Jamie

Laid-back gamer who loves survival & RTS games. Zero filter. Chill by nature, but bring nonsense, and I won’t miss. My opinions are my own.

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

I actually agree with part of what you're saying. Xbox's messaging absolutely got muddy after the say the 360 era. Between Xbox One, TV/Kinect, "everything is an Xbox," cloud-first messaging, and multiple strategy shifts, I understand why consumers want a clearer value proposition.

Where I think we differ is that I don't think you can determine what Xbox's identity should be without first evaluating the portfolio you actually own.

If Microsoft wants to strengthen first-party value, they have to look at each franchise and ask what role it serves. Some games strengthen Xbox more by being exclusive. Others may create more value by remaining multiplatform. As you have also agreed. But these decisions have to be made before you can build the message around them.

The consumer sees a finished house(Xbox being the house). But Microsoft has to decide which rooms get renovated first. That actually matters a lot.

This is why I feel that "case by case" is the absence of a strategy. I see it as part of the process of figuring out what the Xbox ecosystem should look like long term.

The reality is that Xbox today isn't just a few tentpole IPs and a dream. They have massive amounts of IP that span different ecosystems.

I agree with you that consumers need to understand why they should buy Xbox hardware. I just think they need time to go though there portofolo, define what they want themselves to be exclusive to Xbox and not. Then make that known after it's more defined.

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

I think the flaw in your argument is that you're treating hardware desirability as if it only increases through a universal exclusivity policy.

I don't think that's necessarily true.

A company can strengthen the value of its platform while still making selective decisions franchise by franchise.

In fact, if Microsoft has the data showing certain franchises perform significantly better as exclusives, then keeping those exclusive would strengthen Xbox hardware value. If other franchises generate more value by remaining multiplatform, then keeping those multiplatform may strengthen the overall gaming business.

Those two things are not mutually exclusive.

The part neither of us can see is the books.

Microsoft knows what sold on Xbox, what sold on PlayStation, what sold on Steam, what drove Game Pass subscriptions, what increased engagement, what retained users, and what actually moved hardware.

We don't.

So when Microsoft says "case by case," I don't interpret that as uncertainty. I interpret it as them adjusting based on actual performance data.

To use a simple analogy: if I own a house, not every dollar I spend has to go toward making the neighborhood nicer. Sometimes I invest directly into my own property because it increases my property's value. Other times I improve things that benefit the neighborhood because that also benefits me.

The mistake is assuming every improvement must be handled the same way.

I also think it's entirely possible that Microsoft is trying to do two things at once:

Strengthen the Xbox brand and make the ecosystem more attractive.
Avoid betting the entire future of the gaming business on hardware exclusivity alone.

Those goals can coexist.

The reality is that only Microsoft sees the full picture. They know which franchises benefit Xbox most by being exclusive and which ones generate more value through broader distribution. That's exactly why a blanket rule may be less rational than a case-by-case approach.

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@PeterP_1985 Example: on my pc i could run the game, but it would use 40 % of my GPU and just give shit fps. Then tweak the game settings and Nvidia Control Panel a few times, then hit reset, and it would work normally at max settings....

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@ModernVintageG Ngl, so happy I just got a Switch 2, upgraded from a Switch OLED.

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@PeterP_1985 @Shpeshal_Nick Tbh every time a little pony has a meltdown they should remove another game.

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@ironXclawGaming @Will777JP All I see from them is wah wah wah. I am entitled boo hoo woe is me lol.

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

Shitty code like shitty art has always existed you don't need AI for shitty anything. People have also been using other people's art and code since it was invented. AI isn't the problem. Slop will be made regardless or stiff would be used regardless. It just made it easier. If you want to get ahead use it we'll learn it and adapt. Or don't

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@ironXclawGaming PlayStation users

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@ironXclawGaming Not a little crash-out. It broke their brain-style crash-out

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@PoniesTearsHQ @RGamerB_ Ngl, when you do the images like that I thought the bottom game was a Switch or mobile game at first.

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@TheRedDragon @RGamerB_ Psst... Just so you know, out of the 20-plus PlayStation State of Play games shown, only 2 were PlayStation-only exclusives. Everything else was multiplatform. Just because they hide the stickers doesn't mean PlayStation-only.

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@JBishie @Swurv__ Even Facebook understands that, when it first started, their platform exclusivity mattered. PlayStation even said they need to keep their games exclusive for their user base. But somehow the chucklefuckes of Twitter still can't grasp that simple concept

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@K__Med

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@PeterP_1985 @XBOX @xboxuk I will 100% @ you when they go live. If you don't beat me to it, lol.

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@JBishie NGL, I am seeing a lot of cope from the Sony camp. Not because games are going to go more and more to Xbox. That will still be case-by-case. They are upset because Sony needs to get off their lazy ass and produce shit again. Which Sony may not actually do.

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@Paladin000Xbox Already snagged the physical edition E-day.

[Jamie @JamieOffline]

@mumi80 @JayDubcity16 Cool story it was just a funny comeback.