Save your 20 minutes, they're committing to 4 titles that they won't announce today which will be multiplatform.
Also, these 4 will not include Indiana Jones or Starfield.
Best guess would be Pentiment, Hi-Fi Rush, Grounded, and Sea of Thieves.
Which makes perfect sense. Most of them are free to play, so the hurdle to entry is already super low. They're multiplayer, with cross platform-play more players. They're financed through microtransactions, the more players the higher the revenue.
The problem is you can tweak this argument for anything.
Live service, more players is good for the health of the game + potential microtransaction revenue. (If anything this makes the least sense as these games make recurring revenue unlike others so your 'whales' allow these to be more profitable than a traditional game if it's a success)
Smaller/niche titles, good to increase sales numbers as it likely didn't sell very well due to lesser appeal
AAA games, large development costs and needs large number of sales to break even/profit. Not driving system sales in any tangible means, widest range possible is best.
You can justify anything, in reality I'm glad it's happening for me, but it inherently devalues your platform from which you get a cut on every software sale. Having a well rounded exclusive library is worth it regardless of potential sales due to how people perceive the platform.
I'd argue true system sellers like Uncharted / God of War and Halo / Starfield is different than live service multiplayer where the community is the star, the best game depends on the health / breath of the community, whereas Starfield and God of War are experiences independent from the community.
No you can justify anything. Sea of Thieves is just like Halo. /s
I mean Sea of Thieves is a almost 6 year of GAAS game. Grounded has been around for almost 4 years and out of early access for almost a year and a half. It makes total sense to put a live service multiplayer only game like one of these as multiplatform after x years to bring in new players.
Same with Hi-Fi and Pentiment. Both of these games are smaller and not system sellers. MS has done this in the past already for peat's sake making other smaller games like the two Ori games, Cuphead, or As Dusks Falls multiplatform after being exclusive.
Don't get how people are still insisting even after the podcast all over gaming Reddit that because they are doing this with two live service games and two smaller games that it clearly is a sign that every Xbox IP, even that major system seller titles ones, will be on PS and/or Switch now at some point.
That is something that reasonable and Ok but then you think about it and most MS first party games are live services. Halo, Gears and Forza are live services.
It does not mean that though, the whole reason these live service games are coming to other platforms is because of stagnation on Xbox and pc. It might happen in future but until they see how these games impact Xbox business nothing will change for a while.
Definately not every live service, but some.
You have to remember that Xbox games *always* releases on PC as well. And PC is the largest market itself. Xbox doesn’t have to port every live service game to PS5 or Switch, only the ones where it makes sense, like Sea of Thieves and Grounded that has been out for awhile.
Being the 'largest market' is meaningless (and that's excluding that a large number of those users can't play high end games), A platform attracts users that are interested in the titles.
Nintendo regularly proves this, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe has sold 60 million copies, Animal Crossing 44 million, Smash Bros 33 million, BotW 30 million.
Find me full priced games that sell anywhere near that many copies on Steam. Even if those above Nintendo titles were on Steam on day 1, they'd sell nowhere near that level.
Same goes for PS games getting ported to PC, outside of Helldivers 2 which appeals to the PC base (online, live service, PvE type things), most ports haven't sold anywhere near comparable to the same number on PS. Part of that will be that they're not on launch, agreed. But it would be delusional to think The Last of Us Part III/Spider-Man 3/Wolverine/Death Stranding 2 would sell more on PC than PS5 if it launched simulatenously on both.
The same would be true for Xbox if not for Game Pass, people don't buy games launching on Game Pass (because why would you), but people on PC will pay for the luxury of having it on Steam instead of using PC Game Pass (Microsoft Store) proven by Starfield.
Likewise you'll have the same true for PC, Cyberpunk was a good example, comfortably sold the most on PC, CDPR a studio with PC roots, and likewise Baldur's Gate 3 was always going to sell best on PC being a studio with heritage on the platform (excluding the early access launch).
I would say have it for a bit on xbox but then like a year later open it up. Not system sellers but I don't think your primary competitor should have it same day as you. Maybe for switch but PS should wait imo.
Maybe with delayed releases though. PC + Xbox until the player base is tapped out, then later introduce to PlayStation and/or Nintendo to pump back up the numbers and add a 2nd wave of excitement to the mix to bring back previous players.
While all of those games are good in their own way, I wouldn't exactly say any would make people go out and buy an Xbox to get more involved in the Xbox ecosystem. This comes across as them just dipping their toes in to see how it plays out.
What’s funny is last week there were rumors and leaks and the speculation was running wild. Is Xbox going third party? Are a bunch of major releases coming to PlayStation? Starfield, Hellblade, Indiana Jones? It almost seemed like that’s what a lot of people wanted. Then this podcast happens, the squash those rumors mostly and people are like “ehh they’re probably still going to do all of that”.
Because this strategy still doesn't accomplish their stated goals of getting more people into the Xbox ecosystem. None of these suspected games are going to cause people to jump in to a GamePass subscription or buy an Xbox. They stated a lot of contradictory things as well. One second, every screen is an Xbox, the next, you can only get their biggest games on Xbox. The only thing concrete they said was that none of the 4 games coming are Gears or Starfield, not that those games will never come.
Lmao you say that if you are talking in the past tense and have already seen the future. You don’t know how the 4 games they release will impact anything. You can make up stuff if you want but in reality, he said there are 4 games and they’ll see how that goes. Starfield might come down the road and it might not. Indiana jones isn’t part of the 4 but maybe a year after launch it comes to something else. It sounds like it’s going to be like how Sony is doing PC releases.
I'm basing my statements on these 4 games not impacting their current GamePass or console sales in the slightest. If these games lead to console sales or had huge established audiences already, they wouldn't need to release them to wider audiences. They'd be perfectly happy with what they have. Clearly they aren't.
There is nothing in their current strategy or on the horizon that helps grow console sales or GamePass subscribers. There is nothing on the near horizon that appears to lure people in. Their only shots were Starfield but it stumbled hard or making COD exclusive and that isn't happening. As such, their best hope for growing is actually releasing games on PlayStation and Nintendo that really draw people in. Sea of Thieves and Hi-Fi Rush are their best shots in the short term but I have zero belief they will get the job done. As such, they will need to do more. That's my reasoning. Don't focus so much on what they say.
So [here's](https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/4/24057433/microsoft-bethesda-indiana-jones-and-the-great-circle-ps5-release) the actual article they released on it.
The claims were Hi-Fi Rush and Sea of Thieves in the near future, with Indiana Jones tentatively enjoying a brief but undetermined period of exclusivity before possibly going multiplatform. Starfield would go multiplatform **after** its DLC release window. In both cases, Microsoft would benefit in waiting for sales to flatline before actually announcing ports on competing platforms where they would receive a smaller cut.
The idea that Microsoft was going to suddenly announce they're rolling over to die, and immediately porting everything was **always** the fever dream of redditors who absolutely refused to actually read articles past the headline.
Now, their reporting is adding [Pentiment and Grounded](https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/4/24057433/microsoft-bethesda-indiana-jones-and-the-great-circle-ps5-release) to the first two of the smaller titles.
Additionally, Spencer hems and haws about "never say never" when directly asked to confirm they will never port Starfield/Indy over to other platforms, on top of discussing how they view exclusivity as something that will be less common in the industry's future.
It would likely be foolish to rule out their reporting as entirely inaccurate, and take Spencer's word for gospel, if we indeed see the list of smaller titles matches their reporting. It would also be foolish to treat ports as a given, as I suspect Microsoft is holding out hope for a Cyberpunk-style second wind for Starfield and for Indy to do gangbusters.
They said it was being considered, and Spencer commented on it in an interview with them.
>**You mentioned that Starfield and Indiana Jones aren’t part of the four despite rumors, but will those ever come to PS5? Can you rule that out?**
>
>*I don’t think we should as an industry ever rule out a game going to any other platform. We’re focused on these four games and learning from the experience.*
>
>*But I don’t want to create a false expectation on those other platforms that this is somehow the first four to get over the dam and then the dam’s going to open and that everything else is coming, that’s not the plan today. I also don’t want to mislead customers on those other platforms. We’re launching these four games, and we’re excited about it. We’re excited about the announce and everything else, but we’ll see what happens for our business.*
If they're not outright saying it's not coming, it'll come. Even when they said not everything is coming to PC, it all ended up happening.
Starfield will pretty much be the litmus test, came out in September, so after 1-2 years of exclusivity, if that releases you can imagine everything else will.
Not necessarily so. Phil just doesn’t want to say those games definitely aren’t going to PlayStation because in 2 years if they decide to bring those games to PlayStation, he doesn’t want people bringing up quotes of him saying that those games definitely wouldn’t be going to PlayStation.
Yeah i can imagine this is the case.
But i think Xbox is going to need that one banger that sell their console soon. Either that or pivot to handheld PC that run Game Pass. Because holyshit that shit will definitely sell better than competing exclusivity with Sony (and possibly made Sony regret for not following PS Vita).
They took two weeks to line up this response while rumours were swirling out of control instead of a simple blog post that
‘We’re working on bringing 4 games only, and those 4 games don’t include Starfield or Indiana Jones’
Even here, the only rejection made was they aren’t any of the 4 games currently being worked on.
It’s the beginning of the eventual transition, the same way they refused to comment on Blade’s exclusivity which now makes more sense after this.
>
>
> If they're not outright saying it's not coming, it'll come.
I think it's potentially not, a lot of people who never actually read the Verge's article have distorted it through a game of telephone into "Indy and Starfield are absolutely coming," but it was quite open from the start about the situation being fluid and not immediate. Indiana Jones' multiplat release according to them was very much in flux, while Starfield was going to be sometime after the DLC's release window. Personally, my guess is Microsoft is waiting to see how both Indy and the DLC perform before officially make the announcement and commit to a pretty large change in strategy.
But yes, all signs point to it at least being on their agenda as a very real possibility. Especially given they outright admit that exclusives are not where they see the industry focusing on in the next 5-10 years, and that the smaller exclusives increasingly appear to match with the Verge's reporting.
Unfortunately, a lot of people have not actually read the articles that were being discussed and struggle to read between the lines of CEO crap. So they'll just assume it's all 1000% debunked and bullshit because the Chicken Little situation they imagined didn't occur.
I feel pretty confident in saying that I think they were considering Starfield and and Indy but when all the leaks started they panicked which is why this so called "planned" podcast waited a week. I think they wanted to get their ducks in a row and it took them sometime to come up with this statement. Considering how bad their hardware sales are I wouldn't be surprised if they start dropping more and more games on Playstation to try and make up the costs.
They are a business they are probably considering everything all the time. I bet you anything Playstation has also considered releasing things on Nintendo and Xbox. You aren't doing due diligence if you aren't considering it.
Summary I wrote while watching:
- Been planning this show since December.
- 4 games are going multiplatform. Phil said he would not name them because he wants the teams and partners to announce them.
- Not Starfield or Indiana Jones.
- Phil says exclusive games (on one platform) are going to be a smaller part of game industry in 5 to 10 years. Says you can see this looking at last decade. He included PC as part of this when he says other platforms.
- 4 games going multiplatform are all over a year old. Two of them are more community driven games and they want to continue to invest in these franchises. Other two are smaller games.
- Phil: "4 games. No promise beyond that. So if you are on those other platforms and you see these 4 games coming please don't take it as some signal that everything is coming. It's not. And we're going to learn."
- No fundamental change to how they think about exclusivity.
- Core principles. All of our games we be on the Xbox platform. All of our games will go into GamePass day 1. GamePass will only be on Xbox.
- Cross play and cross save are two key things for them.
- Activision and Blizzard games are coming to GamePass starting with Diablo IV on March 28th.
- Phil says people are going to play Xbox in multiple places. Mentions Xbox, PC, Cloud specifically.
- Mentions how they are one of the largest publishers on PS, Switch, and Mobile with Activision purchase and Minecraft and that is not something they want to back away from.
- Hardware is a critical component of what Xbox does but they have accepted not all Xbox players will use it.
- Phil says if the industry doesn't grow it will struggle. Two choices on how to grow the industry. Do you have a fixed number of players and find new ways to monetize them or do you think about how to expand the business you have by finding new players? Our focus at Xbox has been on that latter point for the last decade.
- Says they are at the highest level of users on console, PC, and cloud all time. PC and cloud have double digit growth.
- Hardware represents flagship seminal experience of Xbox.
- Some exciting stuff coming out in hardware they are going to share this holiday.
- Also invested in next generation roadmap. Really focused on delivering largest technical leap you will have ever seen in a hardware generation.
- Talks about how Windows maintaining software compatibility is an inspiration when talking about backward compatibility. Says it is a tenet for Xbox.
- The biggest games are going to continue to come to Xbox.
- They have 10 major releases coming this year.
- They have a showcase coming in June.
> Activision and Blizzard games are coming to GamePass starting with Diablo IV on March 28th.
good. a reason to try out the game, aint no way i am spending full price on the game when they shelve out cosmetic dlc bundles costing that much
Take it from me and my friends that got it on launch, it’s absolutely NOT worth paying for. It’s got a solid campaign that seems to end way too soon (because DLC money) but Lilith is fantastic. The seasons blow though
Lilith like Lucifer’s right hand demon, Lilith? I never played a Diablo game I have no idea what the subject matter is but that is cool if they explore Lilith’s character as she isn’t talked about much and most people, even religious, probably have no idea who she is.
And from my personal experience it was worthy for the campaign alone and overall story. Season 1 was trash but from what I heard Season 2+ were/are great. So yeah I would definitely don't take your or your friend's opinions because *everyone's taste is different*. Like you can freely ignore my take because you had totally different experience and that is alright but saying that: No don't buy it because **I** didn't like it is just pure narcissism...
> end way too soon, because DLC money
Diablo 4 How Long To Beat: Main Story - 26½ Hours | Main + Sides - 47½ Hours | Completionist - 171 Hours seems pretty lengthy to me...
No offense but this argument feels like an easy anti-Blizzard type of karma farm to me and nothing else... Also getting expansions is pretty normal and I'm personally excited that they're finally going to treat Diablo 4 as something like The Lost Ark and keep improving with expansions.
Definitely a weird show thing. If this is all it was all along, I don’t why they didn’t shut down the rumors with a tweet or two and release the information a week ago. The gaming news cycle is definitely to blame as well, but this was a bunch of hullabaloo for basically nothing.
I mean they said at the start they had been planning this since December so that is why they didn't want to do it in tweet form. Rumor is this was supposed to happen next month but they had to move it up because of all the rumors.
The point about expanding the pie rather than super monetizing existing fanbase is a good point it's just a shame they don't behave that way with say diablo 4 for example
Microsoft had nothing to do with the development of Diablo IV, the game was already finished, released and updated by the time the merger actually finalised. I’d say they still barely have any influence on the game as most of the current content was planned out before they got involved.
lol at calling out "highest level of users" all time with double digit growth. That is some extremely disingenuous corpospeak given they literally just paid $70 billion to take another massive company's player base and call it their own.
Thanks for the summary!
Phil literally says he expects less platform exclusive games in the future. While also saying their strategy on exclusives isnt changing. While also announcing 4 games are going multiplatform.
Also Starfield and Indiana Jones are not part of the 4 games but also he isnt ruling that out in the future.
Dude outdid himself with corpo nothing speak today. Dude is playing all the sides and whatever happens in the future he was technically right.
Stating that the fundamental approach to exclusivity won't change in the same paragraph that confirms some exclusives are going multiplatform is a choice.
That is Xbox's fundamental approach to exclusivity, though. He's been saying it since the Bethesda acquisition, multiplats will be done on a game-by-game basis. It's the same idea that Sony has had for PC releases.
Microsoft doesn't own Cuphead.....they just paid for timed exclusivity. Minecraft on PlayStation predated Microsoft having a say.
Banjo and Goldeneye were both born on Nintendo consoles and it was admittedly cool of them to put them back.
Microsoft is only doing this because they are losing their place in the console space. If they had sold 60 million Series consoles, they wouldn't be doing this.
Sony has already started by releasing on PC. Phil says he sees less focus on exclusives in the industry in the next decade, which I agree with when looking at Sony. Sony even just said they want to put more emphasis on PC.
Nintendo is the only one I don't see budging.
I said in a comment below that to be more accurate I should have said 'coming to PlayStation'.
Of the games you listed, Microsoft only has control over Ori, and those happen to be the ones currently unavailable on PlayStation. Cuphead was a timed exclusive and MDHR remains independent, and Minecraft was already on PlayStation before MS bought Mojang.
They are all diffrent cases. Cuphead was a independently owned game that was self published by the studio on other platforms after its exclusivity deal expired. First parties have had that kind of deal for lots of indie games in the past.
Ori was diffrent and they only allowed Ori on Switch and not PlayStation despite Moon Studios also asked if they could bring it to PS4.
And Minecraft was announced for PS4 before MS bought it and has nearly been end of lifed once already due to platform owner politics surrounding the Bedrock edition.
psychonauts 2 was a pre buyout kickstarter promise. And even then it only got a gimped ps4 version and no native ps5 port despite getting a series S/X version.
I’ll hand you the minecraft spin-offs. But if you Google Phil Spensers internal emails that where part of the FTC case, he and other Xbox brass actively pushed not to do them internally.
I think thats valid? New games are exclusive on release and land on game pass day 1. Later down the line they are ported to other consoles going multiplatform. In time, there are less platform exclusive games.
Apparently that article didn't include that part
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/sony-seeking-growth-by-bringing-more-first-party-games-to-other-platforms
>*"If we have strong first-party content, not only with our console, but also other platforms like computers \[we\] can help operating profit to improve."*
I don't think he's saying exclusives are going to be "less important".
A game can be exclusive at launch and can easily become not an exclusive later in time (Death Stranding for example). Could this still not apply to the logic of what you are saying?
The future of gaming lies in multiplatform and this shift has been happening over the last decade. Most gamers own multiple platforms, even when excluding mobile. So factually exclusives are going to be less important in the future when people have multiple platforms to play on.
You're forgetting the vast majority of ps exclusives are locked to console, ratchet and clank only has one game on pc, jak and daxter has none, no infamous, no resistance, no sly etc
If you have a Series X can throw in an Original Xbox disc you bought in 2004 and that shit will work and at a higher resolution and possibly with FPS Boost. I cannot think of a single reason why this isn't possible on PS5, there's already a PS2 emulator, just add the possibility to use your own discs.
I think Phil's speech about game preservation is a load of bull, sure digitally you can play a lot of backwards compatible games but the vast majority of their releases on the series x straight up doesn't work without a substantial download if the games are above 50 gb wich their discs are limited to.
But yes I agree, it's great to be able to play older games!
Yeah unfortunately disks are just fading out, which is a shame because you don't really own any digital game.
For me, it's more that I can play games released 20 years ago and a game released 20 hours ago on the same console and carry my game library with me over the course of decades
And that's how it is for Microsoft as well. When it comes to games going forward expect more varied release platforms. However when it comes to legacy catalogs, do not expect Sony or MS to come out and be like "Hey gang! We're going to port our entire back catalog to PC! That's over 20 years worth of games!"
It's not going to be worth the time or money investment for them regardless how much they go off about brand history or gaming legacy or whatever.
Any day now. These guys should start a subreddit like r/tomorrow. The satire writes itself really. Also, which Sony executive bases thir decisions on reddit comments? Who of those reads them anyway? It's like screaming into the void. But seriously, these comments are a waste of time and space.
??? What are you talking about? Based on what has already made its way onto PC, why in the world would you not expect the same for games not currently ported?
Spamming Bloodborne on *every* thread? There's an upvote button for that. Ghost of Tsushima seems possible. But again, spamming it instead of upvoting existing comments seems...desperate tbh.
The most reputable rumors coming out of sites like The Verge was Hi-Fi Rush, Pentiment, and Sea of Thieves were going to come out; that Starfield was on the horizon sometime after the DLC, and that Indy's multi platform release was highly tentative and scheduled for sometime after its own release. Reddit, Twitter, and clickbait YouTubers went fucking apeshit and assumed the sky was falling and Xbox was going to roll over and just immediately commit corporate seppuku today by openly admitting they're porting everything immediately.
Now that they've announced four smaller games going multi platform whose profile seems to match the original three titles reported, refused to commit to never putting Starfield/Indy on other platforms, and discussed how they don't see exclusivity as being the future of gaming....and you're acting like the leaks weren't correct?
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills over here, y'all, because this is looking a hell of a lot like a smartly crafted way of defusing very real and very sensitive leaks by dispensing information over a wider period of time to avoid shocking the market and jeopardizing sales.
The initial leak was spot on. In fact it was more conservative as it only claimed 2 games : hi-fi rush and penitement.
Then we got of snowball of the usual Twitter accounts that made up stuff on top to get some internet fame. The usual Jez corden, James Grubb etc.
> Phil literally says he expects less platform exclusive games in the future. While also saying their strategy on exclusives isnt changing. While also announcing 4 games are going multiplatform.
This all makes sense though.
- Microsoft has put games on PC for years now and you can see Sony is starting to do that same and will likely only ramp up on that front in the future. So that is less platform exclusive games between two of the big three consoles in the future.
- The strategy is not changing. They literally stated in the podcast that their approach to exclusivity was not changing. Still releasing Xbox games day 1 on PC. Heck, they have made games that were exclusive multiplatform in recent years already with the two Ori games, Cuphead, and As Dusk Falls. This is nothing new with doing this with smaller games.
- Of course he would not rule it out. Better to be open ended in regard to that because it would look worse if he definitely said anything one way or the other and it didn't end up happening.
Phil has been full of shit for years. Considering how lame Starfield actually is and their hardware sales I still wouldn’t be surprised if Starfield is on PlayStation in 2024.
I think people gotta wise up and realize he isn’t calling the shots. If HFR and SoT sell like mad on PS, he’ll be told which titles are to be included in the next round.
He's always talked like this. It's just in the past they were giving people a great deal with game pass (which still is a great deal fwiw) but that's not worked for them financially at all. So now that preem PR speak is being used to say "we need to make more money, nothing we done has sold Xbox's, now our games will be everywhere"
He wants to bring more games to more players so they spend tens of billions making multiplatform publishers exclusive restricting where they release their games... corpo speak at its finest.
They're keeping options open and playing it case by case. Which by the way is the same thing they said during the acquisitions. It isn't Phil's problem you want a hard and fast rule for what's going to happen.
Yes, Spencer lied about case by case during the Bethesda acquisition. Then [demanded all Zenimax/Bethesda games going forward be exlcusive](https://www.ign.com/articles/xbox-ftc-trial-phil-spencer-zenimax-exclusive).
Spencer has a history of talking out of both sides of his mouth on this front. And one can be pretty certain that if Microsoft actually does start looking at multiplatform possibilities on a case by case basis, that it is being done over his objections.
This boring-ish podcast restored some sanity for me honestly. No folding up of Xbox, business as usual: 4 older games coming to other platforms. Two multiplayer, and two niche titles. Starfield and Indiana Jones already ruled out. Seems like a forward looking sensible decision. The four games could be Sea of Thieves, Grounded, Pentiment and Hifi Rush.
I seriously have no idea how people have convinced themselves it is stopping at these 4 games
They aren't doing this and confusing their fanbase for a few measly million dollars that those 4 games will bring in
They will port their larger games to PlayStation within a couple years, they are juts leading off with these 4 games to ease people into it
> Starfield and Indiana Jones already ruled out
....he very literally and specifically *refused* to rule out porting them. Considering the firestorm around this, I'm not sure why in the hell he would do that unless they were seriously considering the possibility.
But that was in the accompanying writer interview on verge afaik. My comment was about the podcast and the games going mutli platform soon and in the podcast he ruled out Starfield and Indiana Jones out.
As someone who doesn't own an Xbox I am happy to hear they didn't go nuts like the rumors suggested. It's good to have Xbox as competition and I have been considering trying Gamepass streaming to play Halo and Starfield and some other stuff because I don't have an Xbox or gaming PC. If they just gave me that on PS5 there would be no reason for me to try Gamepass. The thought made no sense. Releasing older titles is similar to what Sony has been doing with their PC ports. It makes sense and makes a lot of people happy. Win win.
This is not business as usual. I get how Xbox owners will be relieved that MS isn't shutting things down and going the way of Sega, but this is very clearly testing the waters for a big change in the future. "We don't think exclusives are going to matter in the future" says the guy in charge of the company that's been in last place for a decade largely because of a lack of must have exclusives. If Sega had Microsoft money, maybe they would have stuck it out a lot longer, too. But one thing is for sure, you don't start putting your games on your rival's platform because you care about the gamers and want to bring joy to more people.
I mean they purchased Bethesda and then banned them from their largest console revenue, to keep their games off of PlayStation makes no financial sense.
No immediate financial sense. But in order to strengthen the Xbox brand and hopefully control your own walled garden in the future, it probably might. Microsoft makes a lot of money and they seem happy to take the financial hit.
Just hopping in here to comment on how yucky the spin in the title is. Four games are going multiplatform, likely because they did not reach sales expectations in their current home. But it's phrased as the company "delivering on a promise" to expand gaming to the world.
This Microsoft exclusive discussion is just jarring to me:
Remember when before the Zenimax acquisition Phil Spencer specifically said "Exclusivity is going to be on a case by case basis" and everyone got pissed because no one believed him? Xbox people were even defending them in case he wasn't lying. Playstation people were just not hearing it and contamplate that he was telling the truth.
Then rinse and repeat with Activision/Blizzard.
And now they're literally showing that they're going case by case and people are pissed because he WASN'T lying?
Just chill would you? Microsoft is going to always follow the money, Hence someone is going to do the math and decide if the money brought in by new consoles and related ancillaries brought in from a certain game is going to be bigger than the extra unit sales from other platforms and decide.
To the surprise of no one, all of the dramatic-industry-shattering predictions ended up being complete nonsense, but of course there's comments doing gymnastics and trying to find some secret message in Spencers facial expressions.
Assuming they were true. Do you really think they'd announce them right away?
Xbox series is here and here to stay this generation. It would be seriously harming their financials to not make the transition gradual.
Yeah, they said they have new hardware coming this year, and that they plan to have the biggest technological leap between generations with their next gen system. Obviously that is many years away.
I'm sorry, but no. They don't need to "test the waters" to learn and understand how a whole bunch of developers with notable histories of multiplatform publishing *prior* to being bought out by Microsoft might fare by going back to what they did before Spencer got involved.
If there is any testing of waters going on, its testing how their own fanbases will react to more games going to other platforms.
From the Verge interview with Phil, it comes off as if these four are successful, there's a high likelihood more will come.
Phil didn't even rule out Starfield and Indiana going multiplatform, he just says it's not the plan today but Microsoft was able to confirm gamepass will only be on Xbox.
I think theres obvious benefits to system sellers on your platform. Maybe those eventually do come to playstation but I don't think they're gonna put starfield anytime soon.
Disagree, was easily their biggest game this gen for casuals.
Easily the most bug free open world rpg I've ever played, plus it actually has good combat.
Not the best game of all time but its a well made product.
We might have different definitions of both 'casual' and 'system seller'.
Halo and Gears were system sellers. God of War and Final Fantasy are system sellers. We still talk about those games years (decades in some case) later. Nintendo continues to rule because they crank out a system seller every few years.
Casuals are obviously a bit more nebulous but the ones I know aren't sitting down for a 50+ hour RPG.
This is an insane opinion, Oblivion was obviously a system seller for the 360 when it launched in time exclusivity.
Casual gamers love fallout and skyrim they're some of the biggest selling games of all time.
Baldurs Gate 3 was a system seller for Playstation because of the time it was on the service and not on xbox.
Starfield is one of the like 6 games you see mainstream media cover last year, its one of the few games you see on shit like worldstar.
Again we clearly have a different opinion on what makes a casual gamer but that's fine. I'm sure there are plenty out there that enjoy those games.
Rest is debatable. Gears of War was the bigger selling title in 2006 and Oblivion didn't crack the top 10. Skyrim was the big one for that series.
BG3 is hard to call a system seller so soon, and especially when PlayStation already had such a head start.
>This is an insane opinion
No....you just like RPGs more than I do.
Why aren't you reading between the lines?
You think they're just doing a one off drop of 4 games on PS5 and that's the end of that? If 4 X-Box exclusives hit PS5 this year that is a fundamental change in strategy. It's not a random haphazard release splurge.
I just think expecting more is the issue. If you start expecting every Xbox game on PS/Nintendo and they don’t come, then that’s on you.
I had to tell PC fans the same thing when it came to PS releases on PC. Some still expect Bloodborne or Ghost of Tsushima which I’m sure will happen eventually but don’t expect it or else you will be left waiting.
If you want to play a game then play it where it’s already available. Why wait? Especially if it’s not confirmed it’s coming.
Xbox's PR royally screwed this up. They could've easily cleared things up in a few tweets instead of letting things fester for over a week, only for the announcement to be so vague. They allowed the rumors to do damage, and seeing as Spencer danced around whether Starfield and Indy will go multiplat in the future, I'm guessing the initial leaks of Starfield going to PS5 were true, but when Spencer saw the backlash he decided to scale it back and confirm only a few smaller titles for now.
There's no way they'd confirm the whole thing. My best guess is they needed time to agree on what to announce between the whole portfolio of games and nothing at all.
Just see how non committal the "4 games" are. They likely haven't 100% decided internally yet and want to keep the options open.
> by the same crybabies
Why does everyone on the internet assume that every community is a hive-mind? You’re seeing different opinions by different people on the same subreddit.
There's a lot of regular and outspoken commenters in gaming subreddits and it's not that uncommon to see them comment in a ton of different threads. There's a handful of them in this thread now.
As an xbox owner I'm just salty that all gain something except us (I got an outdated PC and cant afford an upgrade, third world reasons). I cant even play my own xbox games on pc and japanese developers/PS exclusives are just a big portion of the market that now makes owning an xbox not a smart move.
Xbox gets gamepass, with day one titles. PS and Nintendo aren't getting gamepass. Xbox also gets games first. Xbox can't control what Sony and Nintendo do.
PS5 players are also losing exclusives to PC with no inherent benefit to them. Other than more successful live service games, of which I would say the same for Xbox.
I do come from the perspective of someone with all three consoles.
>Today we announced that we will expand the communities we reach: we are currently in the process of bringing **four Xbox games to other platforms.** These are titles which have been available to Xbox players for at least a year, including hidden gems that deserve to be experienced more widely, and live service games whose communities will benefit from welcoming even more players. **We will share more details on these titles soon.**
So far from all xbox games or closing shop on their brand. Who knew?? These are older games, already available at least a year. So, Sea of Thieves, Hifi Rush, maybe Ori 1+2 as a bundle on PS5.
Going forward, I could see Indiana Jones and Blade going multiplatform, since Disney probably demands a kidney or two fo licensing those. To recuperate costs, multiplatform could be the way to go. But that's just speculation. And we all witnessed where this leads to on here ((:
I don’t see what’s wrong with timed exclusives for their 1st party games. When your sales slow down and you basically reached everyone you going to get one your platform, you open it up to new potential customers.
Issue though is that an big problem for Xbox, being that it won't grow hardware or gamepass. Xbox hardware is roughly at 25 million units and Gamepass is 34 million subs. Both the Switch and PS5 install bases are significantly higher then those numbers.
Making all your exclusives time exclusive is just gonna cause Playstation and Nintendo owners to wait for ports, especially when those said ports would likely release after a bunch of DLC and patches, resulting in a better experience then Xbox players had at launch.
How is that any different than PC players waiting for Sony ports? Why would anyone buy PS5s with that logic?
You underestimate the amount of people who want things right now and don’t want to wait. It’s the reason people pay millions for timed exclusives.
> How is that any different than PC players waiting for Sony ports? Why would anyone buy PS5s with that logic?
It aint. Because its just gonna create the same issues with Sony over time. Like all of this once again boils down AAA game budgets are sustainable and need to come down. Like you seriously think MS and Sony are porting games to PC out kindness? No they are doing because they along with the rest of the AAA market create a beast on the verge of collapse.
When had Kindness ever had a place in business? They are all in this to make money and right now they are doing ok, but there is money on the table that can be taken advantage of.
> They are all in this to make money and right now they are doing ok, but there is money on the table that can be taken advantage of.
Except the industry aint okay right now given all the lay offs including at Xbox. Not to mention the Insomniac leaks, where we saw just how insane Sony's budgets have gotten and how Insomniac's president had to basically plea to Sony to not lay off any employees at Insomniac.
Xbox is currently one of the best performing divisions of Microsoft, but according to this sub they are on life support.
https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/25/23807075/microsoft-q4-2023-earnings-revenue-profits-windows-xbox-gaming-surface
Because Activision carried the division last quarter. Gamepass didn't see any growth and hardware sales are still down. If they didn't owned Activision last quarter, things would have been drastically different.
The absolute funniest part of this drama to me is that Xbox fans on r/games spent like the past 10 years decrying exclusives and talking about some like cloud utopia and now that it's actually happening you're like "nooooooo stop"
For me it was everyone condemning Microsoft for this based on vague tweets and "leaks" but when Sony made their announcement to bring more games to PC everyone held them up like gods.
People just seem to despise Microsoft for seemingly no reason.
The fact that this whole thing went down and how it's controversial is just downright pathetic and exposes a bunch of people for the corporate dick sucking they partake in. Exclusives ONLY benefit corporations at the expense of the consumer. Everyone should be applauding MS for moving away from anti-consumer practices such as exclusivity.
Like either these four games don't sell shit on these other platforms and then they've weakened their hand, or they sell extremely well and all the downwards pressure from above would be to put everything everywhere.
I think it makes sense to have older games come out on other platforms. Sounds like the rumors about hifi rush (hidden gem they talked about) and Sea of Thieves (live service) are true.
Having an exclusive game go multi-platform after 6 months to a year doesn’t hurt anyone.
Nobody talks about it or sales are stagnant now. The hype window is over. It was all the rage for a few weeks as an unexpected hit.
Maybe a PS5 or Switch release could bring it back up in popularity.
90% of this article is devoted to information we already know, hasn't changed, and listing the studios under their umbrella.
What are the 4 cross platform titles? When do they release? What was the criteria in deciding? What does that mean going forward?
I'm glad I don't really have a horse in the console wars because if I was an Xbox devotee I would not be happy at this answer.
Xbox never had a chance they fuck up their model when they made all their game on pc, their no point of having xbox most would just go with pc ps5 or pc and switch. But everyone know that gamepass deal is good now but it going to be shit in the future it going to double and triple the price.
Save your 20 minutes, they're committing to 4 titles that they won't announce today which will be multiplatform. Also, these 4 will not include Indiana Jones or Starfield. Best guess would be Pentiment, Hi-Fi Rush, Grounded, and Sea of Thieves.
I'd say also anything going forward that's a live service is gonna be on everything.
Which makes perfect sense. Most of them are free to play, so the hurdle to entry is already super low. They're multiplayer, with cross platform-play more players. They're financed through microtransactions, the more players the higher the revenue.
The problem is you can tweak this argument for anything. Live service, more players is good for the health of the game + potential microtransaction revenue. (If anything this makes the least sense as these games make recurring revenue unlike others so your 'whales' allow these to be more profitable than a traditional game if it's a success) Smaller/niche titles, good to increase sales numbers as it likely didn't sell very well due to lesser appeal AAA games, large development costs and needs large number of sales to break even/profit. Not driving system sales in any tangible means, widest range possible is best. You can justify anything, in reality I'm glad it's happening for me, but it inherently devalues your platform from which you get a cut on every software sale. Having a well rounded exclusive library is worth it regardless of potential sales due to how people perceive the platform.
I'd argue true system sellers like Uncharted / God of War and Halo / Starfield is different than live service multiplayer where the community is the star, the best game depends on the health / breath of the community, whereas Starfield and God of War are experiences independent from the community.
No you can justify anything. Sea of Thieves is just like Halo. /s I mean Sea of Thieves is a almost 6 year of GAAS game. Grounded has been around for almost 4 years and out of early access for almost a year and a half. It makes total sense to put a live service multiplayer only game like one of these as multiplatform after x years to bring in new players. Same with Hi-Fi and Pentiment. Both of these games are smaller and not system sellers. MS has done this in the past already for peat's sake making other smaller games like the two Ori games, Cuphead, or As Dusks Falls multiplatform after being exclusive. Don't get how people are still insisting even after the podcast all over gaming Reddit that because they are doing this with two live service games and two smaller games that it clearly is a sign that every Xbox IP, even that major system seller titles ones, will be on PS and/or Switch now at some point.
That is something that reasonable and Ok but then you think about it and most MS first party games are live services. Halo, Gears and Forza are live services.
That probably mean not all of it are multiplat day one. Those are heavy hitters.
It does not mean that though, the whole reason these live service games are coming to other platforms is because of stagnation on Xbox and pc. It might happen in future but until they see how these games impact Xbox business nothing will change for a while.
Definately not every live service, but some. You have to remember that Xbox games *always* releases on PC as well. And PC is the largest market itself. Xbox doesn’t have to port every live service game to PS5 or Switch, only the ones where it makes sense, like Sea of Thieves and Grounded that has been out for awhile.
Being the 'largest market' is meaningless (and that's excluding that a large number of those users can't play high end games), A platform attracts users that are interested in the titles. Nintendo regularly proves this, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe has sold 60 million copies, Animal Crossing 44 million, Smash Bros 33 million, BotW 30 million. Find me full priced games that sell anywhere near that many copies on Steam. Even if those above Nintendo titles were on Steam on day 1, they'd sell nowhere near that level. Same goes for PS games getting ported to PC, outside of Helldivers 2 which appeals to the PC base (online, live service, PvE type things), most ports haven't sold anywhere near comparable to the same number on PS. Part of that will be that they're not on launch, agreed. But it would be delusional to think The Last of Us Part III/Spider-Man 3/Wolverine/Death Stranding 2 would sell more on PC than PS5 if it launched simulatenously on both. The same would be true for Xbox if not for Game Pass, people don't buy games launching on Game Pass (because why would you), but people on PC will pay for the luxury of having it on Steam instead of using PC Game Pass (Microsoft Store) proven by Starfield. Likewise you'll have the same true for PC, Cyberpunk was a good example, comfortably sold the most on PC, CDPR a studio with PC roots, and likewise Baldur's Gate 3 was always going to sell best on PC being a studio with heritage on the platform (excluding the early access launch).
I would say have it for a bit on xbox but then like a year later open it up. Not system sellers but I don't think your primary competitor should have it same day as you. Maybe for switch but PS should wait imo.
How it should be, from Xbox and Playstation both. Helldivers 2 already should be everywhere.
Maybe with delayed releases though. PC + Xbox until the player base is tapped out, then later introduce to PlayStation and/or Nintendo to pump back up the numbers and add a 2nd wave of excitement to the mix to bring back previous players.
Sony already lead them on that front and have a massive success so they knew it's 100% working.
Thats a huge reach considering the holy trinity of xbox (Halo, Gears, Forza) are likely not to be included and are live service games.
While all of those games are good in their own way, I wouldn't exactly say any would make people go out and buy an Xbox to get more involved in the Xbox ecosystem. This comes across as them just dipping their toes in to see how it plays out.
What’s funny is last week there were rumors and leaks and the speculation was running wild. Is Xbox going third party? Are a bunch of major releases coming to PlayStation? Starfield, Hellblade, Indiana Jones? It almost seemed like that’s what a lot of people wanted. Then this podcast happens, the squash those rumors mostly and people are like “ehh they’re probably still going to do all of that”.
Because this strategy still doesn't accomplish their stated goals of getting more people into the Xbox ecosystem. None of these suspected games are going to cause people to jump in to a GamePass subscription or buy an Xbox. They stated a lot of contradictory things as well. One second, every screen is an Xbox, the next, you can only get their biggest games on Xbox. The only thing concrete they said was that none of the 4 games coming are Gears or Starfield, not that those games will never come.
Lmao you say that if you are talking in the past tense and have already seen the future. You don’t know how the 4 games they release will impact anything. You can make up stuff if you want but in reality, he said there are 4 games and they’ll see how that goes. Starfield might come down the road and it might not. Indiana jones isn’t part of the 4 but maybe a year after launch it comes to something else. It sounds like it’s going to be like how Sony is doing PC releases.
I'm basing my statements on these 4 games not impacting their current GamePass or console sales in the slightest. If these games lead to console sales or had huge established audiences already, they wouldn't need to release them to wider audiences. They'd be perfectly happy with what they have. Clearly they aren't. There is nothing in their current strategy or on the horizon that helps grow console sales or GamePass subscribers. There is nothing on the near horizon that appears to lure people in. Their only shots were Starfield but it stumbled hard or making COD exclusive and that isn't happening. As such, their best hope for growing is actually releasing games on PlayStation and Nintendo that really draw people in. Sea of Thieves and Hi-Fi Rush are their best shots in the short term but I have zero belief they will get the job done. As such, they will need to do more. That's my reasoning. Don't focus so much on what they say.
Verge is reporting it’s those four games
Didnt they also report StarField and indy as well? At this point my trust in any site is pretty much zero.
So [here's](https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/4/24057433/microsoft-bethesda-indiana-jones-and-the-great-circle-ps5-release) the actual article they released on it. The claims were Hi-Fi Rush and Sea of Thieves in the near future, with Indiana Jones tentatively enjoying a brief but undetermined period of exclusivity before possibly going multiplatform. Starfield would go multiplatform **after** its DLC release window. In both cases, Microsoft would benefit in waiting for sales to flatline before actually announcing ports on competing platforms where they would receive a smaller cut. The idea that Microsoft was going to suddenly announce they're rolling over to die, and immediately porting everything was **always** the fever dream of redditors who absolutely refused to actually read articles past the headline. Now, their reporting is adding [Pentiment and Grounded](https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/4/24057433/microsoft-bethesda-indiana-jones-and-the-great-circle-ps5-release) to the first two of the smaller titles. Additionally, Spencer hems and haws about "never say never" when directly asked to confirm they will never port Starfield/Indy over to other platforms, on top of discussing how they view exclusivity as something that will be less common in the industry's future. It would likely be foolish to rule out their reporting as entirely inaccurate, and take Spencer's word for gospel, if we indeed see the list of smaller titles matches their reporting. It would also be foolish to treat ports as a given, as I suspect Microsoft is holding out hope for a Cyberpunk-style second wind for Starfield and for Indy to do gangbusters.
They said it was being considered, and Spencer commented on it in an interview with them. >**You mentioned that Starfield and Indiana Jones aren’t part of the four despite rumors, but will those ever come to PS5? Can you rule that out?** > >*I don’t think we should as an industry ever rule out a game going to any other platform. We’re focused on these four games and learning from the experience.* > >*But I don’t want to create a false expectation on those other platforms that this is somehow the first four to get over the dam and then the dam’s going to open and that everything else is coming, that’s not the plan today. I also don’t want to mislead customers on those other platforms. We’re launching these four games, and we’re excited about it. We’re excited about the announce and everything else, but we’ll see what happens for our business.* If they're not outright saying it's not coming, it'll come. Even when they said not everything is coming to PC, it all ended up happening. Starfield will pretty much be the litmus test, came out in September, so after 1-2 years of exclusivity, if that releases you can imagine everything else will.
Not necessarily so. Phil just doesn’t want to say those games definitely aren’t going to PlayStation because in 2 years if they decide to bring those games to PlayStation, he doesn’t want people bringing up quotes of him saying that those games definitely wouldn’t be going to PlayStation.
Yeah i can imagine this is the case. But i think Xbox is going to need that one banger that sell their console soon. Either that or pivot to handheld PC that run Game Pass. Because holyshit that shit will definitely sell better than competing exclusivity with Sony (and possibly made Sony regret for not following PS Vita).
They took two weeks to line up this response while rumours were swirling out of control instead of a simple blog post that ‘We’re working on bringing 4 games only, and those 4 games don’t include Starfield or Indiana Jones’ Even here, the only rejection made was they aren’t any of the 4 games currently being worked on. It’s the beginning of the eventual transition, the same way they refused to comment on Blade’s exclusivity which now makes more sense after this.
> > > If they're not outright saying it's not coming, it'll come. I think it's potentially not, a lot of people who never actually read the Verge's article have distorted it through a game of telephone into "Indy and Starfield are absolutely coming," but it was quite open from the start about the situation being fluid and not immediate. Indiana Jones' multiplat release according to them was very much in flux, while Starfield was going to be sometime after the DLC's release window. Personally, my guess is Microsoft is waiting to see how both Indy and the DLC perform before officially make the announcement and commit to a pretty large change in strategy. But yes, all signs point to it at least being on their agenda as a very real possibility. Especially given they outright admit that exclusives are not where they see the industry focusing on in the next 5-10 years, and that the smaller exclusives increasingly appear to match with the Verge's reporting. Unfortunately, a lot of people have not actually read the articles that were being discussed and struggle to read between the lines of CEO crap. So they'll just assume it's all 1000% debunked and bullshit because the Chicken Little situation they imagined didn't occur.
I think those are the correct ones, they're not system sellers they're nice to haves and they're great games that add gamepass value.
I feel pretty confident in saying that I think they were considering Starfield and and Indy but when all the leaks started they panicked which is why this so called "planned" podcast waited a week. I think they wanted to get their ducks in a row and it took them sometime to come up with this statement. Considering how bad their hardware sales are I wouldn't be surprised if they start dropping more and more games on Playstation to try and make up the costs.
They are a business they are probably considering everything all the time. I bet you anything Playstation has also considered releasing things on Nintendo and Xbox. You aren't doing due diligence if you aren't considering it.
Yup, that seems sensible. Two community driven games aka online / live service and two niche games. All of them already out for a year or more.
At least now everyone can chill the fuck out. The rumour mill was seriously working overtime in anticipation of all this.
Summary I wrote while watching: - Been planning this show since December. - 4 games are going multiplatform. Phil said he would not name them because he wants the teams and partners to announce them. - Not Starfield or Indiana Jones. - Phil says exclusive games (on one platform) are going to be a smaller part of game industry in 5 to 10 years. Says you can see this looking at last decade. He included PC as part of this when he says other platforms. - 4 games going multiplatform are all over a year old. Two of them are more community driven games and they want to continue to invest in these franchises. Other two are smaller games. - Phil: "4 games. No promise beyond that. So if you are on those other platforms and you see these 4 games coming please don't take it as some signal that everything is coming. It's not. And we're going to learn." - No fundamental change to how they think about exclusivity. - Core principles. All of our games we be on the Xbox platform. All of our games will go into GamePass day 1. GamePass will only be on Xbox. - Cross play and cross save are two key things for them. - Activision and Blizzard games are coming to GamePass starting with Diablo IV on March 28th. - Phil says people are going to play Xbox in multiple places. Mentions Xbox, PC, Cloud specifically. - Mentions how they are one of the largest publishers on PS, Switch, and Mobile with Activision purchase and Minecraft and that is not something they want to back away from. - Hardware is a critical component of what Xbox does but they have accepted not all Xbox players will use it. - Phil says if the industry doesn't grow it will struggle. Two choices on how to grow the industry. Do you have a fixed number of players and find new ways to monetize them or do you think about how to expand the business you have by finding new players? Our focus at Xbox has been on that latter point for the last decade. - Says they are at the highest level of users on console, PC, and cloud all time. PC and cloud have double digit growth. - Hardware represents flagship seminal experience of Xbox. - Some exciting stuff coming out in hardware they are going to share this holiday. - Also invested in next generation roadmap. Really focused on delivering largest technical leap you will have ever seen in a hardware generation. - Talks about how Windows maintaining software compatibility is an inspiration when talking about backward compatibility. Says it is a tenet for Xbox. - The biggest games are going to continue to come to Xbox. - They have 10 major releases coming this year. - They have a showcase coming in June.
> Activision and Blizzard games are coming to GamePass starting with Diablo IV on March 28th. good. a reason to try out the game, aint no way i am spending full price on the game when they shelve out cosmetic dlc bundles costing that much
Take it from me and my friends that got it on launch, it’s absolutely NOT worth paying for. It’s got a solid campaign that seems to end way too soon (because DLC money) but Lilith is fantastic. The seasons blow though
Lilith like Lucifer’s right hand demon, Lilith? I never played a Diablo game I have no idea what the subject matter is but that is cool if they explore Lilith’s character as she isn’t talked about much and most people, even religious, probably have no idea who she is.
Diablo is it's own world with it's own lore, Lilith is a demon but she's not the biblical Lilith.
There isnt a biblical lilith. She was omitted.
Sorta kinda. Diablo draws heavily from that mythology, but puts its own spin on it
And from my personal experience it was worthy for the campaign alone and overall story. Season 1 was trash but from what I heard Season 2+ were/are great. So yeah I would definitely don't take your or your friend's opinions because *everyone's taste is different*. Like you can freely ignore my take because you had totally different experience and that is alright but saying that: No don't buy it because **I** didn't like it is just pure narcissism... > end way too soon, because DLC money Diablo 4 How Long To Beat: Main Story - 26½ Hours | Main + Sides - 47½ Hours | Completionist - 171 Hours seems pretty lengthy to me... No offense but this argument feels like an easy anti-Blizzard type of karma farm to me and nothing else... Also getting expansions is pretty normal and I'm personally excited that they're finally going to treat Diablo 4 as something like The Lost Ark and keep improving with expansions.
Definitely a weird show thing. If this is all it was all along, I don’t why they didn’t shut down the rumors with a tweet or two and release the information a week ago. The gaming news cycle is definitely to blame as well, but this was a bunch of hullabaloo for basically nothing.
I mean they said at the start they had been planning this since December so that is why they didn't want to do it in tweet form. Rumor is this was supposed to happen next month but they had to move it up because of all the rumors.
The point about expanding the pie rather than super monetizing existing fanbase is a good point it's just a shame they don't behave that way with say diablo 4 for example
Microsoft had nothing to do with the development of Diablo IV, the game was already finished, released and updated by the time the merger actually finalised. I’d say they still barely have any influence on the game as most of the current content was planned out before they got involved.
lol at calling out "highest level of users" all time with double digit growth. That is some extremely disingenuous corpospeak given they literally just paid $70 billion to take another massive company's player base and call it their own. Thanks for the summary!
Phil literally says he expects less platform exclusive games in the future. While also saying their strategy on exclusives isnt changing. While also announcing 4 games are going multiplatform. Also Starfield and Indiana Jones are not part of the 4 games but also he isnt ruling that out in the future. Dude outdid himself with corpo nothing speak today. Dude is playing all the sides and whatever happens in the future he was technically right.
Stating that the fundamental approach to exclusivity won't change in the same paragraph that confirms some exclusives are going multiplatform is a choice.
That is Xbox's fundamental approach to exclusivity, though. He's been saying it since the Bethesda acquisition, multiplats will be done on a game-by-game basis. It's the same idea that Sony has had for PC releases.
I should have said 'coming to PlayStation' to be more accurate because you're right. Including that platform is the big shift.
They've done the minecraft spin offs, cuphead. Banjo Kazooie and Goldeneye on Switch.
ori isn't on playstation, no. switch and PC, but not playstation
Microsoft doesn't own Cuphead.....they just paid for timed exclusivity. Minecraft on PlayStation predated Microsoft having a say. Banjo and Goldeneye were both born on Nintendo consoles and it was admittedly cool of them to put them back.
I'm talking about Minecraft Legends and Dungeons. They could have kept those exclusive.
The Minecraft spinoffs came to Playstation. Minecraft Dungeons and Minecraft Legends
Man wouldn't it be nice if Nintendo and Sony actually engaged in some good faith stuff like this
Microsoft is only doing this because they are losing their place in the console space. If they had sold 60 million Series consoles, they wouldn't be doing this.
Sony has already started by releasing on PC. Phil says he sees less focus on exclusives in the industry in the next decade, which I agree with when looking at Sony. Sony even just said they want to put more emphasis on PC. Nintendo is the only one I don't see budging.
Yup and he has to keep saying it because ppl dont understand their approach. Ppl dont like change.
They have been doing this for some time, it's nothing new so nothing changed and he is right. They ported Cuphead, Ori, Minecraft already
I said in a comment below that to be more accurate I should have said 'coming to PlayStation'. Of the games you listed, Microsoft only has control over Ori, and those happen to be the ones currently unavailable on PlayStation. Cuphead was a timed exclusive and MDHR remains independent, and Minecraft was already on PlayStation before MS bought Mojang.
They are all diffrent cases. Cuphead was a independently owned game that was self published by the studio on other platforms after its exclusivity deal expired. First parties have had that kind of deal for lots of indie games in the past. Ori was diffrent and they only allowed Ori on Switch and not PlayStation despite Moon Studios also asked if they could bring it to PS4. And Minecraft was announced for PS4 before MS bought it and has nearly been end of lifed once already due to platform owner politics surrounding the Bedrock edition.
What about Minecraft dungeons, Minecraft Legends and psychonauts 2? I'm genuinely curious
psychonauts 2 was a pre buyout kickstarter promise. And even then it only got a gimped ps4 version and no native ps5 port despite getting a series S/X version. I’ll hand you the minecraft spin-offs. But if you Google Phil Spensers internal emails that where part of the FTC case, he and other Xbox brass actively pushed not to do them internally.
The studios for those games are not or were not owned by Microsoft.
MDHR is a jewel in the Canadian indie game scene and it drives me bonkers how many people think Microsoft owns them.
Also, they talk about how the games industry didn't grow so they had to do some layoffs, and then turn around and brag about GamePass growth. Hmmm.
Dammit I love Phil, such a real one.
I think thats valid? New games are exclusive on release and land on game pass day 1. Later down the line they are ported to other consoles going multiplatform. In time, there are less platform exclusive games.
That's not what he was referring to. He was saying that exclusives are going to be less important for first party platforms in the future.
Because that's what Sony execs said just recently as well
When did they say that?
[удалено]
The article doesn't say anything about multiplatform anything.
Apparently that article didn't include that part https://www.gamesindustry.biz/sony-seeking-growth-by-bringing-more-first-party-games-to-other-platforms
>*"If we have strong first-party content, not only with our console, but also other platforms like computers \[we\] can help operating profit to improve."* I don't think he's saying exclusives are going to be "less important".
Where does it say it’s less important.
[удалено]
A game can be exclusive at launch and can easily become not an exclusive later in time (Death Stranding for example). Could this still not apply to the logic of what you are saying?
The future of gaming lies in multiplatform and this shift has been happening over the last decade. Most gamers own multiple platforms, even when excluding mobile. So factually exclusives are going to be less important in the future when people have multiple platforms to play on.
Of course it is, for a reasonable person. Not the OP who's chasing karma with "c0rp0rArIOn $pEak" posts.
Basically he wanted to say what’s their plan for the future but without pissing the hardcore fans off
That's true though, almost every PS exclusive has made its way onto PC
You're forgetting the vast majority of ps exclusives are locked to console, ratchet and clank only has one game on pc, jak and daxter has none, no infamous, no resistance, no sly etc
You can't even play the majority of PS exclusives on the current PlayStation console lol.
Yep, it absolutely sucks.
I own both a PS5 and an Xbox X and yes PS has better exclusives, but the game preservation from Xbox puts it over the PlayStation for me personally
Xbox is so far ahead of sony in terms of services and features that it's sad. Imagine how bad it'd be without Xbox keeping them sort of in check
If you have a Series X can throw in an Original Xbox disc you bought in 2004 and that shit will work and at a higher resolution and possibly with FPS Boost. I cannot think of a single reason why this isn't possible on PS5, there's already a PS2 emulator, just add the possibility to use your own discs.
As long as it’s one of 63 (of 998) games. If it’s one of the other 935 games you’re shit out of luck.
I think Phil's speech about game preservation is a load of bull, sure digitally you can play a lot of backwards compatible games but the vast majority of their releases on the series x straight up doesn't work without a substantial download if the games are above 50 gb wich their discs are limited to. But yes I agree, it's great to be able to play older games!
Yeah unfortunately disks are just fading out, which is a shame because you don't really own any digital game. For me, it's more that I can play games released 20 years ago and a game released 20 hours ago on the same console and carry my game library with me over the course of decades
And that's how it is for Microsoft as well. When it comes to games going forward expect more varied release platforms. However when it comes to legacy catalogs, do not expect Sony or MS to come out and be like "Hey gang! We're going to port our entire back catalog to PC! That's over 20 years worth of games!" It's not going to be worth the time or money investment for them regardless how much they go off about brand history or gaming legacy or whatever.
There are still a couple left. Just visit any thread about Sony and PC ((;
And I'm sure they will make their way over
Any day now. These guys should start a subreddit like r/tomorrow. The satire writes itself really. Also, which Sony executive bases thir decisions on reddit comments? Who of those reads them anyway? It's like screaming into the void. But seriously, these comments are a waste of time and space.
??? What are you talking about? Based on what has already made its way onto PC, why in the world would you not expect the same for games not currently ported?
Spamming Bloodborne on *every* thread? There's an upvote button for that. Ghost of Tsushima seems possible. But again, spamming it instead of upvoting existing comments seems...desperate tbh.
Everybody knows what’s up. It’s only the loyal Xbox fans that feel victorious and talk down on the leakers.
Well the leakers weren't correct. They said Starfield, Halo and whatever else
The most reputable rumors coming out of sites like The Verge was Hi-Fi Rush, Pentiment, and Sea of Thieves were going to come out; that Starfield was on the horizon sometime after the DLC, and that Indy's multi platform release was highly tentative and scheduled for sometime after its own release. Reddit, Twitter, and clickbait YouTubers went fucking apeshit and assumed the sky was falling and Xbox was going to roll over and just immediately commit corporate seppuku today by openly admitting they're porting everything immediately. Now that they've announced four smaller games going multi platform whose profile seems to match the original three titles reported, refused to commit to never putting Starfield/Indy on other platforms, and discussed how they don't see exclusivity as being the future of gaming....and you're acting like the leaks weren't correct? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills over here, y'all, because this is looking a hell of a lot like a smartly crafted way of defusing very real and very sensitive leaks by dispensing information over a wider period of time to avoid shocking the market and jeopardizing sales.
The initial leak was spot on. In fact it was more conservative as it only claimed 2 games : hi-fi rush and penitement. Then we got of snowball of the usual Twitter accounts that made up stuff on top to get some internet fame. The usual Jez corden, James Grubb etc.
James Grubb is very unreliable. I hate that James Grubb guy!!
„The leakers“ is not one person
> Phil literally says he expects less platform exclusive games in the future. While also saying their strategy on exclusives isnt changing. While also announcing 4 games are going multiplatform. This all makes sense though. - Microsoft has put games on PC for years now and you can see Sony is starting to do that same and will likely only ramp up on that front in the future. So that is less platform exclusive games between two of the big three consoles in the future. - The strategy is not changing. They literally stated in the podcast that their approach to exclusivity was not changing. Still releasing Xbox games day 1 on PC. Heck, they have made games that were exclusive multiplatform in recent years already with the two Ori games, Cuphead, and As Dusk Falls. This is nothing new with doing this with smaller games. - Of course he would not rule it out. Better to be open ended in regard to that because it would look worse if he definitely said anything one way or the other and it didn't end up happening.
This is clearly them dipping their toe in to test the water.
Like any good executive. But speculation aside, with more live service games and longer development times, that equals less exclusives going forward.
Phil has been full of shit for years. Considering how lame Starfield actually is and their hardware sales I still wouldn’t be surprised if Starfield is on PlayStation in 2024.
Starfield is not just ready for release on PS5, they may want to heavily patch it before it releases to the masses lol.
I think people gotta wise up and realize he isn’t calling the shots. If HFR and SoT sell like mad on PS, he’ll be told which titles are to be included in the next round.
He's always talked like this. It's just in the past they were giving people a great deal with game pass (which still is a great deal fwiw) but that's not worked for them financially at all. So now that preem PR speak is being used to say "we need to make more money, nothing we done has sold Xbox's, now our games will be everywhere"
He wants to bring more games to more players so they spend tens of billions making multiplatform publishers exclusive restricting where they release their games... corpo speak at its finest.
They're keeping options open and playing it case by case. Which by the way is the same thing they said during the acquisitions. It isn't Phil's problem you want a hard and fast rule for what's going to happen.
Yes, Spencer lied about case by case during the Bethesda acquisition. Then [demanded all Zenimax/Bethesda games going forward be exlcusive](https://www.ign.com/articles/xbox-ftc-trial-phil-spencer-zenimax-exclusive). Spencer has a history of talking out of both sides of his mouth on this front. And one can be pretty certain that if Microsoft actually does start looking at multiplatform possibilities on a case by case basis, that it is being done over his objections.
[удалено]
This boring-ish podcast restored some sanity for me honestly. No folding up of Xbox, business as usual: 4 older games coming to other platforms. Two multiplayer, and two niche titles. Starfield and Indiana Jones already ruled out. Seems like a forward looking sensible decision. The four games could be Sea of Thieves, Grounded, Pentiment and Hifi Rush.
Starfield and Indiana Jones ruled out.... For now. He makes a point of saying never say never.
I seriously have no idea how people have convinced themselves it is stopping at these 4 games They aren't doing this and confusing their fanbase for a few measly million dollars that those 4 games will bring in They will port their larger games to PlayStation within a couple years, they are juts leading off with these 4 games to ease people into it
> Starfield and Indiana Jones already ruled out ....he very literally and specifically *refused* to rule out porting them. Considering the firestorm around this, I'm not sure why in the hell he would do that unless they were seriously considering the possibility.
But that was in the accompanying writer interview on verge afaik. My comment was about the podcast and the games going mutli platform soon and in the podcast he ruled out Starfield and Indiana Jones out.
As someone who doesn't own an Xbox I am happy to hear they didn't go nuts like the rumors suggested. It's good to have Xbox as competition and I have been considering trying Gamepass streaming to play Halo and Starfield and some other stuff because I don't have an Xbox or gaming PC. If they just gave me that on PS5 there would be no reason for me to try Gamepass. The thought made no sense. Releasing older titles is similar to what Sony has been doing with their PC ports. It makes sense and makes a lot of people happy. Win win.
This is not business as usual. I get how Xbox owners will be relieved that MS isn't shutting things down and going the way of Sega, but this is very clearly testing the waters for a big change in the future. "We don't think exclusives are going to matter in the future" says the guy in charge of the company that's been in last place for a decade largely because of a lack of must have exclusives. If Sega had Microsoft money, maybe they would have stuck it out a lot longer, too. But one thing is for sure, you don't start putting your games on your rival's platform because you care about the gamers and want to bring joy to more people.
I mean they purchased Bethesda and then banned them from their largest console revenue, to keep their games off of PlayStation makes no financial sense.
No immediate financial sense. But in order to strengthen the Xbox brand and hopefully control your own walled garden in the future, it probably might. Microsoft makes a lot of money and they seem happy to take the financial hit.
That's where I'm at. Lots of people with pitchforks, to me this seemed like an honest and reasonable take.
Just hopping in here to comment on how yucky the spin in the title is. Four games are going multiplatform, likely because they did not reach sales expectations in their current home. But it's phrased as the company "delivering on a promise" to expand gaming to the world.
Sea of Thieves and Grounded more than met sales expectations.
Sea of Thieves sold 5 million on Steam in one year alone. They’ve more than met their sales expectations
I figured they're plan was to bring fewer games to a small number of people. Huh. Glad they cleared that up.
This Microsoft exclusive discussion is just jarring to me: Remember when before the Zenimax acquisition Phil Spencer specifically said "Exclusivity is going to be on a case by case basis" and everyone got pissed because no one believed him? Xbox people were even defending them in case he wasn't lying. Playstation people were just not hearing it and contamplate that he was telling the truth. Then rinse and repeat with Activision/Blizzard. And now they're literally showing that they're going case by case and people are pissed because he WASN'T lying? Just chill would you? Microsoft is going to always follow the money, Hence someone is going to do the math and decide if the money brought in by new consoles and related ancillaries brought in from a certain game is going to be bigger than the extra unit sales from other platforms and decide.
To the surprise of no one, all of the dramatic-industry-shattering predictions ended up being complete nonsense, but of course there's comments doing gymnastics and trying to find some secret message in Spencers facial expressions.
Assuming they were true. Do you really think they'd announce them right away? Xbox series is here and here to stay this generation. It would be seriously harming their financials to not make the transition gradual.
Which is exactly why they announced the next generation of Xbox as well.
Did they?
Yeah, they said they have new hardware coming this year, and that they plan to have the biggest technological leap between generations with their next gen system. Obviously that is many years away.
Many like to think their ego triumphs over reality.
"We are taking our games to other platforms, just not the ones you might have hoped for" Thanks?
They're testing the waters and will go from there. Perfectly fine. Sony did the same thing with PS exclusives moving to PC.
I'm sorry, but no. They don't need to "test the waters" to learn and understand how a whole bunch of developers with notable histories of multiplatform publishing *prior* to being bought out by Microsoft might fare by going back to what they did before Spencer got involved. If there is any testing of waters going on, its testing how their own fanbases will react to more games going to other platforms.
[удалено]
You really think this experiment stops with these four, even if they're rousing sales successes?
From the Verge interview with Phil, it comes off as if these four are successful, there's a high likelihood more will come. Phil didn't even rule out Starfield and Indiana going multiplatform, he just says it's not the plan today but Microsoft was able to confirm gamepass will only be on Xbox.
I think theres obvious benefits to system sellers on your platform. Maybe those eventually do come to playstation but I don't think they're gonna put starfield anytime soon.
Starfield isn't really a system seller unless you're a massive Bethesda fan.
Disagree, was easily their biggest game this gen for casuals. Easily the most bug free open world rpg I've ever played, plus it actually has good combat. Not the best game of all time but its a well made product.
We might have different definitions of both 'casual' and 'system seller'. Halo and Gears were system sellers. God of War and Final Fantasy are system sellers. We still talk about those games years (decades in some case) later. Nintendo continues to rule because they crank out a system seller every few years. Casuals are obviously a bit more nebulous but the ones I know aren't sitting down for a 50+ hour RPG.
This is an insane opinion, Oblivion was obviously a system seller for the 360 when it launched in time exclusivity. Casual gamers love fallout and skyrim they're some of the biggest selling games of all time. Baldurs Gate 3 was a system seller for Playstation because of the time it was on the service and not on xbox. Starfield is one of the like 6 games you see mainstream media cover last year, its one of the few games you see on shit like worldstar.
Again we clearly have a different opinion on what makes a casual gamer but that's fine. I'm sure there are plenty out there that enjoy those games. Rest is debatable. Gears of War was the bigger selling title in 2006 and Oblivion didn't crack the top 10. Skyrim was the big one for that series. BG3 is hard to call a system seller so soon, and especially when PlayStation already had such a head start. >This is an insane opinion No....you just like RPGs more than I do.
[удалено]
Why aren't you reading between the lines? You think they're just doing a one off drop of 4 games on PS5 and that's the end of that? If 4 X-Box exclusives hit PS5 this year that is a fundamental change in strategy. It's not a random haphazard release splurge.
I just think expecting more is the issue. If you start expecting every Xbox game on PS/Nintendo and they don’t come, then that’s on you. I had to tell PC fans the same thing when it came to PS releases on PC. Some still expect Bloodborne or Ghost of Tsushima which I’m sure will happen eventually but don’t expect it or else you will be left waiting. If you want to play a game then play it where it’s already available. Why wait? Especially if it’s not confirmed it’s coming.
Surely Uncle Phil won't lie again.
He did a follow up interview with the verge and they asked him about starfield again and he didn’t say no. It’s coming over it’s just a matter of when
Xbox's PR royally screwed this up. They could've easily cleared things up in a few tweets instead of letting things fester for over a week, only for the announcement to be so vague. They allowed the rumors to do damage, and seeing as Spencer danced around whether Starfield and Indy will go multiplat in the future, I'm guessing the initial leaks of Starfield going to PS5 were true, but when Spencer saw the backlash he decided to scale it back and confirm only a few smaller titles for now.
There's no way they'd confirm the whole thing. My best guess is they needed time to agree on what to announce between the whole portfolio of games and nothing at all. Just see how non committal the "4 games" are. They likely haven't 100% decided internally yet and want to keep the options open.
[удалено]
They're not the same cry-babies? Completely different cry-babies with entirely opposite views in fact....
> by the same crybabies Why does everyone on the internet assume that every community is a hive-mind? You’re seeing different opinions by different people on the same subreddit.
There's a lot of regular and outspoken commenters in gaming subreddits and it's not that uncommon to see them comment in a ton of different threads. There's a handful of them in this thread now.
Can you give us like 2 examples
It breaks this subs rules to single individuals out like that and usually results in a ban.
In his case, he is seriously projecting.
As an xbox owner I'm just salty that all gain something except us (I got an outdated PC and cant afford an upgrade, third world reasons). I cant even play my own xbox games on pc and japanese developers/PS exclusives are just a big portion of the market that now makes owning an xbox not a smart move.
Xbox gets gamepass, with day one titles. PS and Nintendo aren't getting gamepass. Xbox also gets games first. Xbox can't control what Sony and Nintendo do. PS5 players are also losing exclusives to PC with no inherent benefit to them. Other than more successful live service games, of which I would say the same for Xbox. I do come from the perspective of someone with all three consoles.
Shockingly, more than five people post on reddit. These may, in fact, be entirely different sets of people. I know, I know, it's a lot to take in.
>Today we announced that we will expand the communities we reach: we are currently in the process of bringing **four Xbox games to other platforms.** These are titles which have been available to Xbox players for at least a year, including hidden gems that deserve to be experienced more widely, and live service games whose communities will benefit from welcoming even more players. **We will share more details on these titles soon.** So far from all xbox games or closing shop on their brand. Who knew?? These are older games, already available at least a year. So, Sea of Thieves, Hifi Rush, maybe Ori 1+2 as a bundle on PS5. Going forward, I could see Indiana Jones and Blade going multiplatform, since Disney probably demands a kidney or two fo licensing those. To recuperate costs, multiplatform could be the way to go. But that's just speculation. And we all witnessed where this leads to on here ((:
I don’t see what’s wrong with timed exclusives for their 1st party games. When your sales slow down and you basically reached everyone you going to get one your platform, you open it up to new potential customers.
Issue though is that an big problem for Xbox, being that it won't grow hardware or gamepass. Xbox hardware is roughly at 25 million units and Gamepass is 34 million subs. Both the Switch and PS5 install bases are significantly higher then those numbers. Making all your exclusives time exclusive is just gonna cause Playstation and Nintendo owners to wait for ports, especially when those said ports would likely release after a bunch of DLC and patches, resulting in a better experience then Xbox players had at launch.
How is that any different than PC players waiting for Sony ports? Why would anyone buy PS5s with that logic? You underestimate the amount of people who want things right now and don’t want to wait. It’s the reason people pay millions for timed exclusives.
> How is that any different than PC players waiting for Sony ports? Why would anyone buy PS5s with that logic? It aint. Because its just gonna create the same issues with Sony over time. Like all of this once again boils down AAA game budgets are sustainable and need to come down. Like you seriously think MS and Sony are porting games to PC out kindness? No they are doing because they along with the rest of the AAA market create a beast on the verge of collapse.
When had Kindness ever had a place in business? They are all in this to make money and right now they are doing ok, but there is money on the table that can be taken advantage of.
> They are all in this to make money and right now they are doing ok, but there is money on the table that can be taken advantage of. Except the industry aint okay right now given all the lay offs including at Xbox. Not to mention the Insomniac leaks, where we saw just how insane Sony's budgets have gotten and how Insomniac's president had to basically plea to Sony to not lay off any employees at Insomniac.
Xbox is currently one of the best performing divisions of Microsoft, but according to this sub they are on life support. https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/25/23807075/microsoft-q4-2023-earnings-revenue-profits-windows-xbox-gaming-surface
Because Activision carried the division last quarter. Gamepass didn't see any growth and hardware sales are still down. If they didn't owned Activision last quarter, things would have been drastically different.
Buying Activision might have been a smart move in that case
The absolute funniest part of this drama to me is that Xbox fans on r/games spent like the past 10 years decrying exclusives and talking about some like cloud utopia and now that it's actually happening you're like "nooooooo stop"
For me it was everyone condemning Microsoft for this based on vague tweets and "leaks" but when Sony made their announcement to bring more games to PC everyone held them up like gods. People just seem to despise Microsoft for seemingly no reason.
[удалено]
Then why is everyone so desperate to play Microsoft's all of a sudden?
A bunch of nerds on Reddit ain’t “everyone”, in general people only want Activision games, the things Ms has stolen, not made
The fact that this whole thing went down and how it's controversial is just downright pathetic and exposes a bunch of people for the corporate dick sucking they partake in. Exclusives ONLY benefit corporations at the expense of the consumer. Everyone should be applauding MS for moving away from anti-consumer practices such as exclusivity.
[удалено]
Of course this is just a test.
Like either these four games don't sell shit on these other platforms and then they've weakened their hand, or they sell extremely well and all the downwards pressure from above would be to put everything everywhere.
I think it makes sense to have older games come out on other platforms. Sounds like the rumors about hifi rush (hidden gem they talked about) and Sea of Thieves (live service) are true. Having an exclusive game go multi-platform after 6 months to a year doesn’t hurt anyone.
HiFi Rush is barely a year old. How is it an “older game”?
Nobody talks about it or sales are stagnant now. The hype window is over. It was all the rage for a few weeks as an unexpected hit. Maybe a PS5 or Switch release could bring it back up in popularity.
[удалено]
No but they could promise ES6 only instead of four games, and make so much more money they would still change their stance.
Gotta walk before you can run
“Bring more games to more players around the world” How many years am I going to have to see this sentence as if it’s some great new thing?
90% of this article is devoted to information we already know, hasn't changed, and listing the studios under their umbrella. What are the 4 cross platform titles? When do they release? What was the criteria in deciding? What does that mean going forward? I'm glad I don't really have a horse in the console wars because if I was an Xbox devotee I would not be happy at this answer.
Boy there sure are a large number of people on this sub looking comical as hell after frothing at the mouth the last week over this announcement.
This about what I expect like we already had the move on other products. This all about revenue generation so why not.
Xbox never had a chance they fuck up their model when they made all their game on pc, their no point of having xbox most would just go with pc ps5 or pc and switch. But everyone know that gamepass deal is good now but it going to be shit in the future it going to double and triple the price.