Phil Spencer said "not every screen is equal" about Xbox Multiplatform Strategy

[fatpunkslim]

I would like to revisit some quotes from Phil Spencer during the recent Xbox Era interview that confirm or clarify Xbox's multiplatform strategy.

And obviously not every screen is equal. Yeah, like there’s certain things we can’t do on the other closed platforms that we can do on open platforms, cloud – it’s different. But games should be the thing that we’re focused on. And the strategy that we have allows us to do big games, while also supporting our native platform from hardware to the platform and services that we have and that’s going to be our approach.

(...)

But yeah, I would love to make all of the money for all of the games that we ship right, like obviously we make more on our own platform. It’s one of the reasons that investing in our own platform is important.

(...)

It’s why us embracing Windows and embracing Cloud has allowed us to grow. One of our fastest growing regions for us right now is Asia and it’s not because we’re selling more consoles in Asia, but through cloud and PC, we’re finding more users year over year than in any other place. The fastest kind of platform is Cloud

To summarize:
Phil Spencer discusses how their strategy is tailored to different types of screens, acknowledging that "not every screen is equal." He explains that their focus is on open platforms like PC and cloud, which are growing rapidly, while also supporting closed platforms like competing consoles on a case-by-case basis. He emphasizes that games are the primary focus of their strategy, allowing for the development of major titles while still supporting in priority their own hardware, services, and platform. (where they more money).

Phil Spencer emphasized in his interview with Destin that not all Xbox games will be available on other consoles.

He also said it a year ago during last year's Xbox Developer Direct about the case-by-case strategy and not to think that, i quote: "these 4 games were a not a sign that everything else will follow, that is not the case."

He reiterated this point during the Xbox Era interview, stating that "not every screen is equal," and explained how their strategy differs depending on the type of platform. He noted that their approach primarily focuses on open platforms like PC and cloud, rather than closed platforms such as competing consoles.

Xbox's strategy is much more nuanced than some believe; it's not all or nothing but somewhere in between. Xbox is aware that they make more money with their own ecosystem, services, and hardware. And They are also aware that it is in their best interest to prioritize open platforms like PC and especially the cloud.

It's logical, what brings the most is PC and cloud, and their own ecosystem, where there are no 30% commissions, as he said in the interview. It's logical that they continue to prioritize their own ecosystem, it's just good business sense.

The mistake often made by some people is to believe that the multiplatform strategy primarily concerns other consoles, but that's false; it mainly concerns growing markets like PC and cloud. As for other consoles, it will be on a case-by-case basis like we can already see and as has been said many times., and for the few games that will be ported to other consoles, these are temporary exclusives, as it seems to be the case: sea of thieves (Exclusive for 8 years), forza horizon 5 (Exclusive for 4 years), etc.... Of course, games that are already multiplatform remain multiplatform, like Call of Duty, Doom, Outer Worlds, etc.

It should be noted that Phil Spencer wants to be more transparent about what will or will not be released on other platforms, as he mentioned in the interview, which is also a good thing and will avoid false speculations.

Source: https://xboxera.com/2025/02/15/xboxera-interviews-phil-spencer/

 

[fatpunkslim]

It's funny, I asked ChatGPT, which I use very little, what it thinks about the media treatment of Xbox's multiplatform strategy.

The media play an important role in the perception of events and company strategies. Clickbait is a common practice to attract visitors, even if it means presenting information in a misleading or sensationalist manner. In the case of Xbox, some media may exaggerate or misinterpret Microsoft's actions to create catchy headlines that generate traffic. However, it is important to rely on facts and official announcements to avoid falling into the clickbait trap. Microsoft has clearly stated that they continue to invest in exclusives for Xbox while exploring other opportunities, particularly with cloud gaming. False information can create confusion and misunderstandings, so it is essential to refer to reliable sources.

It's also funny to see that no media has picked up on the phrase "not every screen is equal," which is quite eloquent, nor on the fact that they continue to invest in their own platform which brings in more revenue, that the multiplatform focus is mainly on the cloud, etc. Everything revolves around competing consoles because that's what gets clicks, even if it means misleading and completely missing what Phil Spencer actually said. That's what attracts PlayStation fanboys and also Xbox fanboys.

 

[fatpunkslim]

If media did their job, you would know that it is the entire console market that is in decline, not just Xbox. According to VGChartz (data from January 2025), the PS5 sold 2 million less units than the PS4. non one talk about that.

If media job did their job, you would know that there is no mid-gen for this generation of consoles, so it's not comparable to talk about console sales. Even though there is indeed a decline, all other things being equal. But with fewer consoles, Xbox generates more revenue than PlayStation ...

If Media did their job, you would know that Xbox has never talked about ending exclusives. Just because they release some games on other platforms doesn't mean it's the case. But of course, clickbait is a must! No one talks about their multiplatform strategy differ between open and closed platform, but it's visibly too complicated to explain. Clickbait should be simple; otherwise, it's no longer clickbait.

If Media did their job, you would know that there are still exclusive games on Xbox, and several are announced. Why do some talk about the end of exclusives as if it were already the case? It will be the case when no one makes exclusives anymore, not before! Attention, I am 100% behind the current multiplatform strategy. I'm just saying that it is more nuanced than some want to make us believe; it's not all or nothing, but something in between! But again, nuance has no place in the current media system.

If Media did their job, you would know that Phil Spencer recently stated on XboxEra that "not every screen is equal" when comparing open platforms like PC and cloud, where they go all-in, and closed platforms where their multiplatform policy is different (case by case). But of course, it contradicts the whole narrative they've been pushing for months, so it's difficult for them to backtrack.

What's funny is that when people finally realize that Xbox continues to announce exclusive games in 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, for the next generation of consoles, they'll say "Oh, Xbox has changed its strategy, they are making exclusive games again"... But actually, they never stopped, they are just doing both at the same time.

Moreover, it's already happening. Count the article and video titles like "Xbox has changed strategy..." Really? Xbox has been making both multiplatform and exclusive games for years now; what's so complicated about understanding that ? The evolution comes simply from the fact that they have many more studios than before, so they are making both more multiplatform games (especially games historically multiplatform from studio acquisitions) AND more exclusive games than before.

If, and I repeat IF, they start releasing games day one on other consoles—which they haven't done until now (except for games that are already multiplatform of course)—I will reconsider my position. But until then, I am convinced their strategy is to maintain a balance.

An interesting test will be Forza Horizon 6. If that game is released day one on other consoles, then I can say I was completely wrong and that Xbox is making a big business mistake by doing so. But I really don't think so because I believe they are smart enough to release Forza Horizon 6 only four years later on other consoles, thereby attracting PS players to the Xbox ecosystem (Game Pass and platform).

Maintaining a balance serves both to support the studios and at the same time to support their own ecosystem (services and hardware), and that's exactly what I understood from the latest Xbox Era interview.

But to understand that, you just need to read the entire interview, simply, and not the media that takes small parts to make clickbait.

Besides, it's funny because this is precisely a topic addressed at the end of Phil Spencer's interview, about media bias and "information" (or misinformation) made for SEO or clickbait.

 

[fjtorres5591]

If media did their job, you would know that it is the entire console market that is in decline, not just Xbox. According to VGChartz (data from January 2025), the PS5 sold 2 million less units than the PS4. non one talk about that.

If media job did their job, you would know that there is no mid-gen for this generation of consoles, so it's not comparable to talk about console sales. Even though there is indeed a decline, all other things being equal. But with fewer consoles, Xbox generates more revenue than PlayStation ...

If Media did their job, you would know that Xbox has never talked about ending exclusives. Just because they release some games on other platforms doesn't mean it's the case. But of course, clickbait is a must! No one talks about their multiplatform strategy differ between open and closed platform, but it's visibly too complicated to explain. Clickbait should be simple; otherwise, it's no longer clickbait.

If Media did their job, you would know that there are still exclusive games on Xbox, and several are announced. Why do some talk about the end of exclusives as if it were already the case? It will be the case when no one makes exclusives anymore, not before! Attention, I am 100% behind the current multiplatform strategy. I'm just saying that it is more nuanced than some want to make us believe; it's not all or nothing, but something in between! But again, nuance has no place in the current media system.

If Media did their job, you would know that Phil Spencer recently stated on XboxEra that "not every screen is equal" when comparing open platforms like PC and cloud, where they go all-in, and closed platforms where their multiplatform policy is different (case by case). But of course, it contradicts the whole narrative they've been pushing for months, so it's difficult for them to backtrack.

What's funny is that when people finally realize that Xbox continues to announce exclusive games in 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, for the next generation of consoles, they'll say "Oh, Xbox has changed its strategy, they are making exclusive games again"... But actually, they never stopped, they are just doing both at the same time.

Moreover, it's already happening. Count the article and video titles like "Xbox has changed strategy..." Really? Xbox has been making both multiplatform and exclusive games for years now; what's so complicated about understanding that ? The evolution comes simply from the fact that they have many more studios than before, so they are making both more multiplatform games (especially games historically multiplatform from studio acquisitions) AND more exclusive games than before.

If, and I repeat IF, they start releasing games day one on other consoles—which they haven't done until now (except for games that are already multiplatform of course)—I will reconsider my position. But until then, I am convinced their strategy is to maintain a balance.

An interesting test will be Forza Horizon 6. If that game is released day one on other consoles, then I can say I was completely wrong and that Xbox is making a big business mistake by doing so. But I really don't think so because I believe they are smart enough to release Forza Horizon 6 only four years later on other consoles, thereby attracting PS players to the Xbox ecosystem (Game Pass and platform).

Maintaining a balance serves both to support the studios and at the same time to support their own ecosystem (services and hardware), and that's exactly what I understood from the latest Xbox Era interview.

But to understand that, you just need to read the entire interview, simply, and not the media that takes small parts to make clickbait.

Besides, it's funny because this is precisely a topic addressed at the end of Phil Spencer's interview, about media bias and "information" (or misinformation) made for SEO or clickbait.

Minor point: Sony talks about boxes shipped, not boxes sold.

Their own brags about "active users" which includes forced *PC* signups, point to a smaller number of active PS5. I've seen estimates as high as 25% warehouse queens. So that 75m? Not a useful number.

Now factor in that 70% of user engagement is live service and the addressable market for single player games on that platform is much smaller. Which explains the 6% sell through rate of even their most popular *recent* games.

XBOX is probably not terribly different but XBOX also *owns* over a dozen of the timesink games and thus 100% of their revenue streams (or trickles?). As Spencer said, 100% is better than 70% which are both better than 30%.

Just by the nominal numbers, XBOX makes more money off their active consoles than Sony does off their highly touted number.

The real difference isn't exclusivity but rather First Party.

And that is the reality the gaming media doesn't *want* to face.
But they are forgetting that *net* profit, not customer spend, is what pays for future games and future hardware.

All screens aren't equal and neither are the gamers.
In gaming the hardware is a cost center and the games and subscriptions are the profit centers. Which is XBOX focusing on growing?

 

[fatpunkslim]

@fjtorres5591 Yes, you are right to point out that the number of active users on PS is very low. The PS5 console, as hardware, is essentially an empty box. Many people buy it as a default console because they don't know anything else and either play the same games (FIFA, Fortnite, etc.) or the console gathers dust. There are very few real gamers, potential game buyers, which is what interests publishers. We can see it in the weak sales of their own games or exclusives like FF. That’s why Square Enix, Capcom, and almost all publishers no longer want to make exclusives for PS, which inevitably leads to a drastic reduction in exclusive games, especially considering they make very few first-party games.

In reality, I wanted to shed light on the relationship between an editor's financial health and making exclusive games. Making an exclusive game nowadays is a luxury few developers can afford. Only Nintendo can afford this luxury today. PlayStation can no longer afford this luxury because their financial health isn’t great, exclusive contracts with third-party publishers are very expensive, and producing AAA games costs a lot.

This is why the statements by Yoshida, the CEO of Sony, are very clear and outline day-one releases of PS games on PC. This is also why we see so many remakes; making a remake or releasing a game on PC isn't expensive. That’s why PlayStation hasn’t released any new IPs for years; they take no financial risks because they are in the red.

On the other hand, Xbox, with its multiplatform strategy (which isn’t what some media portray and is much more nuanced), allows them to have the luxury of releasing exclusive games, even if only temporarily and released several years later on other consoles, they remain exclusive (who wants to play Forza Horizon 6 four years later?). And we can already see this; Xbox is currently releasing exclusive games like Stalker 2, Avowed, South of Midnight, MechaBreak, etc. and what about PS?

On the other hand, Silent Hill 2 will be released on Xbox, Death Stranding 2 will also be released on Xbox, and more and more former PS exclusives are being recovered due to Sony's dependence on third-party publishers
AND above all, because they make and sell very few games. The one selling games and services is the one who can afford the luxury of having some exclusive games—it's all about balance. Right now, only Xbox has that luxury.

This ties back to what you said: "The real difference isn't exclusivity but rather First Party." And that's the strong point—ironically, it’s Xbox’s multiplatform strategy and their first-party game production that allows them to have exclusive games. I don’t know if I’m making myself clear? lol With their strong financial health, Xbox has the luxury of choosing what can be ported to other consoles and what cannot. Nothing forces them to release everything on day one—they're not backed into a corner.

"All screens aren't equal and neither are the gamers."

Take Black Myth: Wukong—the studio, Game Science, took Sony’s check, but where did they actually sell their game? 80% on PC, knowing that only 30% of those sales are outside of China. Sony’s goal is obviously to monopolize the console market in China, which is why they prefer not to let this exclusivity contract leak too much.

"All screens aren't equal and neither are the gamers."

Yes, a PC player is not a console player, and vice versa. Some console players are willing to switch to PC, and we can clearly see this with the double-digit growth of the PC market and the decline of the console market—there’s a clear shift happening. But some console players will never switch to PC for a variety of reasons, especially the plug-and-play aspect.

That’s why Xbox focuses its strategy on PC, the cloud, and its consoles—essentially, its own ecosystem ("this is an Xbox")—but other consoles ("this is not an Xbox") don’t fit into the same model. It’s a slightly different strategy, based on a case-by-case approach and temporary exclusives.

That’s what some media struggle to understand because they tend to oversimplify everything—it's all or nothing.

And why do they oversimplify?

• Intellectual laziness from the writers.
• Because it’s easier to explain that "Xbox is going to release everything on other platforms."
• It’s simpler for the general public with an IQ below average.
• And it’s an easier way to generate clickbait.

Yes, Xbox focuses its energy on games and services because that’s the core of everything—and that’s normal. That’s what allows them to fund everything else:

• Their game development studios
• Their future exclusives
• Their future hardware
• Their marketing campaigns
• Their cloud servers

Multiplatform isn’t the core of their strategy; games are (as you pointed out). That’s a completely different approach. Balanced multiplatform publishing is just one of the many means to reach that goal. Selling games is what sustains their ecosystem, their hardware, and even—let me emphasize this—their exclusives. It’s all about balance.

This strategy is the opposite of PlayStation’s historical approach, which has essentially been: "I make games to sell consoles, and those consoles are just receptacles for third-party games."

That’s why most of their game lineup usually comes at the beginning of a generation or when they release a mid-gen console—and after that, almost nothing. But now, they’re evolving. And once again, they’re following the path set by Xbox—though not without struggles (the failed Bungie acquisition, a dozen canceled games, flops like Concord, closed studios, 10% of their workforce laid off—way more than Xbox or other publishers).

You can clearly see they’re in trouble—just look at the numerous leadership shake-ups, strategy changes, and statements from Sony’s CEO. All of this shows a shift in strategy, but they still don’t quite know how to communicate it to their community.

 

[fjtorres5591]

Nintendo works because they make money off their hardware, their games are cheap to make, and they still sell tens of millions of their two/three exclusives a year.
Also, they operate at the high end of the toy market: for many, their first console is a Nintendo. And that limits the market for the living room boxes. NINTENDO at the low end and PC at the high end limits the addressable market. MS created the SX precisely to address that entry level segment but the product libel that "series S holds games back" has muted its impact. Nonetheless the strategy is good and should remain. (The FUDers conveniently neglect to mention that SX is twice the power of the Steam Deck and four times the Switch, both of which oftentimes render SD resolutions, counting on the small screen size to tide them over.)

Oh, and yes: that Wukong barely moved 1.5M sales on PS (same as ASTROBOT!) indicates that their gamers are getting...parsimonious...after spending their money on hardware. That 30% percent non live service engagement is spread pretty thin.

Another reason for XBOX to limit their PS output to already paid-for games. It is never going to be a primary market for new (to them) IPs. Which explains why Sony only dishes out sequels and remakes.

The FORTNITE-as-minimal-benchmark narrative looks pretty accurate right now.