Phil Spencer Would Like To See Other Digital Storefronts Appear On Xbox

Might have thought the most obvious people will want is Steam 🤔🙂

Game Pass is the main service and the future for XBOX. Consoles might have low sales and playerbase around 10-20 million sale, but Game Pass had already 34 million subscribers in any platform(PC, console, cloud) and it's expected to grow to almost 100 million subs.

Microsoft SHOULD be going multiplatform. They need that extra cash to increase profit margin. They need to sales Halo, Gear, Starfield, Elder Scrolls, Call of Duty etc etc to PS5/Switch because there's a huge consumer base on these platforms, which have millions of users who don't have gamepass, so the only way to profit from them, is by selling the games at full price.

Game Pass and multiplatform is the future for XBOX to dominate the gaming market. It's the only way to increase revenue and profit to a new records. XBOX is the biggest publisher in the world at the moment with over 40 studios and 19.000 employees. XBOX studios have a diverse portfolio by making AAA games, mobile games, GaaS etc and they have multi-million dollar franchise which are extremely popular in any platform.

XBOX have so much content that it will be stupid no to appeal the whole gaming community because of some stupid "exclusivity strategy" bull-***** inspired by hardcore XBOX fanboys who don't understand business. More money, more profit, this is the way.

I guess no more skipping Xbox if this ever happens lol. We're gonna play Final Fantasy whether Sony wants it or not!

@Phil-Spencer-Gate well they got rid of Xbox Live so GP numbers aren’t impressive to me. All I want to do is play some games online with my Series X. I don’t care about GP as I only buy physical for the consoles. But since they got rid of Xbox live, I’m forced to get GP and am a part of that ecosystem or total. I don’t believe in the subsidized GP model.

The less barriers around home consoles the better? I know he might have not had much of a say in it but retail emulators were great until they got shut down. Also more bc would be nice.

Game Pass sub numbers are not anything to write home about , let’s face it.

If GPU is the future for Xbox, then fine but it’s still not enough to convince people to buy an Xbox console any longer. They will need to offer something different.

I fully expect them to reveal a native handheld this year and use that as their hardware future with one last throw of the dice.

The issue with Xbox is that they have flip flopped around what they are doing and now Phil is doubling down on Xbox being a place where you can access lots of different store fronts.

To do so means you still need hardware but the fact is that nowhere near enough people are buying Xbox consoles.

Time is running out so Xbox need to make a huge decision snd make it asap.

Imagine a Steam client on the Xbox consoles with verified One, Series S or X games, similarly to the Steam Deck...

@Vaako007 The name change is just a 'technicality' but the reality is that you were and continue to be a Subscriber to an Xbox service. Whether its called 'Gold' or 'Game Pass Core', its still around the same cost.

As I said, it's a mere 'technicality' as the Subscriber numbers don't really change. If they had 10m just on Gold, those 10m are now Game Pass Core. If they had 35m Subscribers before, they still have 35m Subscribers.

Sony have gone from a '2' separate Subscriptions (PS+ & PS Now) into a '3' tier single name Subscription ( PS+ - Essential, Extra and Premium tiers).

Whether you 'care' about Game Pass or the 'games' you get to play on the 'Core' tier, it still costs the same as 'Gold' and just like Gold, gave you discounts on Digital purchases and access to Digital games. Since they 'stopped' giving 360 games on Gold, you never got ANY games to keep and rarely any AAA or well known Games to play.

Core at least offers 30+ games you 'can' play for FREE as well as keep buying Physical discs, keep playing 'online' etc.

@Vaako007 First of all, it doesn't matter if you don't believe in subscription model. It is an objectively fact that game pass is an big value as a service for many people, because you get so many games, including day one releases, for a small price every month. And the value of game pass will become much bigger as they are releasing more first party titles and when they will bring all Activision Blizzard games to the service.

If you like to own the games, XBOX will still give you the choice for full purchase in your xbox console. There is no gamepass exlusive games, but you have the option to either play the game via subscription or full purchase. However, it's pretty clear that most people prefer gamepass for its value, they don't care to own the games, they just want to play games for a small price every month. It's the same evolution like tv streaming, which dominates the film market. Nobody cares to buy films on blue ray disk(expect some niche collectors) because they can watch all the films/tv series in sub services like Netflix, HBO, Disney plus etc etc.

The next Xbox should be a prebuilt PC with Xbox branding.

Start by getting our full xbox digital library playable on the pc app. Take the full xbox experience to pc.

Epic game store would be sweet on xbox. I have claimed like 400 freebies from them and some of them (even the small unknown titles) are quite good. I would love a world where Epic is closer to Steam. Steam is my favorite platform in gaming but they are at a concerning level of the pc gaming landscape.

What? The only way this would be possible is if the Xbox was just a PC and not a console, otherwise this makes no sense.

@Beetlebum91 I've still got a series S offline with all the retail emulators, I'm glad I snagged one for cheap before they started to ban them, it will be offline forever.

I'm really glad that I've supported Xbox since the beginning in 2001. Thanks Microsoft!

If this opened the door for something like Steam to have a storefront on Xbox, that would allow players to play PlayStation games on the Xbox. That’s of course a big “IF.”

@UnusedBabyWipes

Except Sony blocked Xbox from getting God of War when it streamed from Nvidia so Sony would more than likely do the same thing.

yes phil, try anything but making good games for xbox.

@Chaotic_Goat
I had the same thought. I wonder if the idea is to say, "hey Epic, hey Valve, etc. come develop a console storefront - you can make your own deals with devs and pubs to use your store to sell their xbox games" rather than just drop the existing storefronts on the xbox dash, which seems like it could not technically work.

@Chaotic_Goat The Original concept of the 'Xbox' was to bring the PC Games to a much wider audience by making an affordable 'Console'. Nowadays, most consoles are built more like 'PC's' anyway but back then, it was built to be an 'affordable' way to bring PC games to a wider audience.

MS weren't a 'Hardware' company - they were always a Software and Services based. You don't really need an Xbox Console to play 'Xbox' games as you can play them day/date on PC and often on Cloud too. Series S/X only provide a certain 'tier' experience.

Cloud is 'entry' tier - 1080/60, limited Library and reliant on internet
Series S is Entry Hardware tier - 1440/120, larger Library but no Physical media player
Series X is 'premium' Console Tier - 4k/120, Physical Media player and often more customer choice (Performance or Graphics modes)
PC is the 'open' and variable spec tier to suit whatever budget and/or spec an individual wants with the largest Library and most Consumer choice...

Game Pass 'works' across all those options too. With GPU, I can play Forza, Starfield etc on my Mobile, my Xbox Consoles (inc last gen with Cloud), my PC, my RoG Ally etc at no 'extra' cost. My saves carry across all too so its all one 'ecosystem' of which the 'Xbox' Console is just one option for Consumers to play those games - based on their preferences and/or budgets...

Couple of opposing (not really) thoughts.. I see a scenario where every storefront would be available on any console hardware+PC as an Xbox consumer utopia, while at the same time it would almost certainly be the eventual death of Xbox hardware as we know it. Quite frankly, it might also be the end of GP as we know it, since the existing model has not reached much traction on the "open" PC platform.
It's a tricky situation as I don't believe MS is in a position where GP is so much better then competition that they can advocate open market, in a way Netflix can for example. GP appeal is in XSS being a $250 box to play many games natively without lag. If users can get a better or similar library elsewhere, but still use your cheap hardware, they will (which is why I think that hardware has to die out in "open" scenario, and subscriber number might plummet instead of rise).

As much as I like the idea of more choice this is again Microsoft trying to look like the good guy when there gonna be forced to open up. Xbox is soon to be digital only eco system. This then opens Xbox to the scrutiny of the EU's Digital Market Act which Microsoft is on the list of Gatekeepers.

The crux of the problem with your senario of putting the likes of Gears etc, on the PlayStation, @Phil-Spencer-Gate, is that it will lead to the rapid death of the Xbox console. Once the core games that attract people into the Xbox ecosystem are on the PlayStation, there is literally no reason to own an Xbox.

Then what happens? Game Pass will be a First Party only service that Sony may permit on their platform. It may prove popular, it may not. Will Microsoft still want to put new games on to the service day one? Probably not.

What also may happen is that Sony, now being the only high-end console manufacturer will charge full price and then a little profit for their consoles; so expect to be paying £800 or more for your PlayStation.

What Sony may also do is charge more to Developers to put games on to their platform. Currently Sony charge 30%, which is the same as Microsoft. However, with Xbox out of the picture (in terms of consoles) and with the PlayStation being the only high-end console, they may choose to raise that to 40% or even 50%. After all, they have no competition to keep them in check, so they can do what they like. They could even raise the prices of games too. Why not? Who are they now competing against? And Microsoft would follow suit, particularly if they are having to give Sony 40% or more of the revenue from each game they sell. Even 30% is going to sting, even with more sales on the PlayStation, because they will not be getting 100% of the sales on the Xbox, because that has ceased to exist.

Anyone that thinks that one time exclusive games going to the PlayStation has not thought through the ramifications for both Xbox as a console, and us as gamers. Yes, you would only need to buy one console, not two, but at what cost. Same for games. And Likely as not, Microsoft will only invest in developing sure fire big sellers, not smaller games because they will need that return on the games.

Sony being the only console will create the exact same monopoly that everyone was shouting about when Microsoft were in the process of buying ABK. That monopoly will massively negatively impact gaming, and innovation...

@Gollum have fun! They had some amazing emulators on there. I can't be stuffed doing the dev mode installation either any more.

I feel like we are entering the "throw ***** at the wall and hope something sticks" phase of Xbox hardware.

I'm just going day by day now, along for the ride. In any event if they are putting PC storefronts on Xbox let's hope for Steam, where I've got something like 900 games.

Id bet on Xbox going down the switch route. Something handheld, using the current Xbox UI that can connect to a TV. That way as it would technically be a PC, you should use other storefronts. Probably called Xbox still, but just different.

Lot off known ppl saying this WILL happen im down for it i have them all spend on all choice is a winner.

@Beetlebum91 Yeah definitely, I ended up wasting money on buying the developer mode before hand, it's a bit crap having to set it up like that.

To be fair this isn't the first time Phil has talked about multiple storefronts. He talked about it 2 or so years ago, too, then we didn't hear anything about it and I thought that was one of those many floating ideas they abandon once corporate gets it.

The fact he's bringing it up again now means it wasn't a flash in the pan. Behind the scenes that's been on the to-do list. It coincides with the multiplatform, long-term BC approach approach. The talk on the handheld around Windows being an obstacle on other handhelds. The talk of console growth stagnating. It does seem like they're looking to bridge PC and console. If you can't win the walled garden game, implode the wall model for everyone....I can see how that's a microsoft way of thinking. It maybe also explains the "most games on PS" approach if they know behind the scenes all PS games will be in their platform too, even if they're backdooring it.

But I don't think any of this will see any details until next "gen" (whatever that will mean.) It all ties into rumors of an Intel based Xbox as well. That would hint at a PC-ward shift of the hardware.

What would other storefronts look like on Xbox though? I can't imagine they'd just dump Steam on it knowing nobody would buy games from MS as long as they sub GP. Or maybe it doesn't matter? Put steam on Xbox, charge 10% royalty for a platform within a platform....could be a win-win. If they can't get enough customers on their store at 30% getting a cut of a segment Steam sales at 10% could be just as good or better. MS is all about that passive money these days. Simply be so big you get money just by existing.

I'd love to see that fusion of console and PC, and they're not wrong, consoles are dying. PS may be king, but it's trending down vs itself as well. We'll see how well Switch 2 does but I bet it does nowhere close to Switch 1. Nintendo will be in a rough spot if their handheld niche starts to dwindle or gain competition though. For better or worse we've entered the era of commodity gaming.

@Fiendish-Beaver i tried to explain this to him a few weeks ago. If all the games go to PS. Xbox will be out of the hardware game as we know it in 2 years or less. Heck i might not even keep my Xbox if just Gears of War go to Sony. Not to mention all the first party games. MS is just trying to find a way to getting hardware moving or to be done with it. Which i can’t blame them since the Series consoles haven’t even crossed 30 million in sales and we are almost half way over with the gen.

@Weapon_Wheel I think they have to tear down the line completely. It’s the only route forward with publishers putting more effort into PlayStation optimization and increasingly skipping Xbox all together. Make Xbox a launcher on a pre built pc and work with publishers to optimize games for it similar to what steam does with the steam deck.

@NEStalgia You literally just said yesterday before this report came out that Xbox needs to bridge PC and console. I agree that the only way forward for them. PS is going to continue to be the console leader and Nintendo is more of a Toy Company them console maker in my eyes. They sell 2GB games as fun and it works well for Switch. I see them being just fine. Sony on the other hand is going to have to figure out how to make their budget work and MS just has to crack the code of being that PC/hybrid and all 3 should live well. Things are about to end as we know them after this generation. PC is to big to ignore and Xbox is no longer going to just make a console.

@HonestHick Yeah but this is also a move to put pressure on Sony to open up their ecosystem. The end goal is to kill traditional consoles and push everyone to PC, handhelds and cloud.

@MrMagic it looks like it for sure as a push to PC. I don’t know if MS is trying to do anything to the PS. Sony has to figure out their budgets, if they do that they can keep to their walled garden and do really well as they are still the console name worldwide. But Sony themselves had said they are coming to PC. Well if they are doing that then they are in Microsoft’s world a little and they know that.

@HonestHick Xbox might also have to figure out how to get their budget work because nobody likes to infinitely lose money. All these moves lately indicate MS is working very hard at trying to fix it actually.
I'm not sure all 3 will be fine, and in a way I don't care. Video games market is in a need of tectonic change, a disruption on a level of what PS1 was to SNES. I don't know, maybe AMD or NVIDIA accept the risk and enter market with their own vertically integrated platform.

@MrMagic its not. This is Microsoft preparing for a digital only future where the market just got heavily regulated in the EU. with named gatekeepers. Which Microsoft is on the list for Windows. Have to open there eco systems to the terms of the Digital Markets Act. So this has nothing to do with Sony.

If Microsoft can get Steam, GOG, Epic on Xbox consoles, then it achieve what it set out to do over 20 years ago: finally making the dream of PC in the living room.

@HonestHick If they finally admit they are going to just make an Xbox PC instead then sure but if they are just going to pretend that they still make consoles then at a certain point they'll be doing it for no other reason than to hurt Sony and traditional consoles.

@cragis0001 Maybe not directly but they see the benefits for them and one of those is obviously hurting Sony. That's why they are trying to accelerate it as soon as possible. They also obviously have a big hand in pushing for that all digital disgusting future they've always wanted and it's obvious now they also want traditional consoles to disappear as well.

I said on yesterday's article, @HonestHick & @MrMagic, that I think Microsoft's last roll of the dice is to make a 'high-end' hybrid handheld. It's going to be a device on par with the current abilities of the Series, or thereabouts (maybe even better, if the tech wizards can get it all into a handheld). At the very least it will sit in between the Switch 2 and the PlayStation 6.

I think Microsoft know that there is not a hope in Hell that they can close the gap on Sony now, and so they now have to attempt something completely different. They've seen the success of the Switch, and can see that as their only possible future in gaming (other than becoming fully third-party, of course).

This rumoured handheld could indeed be the next generation of console that Microsoft have said they will be doing (rumoured to be 2026). Time will tell, but I know one thing for certain; were I to buy such a console, it would be in TV mode all the time as I have no need for a handheld...

@HonestHick @RBRTMNZ Yeah, I mean that is LITERALLY what the OG Xbox was supposed to be all about. It's kind of sad that the vision in 2000 was to merge PC and consoles back into Windows, and here in 2024 we're talking about rumors and arguing about if they actually "might" do something like that.

When the OG launched, the whole vibe at the time was basically "whoa, a consolized gaming PC!" Microsoft got caught red handed at CES demoing the "X-BOX" that was actually an empty plastic shell, the cables ran under the table to a quad-Xeon NT4 box. ......and then the 360 happened and turned it into a Microsoft Dreamcast. Which was cool...but also a step backward. It was the best selling, but that wasn't the brand vision. And it really only sold so well because PS3 was so troubled for so long. Although, at the time, even the PS3 was LITERALLY a PC. A selling point at launch was you could install Linux. Officially.

The only thing not mentioned here is in the larger context of the interview, Phil is also talking about the death of the subsidized hardware model as hardware prices are no longer coming down like they used to. So the upshot of this multi-store, PC-conversion, might be paying PC-like prices for hardware. Or at least only a minor discount vs just buying newegg parts.

TBH I find the recent rise of "pc gaming" to be kind of bizarre as console gaming shrinks. Between cost, complexity, heat, and noise, and the fact that actual tower PCs have become a complete rarity entirely vs 20 years ago when everyone had one for excel and email, the whole shift seems like it's a bubble anomaly.

Like mobile gaming I'm wondering how much of "PC gaming has risen" is actually "Asia likes PC gaming and people like playing mobile-like simple games on laptops they already own more than "suddenly everyone that used to buy $300 consoles now buys $3500+ fire-breathing jet-engine LED-glowing nerdoliths and ROG chair.

When you look at the hardware survey on Steam you get a general picture that Steam's top market is China (maybe Taiwan, but the language is Simplified CN, not Traditional, implies mainland and affiliated territories.), and the average hardware is a potato that would barely run modern AAA games even half decently if at all. Makes the XSS look like a powerhouse. We say "PC gaming" but what we really mean is "low power commodity gaming for simple games."

To a large degree I think part of what we're seeing is less a shift to PC gaming, and more the final effect of mobile gaming, where most of the market that bought "consoles" was more like the Wii market than Sony or MS care to admit. It was people that bought it to play crossword puzzle games, dance games, and match-3 games occasionally, and made console install base look great, and now that's all on their phone and they don't need it. So the overlap of console and PC market is now more evenly split since "core gamers" a all that's left buying consoles and is ironically not enough for selling consoles. Core gaming has always been a small market, continues to be a small market, and the size of the market doesn't change over decades. Yet costs keep going up and up and up.

The problem with the "console" business model is it was basically designed exclusively by Nintendo from a position of being a monopoly in the 80's bubble economy of Japan. It doesn't work with real competition or in periods of low consumer buying power. It's like the US debt. It's all about kicking the can of worms one more generation ahead, and eventually you can't kick it another time, you have to open it. Even Nintendo will have to face it. Switch as great as its library is, has been built up largely on rereleases of old games "on a handheld for the first time."

@MrMagic of course Microsoft see the benefits as there using the new law to open Xbox stores on IOS & Android in the future. But will it hurt Sony?. As they'll be aware of the Digital Market Act & could already be planning something similar as PlayStation management will be aware that they'll eventually have to go digital only at some point. I Don't see how it's Microsoft's fault gaming is going digital only when mobile gaming is the most profitable & PC gaming has been digital for easily a decade. Music & TV/movies are mostly digital these days. It was only a matter of time before console gaming followed.
Consoles have to move with the times as they have evolved over the years. So this is no different.

@Cikajovazmaj MS budget will be more than ok due to the ABK money that is coming in. But certain studios within MS have to make sure their budgets are in line with what they are creating. Overall the industry is coming adjusting to an odd time in recent world history with the covid lockdowns. Then the other part is just not having good leadership and keeping projects in line and on budget. I do think it will settle down again at some point. But the only thing the tech industry is known for is constant change and the video game industry has been changing since the first day it arrived.

@Fiendish-Beaver no they can't catch Sony at there own game. But I think Microsofts new strategy is to take some of the burden off there shoulders & allow others to invest in the eco system. That's what the EU's Digital Market Act will allow when Xbox goes all digital as Microsoft is already on the Gatekeeper list.

@MrMagic Xbox was made in the first place to get windows into more homes and blur the lines a little between PC and console. Looks like they are coming back to that after not getting it right in just the walled garden console market. Everyone wants to put Sony’s mistakes on MS or Xbox. MS didn’t tell Sony to make a near 300 million dollar super hero game that Marvel takes a cut from. Sony’s 2 biggest problems are they don’t know how to make multiplayer games or refuse to and stick to one and done trade in single player titles and problem number 2 is their fans only want one and done trade in single player games. So i am not sure what Sony can do to help their rising costs of development. Cancelling all their work on online games didn’t help them either cause now there is a gap in in house developed games. Again none of this is MS’s fault. The same it’s not Sony fault MS launched the One and upset its fan base they built with 360.

@Fiendish-Beaver MS wants to be where the younger crowd of players are. Mid 30’s to 40 year old players are still a bulk of console sales and thats why it’s not growing. Most younger teens are happy with a cheaper laptop or mobile. Not a $500 dollar box they can only play games on and only in one spot of the house. I have been saying for a few years now that the future is cloud and PC. cloud for the basic play once in a while gamer and PC for the hardcore gamer. Cloud isn’t ready to replace console just yet. So MS is just waiting it out cause they can afford to and Sony is wondering how much of a console drop off will they see when it happens. If MS turns Xbox back into a PC and it runs everything that would be about the most future proof plan they’ve had in a while in my opinion.

@HonestHick I talking about Microsoft now trying to kill traditional console gaming, I didn't blame them for the cost of Sony's singleplayer so I'm not sure where you got that from.

@cragis0001 Xbox has been pushing an all digital future since the launch of Xbox one. They wanted to kill the second hand market and they've been manipulating and conditioning their customers with those 50gb discs for years now.

@NEStalgia 100% agree with you. I said a while ago MS and Sony battling for the same customer was always trying to feed a family of 5 with 2 pieces of bread. Meaning the hardcore market is small and this is why mobile gaming is so big. Cause there is 10,000 people that pick up candy crush on their iPhones for 20-30 mins a day for every 1 hardcore gamer like ourselves. Consoles are already PC’s in a box minus the software. So all MS is doing is leveraging their software (windows) and other store fronts. Which is smart. I agree with the potatoe PC being a huge number cause again it proves Phil’s point. Most younger gamers now want a device that does more than play games and can be taken anywhere and not locked to a room and a certain tv. Hence consoles aren’t growing and they are selling to the same age group that has been buying them since the 90’s. I like the idea of MS going back to the PC side of things and i think the console space is on life support until cloud is good enough to take a huge section of gamers away from it. I have been saying for years the future will be cloud and Pc. It caters perfectly to the two types of gamers. Cloud isn’t ready yet so console still seems like the next best place and thats great for now. I like that the industry is shifting, I’m excited to see what Xbox does now more than ever cause they are now in position with all their studios to take chances and have games to bring in money to support those chances they are taking. Meanwhile on PS we know what we are going to get after all the cancelled GAAS games. It’s back to one and done single player games that have a budget and used game market issue. Nintendo Switch 2 is a wild card cause at some point players are going to want better online and features. Forget power, Nintendo has proven time and time again they make fun games and power don’t matter for those games. But younger crowds love social and interactive online features that Nintendo is like 15-20 years behind on.

@MrMagic traditional console gaming is killing itself. Xbox is just part of it not the main reason. I didn’t say you said it was MS fault for Sony’s weak profits, but it proves the point that the traditional console market is even hard for them and they are the leaders in it. Xbox pushing an all digital market is tied to where the industry is going and of course options of how and where to play the games. Sony launched an all digital console and their numbers show 75% or more of their players are buying digital. PC has been digital forever and of course so has mobile gaming. Players that want to hold onto physical media are a small faction to the industry now and while i hope it sticks around for a few more years for them. It’s on life support as even big box retail stores don’t see the profit in stocking it on their sales floors.

Phil Spencer hates the Xbox console. The way he talks about it with such distain makes it obvious.
I have no desire to play on a PC, if I wanted to play on a PC I would do so. I do not want to navigate 4 stores and mess with sliders and so on. I also don't want less people on the console version than are already there. PC is full of cheaters and hackers and I turn off cross-play first thing on every game.
Hate to say it, but if they try to Trojan Horse the next Xbox as a PC, I'm out.

@HonestHick Yeah they are not the main reason traditional console gaming is dying but they do have a hand in it (as do Sony) but the worst part of it is that it is clear that it is actually what Microsoft wants and it is the reason they've been trying to accelerate it every chance they get.

Yeah Sony released an all digital but from the numbers we've seen over the years from different markets it is clear a PS5 with the disc drive still vastly outsold the digital version, especially in Japan so it's clear Sony's fanbase at least prefers to have that option.

I know the digital future is inevitable and Console gaming as we know it will change with the times but I still take issue with Microsoft's obvious attempts to speed up the process.

@BAMozzy I understand the technicality. I’m saying I don’t want to be part of gamepass at all. Even if Xbox Live was one dollar less or the same cost I’d go with that service. Just because I don’t believe in the subsidized GP service. I do recognize for many that it is tremendous value on the surface but beneath it all, however it’s not good in the long term for the industry IMHO.

@Phil-Spencer-Gate I’m the exception but I only buy movies on Blu-ray if I want to watch something. The quality on 4K ultra’s for audio and video cannot be matched by streaming services. For those of us that have home theater and a good TV, physical is a must. Of course for most compressed formats work just fine through streaming.

I digress, I know GP is a good value for many whom don’t want to spend much coin on the hobby that is gaming. The Xbox subsidiary can get away with the subsidized GP model. I believe that this model isn’t good in the long term for the gaming industry. I’ll continue supporting developers by buying games outright physically for as long as I can as I believe in the ownership model.

@MrMagic again Sony released the PSP Go years before the digital Xbox One & now has the PS5 digital. Sony wanted to charge second hand gamers a fee to play there first party games online like EA with there online pass back in 2010 but abandoned the idea. Again the idea was before the Xbox One release.

@MrMagic i wouldn’t be if i were you, here’ why. As much as we all agree Nintendo just does their own thing and marches to the beat of their own drum for better or worse. This is what MS is trying to do with the Xbox. Go their own different way and carve a path for them. So if Sony plans to stick to the traditional console experience than that is their path and we have 3 different ways to play and that is good. There is little reason for MS to chase Sony the same reason Nintendo decided not to in the end. Gives us more options and i find it to be more of a good thing than a bad. Thats just my take of course. 😊

@MrMagic @cragis0001 “again Sony released the PSP Go years before the digital Xbox One & now has the PS5 digital. Sony wanted to charge second hand gamers a fee to play there first party games online like EA with there online pass back in 2010 but abandoned the idea. Again the idea was before the Xbox One release”

I mean this is true and in the end the Xbox one vision become the normal the next gen after in more ways than one. All companies want more profit margins and less overhead. Digital does that.

@HonestHick @cragis0001 That was just to get rid of the expensive UMD's which never really reduced in cost to produce, it had nothing to do with home consoles and Blu-ray disks also that second hand fee was to access the online multiplayer portion because back then Singleplayer campaigns were almost always paired with online multiplayer, it would never have destroyed the second hand market, actually it would have just reduced the price of second hand games.

@MrMagic if the PSP Go had been successful. Sony would have released a digital console & disk one like today. If anything it's failure is why we only see a diskless console now with the PS5. The online pass wouldn't have killed the 2nd hand market but would be stop gap to something that gradually would. Microsoft's mistake was to try & kill the 2nd hand market in one swoop.

@MrMagic It's not a question of if, it's a question of when physical dies for all platforms. The platform holders hate it, and always have. And the young players grew up on iOS/Android and have never seen a disc in their lives. I'm sure they'll still exist for a while as an option, but they won't be a relevant component of the overall market. Even PS, even Nintendo. TBH I think we're 2 gens away from MS abandoning it, which means 3 gens for PS, Nintendo, but it'll happen. But that's 10+ years away and might not seem strange by then. Or they'll make physical so much more expensive few would choose it.

Best not to confuse "Xbox vs Playstation" with "Physical vs Digital." They're both on the same trajectory, PS is just a bit delayed. Physical already serves next to no purpose with the "sell now, fix later" as standard across the industry and patches that consist of downloading new archive files of almost the entire disc content. It's a not a game disc, it's a license dongle.

@Vaako007 You belong to the niche market that you prefer physical sales for games and films. But it doesn't matter. You kind doesn't matter because the mainstream audience prefer digital only and subscription services. The film industry is completely dominated by sub streaming. Same thing is happening with gaming. However, you will always have the choice to either buy or sub for a game. Even in the film market you have the choice to buy your films rather than being a sub to a streaming service. I don't see any problem with that. And I definitely don't believe that Game Pass is some kind of problem for the industry. Game Pass is the future, which will be available to play console games in your phone through cloud. The only thing that matters for gamepass is to increase its number of subscribers from 35 million to 50-60 million in order to be more profitable and have enough revenue to futher support its content with more day releases and more third party games along with first party ones.

@cragis0001 Sure in an alternate timeline it is a possibility but I'm talking about the one where in, well at least I was but I've got better things to do at the moment and plus I can't be bothered to keep responding to everyone who keeps messaging me. I'm sure I'll muster enough enthusiasm to celebrate if Microsoft's plans fail again though. 👍

@Phil-Spencer-Gate I think cloud is further away today than it looked like it was going to be 3 years ago. It was fast tracking but ran into the inherent bottlenecks harder than it appeared and hit much lower adoption than it seemed like it might. Since then, and since reporting the very low adoption numbers during the ABK hearings, I thing MS has dramatically stepped back from datacenter rollouts to expand it. The high interest rates are also part of that, that was all "free money" being borrowed back then. Now those big expansion projects need second and third reconsideration. 3 years ago I was all in on the future of cloud. Today, seeing the backend obstacles, I feel like cloud is stuck in the same place VR is. It's clearly the future, but the investment to make it happen isn't going to happen until the market is there for it, and the market can't be there for it until the investment happens.

I still do think cloud is the future of pancake games. And I still feel like VR will eventually become much more widely adopted and replace the traditional console market niche (and there's not a chance cloud will actually work for that as any frame hiccup is a disaster in VR), but I feel like we're moving further rather than closer to that result then a few years back.

It feels like it's all but at a standstill for MS and oddly Sony eclipsed them minus the limitation it's PC/console-only. For MS, the datacenter rollouts slowed/vanished, quality stuck at 1080p, performance appears to have been dropped to Series S in order to double datacenter capacity, owned library MIA, quick resume MIA, and they don't really talk that much about it now. Personally I get the impression it's on pause, if for no other reason, until the fed lowers rates considerably.

@Fiendish-Beaver "Once the core games that attract people into the Xbox ecosystem are on the PlayStation, there is literally no reason to own an Xbox."

....so what's the problem about that? XBOX will sale its first party games at a full price on PS users and, at the same time, will have the same games day one on gamepass to increase the number of subscribers. It's a win-win scenario for XBOX in terms of revenue and profits.

"Then what happens? Game Pass will be a First Party only service that Sony may permit on their platform. It may prove popular, it may not. Will Microsoft still want to put new games on to the service day one? Probably not."

Game Pass WILL NOT come on PS5 because SONY won't allowed it. If gamepas comes on PS5, then there will be no reason to buy any third party on PS Store and Sony will lose a lot of money. Sony will not allow to jeopardize her own platform with such a move. Having said that, the only console in which you can have Game Pass is XBOX consoles, which is enough reason to buy XBOX in the first place.

"What also may happen is that Sony, now being the only high-end console manufacturer will charge full price and then a little profit for their consoles; so expect to be paying £800 or more for your PlayStation.

What Sony may also do is charge more to Developers to put games on to their platform. Currently Sony charge 30%, which is the same as Microsoft. However, with Xbox out of the picture (in terms of consoles) and with the PlayStation being the only high-end console, they may choose to raise that to 40% or even 50%. "

Sony WILL NOT have any monopoly and XBOX will not abandon hardware completely. XBOX will release a next gen home console because they know that there is a consumer base of 15-20 million gamers who prefer to have gamepass on console, and they are not PC gamers. XBOX don't want to lose these console consumers. However, XBOX will not compete Sony on hardware sales because there is no point. Game Pass is the main service and the only thing that matters is subscription growth. If Gamepass managed to increase subs to 50-60 million, Sony will not be able to compete because they don't have a similar service.

Gamepass could have a combined subs of 50-60 million in all platforms whether it's PC, console and cloud. And by going multiplatform will have extra sales(more revenue) from users in other platforms who will buy the XBOX games at a full price.

If Sony wants to increase the price of her console in the next gen or charge more than 30% cut, it's irrelevant for a subscriber of Game Pass. If you have Game Pass and you're part of XBOX ecosystem, then you don't care about your rival platform. For example, I am a PC gamer and I have Game Pass. I only buy Sony games on steam sales because I am satisfied with Game Pass. Sony makes great cinematic games but I don't care so much about her content if it's not available. If Sony doesn't sale her games on PC, then see won't take a penny from me, because I don't belong on PS ecosystem and I have Game Pass, which has enough content and games to spend a lot of time.

@NEStalgia I agree that it will take years for cloud gaming to be a serious thing but it will be the future of gaming. Microsoft long term prediction has cloud subs as a big part of Game Pass. But these are 10 years predictions until 2034.

The realistic scenario for Game Pass for the next 2-3 years is to increase the number of subs from 34 million to 50-60 million. I believe that the best way to make the content more attractive for more subs is to release day one games every single month, whether be first or third parties games. Also, they could bring more old third party games to their platform which will be permanently on Game Pass without an expire time. They could bring day one release new games and 10-15 old games every month to create a huge library for gamers.

@Phil-Spencer-Gate I imagine they've pushed back those predictions in light of, if I'm right, the pause on expansion. It's just such considerable outlay with still not wide enough adoption. They do have a lot of mobile/touch-only subs. But I think there's a sort of stagnant part of the market that jumped in right away but doesn't grow much.

I agree it's the future, but I can't get a handle on when the world will really be ready for that. If even low cost isn't enticing people, it's going to be a big struggle for a long time. The success of PS Portal probably bodes well for accelerating adoption though. Weirdly Sony doesn't support cloud on the Portal which is just another in their long string of WTF moments in their past 5 years. That was a no brainer...you have a cloud service, you have a dedicated streaming handheld....just.....WHY would you not connect those two?!

I think the obstacles on GP right now are, the content as you said, it's kind of static right now and that won't help subs. Console makes up a big part of the numbers but that's just by renaming Gold into "Game Pass". And obviously a huge chunk of the console market on Nintendo and PS that is simply entirely out of reach of it without moving those players to PC/XB, or cloud, but could is not really ready for that right now. PC is a good growth area but it has to compete with the Steam Sale there, so it's less appealing, plus so much of the PC market is into playing one big huge service platform game forever (LoL, WoW, Diablo 4 for that matter, etc.)

There's an irony that I think, until cloud is ready, the best way to increase GP numbers is to increase console numbers, but right now they're using GP to move consoles which isn't working. GP works better as an up-sell IMO. You have the console, now subscribe and get the most from it. It's harder to use the sub as an incentive to buy the box, particularly if you already own another box. The box needs something else going for it. Some will say "exclusives" but that doesn't really seem to work either. Those SoT PS buyers never bought an XB.

XB is in a weird spot where it has all the answers but hasn't figured out what the questions are yet. Sony has all the questions but not a single answer. Nintendo's just headbanging with headphones on in the corner.

@NEStalgia long story short for MS. Go back to intel and Nvida. Leave AMD to Sony. This gives the Xbox an advantage of better computing capabilities. Open up the PC branding of Xbox and windows working together like they intended from the start. Let more mouse and keyboard games onto the Xbox (world of Warcraft) i mean WOW on my Tv would be a happy day and something PS can’t do. I am considering selling my 55 inch LG C2 Oled and downsizing to a 42 to sit closer and try and get myself more into a PC gamer mindset. I have since the launch of this gen been on a 65 and 55 inch LG Oled. Time to downsize, and i really want to see Xbox leverage their advantages. All this doom and gloom and somehow i still love my Series X. Sure they need some big games to hit and they have a few this year even tho they aren’t ones i care much for. But… if that Marcus Fenix Gears of war collection is real. I won’t touch my PS or switch for a year.

I'm fairly certain the Xbox Series X|S could run a decent Android emulator and Google would be all over having the Play Store available on those consoles... and of course there are other emulators/storefronts that could be easily run, such as PICO-8.

EDIT: This makes me think Microsoft should just release a gaming variant of Windows to compete with SteamOS, and then release specialized PC "consoles" to compete with the Steam Deck and Steam Machines. It's not the approach I'd take with Xbox, but it's not without merit.

@HonestHick lol, you love your X until you get a PS5 pro 😂

For me the trick to being multiplatform is picking one for multiplat games and stick to it. So Xbox for multiplat, ps for exclusive and VR. If the handheld is real I'll be soooo glad my library is bigger on Xbox.

the only real problem with Intel and Nvidia is price. That's why everyone left them, they're just much more assertive in pricing. Nintendo is on Nvidia but that's their mobile chipset division. I think to get those players onboard at good prices they'd have to throw them a data center/Enterprise bone into the offer. But yeah. Deck proved PC as a console works perfectly. Xbox could do that on a much larger scale. Console+PC game pass on one box. I still don't understand how valve never got steam box off the ground. Console would have been replaced long ago but they just messed it up at every step.

But I still think it would come with a lot of advantages.

This would be awesome! Xbox has long needed a windows mode that allows PC game installs. But before all of that they really need to bite the bullet and make ALL online play free. This would attract back the PC master race and shake up the console market

@NEStalgia my PS5 Pro excitement has cooled a bit. Once i seen that that couldn’t overclock the CPU to 20% i was like this isn’t what i need. I am fine with today’s graphics but i want 60 fps. The Pro won’t cut it. So i am sure i will get one just cause i can sell mine for 50% or so of the cost. But it’s not as exciting of an upgrade as i would have hoped for. Yeah i think if Steam did that same thing today it would take off. But at it’s time and the way it was delivered it just didn’t catch. Nvida and intel is rumored to be the choice for the next Xbox and i hope it’s true. It would set some separation from Xbox and PS. But time will tell if the money matches the enthusiasm from MS.

How will the discounts be. How with the encryption, accounts, data signing away, license agreement pop ups. So many factors. If on a Windows mode extent then maybe? Dev mode isn't Other OS PS3/PS2 Linux but I mean they could offer it even if Edge allows a lot for it's version on Xbox anyway.

Offer us singleplayer and multiplayer separate for more games. Offer Xbox on a Smart Fridge then we will talk. XD On a graphics calculator even that I can hook a cable up to.

I mean as if PC isn't a mess though. I get the monopoly angle of 1 storefront and to look good, the cuts, the other factors but PC has shown how much people trust some platforms regardless of more options. Variety helps but their business practices or too much choice or limits in their more choice don't change much. The features of Steam, the trust of Valve. Offline mode. Improvements over the years.

While they could bridge the gap for some companies for others it won't change player's minds really.

There is a reason that while Crunchyroll can be bad some times we can't leave it. Some of my anime licensing ends up with Crunchyroll even if I don't use their service they have for physicals. I can't win there can I. What was the point in Madman and Hanabee if Crunchyroll has bigger reach and has many of Madman releases. It's called give up. The fact it took them as long as it did to add other licensors flexible subtitles with a dub audio change is a joke. Laziness and quality assurance lol clearly.

If people hate the launchers for many things and how much their few IPs they support are for these third parties as it is (even though I don't use my PC as much and do partial gaming it's none of their launchers that's for sure) make you go oh they don't have many games to give me a reason for their launcher/to open it that often (Xbox at least having more due to back compat but PC may of old titles too I assume unless more the case with GOG/Steam compat of old games instead while similar. PS doesn't offer of back compat releases so less to offer and well no Nintendo platform Ubisoft games or other examples end up on their other platforms so just get those games while you can physical at that point on the old hardware I mean they aren't porting Red Steel 2 to VR, PC or the Switch so might as well enjoy my Wii copy they don't care about it).

If players don't care for most of their games, publishers don't their older titles, why should I a player bother with them.

They can push Gamepass/Ubisoft+/EA Play. I'm not using those services no matter how much they want me to I'm just not. They don't have games I want to play and the time span I play for is too unbalanced for those services so it doesn't suit me while physical or a regular digital storefront does sure but I buy physical, install and uninstall it whenever with less internet annoyance.

That and their accounts/license agreements. That as well is why I go AA/Indies. I am not giving them my data to play their AAA safe experience games.

I'd like to see Phil on other storefronts like mcdonalds

@Chaotic_Goat it's already a PC with a variant OS and fixed hardware.

itch.io would be cool on Xbox console. I don’t see how epic game store would work on console tho…

@HonestHick Yeah the pro really is disappointing. Decent GPU upgrade but that's it. Weird product to release imo. Like the branded earbuds.

Steam really blew the steam box. I heard from someone inside that basically they didn't really believe in it or know that they wanted to do with it, and the just focused on steam.

@Vaako007 and there you go again making wild claims about Game Pass and how its detrimental to the GREEDY and completely money focussed industry.

An industry that pushes out broken, unfinished games filled with MTX, Season Passes that are designed to extract money from gamers. They expect to charge more money for 'less' of a game - cut and paste boring filler missions, mediocre predictable stories that will somehow keep players giving them money through some Live Service Structure.

Then when games vote with their wallet that they don't want Gotham Knights or Suicide Squad, don't want 'Sequels' that don't evolve the IP, instead get repetitive and boring, don't want remakes/remasters that somehow cost more than the version you can play via BC etc etc...

The GREED in the industry itself is the problem. Look at the 360 era and ALL the new IP's that came out during that time. So many New IP's - nowadays, its mostly Familiar IP's because publishers want to milk them dry rather than 'create' something new.

The 'Xbox' future is enabling Devs to 'create' their own games - not what some Publishers force their Devs to make their IP's into 'Live Service' games, make their Single Player IP's into Online games etc. The fact that they can self-publish is a GREAT thing for the industry.

The industry has to evolve too - just like Film and Music have evolved. Publishers controlled who or what 'music' you would hear until Artists can 'self' produce, self Publish etc and get their music out on Spotify, Youtube, Instagram, etc etc. Just like I can listen to an Album for 'free' on Youtube or 'buy' the Album 'digitally/Physically', that is Consumer choice. Physical may 'limit' you to only listening on specific Hardware (CD/Record Player), digital may allow you to listen on many more devices anywhere. Games are moving in that direction too.

So where is your evidence that Game Pass specifically is detrimental to the industry when others are 'copying' - Ubisoft and EA have their own Sub services too as does Sony and Nintendo. Maybe the future is more like TV where you 'Sub' to the Publishers to play their Games - Ubisoft for AC, FC, PoP etc, EA for FC, Madden, BF, ME etc just like you may Sub to Disney, HBO and/or Paramount for the TV/Film IP's you want to watch...

You simply don't get it, @Phil-Spencer-Gate. Xbox will cease to exist as a console manufactorer if they put their exclusives on to the PlayStation not because they necessarily want to, but because their current userbase will abandon them. The money men at Microsoft will pull the plug on a console that is unable to compete and to draw in the players.

Once Xbox exit the console business, Game Pass will become a First Party only service similar to EA or Ubisoft, and at the point Sony will allow the service on to the PlayStation just as they do with EA and Ubisoft.

Game Pass will be completely different to what it is now because it will have no third-party content, unless it is also on the PlayStation services.

Why would anyone bother buying an Xbox if all First Party games are going to the PlayStation? That is even more the case if the games release on both platforms at the same time. What would people choose to play on an Xbox, when they can access Xbox games on a PlayStation, and have access to all the Sony exclusives too?

Why do you thing there has not been a single third-party exclusive on the Xbox this generation? And why has there been several on the PlayStation during that same period? It is simply a matter of install-base; Sony has a massive player base, and Xbox's is not growing at all. Developers are going to choose the larger install-base.

Ultimately, the only thing that has kept the price of the PS5 at roughly the same as the Series X is because the Series X exists at all. I have said before, the possibility is that Microsoft will make a left-turn at the next generation, and go with a 'high-end' hybrid handheld, so instead of a console that would compete with the PS6, it will fall in between the PS6 and the Switch 2 in terms of power and capability.

Xbox has overwhelmingly lost this generation. The money men at Microsoft forked out $68 billion for ABK and want a return on their investment. They will not be getting it by putting everything on Game Pass alone, and they are behind the decisions to put First Party titles on the PlayStation. What they care about is money. They do not care whether the Xbox console continues to exist. They will chase the money, and if that means the demise of the Xbox console, so be it...

I think you may well be right, @HonestHick, however I also think that Microsoft are going to release a hybrid handheld that will fall somewhere between the PS6 and Switch 2 in terms of power. It may well be that this handheld is indeed the next generation console that Xbox has already spoken about. It maybe that the Series is the last proper Xbox console we get, unless they actually make what is essentially a PC, which both the PS5 and Series X are getting closer and closer to being anyway...

I think they will go fully third-party, @cragis0001, and sooner rather than later too. Not so sure that will be good for us as gamers, but I do think it is inevitable

@NEStalgia the branded earbuds were for sure odd. Yeah Steam is good at what they do and thats not making controllers. I had no interest in their box. But if they and MS team up it could be really good. Time will tell but i think the next Xbox is going to really shake things up and as you have said go back to the vision of PC

@Fiendish-Beaver not sure they do that to be honest. They are releasing a next gen console and maybe a handheld alongside it. I do think they will go back to the OG Xbox plan and make it more of a PC. Rumor is MS is looking to go with Intel and NVIDA in the next Xbox. So i think Xbox hardware goes back to being a PC in console form. There is little reason for them to leave hardware at the moment but the moment cloud is a major player for the causal gamer, then i could see them saying Xbox is cloud and PC only. Not saying you are wrong, heck anything could happen in this industry and we all know that. But i think they stick around the hardware game for another 10 years as other tech and trends continue to play out.

I hope you are right, @HonestHick. Xbox is my preferred platform, despite owning all 3, and a gaming PC. However, I can see the money men at Microsoft pulling the next generation console. Two years is a long time in this business, and a lot can change, as you say, but if they are going to release a next generation console in 2026 (as rumoured) or maybe a bit later, there is still time to change their plans. I'd much prefer that we get another proper Xbox console (the handheld doesn't really interest me), but I am by no means certain that it will happen, despite what Spencer has said, as right now, I think he is all but a puppet leader, with Microsoft pulling on the strings pretty firmly...

@Fiendish-Beaver I don't think they go "third party" as-in "become nothing but a mega-Activision and that's the end of it." Actually Phil's more direct about that in the interview. Our idea of "first party, third party, console ecosystem" is based on the idea of walled gardens on subsidized hardware and vendor locked overpriced software. The Nintendo-designed, Sony-redefined business model of consoles that we know.

The subsidized hardware thing was started by Sony to undercut Nintendo, then Sega, but was dependent upon hardware costs dropping rapidly on the supply side, and that's no longer happening because hardware performance increase has slowed down since the 90's and they can't shrink dies like they used to, they're already small at launch. Nintendo never did the subsidized hardware thing, they always make small profit on hardware except WiiU.

So Phil's view is the new reality of hardware prices, prices on CPUs, GPUs, VRAM, etc don't fall quickly like they used to, means that subsidized console model is done. (Remember Sony actually RAISED console prices outside the US for the first time in console history! A strong Xbox here is the only reason they kept the price here, along with US currency.) And if that's over, I think MS's take is that, without that model, then it's just PC anyway. The "console" model is over. Publishers also really just want a PC platform, that's why PS4 and X1 went x86, it was the demand of publishers to make consoles into PCs for ease of porting. That was step 1.

So I don't think MS's view is to "go third party", I think his view is more that "first party/third party" isn't relevant anymore. The console business model is finished for both MS and Sony" because hardware costs (Nintendo's different because they never followed that model, they gouge for old hardware and people thank them...and they're aware of the looming problem and talked about possible "future without hardware" (a.k.a. going third party) with investors years ago, meaning they're watching closely what the future of hardware will be and how it impacts them.) And I think MS's take is "we're MS. We are PC. So how do we migrate consoles into PCs?"

From the MS perspective I think Steam Deck is the future of consoles. Not necessarily handheld only. But the idea of a custom built, low power consumption real PC built to play games. Still cheaper and more efficient than buying a 3080 and plugging into a PCIe slot. It looks like a console. It acts like a console. But it's actually a PC. But Steam also doesn't do "first party games". We might forget that Valve also makes games. Half-Life 3 is real soon now! But you can buy Portal 2 on Steam, on Microsoft, on Sony, even Nintendo. Nobody screams "OMG Valve went third party" they just talk about the next Steam sale and how Deck is better than (insert your favorite console here). I think that's what MS sees for Xbox. Why compete with Sony on a dinosaur business model that's failing due to outside forces when Valve is the competition that matches their own natural model and now competes in hardware, too?

So for both market force/progression of tech and what DEVS/PUBS want and have wanted for a long time reasons, and also selfish, internal "if we can't win console we'll just destroy console and force everyone onto PC" scorched earth reasons, I think MS is going to bring console back into PC, and drag PS kicking and screaming with them as they kind of already started with even the mighty PS4 becoming much more "a box to play PC games on" back in 2013. Sony didn't have a choice, PS3 was a disaster, they caved to publisher demands that MS helped foment.

So I think you'll see future "Xbox hardware" that's a smartly designed, sleek PC that feels like a console, runs literally everything, probably doesn't lock you into the MS store, and will undoubtedly cost more money than we're used to paying for consoles, or will be "weaker" hardware than we're used to for launch consoles outside Nintendo. Or will be both in two models. We're done getting "hardware from the future" for low low prices. That's part of why even this gen is kind of weak. It's still subsidized but hardware didn't leap THAT much since last gen launched. Buy theirs, buy Valve's, buy Lenovo's doesn't matter, just sub to GP. I think it's crazy when people talk about MS "getting out of hardware" as though they haven't been making hardware since they introduced scroll wheels on mice, winged keyboards, and the first haptic feedback controllers (Those Sidewinder FF flight sticks were awesome. Why is that gone?) Plus, that's literally what the Xbox was supposed to be. 360 was such a weird sidestep. The point of OG Xbox was ALWAYS : Spit in Sony's PS1 soup and take back Windows gaming that PS was stealing from them. It just took them 24 years to remember the original goal because Microsoft reasons.

What's weirder is that people are rejecting the idea. Like, isn't that why you buy Xbox, because it's more like the advantages of PC but without the cost and time consumption? I see taking it even further as a good thing. I think people worry about a lack of hardware innovation going that route which is true. But is there anything innovative in the last 2 generations? Even Nintendo's big innovation was basically "ok, how about we make a really really BIG GBA, with clip-on mini-Wiimotes, and a TV-out jack?" Marketing gave that thing wings.

@Fiendish-Beaver i agree with that in terms of Phil is just the messenger. The higher up’s at MS just spend around 100 Billion cash on all the studios they bought up. They want a quicker plan as to how to get the cash coming in and it might not be growing GP one person at a time. I still think they do come out with another console but it won’t be the console we know now. It will be much different. Sony and Nintendo will continue doing what they are doing cause well it’s working, for now at least. I have all 3 and a Mac computer and an iPad. So i don’t PC game and have a little interest in it but not much. Honestly these days i just want good games and where they land isn’t that important to me. I know what i like from Nintendo, so thats all good. PS5 has been my most used PS since the PS2. However i still don’t love their controllers but Dual Sense is better than any Dual shock for me. I’m a controller snob. It’s what lets me interact with the worlds and characters dev’s create. Some will say it’s not a big deal to them and thats fine, but for me the Xbox controller is still king. Hope they are around for a long time to come, but you make a great point in saying 2 years is a long time away. Heck in this business a month is a long time. I respect the heck out of you and your takes and always have, but I’m hoping your wrong on your feeling. But if you were right, i wouldn’t be surprised.

@Fiendish-Beaver Again, Game Pass won't come on PS5 because Sony won't allow it. If Game Pass comes on PS5, then there will be no reason to buy XBOX games at full price on PS store, and Sony will lose a lot of money from revenue cut on her platform. Also, if gamepass comes on PS, then Sony will lose a lot of subscribers from PS Plus, which is the main rival service against Game Pass.

Multiplatform XBOX games won't hurt XBOX consoles because it doesn't matter for Microsoft to make sale a lot of hardware in the first place. Game pass will remain exclusive on XBOX consoles, which will be available for the 15-20 console user who don't like PC.

"Why do you thing there has not been a single third-party exclusive on the Xbox this generation? And why has there been several on the PlayStation during that same period? "

Again, you misjudge Microsoft new tactic because you don't understand the new reality of XBOX. Sony needs exclusive games, first or second party, because they still follow the tactic of "more exclusives= more PS5 sales". However, Microsoft doesn't need any exclusivity, they just need more content on gamepass and it doesn't matter if the same game are not exclusive. For example, you can either buy Life of P at a full price or play it via sub on game pass. It's day one releases which the selling point on Game Pass, not exclusives games to sale more XBOX consoles. It's a total different tactic from Microsoft, which want to replace hardware based plan to software based plan, which is more profitable anyway.

So, let me repeat again:

1) Game Pass won't come on PS5.
2) Multiplatform XBOX games will boost revenue and profit.
3) XBOX consoles will keep coming out but they are not the selling point anymore. The only thing that matters is subscribers growth on Game Pass.
3) Besides Game Pass, Microsoft has now a lot of popular GaaS games like Callf of Duty, Overwatch etc etc which generate a lot of money through microtransactions in all platforms. Microsoft needs more multiplatform games, bigger consumer base, more sales and more revenue and higher profit margin.
4) XBOX can make a lot of money by both raising subs on gamepass and sell multiplatform games despite the low sales on console hardware.

5) If a consumer wants to play Starfield via gamepass, Microsoft will make money through subscription. If a consumer wants to buy Starfield on PS5, Microsoft will make money through full price sale. It's a win-win scenario. Microsoft can't lose, it will make a lot of money by approaching all platforms.

I think he’s living in lala land believing Steam or Sony will launch their game stores on a platform with huge falling sales, in Europe at least.

Explain to me, @Phil-Spencer-Gate, how it is that both the Ubisoft and EA subscription services are on the PlayStation despite them selling their games separately on the platform, but Microsoft could not do the same with a First Party only Game Pass?

As it stands, right now, Game Pass, as it currently exists, would not be permitted on the PlayStation because it would be in direct competition with Sony's subscription services because of all the third-party games that also appear on each service.

A First-Party only service from Microsoft would be no different to those offered by EA or Ubisoft, and the manner in which Sony takes money from Microsoft would be no different to how they take it from EA and Ubisoft too.

The only reason that Sony will not allow Game Pass on the PlayStation at the moment is because Xbox exists as a console. If that ceased to be the case, Sony would allow a service on to the platform so long as it was not directly competing with their services by having the same games as they were offering, which would not be the case once Game Pass became First Party only...

@Fiendish-Beaver Because you don't understand that Game Pass is bigger service than both EA play/Ubisoft Plus. We don't have any information that Game Pass will become a first party only service and abandon third parties. This is your own baseless assumption. It will be a fail move to abandon third party content because Game Pass will become less competitive and won't have much value for a user to become a sub. To the contrary, Game Pass will increase third part content while there's revenue ans sub growth. Phil Spencer has said that XBOX spent 1 billion dollars on third party content in 2023, and they will bring more games to the service in the next years.

You just have your facts wrong dude.

Game Pass will not be a first party service. XBOX consoles won't cease to exist. Multiplatform will bring more revenue and profits for Microsoft. First/third party games with day one releases will make Game Pass even more valuable.

This is the true state of XBOX at the moment.

@Fiendish-Beaver That's true, but I don't think MS is interested in selling a "first party only" Game Pass the way EA/Ubi does precisely because they want to sell the same kind of "Netflix for gaming" service as Plus. Even without consoles, a PS version that doesn't include the buffet as its own digital platform for subscribing to all your gaming needs would defeat the point of the brand for them. That would be like Netflix selling addons for only Netflix Originals on Disney+ for $4.99/mo. Why do that when it kills the value of the Netflix platform? Game Pass becomes an add-on for PS Plus, and that won't work. Even if you ignore the battle of consoles, there's still the battle of subscription/cloud platforms to consider and they're still both locked in that competition. Heck, Sony has the better stream, and they're paying for MS's servers to do it from!

With or without a hardware console, Microsoft is selling a platform, not just games. Even if it's a digital cloud platform they're still selling the whole platform ecosystem, and they're still using their games as loss-leaders to dive into their total platform. Remember, end-game is cloud-based streaming subs. Even if end-game is 20 years away. Peddling just their games in a limited sub doesn't build that endgame platform.

Then again if Amy Hood gets a hold of that idea for the quarterlies she'll tell them to do it. Someone needs to keep her away from the gaming department, she's like Jim Ryan's twisted twin.

I still think MS's strategy is going to be "Get all this great content for LESS!" You can get it anywhere but you can get a better value with us. TBH if the economy is going to suck for the long haul there's a lot worse strategies than that. (Sorry, I didn't read my New Truth, "the Economy is great! Better than ever! No landing! Bread lines are a sign of growth! Will the good times never end?!" )

Yes, @Phil-Spencer-Gate, everything I am saying is simply assumptions but based on market factors. The only reason that third-party developers put their games on the Game Pass is because there is an Xbox console to put it on. If there ceases to be an Xbox console, then the subscriber numbers on the service would dip severely, and Microsoft are not going to make up that shortfall. Thus the Game Pass will become entirely First Party content, and that is the only way that Sony would allow the service to be on the PlayStation.

What may happen is that Game Pass will have tiers, similar to the PlayStation, and higher tiers may still offer third-party games on other devices such as PC and TVs, but for it to be on TVs it is going to require streaming, and then that entails entirely other issues.

Am I making assumptions? Absolutely! However, I base that on how I, as an ardent Xbox player, feel about the direction of travel that Microsoft is currently taking. If the likes of Halo, Gears and Forza go to the PlayStation, it does indeed mean more income for Microsoft. However, it also negates the need to own an Xbox. That then means fewer, and fewer people will buy an Xbox console, which will mean that Microsoft will stop making them. It would make absolutely zero business sense to make a device, at enormous cost to the company, that they no longer need, or that people are no longer buying.

I think people seem to be blissfully ignorant to the ramifications of Xbox having no exclusives, or just timed exclusives. Starfield will go over to the PlayStation towards the end of this year, once it has passed 12 months since its release, and once the DLC for it has released. I don't think Spencer wishes for that to happen, but truthfully, I no longer think he is the one making the decisions. The money men at Microsoft have punched the numbers since the release of Starfield, they have taken note of the subscriber number bounce, and sales of the game, and come to the conclusion that those numbers either don't add up, or could be much better were the game to release on the PlayStation. And that is just the start. Once Starfield goes over, it is the beginning of the end of the Xbox console...

You may be right, @NEStalgia, but I'm not so sure. You touch on it in your last response, but I don't believe that Spencer has control of the situation any longer. Microsoft's money men are not pulling the levers, and Starfield, and most likely pretty much everything else will be going over to the PlayStation, starting with Starfield later this year.

Once there is no longer a need to own an Xbox, because you may as well buy a PlayStation where you can play both Xbox and Sony's games, Microsoft will stop making them. That will undoubtedly hit the Game Pass subscriber numbers, because owning an Xbox and having Game Pass go pretty much hand in hand. So, not owning an Xbox means you are less likely to remain subscribed.

I think that if Starfield sells well on the PlayStation, (and let's face it, regardless of how much they laughed at the game over there, they will still buy it in droves), the Money-Men at Microsoft will literally throw open the floodgates and salivate as they watch the dollars flow in, overlooking the fact that those that previously bought into the Xbox ecosystem will simply leave and buy a PlayStation instead. Then, Microsoft will be left with a console that is essentially pointless, and that no one is buying, and just stop making them.

There maybe one more generation after this one, there may not, despite what Spencer said. However, I really don't see Microsoft being in the console business in 10 years time, though it will probably be much less than that...

@Fiendish-Beaver You're right about the money men, but again I think You're missing the Idea of the future of Xbox "consoles" actually being PCs. An Xbox "console" would be a "Surface Gaming PC" . It would look and feel the same to use as current consoles but would really be a Microsoft branded PC and a game compatibility certification program like steam does with deck. I.e. instead of being a play station clone future Xbox would be a steam deck clone.

No need to discontinue a Microsoft made gaming PC. They make plenty of other PCs already. Doesn't matter if ps has 90 million consoles if Xbox PCs are just some of hundreds of millions of gaming rigs. Ally and Deck sell for less than a PS5. Real gaming PCs in your hand. A power version instead of handheld could be pretty slick.

I think the game changed after Deck launched. PC as a console became viable. And that's what Xbox was always trying and kind of failing to be.

Yes starfield will play on a PlayStation. And God of war will run on an Xbox branded gaming PC. And on a crazy 4090 rig. And on a Deck.

I understand what you are getting at, @NEStalgia, and I have been saying for a fair few days now that I see the next step that Microsoft will make will be to move away from the traditional console that we see today, and move into the handheld market with a console that will sit (power wise) in between the Switch 2 and the PS6. I think that will be their 'next generation' console, not a traditional console.

As for an Xbox PC, I can see that happening, but it will need a significant step up in power and performance if it is going to attract the PC crowd, and also be capable of playing many of the PC games at a high quality. With that step up in power and performance will come a significant step up in price too. It simply cannot cost much less than a £1000/$1000. Anything less than that will simply be a budget PC that won't cut the mustard for PC gamers, and will be too expensive for console gamers. They have to go high-end, capable PCs (likely with upgradeable guts too) or it just won't fly.

Also, for it to have the Steam Store front, it will essentially need to be a PC, not a console, otherwise gamers will have to make too many sacrifices with game settings, and many games will simply look like sludge. The point being, Microsoft simply cannot make a budget PC...

@Fiendish-Beaver "As for an Xbox PC, I can see that happening, but it will need a significant step up in power and performance if it is going to attract the PC crowd, and also be capable of playing many of the PC games at a high quality. With that step up in power and performance will come a significant step up in price too. "

They did already say that next Gen console will be the biggest jump in power of any generation ever. I think that was them suggesting exactly that, the power jump to PC hardware. Half of it for overhead.

Agreed on price, but remember rumor says Sony wanted to charge $600us for PS5 and only lowered it because Xbox. That was before inflation. And before hardware stopped dropping prices. I'm betting the ps6 is $700. From there a handheld Xbox at $450 or a power Xbox at $900.... All doesn't seem strange.

Phil did talk about how subsidized console hardware is over because hardware costs don't drop as much. Expect all consoles to get a lot more expensive. Also expect all consoles to drop catastrophically in sales once they become higher investments. Or, expect the low spec version to get a lot more popular.

I don't think pc gamers need big power though. Look at steam stats. The top GPU couldn't even run must modern aaa games as well as a series s. And pc gamers mostly still play 1080p. Hardcore enthusiasts with 40x0 cards are actually a rarity in PC.

I also don't think it should be modular. Fixed hardware just like a console, and deck. Modular is how Steam Box failed to get off the ground. Too complicated. Wrong market. We're still looking at the console market consumer, just not bespoke incompatible hardware and software on the inside.

I agree with everything you say, @NEStalgia, except maybe the pricing. I think you are right about the handheld at £450/$450, but I think the PS6 will be nearer £800/$800 and the Xbox PC will drop at £999/$999.

I know what you are saying regarding 1080p, but I think that Microsoft knows that if it can produce a PC/console that can consistently hit 4K, then they will attract the attention of the PC gamer.

I have a very capable PC that cost me £2600 five years ago, but for which I have subsequently upgraded both the memory and the graphics card, so it would probably be closer to £3000+ now. I played through Baldur's Gate 3 at 4K with absolutely no issues, including the infamous Act 3.

Now, if you can produce an Xbox PC that can hit that, or close to that, performance, even at £999/$999 you are going to have a lot of interest in your device. My point being, that if Microsoft are going to effectively bring out a PC, then there can be no halfway house between a PC and the PS6, it must be a PC, and one that performs decently at that...

@Fiendish-Beaver I wouldn't doubt the $800 PS5 for sure. Xbox....I think if they offer a $1k performance sku then they'll do like S and offer a much cheaper $700-750 SKU between the handheld and performance rig. Costs little to have another option as long as it's PC and doesn't leave a market segment on the table

Moreover we're in a period of reduced consumer spending and it probably will get much worse before it gets better. I think they want to move beyond targeting wealthy enthusiasts at this point. Not Sony, wealthy enthusiasts is always their market in all industries when times get tough for better or worse. Ms wants as many market segments as it can get, specs be darned.

Would they do 3 skus? Hybrid handheld, mid range and "pro"? It's PC, why not, it's just some sliders. Though I think "generations' also end with that. You just upgrade like phones. There was a platform that believed in generations.... Years ago.... After saying they didn't. And then demonstrated they didn't

They'res also the issue of power and budgets. Are we beyond needing more and more power frequently? Seems trying to use it all is bankrupting devs, and the turnaround time for a game means old hardware remains current for ages.

If we arrive at a point that console games have a $800k barrier to entry, I think the casuals are gone forever. They have phones. I also think it'll mess up development. An even smaller market isn't going to help them pay for $300m games, and jacking prices up to $150 a game will take Toll even on the rich kids club. Console really will price itself out of existence. The handheld hybrid starts looking more important then ever!

Honestly if ps6 is $800 I see a repeat of ps3 on their hands. Especially if a switch 2 and Xbox handheld can hold their own for under $500. I don't mind the$1k option and You're right that could win big, but it can't be the only option. It's adorable market at that price. iPhone is the top phone, but it's not exactly the Max models filling the charts. And that's for business use too!

I don't disagree with anything you have said, @NEStalgia. If Microsoft do introduce a mid-range PC, it will effectively be a slightly better Series X, but all digital, I'd imagine. I can see them doing that.

Do you think that Microsoft will actually enable you to upgrade the guts? A new graphics card every couple of years, for example? Or do you think it would be buy a new PC every 6 or 7 years?

@Fiendish-Beaver I don't think they'd do an upgradable Xbox. The idea is appealing but I think that introduces complexity that gets costs too high. It needs to still be a sealed box that looks and feels like a console. And no fcc regulations increasing cost for user accessible parts. I think it'll sell like a traditional console.

Plus the modular thing is what made steam box doomed. I think if you want modular you build a normal modular PC. That's what you're paying extra for is the modularity

Again, I agree with you, @NEStalgia, but therein lies the problem with Microsoft going the PC route. We all know that PC improvements happen all the time, and if you want to play a game at the highest settings you need to keep on top of those improvements by upgrading fairly often. And that it is not a cheap hobby as so many, non-PC players, seem to think.

So, if Microsoft introduce a PC, how long would the interval between new PCs need to be? 7 years would most definitely be too long, so maybe 5 years? But that would then mean disposing of a £1000 PC after 5 years, to then buy one that's £1100 or maybe even £1200, if you wanted to keep having the newest model.

Effectively, what that would mean is that instead of buying a £500 console every 7 years, we would be expected to pay £1000 every 5 years. If you cannot upgrade the Xbox PC (which I think would be fraught with problems, not least of which would be setting a target for a how a game should perform) then you are faced with paying an awful lot of money on a more frequent basis.

I don't know what the answer is, but the more I think about it, the more I think that my original conclusion is the direction that Microsoft will be taking in that their next generation console will be a hybrid handheld that will sit between the Switch 2 and the PS6 in terms of power. I'm not so sure they will either develop a successor to the Series, or a PC, as the successor is likely to sell even fewer consoles than the Series has, and a PC is going to alienate even more gamers.

I'm certainly curious to see what they do next, that's for sure...

@Fiendish-Beaver IS that so different from console these days? PS5/XSX are already "underpowered" and Sony's selling the "Pro" that will be less underpowered but still underpowered, etc, etc.

It's kind of an industry level problem. 20 years ago computer games were made for computers and their infinite configurations. Console games were purpose made for one specific console brand, and occasionally ported to 2, but only occasionally. Xbox technically is what broke that, and then Sony copied with PS4. It's all bog standard PC games made like PC games by PC game publishers these days, so consoles suffer the same upgrade mess as PC.

At some point the customer has to decide what they want. If they want bleeding edge graphics with a modular PC, nothing's changed. "Console" and what it used to mean is kind of obsolete now though. I think that's where the console PC comes in. It's a PC inside so publishers just make a PC build and that's that. But for the consumer it's "a console" i.e. a fixed box at a decent price with decent compromise gfx just like always. I think the "PC console" targets the same old console market but with the advantages of PC (multiple stores, automatic BC, scaling your game with the sliders/defaults as your hardware gets upgraded (which wouldn't be "generations" anymore, and why should it be, PS5 is now raising the "generation" performance 4 years into the "generation"....) PS5 is really just PC, too, but without the advantages of a PC software environment.

But the reality is those maxed-sliders players are like 8% of the PC market. A boxed "PC console" isn't there to cater to the people that aready buy $3k+ PCs. It's there to capture the people that build cheap PCs but want a better/smaller/quieter/easier/more couch-minded PC, and it's there to get console players away from bespoke consoles and onto PCs.

I don't think it changes the Newegg market and the people that already spend god-money chasing the tech dragon.

But you're right, not 7 years. I think we'd get the cell phone/PC model. Modest upgrades every year or 2, easily skippable, but just like PC eventually games "aren't supported" (a PC console would still have a "certified games" list - Steam Deck does this. Even Sony certifies their games on it. Not unlike a console.) But again, is bi-annual available upgrades and "you have the best" only for a short time that different from now, where PS5 Pro comes in 4 years before any games even properly used the PS5? and then PS6 follows right after it? Or X1X that was on the market for a whole two years? We're already there, we just get none of the advantages. Interestingly Jim Ryan had talked about ending generations and going on a phone-like upgrade cycle, and then walked that back and "believed in generations" and then ignored generations, and then released the Pro. It's funny because people are quick to dismiss MS doing it "as a PC" when Sony's already doing the hardware part of that in a lot of ways. Except steady upgraded models is an easier concept than "mid gen refresh that only really bumps some parts of it" because if it's PC, it just bumps the sliders like always.

But are we buying a $500 console every 7 years now? We both agreed prices go way up next gen. If Sony's $800 at launch, and the a $1200 upgraded "pro model" in 4 years, wouldn't $1k every 5 years be similar? And I still think there would be a cheaper box as well. $800+ consoles are simply not for the masses and will decidedly shrink the console market heavily. PS included. If nothing else Ninendo takes the whole market. Phil's already getting people used to more expensive hardware as an idea. WIthout subsidy XSX would be $700+ already. Or do people adapt to weaker hardware in general and keep costs in check? We had this tech arms race of pushing tech too far by subsidizing it past real market viability.

MS already said their next generation console will be the "biggest power leap of any gen" so there's aready a high power console of some form guaranteed, and it's not the hybrid. They also kind of semi-confirmed by not denying it the hybrid. So the "PC" box is either already a lock, or we're talking about a PS7 era change to that "hybrid." But the Series successor, be it "console" or "PC console" as high powered console was already directly confirmed by Sarah Bond. And a hybrid/handheld soft-confirmed by Phil. So we do know the next 7 years, kind of. We're just down to guessing if it's a PC or another proprietary black box. And my money's on a PC.

Lot's to think over there, @NEStalgia.You maybe right, but I think the concept of a new console every year or two, but with minimal improvements (as with mobiles) will be a hard pill to swallow, unless Microsoft fully commit to the mobile philosophy and actually go the 'contract' route, wherein you pay for the console over a two year period with the option to upgrade at the end of your contract. That might be an option, I guess.

I'm still not convinced about there being a next generation console, as plans change (as the saying goes!). This generation has been very, very expensive for Microsoft; console sales are (or likely are) weaker than the last generation, and we hear rumour that Game Pass subscriber numbers plateaued, and are now falling. That does not bode well for the Xbox, and it is, I believe, the reason why the money men at Microsoft have pushed Phil into releasing (likely all) first party exclusives on the PlayStation. I have little doubt that the 3 staple games (Gears. Halo and Forza) will also make their way over. The rumours are that the much rumoured Marcus Fenix trilogy was delayed whilst the PlayStation version was finalised, and that they will release day and date on both consoles.

The reason I mention this is because the more casual Xbox gamer, and even some of the more ardent Xbox gamers, will see this as a reason to cease gaming on an Xbox. Why limit yourself to just Xbox games by owning an Xbox, when you can play Xbox and PlayStation games on the PS5/6, and do away with owning an Xbox?

That will directly impact the number of Xbox console sales. It doesn't matter what way you paint it, it will hurt Xbox as a console. So it just might be the those same money men, are crunching the numbers and deciding to sell Xbox games on the PlayStation, and to do away with the planned next generation console. Then, the hybrid handheld becomes the sole SKU and what makes Xbox different to the PlayStation.

We are in uncertain times. Plans do change. The future is not set. Phil is no longer in control...

@Fiendish-Beaver They kind of already offer that with the All Access financing, in a way, so it's not all that new an idea. IDK if they'd go with "XBox (2028 ver), XBox (2029 ver)" of continuous upgrades, or if they'd have more of a "Pro" model approach but maybe every 2, 3, 4 years an upgrade, but without a hard line in generations of "gen/pro, gen/pro" so instead of calling it a "pro" it would be just a general spec upgrade every few years. They probably don't even know that yet.

Plans do change, but with a next gen console I'd think so much of the R&D, parts lineups etc are probably already well underway. And if it's really an "Xbox branded Surface" in a way, it would make a lot of sense that it's full steam ahead on it.

It's a weird position because on one hand they're "losing" in consoles. On the other hand MS gaming makes more in revenue than Windows..... IF they're going to make Surface Books that trail behind Lenovo counterparts in sales...why not a Surface Xbox? And if going the PC route and allowing other stores, then your argument kind of goes full circle. Why buy a Playstation when you can play Sony games on EGS/Steam/PSN launcher on an Xbox and get Game Pass? Of course we're deep into speculation (or in Jim Ryan words "very very granular" lol)

And again, if "Xbox" consoles are PCs, there's no "Xbox console" to hurt, it's just an MS branded custom PC, a digital storefront and subscription base. You could build a super rig from Newegg parts or buy the MS premade box. MS wouldn't need to care if they sell 1000, or 100,000,000, as long as they're turning a profit on it and it boosts their digital presence. Same with Surface. It makes up a tiny percentage of PC sales, but helps Windows compete with Mac by existing.

I think the biggest thing is what MS does not want to be is a boxed software retail publisher in someone else's ecosystem. They don't mind making money from doing that, but they want to establish their own ecosystem. They play nicely in everyone's ecosystem, but they always make sure they have their own. MS didn't buy Activision so they could be a Sony second party publisher. By ecosystem we really mean OS/storefront/subscription base. But do do that, they need available hardware to engage in that ecosystem. If they make it or they cobrand something from Lenovo or Asus, they need something to put their digital sales platform on. And if they don't have one, you know Sony jacks up royalties on all publishers, including MS, with no competitor. That's what I think keeps them in the game. Boxed software sales isn't what they do, and it's not something they spent billions buying into.