I think so too, but apparently some really big players are seeing a golden future in streaming games only. Amazon Luna, Stadia and Xcloud are all aiming for a 3 billion audience, thinking we'll all be playing our games in the cloud in the near future.

MS didn't spend $7,5B on Bethesda because they want to beat Sony in the console business, they did it because they want to beat Google and Amazon in the cloud gaming business. I just wonder what will happen if cloud gaming in general turns out to be a dud for MS, especially after spending such a crazy amount on Bethesda. Series X is a cool piece of kit and all but with MS's whole GP cross platform strategy, there's practically no reason to buy one. Hell, I can easily see the ps5/Switch outsell Series X/S by 4:1 or more.

@sealionact: Is know what GP and Xcloud are. But how do you expect MS to tap into that 3 billion audience without Xcloud? The strategy is obviously to combine the two, effectively making it the "the Netflix of gaming"

If you look at the numbers.. sure, 3 billion people play games on their phones and yes, Spotify and Netflix have decimated the traditional retail market for music and movies.

The thing is, though, everybody likes movies and music but not everybody is a gamer, at least not in the traditional console gaming sense. Mobile gaming has overtaken traditional gaming but do people who play Candy Crush for free on their phone want to play something like Skyrim? And enough so that they'll buy a $60 controller and pay $15 a month for it? I just don't understand who those "gamers" are that are too cheap or unwilling to buy a console, but would spend that kind of money on GP, Luna or Stadia.

MS is really banking on becoming the Netflix of gaming, but even Netflix has "only" 300m subscribers, not 3 billion. Also, only 10% of Netflix streaming is spend on phones compared to 85% on TV's. People don't like to watch Netflix on phones so why would that be different for full blown console games?

The real question is what will happen if Cloud gaming doesn't take off like MS is banking on? Stadia now has 250k subscribers, Geforce Now recently had half of its major titles pulled from the service. Gamepass is doing a bit better but 15m subscribers is still peanuts when you consider Netflix is making a net profit of "only" $1,5B a year and has 300m subscribers. Looking at those numbers, it would take decades for MS to break even on that $7,5B Bethesda deal, so what am I missing here lol?

@Pedro: I dunno man. I just don't see who they are targeting with Cloud gaming. Gamers obviously don't care and MS keeps mentioning the 3 billion mobile gamers. I just think they are completely overestimating the appeal of cloud gaming. My granny spends hours a day playing Candy Crush on her phone, doesn't mean she is interested in fragging fools in COD, though.

People keep saying MS will be the Netflix of gaming. Thing is, we all love music and movies but not everybody is a gamer. Something like Netflix has a lot more potential to hit mass market, but even Netflix has "only" 300m subscribers, not 3 billion lol. Getting people to download and play free games on a phone is something completely different than getting people to subscribe for $15 bucks a month. Another interesting fact is that only 10% of Netflix streaming is spend on a phone, compared to 85% on a tv. Just because something is technically possible, doesn't mean people will want to use it.

@blessedbyhorus: I don't know why everybody thinks Cloud gaming will be the future and its snooze or you lose for Sony. Sony is the undisputed king in the core gaming market and just had the second best selling console in gaming history. What makes you think Amazon, Google or MS even got a chance to win over those 130m gamers who currently own a ps4? Imo the ps5 will be even more dominate than the ps4 and streaming services will exist just as an addition, not a replacement just because MS says so. Cloud gaming is a completely unproven market, while Sony is dominating a market that's been around forever. Geforce Now had almost all its big games pulled and Stadia has like 250k subscribers... https://subscribercounter.com/channel/UCQKyy9Wl7hsVn1BP7BC53Yg

For Google and Amazon, Cloud gaming makes total sense as they have no history in the console business, they already have the cloud servers in place and they got nothing to lose. But for MS, putting all their eggs in the Xcloud/ GP basket is going to decimate their position in the traditional console market. In 2 months Series X/S will come out and we still haven't seen a single reason to buy one. Instead its all been about GP and reaching 3 billion mobile phone gamers with Xcloud. Some might think GP is Series X's secret weapon but its not. Sure, its a cool bonus, just like PSNow, but nobody is going to buy a console just for GP. If they would, Nintendo and Sony wouldn't be wiping the floor with Xbox right now.

@Pedro: I loved Dishonered, it's just that it didn't sell and it will probably have little effect on console sales, even if it was exclusive to one platform. Wolfenstein and Fallout are good franchises but the last two entries in those series bombed, both in critical acclaim and sales.

Don't get me wrong, MS buying Bethesda is a big deal. But in the grand scheme of things, I just don't see it having much impact on console sales. Maybe later on if Cloud gaming really becomes the future MS is banking on. But in all honesty, I don't think Cloud gaming is going to take off at all, let alone replace or outgrow the traditional gaming market. Look at what happened to Stadia, Geforce Now etc.

@blessedbyhorus: I think Sony should just do what they've always been doing. Cherry pick and secure promising exclusives and buy/ build up some of the "smaller" studios they've build a good relationship with. There aren't many studios that are guaranteed to deliver AAA blockbusters and its not always smart to buy the whole developer, let alone a whole publisher. Just look at Bethesda, if you take away Doom, the last great game from them is probably Skyrim and that came out in 2011. Fallout 4 was ok, and they also had their share of duds lately like Fallout 76 and Wolfenstein Youngblood. We'll see about Deathloop and Ghostwire but I don't see them break sales records either. MW6 will probably be amazing but Starfield better be one hell of a game too for that $7.5B lol.

For Sony, Square Enix would be way to expensive but something like From Software would be a great purchase. Unless Starfield turns out to be a generation defining masterpiece, I actually think From Software exclusives would have a bigger impact on console sales than Bethesda exclusives. And it would cost a fraction of that $7.5B.

@xantufrog: I loved that game myself. Sales wise it was a dud, though.

@Ibacai:Skyrim came out in 2011 and Fallout 76 sucked. Not trying to downplay the significance of this acquisition but $7.5B is a shit ton of money for a publisher that, besides Doom, haven't released a noteworthy game since... err. well.. I can't remember actually. Fallout 4 maybe in 2015?

Starfield could be great but the game is getting an awful lot of hype considering nobody has seen it yet. In the end I don't think this deal will have much of an impact if we're talking ps5 vs SX sales, though. It's not like SX will now launch with a MW6, Starfield and Doom exclusive. Who knows when these games come out and if they'll be exclusives? This will be a long term thing for MS as they try to get 3 billion phone gamers into their ecosystem

@CanYouDiglt: 15m users is peanuts when we're talking about a $7,5B investment. Just to put things in perspective. Netflix has 300m subscribers and they've made a total net profit of a little over $5B since 2005... https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/NFLX/netflix/net-income

Now, keep in mind that GP has 15m subscribers while they are practically giving it away for free with their $1 trials. But how many of those 15m people will stay subscribed for a whole year at $15 a month? I know, I didn't. I've paused my subscription three times already. I renew for a month when a couple of big games get released, play them, and cancel the next month. I bet most people will do this.

I just don't see this working out at all in the long run, especially for publishers like Ubisoft who are now putting their games on Amazon Luna from day one. Why would I buy any of their games now, if I can just sign up for a month, play those games for $5 bucks and cancel right after?