Microsoft Confirms Plans To Release Xbox First Party Games “Across All Platforms”, Including PlayStation

[Zephrese]

Don't trust Microsoft whatsoever, but if this means I can keep playing certain games and series on PlayStation (e.g Crash, Doom, Spyro, etc.), and can get previously Xbox exclusive games on it as well (e.g Banjo, Forza, Halo, etc.), then I'd at least be content with that.

Edited January 18 by Zephrese

[AJ_-_808]

1 hour ago, majob said:

As it stands, Microsoft is the largest third party publisher for Sony with their purchase of ABK. it's not a matter of installing software on the Playstation but the games you buy and play are increasingly becoming owned by Microsoft. That's being part of their ecosystem, not just necessarily being  a gamepass subscriber or xbox owner. Sony is heavily reliant on the revenue COD brings in, they've made it no secret, hence their reliance on Microsoft publishing software on their platform. This is the Embrace phase.

Not disagreeing entirely, but their defined eco system is paid subscription services.

 

Their goal with the Bethesda, ABK and other planned acquisitions was to outspend the others and bring more people into Xbox & gamepass, not to sell on the competing platforms.  I believe it backfired and this is plan B (embrace etc)

 

 

[jgm4789]

Id like to think that the recent fumbles the embracer group recently went through might have contributed to this decision as even microsoft with its infinite money still has shareholders to please and with all these mega purchases they have been doing they aren't gonna be happy if after spending almost double what embracer paid for most its aquisitions on bethesda and activision they still are in third place. And this move could be a last ditch effort to please the shareholders who have been calling for them to drop Xbox because you cant just spend 69 billion and not expect a ton of return on that investment. Honestly i wouldn't be surprised if the series xx is just a windows box thats an entry level pc at this point as clearly they dont know what theyre doing as far as being a traditional console.

[Fey]

Will believe when I see it. Should be best if they do it on all FUTURE games and not already released games.

[ZachBoardyHD]

I would absolutely love if the Rare games got released on Playstation (Banjo Kazooie 1-2 and Conkers Bad Fur Day). I'm not sure if they're classed as 'first party's games. They were my childhood ♥️

Edited January 18 by ZachBoardyHD

[MonaSaxPayne]

I want to play Ori

[Sagaan]

Only games i would like to have is Fable and killer instinkt Rest is mid from trashbox.

[cometowner]

I don't think expectation should be high at this stage.

 

I guess big names might not be on the PlayStation. secondly they are going to be timed exclusive to XBOX not mention exclusive contents to XBOX owners first.  

[majob]

8 hours ago, AJ_-_808 said:

Not disagreeing entirely, but their defined eco system is paid subscription services.

 

Their goal with the Bethesda, ABK and other planned acquisitions was to outspend the others and bring more people into Xbox & gamepass, not to sell on the competing platforms.  I believe it backfired and this is plan B (embrace etc)

 

 

Gamepass would be considered their preferred path as you've said but selling software and benefitting from things like MTX and DLC sales is also an ecosystem. The overall goal is to have their company be an anchor you can't escape in some way, shape, or form. Even if they aren't getting gamepass subscriptions like they want, having Sony rely on their software and servers, since Sony uses Azure for PSN, is still in line with the strategy. You could compare this to how Microsoft made IE the dominant browser for a time by simply undermining other browsers by simply including it for free to other business along with  the stipulation they only use it. Also similar to how they made DirectX almost mandatory in game development by refusing to allow any other program on Windows.

[ZombiJoel_Tlou3]

You fools there are a bunch of awesome games xbox still has locked to them. For example Ninja Gaiden Black and Ninja Gaiden 2 are better than like half the shit you probably played your entire life

[stuck-energies3]

19 hours ago, blue_blur_98 said:

You fools wish for Sea of Thieves or Starfield to get PlayStation ports, whereas I, the based one, will be using my time far more productively than you feeble-minded simpletons by praying for Banjo-Kazooie on PS4.

 

...But I'd take Hi-Fi Rush as well.

Words of wisdom !!!

[vanessaking2]

Sounds good. I appreciate games on Playstation from Xbox.

[AJ_-_808]

1 hour ago, majob said:

Gamepass would be considered their preferred path as you've said but selling software and benefitting from things like MTX and DLC sales is also an ecosystem. The overall goal is to have their company be an anchor you can't escape in some way, shape, or form. Even if they aren't getting gamepass subscriptions like they want, having Sony rely on their software and servers, since Sony uses Azure for PSN, is still in line with the strategy. You could compare this to how Microsoft made IE the dominant browser for a time by simply undermining other browsers by simply including it for free to other business along with  the stipulation they only use it. Also similar to how they made DirectX almost mandatory in game development by refusing to allow any other program on Windows.

Shoot... I forgot about Azure.

 

Maybe it'll be different because it also involves Nintendo?  As long as Sony and/or Nintendo don't become complacent as they still compete against each and both maintain a strong first party, then maybe the EEE plan won't work out.

 

If we see a gamepass app pop up over the next year or two, then Hell hath frozen over

[yowzagabowza]

20 hours ago, Komrade_Dusty said:

I suspect Starfield was a substantial contributor to this. They banked on that game so much and it was...fine. It feels like it being totally overshadowed by BG3, like basically everything else was last fall, took some steam out of their plans. I don't even know what the next big Xbox exclusive on the horizon would be.

Hellblade 2

[Titanomachy_75]

XBOX this is SEGA ... SEGA this is XBOX ... WELL xbox to the loser den!! LOL

 

SEGA - DREAMCAST is still my FAV Console!! SAD!!

Edited January 18 by Titanomachy_75

[yowzagabowza]

You guys have all jumped to so many conclusions from like, two sentences.

Xbox already said they'd bring IPs they now own to other platforms. Call of Duty was mandatory and they have signed contracts for it! They've maintained that they will decide on a case by case basis. 

This isn't even new information : /

[ZitMeatloaf]

And now, some thoughts and opinions from yet another random person on the internet.

1.  None of this should be surprising. MS has already been lightly testing the waters for this strategy for almost 5 years when they allowed Cuphead to release on Switch in early 2019 (remember that Nintendo specifically thanked "Our friends at Microsoft" when it was announced during a Nindies Showcase, so it clearly wasn't just a Studio MDHR decision). Cuphead must have sold well on Switch, because this was followed by Ori and the Blind Forest on Switch later that year. Cuphead then came to PS in 2020, and Ori and the Will of the Wisps to Switch later in 2020. I firmly believe that MS has been testing these third-party style releases on other platforms as a backup strategy the entire time.
2. It certainly helps that Cuphead and the two Ori games are absolute bangers, some the best that MS could have put out elsewhere. They are also indie-style games, so if they'd flopped MS wouldn't have had too much egg on their face. Had they tried this with a mid AAA game like Crackdown 3 or something similar and it bombed, it would have been a much worse look for them. Also, you don't provide your biggest and best games (i.e. Forza and Halo) right away in case the strategy fails, as that would be the most embarrassing look of all.
3. If they go all-in and release absolutely everything everywhere, one of the biggest leverage points MS will retain will be requiring an Xbox account to play online. This is already a requirement for Minecraft; if one day we have the option to play Halo or Forza on PS, I can guarantee you're going to need to make an Xbox account if you want to play online. This will allow MS to keep touting an ever-rising number of monthly active users to their Board and investors.
4. PlayStation and Nintendo are quite right to reject GamePass on their platforms. I've always believed that GamePass can only cause long-term harm to gaming as a whole. The short version is that if you work for a studio that knows ahead of time that your game will be dumped into a subscription service on day one, the quality of your games is going to decline. The game no longer needs to be good enough to buy, it only needs to be good enough to try. There's a big difference.
5. For my personal tastes, MS putting their games elsewhere isn't going to change very much. Cuphead and the Ori games were fantastic, but I've already played those (on Switch). I enjoyed Halos 1-3, but don't have much desire to play more Halo. I tried Gears of War, couldn't get into it. Racing sims aren't my bag, so Forza doesn't interest me. Bethesda games don't do anything for me. I don't care about Call of Duty (at least not outside of the games that were included with PS Plus), and there isn't much else in ABK's portfolio that I have a strong interest in.... I suppose I'm happy that I'll still be able to play future Crash and Spyro games, but it's not like I'm a diehard fan of those franchises. There really isn't anything else is MS's catalog that I'm itching to play. Anyone who feels differently, totally cool, these are just opinions.

This concludes your daily dose of another internet rando's thoughts. Thanks for reading.

[vegetollo7]

If I could play Banjo Kazooie and Banjo Tooie with trophies I would be so happy...

[majob]

27 minutes ago, ZitMeatloaf said:

And now, some thoughts and opinions from yet another random person on the internet.

1.  None of this should be surprising. MS has already been lightly testing the waters for this strategy for almost 5 years when they allowed Cuphead to release on Switch in early 2019 (remember that Nintendo specifically thanked "Our friends at Microsoft" when it was announced during a Nindies Showcase, so it clearly wasn't just a Studio MDHR decision). Cuphead must have sold well on Switch, because this was followed by Ori and the Blind Forest on Switch later that year. Cuphead then came to PS in 2020, and Ori and the Will of the Wisps to Switch later in 2020. I firmly believe that MS has been testing these third-party style releases on other platforms as a backup strategy the entire time.
2. It certainly helps that Cuphead and the two Ori games are absolute bangers, some the best that MS could have put out elsewhere. They are also indie-style games, so if they'd flopped MS wouldn't have had too much egg on their face. Had they tried this with a mid AAA game like Crackdown 3 or something similar and it bombed, it would have been a much worse look for them. Also, you don't provide your biggest and best games (i.e. Forza and Halo) right away in case the strategy fails, as that would be the most embarrassing look of all.
3. If they go all-in and release absolutely everything everywhere, one of the biggest leverage points MS will retain will be requiring an Xbox account to play online. This is already a requirement for Minecraft; if one day we have the option to play Halo or Forza on PS, I can guarantee you're going to need to make an Xbox account if you want to play online. This will allow MS to keep touting an ever-rising number of monthly active users to their Board and investors.
4. PlayStation and Nintendo are quite right to reject GamePass on their platforms. I've always believed that GamePass can only cause long-term harm to gaming as a whole. The short version is that if you work for a studio that knows ahead of time that your game will be dumped into a subscription service on day one, the quality of your games is going to decline. The game no longer needs to be good enough to buy, it only needs to be good enough to try. There's a big difference.
5. For my personal tastes, MS putting their games elsewhere isn't going to change very much. Cuphead and the Ori games were fantastic, but I've already played those (on Switch). I enjoyed Halos 1-3, but don't have much desire to play more Halo. I tried Gears of War, couldn't get into it. Racing sims aren't my bag, so Forza doesn't interest me. Bethesda games don't do anything for me. I don't care about Call of Duty (at least not outside of the games that were included with PS Plus), and there isn't much else in ABK's portfolio that I have a strong interest in.... I suppose I'm happy that I'll still be able to play future Crash and Spyro games, but it's not like I'm a diehard fan of those franchises. There really isn't anything else is MS's catalog that I'm itching to play. Anyone who feels differently, totally cool, these are just opinions.

This concludes your daily dose of another internet rando's thoughts. Thanks for reading.

This is a little off the mark. Microsoft never owned Cuphead, it belongs entirely to MDHR so the decision for other platforms was always theirs. Microsoft helped fund the game definitely but they don't own it. Same as how Sony helped fund FFVIIRemake and FFXVI but don't own either

Edited January 18 by majob

[ZitMeatloaf]

5 minutes ago, majob said:

This is a little off the mark. Microsoft never owned Cuphead, it belongs entirely to MDHR so the decision for other platforms was always theirs. Microsoft helped fund the game definitely but they don't own it. Same as how Sony helped fund FFVIIRemake and FFXVI but don't own either

Yes, I know Studio MDHR owns their property, but it's clear MS still had to greenlight the release - probably a condition of providing the funding. Watch the video I linked, Nintendo specifically thanks MS for bringing the game to more players. There's no other reason for them to do that.

[Rozalia1]

3 hours ago, majob said:

Gamepass would be considered their preferred path as you've said but selling software and benefitting from things like MTX and DLC sales is also an ecosystem. The overall goal is to have their company be an anchor you can't escape in some way, shape, or form. Even if they aren't getting gamepass subscriptions like they want, having Sony rely on their software and servers, since Sony uses Azure for PSN, is still in line with the strategy. You could compare this to how Microsoft made IE the dominant browser for a time by simply undermining other browsers by simply including it for free to other business along with  the stipulation they only use it. Also similar to how they made DirectX almost mandatory in game development by refusing to allow any other program on Windows.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/14/23760879/sony-ps5-cloud-streaming-games-test

 

Quote

Sony’s confirmation of PS5 cloud streaming comes more than four years after it unveiled a surprising partnership with Microsoft that would see the companies collaborate to develop future cloud solutions for game and content-streaming services. We haven’t heard much about that deal since 2019. In 2021 PlayStation chief Jim Ryan said Sony was still at the “exchanging ideas” stage, despite an original promise of the gaming rivals exploring the use of Microsoft Azure datacenter-based solutions for Sony’s game and content-streaming services. Given Sony’s recent mentions of AWS in its job listings, the Microsoft strategic partnership could well be over.

 

It is not an open thing, but PlayStation seems to use AWS. Which wouldn't be surprising considering the dates. Sony likely was fine with using Azure in 2019 as the hate is very much one sided from Microsoft, and they thought maybe the relationship could improve with a partnership. 2020 onward though we saw Microsoft's astroturfing network (directly by Xbox management) become extremely hostile (and they weren't nice to begin with) towards PlayStation, which might be what killed any such possible partnership.

 

As for Microsoft using PlayStation/Nintendo to grow strong... don't particularly see it at the moment. For a start as Phil Spencer cried about when he questioned the point in living, the Platform holders are going to get 30% of whatever money Microsoft is going to make, 30% with no need to put any money in. When you take the costs into account, and as we know, Xbox is constantly overbudget and behind schedule, PlayStation is possibly going to be making more off their games than Microsoft is going to. Then there is the matter of... will Microsoft's bought up games actually be successful on PlayStation? Look at the third party situation on Nintendo for example. Nintendo games are king on there and no third party has a chance. Are PlayStation gamers going to be playing Forza over Gran Turismo for example? Seems doubtful. Especially if Microsoft, if trying to be profitable in gaming, gives Forza's developers less money and time to make their game.

 

It could be that wishful thinking or Xbox's seemingly never ending failure is colouring my view here, but them making their games multiplatform has the chance of being absolutely catastrophic. To start with by killing the Xbox entirely so there is no hope of a revival there. Then by having their games not do all that well in sales regardless of being on other platforms. We can't forget that Bethesda when they got bought out were shopping out timed exclusives because their business was in the toilet. That has not changed since being bought by Microsoft, as they still suck and we know they're doing worse even if Microsoft will never show us the numbers. ABK is a big deal of course... but the latest CoD/Diablo/Overwatch have done poor relatively speaking. Could they recover with the next game? Possibly, but what if they don't? Candy Crush and such could dry up and a follow up could fail to replicate the success (we've seen how a company becomes worse once put under Xbox, so wouldn't be a surprise). It'd be a horror show for them.

 

4 minutes ago, ZitMeatloaf said:

And now, some thoughts and opinions from yet another random person on the internet.

1.  None of this should be surprising. MS has already been lightly testing the waters for this strategy for almost 5 years when they allowed Cuphead to release on Switch in early 2019 (remember that Nintendo specifically thanked "Our friends at Microsoft" when it was announced during a Nindies Showcase, so it clearly wasn't just a Studio MDHR decision). Cuphead must have sold well on Switch, because this was followed by Ori and the Blind Forest on Switch later that year. Cuphead then came to PS in 2020, and Ori and the Will of the Wisps to Switch later in 2020. I firmly believe that MS has been testing these third-party style releases on other platforms as a backup strategy the entire time.
2. It certainly helps that Cuphead and the two Ori games are absolute bangers, some the best that MS could have put out elsewhere. They are also indie-style games, so if they'd flopped MS wouldn't have had too much egg on their face. Had they tried this with a mid AAA game like Crackdown 3 or something similar and it bombed, it would have been a much worse look for them. Also, you don't provide your biggest and best games (i.e. Forza and Halo) right away in case the strategy fails, as that would be the most embarrassing look of all.
3. If they go all-in and release absolutely everything everywhere, one of the biggest leverage points MS will retain will be requiring an Xbox account to play online. This is already a requirement for Minecraft; if one day we have the option to play Halo or Forza on PS, I can guarantee you're going to need to make an Xbox account if you want to play online. This will allow MS to keep touting an ever-rising number of monthly active users to their Board and investors.
4. PlayStation and Nintendo are quite right to reject GamePass on their platforms. I've always believed that GamePass can only cause long-term harm to gaming as a whole. The short version is that if you work for a studio that knows ahead of time that your game will be dumped into a subscription service on day one, the quality of your games is going to decline. The game no longer needs to be good enough to buy, it only needs to be good enough to try. There's a big difference.
5. For my personal tastes, MS putting their games elsewhere isn't going to change very much. Cuphead and the Ori games were fantastic, but I've already played those (on Switch). I enjoyed Halos 1-3, but don't have much desire to play more Halo. I tried Gears of War, couldn't get into it. Racing sims aren't my bag, so Forza doesn't interest me. Bethesda games don't do anything for me. I don't care about Call of Duty (at least not outside of the games that were included with PS Plus), and there isn't much else in ABK's portfolio that I have a strong interest in.... I suppose I'm happy that I'll still be able to play future Crash and Spyro games, but it's not like I'm a diehard fan of those franchises. There really isn't anything else is MS's catalog that I'm itching to play. Anyone who feels differently, totally cool, these are just opinions.

This concludes your daily dose of another internet rando's thoughts. Thanks for reading.

 

Cuphead is no such case. Microsoft helped with the publishing (nothing compared to the help PlayStation and Nintendo give third parties they get as timed exclusives) to get the game as a timed exclusive. Microsoft does not own the studio nor the IP. Ori I believe they own the IP so I guess you could say it is an example, but it all has the air of the developers asking Microsoft to let them do it at least to the Switch (not PlayStation that Xbox management detests) or their relationship is going to sour, and Microsoft bent the knee to them. Regardless, neither game's quality is a result of Microsoft itself. 

 

Cuphead developers thanking Microsoft when bringing the game to Switch could be seen as you see it, but I don't see it that way. They thanked Microsoft because the Microsoft astroturfing network promoted their game which helped get it attention on other platforms. That is all.

 

You're correct. Anybody playing a Microsoft owned game on PlayStation/Switch gets counted as MAU for Xbox. Heck, someone playing Solitaire on their PC is counted too. Hence why they've touted a higher number than PlayStation for years, but then in court had to admit that Xbox's actual MAU is under half of PlayStation. Ultimately like with everything involving Xbox, these fake numbers are nice for shareholder meetings and for the shills to repeat, but does nothing to improve business.

[dakk55]

22 hours ago, MoreFuego said:

Ahhh Halo MC Collection on PS5…..Don’t give me hope 😭

 

 

 

On a serious note, this would be good. It would be nice to finally play Sunset Overdrive and MC Collection on the PlayStation.

[SmileSlice]

Personally, I would love to revisit some old Xbox favourites from back in the day, like Halo and Perfect Dark. Keeping my fingers crossed!

[MAUSZX]

I read the IGN article, and it seems they will do that with SOME of their games, Tango games were mentioned which is awesome, also it seems that they plan to have every Activision/Blizzard game on Playstation. I don't know if that was a contract thing or what.

Personally I think that because Hifi Rush game and Starfield didn't really pulled more console sales or way more gamepass subscriptions, they are realizing that Gamepass system is not really profitable by itself, (considering they have to pay third party developers to have their games and while they don't have to pay their first party studios to have them on Gamepass, they are spending money in making the games). And because Microsoft and Nintendo have already basically have their own subscription service, it really seems like gamepass is not really "the netflix of videogames" and is more like the Disney+ of videogames.

[Rebourne07]

16 hours ago, sepheroithisgod said:

While this should be good news, part of me sees this as a Trojan horse. Like they are about to buy more stuff and are setting the groundwork so they have more evidence to say it doesn't matter that they buy more since they put their games out on other platforms.

This is a good point. Honestly though, from a consumer standpoint does it matter if they buy up stuff as long as it's released on all platforms? Like I was pissed that Fallout and Doom would be taken away. But if future entries get put on Playstation then, as long as xbox doesn't cut funding and make them crappy games, sounds like things continue like business as usual except instead of zenimax getting the cut of sales its microsoft. Right?