740°

Microsoft wants to bring Xbox Live cross-platform gaming to Android, iOS, Nintendo Switch, and more

Microsoft has made no secrets about its cross-platform ambitions, and it's about to turn up the heat.

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
XiNatsuDragnel1915d ago

So Xbox live is coming to all platforms like a service or is it something different?

lelo2play1915d ago

Microsoft wants to be the Netflix of gaming...

Eonjay1915d ago

The whole point of cross play is that you dont have to buy into one ecosystem. What us the point of forcing people to use your ecosystem when they never had to in the past. The get people to pay for live for f2p games so I'm sure the will let Microsoft change people to play Minecraft on mobile devices as well.

Kribwalker1915d ago

@Eonjay

it’s already used for cross platform minecraft play, and people don’t have to pay to use it

S2Killinit1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

MS cant even be the kmart of gaming. Not when everyone else is doing better than them in every area. PSNow has the same streaming service with a much larger library of games.

rainslacker1915d ago

@Eon

That may be the point of cross play, but MS is most certainly all about getting people to buy into one ecosystem. It has been since the introduction of Live services on Windows. Which is why all their products, even enterprise solutions, center around Live in some way.

Cross play gives MS visibility, and keeps them relevant even if people aren't using their ecosystem. It also bolsters those who are using their ecosystem, by expanding the relevance to those who are currently using it.

RosweeSon1915d ago

Never they don’t have the games for it.

Zeref1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

@Eonjay

I think you need to look up the definition of "forcing".... I don't think it means what you think it means.

beulahland1915d ago

@Zeref this @Eonjay guy needs to look up the definition of cross play and cross platform, since he is absolutely mixing everything. Logic would help too.

Omegasyde1915d ago

No Microsoft wants to be the “Windows OS” of gaming ie become the standard.

I actually think this would be bad, as it will mean if you want to play a specific game you will have to exclusively subscribe to thier service and play by their rules. Pretty much rules out used game market.

I don’t think Nintendo would submit to this but Sony could have some future ass clown of a CEO who might think this will be a great idea 5-10 years from now (investors first...).

Now for those loving/praising all digital future, imagine having to pay 99$ a month just on a game pass, and X ammount still to play online or piece meal some other BS service. If they are only game in town, they control the pricing.

bouzebbal1914d ago (Edited 1914d ago )

I always said they will be a multi platform service, and always get down voted.. Here you go, looks like it's going that way.. Which is a good thing tbh...

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1914d ago
KeeseToast1915d ago

What that means is that developers can implement Xbox Live features into games across plattforms. I assume its kinda like when you have the option to log into Uplay, Origin in EA/Ubisoft games.

battlegrog1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

The thing is the ps now service can not compete , It does not work well.Its old tech on a very very small scale.All it is is a small company sony bought and they are not heavily investing in the tech and are just renting servers. Companies like MS have more top quality self owned servers around the world than almost anyone and they have a big dedicated team developing its own version of the software. Right now it does not matter at all but in the long run this format is what everyone will want just like any other streaming service. So you better have the structure for it. Sony is kinda fucked in this aspect but not because they pretty much can just sue some big companies service and pay them. Its just not a first party product so it will be tricky .

I hope they figure out a solid solution. I would love to play ps exclusive games that can properly run well at native res and can handle multiplayer. Time will tell !!

S2Killinit1915d ago

MS is adament about destroying consoles.

Unspoken1915d ago

Microsoft has experience with Azure and can see the direction compute is going. Of course as usual they are well before their time and unfortunately have to cater to those who only can digest incremental changes.

battlegrog1915d ago

They are refering to when they launch its cloud service that will run the entire xbox platform. So why would they not try to put it on the switch if they want it on every phone,tablet and tv computer

sprinterboy1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

So all I need then is a ps5 and a switch and use switch for exclusives like Mario etc and xbox live for MS exclusives and use my ps5 for exclusives and all my 3rd party games.
That won't turn out well for MS

mcstorm1915d ago

@sprinterboy why not Sony and Microsoft don't make alot off console sales anyway they make it from software and services so Microsoft putting there's on all devices, mobile other consoles pcs even smart tvs opens them up to more than both Sony and Nintendo have together.

1914d ago
Edito1914d ago

@mcstorm

Sorry but are you OK or are you sick? Every single company in the world that sells hardware has more profit with accessories, services and etc... HP with printers, cars with accessories and etc, tvs and smartphones are different because they release new models all the time but u get me why would anyone buy 10 ps4s or xboxes?

Plz...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1914d ago
gangsta_red1915d ago

No, as the article states...

"Microsoft already has a few games with Xbox Live support across mobile devices, most notably via Minecraft, which requires an Xbox Live login on Android, iOS, and Nintendo Switch. Until now, Microsoft reserved Xbox Live support on those platforms for its own games, but now now, Microsoft is aiming to bring Xbox Live cross-platform play to even more titles. Developers will be able to bake cross-platform Xbox Live achievements, social systems, and multiplayer, into games built for mobile devices and Nintendo Switch, as part of its division-wide effort to grow Xbox Live's userbase."

Developers have the option of implementing Xbox Live features to their crossplay titles.

Kosic1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

I think it's a community link between platforms. Like the Nintendo online mobile app, but cross platform with achievements, friend list and other bits.

If it ends up being that game pass on other platforms. That would be insane.

Zeref1915d ago

Gamepass is coming to iOS/Android/PC and strong rumors for Switch as well.

Kosic1914d ago

@Zeref a lot of those games on gamepads aren't supported on the switch. So I got this feeling it won't get it. Unless Nintendo do their own version?

Muzikguy1915d ago

sounds like another step in not needing another Xbox

Kavorklestein1914d ago (Edited 1914d ago )

Let's pretend you are correct for a second. Imagine if Microsoft gets paid by 500 million users?
At that point, selling 20 million consoles a year is going to be less important for them, and being an Xbox gamer becomes much cheaper for all of us.

Since you're not correct, there is money to be made and games to be played in all spectrums of the gaming rainbow.

1914d ago
+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1914d ago
Jin_Sakai1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

“Microsoft wants to bring Xbox Live cross-platform gaming to Android, iOS, Nintendo Switch, and more“

Nintendo should’ve never let them put Minecraft on Switch. Microsoft wants to use other devices to promote their own service. So glad Sony stood strong and didn’t allow Xbox Live sign in on PS4.

Xbox isn’t selling well so the want to become a service. They know they’re lagging behind PSN’s massive 90+ million active users. Xbox Live only has 64 million. They want to slap Xbox Live on every device they can to get that number up.

Vasto1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

Xbox Live is still the best.

https://www.polygon.com/201...

Jin_Sakai1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

“You seem upset”

Just stating facts. Microsoft are using its competitors such as Nintendo Switch to grow their on service. They also tried to do the same with Sony but they didn’t allow it.

1915d ago
badz1491915d ago

@Vastro

based on an article from 2016? LOL it's already 2019 dude

where is MS when Sony just announced PSN alone is making more money than its whole gaming division, though?

JesusBuiltmyHotrod1915d ago

Xbox live is no better and PSN has far better games, so no.

letsa_go1915d ago

Xbox Live is still the best, it only went down twice this past week!

S2Killinit1915d ago

PSN is better than xbox Live. Hands down. Plus, everybody and their uncle is on PSN.

bluefox7551915d ago

I didn't get that impression. Seems like he simply disagrees with MS's approach. Many of us do.

OffRoadKing1915d ago

Stating facts is being upset now? lol, only on n4g

zackeroniii1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

Your thoughless comment is enough to show you have nothing to argue for because you have nothing to show for your sorry pathetic ass xbox...and nope i'm not upset, i'm amused by you brainless xbots hahaha

AngainorG7X1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

@zackeroniii

You seem happy

Dragonscale1914d ago (Edited 1914d ago )

@xexai, and since when have Samsung tv's been a direct competitor to Sony's Playstation.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 1914d ago
KeeseToast1915d ago

What exactly are you losing if Microsoft is successful in expanding their service? Do you have Sony stocks or something? Also Uplay and Origin log-ins have been allowed for a long time on PlayStation. Whats the difference?

DuckOnQuack351915d ago

Seriously why do so many people give a shit how much any of these companies make? Awww they think they actually care about them LMFAO

RauLeCreuset1915d ago

You don't have to have Sony stock to be invested in their product, which a PS owner is the moment they buy the console. That's just how console ecosystems work. I'd rather money spent by PS customers go to PS, rather than have MS use Live to infiltrate and siphon money away to MS. I have a lot more faith in PS to reinvest the money in a way that will satisfy me as a PS gamer. That's why I bought the PS and not Xbox. Same goes for Switch, but their lackluster online offerings make them particularly vulnerable to MS' ambitions.

Livingthedream1915d ago

It's just fanboyism, it's almost like the playstation selling more is more important than the gaming experience. If MS ever destroys playstation in sales, don't worry it will still be a playstation with it's own experiences, ps doesnt need to outsell everyone to outsell everyone.

Mr_Writer851915d ago

@vasto

2016? 3 years ago mate

Where as here in 2019......

https://www.eurogamer.net/a...

Vasto1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

LMAO, I guess you dont know how to read. The article is talking about which network is best. PSN and Live always go down from time to time and they will continue to do so. PSN goes down more than Live does. Thats just the nature of online networks. Have you been living under a rock?

https://venturebeat.com/201...
https://www.newsweek.com/ps...

That has nothing to do with which Network is the best which is what the article is talking about. Xbox Live is the better than PSN. It has been tested many times and Xbox Live always beats PSN.
http://compass.xbox.com/ass...
Nice try though!

letsa_go1915d ago

Xbox live was down twice this past week though!

S2Killinit1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

@Vasto
Lets be honest here, most people game on PSN these days whether you like it or not. As far as stability, Ive never had a problem with PSN that was combersome, but when my xbox 360 was breaking down every 6 months, it didnt matter if Live was on or off. As to this generation i wouldnt know because its hard to find a game worth playing on the cbox one in the first place.

Kribwalker1915d ago

@S2
“As to this generation i wouldnt know because its hard to find a game worth playing on the cbox one in the first place.”

that’s funny, i have 480 games right now on my xbox one. It’s pretty easy to find good games worth playing

343_Guilty_Spark1915d ago

@S2Killinit

Well considering the definitive version of 3rd party games are on the X, and they sell the most, I’d say there are plenty of good reasons to game on Xbox. RE2 looks fantastic on the X.

The Wood1915d ago

'343_Guilty_Spark'

Why lie. . Since when were multiplats selling more on the Xbox for you to make such a blanket statement. . Some of you guys are becoming more desperate as the gen goes on.

Mr_Writer851915d ago

@vasto

I can read, I stopped reading at 2016 if I'm honest.

I've been a PSN user since 2007 on PS3, I was a Live user on and off at the same time.

And there was a clear difference between the two.

I've been a PS4 user since day one, and other than the Christmas outage a few years back, I've not had any issues.

I've only been an X1 user since Christmas, and other than the outage I linked to I've had no issue either.

I like and use both services and I can't tell the difference tbh, and no polygon article from 2016 will change my mind.

So TTFN bud

,

S2Killinit1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

All i know is that my friends are on PSN, and it works perfectly. We play both regular and VR titles and its a blast. I highly doubt i would have been happy if i only had an xbox this generation. Or the previous for that matter as there is just too many games to miss out on Playstation. Its a no brainer to me. Xbox will be a second or third choice when it comes to gaming for me. PSN is larger and works just as well as Live if not better, and like i said all my friends are on it.

@krib
Everything is relative. I figured that was implied. Apparently i have to expressly say it, Im comparing.
@343
So then according to you whoever comes out with a console later and has extra pixels, is the version to own. To me the extra pixels arent worth missing out on games and VR. It really isnt.

Vasto1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

You mind does not have to be changed. What you think does not matter.

Xbox Live is faster, stable and more reliable than PSN.

You can keep sticking your head in the sand or you can actually read the IHS Markit report that has nothing to do with Polygon. They are just reporting the news.

http://compass.xbox.com/ass...

PSN cant compare to Microsoft's world class Azure network. Its common sense.

Mr_Writer851915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

@vasto

You keep banging that drum mate, I'll enjoy playing on PSN and Live.

Enjoying Games >>>>>>>&a mp;g t;> caring about who's network is best.

"What you think does not matter."
It does to me, and that's all that matters to me, like I said I use both, have no issues with either, so why would it bother me that one is deemed better than the other?

What possible affect can that have on me?

343_Guilty_Spark1915d ago

I didn’t say they were selling more on Xbox I said 3rd parties sell more in general

1915d ago
P_Bomb1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

@someone72
Pure raping people eh? Wow. Yeah I don’t think MS will be quoting you on that any time soon. Not helping.

Mr_Writer851914d ago

"pure raping of people on service features like psnow"

And?..... Go on what other services that are voluntary and are not forced on you in anyway are they "pure raping" us on?

You do know that rape is a horrible act, that is when someone is forced into sex against their will?

To compare anything that you can choose to pay for or not is a very ignorant and pretty pathetic.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 1914d ago
gamer78041915d ago

okay so you are basically anti-consumer and anti-microsoft, got it!

gamer78041915d ago

"just stating facts". No you are editorializing and injecting your opinion, "Nintendo should've never let them put Minecraft on Switch". "So glad Sony stood strong and didn't allow xbox live sign in on PS4".

sprinterboy1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

"So glad Sony stood strong and didn’t allow Xbox Live sign in on PS4"

WTF are just sprouting on about.
Edit: btw I'm playstation.

King_Noctis1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

What’s wrong with MS wanting more subscribers? What’s wrong with them trying to get more profit?

And on that note, what’s wrong with login into Xbox live for Minecraft? You have no problem logging into other accounts like Blizzard account for games like Hearthstone or Overwatch, yet it is a problem with you login into Xbox live account to play a game that MS owns? Well....

Razzer1915d ago

"yet it is a problem with you login into Xbox live account to play a game that MS owns?"

This is an SDK. It is not for games that MS owns. It is for other third party devs to implement in their own games.

badz1491915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

@King_Noctis

"What’s wrong with MS wanting more subscribers? What’s wrong with them trying to get more profit?"

So...when Sony decided to not allow cross-play so they can keep all their fanbase for themselves to make more money, it's suddenly wrong?

Kribwalker1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

@Razzer

but the OP is expressing his concerns on a specific MS owned game,which is what King is referring to
“Nintendo should’ve never let them put Minecraft on Switch. Microsoft wants to use other devices to promote their own service. So glad Sony stood strong and didn’t allow Xbox Live sign in on PS4.“

Razzer1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

@Krib

I'm not sure anyone here is really looking at what this really is, but yes you are right. That post is off-base as well. This has nothing to do with Minecraft on Switch. Bottom line is that if a game dev has created a game that hooks into Xbox Live then they can use this to extend Live services to other devices that allow it. MS doesn't need to release an SDK for what they already do.

rainslacker1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

There's nothing wrong with what MS wants to do. But, Sony didn't disallow minecraft cross play content sharing on PS because it required XBL login, they denied it because MS required you to log in to XBL to get updates for said game. I don't think people who bitch about what happened in that scenario understand what was going on, or what MS was trying to do. It was all on MS for locking new Minecraft features behind logging in, and there was no reason they couldn't have rolled out the anticipated update at the time, and just not have done the cross content sharing on PS platforms.

Sony requires that all content be curated and distributed through their own services, and expressly forbids log ins being required to gain updates. MS was trying to bypass compliance standards, and Sony would have said no to anyone in that situation. If MS provided updates through normal channels, there would be nothing in the compliance standards that would disallow a 3rd party sign in for other functions of minecraft, and there are games which do allow this, such as some EA games needing Origin log ins to track progress stats in MP games, or to log into their servers for matchmaking purposes. Even for FFXIV, Square has to roll out its updates for PS on PSN. But Sony allows the 3rd party log on for everything else. In the minecraft scenario, MS didn't get what it wanted, so they took their toys and went home. They could have gotten the MAU's if they had implemented it within compliance standards, because Sony isn't against MS publishing on their system, but they are against companies trying to bypass them for their own gain.

trooper_1915d ago

But you were ready to nail Sony to the tree for wanting to make a profit?

Double standards ftw.

ziggurcat1915d ago

"What’s wrong with MS wanting more subscribers?"

Nothing, but why should they force people on other platforms to create an XBL account in order to cross-play with Xbox users?

Kribwalker1915d ago

ziggurcat1h ago
"What’s wrong with MS wanting more subscribers?"

Nothing, but why should they force people on other platforms to create an XBL account in order to cross-play with Xbox users?“

They only do that with minecraft. A MSowned game, so that being said they can do whatever they want with it. If you want crossplay on aMS owned game, then sign into their servers. Or else just be Happy a MS game is even on PS. Especially since it’s consistently a top seller every year

ziggurcat1915d ago

@krib:

I was referring to this SDK, not Minecraft. Implementing cross-play using this SDK will force people to create an XBL account because it will be required in order to access those Live features.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1915d ago
Shiken1915d ago

90 mil active users on PSN? You just lost all credibility as anyone knows that...

A. Not every PS4 owner is subbed to PSPlus.

B. Not every PS4 that has ever been sold is active.

C. There are actually more XBLGold members than PSPlus members because of thise that still play on 360 and there is no need for a plus membership on PS3.

I actually hope XBL does go to the Nintendo Switch. Maybe then the Switch, which is an otherwise great console, will actually have a feature complete online service.

Playstation is killing it right now, and as a Playstation fan, I am happy for them. They are not perfect however and MS stepping up their game in any way is welcome as competition drives the industry. Or have you forgotten what happened when Sony thought they had a monopoly going into gen 7?

yomfweeee1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

Microsoft doesn't release "Gold membership" counts, so congrats on just making stuff up or being confused. Their Live counts are both free and paid accounts.

There is no way there are more Gold members than Plus members. There are are almost as many Plus members as there are X1 owners.

S2Killinit1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

@Shiken
Wrong, we just had a report saying PSN makes more money than Microsoft’s ENTIRE gaming division. So how can MS have more Live users? Face it people are playing on PSN.

Kribwalker1915d ago

@S2

that total doesn’t include only PSN Subs.

“Sony made around $12.5 billion in 2018 purely from PSN. This accounts for digital sales, purchases of add-on content, and other assorted subscription fees like with PS Plus.”

all those fortnite MTs that are making 250+ million every month are counted in there, digital game sales, DLC, movies all that stuff

Mr_Writer851915d ago

@Shiken

Why are you talking about sub services? PSN is a free service on PS3 and does not need Plus to play free to play PS4 games (eg Fortnite)

So 90m users over Plus, free to play and PS3 is a very credible number.

S2Killinit1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

@Krib
The report was very clear, “PSN makes more money than Microsoft’s ENTIRE gaming division” (that includes Live and anything else MS makes related to games)

ziggurcat1915d ago

You're conflating PSN users, and PS+ subscribers. And some games, even though they are online MP titles, don't require PS+.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1915d ago
Tazzy1915d ago

Minecraft is on PS4 and so is PUBG but I see where you're coming from.

Razzer1915d ago

As I said to King_Noctis, this has nothing to do with MS first party games. MS has internal APIs and libraries for accomplishing their Live functionality. An SDK gives third party game devs the ability to use these features and extend them to other devices. Minecraft on Switch really has nothing to do with it.

Atom6661915d ago

Nintendo has made millions in royalties off of selling Minecraft. I think they're ok with it.

gangsta_red1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

"So glad Sony stood strong and didn’t allow Xbox Live sign in on PS4."

Why? You sign in to every other different service on PSN (Netflix, Ubisoft, EA, Activision, etc, etc). Every other huge company allows you to make an account for thier service on any platform, but for some reason when MS does it, it's considered evil and bad.

The double standards or just the absolutely plain ridiculousness some people have when it comes to MS is hilarious.

"Xbox isn’t selling well so the want to become a service"

About as false as false can get. MS knows as well as Sony and any other service, that subscriptions are where the money is. This is why you see every company creating their own type of subscription type service including good guy Sony.

"They want to slap Xbox Live on every device they can to get that number up."

Heaven forbid a business trying to make money and expand their user base and get with the times.

S2Killinit1915d ago

Because they are trying to destroy consoles as we know them. You might like what MS does, but i dont. Wouldntblike it if Sony did it either. But it seems MS is actively pushing this future.

gangsta_red1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

@S2killinit
"Because they are trying to destroy consoles as we know them."

Okay...let me understand this correctly...by giving developers easier tools to achieve cross-platform play that allows Xbox Live achievements, social systems, and multiplayer, into games built for mobile devices and the Nintendo Switch...MS is destroying consoles.....

This is exactly what you're telling me correct?

I can't even begin to put any more sarcasm behind this to make this even funnier than it already is.

yomfweeee1915d ago

You need console sales to get subscribers. Does your brain work? No one is buying Gold membership without a Microsoft console.

gangsta_red1914d ago

@yomfwee
"You need console sales to get subscribers"

I wish that made sense!?! Netflix, EA, Ubi as well as other major media services all have subscription services, do they also have their own consoles to sell?

"No one is buying Gold membership without a Microsoft console."

This is extremely funny to read, especially after saying "does your brain work"...this has nothing to do with paying for a live service which is strictly for Xbox consoles that want to play online, this is just tools for developers taking advantage and adding achievements, an established multiplayer and other extras that all come with that live service for crossplay games.

And you do realize that you can create an Xbox Live account (for free) without having an Xbox...did your working brain know this? That this live account will be accessible across all platforms (mobile, PC, Switch, etc) that you play on, this is what MS and everyone is doing to keep gamers connected.

Now, how is MS destroying consoles? How will the PS5 and the next Nintendo console going to be destroyed because of this?

Since your brain is obviously working better than mine maybe you can answer these questions.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1914d ago
Livingthedream1915d ago

Xbox is just a way for MS to get into your living room and expand their services. it's not their main attraction they make a lot more money of other things. Sony needs playstation to sell at these levels since it's one of its main $$ producers so they need to be more protective and restrictive.

Kiwi661915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

So just to twist the scenario what would you say if it was Sony or Nintendo doing this instead of MS, would you be ok with it or would you have the same attitude towards it

Unspoken1915d ago

They've remarked about becoming a software and services company well befote this announcement.

conanlifts1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

"Nintendo should’ve never let them put Minecraft on Switch."

What nonsense. By using live for Minecraft it means any content or items you purchase on a PC, Xbox or switch carry across to all platforms. So you never have to buy things twice.

Omegasyde1915d ago

i agree - I am thinking this whole cross play drama was a trojan horse.

Sure its great for small player bases across games, but it very well could lead to a Publisher Service war.

Ie MS gamepass
Ea game pass
ubisoft game pass
PSnow
Bethesda game pass
Activision game pass.

Just like how people cut cable and went streaming only, now to watch the shows you want now you have to subscibe to multiple services and actually end up paying more that you would of on a cable bundle.

conanlifts1915d ago

The trick is to subscribe to one at a time. Watch or play what you want and then move to the other service. People that subscribe to everything at once are doing it wrong. There is more than enough available to subscription hop. It also means you get to take up offers when these companies try to get you to return.

NeoGamer2321915d ago

I am not sure what planet you have been on for the last decade but it does not seem to be planet earth.

Microsoft has been pushing towards multi-platform XBox Live for many, many years now. There was Games for Windows Live launched in May 2007, Age of Empires Castle Seige in September 2014, Wordament back from 2012, Microsoft Solitaire, etc over the past many years. They took those efforts and put efforts towards Xbox Play Anywhere and now they are spreading more broadly with Minecraft among other games.

Microsoft has quietly built towards this point for over a decade now. And it is starting to become more and more popular as gamers see the benefits of connecting to one gaming profile to play all your games on many devices from Android, to iOS, to PC, to XBox Console.

There is no logical argument against a multi-platform gaming network. There are only gamers who are salty to this idea because they know it would end the console wars to which they have been attached to for a very long time. I can't wait til the console wars are over and gamers are free to choose the platform they like the most and can play their games against anyone else on any other platform.

+ Show (15) more repliesLast reply 1914d ago
Vits1915d ago

Well Microsoft Gaming division is growing. Last quarter they reported a 44% overall increased, but that was highly because of a 36% growth in the software and service revenue. So it's obvious that this segment is their biggest strength.

Xbox Live Gold alone have 57 million users and the last report put the active Live users at 64 million. The difference between those numbers is most likely from platforms that have access to the Live but don't pay for the Live Gold. Like the Nintendo Switch and the PC.

Therefore it's a no brainer that they want to expand the places where the service is available. Even more if the rumors of their streaming gaming system comes to fruition.

Godmars2901915d ago

So it has more users than consoles?

Meanwhile Sony's made more than the Xbox and Switch combined.

Vits1915d ago

Yes, there are more Xbox Live users than Xbox One consoles sold. That is obvious since the service can be used by means other than XOne consoles.

And Sony is doing a great job and it is the de facto leader of the console gaming market. That said, both Nintendo and Microsoft's gaming division are also growing, expanding and profiting. Which in the end is great for consumers and the market as a whole.

mcstorm1915d ago

Goldmars290 yep it dose as pc users can use xbox live and I am one of them. Due to now having a family I sold my X as I don't have time to play online and decided to use my pc instead seems most games I owned were play anywhere and I also kept gamepass. But don't need to pay for live to play online for the small amount of times I do at the moment.

Unspoken1915d ago

Whoa, you can't comprehend it having more users than consoles. Whoosh!

Sony's handful is dwarfed in comparison to PC and Mobile.

conanlifts1915d ago

He is taking into account users on PC or switch that subscribe for cross play etc. Plus 57 million users would probably include xbox 360 owners, though i would find it interesting of so many 360 owners still had subscriptions. It would be good for MS to break it down. Last reports were 41 million xbox one consoles sold. Now bare in mind that many families have 2 consoles so they can play with their kids, which means less paid users.

Alternatively MS are counting users based on profiles, so for example I have 4 profiles and 2 consoles. The other 3 profiles are my childrens, so if they count child and family users as active users that is quite different.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1915d ago
Godmars2901915d ago

Thing is, many on XBL - PC users - aren't paying for XBL. Which, considering MS first tried to charge PC users for it only to be laughed at and shamed not to, would change as soon as it became legitimately popular.

And MS still has issue in not valuing SP games. Have repeatedly been shamed into making statements about supporting them, only to as soon either reverse those statements or directly give no support to SP gaming. Tack on MP and reason for XBL, their paid subscription service.

So stop saying everything a gaming company does - which "indirectly" increases their profits - is good for gaming in general. That's how DLC, MTs and loot boxes became things.

A "Netflix of Gaming" does not bode well for RPGs much less anything requiring deep story or character development. It does however favor production line game development mentality which we sorely need less of.

Vits1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

Yes, this is obvious. If it were not, there would be no need to report both numbers.

And I'm not saying that anything that a gaming company does is good, as long as it increases their profits. What I'm saying is that companies surviving and growing is ultimately a good thing for the market, because it allows for multiple options for the consumer what is ultimately good.

Now, if Microsoft is going to a path you do not agree, then you can support other companies that are going the other way. If only one company were successful, that would not be possible.

The Wood1915d ago

I like your comments Vits. Very diplomatic.

Omegasyde1915d ago

If streaming/annual services becomes the main channel for new games kiss all those AAA games goodbye.

Studios will split resources and make smaller games with less budget and time.

Godmars2901915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

"Now, if Microsoft is going to a path you do not agree, then you can support other companies that are going the other way."

Thing is we're having this discussion regarding an article where MS is effectively trying to insert themselves into how other companies do things. Which could very well result in having to pay for two subscriptions: the console you own, and access to MS's networks. Likewise MS muscling in on Android and iOS could result in Google or Apple gaming going paid subscription, which was why PS3 owners complained to 360 owners to complain about/not use XBL Gold.

When COD, then Skyrim, became industry standards I, as a SP RPG fan mostly into deep narrative stories and predetermined complex characters whose character was examined/explored through gameplay rather than openended player templates, was f**ked. Now at best all I've got are MMO clones, iOS gotcha RPGs and largely unevolved visual novels.

And all you've got to say is let MS be MS.

Livingthedream1915d ago

MS has released several single player games this gen, and I'm inclined to believe they would have done really well on playstation. They sell more multiplayer games than single player only games, it's just a fact for their platform, so they have to play to their strengths. Sonys hardcore fans love their single player games, good or mediocre they still sell.

Vits1915d ago

"Thing is we're having this discussion regarding an article where MS is effectively trying to insert themselves into how other companies do things. Which could very well result in having to pay for two subscriptions: the console you own and acces to MS's Network"

I personally don't see a issue in paying for a service, if I'm using that service. Even more if that allows me to access games and features in a device that would normally not have them. But if you see a problem with it, don't support it. There are other options on the market.

"Likewise MS muscling in on Android and iOS could result in Google or Apple gaming going paid subscription, which was why PS3 owners complained to 360 owners to complain about/not use XBL Gold. "

That would be on Google and Apple though. The same way that the PSN going paid is on Sony.
Yes, Microsoft "started" the paid online on consoles with the Live Gold way back in 2002, but each company has chosen how to proceed by themselves.

Nintendo for example keep it free for more than 15 after the Live Gold was first introduced.

"When COD, then Skyrim, became industry standards I, as a SP RPG fan mostly into deep narrative stories and predetermined complex characters whose character was examined/explored through gameplay rather than openended player templates, was f**ked. Now at best all I've got are MMO clones, iOS gotcha RPGs and largely unevolved visual novels."

That happens buddy. Not every market trend will be good for you in particular, but it's not like every single companie will follow them, just look for the ones that create what you enjoy and support their work.

"And all you've got to say is let MS be MS"

Yes, every company will do what they think is best for their business. Support the ones that resonate with you. But again, if the is a single winner in the maker. We are all screwed because their way becomes the only way.

Godmars2901915d ago

One more time: We're talking about companies going their own way, doing their own thing, in regards to an article about MS inserting the Xbox brand onto other platforms like Android and Switch. This after leading the charge for crossplay, which is directly related to the subject at hand, while continuing to recover from the original XB1 launch polices which would have strictly dictated how the system would have been accessed. You might be happy with all that entails from a company that's been repeatedly pressured towards supporting exclusives only reverse itself, but I'm not. Would rather they just kept to themselves or realize their mistakes - but they aren't.

Really have to ask why they aren't compared to EA Activision and Ubisoft, but then their fans keeps telling me with each declaration that MS can do no wrong.

starchild1915d ago

Hey, Vits, nice comments. We need more people like you around these parts. Next to my PC I've always preferred Sony consoles, but that doesn't mean I hate the other platforms. A lot of the fanboys on this site are just completely unreasonable and toxic. They don't know how to have a preference but still be fair and honest. I mean, I think most of us can be a little fanboyish from time to time, but for some of these guys it's a full time job.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1915d ago
eagle211915d ago

I understand clearly why they would want this but the benefit to their hardware sales seems like it might actually shrink. Nintendo has been excellent at attracting gamer's from all consoles this generation and something like this will help them get even more Xbox fans....especially the Xbox fans in Japan. It's like having Windows on competitor hardware...it helped the sales of competitors hardware while helping make Microsoft richer. So they rather Xbox be a software provider in the future? Maybe Halo is going to be on PlayStation's and Nintendo consoles in the future? I'll take Banjo back on Nintendo, Microsoft. And allow Nintendo (or Retro Studios) to co-develop it with Rare. Make that happen and you will get some money from me...lol.

Wikkid6661915d ago

Little to no money in hardware.

Psychonaut1915d ago

Having a sony console with exclusive games via disc,with xboxlive and Xbox exclusives online. I wouldn't be upset about that. I could play my favorite games, then jump online and enjoy Forza from Xbox. I'm not mad at that notion.

King_Noctis1915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

Most people here don’t think it that way. They don’t want choice. They only want one plastic console to reign supreme. I’ll never understand this thought process.

InTheZoneAC1915d ago

because games as a service is cancer if that ever becomes #1 priority, in this case it is for M$

S2Killinit1915d ago

You will rue the day MS’s business model becomes the norm.

RauLeCreuset1915d ago

"Most people here don’t think it that way. They don’t want choice."

Nah. We don't want Xbox. Some of you don't understand the distinction. It's a shame.

SuperSonic911915d ago (Edited 1915d ago )

Wow, your ignorance is amazing!
Open your eyes and do some detective work man.

There is a profound reason why most people prefer to play PS4 than Microsoft or Nintendo game products combined. More people have seen through the good PS4 is doing for the gaming industry and the bad MS and Nintendo is doing to it. So they learn and choose to support PS4.

Do yourself a good favor and try to find out, man.

Nintendo will become Microsofts little pawn to be used to stop Sony's dominance in gaming.

S2Killinit1915d ago

We want choice, just not the type of choice MS is handing out.

OffRoadKing1915d ago

Which is funny considering the article after article we get here talking about how MS is "fixing everything" and "buying up studios" and will "take over" and "be the winning console" next gen. Apparently some people want that plastic console to reign supreme, of course until it does some will act like they dont understand the thought process. I never saw any "people dont want a choice" comments like yours when 360 reigned supreme.

Razzer1915d ago

and now we have another mind reader. Great

King_Noctis1914d ago

@Razzer

Mind reader? You can’t be freaking serious. Either you have a short attention span or you pretend to know nothing about this place.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1914d ago
ILostMyMind1914d ago

And that's what MS says? I would not mind that option. The platform is from Sony and it will earn the share of it on all sales anyway. I wonder how much it would cost a Microsoft game on PlayStation having to pay part of the Sony + Microsoft + developer.

Show all comments (195)
230°

AMD gaming revenue declined massively year-over-year, CFO says the demand is 'weak'

Poor Xbox sales have affected AMD’S bottom line

Read Full Story >>
tweaktown.com
RonsonPL15h ago

Oh wow. How surprising! Nvidia overpriced their RTX cards by +100% and AMD instead of offering real competition, decided to join Nvidia in their greedy approach, while not having the same mindshare as Nvidia (sadly) does. The 7900 launch was a marketing disaster. All the reviews were made while the card was not worth the money at all, they lowered the price a bit later on, but not only not enough but also too late and out of "free marketing" window coming along with the new card generation release. Then the geniuses at AMD axed the high-end SKUs with increased cache etc, cause "nobody will buy expensive cards to play games" while Nvidia laughed at them selling their 2000€ 4090s.
Intel had all the mindshare among PC enthusiasts with their CPUs. All it took was a competetive product and good price (Ryzen 7000 series and especially 7800x3d) and guess what? AMD regained the market share in DYI PCs in no time! The same could've have happened with Radeon 5000, Radeon 6000 and Radeon 7000.
But meh. Why bother. Let's cancell high-end RDNA 4 and use the TSMC wafers for AI and then let the clueless "analysts" make their articles about "gaming demand dwingling".

I'm sure low-end, very overpriced and barely faster if not slower RDNA4 will turn things around. It will have AI and RT! Two things nobody asked for, especially not gamers who'd like to use the PC for what's most exciting about PC gaming (VR, high framerate gaming, hi-res gaming).
8000 series will be slow, overpriced and marketed based on its much improved RT/AI... and it will flop badly.
And there will be no sane conclusions made at AMD about that. There will be just one, insane: Gaming is not worth catering to. Let's go into AI/RT instead, what could go wrong..."

Crows9011h ago

What would you say would be the correct pricing for new cards?

Very insightful post!

RonsonPL6h ago

That's a complicated question. Depends on what you mean. The pricing at the release date or the pricing planned ahead. They couldn't just suddenly end up in a situation where their existing stock of 6000 cards is suddenly unsellable, but if it was properly rolled out, the prices should be where they were while PC gaming industry was healthy. I recognize the arguments about inflation, higher power draw and PCB/BOM costs, more expensive wafers from TSMC etc. but still, PC gaming needs some sanity to exist and be healthy. Past few years were very unhealthy and dangerous to whole PC gaming. AMD should recognize this market is very good for them as they have advantage in software for gaming and other markets while attractive short term, may be just too difficult to compete at. AI is the modern day gold rush and Nvidia and Intel can easily out-spend AMD on R&D. Meanwhile gaming is tricky for newcomers and Nvidia doesn't seem to care that much about gaming anymore. So I would argue that it should be in AMDs interest to even sell some Radeon SKUs at zero profit, just to prevent the PC gaming from collapsing. Cards like 6400 and 6500 should never exist at their prices. This tier was traditionally "office only" and priced at 50$ in early 2000s. Then we have Radeons 7600 which is not really 6-tier card. Those were traditionally quite performant cards based on wider than 128-bit memory bus. Also 8GB is screaming "low end". So I'd say the 7600 should've been available at below 200$ (+taxes etc.) as soon as possible, at least for some cheaper SKUs.For faster cards, the situation is bad for AMD, because people spending like $400+ are usually fairly knowledgable and demanding. While personally I don't see any value in upscallers and RT for 400-700$ cards, the fact is that especially DLSS is a valuable feature for potential buyers. Therefore, even 7800 and 7900 cards should be significantly cheaper than they currently are. People knew what they were paying for when buying Radeon 9700, 9800, X800, 4870 etc. They were getting gaming experience truly unlike console or low-end PC gaming. By all means, let's have expensive AMD cards for even above $1000, but first, AMD needs to show value. Make the product attractive. PS5 consoles can be bought at 400$. If AMD offers just a slightly better upscalled image on the 400$ GPU, or their 900$ GPU cannot even push 3x as many fps compared to cheap consoles, the pricing acts like cancer on PC gaming. And poor old PC gaming can endure only so much.

MrCrimson2h ago

I appreciate your rant sir, but it has very little to do with gpus. It is the fact that the PS5 and Xbox are in end cycle before a refresh.

13h agoReplies(1)
KwietStorm_BLM11h ago

Well that's gonna happen when you don't really try. I want to support AMD so badly and give Nvidia some actual competition but they don't very much seem interested in challenging, by their own accord. I been waiting for them to attack the GPU segment the same way they took over CPU, but they just seem so content with handing Nvidia the market year after year, and it's happening again this year with their cancelled high end card.

MrCrimson2h ago

I think you're going to see almost zero interest from AMD or Nvidia on the gaming GPU market. They are all in on AI.

RhinoGamer8811h ago

No Executive bonuses then...right?

enkiduxiv5h ago

What are smoking? Got to layoff your way to those bonuses. Fire 500 employees right before Christmas. That should get you there.

Tapani4h ago(Edited 4h ago)

Well, if you are 48% down in Q4 in your Gaming sector as they are, which in absolute money terms is north of 500M USD, then you are not likely to get at least your quarterly STI, but can be applicable for annual STI. The LTI may be something you are still eligible for, such as RSUs or other equity and benefits, especially if they are based on the company total result rather than your unit. All depends on your contract and AMD's reward system.

MrCrimson2h ago

Lisa Su took AMD from bankruptcy to one of the best semiconductor companies on the planet. AMD from 2 dollars a share to 147. She can take whatever she wants.

darksky9h ago

AMD prcied their cards thinking that they will sell out just like in the mining craze. I suspect reality has hit home when they realized most gamers cannot afford to spend over $500 for a gpu.

Show all comments (26)
320°

Batman: Arkham Shadow - Official Teaser Trailer

Watch the Batman: Arkham Shadow teaser trailer for the next game in the Batman: Arkham franchise, releasing exclusively on the Meta Quest 3 in late 2024.Evil stalks the streets. Gotham City is in danger. And you’re the only one who can save it. Check out the teaser for the upcoming Batman VR game.Tune into Summer Game Fest 2024 on June 7 at 2pm PT/ 5pm ET/ 10pm BST/ June 8 at 7am AEST for the official Batman: Arkham Shadow world premiere reveal from Camouflaj and Oculus Studios, in partnership with Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment and DC.

Petebloodyonion1d 4h ago

Nice to see some VR games following Batman Arkham!
Was a huge fan of Batman Vr on PSVR :)

Cacabunga20h ago

Quest 3 only is a letdown.. need to see what the experience will be like.

Looks like Ratcatcher will be the main villain in this game.. you gotta love thos rat waves in VR. Was already too much with A Plague Tale Requiem…

Also gives hope WB is not giving up on Arkham series.. hopefully a Rocksteady full blown Batman game after the suicide mission they just got..

Petebloodyonion16h ago(Edited 16h ago)

I would not be surprised if a PSVR2 version is announced after.
If there's none, It would mean that devs truly believe that PSVR2 is dead.

And really loved Plague tale Requiem (feel bad about the ending)

Babadook710h ago(Edited 10h ago)

"If there's none, It would mean that devs truly believe that PSVR2 is dead."

Not really. It would mean Meta pad for exclusivity.

Regarding PSVR2 dying don't believe the FUD, it's healthy, has a lot of great things coming, and won't die for many years.

But that being said it looks like a great game.

Petebloodyonion9h ago

@Babadook
Not every company uses Sony's tactics of paying with the idea of removing content from others platform
case in point of Meta releasing a " Free" update PSVR2 patch for Beat Sabers while publishing games like Starwars Tales from the Galaxy.

But since we should not listen to the FUD how about listening to the devs of Rec Room the most popular social VR app about the PSVR 2 version of the game

"No current plans to bring RR to PSVR2. We’ve looked into it, it’s a non-trivial port, and we haven’t found a way to make it make economic sense. In an ideal world we would love to bring RR to PSVR2, but we just can’t justify the cost based on the numbers. Sucks I know, but that’s the truth.”

https://www.roadtovr.com/re...

shinoff21831d 2h ago

Shame that something like this won't be on psvr2. Sony really has to step up on this front. There's a bunch of neat and nifty games out there for it. I'll end up getting one once I get caught up buying all the rpgs I've missed these last few years. Anyway I can't justify spending money on this with only a couple major vr titles. Re4 doesn't cut it for me since I was never a huge fan of the game. To see this batman as an exclusive, unless I'm wrong. Sony gotta pump something up

mooreneco2113h ago(Edited 13h ago)

Sadly Camouflaj was acquired by Meta in 2022 when Sony allowed the psvr Iron man game to be ported to the quest, but given the amount of cash meta is losing never say never…..

Profchaos4h ago

It'll be a timed exclusive the VR market is far to small to have true exclusives unless meta or Sony shell out millions of dollars to develop them exclusively.

Extremely common for VR studios to run very lean staffing wise take smaller projects and aim for mobile, and psvr2 and possibly PC.

Probably also why so many VR games get released so buggy to

Toecutter0015h ago(Edited 15h ago)

What if Gotham Knights was a direct sequel to the Arkhamverse and was a battle for the cowl storyline, but the the traditional fighting mechanics while still being coop optional? What if SSKTJL wasn't set in the Arkhamverse and a wholey elseworlds story? What if this new batman game wasn't just VR cobblygook?

thejigisup9h ago

All vr games need to be muliplatform. In order for the medium to grow we need as many hands on the software as possible. Dick around with exclusives once vr as a format it's established and the general public perception is more accepting.

EternalTitan9h ago

Why cant we have a BATMAN BEYOND GAME, you corporate jabrronis?

Show all comments (15)
80°

SteelSeries Reveals Arctis Nova Pro White Edition

Looks like a great headset and it will be interesting to hear how they sound. From the makers of Arctis, the most awarded audio line in gaming, SteelSeries, the original esports brand that fuses gaming and culture, today introduces an all-new white version of the award-winning Arctis Nova Pro series headsets.