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.

 

[fatpunkslim]

Maybe some of Xbox games are only temporary exclusives, but which ones? And for how long? how many years ? If you want to take advantage of Game Pass, be sure that a game will be playable on your platform, and play it on day one, it's on Xbox or PC where it happens because they have much more to offer, whether in exclusives or via Game Pass, just facts!

None of PS "exclusives" are permanent, even death stranding 2 or silent hill 2 remake are coming to xbox ! Because, 90% of PlayStation exclusive games are from third-party publishers, so they will all come to Xbox. It's only the first-party games that remain exclusive, but since they makes very few first party games, mostly do remakes and are available on PC, who cares!

The key is that Xbox makes far more first-party games, so they can choose what they want to port to other consoles or not, unlike PlayStation which heavily relies on third-party publishers for its exclusive games. Furthermore, Xbox, like playstation, also continues to make temporary exclusive deals with third-party publishers. Mechanically, it's logical that Xbox has more exclusive games because they simply produce more games, that's it !! And their few multiplatform games (mainly games already multiplatform and service games) help them to finance Game Pass, future exclusive games, cloud servers, their future hardware, marketing campaigns, etc.. It's good for Xbox, so it's good for Xbox players first !

Some Xbox exclusives on 2025-2026:
stalker 2
avowed
south of midnight
mechabreak
state of decay 3
Clockwork Revolution
Contraband
Replaced
Subnautica 2
Ark 2
Everwild
OD
33 Immortals
Gears of War: E-Day
Perfect Dark
Fable
The Elder Scrolls VI
etc... (+ not announced games)

And the biggest exclusive is the Game Pass because all these games above are in the Game Pass. Plus, we can add the games announced as being multiplatform (first and third party) like:
Doom: The Dark Ages
expeditions 33
outer worlds 2
Hollow Knight: Silksong
Wuchang: Fallen Feathers
Ninja Gaiden 4
Mixtape
FBC: Firebreak
The Alters
Atomfall
...

Xbox is really the best ecosystem, no matter what (pc, cloud, tv, xbox console,) thanks to gamepass, exclusive games, xbox play anywhere, backwards compatbility, controller, quick resume, cross save, and many others features, they have so much to offer !

 

[fjtorres5591]

There is a reason the MS board tied Nadella's compensation to Game Pass.
And why it is being phased out for this year.
That incentive is complete.
The content pipeline is full and producing at close to capacity.

We'll have to wait a couple weeks until the GDC to see what comes next but my best guess is an official announcement of a cloud only GamePass tier.
And maybe a few more TV brands getting xcloud clients.
Also, it's about time XBOX went fishing for more developers and;or studios.

XBOX is on the ascendancy.

 

[Lurking_Lurker_Lurks]

To me it's as simple as looking at the state of affairs of Xbox. They're releasing more games more consistently than ever. They have more support on their consoles than ever. They have a wider presence due to expansion into cloud and PC than ever. They've also grown into a behemoth. Speaking of the multiplatform titles they're dominating there as well. Not just due to the ABK purchase or even Minecraft, but their own long running original IP like Sea of Thieves and Forza Horizon. It says a lot to me that Xbox can release a game several years old on Playstation and dominate the store charts there. And I DO NOT imagine any of those PS customers were planning to buy an Xbox for the like the hit 2018 game sea of thieves 5 years later or Forza 4 years later.

I compare this to Sony whom all I've seen of this generation is price increases and gimmicky hardware accessories (gimmick isn't even really an insult there, but a matter of fact. VR hasn't taken off well enough to call it anything but and the PS Portal is a weird "not a handheld" device). There's been a handful of great first party games from them, but far less than usual. They've also increasingly been basically burning money in an attempt to crack live service. Helldivers 2 was a major success there, but also revealed that while the devs hit the mark, Playstation themselves aren't well versed in maintaining a live service and they'll have some additional challenges there in the future.

I look at all of this and truly don't know how this isn't the most stable Xbox has ever been. It's certainly the biggest. They started this generation a 15 billion dollar gaming business (actually more at times) and are now an over 20 billion dollar one. Yet media and even fans seem to warp reality to say the opposite. In part, I do blame Xbox for their poor messaging and marketing. Additionally, thid is partly a case of "you reap what you sow". At one point the marketing WAS for Xbox to take advantage of the public perception of the console wars to purposefully make fans more polarized and weaponize the very nature of competition. That's what many gamers grew up with and for many more they grew up with it prior to Xbox, making Xbox the visiting challenger. But still it just creates this illusion of strength for Playstation and illusion of Doom for Xbox that undermines the real value both platforms offer.

Console hardware is a good one. The reality is that most console consumers have just been upgrades for the past couple of generations. The overall market hasn't really grow. This generation games have been cross gen more than ever and last gen had been well supported for longer. In addition to this situation Xbox hasn't done real console refreshes (just increased storage) where they had done multiple last gen (Xbox One S and One X in the years following the One), so they aren't capturing repeat customers. The world economy being trash has also kept console prices higher than ever. And Xbox just didn't really market their consoles much at all after a certain point. I think Phil blamed the ABK case. But regardless there was a ton of marketing for both the Series S and X at the start and then it really died down in 2022 and 2023. In 2022 it especially had felt like Xbox lost their voice. 2023 was better, but marketing has only really picked up since 2024. Despite all of that this generation of Xbox console sales are estimated to have sold between 25 and 30 million in 4 years with some estimates higher and closer to 35 million. That's actually really good. Historically most consoles haven't hit that. It's very far from actual failures like the WiiU which sold something like 13 million in 5 years (it's entire lifetime). Yet, the predominant headline is that Xbox hardware is dead. Dee diddly dead. Why? Just because they aren't seeing the massive growth in consoles every business wants from their products so they're expanding to cloud and have become so big as a publisher they do multiplatform releases?? I think it says a lot about the sustainability of Xbox hardware that despite the Xbox One selling 3x less than the Nintendo Switch, Xbox has been earning several billions more from gaming revenue than Nintendo. Yeah Microsoft is a bigger company and you expect that, but it also shows how lucrative their gaming business is both in hardware, dedicated users on their owned platforms, and more.

It's the mental gymnastics for why a 20 billion dollar gaming company is going to do anything that would cut into a big chunk of its revenue. There are comparisons made to Sega and... no. Microsoft is no where near Sega at any point. Xbox gaming revenue even before ABK was like 10x we much as Sega's peak revenue. Xbox is barely even trying to sell hardware and have moved a very respectable number. Like again, comparisons to Sega, Sega was strulling to sale more than 10 million units of their consoles.

I think the Indiana Jones situation shows that the real click bait that works is treating Xbox like the enemy against gamers. When it first came out during the FTC case that Xbox had renegotiated the Disney deal to make it exclusive everyone hated Xbox for that and the titles ran with words that conveyed how awful what Xbox was doing. Fast forward and Xbox an announces an eventual PS release for Indiana Jones and people are ******. Even now if you go on the Xbox reddit and a post with Forza Horizon 5 or about the multiplatform strategy. It's all doom. Just the cloud announcements and letting people who pay $20 a month play XCloud on no Xbox devices is all doom to people. You even constantly see the idiotic belief that Xbox is losing support when they have more game support from third party devs than ever. Or that Playstation isn't doing the same when Playstation was just forced to make MLB the Show (first party developed and published) multiplatform to keep the license and even had to support day one game pass for multiple years. The only difference is Sony didn't get to make the choice themselves. That was also a former exclusive that became a day one multiplatform launch title. Xbox hasn't even done that yet. Then there's all the third parties which did predominantly make up Playstation exclusives. The State of Play was crazy in terms of the number of day one multiplatform (including Xbox) titles. Many of which would be franchise firsts. We've also got long time Sony supporters like Square consistently publicly regretting taking exclusivity deals and saying they don't make sense anymore.

If people had it their way Xbox would be stuck on the console with no PC or Cloud or owning the biggest games across all platforms. And that's when I'd really fear for the death of the brand and Console hardware. Neither Xbox nor Playstation control got costs like Nintendo and both are just smaller business units in big companies with shareholders who will always want to know why money is being wasted in a sector that has stalled as much as the console market. Xbox is getting more support from Microsoft than ever because they are answering that question. Playstation is getting internally shook up more than ever by Sony for failing to.

I've gotten to just laugh at the ridiculousness, but I have to say part of me is concerned that the warped perception will become reality because perceived value matters a lot. Like it's all over the internet, "why buy an Xbox?" the reality is that there's more reason to than ever. Xbox has more overall games than ever, Xbox services are better than ever, the Xbox ecosystem is more expansive than ever, Xbox hardware is better than ever (even smaller and more affordable with thr Series S), there's more first party games releasing day one on Game Pass Ultimate than ever (if you choose to pay for ultimate), there's more exclusives than ever, and their competition has less exclusives than ever. Yet no one wants to accept that. Even so called Xbox fanboys aren't able to perceive that as reality and that matters a lot. Value is largely based on perception and it shifts from consumer to consumer. If Xbox hardware ever does "die" than at least it things continue as they are, it'll be due to the so called fans and industry journalists and Xbox is only to blame for how bad they are with marketing and changing perceptions.

All that said, I've kinda been noticing that the people who actually talk about games online are REALLY out of touch with the industry. And I think even I'm included in this. You look at the conversations people have and then at what's actually having and there's a huge disconnect. Like everyone hates micro transactions, but that keeps growing in terms of purchases. Everyone hates live services but the the size of that sector of gaming is insane and only growing. Who knows, maybe the same can be said of Xbox. I do think a lot of people are stuck in an archaic and I'd say really bad past. People want to go back to the 360 glory devs even if Xbox had less third party game support then.

 

[fatpunkslim]

@Lurking_Lurker_Lurks
Very good analysis, especially on the perception of value. However, I would be a little less pessimistic. More and more media and commentators are realizing how little effort PlayStation puts into creativity and criticize its remake policy. We also cannot say that the PS5 Pro has been universally praised by the media, as it has faced a lot of criticism, not only because of its price but also due to the embedded technologies that don't justify the cost, such as the PSSR, which developers are forced to create a function to disable due to its numerous bugs.

All this to say that, even though it takes time, perceptions are changing, and the quality image of Xbox games is also shifting positively. The Game Pass is also generally well perceived despite the bad faith of some.

It's true that progress isn't as fast as it should be, simply because many media outlets have a very limited understanding of the video game industry and the reality of it. There are many influencers who are actually PlayStation fanboys who spend their time caricaturing, speculating, and extrapolating, and this kind of information is often picked up by some media without any critical thinking.

But that's how the media system is. It's not necessarily against Xbox, it's just that the media system is binary, without nuance, hurried, and hungry for clickbait. They go for the simplest, without verifying information or applying critical judgment.

PlayStation also spends millions on marketing and sponsorship on gaming media sites. We can see that some sites struggle to criticize PlayStation out of fear of repercussions.

Even people like Jez Corden, who isn't necessarily a PlayStation ******, get caught up in this ambient pessimism instead of seeing reality and often prefer to see the glass half empty rather than half full, and they end up repeating misinformation.

But what will change perceptions the most are the games. The best ambassador for Xbox is not Phil Spencer or others; it's the games. Games speak for themselves, and almost everyone today sees that Xbox is doing more to push the gaming industry forward positively, while PlayStation is falling behind.

Regarding the multiplatform strategy, there is a lot of speculation, but eventually, people will realize that it's false. There will always be PS fanboys who cling to illusions, but we mustn't forget that most PS players are far removed from all this. The proof is that if the PS community were full of blinded fanboys, there wouldn't be more sales of Xbox games on PS than of their own PS games. A majority recognize the quality of Xbox games, the quality of Game Pass, etc.

We're clearly on a two-speed multiplatform strategy, which is just what the facts show. Speculations, even if they're very trendy and generate clicks, are not worth more than the facts. The facts are that the multiplatform strategy is 100% cloud and PC, and regarding other consoles, it's different; it's case by case and temporary exclusives. Apart from games already multiplatform, absolutely no Xbox studios' games have been released day one on other consoles.

Even the media will have to accept that when they see Forza Horizon 6 released, it won't be day one on other consoles, same for Gears e-day. They will eventually admit that the release of older games like Forza Horizon 5 or Gears Collection is there to get people to discover the licenses and create attractiveness towards new versions of the game, namely Forza Horizon 6 and Gears e-day. It doesn't mean these games will always remain exclusive, but they will follow the same pattern, and when these games reach the end of their life, they'll be ported to other consoles to be profitable again.

This is something Jez Corden doesn't understand, for example. A temporary exclusive game is an exclusive game, knowing that the concept of permanent exclusivity only exists with Nintendo (and that may change in the future). A sufficiently long temporary exclusivity has the same effect as a "permanent" exclusive, which is to attract consumers to the ecosystem that offers the game day one.

It pushes consumers towards Game Pass, PC, or even an Xbox console. I see it around me, I have friends with PlayStation consoles, and several of them have taken the PC Game Pass to play Starfield, Flight Simulator, etc., or simply for the financial aspect and to enjoy the game catalog offered (PS+ being far behind in terms of added value). And once you have the Game Pass, it's already an entry point to go even further into the Xbox ecosystem. Those who have taken the Game Pass are more likely to get an Xbox console. I also see this with my friends who got the Series S after tasting the Game Pass.