On a business point, bringing their games to as many platforms as possible is understandably a good move, and I'm not just talking about Xbox/Windows ecosystem, but also Nintendo and Sony, with the exception of selected few games that will stay exclusively on Xbox and/or Windows.

That begs the question though, as what kind of scenario this "openness" may possibly mean for Microsoft and for their future in the console business.

How is the average gamer enticed to buying a Microsoft platform knowing that their games are also available elsewhere?

Are they merely focusing on the services provided within the Xbox ecosystem, and exported outside of their own hardware, in order to reach a bigger chunk of market? If that is the case, what kind of role does their console/s really play in such a scenario?

@boxrekt said:

Time to bring delusional and geeking xbox fanboys back to earth who hope Playstation looses all it's exclusives like you have lost with xbox because you guys don't buy games.

Pay close attention to what is says after "PlayStation streaming".

"Turns PlayStation4 , which is expected to reach 100 million units cumulative sales this calander year, into a streaming game server, providing streaming content at the closes point to users."

So yeah, technically you could "steam" to PC but doesn't mean you won't need a PS4/PS5 in order to achieve that feat.

lol now you can go back to pretending you hate all Sony games like you've been doing all gen before you exposed yourselves here.

Remote play is one thing, Ps Now is another. You just need to understand that subscription services are where money, a lot of money is at. Just imagine the revenues a company with a userbase made of millions of people can make having all those users pay their monthly fee; and if you can spread that across multi-platforms, you just multiply earnings tenfold. It's only natural that Sony and Microsoft choose the most proficuous path, now isn't it?

It just means that both Sony and Microsoft have a common, giant target: challenging Google.

I'm playing Sonic Mania and sadly I can't seem to enjoy this type of game as I used to when I was younger.

Development times have to be taken into account

The Metacritic score reflects my opinion on the game as well, it's enjoyable but not great, yet I'd never give it a 5/10, that score seems a little too negative in my opinion. 7/10 is fair.

I do, I don't mind story focused games as long as the gameplay is solid, or else I simply get bored. I'm quite bad at following the narrative in games properly especially when this is being told as I'm busy exploring or kicking enemies' ass, I literally struggle to follow through the story when that's the case, so if I'm really interested in it and I miss some parts, I make sure to watch some walkthrough on YouTube to fill that "gap".

Ultimately, though, a good gameplay is what makes me come back to playing a certain game.

Exactly, fun factor should be the priority

Dishonored comes to mind

@Ant_17 said:

You really want to pay 60 bucks for an indie game?

Cause that's what you want AAA to do, make indie games.

No, well, I don't want AAA to make indie games, I'm merely talking about types of games I'd wish to see more often other than realistic, gritty, open world games. If you have devs (that isn't Nintendo) churn out more games that span different themes and approaches whilst keeping a top notch quality, it'd be great, but I understand this is the era where risk can lead to dire consequences.