MS bringing Gamepass to The Switch? (and perhaps other consoles?)

I guess we will agree to disagree.

That's fine. Val gave you sh1t for that response, but I prefer that to other options (e.g., just restating things or going around in circles).

Anyhow, we're talking about something that may or may not happen in 5 to 10 years. Lots of unknowns. "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future."
 
I saw Crapgamer mention that there's a rumor that MS is considering (or has considered?) putting Gamepass on PS4 or PS5. I know it's Crapgamer, but I figured it was worth a post.

I've cued it up to the part where he mentions it:




Now that would be interesting.

I looked at his show notes and looked up the source. It sounds like MS has "considered" this, but it didn't work out (or perhaps hadn't worked out yet?), for some unknown reason. Here's the relevant bit:

"The elephant in the room is PS4. With the largest install base of all current generation consoles at the moment, why not bring Game Pass to PS4 too? Apparently, Microsoft did consider that at one point, reports Windows Central, noting that there have been internal reports of Microsoft wanting to bring Game Pass to PS4 for at least a year. If so, it is clear that the initiative has not yet worked out — whether because Microsoft decided against it, or because Sony shot it down much like they do things like cross-platform play, or even subscription services like EA Access, is unknown for now.

https://gamingbolt.com/microsoft-allegedly-looked-at-bringing-game-pass-to-ps4-too-rumor
 
I said earlier that MS wouldn't put GP on PS4/5, because it would kill Xbox hardware sales for next gen. However, I realize now that I overlooked something important. I assumed we were talking about the full GP catalog, including Day 1 access to all first-party exclusives. But that's probably not the case. It sounds (from the rumors anyhow) that Nintendo is not getting that sort of deal, but instead a limited subset of exclusives. Sounds like MS is withholding Day 1 access for their big first-party titles like the next Halo, Gears, etc. That makes sense. Switch would struggle to run them anyhow, but more importantly, MS needs to give people a reason to buy an Xbox.

Now I realize that MS wouldn't offer to bring the entire GP catalog to PS4/5, including all their Day 1 first-party heavy hitters. They'd want to keep those for themselves. They'd offer a stripped down GP, with a limited number of smaller and older exclusives. That would allow them to preserve some reason for people to still buy an Xbox.

I'm guessing that the initiative didn't work out because 1) the version of GP MS offered Sony wasn't robust enough to kill the hardware sales, so it wasn't all that tempting, and 2) the financial terms weren't acceptable to MS (i.e., Sony wanted too big a cut). There may have been other issues, too, related to the interface between the networks. Maybe it'll get worked out in the future...?
 
That's fine. Val gave you sh1t for that response, but I prefer that to other options (e.g., just restating things or going around in circles).

Anyhow, we're talking about something that may or may not happen in 5 to 10 years. Lots of unknowns. "It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future."
I doubt I will be gaming in 10 years.
 
Now I realize that MS wouldn't offer to bring the entire GP catalog to PS4/5, including all their Day 1 first-party heavy hitters. They'd want to keep those for themselves. They'd offer a stripped down GP, with a limited number of smaller and older exclusives. That would allow them to preserve some reason for people to still buy an Xbox.

There would be a less than zero percent chance Sony would want that regardless of whatever cut they would want.
 
I said earlier that MS wouldn't put GP on PS4/5, because it would kill Xbox hardware sales for next gen. However, I realize now that I overlooked something important. I assumed we were talking about the full GP catalog, including Day 1 access to all first-party exclusives. But that's probably not the case. It sounds (from the rumors anyhow) that Nintendo is not getting that sort of deal, but instead a limited subset of exclusives. Sounds like MS is withholding Day 1 access for their big first-party titles like the next Halo, Gears, etc. That makes sense. Switch would struggle to run them anyhow, but more importantly, MS needs to give people a reason to buy an Xbox.

Now I realize that MS wouldn't offer to bring the entire GP catalog to PS4/5, including all their Day 1 first-party heavy hitters. They'd want to keep those for themselves. They'd offer a stripped down GP, with a limited number of smaller and older exclusives. That would allow them to preserve some reason for people to still buy an Xbox.

I'm guessing that the initiative didn't work out because 1) the version of GP MS offered Sony wasn't robust enough to kill the hardware sales, so it wasn't all that tempting, and 2) the financial terms weren't acceptable to MS (i.e., Sony wanted too big a cut). There may have been other issues, too, related to the interface between the networks. Maybe it'll get worked out in the future...?

I don't think Sony would want it anyway, they already have their own streaming service so why would they invite MS to offer theirs on the PS4/PS5 as well?

GP on Switch would clearly have to be streaming only much like AC Odyssey is, none of the games on X1 or PC are made to run on the switch so streaming them is the only way it'll work. If MS doesn't offer AAA exclusives and only the smaller digital titles like Ori and Cuphead what's the incentive? 3rd party games that didn't make it to switch? I can see where 3rd parties may like that idea initially because it opens them up to a share of the GP fee on a platform they couldn't run their games on initially, if those 3rd party publishers all start their own sub services down the road GP would be screwed though.
 
Last edited:
I don't. That's MS's vision, not Sony's (or Nintendo's).

I agree there will be a trend toward digital services/content delivery, but I think MS and Sony are heading in very different directions. Talking as if they're equivalent companies with equivalent strategies -- and as if the cloud-based/sub-based "Netflix of gaming" future that MS envisions is inevitable -- is just not accurate.

It's also rather sad. I like traditional home consoles, and I don't want them to be relegated to an afterthought.

I’ll actually agree with you on this...for now. Sony is much more conservative than Microsoft. They have the higher ground in the traditional console space. I cannot see them doing anything that would weaken their grip on consoles to compete with Microsoft, Amazon and Google where those companies have the advantage.

I also don’t think Microsoft is going to make hardware an afterthought. They are simply trying to carve out a different niche. They have to. Sony, Nintendo and Valve have an identity and space solidified in gaming. Microsoft doesn’t....and Amazon and Google are coming hard for the one space that’s up for grabs.

I think it’s the right move for Microsoft to jump in this direction early. It’s the right move for Sony to play it slow and conservative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy
I also don’t think Microsoft is going to make hardware an afterthought. They are simply trying to carve out a different niche. They have to. Sony, Nintendo and Valve have an identity and space solidified in gaming. Microsoft doesn’t....and Epic, Apple, Amazon and Google are coming hard for the one space that’s up for grabs.


Fixed :)
 
Why? Again they have a switch version of GP and a PS version. Doesn't mean they will have Xbox exclusives on it.
 
Op-ed:

https://www.windowscentral.com/why-...r-systems-smart?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Why Microsoft NEEDS to bring Xbox Game Pass to Nintendo Switch

Rumors abound that Microsoft is planning to expand its games portfolio to Nintendo Switch, and maybe other platforms.

Here's why that would be a (very) smart move.
Jez Corden22 Feb 2019

In the console-war world, fanboys/girls of all stripes still rage over hardware sales and figures, pouring over who "won" the NPD Group sales race in the U.S. When in reality, a major upheaval could be on the way for console gaming, as tech heavyweights Google and Amazon are gearing up for their grand entrances. The landscape, and what determines "success," is going to look very different as a result. These cloud-oriented giants are not beholden to any platform or plastic box, and that could give them a major advantage over platforms that still confine themselves to a specific hardware ecosystem.
There are rumors Microsoft will soon put more of its exclusive titles onto other systems, as the company already does with Minecraft. By far the company's most successful game, Minecraft has been described to me by Microsoft sources as a "business unto itself," owing to the licensing empire and its completely platform-agnostic nature. This is ultimately the future of gaming, with access to software and services completely circumventing (but not replacing) the need to sell console hardware.
Here's why Xbox Game Pass hitting other systems would be smart.

Xbox Game Pass on Switch?

xbox-game-pass.jpg
For $9.99 a month, Game Pass gives you access to dozens of quality games.
I've been hearing for almost a year that Microsoft was aiming to put Xbox Game Pass on Nintendo Switch, and even PlayStation 4, though at first, I didn't fully believe what I was hearing. At a surface-level, why would Microsoft want to reduce its own console business by removing the need to buy Xbox hardware to play Xbox games? Well, Microsoft has already committed to putting Xbox exclusives on PC, and despite that, Xbox hardware sales have continued to trend upwards, because Xbox One X is truly the best place to play many of those big-name multiplatform titles in 4K.
The thing is, this rumor isn't exactly news. Xbox head Phil Spencer said last year in (via GameSpot) that this has always been the plan:
So we built Xbox Game Pass – it started on console, it will come to PC, and eventually it will come to every device – we use the flywheel that we have with customers on an Xbox to start the growth in Xbox Game Pass. But as somebody sitting back and taking a longer-term view of where our business is going, you should look at that as a business model that we think scales to billions of people not hundreds of millions of people like retail does.​
I've also heard games like Ori and the Blind Forest and Cuphead may be test-cases for the new Xbox Live SDK for third-party developers, which will facilitate Xbox Live-services on Nintendo Switch and mobile devices, features which were previously restricted to Microsoft internal titles like Minecraft.
Ori and Cuphead on Nintendo Switch?
The source of this recent rumor is a relatively small YouTube Channel with a few thousand subscribers, but it caught fire because if you've been following what Microsoft has been doing in this space recently, it's a no-brainer.

Wait. But WHY?

Microsoft's ambitions have shifted away from the small slice of the gaming industry that represents home consoles. The big players, namely TenCent, prioritize mobile as their platform du jourand reach insanely huge audiences as a result. When you think of Xbox competing with Sony's PlayStation, Microsoft as a company is really competing with large tech corporations like Google and Amazon, which are gearing up their own sizable cloud platforms for game-streaming services of their own. If Microsoft's sits around doing nothing, competing with PlayStation on the small scale, Google and Amazon could muscle in and eat their lunch. This is about long-term thinking.
In 2019, 5G wireless connections are going to begin rolling out across Microsoft's traditional market territories, and while it could take years for the super-charged wireless speeds to truly proliferate, they ultimately will. Microsoft, with its own Project xCloud game streaming service, will be ready and poised to take advantage of this wireless revolution, which should make streaming 1080p gaming to any device, anywhere, a reality.
It would be irresponsible of Microsoft to not explore putting its services on other platforms given the threat from Google and Amazon. Why spend hundreds of millions, maybe billions, trying to build a home console service when they can just put their services on existing platforms? And sure, maybe this whole streaming thing doesn't take off. Blockbuster video (RIP) said the same thing about Netflix.
The point? It most likely will take off.
But OMG what about Xbox hardware?
Xbox hardware isn't going away. There are more engineers, more developers, and more investments going into making Xbox hardware and accessories than ever before, and simply having a home console experience and install base in addition to a large external service audience is going to give Microsoft an advantage.
Every single damn time Microsoft mentions Project xCloud, they always bring up "future Xbox hardware" which should serve as a large billboard to anyone worried or concerned about Xbox hardware falling by the wayside. Much like how Microsoft built up and enjoys having a high-quality line of Surface products to showcase the best of Windows, they will continue to build up an industry-leading line of home consoles to showcase the best of Xbox gaming.
This is an Anaconda, and he loves Xbox consoles.
Microsoft is working on multiple next-gen Xbox consoles, according to our sources. Under the codename "Scarlett," its double SKU strategy will come with the codename "Lockhart," aiming to be the lowest-price entry to next-gen consoles, and codename "Anaconda," which Microsoft hopes will become the obvious choice for gamers wanting the most powerful home console, outside of highly-expensive custom Windows PC rigs.
Flagship products, including high-quality Surface hardware and Xbox hardware, drive what the industry calls a "halo effect" across their product ecosystem, which solidifies consumer loyalty. Microsoft isn't about to sacrifice the goodwill it has built up over the years as a leader in the console space simply because it is exploring 1080p streaming to mobile devices, nor is it going to abandon its customers who simply want that experience.

No downsides

The console-faithful are already crying doom and gloom over this whole scenario because they can't see the bigger picture. Microsoft would be missing out on a huge opportunity if it didn't chase at least some degree of platform agnosticism.
Microsoft would miss a huge opportunity by not exploring platform agnosticism.​
When Microsoft presented Office for iPad, it was a huge deal, because for years Microsoft had tried to use Office to force its customers to choose Windows above all other platforms. By opening up Office to every platform, Microsoft has effectively destroyed competition from Google Docs and similar competitors. Office now remains a mammoth part of Microsoft's diverse business, because of that forward-facing decision.
That said, Microsoft also failed to bring decent mobile hardware and OSes of its own to market fast enough, pushing it into a corner with Office. They're also facing stiff competition from Google's Chromebook platform in the education space because Microsoft didn't bring out cheaper alternatives fast enough.
sddefault.jpg

Microsoft doesn't have to make the same mistakes with Xbox, which is why they'll continue to invest in both hardware andservices. That's why Lockhart will compete on the affordable end, Anaconda will compete on the high-end, and Xbox Game Pass and xCloud will compete with Google and Amazon for customers who probably weren't going to buy Xbox hardware anyway. Microsoft needs to bring its services to other platforms, because anywhere they aren't present, is a foothold for its competitors to gain, and potentially win.
At the end of the day, all of the cash Microsoft makes with this agnostic push will be reinvested in gaming, its customers, and the growth of the platform. There are absolutely no downsides.
stopped reading after "not replacing the need for hardware."

Putting your exclusives on to other console hardware totally negates a massive reason to buy Xbox. We all know the real money is in software and services and accessories, not the console hardware itself. So why do this and spend on all that money on hardware that now has far less reasons for consumers to invest in? Makes no sense.
 
I don't think Sony would want it anyway, they already have their own streaming service so why would they invite MS to offer theirs on the PS4/PS5 as well?

Because, if it was the full version of GP (Day 1 access to all first-party exclusives), then it would kill MS's hardware business. Sony would become the uncontested next gen king by a landslide, before the race even began (well, not counting whatever Nintendo is up to). That would be well worth the trade-off for Sony. They'd sacrifice a little PS Now traffic to kill their main competitor in the hardware space. Plus they get a cut of the GP revenue. Kill your competitor's hardware business, and charge them a fee to do it. Good deal.

p.s. But that's not what's on offer (full GP), so it's a hypothetical. We're apparently talking about just a watered-down version of GP, which wouldn't appeal to Sony. No real upside there, apart from whatever cut they might get.
 
stopped reading after "not replacing the need for hardware."

Putting your exclusives on to other console hardware totally negates a massive reason to buy Xbox. We all know the real money is in software and services and accessories, not the console hardware itself. So why do this and spend on all that money on hardware that now has far less reasons for consumers to invest in? Makes no sense.

But it doesn’t. Still the best value way to play Game Pass games unless you already own a kick ass PC. I’m confused by people who say they’ll never play streaming games yet the fact that these exclusives will be streamable on other platforms means that they are out on Xbox hardware.

Your point is one I’ve seen a bunch on a YouTube for (now former) Xbox fans. It’s a weird circular logic with my only conclusion is that many gamers loyalty is based on treating consoles wars as a sport and supporting their team. Since Microsoft has effectively bowed out of the sport, they’ll give them no more money even if the ecosystem and products are only offering more options and improving in every conceivable way.

If you’re not open to streaming and don’t have a high end PC, then Xbox hardware is still the best way to play Microsoft published games and use Game Pass.

So F’n confused.
 
Because, if it was the full version of GP (Day 1 access to all first-party exclusives), then it would kill MS's hardware business. Sony would become the uncontested next gen king by a landslide, before the race even began (well, not counting whatever Nintendo is up to). That would be well worth the trade-off for Sony. They'd sacrifice a little PS Now traffic to kill their main competitor in the hardware space. Plus they get a cut of the GP revenue. Kill your competitor's hardware business, and charge them a fee to do it. Good deal.

p.s. But that's not what's on offer (full GP), so it's a hypothetical. We're apparently talking about just a watered-down version of GP, which wouldn't appeal to Sony. No real upside there, apart from whatever cut they might get.

I don’t think Sony is going to allow Xbox on their console. There’s too many caveats. They would need to allow Xbox Live. Spencer was talking about using Xbox on phones and said that it feels exactly like being on Xbox hardware based on how the UI, store, etc is the same. Nintendo conceded to allow Xbox Live on their platform. They aren’t getting Microsoft games without allowing Game Pass. Sony would be doing Microsoft too many favors allowing Xbox Live and Game Pass onto PlayStation. Yes it would cut the direct hardware competition but at what expense? Sony isn’t worried about Microsoft taking their 100 million gamers from them. Not in this age where all digital content goes forward. They would be worried about Game Pass cutting into PS Now...which is where the real competition will be long term.

Owning the hardware manufacturing is a headache for Microsoft. I’m sure they’d love to just create a gaming tier of Surface and be done with it. The 30% cut they get from 3rd parties isn’t the long term focus. The new focus is monetizing the industry with their services, APIs and Azure. They are only keeping the hardware because they have to for mindshare and leverage. Sony would be letting them off the hook to be able to use their console as a Trojan horse for all their other stuff.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think Sony is going to allow Xbox on their console. There’s too many caveats. They would need to allow Xbox Live. Spencer was talking about using Xbox on phones and said that it feels exactly like being on Xbox hardware based on how the UI, store, etc is the same. Nintendo conceded to allow Xbox Live on their platform. They aren’t getting Microsoft games without allowing Game Pass. Sony would be doing Microsoft too many favors allowing Xbox Live and Game Pass onto PlayStation. Yes it would cut the direct hardware competition but at what expense? Sony isn’t worried about Microsoft taking their 100 million gamers from them. Not in this age where all digital content goes forward. They would be worried about Game Pass cutting into PS Now...which is where the real competition will be long term.

Yes, there may be network issues as well.

I disagree about the latter point. I think MS is their main competitor in the hardware space, and they'd love a chance to cut their knees out from under them. They would be able to do that without lifting a finger, if MS offered full GP. Which they wouldn't, because they're not stupid. After the next gen is launched and MS has sold at Wii U levels for a couple years (and it's too late to recover), they boot them off the service and brush their hands. Mwah ha ha. At that point, the only market for GP is Switch and MS's own, now-vastly diminished, hardware base. Sony would trade a few years of somewhat diminished PS Now revenue for that scenario.

But all is that is just a hypothetical. MS didn't offer full GP with all the bells and whistles. They offered some watered-down version of it, and in that context, everything I said above becomes moot, because then it's not worth the trouble. I mean, you're certainly right, that it represents significant risks to Sony. There are several reasons for them not to do it, and there are some practical reasons why it might not work (e.g., related to networks).

Owning the hardware manufacturing is a headache for Microsoft. I’m sure they’d love to just create a gaming tier of Surface and be done with it.

Yeah, I'm getting the feeling that next gen is pretty much the last hurrah for Xbox, and they're already eyeing the exit. They can't let hardware go yet -- it would be suicide, terrible PR, and premature to boot (since their hardware is currently the main place people access the service), but it does seem like that's the plan.
 
But it doesn’t. Still the best value way to play Game Pass games unless you already own a kick ass PC. I’m confused by people who say they’ll never play streaming games yet the fact that these exclusives will be streamable on other platforms means that they are out on Xbox hardware.

Your point is one I’ve seen a bunch on a YouTube for (now former) Xbox fans. It’s a weird circular logic with my only conclusion is that many gamers loyalty is based on treating consoles wars as a sport and supporting their team. Since Microsoft has effectively bowed out of the sport, they’ll give them no more money even if the ecosystem and products are only offering more options and improving in every conceivable way.

If you’re not open to streaming and don’t have a high end PC, then Xbox hardware is still the best way to play Microsoft published games and use Game Pass.

So F’n confused.
It isn't about my personal opinion on crappy streaming, though...and I couldn't careless about console wars.

The masses will flock to streaming, that means the majority of hardware sales are going bye bye anyway. A lot of MS's core Xbox consumers will move on too...and why not, MS's exclusives have fallen way behind and even with their aquisitions the future is still uncertain.

Funhy thing is MS has already said they don't care about selling hardware.

I bedn saying for years now, MS want out of the hardware business.
 
But it doesn’t. Still the best value way to play Game Pass games unless you already own a kick ass PC. I’m confused by people who say they’ll never play streaming games yet the fact that these exclusives will be streamable on other platforms means that they are out on Xbox hardware.

Your point is one I’ve seen a bunch on a YouTube for (now former) Xbox fans. It’s a weird circular logic with my only conclusion is that many gamers loyalty is based on treating consoles wars as a sport and supporting their team. Since Microsoft has effectively bowed out of the sport, they’ll give them no more money even if the ecosystem and products are only offering more options and improving in every conceivable way.

If you’re not open to streaming and don’t have a high end PC, then Xbox hardware is still the best way to play Microsoft published games and use Game Pass.

So F’n confused.
Heck no
 
What will be the cost of streaming, I mean resolution and FPS wise. Will games play at 720p 60fps? And how bad will it be on the Switch when not docked?
 
What will be the cost of streaming, I mean resolution and FPS wise. Will games play at 720p 60fps? And how bad will it be on the Switch when not docked?
he biggest cost of streaming is latency, so simple things like movement become sluggish & unresponsive. If you are competitive gyen MP is a no no.

5G can stream Gods face in realtime, if you believe the hype.
 
Because, if it was the full version of GP (Day 1 access to all first-party exclusives), then it would kill MS's hardware business. Sony would become the uncontested next gen king by a landslide, before the race even began (well, not counting whatever Nintendo is up to). That would be well worth the trade-off for Sony. They'd sacrifice a little PS Now traffic to kill their main competitor in the hardware space. Plus they get a cut of the GP revenue. Kill your competitor's hardware business, and charge them a fee to do it. Good deal.

p.s. But that's not what's on offer (full GP), so it's a hypothetical. We're apparently talking about just a watered-down version of GP, which wouldn't appeal to Sony. No real upside there, apart from whatever cut they might get.

That's what I mean, MS wouldn't be putting their top exclusives day one on their main competition anyway.
 
he biggest cost of streaming is latency, so simple things like movement become sluggish & unresponsive. If you are competitive gyen MP is a no no.

5G can stream Gods face in realtime, if you believe the hype.

I don't lol, they always hype every new wireless tech as the second coming and they always disappoint. Sadly 5G frequency won't travel as far as 4G so that's going to mean more towers need to be put up, it's going to cost these companies a good deal of money so they'll likely be fairy slow with the rollout, then when that's done we'll probably see once again their the best case scenario stuff they always spout before they launch a newer faster network doesn't apply to real world usage. No doubt it'll be better than 4G but I don't believe the hype around it right now, we'll see how it goes though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: menace-uk-
Streaming will be in its infancy. Won’t hit critical mass for a few years at least. 5G as we know it in 2019 or 2020 wont be true 5G. It’ll be running on 4G infrastructure much of the time. It’ll be 5 to 10 years before the peak theoretical performance they talk about today is experienced by the masses.

What’s underrated is the amount of compute power in local hardware. Most high end phones have enough compute power to handle a lot of latency sensitive tasks while offloading less latency sensitive stuff. Also not all games require low latency. A service like Game Pass has a lot of games for all situations. Won’t need low latency for Gears Tactics or an Obsidian RPG. Competitive Halo is another story.
 
Yeah, I'm getting the feeling that next gen is pretty much the last hurrah for Xbox, and they're already eyeing the exit. They can't let hardware go yet -- it would be suicide, terrible PR, and premature to boot (since their hardware is currently the main place people access the service), but it does seem like that's the plan.

I can see them continuing to supply Xbox hardware as a way to maintain mindshare. The hardware is still a Trojan horse to the rest of their core business...which is cloud and services. As long as customers keep demanding it, they’ll make it but I think the days of innovative tweaks to hardware and selling at a loss/breakeven will be over next gen. They’ll be luxury items like Surface. This gen will be different because they still have work to do winning back good will and mindshare.

I still disagree with people who’re using it as the sole reason to exit the Xbox ecosystem. Not because I care what they do...just bad logic. If Microsoft succeeds, then the stuff bought through traditional means will be forward compatible with lots of devices in the future.
 
I can see them continuing to supply Xbox hardware as a way to maintain mindshare. The hardware is still a Trojan horse to the rest of their core business...which is cloud and services.

Yup. They can't get out of the hardware business completely, at least not for the next 5 to 10 years. They'd be cutting their throat.

I still disagree with people who’re using it as the sole reason to exit the Xbox ecosystem. Not because I care what they do...just bad logic. If Microsoft succeeds, then the stuff bought through traditional means will be forward compatible with lots of devices in the future.

Yeah, I don't really see the logic there, either. After all, what we're talking about is a limited version of GP being available with inferior visuals and performance. That's not a good reason to abandon Xbox, if you've been happy with them otherwise.

I think some people have more emotional (?) reasons for feeling disenchanted with these moves. It's not so much logical reasoning as it is just a distaste for the direction they're going -- away from traditional home console hardware and towards Xbox as a digital service. Some people in the Xbox camp are long-time home console gamers, and they like it that way. They don't like the fact that MS is moving away from that and towards a subscription based, platform-agnostic approach.