Starfield is not technically out until next week, yet it is already dominating conversations in many ways across the game space – and inevitably, bugs are a factor.
Microsoft has once again reiterated that the acquisition of Activision-Blizzard was mostly about securing a foothold in the mobile market, CFO Tim Stuart has said. In addition, the executive explained that Microsoft intends to drive high-margin sales on both PlayStation and Nintendo.
They can support their own platforms as well as others without going full 3rd party. with the Sony/Nintendo fans buying... it only serves to benefit MS fans who just use GP.
There was some article the other day that said kids are wanting more subs for xmas instead of physical games. i don't know how accurate that is but it sounds like the next generation is less about ownership and more about just playing to have fun.
Exactly, to that final point in particular. What makes games so sacred that they'd be immune from changes in purchasing trends across almost every single industry?
Phone subscriptions, Music subscriptions, movie subscriptions, food/meal subscriptions, grocery delivery subscriptions, automotive subscriptions; if you're someone growing up with these especially, why stop and put your foot down suddenly at $70 video games, which then have their own subscriptions in the form of seasonal battle passes and Mtx?
So long as there remain quality single player experiences and respectable pathways to ownership/preservation, I don't particularly see a problem.
My simplistic interpretation is that to drive more revenue with higher margins, MS would use it's large catalog of games to negotiate a larger cut of the game sales on PS/Nintendo.
Like, for example, Sony might get less than 30% for MS published games. I kinda think that might imply they'll be throwing in some previously exclusive titles to sweeten the deal... we'll see
Kind of makes sense. I can see how a kid would rather have an ongoing sub to have access to a ton of games rather than getting a game or two now and then. They're not the one footing the bill.
You are correct, kids are ill-informed on the importance of ownership. We shouldn't let kids decide the future of the market.
I belive that was misleading, digital sales is increasing, so of course kids born in the digital age would prefer cards that allow them to purchase games online rather than physical games. This can also simply be cause subscription is required to play online on consoles. People are buying them because they have to
They aren't making money by investing in R&D for hardware that doesn't recoup its costs... they lose money on hardware, their only profits are from services, so it only makes sense for them to just support their services and leave the hardware up to the ones who can actually sell it.
As for subscriptions taking over everything else... look at how the movie and TV show subscription market is imploding right now... It isn't working out very well for them. Disney has more subs than netflix, for instance, but is still losing money.
Yeah what a weird thing to ask for I know some of my greatest memories as a kid centred around unwrapping consoles and games on Christmas if someone gave me a subscription that I only had for 12 months I'd be a bit disappointed it's like the modern gift card in a way
But they can only do that by buying up 3rd parties. And in that, if they announcing such was the plan, they're doing it wrong by making certain titles exclusive to their own platform(s).
Less about ownership and more about playing to have fun....
As if people didn't always play to have fun.
When I was kid, I had all the time in the world to play games, but was too broke, so I might have played 3-4 games in any given year (and they may not even have been new games).
If something like PS Now or Xbox Game Pass was around back then. I'd have been like a kid in a candy store. I can play hundreds of games at no added cost? I'd gladly take a 12 month sub every Christmas.
Now I'm a fully grown adult with not nearly enough time for games. A subscription for me is worthless at any price, because I only have time for 3-4 games per year anyway and then I probably won't even finish all of those games either.
Great idea! Let Playstation monopolize high-powered home consoles so they can hike up console, game, and subscription prices at their leisure.
/facepalm
I agree. Why not? It might be better for gaming as a whole, but then it would be less competition on the console side and that’s never good.
Why "chaos is a good thing" articles incoming
Any other game with bugs would be considered a hot mess.
This is the same guy that lied about this game actually having planets to explore.
This the same guy who said starfield would be seamless only to be filled with loading screens. Half the playtime gonna be you loading LOL. Also not next gen features whts so ever to. if this was a Sony title it would have been cooked
Funny way to say "we are still using the creation engine, which we know is a piece of shit and needs to be taken behind the barn, but it turns out our buggy messes generate word of mouth from bug montages"