Microsoft acquires Zenimax Entertainment for $7.5 billion

[HereticBD]

They're going to make their extra bonus money from people like me who do not have Gamepass and will pay for a copy on PC so why not also put it on PS store but negotiate a better fee? Offer the whole or a large portion of the ZC collection but for a better lower percentage cut that Sony takes. Then you get their business and you could differentiate the versions on GamePass by making special bonus content that's only available on XBox (like when Destiny was released there was a lot of special content on PS... there were some jealous gamers.)

Now think about all that. You're arguing it's a better play to release all the games on PS, but give GP users bonus content to sway consumers. How is that a better play, than just keeping the games exclusive and swaying consumers that way? What's more tempting? A few exclusive map packs and skins, or the entire game? C'mon man, that's just wishful thinking from a Playstation fan that just wants the games on Playstation. It makes about as much sense as Sony giving Microsoft access to all of their exclusives, but keeping the DLC. At the end of the day, you're allowing your competitor to profit off of a product they don't own. It doesn't make any sense at all, unless a company is bleeding money and needs to work out some kind of partnership with their competitor to keep them afloat, and their competitor was kind enough to throw them a lifeline.

Think about it like this...if tomorrow, Sony announced that it was releasing all of their exclusive games on Xbox, but was keeping DLC exclusive to Playstation, would that be a win for Sony or Microsoft? Would it make sense for Sony to do that?

Also, it's not solely about Game Pass. It's about moving Xbox units. You know, that third place console that everyone makes fun of for not having any exclusives. Well, they remedied that. They make far more money if they can get these games selling systems, than whatever they might make with some kind of partnership deal. That's a huge part of this play, and the only way it works, is by shutting out the competition, and funneling consumers to their brand. It's why Sony and Nintendo has all of their exclusives locked up, and it's why Microsoft is locking theirs up.

 

[method115]

Now think about all that. You're arguing it's a better play to release all the games on PS, but give GP users bonus content to sway consumers. How is that a better play, than just keeping the games exclusive and swaying consumers that way? What's more tempting? A few exclusive map packs and skins, or the entire game? C'mon man, that's just wishful thinking from a Playstation fan that just wants the games on Playstation. It makes about as much sense as Sony giving Microsoft access to all of their exclusives, but keeping the DLC. At the end of the day, you're allowing your competitor to profit off of a product they don't own. It doesn't make any sense at all, unless a company is bleeding money and needs to work out some kind of partnership with their competitor to keep them afloat, and their competitor was kind enough to throw them a lifeline.

Think about it like this...if tomorrow, Sony announced that it was releasing all of their exclusive games on Xbox, but was keeping DLC exclusive to Playstation, would that be a win for Sony or Microsoft? Would it make sense for Sony to do that?

Also, it's not solely about Game Pass. It's about moving Xbox units. You know, that third place console that everyone makes fun of for not having any exclusives. Well, they remedied that. They make far more money if they can get these games selling systems, than whatever they might make with some kind of partnership deal. That's a huge part of this play, and the only way it works, is by shutting out the competition, and funneling consumers to their brand. It's why Sony and Nintendo has all of their exclusives locked up, and it's why Microsoft is locking theirs up.

Yep it's the move MS needs to make. They needed exclusives and now they have the devs to do that. Now they can slowly start to build back up and work towards gaining people back into their ecosystem. It will take time but they are making all the right moves.

 

[SaiWa]

Now think about all that. You're arguing it's a better play to release all the games on PS, but give GP users bonus content to sway consumers. How is that a better play, than just keeping the games exclusive and swaying consumers that way? What's more tempting? A few exclusive map packs and skins, or the entire game? C'mon man, that's just wishful thinking from a Playstation fan that just wants the games on Playstation. It makes about as much sense as Sony giving Microsoft access to all of their exclusives, but keeping the DLC. At the end of the day, you're allowing your competitor to profit off of a product they don't own. It doesn't make any sense at all, unless a company is bleeding money and needs to work out some kind of partnership with their competitor to keep them afloat, and their competitor was kind enough to throw them a lifeline.

Think about it like this...if tomorrow, Sony announced that it was releasing all of their exclusive games on Xbox, but was keeping DLC exclusive to Playstation, would that be a win for Sony or Microsoft? Would it make sense for Sony to do that?

Also, it's not solely about Game Pass. It's about moving Xbox units. You know, that third place console that everyone makes fun of for not having any exclusives. Well, they remedied that. They make far more money if they can get these games selling systems, than whatever they might make with some kind of partnership deal. That's a huge part of this play, and the only way it works, is by shutting out the competition, and funneling consumers to their brand. It's why Sony and Nintendo has all of their exclusives locked up, and it's why Microsoft is locking theirs up.

I never said it was the better play.
I don’t know what the better play is.

I am saying you are leaving a lot of money off the table. Elder Scrolls was never going to be on Gamepass unless it was owned by MS. It’s a big game. Not only do did you buy the company and incurred huge losses but you’re paying their salary right now for this massive game to be on Gamepass. You’re hoping it’s going to pull more customers but I don’t see players abandoning PS. That’s just me. Elder Scrolls can be played on PC and has historically been the favored format - by a shit ton. Based on what I read the remastered sold 30mil total: less that 2 mil on Xbox and less than 4 mil on PS. You’re not stealing much of a fan base. Granted action fantasy RPG are more popular now so we may see more sales but you’re cutting a portion of gamers who I don’t will switch over. ES is not a console seller IMO but I always played games like this on PC so I am not the target audience.

and your saying letting competitor profit but the most profit will go to the one who owns the company. They get a cut but you get the lions portion. A sell is a sell.

as I stated before though I was just wondering about the business part of it. Gamepass is intriguing.

 

[method115]

I never said it was the better play.
I don’t know what the better play is.

I am saying you are leaving a lot of money off the table. Elder Scrolls was never going to be on Gamepass unless it was owned by MS. It’s a big game. Not only do did you buy the company and incurred huge losses but you’re paying their salary right now for this massive game to be on Gamepass. You’re hoping it’s going to pull more customers but I don’t see players abandoning PS. That’s just me. Elder Scrolls can be played on PC and has historically been the favored format - by a shit ton. Based on what I read the remastered sold 30mil total: less that 2 mil on Xbox and less than 4 mil on PS. You’re not stealing much of a fan base. Granted action fantasy RPG are more popular now so we may see more sales but you’re cutting a portion of gamers who I don’t will switch over. ES is not a console seller IMO but I always played games like this on PC so I am not the target audience.

and your saying letting competitor profit but the most profit will go to the one who owns the company. They get a cut but you get the lions portion. A sell is a sell.

as I stated before though I was just wondering about the business part of it. Gamepass is intriguing.

Your right in that ES isn't really a system seller I agree with that. I think the strategy though is to just have not only more games in general but a bunch of games at this level. So maybe they wont get anyone to switch with just ES but now you throw in Doom, then Wolfenstein, then the next outerworlds, then all the other stuff they release.

Basically the strategy isn't just create one massive game and everyone will jump over. It's provide a consistent steady stream of exclusives and get people to switch over.

 

[HereticBD]

I never said it was the better play.
I don’t know what the better play is.

I'm pretty sure you do.

I am saying you are leaving a lot of money off the table. Elder Scrolls was never going to be on Gamepass unless it was owned by MS. It’s a big game.

See, it's comments like that, that makes me think you're ignorant as to what Game Pass actually offers. There are and have been MANY big games on Game Pass. Whether or not MS owns Bethesda, is really no indicator as to if their games would've been on Game Pass. "Fallout 4" was on Game Pass long before this deal ever went through, as was DOOM. Game Pass is not some cheap indie game service, like you appear to think it is. There have always been big AAA games on the service. That's the draw.

Not only do did you buy the company and incurred huge losses but you’re paying their salary right now for this massive game to be on Gamepass. You’re hoping it’s going to pull more customers but I don’t see players abandoning PS. That’s just me.

Nobody said you had to abandon Playstation to buy an Xbox. It's not a matter of choosing ES over GOW or Uncharted. It's about making the Xbox more appealing in general.

Elder Scrolls can be played on PC and has historically been the favored format - by a shit ton.

No. Now, I can't find any up to date statistics on sales, but at the height of Skyrim's popularity, consoles made up for 86% of it's sales. Yes, 86%. I don't believe those numbers have drastically shifted over the years, considering it's been on all consoles since 7th gen.

Based on what I read the remastered sold 30mil total:

That's total units since launch. Not the remastered version.

and your saying letting competitor profit but the most profit will go to the one who owns the company. They get a cut but you get the lions portion. A sell is a sell.

And if you keep it to yourself, you get all of it and your competitors get fuck all.

 

[SaiWa]

Your right in that ES isn't really a system seller I agree with that. I think the strategy though is to just have not only more games in general but a bunch of games at this level. So maybe they wont get anyone to switch with just ES but now you throw in Doom, then Wolfenstein, then the next outerworlds, then all the other stuff they release.

Basically the strategy isn't just create one massive game and everyone will jump over. It's provide a consistent steady stream of exclusives and get people to switch over.

I am not disputing this strategy at all. It makes sense. I am just wondering if the other would be viable too.

I am just saying from my POV you're not affecting me at all. As I've stated many times I've never played a Bethesda game on a console. All their games have been played on PC. They're going to get my money on PC no matter what if I choose to buy the game. The question is whether this change will get console gamers to switch/add Xbox. In my head... not really but that's just me. If all these games were walled off from PC it wouldn't make me run off and buy an XBox. I am a jaded player though. There's way too many games that I haven't played that I already own for me to go out of my way. I've said it many times. If I had a family and kids who share in gaming then Gamepass is the way to go. We would share in the gaming experience. If it's just me though... yeah I don't game that much (quantity wise) to warrant getting Gamepass.

I'm pretty sure you do.

See, it's comments like that, that makes me think you're ignorant as to what Game Pass actually offers. There are and have been MANY big games on Game Pass. Whether or not MS owns Bethesda, is really no indicator as to if their games would've been on Game Pass. "Fallout 4" was on Game Pass long before this deal ever went through, as was DOOM. Game Pass is not some cheap indie game service, like you appear to think it is. There have always been big AAA games on the service. That's the draw.

Nobody said you had to abandon Playstation to buy an Xbox. It's not a matter of choosing ES over GOW or Uncharted. It's about making the Xbox more appealing in general.

No. Now, I can't find any up to date statistics on sales, but at the height of Skyrim's popularity, consoles made up for 86% of it's sales. Yes, 86%. I don't believe those numbers have drastically shifted over the years, considering it's been on all consoles since 7th gen.

That's total units since launch. Not the remastered version.


And if you keep it to yourself, you get all of it and your competitors get fuck all.

I do not know because I am questioning how they are making money properly.

I actually meant blockbuster new games that would be available on Gamepass on launch day. If they're older then yeah you can see a good chunk of them on Gamepass (and PS Now) eventually. If they are not under MS it's typically not on Gamepass when launch day comes around.

And I was shocked to see Outriders on Gamepass launch so they must have gotten a sweet deal or something for them to make that available on console Gamepass (Not PC mind you i think. Only for console so sometimes you don't get the choice of platform). Was RE Village on Gamepass? Any Call of Duty? Battlefield 2042 was free for 10 hours. Then you have to pay for a full copy. I believe sports games (like EA FIFA and Madden) are only hitting gamepass months after release once the real season is mostly done? Farcry 6? Not at GP launch game for sure. AAA developers make way more money selling it a full price if you known it’s a blockbuster.

I agree with you the draw is being able to play these new Bethesda game on gamepass upon launch. My question is will you also draw people and also make that money by selling it elsewhere. Doom Eternal sold decently well on both PS and Switch. MS will be making a lot less money because instead of selling these games at full price its now free on Gamepass (and not on the other consoles). These new Bethesda games would have sold like hotcakes at full price. If you are making up the difference with more Gamepass users then okay but it will take a lot to make that up. Doom Eternal made half a billion dollars. Is the next Doom going to be free on both PC and XBox console? Is Gamepass going to cover the potential difference in profit after they make the next one free to play on Gamepass (along with sales losses on PS and Nintendo platform)? The GP revenues need to be shared across all the other games yes?

This is why i am so interested in the financial/business aspect with Gamepass. The business strategy is intriguing and I want to know how they're doing.

 

[method115]

This is why i am so interested in the financial/business with Gamepass. The business strategy is intriguing and I want to know how they're doing.

Yep I agree it's an interesting strategy and I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays out. From what people in the industry are saying they aren't making money off of GP right now. They are just in their building phase though so it's not really surprising. Halo and Forza just came out so it will be interesting to see how their subscriber base grows from that.