@BIG_BOSS_927: Microsoft will lose again with that attitude. Not to the degree of XB1 vs PS4, but worse than if they use their software properties to fully define their the platform.

The idea is to build a lasting future for XBox and Game Pass on console and PC. GP can transcend either. Similar to the Planet Fitness model -- just pay the alluring low monthly fee, we don't care if you ever actually show up. You can't do that with XBox Live, as it is bound to the console.

@Carpetfluff: What enormous installed userbase? PS4?

Deathloop is on PS5 and PC, and I imagine the same for GW: Tokyo. Releasing any other single player or non-MMO game on Playstation would be daft. The most relevant question Spencer could have answered, definitively, is will Deathloop launch on PC Game Pass.

@bdrtfm: We won't get a more clear answer for a while. From what Phil restated in the "roundtable":

1. Exclusives for any Game Pass platform (XBox, PC-GP, mobile/xCloud if possible), however...

2. Some games were near release at the time of acquisition and contractual obligations will be honored (e.g. Deathloop, Ghostwire)

3. Existing games (i.e. live games) will continue to be supported on other platforms and not be cut-off (e.g. ESO, FO76)

@gamerforlife96: Unless it is Xcloud-only, that would mean developing digital PS builds of all their games. I seriously doubt Microsoft wants to do that. Windows and even more so, mobile are already extensions of the ecosystem.

@Carpetfluff: Deathloop and most likely Ghostwire will hit PS. Will the timed-exclusivity portion of the deal stand? Seems silly to honor that stipulation, we will see. Fallout 76 and ESO will be supported on all existing platforms.

Time will tell about the rest. X-clusivity is the most sensible path for building worth within their ecosystem.

@keiser69: True. That hasn't bothered Sony or Nintendo. Each company is trying to promote their ecosystem. For Microsoft, the distinctions are a bit more abrupt, with XBox, PC, and GamePass being bolted together.

The idea is not just to sell as many games as possible, or else all would go multi-platform. The approach has been to sell as many games possible through your portals, not the competition's. Certainly don't provide them ammunition.

@Pyrosa: You might want to fill Sony and Nintendo in on that obvious business math.

There is a strong case to be made for exclusivity, however you arrive at it. Sony is currently buying up as many timed-exclusives are they can, to disrupt releases on other platforms. If they had the capital, they would buy more studios outright and not release anywhere but on PlayStation.

Only recently have they dipped their toes into PC releases of older titles. No way would they release directly on XBox, regardless of a studio or title previously being multi-platform.

If you let the comments section tell it, XBox is a platform of 50+ million potential customers "starved for games." Sony could potentially delayed release their 1st party titles on XBox and see better attach rates and even total sales in foreign territory.

@gleencross: The creators are targeting the masses by emulating movies.

Independence Day sucked, yet it likely sold more tickets and home editions than any Oscar winner. Droves want to play what they have seen in the movies, and that usually means the gameplay easy and simplified. The mechanics are usually shallow, or safe, borrowed from other games in the genre (and reskinned).

Look at the new Aliens game -- the gameplay video looks like tons or other games wrapped in an Aliens skin. Could be the session was set on easy or normal. Still, there did not seem to be any indication the lore of the movies would be built upon.

@GalvatronType_R: So...do you think Microsoft should have withheld UI updates from XBox One just differentiate Series S|X from it?