Topic: General Xbox Series X|S Thread

@LtSarge
Not sure. I buy so many games, but there's still a lot I haven't played. Maybe Psychonauts 2 (since its still on my Steam wishlist). Or A Plague Tale. Or Descenders. Heck, I may even try some Hocky just for the nostalgia of tripping when I was 18 (dont judge, I was a wild child in my teen years) playing NHL 2002 for 48 hrs straight, seeing tracers of the puck across the ice 😀 I hate sports games though. But if it's free... could be fun! Or The Show to see what modern baseball games are like.

That's the thing. It's gonna allow me to dabble in games I'd never buy in a million years, but might actually have some fun with.

All the big name games like Mass Effect, Doom, Wolfenstein, Outer Worlds, Skyrim, Zombie Army 4, etc I own on Steam where I use gyro aiming. But still. There's a ton of games in this list. At least a dozen or two I'm downloading right away.

@JaxonH Sounds like you've got tons of games in mind already, and yeah Psychonauts 2 and A Plague Tale would be great to start out with. I really enjoyed both of those titles.

If you want some advice from me, I highly recommend trying out Xbox Cloud Gaming. I know most people don't like to stream games, but honestly, after having invested in an internet cable for my Xbox One, I've been enjoying so many games completely lag free with the only issue that the image will refresh every once in a while. The advantages of this are many: you don't need to download 100+ GBs of games, you can easily sample titles, you don't need to constantly download patches for new releases and so on. So if you have fast internet, then Cloud Gaming plus Game Pass Ultimate is a match made in heaven.

@LtSarge
Ya know, a week ago I would have let that go in one ear and out the other. But the new me has seen the light, so to speak. Using Gamepass as a demo rental service to curate my purchases means cloud streaming may actually make sense for quickly trying out a game I don't want to commit that much time to.

I went hard ethernet for all my devices a year ago. Switch, PS5, PC and Xbox will all be hard wired to the modem. So I could give it a go. I even considered one of those grips for my phone but then realized the only place I'd have internet good enough to stream to is at home and I'd rather just play Switch in handheld at that point.

But if I can stream to the system instead of download... ya. I'll give it a shot. If it's insufficient l can always download. I did try Control Cloud version on Switch (I already owned on Steam, I was just curious how well it worked) and it was... playable. Not perfect, but playable. I hear Xcloud is better so, ya. I'll give it a shot for sure.

@JaxonH welcome around old friend! Why not join us at the Pure Xbox game club where we decide each month for a gamepass game so we can all play and have a chat about it. This month we are going through Mirror's Edge (mixed feelings) and next month may be the forgotten city but it can still change as some have not voted yet.

@Balta666
I'm all game for convos but no promises on what I manage to play! Right now I'm on my 2nd playthrough of Monster Hunter Rise (since it released on PC, got sucked in again) and its all I can think about day in day out.

But I'd still love to hear other ppl's takes. Might be good for/against arguments to try a game or not

@JaxonH Awesome mate, and yeah the system will ask you if you're enjoying the game and want to install it, which I think you can do while you're still playing it through the cloud. Either way, it's nice to have options! I personally can't stand downloading something like Forza Horizon 5, which is 100+ GB, anymore. It's a waste of time and why I believe Cloud Gaming will be even more important in the future as games become larger and probably 200 or 300 GB in size.

One franchise that I think will benefit from Cloud Gaming a lot is Call of Duty. I've been playing their older games, such as Modern Warfare and Black Ops, and they deliver such phenomenal campaigns. I want to check out their latest ones, but they take up so much space for simply a 7 hour campaign. So hopefully when they're added on Game Pass, we can play them through the cloud and not waste so much hard drive space for such short titles.

@LtSarge
I just want CoD to go back to Steam. My first CoD was Black Ops 2 on Wii U. I played using the Wiimote and Nunchuk which was a revelatory experience having such precision aiming.

In Steam you can map mouse to gyro for any game that allows mouse input simultaneously (which is most games). But CoD left Steam because Activision and everyone and their mother wanting their own launcher. If it goes to Gamepass- all other MS 1st party games release on Steam, so here's to hoping.

I bought the 2TB SSD expansion, and I can start downloads from the app so I'm not too worried about that. But still, streaming definitely has the advantage of not needing to deal with installs which is a massive plus for large games.

@JaxonH Well with the acquisition I can definitely see CoD return to Steam. Wasn't even aware that that was a thing since I don't play on PC at all. So yeah, hopefully that will change in the future.

Yeah, having that much storage is definitely going to be helpful. Sadly, I still have my base Xbox One from 2015 with only 500 GB of storage, lol. I do have a 500 GB external hard drive, but it's still not enough considering how many digital 360 games that I own.

Speaking of which, do you have any interest in backwards compatibility or older titles in general? There are plenty of Xbox and Xbox 360 games to keep you occupied on Series X, not to mention collections like Rare Replay. It's been a blast revisiting games and checking out ones that I missed out on.

@LtSarge
Oh absolutely. It's just that, the list of 360 games that haven't gotten ported to Switch or Steam or been remastered, that I'm interested in, isn't as big as it once was.

But Lost Odyssey and Blue Dragon are the first 360 games I'm downloading. They were the reason I bought an Xbox One X back in the day. When I sold my X1X and PS4pro, I didn't mind because all games I wanted to play were on Steam/Switch... except for those two games, which are absolute classics.

Also, I think Trials series has an older 360 game not available on PC. Trials Evolution? Can't remember. But I loved Trials Rising. What a masterpiece that was.

@JaxonH Lost Odyssey and Blue Dragon sound like a great start! Yeah I think Trials HD and Trials Evolution are Xbox exclusives if I'm not mistaken.

Don't know when you'll be getting your Series X but there's a backwards compatibility sale going on now in case you're interested in buying more Xbox and Xbox 360 titles since they rarely get a huge sale like this these days.

@JaxonH I can see Call of Duty going Free to Play for its Online presence. Halo:Infinite could provide a 'template' for CoD so that in a year or two, they have a similar Battle Pass system on ALL platforms to keep ALL the Online CoD fans happy on whatever platform they prefer. Instead of trying to push out a 'new' game every year, they'll do seasons to keep things fresh.

As for another 'mainline' CoD game, maybe we will see Infinity Ward work on a Single Player FPS military shooter as that's all they've known and releases to Game Pass with the 'CoD' name attached but apart from those staff who are keeping CoD Online maintained and updated with new content, the other Staff from Infinity Ward, Treyarch, Sledgehammer, High Moon, Ravensoft, Beenox etc will be able to work on their 'own' projects - whether that's 'new' IP's or 'new' games from MS's growing portfolio of IP's. Those games will be on Game Pass exclusively.

MS speaks about Communities and those Communities would be the Online ones predominantly - hence Minecraft, Elder Scrolls Online, Fallout 76 and no doubt Warzone and whatever CoD 2022 game releases and/or legacy contracts remain. But as soon as they end, I don't expect a 'new' CoD campaign being sold on PS5 IF MP does go F2P. F2P makes most sense right now in a world where Apex, Fortnight, Halo, PUBG etc are free to play. Therefore, I do see CoD changing for EVERYONE - no longer the 'yearly' release - but maybe a BIG annual update like Warzone gets and 'F2P' for 'everyone'. Maybe Game Pass Ultimate perks may include CoD battle pass, CoD points to spend, free Cosmetics etc...

That's still catering to all those PS gamers who bought a PS to play CoD with their friends in the past. That's giving everyone access who wants to play and hopefully learned from mistakes made with Halo's Battlepass - they have a long time to 'learn' how to implement a 'fair' system that still brings in revenue.

As MS will own Call of Duty, they can make 'other' experiences - third person cover shooter (Gears of War but 'military' instead of Scifi), an arcade style on rails game (like Operation Wolf), a First Person single/co-op story (like a traditional CoD Campaign), An RTS (like Gears Tactics/Xcom) etc etc with the CoD name 'exclusive' to Game Pass but I'm sure that will depend on the '30+' studio's and what 'games' they want to make. If one happens to want to do a military based game that having the CoD name would benefit from, then I'm sure MS would allow but I think the days of Annual CoD releases and multiple studio's being pushed into crunching to make that release happen are OVER - or at least will be when MS can.

@LtSarge
Tomorrow, apparently. So, sooner than I thought.

I have about 20 360 games on the shelf I bought back when I owned an X1X, but I'm all digital now (though I do still double dip for physical versions on Switch- that Nintendo collector in me refuses to die, but this is the last gen I'll be doing that, gonna finish up my collection and that's the last system I'll have a shelf for). Anyways, what In saying is, I'd like to rebuy them digitally.

So I'll definitely be hitting the store tomorrow.

@BAMozzy
I guess we'll see. It's yet to be determined just how hands off MS is going to be with these newly acquired studios. Will it be, "only develop for Xbox/PC, day and date, and we're putting on Gamepass, other than that, carry on as usual" or will it be complete restructuring of projects and a more hands-on managed approach.

@JaxonH I can see the 'last' MP release just being either supported, updated built upon and eventually free to play.

MS isn't buying Studio's to keep churning out games for anything other than Game Pass platforms with cloud gaming being central to that so they will support any 'Active' game which I think will end up free to play, as they then try and build a CoD online 'team' from those staff amongst the studio's they need to, but then those Studio's will be set free to make Games for Game Pass. Studio's of that Quality free to make what they want with years of experience. That's MS mission statement.

As a company, Microsoft is committed to our journey for inclusion in every aspect of gaming, among both employees and players. We deeply value individual studio cultures. We also believe that creative success and autonomy go hand-in-hand with treating every person with dignity and respect. We hold all teams, and all leaders, to this commitment. We’re looking forward to extending our culture of proactive inclusion to the great teams across Activision Blizzard.

We deeply value individual studio cultures. They want these studio's making 'great' games and, if they want to be 'ambitious' and jump away from the 'CoD' IP, they could come up with some great new IP's - From the makers of CoD, SpiderMan2, Transformers, Darkwatch... PLEASE do something with Darkwatch - so much promise with modern tech. However, they may want to try something 'new' behind the IP - Maybe a Third Person military shooter, Some military co-op squad shooter, maybe even an RTS - no different from Gears Tactics, Halo: Wars, Forza: Horizon so can use the CoD brand, if they want.

Point is, look at what they've done so far with Studio's - I know its a 'small time frame' because their commitment to Gaming really began when they realised they needed to make Game Pass their main platform. Playground had talked about making a big open world RPG, MS then acquires them, helps them build up a 2nd studio and gives them the option to make that a 'Fable' game so people will want to play - got to be hard to get people to want to buy yet another RPG from a studio known only for making racing games on Xbox so Fable gives them a name and a creative freedom to make it.Ninja Theory are all in on the Games they want to make, Obsidian are making the games they want.

MS want them to make the Best games they can, without 'commercial sales' targets or commercial success determining whether or not your 'project' gets green lighted - its all about Subscribers and Players those games bring in, how engaged they are etc not how many copies it sells, those are 'additional' bonuses. They want every studio to have their 'own' identity so that you have 30+ studio's working on games that define who they are as a Studio and the 'best' games they can be so that you have one big 'hit' of a 1st party game followed by 'hit' - and that 'hit' metric won't be in sales charts, it will be in player and/or critical enjoyment. The more people that want to play, the more that will join their ecosystem.

Right now, the choice isn't PS5 for its fantastic Games that will be £70 each so only play a few of their franchises or buy a Series S/X for Game Pass - all the fantastic value and potential this has suddenly unlocked, all those games I can play that everyone else is wanting to play, getting a lot of players playing, dominating social media. And yes you may need a PC to 'benefit' from some of this too because Game Pass for PC is almost a side thing for obvious reasons. But all 1st party games and GPU gives you access to PC, Mobile, Streaming, EA Play and Gold on Console too. But point is, the consoles aren't going to sell because of 'Starfield', because of 'Redfall', because of Forza/Halo/Gears, they are gonna sell because people want Game Pass - hence Primary platform.

They are buying up all these studio's to make games they want with no commercial metrics to meet. The only thing is likely to be 'make great games that people want to play and we'll support you to make those games happen, because we want 'BIG' games coming to Game Pass every MONTH. Ideally they will be Xbox Published (1st party and 3rd party games they want for GAME PASS so most likely 'online' focussed like all the 'co-op' games which also allows their own studio's to make SP games for Game Pass if they want) and ID@Xbox Indies of course as that saves them negotiating deals with others whose focus maybe is 'commercial' to put them on Game Pass. If ALL the Big Games on Game Pass every month are made/published by Xbox, that's a massive financial saving. They also want those games to be games people want to play so you join Game Pass and STAY Subscribed. They don't care if you join on Phones, PC or that people feel you have to now buy an Xbox, don't care if sales of Xbox beat PS5, they only care now about Subscriber and Player enjoyment because that's what's going to keep you month after month.

When MS said they stopped competing with Sony, they were competing with Google/Amazon etc and Game Pass is absolutely fundamental to that because that's the service that ultimately will bring EVERY GAME PASS game to any platform where GP exists. The only way they can bring Starfield to a Mobile/tablet anywhere, not just those with high enough spec hardware reliably. You want the 'same' games on ALL game pass supported device so you can literally play anywhere - not PC For these, console for those. That's what Cloud will offer - those games either streamed, or installable if a version was made for it. Starfield isn't made for iOS/Android,XB1 hardware but could play via Game Pass.

This is why I am so optimistic by this. These deals aren't about 'Xbox vs PS'

This is about not letting 1 company keep games, and/or content, especially in the 'biggest' Multi-platform releases from the rest of the gaming world. If you wanted to play certain modes, maps, missions, characters etc, they are ONLY on Playstation. That statement goes against the MS mantra of play anywhere how you want - hence Game Pass is available 'everywhere' and on any device it can be.

This may stop a few million PS players who refuse to join Game Pass through some misguided Loyalty to Sony but for those studio's, the loss of those is eclipsed by the reach Cloud gaming has...

@BAMozzy
I have no sympathy for PS or its diehard fans with the criticisms of Xbox buying up studios. After PS has gone on a rampage paying off any studio they could muster to ****block releases on other platforms- Godfall, Kena, Oddworld, Deathloop, KOTOR, Stray, Ghostwire Tokyo, Forspoken, Solar Ash, Little Devil Inside, Final Fantasy VII Remake, Final Fantasy XVI, etc. And after an entire generation of PS4 bribing as many games as possible, too many to list, fighting crossplay to deter purchases on other platforms... That chicken's simply coming home to roost. The diehards are just upset the tables have now turned. They're not used to being on the receiving end like the rest of us. And don't even get me started on the censorship.

I personally funded Little Devil Inside on kickstarter for Nintendo and Sony swooped in and paid them to not release the game I funded on the system I funded it for, and instead release as a PS5 exclusive. Which, I have a PS5 but that's not the point. It's the fact they've been ruthlessly depriving gamers at every turn. If you don't own a game, you have no right to deprive me of it. If you own it, then you can rightfully say, "you must use our platform".

I almost feel like Xbox acquisitions are rightful comeuppance for Sony, similar to how Nintendo losing 3rd party in the PSone days was rightful comeuppance for their hostile tactics. That's not to say I hate PS or want to see them go away. They do make quality consoles (I genuinely like the PS5 and the Dualsense is a fantastic controller, battery life notwithstanding) and have some choice games, which I am very glad to see releasing on PC.

I think ppl overestimate the loyal fans. Wii U only sold 13m consoles. And half of those were casuals buying after Wii. The core Nintendo fanbase is really only about 3-5m gamers. PS probably has more at 5-10m gamers. But when they're doing 100m units a generation that's nothing. Most gamers don't care about loyalty. 360 showed us that. We saw PS2 at 155m vs Xbox/GC at about 20m each, to 360 and PS3 at about 85m each, Wii at 100m. Ppl have no issues switching consoles from gen to gen. When Xbox goofed with the One, ppl abandoned in droves. I think we're about to see that pendulum swing once again.

I completely agree in terms of Console sales but that's almost as a 'consequence' for Microsofts investment into Game Pass and the 'need' to add big games every month to bring subscribers and keep them.

The Consequence of that is that all those Console gamers will buy Xbox which is another reason the Series S exists to offer a 'cheap' console entry into Game Pass. Whether you own an Xbox or not, they still want you to subscribe to Game Pass.

If it ends up 'smashing' console sales records, that's a 'consequence' of MS investing in Game Pass and how the 'console' integrates 'perfectly' for that. Quick Resume - perfect for a handful of digital games in your library, the only console 'hardware' that will support those games 'natively' - all others will rely on Cloud or PC hardware specs high enough to play natively.

They didn't buy those studio's to work on games, certainly not '8' studio's involved on 1 franchise. No doubt CoD games will be 'exclusive' to Game Pass - Campaigns, new genres etc. Maybe Treyarch will make a separate 'Zombies' game that doesn't have 'CoD' branding so doesn't need to tie into WW2 and also perfect for Game Pass (not being CoD branded allows more creative freedom and would bring all Treyarch Zombie fans into Game Pass. High Moon could do something with their Darkwatch IP, Infinity Ward could try a third Person narrative driven military CoD story to break out of first person games, Sledgehammer could actually make a new IP and create their 'own' identity etc - all exclusive where game pass exists. Ravensoft could handle Online CoD F2P - maybe change their name to 'CoD' related (like 343, Coalition) and become the 'home' of their online presence that comes to all platforms to get that money F2P generates and keep their fans happy.

That's what these 'deals' are for - Game Pass and that 'need' to bring great games 'every' month to grow their subscription market. They aren't looking at the '100-150m' console gamers, they are looking at the 'growing' 300m+ gamers everywhere. That 70bn will be 'peanuts' when MS have 100m subs paying $10+ a month, 1bn every month, 12bn a year let alone all the extra revenue those 100m may well bring, buying content, hardware, etc

As Xbox console gamers we do benefit from this and everything I see and hear corresponds to this. In their statement, they said they want Studios to make the games they want to make, have their own identity, foster creativity. Phil knows its not just the Big IP's either, its those games that took a creative chance or had the freedom to make the games they wanted that he loves - Psychonauts, State of Decay, Hellblade, Outer Worlds, etc so that's what Game Pass supports. That's why its more about having 30+ fantastic creative Studio's as well as a large portfolio of some of gamings biggest IP's. Someone wants to make a 'family friendly' game - well there's Banjo-Kazooie, Crash, Spyro or maybe if they don't fit, create your own. Want to try something 'new' but 'familiar', then devs can try different genres for great IP's - a kart racer/smash bros/party game with Xbox owned characters - not just Banjo, Crash, Spyro, Conker etc but also characters from Halo, Doom, CoD, Wolfenstein, Psychonauts, Fallout, Skyrim, Warcraft, Perfect Dark, Avowed, Fable etc etc. The possibilities are endless here. MS's mission statement is for studio's to make the games you are passionate about because they are the 'best' games don't worry about 'financial' success, focus on player fun and engagement, tell the stories you want and we'll give you the potential to reach 'every' gamer. MS get 'new' games releasing every month that people want to play so have to sign up to Game Pass - whether that means buying an Xbox or not to sign up doesn't matter, another subscriber does.

No doubt Gamepass is their priority, but until Xcloud is out of beta and perfected, the bulk of those subs come from Xbox console owners. I guarantee they're trying to sell as many consoles as possible because every one is a sure bet to upsell to Gamepass, and even if not, they're a paying customer who's going to buy games.

The Xbox One era this is not. I think their acquisitions will start bearing fruit in the next few years, and as more games release, I wouldn't be surprised if Xbox overtakes PS in global sales. We already saw Xbox on top in the US not just for November, but December also. Switch still sold more but, nothing can top Switch at this point. The important thing is they overtook PS who has been trouncing all over them for the last 8 years. The $299 Series S was the smartest move I've ever seen.

I just wish they'd add gyro aiming on their console, and let you map mouse to gyro on a system level for any game like Steam does. I would sell my PC immediately, pack it up and list it on eBay if that day ever came. As the one platform that began as a PC-like box to game on, I find it surprising they're not leveraging the accuracy of the mouse, which is PC's greatest strength, by allowing it to be mapped to gyro (which their controllers don't even have).

@JaxonH I completely agree - the potential 'sales' for Xbox could well set new records and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they exceed over 100m units - the best selling Xbox of all time. However, that would be in part as a consequence of MS drive with Game Pass. Without Game Pass and its 'monthly' cycle as Subs are 'monthly', Xbox could of stopped acquiring studio's when they exceeded Sony's number. They just needed to at least match Sony on quality and quantity for their Console to at least do well.

That 'need' to have big new games each and every month coming into Game Pass. That's at least 12 big games a year and if they are ALL made and/or published by Microsoft, that's going to save them time and money negotiating with third party publishers to try an fill in the 'gaps'. Of course that has a massive knock on effect to the 'average' console gamer who maybe undecided which platform to buy. At the moment, deals like Outriders, MLB21,R6, B4B etc maybe don't tend to 'benefit' Xbox specifically when casually comparing - its games like FH5, Halo, MSFS, Redfall, Starfield vs Spider-Man, R&C, Returnal, H:FW, GoW:R, GT7 - Exclusives out and releasing soon - that the average person thinks about.

As for the idea that Gamers aren't Loyal and a lot of those 'examples' are evidence to support that, but until now, Backwards Compatibility wasn't standard. The XB1 didn't launch with BC, so it makes it 'easier' to start again - hence jumping to PS4. Now if you want to jump from PS4 to Series X for example, you are abandoning all your library of games that could be played on PS5, your Trophies, your PS+ games etc so MS also needs to convince them to 'leave' or at the very least, convince them to sign up to Game Pass on whatever 'device' they have. Its not just 'loyalty', its what they 'lose'. At the end of PS3/360 era, there wasn't a 'lot' to lose for many. There library wasn't playable on PS4/XB1 so had to 'start' again. Achievements and Trophies were 'relatively' new so maybe not too important and people didn't like the direction MS seemed to be headed so willing to change.

A generation on, those 360 gamers who jumped and 'others' who decided PS4 was the 'console' for them now have some of the best games of last gen with sequels and other great games on the way, all those games will come forward via BC, all those trophies and 'years' of PS+ games - that's a LOT to give-up compared to PS3/360 or many of the other generations you mention.

That's also where Game Pass comes in. Its not just about the 'quantity' or 'quality', but also 'value'. We have all heard the Xbox only has '3' games (Forza, Halo, Gears) and MS games 'don't' win Game of the Year. Some even question whether these deals will 'bring' Quality as these Studio's haven't had the 'best' track records in recent years. From a Sony perspective, losing Activision/Blizzard is all about 'CoD' and that can't go 'exclusive' as its too 'big'. All those studio's that used to make 'great' games before being pushed into crunching CoD annually are 'not' really a loss. It won't be until these studio's start making new games - whether CoD, another MS owned IP or a entirely new IP that the 'impact' will be felt - especially if some CoD does remain on PS5.

It makes sense that the 'last' main CoD game to release on PS5 before all contractual obligations end and MS are fully in charge to be 'fully' supported across all platforms. Perhaps going 'F2P' so that everyone can play, bring in seasons and maybe a 'yearly' refresh and treat it more like a 'live' service. I can't see another main entry with MP being made to only release on 'Xbox' thus 'diluting' the player base from the last 'CoD' MP on all platforms and upsetting CoD MP fans on PS. Therefore 'CoD' MP will go F2P, especially with all those other F2P games and having the 'CoD' brand will help. Its basically F2P model MP in a premium priced package nowadays anyway and regular seasons, updates etc will keep those 'happy' and allow those Studio's to work on the games they want to come to Game Pass.

Like I said, most console gamers would be comparing PS5 and its 'exclusives' to Series X and its 'Exclusives'. Which would be FH5, Halo, MSFS, Redfall, Starfield vs Spider-Man, R&C, Returnal, H:FW, GoW:R, GT7. However, when they look at 'value', that's where PS5 will struggle £70 'each' game vs all those games for a 'small' monthly fee. I have seen a LOT say that 'tiny' monthly fee not being worth it for maybe Halo & Forza, not interested in Flight Sim. Redfall and Starfield isn't worth subscribing for as its 'cheaper' to just buy both than spend £132 a year. That's because ALL they see are the 1st party 'Exclusives', forgetting that games like R6, ME:Legendary, Plague Tale, Stalker2, Hitman Trilogy, Warhammer: Darktide, Scorn, Avowed, Forza Motorsport, Fable etc also will be coming to Game Pass as well as all those games in Game Pass already.

Therefore MS want 'Exclusives' so that its one 'big' Exclusive after another, month after month - which obviously benefits the console as that's a big release every month on Xbox whilst their rival maybe has 2 or 3 a year. To have at least 12 'big' games a year, as well as a regular supply of interesting and varied content, takes a LOT of studio's - hence building up their 1st Party. However, that costs a LOT too so why not Publish any Studio that has 'new', interesting ideas perfect for Game Pass that perhaps wouldn't get made due to many publishers wanting immediate 'financial' success on release. That's where Xbox Publishing comes in - Contraband by Avalanche is one of these, maybe that rumoured Cloud Kojima project another. Also ID@Xbox adds to the variety of games/experiences too. Having games like R6, B4B, Outriders etc are 'good' but not going to make you 'leave' Sony to save 'buying' games that weren't high on many gamers list. They are games that once you are subscribed, the fact you can 'try' for free is amazing.

I think many underestimate Game Pass, seeing just the 'big' 1st Party exclusives and thinking that those '1 or 2' they'd play wouldn't make financial sense to subscribe to GP to play and 'cheaper' to buy than subbing - despite the fact that you'd also be paying for 'Gold' too - and the game is 'yours' to keep if they buy. Therefore, they need more than 3 or 4 big exclusives that people want to play to get them in to open their eyes to the 'true' value of Game Pass.

That's why I think Game Pass hasn't grown much over the last year despite the $7.5bn spent on Bethesda and the 'promise' of Starfield. 2021 gave us MSFS (not everyone's idea of a 'fun' game), FH5 (misunderstood 'racing' game) and Halo:Infinite (a disaster waiting to happen, old-gen looking game that actually came together just in time for release -missing key features of course). I know Psychonauts 2 arrived on GP but available on PS and of course GP benefited from a LOT of other new day1 releases but its Day1 Exclusives and 'more' than 2 or 3 great games that will convince people to join.

Long term, we can see this coming and why the 'Console' will be a big sales success - despite it not having any 'exclusives' as they can all be played on PC so 'why buy a console'? Well because the Consoles are the 'best' value with most of the biggest 'new' releases coming 'exclusively' to that 'console'. 2 PS5 games = £140(£70 each), 2 Xbox games £110 (£55 each), Game Pass Ultimate £132 (£11pm x 12) so if they release just 2 games a year people want, its pretty 'even' (I know GP gives more than just Exclusives) but then anymore 'games' releasing, and the 'value' jumps up significantly, 4 PS5 games £280, 6 Xbox games £330, GPU still £132.

Makes sense that a LOT of people look at 'exclusives' after all, that's how they have looked at consoles before - the games that differentiate the two as the 'rest' are playable on both.You don't need to leave PS to play Outriders, MLB21 etc, just have to buy where as GP gets it 'free', but its not a game that they couldn't play.

For all this investment, there is still an 'undercurrent' of chatter from numerous people. Most, if not all, studio's were 'struggling' with not the 'best' track record and/or struggling with funding. Ninja Theory contracted out most of its staff to work on 'other' developers games to allow a 'small' team to work on Hellblade, Obsidian was struggling too with Outer Worlds funding. Bethesda was 'struggling' after Fallout 76 - only Doom and Wolfenstein had been 'successful' recently although that 'co-op' Wolfenstein wasn't well received. We all know that CoD is struggling and Activision/Blizzard as a Company were sinking fast. Add to that, peoples memory of what Rare was compared to now, what happened to Lionhead, Bungie etc and 'fear' that will happen to these studio's.

So right now, that undercurrent is lingering in the background. We know MS is under very different management and has a different Primary platform now that has a very different business model but many are waiting for these 'games' to come, waiting to see if those Studio's get 'screwed' over etc.

The whole business model is NOT centred around basing 'success' on Financial sales, canning projects because the cost vs financial return might not be there. Would a project like Scalebound be cancelled today or Fable Legends - a perfect game for Game Pass. Scalebound may well of 'cost' too much to justify continuing when the XB1 wasn't 'selling' well enough and 'luke warm' reception may have pushed the completion of the Project vs financial return beyond salvageable. Now, its not about 'Financial' success, its about player subscription numbers, player engagement and retention. To do that, they need games 'every' month to attract more and more people to sign up, and importantly, keep subscribed to play the 'next' month, and the next, and the next.

I'm sure that MS would 'sacrifice' selling 100m+ Series consoles for say just 50m if that meant having Game Pass on PS5 and gaining 50m+ extra Subscriptions. However, the longer Sony hold out, more that plays into MS's pocket too. Those PS gamers will start to see '£21' a month for Game Pass Ultimate and a Series S as 'too good' to miss out on as more and more of these studio's start releasing 'exclusives' to Xbox. The legacy games haven't quite finished on PS (Deathloop, Ghostwire etc) and studio's most 'recent' releases came to PS and still supported (Doom, Psychonauts 2, Outer Worlds etc) so the 'impact' has not been felt. Even with 'Xbox' essentially having 2 of the most critically acclaimed games Psychonauts 2, Deathloop), 1 of those isn't even on Xbox yet.

There is also the 'deniers', those that think CoD or Elder Scrolls are too 'big' to go Exclusive, that MS won't want to lose that 'revenue' - BS. They are not 'concerned' about losing '10m+' sales on Playstation, financial success isn't the objective of these - hence they release on Game Pass. The OBJECTIVE is to get people to Subscribe to Game Pass. Even if you 'buy' an Xbox so have 'access' to those games, they want you as a Subscriber. You have just spent £450 on a Series X, great and thank-you but now Subscribe to Game Pass for ALL these games. The Consoles are a stepping stone to Game Pass for MS because their primary platform is Game Pass first and foremost. They are 'constantly' adding 'value' to Game Pass to increase its appeal. Every 1m more subscribers is $10m more a month, $120m more a year. If there are 300m gamers in the world, that's their target hence whatever 'device', hence cloud. Not everyone can afford the latest console or hardware, can't afford to buy a new game every month so Game Pass and because you are in the ecosystem, what money you can spend on gaming (on top of the Subscription) is in their ecosystem.

Anyone worried that Microsoft's going to kill off a load of the IPs they owned prior to the Activision acquisition (e.g. Halo, Gears, DOOM, Wolfenstein) because they will own CoD. It came to mind that when Sony had the CoD timed exclusivity, all the Playstation Studios shooter franchises were killed off (e.g. SOCOM, Resistance, Killzone) with the studios either closed or went to work on open world action/adventure games.

@Grumblevolcano That's actually something that I brought up in this thread as well: https://www.purexbox.com/forums/xbox-series-x/xbox_game_studios

It could go either way honestly. I mean, Nintendo has a bunch of platformers with Mario being the most popular one but they still release Donkey Kong, Kirby and Yoshi games. Microsoft could do the same, but the question is how they will position these franchises in relation to each other from here on out. DOOM isn't really known for being a multiplayer franchise, while CoD is. Halo focuses on providing both great single-player and multiplayer modes. I'm guessing that Microsoft wants to stop making annual CoD titles and let the studios create different experiences. Perhaps the series will have more ambitious campaigns while they let Warzone be the main multiplayer mode. That way I think all three franchises can coexist nicely with each other. However, if they keep pushing for multiplayer in all new CoD games, I'm afraid that might damage Halo a lot. Because single-player is single-player, you play the game once and you move on to the next one. But with multiplayer, you pretty much stick with one game for a long time.

I don't think the PlayStation Studios shooters were killed off because of CoD timed exclusivity, Sony just don't care about any of their older franchises anymore. They want to make Hollywood blockbusters and so franchises like Killzone, Resistance, Motorstorm, LittleBigPlanet, inFAMOUS, Sly Cooper and so on are simply not a part of their plan anymore.

I've been watching videos of people reacting to the Activision Blizzard deal and I think this one brings up an interesting point of how Microsoft's acquisition won't really have any legal issues because it's a "vertical" transaction compared to a more problematic "horizontal" transaction.

In short, Microsoft, a publisher, is buying Activision Blizzard, a producer. So there's really no legal problems. If however Microsoft had acquired Nintendo or Sony, i.e. another publisher, then there would be a fuss about it. Which makes sense because I mean, Microsoft is more closely in competition with Sony and Nintendo than companies like ZeniMax, Activision Blizzard, Take-Two Interactive, EA, Ubisoft and so on.