370°

Will Bethesda & ZeniMax games go Xbox exclusive? Here are 3 possibilities

Jez Corden writes: "One big question still hangs over the big Bethesda acquisition. Will all of those games go Xbox platform exclusive? Let's examine the three major possible scenarios, and see if we can draw some kind of conclusion."

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
AngelicIceDiamond1194d ago

76, Elders Scrolls online, Zenimax New IP Death loop and Ghost wire timed games will be on PS5.

New AAA's going forward will be on MS machine and services. Why? Because MS made 15b$ back during the period of the acquisition able to buy them twice. Other platforms and services (besides steam) won't be needed.

The only game that I think could come to other platforms is Starfield. I can actually see that being timed exclusive for a year on Xbox. The game is said to be far along and I'm sure a PS platform was in the works at the time. It would be pretty pointless just to dump the PS version just because MS owns them.

E6 and Indiana Jones etc are gonna be on Xbox platforms though.

1194d ago Replies(7)
Sonyslave31194d ago

I agree i think 99% is going to be xbox eco systems but that 1 % like indiana jones is on all devices.
Eso multiplatform live services
Doom xbox + switch
Fallout xbox
Skyrim xbox + ps5 two or three years later
Dishorned xbox
Evil within 3 xbox + ps5 japan only

This how i see it happen imo.

gamer78041193d ago

I don’t see new fallout or Skyrim games coming tonps5 ever

Orchard1194d ago

I agree. Existing games and signed deals will obviously stay as they are, but it is clear to anyone that MS sunk 7.5bn into Zenimax to get these games exclusively on MS platforms.

knickstr1193d ago

Microsoft made that much. Not Microsoft games division. There's a big difference there. Microsoft sole focus is not gaming.

darthv721193d ago

And where do you think Xbox division got the $$ or the okay to buy Zenimax? The purchase was approved by the heads of MS because it is not just a benefit to xbox division but to MS as a whole.

gamer78041193d ago

Technically a difference but it still matters

AngelicIceDiamond1193d ago

Exactly MS made that much money. MS 7. 5b and made 15b.

gamer78041193d ago

I’d like to come back to this because I think this is exactly what will happen. The games will be on pc but you don’t pay that much money to buy Bethesda only to put on competitors platform whether timed or otherwise. No clue on star field. Mmos will come to PlayStation or stay on PlayStation as well like Minecraft.

enkiduxiv1193d ago

Allowing Starfield to be a timed exclusive would be a strange strategy for Microsoft. Let's say it releases a year from now. It goes on sale and then Sony gets it six months to a year later. Wouldn't everyone buying their new consoles just assume that Bethesda games would continue to be multiplat? I would think that the whole point of this acquisition is to sell more XBOXs.

I know, I know, many of you theorize that the Bethesda deal had more to do with promoting GamePass. It seems to me that if that were the only goal, Microsoft would easily be able to make a deal with Bethesda for GamePass. Hell, the whole point of GamePass is to get around the 70 dollar pricetag. if the games go on GamePass how exactly is anyone making money. My thoughts are that it sells as an XBOX exclusive for a year and then goes up on GamePass for "free."

AngelicIceDiamond1193d ago (Edited 1193d ago )

It would be strange. I dunno if timing of development has anything to do with it. If there's a PS version I just cant see them dumping it. Timed exclusive will massively help MS in the short run but it will Ultimately end up being a multiplat something that won't help MS in the long at all as you suggest. In fact it would make the purchase almost pointless and confusing. Now that I think about it.

I Wouldn't be surprised if it goes either way tbh. Exclusive or timed but going full Xbox ecosystem only will help Xbox ecosystem. That's the point of the Bethesda purchase and all the other purchases from 2018.

343_Guilty_Spark1193d ago

Selling more Xboxes is not their strategy...the goal is to sell GamePass

Disney+ membership skyrocketed because of exclusive content. Keep people interested long enough and their wallets stay open.

Atom6661192d ago

The mental gymnastics on this thing is very amusing. You don't spend $7.5b to not use that content to boost your own user numbers. You don't boost users by making your content for other ecosystems. It's the whole reason you have exclusives, right?

They could have spent a fraction of that if they just wanted Gamepass content.

No one questions that Hellblade or Avowed will be exclusive. No one thinks Halo, Fable, Gears, etc. will be multiplat. Yet, this is different?

We wouldn't hear this kind of nonsense if it was anybody else.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1192d ago
Knightofelemia1194d ago (Edited 1194d ago )

Minecraft is a big money maker and very popular Microsoft would be stupid to limit it to one platform. It's also still too early and I doubt Microsoft has a plan hammered out on how to run Zenimax yet. They would have to keep previous services going or else they could face pitchforks and torches from the gamers. As for the games being timed exclusives before the Zenimax purchase. They would have to keep it timed Sony made contracts with Bethesda on the games and probably paid cash to make those games exclusive. For Microsoft to wreck that they would have to buy out that said timed contract or find a loop hole to put the game on another platform or make amends to the contract. Like what Namco did with Tales of Vesperia that was an XB360 exclusive that also saw the PS3 Namco found a loophole. I would want Microsoft to keep the Zenimax studios as a separate entity that way different titles come out and the studios are not locked to a certain title like 343 for Halo and The Coalition to Gears. Right now as it sits it's just a wait and see what Microsoft will do when they have a plan hammered out on what to do with Zenimax again it's still to early. You can guess all you want and Microsoft could do a 360 and drop a bomb that will piss people off and fans of the games and that is the last thing they want to do.

DJStotty1194d ago ShowReplies(1)
Lennoxb631194d ago

You don't spend that amount of money to get timed exclusives.

knickstr1193d ago

Then why did they buy minecraft?

LOGICWINS1193d ago

@knickstr Because a huge percentage of Minecraft's players play on smartphones and tablets. Removing Minecraft from those platforms would mean losing a ton of money....not the case for games like Doom or Wolfenstein.

cheetah1193d ago

No you spend that money to buy IP. They want as many people as possible to play those games.

Rude-ro1193d ago

Not one bit.
They are spending money for other reasons..

But since Microsoft is not even close to being the dominate platform any time soon...
You do not spend a lot of money to LIMIT your profits.
Ie no one is jumping ship to Microsoft except already existing Microsoft fans.
No matter what deal they make.
You go 10+ years not making any new AAA games and putting $59 price tags on indie games... you have what is called a lack of trust.

Through the life of this gen, Microsoft will be multiplat with said purchases.
Timed or “better” will come into play.. but it will be next gen when you see the effects.

JackBNimble1192d ago

Minecraft was already on other platforms when MS bought them

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1192d ago
LOGICWINS1193d ago

"Minecraft is a big money maker and very popular Microsoft would be stupid to limit it to one platform."

Would you make that same argument for Sony and Spiderman or Nintendo and Pokemon? Both those IPs print money (and would print more money if they were multiplatform) but they remain exclusives.

Why? Because Sony and Nintendo want to give you reasons to invest in THEIR ecosystem. The deeper you invest into an ecosystem, the less likely you are to leave. This is common sense.

Minecraft was a SPECIAL case because a lot of casual gamers (smartphone gamers) play that game.

Knightofelemia1193d ago (Edited 1193d ago )

Sony owns the film rights for Spiderman and they hammered out some sort of a deal with Marvel/Disney for the game so Spiderman could appear in the MCU. Pokemon Nintendo and two other parties are in on the Pokemon franchise and putting it on a Nintendo console is an obvious answer. Minecraft was released on other platforms before Microsoft bought Mojang. Microsoft knew how popular Minecraft was before the bought up they Mojang. Microsoft also knew that limiting Minecraft to one platform would be financial suicide of the franchise and piss off a lot of fans of the game. So the most logical solution is to leave things as is and rake in the cash from the game being on other platforms.

wiz71911193d ago

@knickstr it was already multi platform when they purchased Minecraft. It would of been a shit storm to remove it from over consoles, but Minecraft makes them millions of not billions.

Sayai jin1193d ago

If you think a company makes a 7 billion dollar company without already having plans for said company, then you are rather confused. These decision/aqcuisitions take years in the making sometimes.

The two games Sony paid for timed exclusivity will be just that. In the end no ine but MS knows what their plans are. However. The writing is on the wall. The largest acquisition in gaming history, game pass is their planned future, MS CEO and selected executives salary ate tied directly to the game pass revenues, etc. They don't gain game pass revenue for making future games multi console. They want people to subscribe to game pass through console or PC.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1192d ago
Tedakin1193d ago

Any other platform MS puts their first party games on, MS will want and probably require Xbox Live integration into. I don't see Sony allowing that.

darthv721193d ago

I'd say it's pretty much a given that every game released by any of these developers that MS acquired is going to require an XBL profile at some point.

Atticus_finch1193d ago

I think Ms rather have that $70 than an insignificant account.

Tedakin1193d ago (Edited 1193d ago )

I don't. They're building an entire platform here. If Sony wants those games they will probably have to choose to be a part of that. You guys seem to think MS will miss those PS5 sales. They won't. There's some falsehood that Sony makes up a massive part of the gaming market. They don't.. MS has Xbox Live integrated into 80% of the gaming market without Sony across consoles, Windows, Steam and mobile.

Pocahontas1192d ago (Edited 1192d ago )

@Tedakin Acting like Sony doesn’t make up a massive part of the gaming division is a straight lie especially when the Witcher 3 which is a PC game first sold 48% of sales within first year beating PC and Xbox. Almost beating both combined. Don’t lie you stupid is showing.

DOMination-1192d ago

Microsoft would rather you subscribe to a few months of GamePass to play these games (and most people will end up keeping it anyway) then take a very small percentage of said $70 from selling it on Playstation.

The sooner that Sony accepts Gamepass is the future and that it will be THE place to go for all games the better. Then we can get the couple of Sony games released every year on it too and everyone wins.

Atom6661192d ago

Opposite, actually.

They want active user in their ecosystems. XBL included.

After paying Sony's cut, retail, distribution, etc., they'd make $30-40 tops. Getting someone locked into their services and ecosystem is worth 10X that to them.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1192d ago
VersusDMC1193d ago

No way they will go multiplatform. Nothing obsidian and ninja theory have released since being bought or announced has gone or has been said to be going to PS4 or PS5...so i don't know why Bethesda is a special case. They are just keeping it vague so they don't seem too anti consumer.

sho0ok3601193d ago

Ps guys dont need to beg for Bethesda games... They already got #bangers.

Gardenia1193d ago

Going exclusive only works if it will sell more consoles. Having games exclusive on Xbox are not going to sell more Xbox consoles simply because Europe, Asia and anywhere else in the world not many care for the Xbox no matter what games are on the system.

The smart thing for MS to do is sell them on all consoles so they can make a lot more money. I expect that will happen, but Xbox most likely will get timed exclusive or something like that.

VersusDMC1193d ago

They want to sell subscriptions now.
And in a year there will be a X cloud app for tvs and phones...so you won't even need to get the console.

Pocahontas1192d ago (Edited 1192d ago )

@Versus No they don’t considering they just tried to double gold costs to obviously pay some of there losses

Atom6661192d ago

Then I look forward to playing Halo Infinite and Fable on PS5.

Same logic, right?

ichdich1193d ago (Edited 1193d ago )

it is clear to anyone that MS sunk 7.5bn into Zenimax to get these games exclusively on MS platforms.

NeoGamer2321193d ago (Edited 1193d ago )

First, I think it is more about where development of the games are. If you are 75% of the way building on another platform why would you just flush that? It does not make sense.

Second, MS has to be careful because of its size.

Third, Many times during the initial first few weeks of the announcement ZeniMax senior people were quoted as "We are trying to reach as many gamers as possible, and this relationship helps us do that". So, why would you exclude platforms?

Gaming is changing. The days of exclusives are disappearing. Even Sony is on XB now with MLB The Show.

Shiken1193d ago

When God of War Ragnarok is on MS consoles, I will believe MS will put Bethesda games on PS that did not have a pre existing contract.

NeoGamer2321193d ago

@Shiken
Sony has already put Horizon and Death Stranding on PC. It is not a stretch to see they are looking at multiple platforms as a way to sell more games.

Show all comments (98)
140°

Resident Evil Zero and Code Veronica Remakes are reportedly in the works, not Resident Evil 1

Industry insider Dusk Golem reveals that there is no Resident Evil 1 Remake in the works. Instead, Capcom are reportedly in active development of Resident Evil Zero and Code Veronica.

-Foxtrot1d 3h ago

RE Zero would be better to do first over RE1 because they can tie the story into RE1 more.

The original RE Remake was weird because Rebecca never mentioned anything about what happened in Zero and it felt so disjointed because Zero was developed during the Remake and they clearly didn't share any notes with one another.

Cacabunga2h ago

Wise decision. 2 of my favorites!

Knightofelemia1d 1h ago

Give me Dino Crisis dammit Capcom

TGG_overlord7h ago

And all it took was +24 years + a phone call from me lol.

Show all comments (12)
70°

Limited Run Games reveal physical console editions of Clock Tower: Rewind

Love survival horror? Love physical editions of games? Limited Run Games have got your back as they reveal a physical collection for Clock Tower: Rewind on Xbox, Switch, PlayStation and PC.

Read Full Story >>
thexboxhub.com
Hugodastrevas4d ago

Still waiting for the physical release of Tomba!

150°

10 Biggest Xbox Mistakes of All Time (So Far)

The Xbox brand has done a lot of good over the years, but their various blunders are pretty wild to look back on in their magnitude.

Read Full Story >>
culturedvultures.com
piroh4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

Ironically number 9 can save them at this point (releasing games on multiple platforms)

ChasterMies2d ago

By “save them” you mean make more profit for Microsoft. Xbox will still be a dying hardware platform.

OtterX3d ago

You could add the naming scheme for the consoles, it just confuses customers. I know they wanted to avoid traditional numbering bc it would always be lower than their competitor, but this whole 360 then One then Series thing is confusing af. Imagine a Soccer Mom trying to figure this stuff out. I still mistakenly call the Series X the One from time to time on accident.

RNTody3d ago

Don't forget about the Xbox One, Xbox One X and Xbox Series X! Good luck to Soccer moms around the world.

S2Killinit2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

They did that on purpose to confuse and direct attention away from the generational numbering.

MS doesn’t like reminding people that they joined the industry after others had already been involved in gaming.

For instance, they called the xbox “360” to combat PlayStation “3” because they wanted to seem like “more” than “3”, so instead of xbox 2, they opted for xbox 360. Also this had the additional benefit of selling consoles to uninformed parents who might purchase a “360” instead of a “3” by mistake, or because they thought 360 was more than 3. Kind of a disingenuous move.

They have been continuing with their confusing naming patterns for pretty much the same reasons. Frankly, it fits with who and what they are as a brand.

FinalFantasyFanatic2d ago

I can understand their reasoning, but whoever came up with that naming scheme should be fired, bad naming schemes have killed consoles (I'm pretty sure it was the major reason for the downfall of the WiiU). They should have had unqiue names like Nintendo and Sega have had for their consoles, far less confusing for the consumer.

Cacabunga3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Phil Spencer is the worst that has happened to Xbox.
They built a respectable brand up to Xbox one. Then this guy took over and things became a joke

Reaper22_3d ago

He still has his job. Something you can't say about Jim Ryan.

Cacabunga3d ago

Both bad execs. One is on job and one thankfully retired.

FinalFantasyFanatic2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

I didn't like either person, both people damaged their respective brands and produced worse outcomes, but Phil did save the Xbox brand from being retired by Microsoft. Although in hindsight, he should have just let it die, rather than languish in limbo like it is now.

Rainbowcookie1d 16h ago

Yeah but the one that was "bad" didn't even affect sales.

bunt-custardly3d ago

Phil Spencer was also on the team back when 360 was around, alongside Shane Kim, Peter Moore etc. I think the damage that did the most harm was the Don Mattrick "Always Online" console (ahead of its time basically). They handed Sony and Nintendo a free-pass when that was revealed. It went downhill from there. Then the corporate machine went into full swing to try and recover. They have to a degree as a games company for the masses, and less so for the core gamer. Outside USA, the Xbox brand does not sell as well as Japanese based consoles (citation needed).

Cacabunga3d ago

Want a decision maker. The always online and TV plans was a disaster yes, but they caught up by announcing 1st party games that gamers actually kept the hype going.. until this moron took over and introduced the PC day one release.. e all know where that ended..

S2Killinit2d ago

I dont think they were ever a respectable brand, not since the beginning, when their goal was never to be involved and share in the gaming space. I think the OG xbox was an exception because MS as a brand was still getting its foot in and so the people behind that were people of the gaming industry.

FinalFantasyFanatic2d ago

The 360 was the brand in its prime though, everything went downhill towards the end of that generation. Its staple games like Halo, Forza and Gears are what kept the console relevant and afloat for so long.

MaximusPrime_3d ago

Really good video.

I remember the days with RRoD was big news on here, N4G.

Microsoft had it turbulence number of years.

Looking at the success of Sea of Thieves despite being 6 years old, time to release Halo, Forza horizon 4 & 5 on PS5. It'll help their revenue

shinoff21833d ago (Edited 3d ago )

2 of the 4 games they did already sold really well. So it's definitely going down. Idk about halo or forza but I feel those studios they've bought in the last 5 years, their coming

ChasterMies3d ago

I found this video painful to watch. Can someone list them out?

Top 10 for me from are:
1. 2013 reveal presentation
2. Bundling Kinect 2 with Xbox One
3. RRoD or why rushing to market with hardware is always a bad idea.
4. Buying studios only to close them.
5. Ads on the Home Screen
6. Letting Halo die.
7. Letting Geard of War die.
8. Every console name
9. Charging for Xbox Live on Xbox 360 when Sony let PS3 players play online for free.
10. Cancelling release of OG Xbox games after the Xbox 360 launched.

Show all comments (30)