What's Xbox's strategy for exclusive games? Microsoft itself doesn't really seem sure.
In a new interview with our friends at GamesRadar+, two Xbox C-suite figures offered some mixed messaging on exactly what Xbox fans should expect out of their exclusive games play.
Xbox fans wholly rejected the idea of having the only gaming platform in history without any form of exclusive content. It was the first thing new Xbox CEO Asha Sharma addressed when she got the job, immediately turning around and making Gears of War: E-Day and Clockwork Revolution permanent Xbox console exclusives. What's happening beyond that, though?
Here's what Xbox execs had to say on the topic, although I'm more confused now than I was previously.
Xbox will get exclusive games. Some. Randomly, apparently?
Chief Strategy Officer Matthew Ball emphasized strongly that there will be more exclusives for Xbox players beyond Gears of War: E-Day and Clockwork Revolution. He noted that, indeed, you can't really grow a platform without exclusive stuff — which is something I feel literally anyone on Earth should've known.
"This specific decision was made very early. Asha believes that to build a platform, you must have exclusive services and software — in this case, games. And so to return our platform to consistent growth, we need a reliable pipeline of exclusive games."
"I can assure you, Gears of War: E-Day and Clockwork Revolution are not the only titles we're planning. To grow a platform like ours, you have to have exclusive games and services. These are not going to be the only two titles."
People are speculating about exactly what that might mean.
There has been some suggestion that Xbox might follow PlayStation's stated model, of single-player games being exclusive, while multiplayer games remain multi-platform. After this past week and Bethesda's announcements, many are wondering if that might mean Fallout and The Elder Scrolls VI.
"I wouldn't overly fixate on single-player," Booty said. I think that's a good rule of thumb, but it certainly isn't something that's carved in stone."
"We are the stewards of over 20 game franchises that have made a billion dollars in their lifetime. There are a lot of different games in our portfolio, and we have to think about how different games serve different purposes within it."
Ball then chimed in, "We have a framework for these selections, including how we evaluate them. I recognize that this approach is not obvious to all of our players, and we are committed to making this clearer."
... "Not obvious" indeed.
Exclusives are about setting expectations, if Xbox can't do that then why even bother?
Gears of War: E-Day and Clockwork Revolution both look amazing, and I'm confident they will be amazing. But Gears of War has almost always been exclusive to Xbox, and Clockwork Revolution is an unknown quantity with the wider audience. I would bet money Microsoft doesn't put up the marketing budget necessary to help Clockwork Revolution cut through the noise either.
I really feel like only heavy-hitters like The Elder Scrolls, DOOM, Wolfenstein, Halo, and Fallout are going to move the needle in any direction here. The massive audiences, the TV show mainstream reach ... the decades of fandom and embedded history. These are the only types of games that could come close to delivering new users to the Xbox ecosystem. It's not about gatekeeping either — this is about whether or not Xbox actually wants to have platform "growth," as Matthew Ball says.
The problem in the near term is that there's a memory crisis going on, and that it's not a hot look on a spreadsheet to be selling consoles at all right now. Each Xbox Series X|S sold incurs a loss even after the price hike. If those users only pick up the console for a single game, or a couple of games, or maybe even three games ... you potentially don't even break even. Furthermore, it's not something the studios would likely want either. No access to PlayStation's massive install base would harm their bottom lines too.
When you can't sell consoles and break even, and your cost of user acquisition is higher than ever ... the road to better margins is selling games everywhere you can, be it Xbox, PlayStation, or beyond. But ... Xbox will keep bleeding users in that universe, maybe even irrevocably. It would end up ceding even more control to potentially hostile rival tech companies. It's self-defeating over time, and it might be impossible to fix now.
The economics are very difficult in the short term, but I feel like if Microsoft doesn't absorb the short-term pain, it'll end up with a far bigger and potentially far less workable problem. The memory crisis won't be forever, and this piecemeal approach to exclusivity doesn't set expectations particularly well for future potential customers.
To convert a non-Xbox user to a full-time Xbox user, you need more than new IP and franchises that have historically been exclusive already. You need a coherent, visible strategy that sets expectations for the platform for non-users. You need visible, known franchises that market themselves by virtue of simply existing. Otherwise, I'm not sure what the point is.
It'll be interesting to see how Xbox actually approaches this in the future, but Matthew Ball and Matt Booty's vague comments aren't helpful.
Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.
