Microsoft Signs 10 Year Deal to Bring All of Its Games to Boosteroid Cloud Service

Today, Microsoft announced another ten-year deal to bring all of its games (including Activision Blizzard's if the deal closes) to Boosteroid.

Read Full Story >>
Abracadabra83d ago

Microsoft want to release their games on all platforms. If Sony ask nicely, Microsoft will release their exclusive games on PS5, even Starfield...

Alexious83d ago

It's a smart move. It's silly that we are gated by hardware, imagine that for movies or TV or music.

shinoff218383d ago

Cause then you go from being gated by consoles to being gated by subscriptions. Its the same damn thing and you are gated by all those things you listed

KyRo83d ago

It does happen with movies and music though?

ActualEngineer83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

Human words cannot express how ignorant and unknowledgeable you two sound. Xbox and Playstation are a gaming hub - ecosystem that is accompanied by hardware AND NOT hardware manufacturers - they just provide the hardware as a functional part of the ecosystem. They are software developers and retailers. And as such, they make marginal or no profits from the hardware sales.

So why in the world would Sony want Microsoft to publish the competing platform in their service?

BrainSyphoned83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

Ya imagine only being gated by a monthly $180 cable bill or 6 20$ movie providers. But being gated by a one time hardware purchase, oooo that's the big hurt.

Elda83d ago

It's a business like any other business. The 3 main console platforms have their own identity when it comes to exclusive games.

83d ago
fr0sty83d ago

Yes, movies and music, but you aren't going to get lower quality special effects in your movies due to the TV you are watching them on. Picture and sound quality are one thing, but when it affects the movie itself... or if forced to do it over the cloud... it would be akin to the movie's audio and video being out of sync (input lag).

Godmars29083d ago

Imagine if there were differences in performance as well as production between different types of movies and music-neither industry would exist.

Reason it was diffident for consoles and PCs is that, back in the day, PCs were too complex and expensive for the general market. So console filled the gap PCs left. A gap which pretty much no longer exists.

The ongoing issue with it however, much like movies and music, publishers want to continue to dictate how consumers access *their* media still paying for it. T continue to own it. Something that's been more prevalent with games since code wheels.

So it should not be forgotten as MS moves to put *their* games on everything via subscriptions, that they once tried to dictate how and when they were accessed, and that they wanted to put their hands in your wallet while doing it.

CrimsonWing6983d ago

we kind of are though. There's things that run specific on MacOS that don't on Windows and vice versa.

The thing you're not recognizing here is the competitive market. How do you compete against a company if you have nothing exclusive to offer?

I don't think the concept of exclusivity is rocket science. You have a number of companies trying their hardest to get a consumer to choose them as the platform to play on.

In a sense for TV don't you have things like premium channel services or streaming services that have exclusivity? Are you wanting a single piece of hardware and then all publishers to have Netflix-type services?

I think it's worth having a discussion over. Like what are you envisioning a console competitive market to be like where every game is available to any console. How do you incentivize a consumer to choose your platform?

1Victor83d ago

Can’t wait for Microsoft to offer stadia a 10 years contract as well 🤣

gerbintosh83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

Are all Xbox users idiots or are these two the only idiots, who ruin the reputation of Xbox users?

FinalFantasyFanatic83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

This, I know for example, you can have Netflix on any smart TV that supports apps, but the content is gated between more than half a dozen subscription services (e.g. Disney+, Prime, Stan, Hulu, Crunchyroll, HBO Max, every TV's own streaming app which may/may not be free, ect...).

In the case of media, for example, if you wanted to watch the anime "Teasing Master Takagi-San", each season is literally on a different service, so you actually need 3 separate subscriptions to watch it all. I see this as content wars where everyone wants to gobble up as much content as they can, look at how some streamers like Netflix have to constantly fund new content to stay relevant and it's putting them in the red.

I know it's not the exact same for video games, but it kinda is, for example, you can play Halo MC on Steam, and Infinite, but not Halo 5. Or we can look at Octopath Traveler as a more recent example, you can play the first one on almost everything, but Octopath 2 skipped Xbox this time.

No matter how you look at it, you're being gated one way or another from your desired content, I don't see how this "smart move" is an improvement to the situation, the rest of your comment is moot because of my first/second paragraph's point.

DarXyde83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

Not that different from how phone companies used to be where you could only call people in your network without using minutes.

I'll also add that was in fact the case for movies when HD-DVD and Blu-ray were competing. Some studios exclusively released HD movies on one or the other.

And actually, streaming platforms are like that too. You can often get titles via in store purchase but not other streaming platforms (similar to playing on one console but also having a PC option).

To Abracadabra,

I would say they're pretty okay with NOT doing that if they can use it to specifically strangle PlayStation. Apparently, one of the reasons for the acquisition was to do just that.

Is the plan to ultimately get these games on PlayStation? Probably, with the caveat being it must be through XGP (i.e, Sony allows the service on their platform). Pretty strong conflict of interest there. I don't see this as Sony asking nicely. It's more like Microsoft wanting to paint Sony into a corner.

Bathyj83d ago

No, Microsoft being a platform holder is silly. They're clearly supposed to be a 3rd party publisher.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 83d ago
Vengeance113883d ago

Oh MS will do that all on their own once Starfield sales tank, they'll be begging Sony to put it on the PS5 for a quick sales boost. Remember MS has no idea how to manage studios or make a hit game, have to take notes from Sony.

JEECE83d ago

Starfield will sell a good amount on Steam.

Andrew33683d ago

Almost like the game won't also be on PC too or something.

thesoftware73083d ago

Oh, Is that the new 'goal post hope' now that you know the deal has a high chance to go through now.

MS begging Sony...really,

So their games will be on every single other platform, I mean every other, and you feel that they, MS, will have to Beg Sony?

Wow you Sony-Only fans really are in some sort of denial phase.

GotGame81883d ago

No, Microsoft is setting itself up for success. Starfield is going to be huge and epic.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 83d ago
Flakegriffin83d ago

Sony doesn’t need Xbox and gamepass to succeed and break records

Xbox on the other hand…can’t say the same for them. Their own player base doesn’t even buy games that drop on Xbox.

Andrew33683d ago

We get it. You don't like Xbox and you like playstation. You're going wild in all the Xbox posts the last hour.

hiawa2383d ago

I actually buy all multiplatform games on Xbox, and some of those good GP games, so some of us do buy.

Flakegriffin83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

@Andrew336 Sorry I’m using a forum to speak my opinion. We get it, you don’t understand how forums work.

Flakegriffin83d ago

@Hiawa Oh for sure. A lot of my third party games that I play is through gamepass PC unless it’s something I really want to play on my PS5. Majority of the Xbox player base doesn’t tho. That’s why most, if not all, games never sell the most on Xbox.

The3faces83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

"Their own player base doesn't even buy games that drop on Xbox"

God of War Ragnarok sold 21 million copies, not so impressive when the combined PS4/PS5 sales are around 150 million. Horizon Forbidden West did the same. Out of 31 million PS5's Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart only sold 1.1 million copies.
Just saying!

vallencer83d ago

I have game pass and am still buying starfield on steam. It's considerably easier to mod on steam then it is on gamepass and I imagine it's going to have a massive modding community behind it.

wiz719183d ago

Lol who said they don’t ?? I buy plenty of games on my Xbox tf you talking about

CrimsonWing6983d ago (Edited 83d ago )

Can you provide a link to the source to back up that claim?

I'm just trying to cross my T's and dot my I's, here. Not saying it's hyperbole, but I'm not saying it isn't, either.

I remember reading something along the lines of Halo Infinite being the 2nd best selling game of its month.

But I won't deny third-party sort of niche titles don't sell as well on the Xbox. I think there's definitely a more skewed demographic with preferences on Xbox.

However, they've broken revenue records for the Xbox division, so something's selling:


+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 83d ago
Christopher83d ago

It's amazing to see the extreme responses to these things.

One side says they don't need Xbox or ActiBlizz and they will continue to beat the competition and will still dominate because who needs the one most dominant game out there that accounts for ~10% of PlayStation revenue for the last few years let alone every other IP there that makes more money than Sony IPs.

The other side acts like Microsoft is the Jesus of companies and will graciously and without at all making it financially worse for Sony to allow their games on PlayStation, the one competitor that Microsoft has obviously noted and said that they themselves can't compete against in these filings and 100% not the company that Xbox One era Microsoft said they weren't really competing against.

thesoftware73083d ago (Edited 83d ago )

Why do we need a 3rd Console?

Because peoples perceived direction of what MS is doing? Are people really afraid for Sony?

Sony are giants, MS are giants, and Nintendo is Very relevant in gaming, no one wants a 3rd High Spec console with the same exact games as the 2 we have now. You want people to buy 4 consoles now, because MS is disrupting Sony's regularly scheduled program?


Christopher83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

***Why do we need a 3rd Console?***

Because competition thrives when it's not a war of attrition.

***Sony are giants, MS are giants***

Not according to Microsoft.

***no one wants a 3rd High Spec console with the same exact games as the 2 we have now.***

*looks at PC* Sorry, what?

***You want people to buy 4 consoles now, because MS is disrupting Sony's regularly scheduled program?***

1. Why do people need to buy more than 1 console?
2. Why do you make MS out to be the good guy here but not when Sony disrupts Microsoft's regularly scheduled program?
3. Why do you think a battle between the 3rd highest earning company in the world and a company that doesn't even chart in the top 100 earning is fine and a one-time deal that is valued at almost the full value of the other company is going to maintain competition?
4. Do you think we should only have Microsoft? If not, then why do you fight so hard against Sony's desire to remain competitive against a $70b buyout the likes of which the industry has never seen?

You're arguing against more competition when I can throw the same argument people throw against others, no one is forcing you to buy the new competition's products. But in arguing against competition, you're arguing against yourself and you just don't realize it because you're so blind to trust that a company that literally buys out competition annually has told you they need to buyout more things to compete against a company worth <8% of them as a whole. The logic is ridiculous. If you support the buyout, you can't support competition. And making it about how you get more games day 1 doesn't change that, it's still losing a massive element of competition in the industry. And capitalism has proven that the only thing that keeps people from dominating is competition. It's the only thing.

wiz719183d ago

@Christoper once people realize Microsoft aren’t trying to compete anymore , they’re just trying to make money and put themselves in a position to always make money. You right on raw sales Microsoft can’t compete with Sony they know that , instead of competing why not make money off them ? Say what you want but if this deal goes through Activision will have the financial backing they really need same with Bethesda

FinalFantasyFanatic83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

"Why do we need a 3rd Console? "

I actually wish Sega still made hardware, but at this point, everything is just a mini computer, although I do love how Nintendo actually went in a different direction with the hybrid console/handheld (not that it wasn't attempted before in history). Nintendo is innovative enough, different enough, to warrant their place amongst the big three, and I do enjoy their games and other differences they bring to the market.

"instead of competing why not make money off them ?"
You'd be nuts to think Sony would willingly allow Xbox to take revenue they could have had for themselves, I don't think Xbox has bothered to try and compete since the Xone days (they almost bowed out of the market after the disastrous Xone reveal).

Christopher83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

*** Say what you want but if this deal goes through Activision will have the financial backing they really need same with Bethesda***

The most profitable third-party IP, third most valuable IP, quickly approaching the first two that are Pokemon and Super Mario Bros, which have been out for almost two decades more than CoD, and is the IP that continues to break its own records year after year is finally going to have the financial backing it needs?

Listen to what you are saying. Honestly. Listen.

The absolutely only purpose of ActiBlizz selling is so stakeholders and executives can get massive payouts. There is no problem with the company, it continues to make ridiculous profits every year and has grown every year. The sale isn't because the company is hurting, it's because some rich people want to grab some big money and retire for life off of it.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 83d ago
MadLad83d ago

Sony with no direct competition will slowly degrade over time. Especially with Jim Ryan at helm.

And Microsoft makes a profit off of their consoles. There's no reason to get out of the hardware business for them.

Christopher83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

Microsoft is and will continue to be direct competition for Sony until they manipulate the market to the way they want and have obtained the primary control in it. The problem is that Nintendo isn't competing with either of these two and vice versa. We really need a third powerhouse to compete at the same level as Microsoft and Sony.

FinalFantasyFanatic83d ago

I don't really like Jim Ryan and some of the stuff he's done for Sony, but Microsoft aren't that interested in competing, their recent actions have proven this, and they we going to drop out of the market in the early Xone days. This is just Microsoft going all out to own the market so they can do as they please, if it doesn't work out, just might just stop making hardware and spruik Gamepass (which I kinda feel they're doing now anyway).


Why can’t M$ make games instead of just buying them?

Wintersun61683d ago

"That's just the thing. They don't have the passion that would drive their studios to make the best games. They can hire all the talent money can buy, but as long as the people in charge of Xbox are in it only for the money, they'll never be the top dog in this industry. They just don't understand nor have what it takes to pull it off. Throwing money around and seeing if it sticks just doesn't work when you're up against people who actually love what they're doing and understand this industry."

Wondering about the quatation marks? Yeah I wrote this a couple of years back in some random article. I'm not keeping track you know, just had a little deja vu here.

Now I was hopeful back then, that they would understand this and try something else. Instead they just multiplied the amount of money they're throwing around to find out how much they need to pay to win.

Chocoburger83d ago (Edited 83d ago )


Those have been my thoughts for years now. The Xbox brand started strong, I was a big fan of Xbox, bought it day one in 2001 with no regrets. Lots of good times, MS first party didn't always hit, but sometimes it did, and it was a worthwhile experience. To make things even sweeter was that they made deals with companies like SEGA for exclusive niche games that appealed to me. Panzer Dragoon Orta, Jet Set Radio Future, Gunvalkryie, Spikeout: Battlestreet, and more!

The original Xbox had a great library of games, great online service for its era, and overall MS put in the effort to try and succeed. They stopped putting in the effort around the Kinect era, and each year they just slip further and further into scummy territory. As if the 2013 DRM fiasco wasn't bad enough, they're now doing real life PAY TO WIN tactics, blatantly attempting to horde the industry for themselves. The very same industry they honestly do not give a crap about, they just want to "win at any cost."

Even if they don't end up owning Activision, just for their egregious behavior, I'll never forgive them.

rippermcrip83d ago

So all these Bethesda games are coming to Playstation?

Hofstaderman83d ago

Nah we cool. You guys can keep that.

n1kki683d ago

If Sony adds game pass they get all of the games. Simple as that.

Profchaos83d ago

Boosteroid is what small EU based PC game streaming this is a publicity stunt forgive my ignorance but I've never heard of them before today

Tedakin83d ago

MS would love to put Gamepass on PS5. Sony will never allow it.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 83d ago
crazyCoconuts83d ago

Any other streaming companies with no chance of succeeding want a 10 year deal so that MS looks charitable? Guaranteed the contract will outlive the company

343_Guilty_Spark83d ago

Boosteroid is one of the largest streaming platforms and is doing quite well.

crazyCoconuts83d ago

Oh yeah, one of the big boys. /S
Can't even find their company profile in Wikipedia.
Only news you'll find about them is this MS deal. Obviously another PR play for MS

Mr_cheese83d ago

I like to think I'm fairly clued in with things. This is the first I've heard of them. Doesn't mean they're not big, just never heard of them.

crazyCoconuts83d ago

I've heard of Hemorrhoid... is that what you're thinking of?

DeusFever83d ago

Raise your hand if you never heard of Boosteroids until today.

BlaqMagiq183d ago

Not a single soul including you even knew who Boosteroid was until today.

FinalFantasyFanatic83d ago

"Boosteroid is one of the largest streaming platforms and is doing quite well."
Said no one ever, I don't even know who these people are, it's like they rose out of the ether.

Extermin8or3_83d ago

Which says everything about the gaming streaming market. They ate based in Ukraine, are fucking tiny. The gsme streaming market is 10% Nvidia, 25% Sony, 64% ish Microsoft and the remaining 1% is companies like this. They have no hope in the long run and that's if a Russian missile doesn't wipe out their entire head office and/or whatever little infrastructure they have. Nvidia mostly let's you just streaming games you own so arguably their market share is probably even less than that.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 83d ago
hiroyukisanada83d ago

MS is practically a third party publisher at this point. Might as well drop the hardware altogether and just put Gamepass on everything.

Crows9083d ago

Theyre turning into a subscription service and the xbox fans are so happy about

Sonic188183d ago (Edited 83d ago )

I agree with you there about turning into a subscription service

343_Guilty_Spark83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

Why shouldn’t we be?

The traditional console model says buy a $500+ console and buy games at $60-$70 a pop that will only play on that box.

The model Microsoft wants is you get access to 1000+ games across multiple devices of your choosing and you get day and date release of exclusives.

You really tryna shade Xbox fans for choosing the model with more value?

You one of those people that spend $50 a pop at the movie theater and gets angry streaming services at all the all you can eat model.

darthv7283d ago

for me personally... Im getting older now and less interested in the ownership or even the physicality of things like when i was a kid. Im happy just being able to play something that interests me. Or watch a movie without having to buy it.

Just a word of advice to all the young people... it is inevitable that you will get older and your views on things will change. I used to defend the whole buying physical games thing, now... not so much. Convenience has its ups and downs and I'm okay with that.

343_Guilty_Spark83d ago


I can’t tell you how many movies and games I’ve collected that just sit collecting dust. I’m just not that interested in ownership. Not when the content is readily accessible through streaming or downloading.

Crows9083d ago

@343 subscription automatically would make gaming more expensive.

It's happened with creative software already.

Christopher83d ago (Edited 83d ago )

***The model Microsoft wants is you get access to 1000+ games across multiple devices of your choosing and you get day and date release of exclusives.***

You don't own games. You play what is currently licensed only. Internet is always required, even for SP. This is control that should be in the hands of players, not in the hands of the people making the games. Players should have the option to ensure the preservation of games, should be able to play whenever they want, should not be dictated what is available by license deals, should not disenfranchise communities that tend to be a generation behind on gaming or lack constant Internet access.

Desiring a better deal always comes at a cost. I think people don't really understand what their decisions mean in the long run and are very short-sighted.

***Just a word of advice to all the young people... it is inevitable that you will get older and your views on things will change. I used to defend the whole buying physical games thing, now... not so much. Convenience has its ups and downs and I'm okay with that.***

This is Boomer Logic. Don't listen to him. This is from a 45-year-old gamer. You might move into a position where you can not worry about ownership, but that doesn't mean others don't rely on it. Why remove options, why allow a company like Microsoft to dominate such an industry seeing their history with software as it is, why ignore that just because you might like something now that it doesn't mean it's for the best of the industry.