2w ago

Following the Switch 2 Reveal, Phil Spencer Says Microsoft Is 'Really Looking Forward' to Supporting Nintendo With Xbox Games

www.ign.com Following the Switch 2 Reveal, Phil Spencer Says Microsoft Is 'Really Looking Forward' to Supporting Nintendo With Xbox Games - IGN

Phil Spencer has teased Microsoft’s plan to release Xbox games on Nintendo Switch 2, reinforcing recent reports that indicate the company is set to back the next-gen console in a big way.

Nintendo @lemmy.world

picandocodigo @lemmy.world

2w ago

Following the Switch 2 Reveal, Phil Spencer Says Microsoft Is 'Really Looking Forward' to Supporting Nintendo With Xbox Games - IGN

www.ign.com /articles/following-the-switch-2-reveal-phil-spencer-says-microsoft-is-really-looking-forward-to-supporting-nintendo-with-xbox-games

34 4

10 comments

Also following the legion go steamos reveal. Microsoft is royally fucked, and I'm all for it.
- The old model is fucked, but it's fucked for Sony too, just on a longer time frame. This is them pivoting.
  
  Sony could have innovated more, I am switching to PC currently becuase of how boring this generation is. I dislike psn, how they present the homescreen info. Its just shite. XMB all the way, more customisable, more user friendly and more capable...no ads.
- I think compared to something as big as the Switch 2, SteamOS on another niche PC handheld, as important as it is to us consumers, just wouldn't even register.
  It's like that EA thing, 50% too few sales on DAVG, but the chickens are running around in a panic over 5% less gacha sales in FC24 instead. 😅
- Why are you excited at the prospect of less competition in the gaming space?
  You don't have to like Microsoft at all, don't buy their stuff, but they're still a major competitor to Sony, Nintendo and Valve - and losing them would do more harm than good. Losing any of them would.
  Edit: seems a lot of folks miss the point, I'm not defending Microsoft's practices, I'm saying having more competition is better.
  Sony and Nintendo are not angels either. Even valve has it's bad points. You can by all means pick a side but less competition is always worse.
  
  You should have asked this question to Microsoft before proton when they actively tried to kill Linux in so many different ways. If they had succeeded, then there would be absolutely zero competitors to them on PC handheld arena. Even now in their royally fucked status, they command over 80% market share in PC gaming (conservative estimate), so don't worry they're not going anywhere so soon.
  
  This only effects playing on Windows, which in turn only hurts Windows, which is pretty much a monopoly, so not much of an issue there.
  Personally I don't care too much about Windows, just happy that Linux is finally getting some foothold. Nothing wrong with having both Window and SteamOS/Linux gaming systems.
  
  Microsoft ain't no competitor, they don't play fair at all. Not like the others do. But they don't even make good games. They just buy random stuff and hope windows stays the only platform where gamers go. Which should change with steam. Microsoft won't die, I don't think so, but they'll have to work a bit more than what they did the last decade.
  
  Microsoft inventions that made the gaming space a better competitive environment:
  Always online single player: GFWL
  Pay to play online: Ace
  Pay to play console online up till last year: MW
  Pay to play F2P console online: for over a decade
  And that's just from the top of my head. The closest thing in the known universe to the behaviour of Microsoft is a tumour. It sends metastases to other organisations and then it assimilates and deletes any identity the original organisation had.
  Microsoft needs to be broken from Xbox, it already has a monopoly on the gaming sphere by controlling the OS of the majority, now it wants to metastasise to other platforms to begin assimilation. The future of core gaming is bleak.

10 comments