nintendo up out of this decline... then the WiiU came and took a nosedive into shark infested water. Nintendo's own history immediately shows that exclusive games and IP doesn't sell console hardware. The Nintendo Switch and Wii won on consumer hardware innovation. It's interesting because Nintendo is the one clutching their exclusives like pearls the most, but they're the console that's proven time and time again that their consumers don't buy their hardware for their exclusives; they buy their hardware because it offers them unique fun. Gamers 100% did NOT buy the WiiU for its exclusives or the GameCube for that matter and even the N64 struggled.

I think it's interesting how much the media is focused on hardware sales now when compared to the history of game consoles Xbox Series Consoles are doing well. Exact numbers are unknown, but they're analyzed to be somewhere between 25 million and 30 million. After 4 years that's not bad. Like at all. The only real concern is that year over year suggest Xbox might stall here and without a mid gen refresh they won't pick up, but that's also not really an issue at all based on Xbox's strategy. Like if a new console iteration is coming in 2026. As much as people "hate" Xbox, the brand seems to generate a lot more chatter than even the current winning gaming brands out there have in the past. For the most part Xbox hardware sales are really boring in how "fine" they are. Like it's spun as some catastrophic event and the end of Xbox consoles, but like they are literally doing mediocre in sales. A tad disappointing but that's it. Failure looks like the WiiU and GameCube. Breaking 50m sales is actually quite the struggle for home consoles and breaking 100 million is a major milestone achievement (that Xbox still hasn't reached). Breaking 150m is a crown currently only held by 3 consoles (Nintendo Switch, Nintendo DS, and the PS2) and that's the ceiling... that's the ceiling... Oh god that's the ceiling.

 

[fjtorres5591]

Nintendo plays to a different audience that isn't as a rule all that interested in story (ZELDA aside) or immersion. Their bread and butter is smaller, gameplay-focused games,that are *cheap* to build. Between this, their franchise IPs, and their base in the "toy" market from their handheld history, they don't *need* third party.

In both the Wii and Switch 1 eras most every Nintendo games has been de-facto exclusive. With the Wii you could port games to Wii but porting Wii originals rarely worked. With the Switch it is similar; third parties could port Switch games out but why? Indies have that sector swamped even on console. And the box can barely run console games from the 360 era.

Nintendo has most often landed in trouble when they stray too far from their formula. Cheap to build hardware sold at a profit, cheap gameplay focused games. No $100M 5 year games from them.

Switch 2 is staying close to the model but developers looking to port to it had better be careful. It really aims at a different audience and with PC handhelds improving that market may not materialize for them.