Rumors suggest Xbox is bringing more games to Nintendo Switch and PlayStation, but what's the truth?

[fjtorres5591]

First of all, folks, take a deep breath.
There is no seismic shock here. Honest. Take a step back and look at the facts before moaning or celebrating.

Second, define your terms: are you talking XBOX going third party completely (frosty day in the amazon rain forest), parts of XBOX going third party only, or *XBOX Game Studios* doing *some* ports.

And finally, remember that multiplatform is not in any way shape or form the same as third party. Third party is when you look at it from an outside platform and multiplatform is when you look at it from the publisher point of view. MS is a publisher so the proper term is "going multiplatform". But MS already is a multiplatform publisher.

Step back and remember that XBOX is a multi-headed creature.
First of all ABK *is* multiplatform. And at no point has MS said anything about whether that will change.
Second, Bethesda is *still* mostly multipatform. All MS has said is games will be exclusive on a case by case basis.
Third, Microsoft Game Studios as a rule puts out exclusives...with exceptions, typically for NINTENDO. Remember VIVA PIÑATA? And GOLDEN EYE?

Now, go back to the halcyon days after MS bought BETHESDA and Spencer said that they would not pull any game from its community. Implied, but not stated, was that existing *franchises* that were multi platform would remain so. But that new ip exclusives would be case by case.

Now, list platforms that matter in gaming:
NINTENDO
WINDOWS
XBOX
ANDROID
iOS
LINUX
STEAM DECK
GeFORCE NOW
LUNA(?)
and...
...okay, sony...

List how many of those platforms XBOX *already* has published games for.
Hint: all of the above.

The thing to remember is that each platform serves a distinct demographic/community. XBOX competes with NINTENDO and sony in consoles but each console has its strengths and weaknesses, reflected in their communities.

NINTENDO has its own distinct market and style of game anchored *primarily* in first party cartoony, family friendly games and ips, supplemented by third party and indie titles.

XBOX first party is anchored by Shooters and WRPGs. In fact, it pioneered the latter on console. (MORROWIND, KOTOR, JADE EMPIRE, DEUS EX: INVISIBLE WAR, MASS EFFECT, DRAGON AGE ORIGINS. ETC.) It has over the years strived to add JRPGs (Lost Odyssey, Blue Dragon, etc) and cartoony, family friendly games (KAMEO, VIVA PIÑATA, FUZION FRENZY, and yes, HI FI RUSH.)

Playstation (these days) is anchored by third person narrative action games. And licensed third party games.

There is overlap between the platforms but the communities, not so much. This is *because* of the exclusives. Exclusives *define* the platform and the community. And while there is *some* money to be made porting *some* first party games to alien platforms to reach part of their community, it is isn't as much as many think because the communities skew so differently. Yes, GTA and HALO will sell some on NINTENDO but not as much as on XBOX or PC. And they shouldn't because a big chunk of NINTENDO's community is tweens and younger.

None of the above is a secret.
Certainly not to MS, EA, UBISOFT, or...ACTIVISION.

Neither is the fact that the XBOX hardware platform is *profitable* for MS.

And no, pundits and leakers aside, it is not going away anytime soon.
Why? Nintendo and sony outsell it, right? Ah, but where? Japan is NINTENDO's stronghold and Europe is Playstation crazy. But The Americas matter too.

And so does the cloud.

There is a tendency to forget that the xcloud streams off XBOX SOC blades.
NVIDIA and LUNA stream PC games.
STADIA did neither and died.

If game streaming is the future of Game Pass and Game Pass is the future of gaming, then the XBOX *software* must remain similar but distinct from their PC cousins because it offers a *single* and predictable performance model and thus simplifies the port from console to cloud. Developers selling to XBOX are at the same time selling to the cloud.

That is valuable.

So no, no way, no how is MS getting out of hardware, regardless of what "analysts", pundits, leakers, and fanboys might prefer.

There *will* be new XBOX consoles trailblazing the next iteration of xcloud. Because there is money in the exclusives and the exclusives define the *existing* XBOX community. At the absolute worse, future XBOXes will be, like SURFACE, a fixed PC configuration for thevliving room.

Remember the Steam Box? Same concept, but with a deep catalog of existing games and a steady stream of new ones keeping it live regardless of the successes (or failures) of Sony or Nintendo. And that is the worst case. Best case is more of the same but with embedded AI hardware. Of which the Series X and S have some and Sony and Nintendo have none. Nintendo has an in with NVIDIA but Sony? Where are they going to get their AI chops? With that advantage loomimg big, why would XBOX get out of consoles? They'll hang around for another turn of the wheel. And any games they code to their AI will be by default exclusivem Just like all Wii and Kinect games were inherently exclusive.

XBOX consoles are not going away.

Remember how Spencer doesn't see Sony or Nintendo as competitors? That is because there is little overlap between the communities and the installed bases are stuck with their past choices.

The true contest is for the newcomers to gaming, the cloud, and mobile.

Porting a game or two to Nintendo, supporting existing Elders Scrolls or Fallout gamers on Playstation, even bringing Halo Infinite to other systems won't change the centrality of the XBOX software to microsoft's future just as PC And cloud support will be central.

No need to hyperventilate.

Just chuckle as some gamers on other platforms (a loud minority of their communities) pine after the XBOX exclusives. Which are going to be abundant from now on.

Will any XBOX first party game show up elsewhere? Maybe it'll be Hi Fi Rush on Nintendo, OBLIVION remaster everywhere or KILN shadow dropping next week? Or maybe nothing happens.

Maybe it will, maybe it won't. It won't be tbe end of the world either way.
It'll just be XBOX flexing its new found might.

 

[1LuvableRascal]

Just considering my own experiences - I've purchased consoles that I didn't need because of 1-2 exclusive games. A $400+ console for 1-2 games. I've built a PC for ONE exclusive game (and yes I know PC is multi-use but I genuinely didn't need to upgrade at all for the games I enjoy playing and stuff that I do). PS3 for Yakuza & 2 Tales of games, Vita & PS4 for Persona 4 Golden and Persona 5, DS & 2DS & Switch for Pokemon. Completely skipping PS5 because there's nothing released by Sony studios that warranted upgrading from PS4 Pro for

I bought into X360 initially because family was there despite not really playing much beyond Skyrim, Dragon Age, and Mass Effect. Continued with X1 & X1X for the same reason (family) and special edition consoles (these need to come back cause I like collecting tech). When it came to XSX though? I almost didn't buy in (family part didn't matter much anymore because we have Discord to hang out now). I've stayed because of the exclusives MS Gaming is bringing (and has brought) to the Xbox console ecosystem since I'm a part of it now. But if it starts coming down to waiting out a release on Nintendo consoles? Then I will because I'm being shown my Xbox console buy in isn't needed (and I don't count PC because I'll never have one that can play these massive games that require ice blocks to cool it when you're in the starting menu). Just wait a year or two and it'll be where I need it to be on the competing HW.

I hope MS Gaming and all of its subsidiaries start considering more clear and concise messaging to Xbox console owners (not only Gamepass Core or Ultimate users). Folks have bought in because they believe and support the Xbox consoles but if the platform manufacturer doesn't even care (per rumors) to consider its entire ecosystem (console owners included since there wouldn't be a continued Xbox ecosystem without us) as important too then what's the point?
Corporations are going to be corporations but Xbox console owners are WHY there's even a Microsoft Gaming division that still exists to this day.

 

[Calrissien]

As an Xbox fan I think it would suck, but it seems like Gamepass is all they care about anymore and we all know the money is in the software so I wouldn't be surprised if this is true and the first of many. More money means more titles they can bring to the service. They're a business, and if that means alienating a small percentage of their base then I think they're ok with that. IF this in fact happens.

 

[Jingun]

I don't mind Xbox 1st party games are on other platforms, but they need a consistent and predictable criteria for Xbox users.

The traditional problem with Xbox has been, and still is, a lack of consistency. Especially for Korean Xbox users, Xbox's inconsistency is nothing new.

For example,

Q: Are all Xbox first-party games have Korean language support?
A: No, some games have it, but some don't.

Q: Do all games on the Xbox Store have language support information?
A: No, some games have language information, but some don't.

Q: Does the official Xbox YouTube channel have trailers for all games coming to Xbox?
A: No, some games have trailers and some don't, and there are many more games that don't have trailers on the official Xbox YouTube channel.

Q: Is Xbox Wire translated into all languages in the regions supported by Xbox?
A: No, they currently only support languages in a few regions, they still translate some Xbox articles, but not all into other languates.

Q: Do all games that support Xbox Play Anywhere have the Xbox Play Anywhere mark?
A: No, there are many more games that are not marked despite they are Xbox Play Anywhere.

Q: Are Xbox 1st party games translated into Korean language consistent in translation quality?
A: No, the translation quality is inconsistent due to the different agencies that translate each game. Even within the same franchise (Halo, Gears, Forza), the translation of in-game terminology changes with each sequel, causing confusion for players.

Q: Are Xbox's official terms translated into Korean consistently?
A: No. Even official Xbox terms are not consistently translated. For example, Smart Delivery is inconsistently translated as "스마트 배달" or "스마트 전달", and other incomprehensible Korean terms.

These are just a few of the things that bother me personally.
Beyond that, Xbox is inconsistent in many more areas. Xbox needs to continue to improve in these areas.

 

[pjmlp]

The whole point about game consoles is that they provide an unique experience, for consumers and developers alike.

The consumers get a out of the box experience without the driver and OS issues that plague desktop systems, possibly interaction devices with alternative game design ideas.

The developers get a fixed set of hardware capabilities, or two in XBox's case, that guarantees them a much more stable environment for their games, and stuff to worry about, than computers where every little piece is interchangable.

If now XBox becomes a brand for games produced by Microsoft Studios, then there is no advantage in owning a console, the consumers won't care any experience benefit from owning an XBox versus other device, whereas the game studios will have to care about all possible configurations, not only XBox, thus reducing the monetary value of targeting only XBox.

Looks like when Microsoft had a go at "Games for Windows" branding, now with XBox name instead, disregarding the existence of the console.

Basically following SEGA footsteps, although at least SEGA had a reason given the way their console sales were going on.

 

[josantana]

I think that the final play is to move every console player to PC. Microsoft has already influenced Sony's move to release every game on PC after a year (or so). It's the Microsoft main platform, where it has a dominance and it doesn't require them to worry about hardware (something they always avoided like the plague).

Despite Spencer's recent lines about how Xbox is important and that it would never die, recent moves and the lack of consistency make fans uneasy when taking the decision to buy a new hardware. Most of them, prefer to first invest on the console where they can play most games they know and love. Specially on a country where a console costs a fortune, and only a few can afford to buy more than one.

The bait to attract this audience relies when a really good game came from across the fence. On these rare moments, they tend to find a way to play it: First, they would check if the game could run well on their work PC and buy it on Steam; Or they would try it through the cloud (and most will drop after that message saying they'll have to wait for 200 minutes or so). Only a very few will buy a new console, because Microsoft already offers options. But now it's coming a new option that will please everyone to stay on their current platform. If it is expected that every Xbox game will release on Switch or Playstation, they'll just wait.

I've tried to play on PC years ago but I prefer the convinience of the console. It Microsoft continues to drive on that direction, I'll not buy a new Xbox and just buy a PC (I'm a Mac user, for work). I'll continue to subscribe to Gamepass, buy other games on Steam (like I did years ago) and buy some Playstation games as well. I think it will be easier to imagine the Xbox player migrating, than one who play on Playstation or Switch.

 

[fjtorres5591]

I think that the final play is to move every console player to PC. Microsoft has already influenced Sony's move to release every game on PC after a year (or so). It's the Microsoft main platform, where it has a dominance and it doesn't require them to worry about hardware (something they always avoided like the plague).

Despite Spencer's recent lines about how Xbox is important and that it would never die, recent moves and the lack of consistency make fans uneasy when taking the decision to buy a new hardware. Most of them, prefer to first invest on the console where they can play most games they know and love. Specially on a country where a console costs a fortune, and only a few can afford to buy more than one.

The bait to attract this audience relies when a really good game came from across the fence. On these rare moments, they tend to find a way to play it: First, they would check if the game could run well on their work PC and buy it on Steam; Or they would try it through the cloud (and most will drop after that message saying they'll have to wait for 200 minutes or so). Only a very few will buy a new console, because Microsoft already offers options. But now it's coming a new option that will please everyone to stay on their current platform. If it is expected that every Xbox game will release on Switch or Playstation, they'll just wait.

I've tried to play on PC years ago but I prefer the convinience of the console. It Microsoft continues to drive on that direction, I'll not buy a new Xbox and just buy a PC (I'm a Mac user, for work). I'll continue to subscribe to Gamepass, buy other games on Steam (like I did years ago) and buy some Playstation games as well. I think it will be easier to imagine the Xbox player migrating, than one who play on Playstation or Switch.

Microsoft does SURFACE, you know.
And it serves two main purposes:
1- It establishes a baseline/reference platform for the OEMS as to features, performance, and price. Flag bearers if you will. Plus, some Surface devices like Surface Hub are unique and serve unique niches they hope might grow.

2- Surface devices make significant money: an estimated $6.7B in revenue at last report. That ain't peanuts. So no, MS is not allergic to hardware. They never have been. Look back and you'll see them doing add-in cards for the APPLE II in the early days of MS and tbey've never stopped. If anything, their hardware business has become more significant in recent times.

Now yes, as pixel pimping reaches its limits and consoles move into the AI era, XBOX at least, will become more even more PC-like. (Nintendo and Sony will bevon their own.) I expect it will still have a gaming front end but nothing says it can't internally *be* a Windows game PC to simplify development.

However PCs are open platforms and don't require a "vig" to develop for like consoles do, as established by the old NINTENDO vs ATARI lawsuit.

For Xbox, that is a decent enough revenue stream and there are good technical reasons (simplicity and consistency, to start with) to keep the XBOX hardware platform distinct from PC. So, while the XBOX might become a PC internally (maybe even with a paid activation app mode like the developer mode for apps--but not games) there is value for consumers and Microsoft to maintain the console distinct.

Also, consider that under Nadella, MS is betting its future growth on three pillars: Cloud, AI, and gaming. And where do all three pillars intersect? XBOX.

XBOX hardware will remain as long as Surface does, maybe BOX came first and the 360 proved there was big money in console hardware. There's billions in those consoles. MS has long proven they're not too proud to take anybody's money so ultimately they will almost certainly keep existing multiplatform franchises multiplat, but not at the expense of First Party exclusives or the XBOX hardware. That makes no strategic or, more importantly, *financial* sense.

Ignore the wishful trolls from fans and pundits pining for the old days of 1990 before XBOX. XBOX exclusives will mostly remain exclusive. HALO, GEARS, FORZA, FLIGHT SIMULATOR, and yes STARFIELD will remain XBOX and PC. So will most new IPs, as makes *sense*.

Finally, don't confuse MS making deals with Nintendo with an opening up to Sony. MS has no beef with corporate Nintendo but they do have a few scores to settle with Sony. They won't publicly say anything but internally...

Wait and watch. No favors.

 

[remindmyself]

I think there's a lot of extremes being made on both sides of the argument right now. People who are acting like it's the absolute end of the world and the downfall of Xbox as a platform are overreacting because, at the end of the day, it's video games. At the same time though, people downplaying it and claiming:

- It isn't a big deal
- It's only older/AA/underperforming/live service/etc. games
- There are still exclusives to Xbox
- You lose nothing as an Xbox owner

or other similar arguments are missing how much this devalues Xbox hardware and are being intentionally obtuse. This isn't random FUD being spread about, especially when someone like Grubb backs up what is being said. Xbox as a platform isn't dying, but it just flat out is a bad look. I've always had an Xbox and prefer the Xbox ecosystem, but if a good chunk of their games go multiplatform, I'm out on Xbox hardware and I wouldn't be surprised if there's a decent number of people doing the same. I'd still be in the Xbox ecosystem through PC gamepass, but they'd definitely lose any third party revenue from me as the majority of my purchases would be on Steam. Obviously, signs port to consoles going away in the future, but until that future is a reality, this move would generate even less incentive for anyone to buy an Xbox console other than "I like the controller/ecosystem more." For people who are indifferent to that and just want to play games, Switch and PC would clearly be the logical choice.

If a smaller game here and there goes to Switch, that's fine I guess, but the second games go to Playstation, a line has been crossed and Xbox will lose a lot of faith with their fans. Xbox would be giving the middle finger to their loyal fanbase with moves like this. I couldn't care less that more people get access to Xbox games since I don't derive my enjoyment of games from who can/can't play them, but I do care that all this does is tell Xbox users "you're not enough" and this being a one-way street where every platform gets more and more except for Xbox.

People downplay Sea of Thieves massively and if a game that has amassed 35+ million players can't survive on Xbox + PC alone, then pretty much nothing will. Sea of Thieves was their most successful new IP last generation and is in the tier of Halo, Forza, and Gears of War, and probably above Gears if we're being honest. If Sea of Thieves goes multiplat, then everything is on the table and it's just the start of a trend, not where it ends. If Sea of Thieves and Hi-Fi Rush go to other platforms, specifically Playstation (since there's no arguing they're not viewed as "direct competitors), it would be entirely fair to question how long before X, Y, or Z also make their way to other platforms. It's already been exhausting for years hearing *"Will Xbox bring X game to Playstation?"* and the conversation will only get more exhausting if this comes to pass, but instead of being baseless conjecture, there'd be a precedence and it'd be valid questioning.

Like it or not, exclusives are important to platforms and unless Nintendo, or at least Playstation (again as a direct competitor that nobody can justify as being in their own lane), start porting their games to other platforms also, all this move would do is devalue the Xbox console and platform, to a lesser extent. Porting their games to other consoles does not take away from Xbox users in any way, but it also doesn't benefit them in any way either. The gains are likely not going to be massive from this, which makes it make even less sense why you would devalue your brand for minimal gains? Even if I'm wrong and the gains are massive, it just gives Xbox more incentive to port over more games, at which point they might as well go third party with their games. They can still release hardware, which some people will still buy, but if someone can get Xbox games on Playstation (even if delayed by some time) plus Playstation's own exclusives, then less people will buy Xbox hardware than they currently are. There's also very little chance this actually brings in more people into the Xbox ecosystem for future sequels that may be exclusive because the thought process will just be "The first game came over after a year, so I'll wait for this one too."

Obviously, we don't know the master plan behind these thought processes, but unless Xbox comes out and clearly states their intentions and the plan going forward, which they won't because their communication is always pretty bad and intentionally vague, then it leaves a lot of things in flux and it's a real head scratcher. There's always a rake Xbox can't help but step on repeatedly.

 

[Jez Corden]

thanks for all your comments and queries, it's great seeing discussion here. hopefully microsoft will read through it too.

 

[liquidevilgaming]

Definitely against this, if anyone from Microsoft does read this...? I'm your ideal customer, lured away from Sony as a primary platform to Xbox.. Now over 500 digital games and several consoles... A move like this? I'd never give up my Xbox investment, but I'd stop buying games going forward and change primary platforms.