"Phill should RESIGN!" calls growing louder on Twitter. Do u agree?

  • 135 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for TheEroica
TheEroica

23164

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1 TheEroica  Moderator
Member since 2009 • 23164 Posts

https://www.videogamer.com/news/phil-spencer-trends-on-twitter-amid-calls-for-him-to-resign/

Apparently the armchair quarterbacks at Twitter are enjoying a round of echo chamber centered on Phil Spencer's spotty run as head of Xbox.... Now, we know that Twitter is the very lowest for of human interaction, but perhaps system wars can have a real discussion being that we are one rung more intelligent than Twitter users.... (which isn't saying much 😜)

The question is not whether you like or hate Phil. You don't know him. It's if you think it's time foe the sun to set on his time with xbox... Is Microsoft making a mistake hanging on to Phil or does he simply need more time to make his vision profitable?

Who would be a good replacement?

Avatar image for vatususreturns
VatususReturns

970

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#2 VatususReturns
Member since 2021 • 970 Posts

I always said his "good guy act" was a farse. He was just the Microsoft corporate response to the Don Mattrick fiasco, nothing more. They aimed to create a persona that gamers could relate to and they achieved it for a while.

Now the mask has come off and the world sees him for who he is.

Avatar image for onesiphorus
onesiphorus

5308

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

#3 onesiphorus
Member since 2014 • 5308 Posts

Do these X users own stock in Microsoft or will they organize a boycott of Xbox? Making noise on social media will do little without some teeth.

Avatar image for girlusocrazy
GirlUSoCrazy

1395

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#4 GirlUSoCrazy
Member since 2015 • 1395 Posts

I'm surprised they would not demand Xbox be spun off and be able to manage themselves. Maybe Phil could have managed things better but it depends what MS would let him do.

Maybe they have different priorities and fight against each other. If that is the case, then it probably has led to compromise on both sides along the way instead of a strong and united push where everyone is on board.

On the other hand if they have priorities that align, it seems like some gamers might be unsatisfied with the results.

It is also possible that those being vocal do not represent the main audience that Xbox is trying to target and that Xbox has a bigger picture in view. Gaming has grown beyond just core gamers, and Xbox seems to want a broader target.

A wider audience means more diverse needs, so the vocal audience may feel like they are not specifically being satisfied, and MS keeps claiming bigger profits and bigger numbers, so maybe their strategy is working for whatever MS wants to accomplish, and it may not change much if these unsatisfied gamers move on to whatever suits them better.

Avatar image for Antwan3K
Antwan3K

8451

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Antwan3K
Member since 2005 • 8451 Posts

i think Phil Spencer inherited a sunk ship with the Xbox One, repaired it, and pointed it in the right direction.. from hardware options, to services, to more game studios..

but as stated in the OP, there is a toxic echo chamber around Xbox that simply isn't going to go away.. for example, PlayStation shuts down studios and has a huge layoff, it's a headline for a day and everyone moves on.. Xbox shuts down studios and has a huge layoff, and it's dissected for weeks with blame being placed on every facet of the Xbox business..

honestly, i don't know what the solution will be in the near-term.. "firing Phil" will only bolster those who have been making bad faith arguments this entire time and those same people will just continue to make bad faith arguments about whoever replaces him.. so with that said, what's the point?..

the only thing Xbox can do is what any gaming company should be doing: deliver good games.. the negative news cycles will come and go but it's dampened by good software for gamers to enjoy..

Avatar image for Zero_epyon
Zero_epyon

20287

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#6 Zero_epyon
Member since 2004 • 20287 Posts

Too little too late...

Avatar image for Archangel3371
Archangel3371

44760

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#7 Archangel3371
Member since 2004 • 44760 Posts

I’d like to see him stay myself.

Avatar image for SolidGame_basic
SolidGame_basic

45660

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 SolidGame_basic
Member since 2003 • 45660 Posts

I think so.. he had his crack at it for a decade now. They hyped up GamePass to kingdom come, used to talk about reaching “3 billion gamers”, talked about investing in Japan (but then let go a very talented developer), pretended to care about console gaming when ultimately they are going multiplat. The schtick has run its course. Time for someone new!

Avatar image for ghostofgolden
GhostOfGolden

2715

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#9 GhostOfGolden
Member since 2023 • 2715 Posts

They bought ABK and are now shutting down studios because they, and I quote, “don’t have the resources” to handle everything. How does this happen?!

A bunch of people have to go

Avatar image for saint-george
Saint-George

1478

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#10 Saint-George
Member since 2023 • 1478 Posts

Why...he's beat playstation so bad it's fans boast about console sales because it's the only thing they are winning in, unfortunately for cows Xbox has more customers.

Avatar image for SolidGame_basic
SolidGame_basic

45660

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 SolidGame_basic
Member since 2003 • 45660 Posts

@Antwan3K said:

i think Phil Spencer inherited a sunk ship with the Xbox One, repaired it, and pointed it in the right direction.. from hardware options, to services, to more game studios..

but as stated in the OP, there is a toxic echo chamber around Xbox that simply isn't going to go away.. for example, PlayStation shuts down studios and has a huge layoff, it's a headline for a day and everyone moves on.. Xbox shuts down studios and has a huge layoff, and it's dissected for weeks with blame being placed on every facet of the Xbox business..

honestly, i don't know what the solution will be in the near-term.. "firing Phil" will only bolster those who have been making bad faith arguments this entire time and those same people will just continue to make bad faith arguments about whoever replaces him.. so with that said, what's the point?..

the only thing Xbox can do is what any gaming company should be doing: deliver good games.. the negative news cycles will come and go but it's dampened by good software for gamers to enjoy..

What studios did Sony buy and then shut down within a couple months of owning them??

Avatar image for Antwan3K
Antwan3K

8451

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12  Edited By Antwan3K
Member since 2005 • 8451 Posts

@SolidGame_basic said:
@Antwan3K said:

i think Phil Spencer inherited a sunk ship with the Xbox One, repaired it, and pointed it in the right direction.. from hardware options, to services, to more game studios..

but as stated in the OP, there is a toxic echo chamber around Xbox that simply isn't going to go away.. for example, PlayStation shuts down studios and has a huge layoff, it's a headline for a day and everyone moves on.. Xbox shuts down studios and has a huge layoff, and it's dissected for weeks with blame being placed on every facet of the Xbox business..

honestly, i don't know what the solution will be in the near-term.. "firing Phil" will only bolster those who have been making bad faith arguments this entire time and those same people will just continue to make bad faith arguments about whoever replaces him.. so with that said, what's the point?..

the only thing Xbox can do is what any gaming company should be doing: deliver good games.. the negative news cycles will come and go but it's dampened by good software for gamers to enjoy..

What studios did Sony buy and then shut down within a couple months of owning them??

What studios did Microsoft buy and then shut down within a couple months of owning them?..

Avatar image for Star67
Star67

5191

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 29

User Lists: 0

#13 Star67
Member since 2005 • 5191 Posts

The issue is 4 years ago you spent 9 billion on Zenimax then 4 years later spend 70 Billion on Activision......So 80 billion in acquisitions in less than 5 years

But the excuse is not enough resources? BS All MS is doing is buying rights to IPs to put on gamepass and release on other platforms. The easier money is to go 3rd party and sell games, not make the hardware

Avatar image for TheEroica
TheEroica

23164

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#14 TheEroica  Moderator
Member since 2009 • 23164 Posts

@onesiphorus said:

Do these X users own stock in Microsoft or will they organize a boycott of Xbox? Making noise on social media will do little without some teeth.

I own ms stock... It's been super profitable since I purchased. I'm waaaay up on that position.

Avatar image for Sushiglutton
Sushiglutton

9940

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#15 Sushiglutton
Member since 2009 • 9940 Posts

No one is less qualified than me to answer this 😅.

But it seems like Phil has been given a lot of time and money and has not delivered. I doubt the concept of Gamepass. I don’t think it’s a good idea in the long run. I don’t think Xbox have built great studios that delivers goty-worthy titles.

How much is Phil’s fault, I dunno. But I think it would make sense to get someone new 🤷🏻‍♂️

Avatar image for tdkmillsy
tdkmillsy

6278

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#16 tdkmillsy
Member since 2003 • 6278 Posts

I'd give him a couple more years.

Lots of good stuff coming this year

Avatar image for Chutebox
Chutebox

50743

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 Chutebox
Member since 2007 • 50743 Posts

I couldn't care less.

I just laughed at people who took him for his word this whole time.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

70828

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 72

User Lists: 0

#18 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 70828 Posts

Gamers.🤭

Avatar image for osan0
osan0

17903

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19 osan0
Member since 2004 • 17903 Posts

There are 2 ways i looks at this. From my point of view and from Copororate (which, as we all know in SW, is the most important :P).

From my point of view: No. I think it's great that MS are bringing their games to the PC and other platforms. More games for everyone, less pointless buying of boxes.

I just wish they made better games and more interesting devices to play them on. They are a bit too much "content/services delivery" rather than "Make fun toys".

From MS standpoint: MS are a services company so the success of gamepass and it's growth is critical to Xbox. Frankly MS is not that interested in that 60-70 bucks at retail. They want subs. They want 200million people paying 15-20 bucks a month to play their games.

If MSs top priority is growing Gamepass then their current strategy is not going to work. They need to make better games and (as much as it pains me to say it) they need to lock everything they can get their mitts on behind gamepass. Continue to make gamepass available wherever possible....but everything will be gamepass exclusive. Circa 30billion in reliable revenue per year in subs + Advertising + data sales + licensing revenue (no more MS paying devs to be on gamepass...they will pay MS instead) + services upsales (e.g. Have gamepass? Why not 365 also for half price on top?). Big big money to be chased here.

Short term it will hurt as game sales would dry up. But if it means more subscribers then, over time, the pain will be more than worth it. The thing about subs is, once people are subscribed, they are unlikely to unsub. If i add access to WOW as standard and maybe Elder scrolls online too (bloody hell MS owns both) then people will always have something to play and get invested in (note to MS: achievements for WOW as an ongoing project if that's not already a thing). The more invested they get in it, with their friends lists and trophies and save files etc...the even less likely they are to unsub.

So from corporate shill point of view: I think it's time for a change. In terms of growing the service: the current strategy is not doing the job at all. It's looking more like MS have also bought some very expensive lemons. That money could have been better spent. Still, on paper there is a lot of very valuable IP so not a complete disaster.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

70828

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 72

User Lists: 0

#20 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 70828 Posts

@osan0 said:

There are 2 ways i looks at this. From my point of view and from Copororate (which, as we all know in SW, is the most important :P).

From my point of view: No. I think it's great that MS are bringing their games to the PC and other platforms. More games for everyone, less pointless buying of boxes.

I just wish they made better games and more interesting devices to play them on. They are a bit too much "content/services delivery" rather than "Make fun toys".

From MS standpoint: MS are a services company so the success of gamepass and it's growth is critical to Xbox. Frankly MS is not that interested in that 60-70 bucks at retail. They want subs. They want 200million people paying 15-20 bucks a month to play their games.

If MSs top priority is growing Gamepass then their current strategy is not going to work. They need to make better games and (as much as it pains me to say it) they need to lock everything they can get their mitts on behind gamepass. Continue to make gamepass available wherever possible....but everything will be gamepass exclusive. Circa 30billion in reliable revenue per year in subs + Advertising + data sales + licensing revenue (no more MS paying devs to be on gamepass...they will pay MS instead) + services upsales (e.g. Have gamepass? Why not 365 also for half price on top?). Big big money to be chased here.

Short term it will hurt as game sales would dry up. But if it means more subscribers then, over time, the pain will be more than worth it. The thing about subs is, once people are subscribed, they are unlikely to unsub. If i add access to WOW as standard and maybe Elder scrolls online too (bloody hell MS owns both) then people will always have something to play and get invested in (note to MS: achievements for WOW as an ongoing project if that's not already a thing). The more invested they get in it, with their friends lists and trophies and save files etc...the even less likely they are to unsub.

So from corporate shill point of view: I think it's time for a change. In terms of growing the service: the current strategy is not doing the job at all. It's looking more like MS have also bought some very expensive lemons. That money could have been better spent. Still, on paper there is a lot of very valuable IP so not a complete disaster.

Locking games to Gamepass?

You must be purged of your evil ways.😡
You must be purged of your evil ways.😡

Avatar image for Nonstop-Madness
Nonstop-Madness

12401

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#21 Nonstop-Madness
Member since 2008 • 12401 Posts

They've done an incredibly poor job in managing customer expectations.

However, Xbox is positioned to be significantly more successful than they've ever been. The major challenge they face is materializing all of their recent investments into actual growth drivers in the near term and that will unfortunately result in some tough decisions or at the very least decisions that won't resonate with the legacy Xbox audience.

Avatar image for osan0
osan0

17903

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#22  Edited By osan0
Member since 2004 • 17903 Posts

@Pedro: Oh i know. Not good for us humble consumers. Ideally MS would make better games, some more interesting gaming hardware, develop the services and have each live or die on it's own merits. Generally, industry wide, i'd prefer to see the content, hardware and services/sales business completely decoupled.

But, historically, the way to attract people to something, whether it's a console or a service, is content locked to a thing. Great games, well advertised that gets people excited. It's the only proven way to do it. Every successful platform holder did it. Those that failed, failed due to lacking exclusive compelling content. It's just the nature of the business.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

70828

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 72

User Lists: 0

#23  Edited By Pedro
Member since 2002 • 70828 Posts
@osan0 said:

@Pedro: Oh i know. Not good for us humble consumers. Ideally MS would make better games, some more interesting gaming hardware, develop the services and have each live or die on it's own merits. Generally, industry wide, i'd prefer to see the content, hardware and services/sales business completely decoupled.

But, historically, the way to attract people to something, whether it's a console or a service, is content locked to a thing. Great games, well advertised that gets people excited. It's the only proven way to do it. Every successful platform holder did it. Those that failed, failed due to lacking exclusive compelling content. It's just the nature of the business.

But the nature of the business is changing. The only thing that isn't changing is the gamers wanting "good" games. A game doesn't need to be exclusive to be successful or critically acclaimed just "good" or "compelling" as you stated.

" ": because it is subjective.

Avatar image for dabear
dabear

8946

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#24 dabear
Member since 2002 • 8946 Posts

@TheEroica: From what I have seen, most people calling for his resignation are Sony Ponies who are too stupid to understand what Sony would do without competition.

Avatar image for BenjaminBanklin
BenjaminBanklin

11282

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25  Edited By BenjaminBanklin
Member since 2004 • 11282 Posts

I don't even see what good it would do at this point. Despite being part of the hugest and most ubiquitous corporate entity on earth, his personal goal was to sell Xbox as the underdogs and altruists of gaming while they tried to gain as much real estate in the market as fast as possible. Phil listened to the messageboard warriors and MS continued to be singularly obsessed with one-upping Sony instead of making their own niche, and Xbox flew too close to the sun.

How do you really rescue the brand at this point when the market isn't showing room for three console platform holders anymore?

Avatar image for hrt_rulz01
hrt_rulz01

22433

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26  Edited By hrt_rulz01
Member since 2006 • 22433 Posts

Look, Phil is far from perfect but I worry if they replace him, someone much worse who doesn't know the industry at all (like Don Mattrick back in the day) will come in and things will be alot worse. The grass isn't always greener...

Avatar image for kvallyx
KvallyX

13160

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 5

#27 KvallyX
Member since 2019 • 13160 Posts

Phil is the best gaming CEO, so of course he should stay lol.

Avatar image for blaznwiipspman1
blaznwiipspman1

16629

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28  Edited By blaznwiipspman1
Member since 2007 • 16629 Posts

@TheEroica: no, saint phil is great. He's just starting to realize that the bets on gamepass aren't really paying off like he expected to. Its time to scale back the games on gamepass. Make it a platform for indie titles, and select older games. Provide some demos on the platform as well.

Big games like starfield, horizon, hi fi rush, and more should not be available on gamepass day and date. Perhaps 1 year or more down the line, its acceptable. But on release, people should pay for these big games.

Avatar image for onesiphorus
onesiphorus

5308

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

#29 onesiphorus
Member since 2014 • 5308 Posts

@hrt_rulz01 said:

Look, Phil is far from perfect but I worry if they replace him, someone much worse who doesn't know the industry at all (like Don Mattrick back in the day) will come in and things will be alot worse. The grass isn't always greener...

Is this nothing than a "false dilemma" (damned if Phil is fired and replaced, damned if he remains in his position) fallacy? Is there an alternative that no one has brought up?

Avatar image for blaznwiipspman1
blaznwiipspman1

16629

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 blaznwiipspman1
Member since 2007 • 16629 Posts
@osan0 said:

There are 2 ways i looks at this. From my point of view and from Copororate (which, as we all know in SW, is the most important :P).

From my point of view: No. I think it's great that MS are bringing their games to the PC and other platforms. More games for everyone, less pointless buying of boxes.

I just wish they made better games and more interesting devices to play them on. They are a bit too much "content/services delivery" rather than "Make fun toys".

From MS standpoint: MS are a services company so the success of gamepass and it's growth is critical to Xbox. Frankly MS is not that interested in that 60-70 bucks at retail. They want subs. They want 200million people paying 15-20 bucks a month to play their games.

If MSs top priority is growing Gamepass then their current strategy is not going to work. They need to make better games and (as much as it pains me to say it) they need to lock everything they can get their mitts on behind gamepass. Continue to make gamepass available wherever possible....but everything will be gamepass exclusive. Circa 30billion in reliable revenue per year in subs + Advertising + data sales + licensing revenue (no more MS paying devs to be on gamepass...they will pay MS instead) + services upsales (e.g. Have gamepass? Why not 365 also for half price on top?). Big big money to be chased here.

Short term it will hurt as game sales would dry up. But if it means more subscribers then, over time, the pain will be more than worth it. The thing about subs is, once people are subscribed, they are unlikely to unsub. If i add access to WOW as standard and maybe Elder scrolls online too (bloody hell MS owns both) then people will always have something to play and get invested in (note to MS: achievements for WOW as an ongoing project if that's not already a thing). The more invested they get in it, with their friends lists and trophies and save files etc...the even less likely they are to unsub.

So from corporate shill point of view: I think it's time for a change. In terms of growing the service: the current strategy is not doing the job at all. It's looking more like MS have also bought some very expensive lemons. That money could have been better spent. Still, on paper there is a lot of very valuable IP so not a complete disaster.

damn bro...you just posted the blue print for the evil corporate market take over strategy lol. These corporations are simply the worst.

Avatar image for WitIsWisdom
WitIsWisdom

9636

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#31 WitIsWisdom
Member since 2007 • 9636 Posts

All 3 are completely out of touch... they need to start hiring talent and stop trying to diversify for the sake of image. He always reminded me of a dude trying to act hip and in touch when that is obviously far from the truth... at least he isn't as cringe as Cerny's creepy ass.. lol.

Avatar image for osan0
osan0

17903

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#32 osan0
Member since 2004 • 17903 Posts

@Pedro said:
@osan0 said:

@Pedro: Oh i know. Not good for us humble consumers. Ideally MS would make better games, some more interesting gaming hardware, develop the services and have each live or die on it's own merits. Generally, industry wide, i'd prefer to see the content, hardware and services/sales business completely decoupled.

But, historically, the way to attract people to something, whether it's a console or a service, is content locked to a thing. Great games, well advertised that gets people excited. It's the only proven way to do it. Every successful platform holder did it. Those that failed, failed due to lacking exclusive compelling content. It's just the nature of the business.

But the nature of the business is changing. The only thing that isn't changing is the gamers wanting "good" games. A game doesn't need to be exclusive to successful, critically acclaimed or wanted by gamers just "good" or "compelling" as you stated.

" ": because it is subjective.

On a game not needing to be exclusive to be successful: Yes that's true of course. From our point of view, exclusive games are not inherently superior to multiplats. It makes no difference. There are many cases where current exclusives would be better if they were multiplat (looking at you Nintendo!). From our point of view it's better to keep everything multiplat. All the current consoles are functionally basically the same and the PC can also do a dam fine impression of a console when needed.

But you are not looking at this from corporate enough. This is SW Gods dammit!! :P

Historically the only successful way to build a platform has been exclusive content. Having the right content exclusive to your platform. Halo 2 showed MS that Xbox Live was onto something back in the day. Nintendo...all of it. Steam was just a patching service for counter strike before HL2 was released (which needed Steam to run, thus compelling loads of people to sign up). PS lived on it's exclusives and got battered during the PS3 era because 3rd parties went multiplat and Sony were not making many of their own games (a mistake they spent the gen setting right).

The thing is there is not a single example of a gaming platform I can think of that is successful simply because it exists. Anyone that tried that went bust.

200 million paying 15 quid a month (subject to change) year in year out. Circa 30 Billion a year in revenue at least. Lots of mindshare too. Lots of user data to sell. Lots of opportunities to upsell other services. That's what MSs top brass are looking at.

Yes: there is currently a cost of production problem for exclusives and, at the moment, MS and Sony are cracking under the pressure. Currently consoles can't support their own production costs. You have a service bringing in at least 30 billion+ a year: all of a sudden billion dollar productions don't look so scary.

But the only way Gamepass will see any rapid growth is if MS make better games and put them behind the paywall. By all means bring gamepass to every platform possible....but people need to subscribe to access them. That's how to grow the service.

The big difficulty, of course, is define "Make better games". As you say: it's subjective. That's the challenge for MS. The general consensus around MSs releases generally seems to be "meh" though. Sometimes they score well or make a good first impression....then the reaction changes to "oh....that's it". They are not landing hits at the moment. I hope that changes but, so far this gen, not a lot of positivity around MSs output. Making well loved, highly successful, mega selling hits is not an exact science (that's probably a good thing mind :P). But it's something MS needs to get better at.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

70828

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 72

User Lists: 0

#33 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 70828 Posts

@osan0 said:

On a game not needing to be exclusive to be successful: Yes that's true of course. From our point of view, exclusive games are not inherently superior to multiplats. It makes no difference. There are many cases where current exclusives would be better if they were multiplat (looking at you Nintendo!). From our point of view it's better to keep everything multiplat. All the current consoles are functionally basically the same and the PC can also do a dam fine impression of a console when needed.

But you are not looking at this from corporate enough. This is SW Gods dammit!! :P

Historically the only successful way to build a platform has been exclusive content. Having the right content exclusive to your platform. Halo 2 showed MS that Xbox Live was onto something back in the day. Nintendo...all of it. Steam was just a patching service for counter strike before HL2 was released (which needed Steam to run, thus compelling loads of people to sign up). PS lived on it's exclusives and got battered during the PS3 era because 3rd parties went multiplat and Sony were not making many of their own games (a mistake they spent the gen setting right).

The thing is there is not a single example of a gaming platform I can think of that is successful simply because it exists. Anyone that tried that went bust.

200 million paying 15 quid a month (subject to change) year in year out. Circa 30 Billion a year in revenue at least. Lots of mindshare too. Lots of user data to sell. Lots of opportunities to upsell other services. That's what MSs top brass are looking at.

Yes: there is currently a cost of production problem for exclusives and, at the moment, MS and Sony are cracking under the pressure. Currently consoles can't support their own production costs. You have a service bringing in at least 30 billion+ a year: all of a sudden billion dollar productions don't look so scary.

But the only way Gamepass will see any rapid growth is if MS make better games and put them behind the paywall. By all means bring gamepass to every platform possible....but people need to subscribe to access them. That's how to grow the service.

The big difficulty, of course, is define "Make better games". As you say: it's subjective. That's the challenge for MS. The general consensus around MSs releases generally seems to be "meh" though. Sometimes they score well or make a good first impression....then the reaction changes to "oh....that's it". They are not landing hits at the moment. I hope that changes but, so far this gen, not a lot of positivity around MSs output. Making well loved, highly successful, mega selling hits is not an exact science (that's probably a good thing mind :P). But it's something MS needs to get better at.

What you are proposing will fail. Gamers are not going to greenlit games being locked to GamePass. It just would not fly especially for Xbox. If you want Xbox to die overnight, make games exclusive to GamePass. Also locking your game to subscription also prevents gamers who want to pay more for a single game from paying for that single game. That is lost of revenue just cause. Exclusivity can exist outside of hardware and that is still a viable option while being consumer friendly. You don't need to buy Netflix, Hulu, Spotify specific hardware to gain access to the content but the content is still exclusive to the service.

In order for subscription to be scalable, the process for game development has to be optimized. Let's take a look at Xbox for example. They are using Unreal, Unity, Slipspace, ID, Creative Engine etc for development of games across multiple studios. They need to consolidate that shit. That means, cutting down to bone. Purge everything that is unnecessary and standardize the development across all of your studios. Keynote is standardizing the development process not standardize the type of game. Next, focus on smaller experiences that are easier to make but delivers on expectations regardless of the genre. These big ass cinematic games should be irregular and not the norm.

From the news, it seems like step one is in progress.🙃

Avatar image for sargentd
SargentD

8503

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#34 SargentD
Member since 2020 • 8503 Posts

Over saturation in the gaming industry currently, honest think we are seeing the cracks in the foundation start to show.

Too much to play and options to play by customers, while the AAA industry is trying to make Hollywood blockbuster titles that can't sell enough to keep up with the cost to make them.

I listened to a podcast where they were talking about Gen Z moving towards retro gaming. TBH it makes alot of sense.

Phil Spencer can stay, I don't think anyone else is going to save it. It's industry wide not just MS. Nintendo will be one of the few to survive the crash.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

40156

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#35 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 40156 Posts

So much drama on the Xbox side lmao. This is what happens when you have 100 studios, and none of them are able to release a video game that doesn't look or plays like a student project. On thread, the only person i know that loves Phil is IPee_Daily. Simply put, he adores him like adore my ps5.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

40156

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#36 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 40156 Posts

Is it just my feed or youtube is absolutely flooded with doomer vids about MS ruining the Xbox brand? I can actually see Phil getting his knee caps getting clapped just like Bonnie Ross if this keeps going and Hellblade2 fails like i expect it to fail.

Loading Video...
Avatar image for last_lap
Last_Lap

7061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#37 Last_Lap
Member since 2023 • 7061 Posts

@Pedro said:

Gamers.🤭

There's been 2 threads of this kind and you have not posted an answer in either just taking a shot at gamers, well as a gamer let me say this to you, grow a backbone and have an opinion rather than attack gamers.

Avatar image for last_lap
Last_Lap

7061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#38 Last_Lap
Member since 2023 • 7061 Posts

Like I said in the other thread, you all are just catching up. I was calling for his head more than 5yrs ago. He's done nothing to help Xbox, just hinder it. He doesn't have a competitive bone in his body, why would you have someone like that run your gaming division?

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

40156

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#39  Edited By hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 40156 Posts
@last_lap said:

Like I said in the other thread, you all are just catching up. I was calling for his head more than 5yrs ago. He's done nothing to help Xbox, just hinder it. He doesn't have a competitive bone in his body, why would you have someone like that run your gaming division?

I have been calling him as Flaccid Phil for longer than you were playing racing games. Also listen to this, you're not his only hater.

Avatar image for last_lap
Last_Lap

7061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#40  Edited By Last_Lap
Member since 2023 • 7061 Posts

@hardwenzen: You've been calling Phil flaccid for 40 odd years, please junior you're in your mid 30's at best baby gamer 🤣

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

58616

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#41 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 58616 Posts

Honestly, I don't care any more, I'm so done with the AAA game space. I'm sorry when studios get caught in the crossfire of exclusives, corporations, and so on...but whatever.

Plenty of fish in the sea, lots of a great independent developers, and I am absolutely drowning in more games than I can possibly play all at once.

Anyone that actually cares about these business theatrics and politics is just doing it for the drama.

But then again, this is System Wars, so carry on with the drama 😋

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

40156

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#42 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 40156 Posts

@last_lap said:

@hardwenzen: You've been calling Phil flaccid for 40 odd years, please junior you're in your mid 30's at best baby gamer 🤣

At least i tried, so i hope you respect that for a bit.

Avatar image for last_lap
Last_Lap

7061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#43 Last_Lap
Member since 2023 • 7061 Posts

@hardwenzen: Well one of your nicknames is tryhardwenzen for a reason 🤣

Avatar image for Litchie
Litchie

34838

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#44 Litchie
Member since 2003 • 34838 Posts

I don't care, but I don't find him as annoying as many other CEOs. Not that I'm updated or anything, just from what I've seen. Shouting for him to resign seems silly, no? Doubt a new CEO will give them what they want.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

70828

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 72

User Lists: 0

#45 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 70828 Posts

@Litchie said:

I don't care, but I don't find him as annoying as many other CEOs. Not that I'm updated or anything, just from what I've seen. Shouting for him to resign seems silly, no? Doubt a new CEO will give them what they want.

That is why gamers on forums like these are silly.😂

Avatar image for last_lap
Last_Lap

7061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#46 Last_Lap
Member since 2023 • 7061 Posts

@Litchie: He's been there for about a decade and sales are down for consoles and games, his GP has zero growth, he refuses to compete with PS.

Would you want someone like that running your company?

Avatar image for nfamouslegend
NfamousLegend

1011

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 NfamousLegend
Member since 2016 • 1011 Posts

If I'm Phil, I'm firing Matt Booty, Sarah Bond, and Greenburg tomorrow. They have all overstayed their welcome

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

40156

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#48 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 40156 Posts

Jesus Christ our Aussie is mad as Flaccid Phil. Beyond fascinating.

Avatar image for Jendeh
Jendeh

751

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 Jendeh
Member since 2004 • 751 Posts

I think Phil Spencer is fine as long as you understand that he is full of crap.

Have you ever had someone tell you exactly what you want to hear, despite all evidence pointing otherwise? That is Phil.

He is great at being a mouthpiece. He whispers sweet nothings into gamers ears, and they eat it up.

Avatar image for last_lap
Last_Lap

7061

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#50 Last_Lap
Member since 2023 • 7061 Posts

@hardwenzen: I'm not mad, it's more a told you so situation.

You know I'm going deeper into retro, I knew Phil wasn't the right man for Xbox, like I said you all are just now catching onto that. But there is still a few lems hanging on by their finger nails trying to defend him.