PS5 vs Xbox Series X

[The Mars Volchenkov]

That's why I'm not worried about these established franchises going exclusive to Xbox. It's a win-win for them to keep these games multiplatform.

Microsoft makes money either by people buying into their ecosystem and subscribing to GamePass every month, or they make money from people paying $70 a pop to play on Playstation

I do think a good portion of them are going to be exclusive. You don’t purchase them not to do that. It could be something that they drop to PS5 a while after initial release.

For example, I’d bet on Starfield being exclusive when it comes out.

 

[JaegerDice]

I think at the very least, the vast majority of games will be exclusive for 12 months, since anybody that would be convinced to buy a console or sign up for a service to play a game would do so within that time frame.

Personally speaking, Im more interested in the Doom, Wolfenstein, Dishonored and Prey series than Bethesdas RPGs. But those RPGs are definitely unit shifters.

 

[syz]

I'd play Doom and Wolfenstein on PC either way. What will be interesting to see is if maybe some extra investment can get more Bethesda games to be... like, not broken.

 

[Knave]

Xbox lost badly last generation while Playstation and their fanboys gloated about their exclusives. Now Microsoft is buying up IP. They are 100% going to make this shit exclusive at least for a significant period of time. It's bad for the consumer but I guess this is what console gamers deserve when they justify a purchase with "well... exclusives..." and sit in their camp of Playstation or Xbox and just throw shit at the other side instead of coming together and demanding better from both.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Both companies are taking interesting paths when it comes to exclusives for this generation. Microsoft has been on a studio acquisition spree the last 18 months, while Sony has acquired Insomniac and that's it.

I wonder if Sony's strategy is just to pay developers for exclusive games now. They are paying for Final Fantasy to be PS5 exclusive, it's come out today as of a few months ago they were negotiating to make Starfield PS5 exclusive.

Not many other big studios for Sony to acquire right now, they don't have nearly as much resources and money as Microsoft

 

[Blitzkrug]

I honestly don't think Microsoft's aim is the make the games outright exclusive. Even if they could make life harder for sony by continuing to buy studios, there's less money to be made locking a game down to one platform as opposed to making money off of all 4.

If that was the case they would have done it with minecraft when they bought that way back. Instead they just went "you can still have the game on your platform, but you need to pay us for it."

Their true endgame here is to entice people to get game pass since bethesda games will now be a day 1 addition to the service.


Edit: but if thats where we're going then sony has no one to blame but themselves.

 

[flyingkiwi]

Like many other posters in this thread I don't think Microsoft will be too interested in exclusives going forward, maybe a handful of new IPs will be full or timed exclusive. But I think how they've handled Minecraft is pretty telling. Get the games on Gamepass, and pocket the money from sales on other systems. It means they may stay behind on console sales for a while, but then again it's a Microsoft, they're a software company at heart.

I wonder if a generation or two down the line Sony will find themselves in a place like Nintendo, where their product and exclusives are very unique.

 

[aleshemsky83]

The gamepass model just doesn't make sense to me at the current moment. How are you going to have $70 games go instantly to gamepass? Why would anyone ever buy your full priced games?

I'm not actually complaining, I think it's good, but the question is what is the value of ever buying another full priced Microsoft game?

You have to think they're going to stop doing that once they get their playerbase and subscriber numbers where they want them.

 

[Leafs at Knight]

Pc stays winning

 

[JaegerDice]

The gamepass model just doesn't make sense to me at the current moment. How are you going to have $70 games go instantly to gamepass? Why would anyone ever buy your full priced games?

I'm not actually complaining, I think it's good, but the question is what is the value of ever buying another full priced Microsoft game?

You have to think they're going to stop doing that once they get their playerbase and subscriber numbers where they want them.

Microsoft isn't particularly interested in the hardware business. They can make money off it sure, but even when hardware production reaches the cheapest point during the console lifecycle, it's a relatively large investment for each sale.

SaaS prints money. Each new sale/customer costs ZERO dollars, it's just another subscription to an existing infrastructure. That's why recurring monthly income is one of, if not THE, most coveted metric right now. The profit margins are insane.

Microsoft would MUCH rather have you paying $15 a month for years and years versus paying $70 for a game once or twice a year (1st party), or getting a cut on the games they license for their platform (3rd party).

They'll happily put gamepass on Sony and Nintendo platforms. But those two wouldn't want that, cause it basically cuts them out of the money flow. Sony and Nintendo might sell some consoles based on the fact you can play Gamepass plus your favorite Sony or Nintendo exclusives, but they wouldn't be touching that $15 a month toward Microsoft.

Same reason they'll put it on anything from an iphone to a toaster if they can.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Let's wait to see if those games actually end up being XBox Exclusives or not or even if they're any good, Bethedsa's hit and miss is becoming more miss especially on console.

Other thing is that there's so many f***ing games now that as a more casual gamer, I feel like I'm fine no matter if I use XBox or PS5. I think as a whole maybe the PS5 is a bit deeper so I might miss out on some good games but I'm still gonna have more games than I can actually play.

 

[aleshemsky83]

Microsoft isn't particularly interested in the hardware business. They can make money off it sure, but even when hardware production reaches the cheapest point during the console lifecycle, it's a relatively large investment for each sale.

SaaS prints money. Each new sale/customer costs ZERO dollars, it's just another subscription to an existing infrastructure. That's why recurring monthly income is one of, if not THE, most coveted metric right now. The profit margins are insane.

Microsoft would MUCH rather have you paying $15 a month for years and years versus paying $70 for a game once or twice a year (1st party), or getting a cut on the games they license for their platform (3rd party).

They'll happily put gamepass on Sony and Nintendo platforms. But those two wouldn't want that, cause it basically cuts them out of the money flow. Sony and Nintendo might sell some consoles based on the fact you can play Gamepass plus your favorite Sony or Nintendo exclusives, but they wouldn't be touching that $15 a month toward Microsoft.

Same reason they'll put it on anything from an iphone to a toaster if they can.

I think you're ignoring that the majority of the games on Gamepass, including now EA, are not their games. They have to pay licensing for them to be on there. I assume thats why they're now buying up developer after developer, eventually gamepass will be mostly microsoft games or it just wont be profitable or half as profitable.

Anyways, all this hinges on one thing, that people actually WILL stay subscribed year round like they do netflix, instead of just subscribing whenever a game they are interesting in is released and unsubscribing when they're done with it (like HBO or CBS All Access). Thats literally what I did the last 2 times with Crackdown 3 (I hope I dont get jumped in a dark alley like I did last time for saying it was alright) and Outer Worlds. A grand total of $2.18 Canadian after tax for 2 big budget games they spent years marketing.

Again, I feel like eventually when and if they get stable subscriber count, they're not gonna be putting their AAA games on Gamepass day 1, but maybe they know something I dont.

 

[Leafs at Knight]

Let's wait to see if those games actually end up being XBox Exclusives or not or even if they're any good, Bethedsa's hit and miss is becoming more miss especially on console.

Other thing is that there's so many f***ing games now that as a more casual gamer, I feel like I'm fine no matter if I use XBox or PS5. I think as a whole maybe the PS5 is a bit deeper so I might miss out on some good games but I'm still gonna have more games than I can actually play.

It doesn't really matter if they're exclusive or not. Xbox you pay $5~ a month for game pass to play all of these games day one plus others, PlayStation you're paying $70 day one for one game.

 

[JaegerDice]

I think you're ignoring that the majority of the games on Gamepass, including now EA, are not their games. They have to pay licensing for them to be on there. I assume thats why they're now buying up developer after developer, eventually gamepass will be mostly microsoft games or it just wont be profitable or half as profitable.

3rd party games don't cost Microsoft that much money to host, because the bulk of them don't hit the service day of. By the time they hit Gamepass, 6 months or so after release usually, they've made 90% of the money they'll make over the course of their shelf-life. Microsoft is basically paying a percentage of a reduced price game to host them, and selling publishers on the idea that getting the games into players hands will build the audience interest for the next release. More people are likely to try a game they are unsure of as part of a $15 monthly fee than they are to take a chance on a $60 game they're not sure they'll like, afterall.

Think of Netflix. Netflix originals hit the service first obviously, but almost everything else has to go through theaters and some time at retail before it's available for stream. In that way, these catalogs are less about getting every new game the minute its available to consume, and more about having a catalog of games you haven't tried or haven't managed to get to yet, waiting, for a relatively low cost.

Anyways, all this hinges on one thing, that people actually WILL stay subscribed year round like they do netflix, instead of just subscribing whenever a game they are interesting in is released and unsubscribing when they're done with it (like HBO or CBS All Access). Thats literally what I did the last 2 times with Crackdown 3 (I hope I dont get jumped in a dark alley like I did last time for saying it was alright) and Outer Worlds. A grand total of $2.18 Canadian after tax for 2 big budget games they spent years marketing.

Again, I feel like eventually when and if they get stable subscriber count, they're not gonna be putting their AAA games on Gamepass day 1, but maybe they know something I dont.

That's true, there's always a percentage of people who cancel, or just take advantage of deals. But there's a large percentage that stay too. And the more content you have for them, the more they stick around.

So accruing more content is a good move for Microsoft.

 

[JaegerDice]

It doesn't really matter if they're exclusive or not. Xbox you pay $5~ a month for game pass to play all of these games day one plus others, PlayStation you're paying $70 day one for one game.

If they get it day one. Nothing says Microsoft can't make them exclusive to Xbox/PC/Gamepass for a year, then let Sony have them when everybody who would have bought a console or signed up for said game already has.

 

[flyingkiwi]

I think you're ignoring that the majority of the games on Gamepass, including now EA, are not their games. They have to pay licensing for them to be on there. I assume thats why they're now buying up developer after developer, eventually gamepass will be mostly microsoft games or it just wont be profitable or half as profitable.

Anyways, all this hinges on one thing, that people actually WILL stay subscribed year round like they do netflix, instead of just subscribing whenever a game they are interesting in is released and unsubscribing when they're done with it (like HBO or CBS All Access). Thats literally what I did the last 2 times with Crackdown 3 (I hope I dont get jumped in a dark alley like I did last time for saying it was alright) and Outer Worlds. A grand total of $2.18 Canadian after tax for 2 big budget games they spent years marketing.

Again, I feel like eventually when and if they get stable subscriber count, they're not gonna be putting their AAA games on Gamepass day 1, but maybe they know something I dont.

You raise some good points. I'm definitely one of those people that would only subscribe during the holidays or when there's a particular launch I want to play. I think Microsoft is clever bundling in Xbox Live, that should keep a fair amount of customers subscribed year-round. Same goes for PS+ on Sony's side, I think they'd need to keep the subscription linked to online play in order to retain long-term subs.

I wonder if we'll eventually see multiple digital stores on consoles like we do on PC, if not at least multiple subscription options. Great for price competition in game purchases, but there's also the risk of it becoming like TV streaming. Netflix was great at disrupting the cable companies but now it's as if you need a million different subs just to get all the shows, movies and sports you need.

I also hope that development studios are still able to make enough money with this streaming model. With advancing tech games are getting so much more expensive to make, and from what I hear job security and working conditions in the industry aren't great. Although I wonder if that says more about employment law than actual revenue and profit. But that's another conversation.

 

[x Tame Impala]

I think you're ignoring that the majority of the games on Gamepass, including now EA, are not their games. They have to pay licensing for them to be on there. I assume thats why they're now buying up developer after developer, eventually gamepass will be mostly microsoft games or it just wont be profitable or half as profitable.

Anyways, all this hinges on one thing, that people actually WILL stay subscribed year round like they do netflix, instead of just subscribing whenever a game they are interesting in is released and unsubscribing when they're done with it (like HBO or CBS All Access). Thats literally what I did the last 2 times with Crackdown 3 (I hope I dont get jumped in a dark alley like I did last time for saying it was alright) and Outer Worlds. A grand total of $2.18 Canadian after tax for 2 big budget games they spent years marketing.

Again, I feel like eventually when and if they get stable subscriber count, they're not gonna be putting their AAA games on Gamepass day 1, but maybe they know something I dont.

Microsoft has `15 MILLION Gamepass subscribers and I don't think it's out of the question to say that number is going to keep rising for a while. If they charge $15/month for GamePass that means they're getting $225 MILLION per month. Which is $2.7 BILLION per year from Gamepass alone. Over the course of the typical console generation, that's what like 7-8 years? Even assuming they're not going to get anymore GamePass subscribers over the next 7 years, 15 milliion subscribers over a 7 year period would net them almost 19 BILLION dollars.

$19 Billion. They don't need to give a FUUUUUCK about anything else. They've already got people on the hook.

 

[aleshemsky83]

3rd party games don't cost Microsoft that much money to host, because the bulk of them don't hit the service day of. By the time they hit Gamepass, 6 months or so after release usually, they've made 90% of the money they'll make over the course of their shelf-life. Microsoft is basically paying a percentage of a reduced price game to host them, and selling publishers on the idea that getting the games into players hands will build the audience interest for the next release. More people are likely to try a game they are unsure of as part of a $15 monthly fee than they are to take a chance on a $60 game they're not sure they'll like, afterall.

Think of Netflix. Netflix originals hit the service first obviously, but almost everything else has to go through theaters and some time at retail before it's available for stream. In that way, these catalogs are less about getting every new game the minute its available to consume, and more about having a catalog of games you haven't tried or haven't managed to get to yet, waiting, for a relatively low cost.



That's true, there's always a percentage of people who cancel, or just take advantage of deals. But there's a large percentage that stay too. And the more content you have for them, the more they stick around.

So accruing more content is a good move for Microsoft.

Considering RDR2 was on gamepass for like 4 months, I'd have to assume licensing can get pretty expensive.

Microsoft has `15 MILLION Gamepass subscribers and I don't think it's out of the question to say that number is going to keep rising for a while. If they charge $15/month for GamePass that means they're getting $225 MILLION per month. Which is $2.7 BILLION per year from Gamepass alone. Over the course of the typical console generation, that's what like 7-8 years? Even assuming they're not going to get anymore GamePass subscribers over the next 7 years, 15 milliion subscribers over a 7 year period would net them almost 19 BILLION dollars.

$19 Billion. They don't need to give a FUUUUUCK about anything else. They've already got people on the hook.

You're massively inflating the profits. A huge portion of those subscribers are subscribed at a discount (sometimes as low as $1) or on PC ($5 at most). Those numbers are for shareholders to oggle at and pump up stockprices . Once they set the permanent prices to something actually sustainable, we'll see where the subscriber count settles at. Even then, the model would seem to discourage proper AAA games and encourage Games as a Service multiplayer loot box games, which is another concern.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Considering RDR2 was on gamepass for like 4 months, I'd have to assume licensing can get pretty expensive.

You're massively inflating the profits. A huge portion of those subscribers are subscribed at a discount (sometimes as low as $1) or on PC ($5 at most). Those numbers are for shareholders and stockprices to oggle at. Once they set the prices to something actually sustainable, we'll see where their subscriber count settles at. Even then, the model would seem to discourage proper AAA games and encourage Games as a Service multiplayer loot box games, which is another concern.

That $1/month is just for the initial month, no? Gamepass on PC is only initially $4.99/month and it'll be bumped up to $9.99/month soon. Gamepass Ultimate will be $15/month. I'm not trying to give you an exact figure here, just outlining that Microsoft is going to be raking in a ton of revenue going forward just through a subscription service and the things like licensing and even competition from Sony are going to be relatively irrelevant.

 

[aleshemsky83]

That $1/month is just for the initial month, no? Gamepass on PC is only initially $4.99/month and it'll be bumped up to $9.99/month soon. Gamepass Ultimate will be $15/month. I'm not trying to give you an exact figure here, just outlining that Microsoft is going to be raking in a ton of revenue going forward just through a subscription service and the things like licensing and even competition from Sony are going to be relatively irrelevant.

Its for the first month, or if you attempt to cancel. Thats how they're keeping the numbers high. And yes, the 4.99 is termporary, thats still what it is at the moment.Thats what I'm saying, lets see what happens when they put in place their permanent, sustainable pricing.

How is licensing irrelevant? You really think EA game them a sweetheart deal so they could rake in cash off their games for pennies?

 

[aleshemsky83]

You raise some good points. I'm definitely one of those people that would only subscribe during the holidays or when there's a particular launch I want to play. I think Microsoft is clever bundling in Xbox Live, that should keep a fair amount of customers subscribed year-round. Same goes for PS+ on Sony's side, I think they'd need to keep the subscription linked to online play in order to retain long-term subs.

I didn't even realize they were doing that. That makes it much more appealing.

 

[GreytWun]

I think you're ignoring that the majority of the games on Gamepass, including now EA, are not their games. They have to pay licensing for them to be on there. I assume thats why they're now buying up developer after developer, eventually gamepass will be mostly microsoft games or it just wont be profitable or half as profitable.

Anyways, all this hinges on one thing, that people actually WILL stay subscribed year round like they do netflix, instead of just subscribing whenever a game they are interesting in is released and unsubscribing when they're done with it (like HBO or CBS All Access). Thats literally what I did the last 2 times with Crackdown 3 (I hope I dont get jumped in a dark alley like I did last time for saying it was alright) and Outer Worlds. A grand total of $2.18 Canadian after tax for 2 big budget games they spent years marketing.

Again, I feel like eventually when and if they get stable subscriber count, they're not gonna be putting their AAA games on Gamepass day 1, but maybe they know something I dont.

Doubt it. That’s how you alienate your base and lose complete trust. No point in building up a service like that just to change everything.

Gamepass is like Netflix. That model is here to stay.

 

[Jussi]

That $1/month is just for the initial month, no? Gamepass on PC is only initially $4.99/month and it'll be bumped up to $9.99/month soon. Gamepass Ultimate will be $15/month. I'm not trying to give you an exact figure here, just outlining that Microsoft is going to be raking in a ton of revenue going forward just through a subscription service and the things like licensing and even competition from Sony are going to be relatively irrelevant.

You can get 3 months for the price of 2 here: 3 Month Xbox Live Gold + Game Pass Ultimate Xbox One/PC WW

 

[x Tame Impala]

You can get 3 months for the price of 2 here: 3 Month Xbox Live Gold + Game Pass Ultimate Xbox One/PC WW

Cool but over the lifespan of the new gen of consoles, like i've been talking about, Microsoft is going to be able to assume $15/month for 7 or so years from millions of people. That's the point i'm making. They're emphasizing subscription services in their new business model.

These are just new member subscription fees and will return to the standard $9.99-$15/month for the vast majority.

 

[Blitzkrug]

The biggest takeaway from this: Todd Howard found yet another way to sell Skyrim.