Microsoft Has "No Plans" To Bring More First-Party Exclusives To Other Consoles

Didn't they say the same thing when we got cuphead?

Release Ori on Switch and build up interest for the Xbox/PC exclusive sequel. Smart move.

It's too bad, though, that it looks like Rare Replay on Switch won't be happening.

I feel a strategic port of any of the halo games to Switch before the launch of infinite (especially considering the bad press regarding its development this week - i.e. director leaving and microtransactions confirmed) would be beneficial in potentially driving sales of the next system by expanding the interest base.

Also Rare Replay in some form or another almost feels like a no-brainer for Switch at this point. At least the N64 era titles.

We have no plans to generate higher profits at this time.

@Aurumonado Yeah Microsoft is just like Nintendo when it comes to things they "have no plans" for. In other words they say they have no plans for something then they announce it a month later.

The statement apparently doesnt match the headline and this site is the next on the list to get it wrong. “These studios” they mentioned are moving on to their own exclusives, but NOWHERE did it say that other studios cannot try to bring their stuff to Switch.

I mean, of course they are going to say something like that. There's nothing to announce until it's time to announce it, so it's better to act like there is nothing at all to try and surprise people later.

@Coach_A and nes titles

I'll believe them after Rare Replay comes out on Switch.

Battletoads

The statement does not match the headline.

The statement is referring to prior commitments made ahead of acquiring a game studio. For example, Hellblade was planned for Switch prior to Microsoft buying Ninja Theory, and The Outer Worlds was planned for all platforms prior to Microsoft buying Obsidian.

Microsoft is saying that those newly acquired studios are now focusing on development for Xbox/Windows 10. No need to worry about Ori 2 not coming to the Switch or what not...

And Nintendo had "no plans" for new Switch hardware either lol.

PR talk that means absolutely nothing.

I want to know people's honest opinion.. if Nintendo released Breath of the Wild on Xbox would you be happy or mad? Really curious if people are open to cross-platform or just wishing everything comes to the Switch.

@gamekill neutral but also sad because then people would get their hopes up that everything will come over and we shouldn't tease them like that.

Hmm. This honestly seems strange.

From this PR I understand that the new Xbox Studios won't make new games for other platforms after the end of their current obligations not that Microsoft won't think to publish more of its back catalogue games on other platforms.

As far as Rare Replay is concerned it has the in house xbox 360 emulator. That's why there is no Windows 10 versions and why a Switch game is unlikely. I would want it of course even though I wouldn't mind the new Killer Instict or Recore.

@gamekill After I saw a Sonic game on Nintendo system I don't care about those things. Exclusives sell the consoles but the more people play a game the better. In older generations people that could not afford more than one console missed a ton of games. I am not the biggest fan of BOTW but a 4K/60 fps One X version would be a sight to behold.

I'm already content with New Super Lucky's Tale for Nintendo Switch.
I don't think Microsoft first party games will entertain me as i remember Xbox games are just mainly focused on rated M shooting games with lack of charming and cute games like Nintendo did.

@gamekill I’m on the side that they shouldn’t release their first party on competing consoles. I feel like it undermines the brand they’ve built. What makes them unique and their culture. It’s like any sports team. They are competing in the same arena, it’s what makes it sorta fun. In the end I’ll buy whatever I’m most interested in

@westman98 That’s kinda what I got out of it but wasn’t too sure. I still hope to get Voodoo Vince one day.

I'd like to point out 2 things, in addition to Cuphead and Ori, there is also New Super Lucky Tales coming to the Switch as well. Plus things like Gamepass via Xcloud could still stream Xbox exclusives to the likes of the Switch, and I could even see remote play of one's Xbone on their Switch becoming a thing as well.

This Microsoft x Nintendo collaboration won’t mean anything to me until Rare games come back home to Switch.

It would be funny if their games sold more copies on Switch than Xbox.

...Does Rare count as first party? Also I thought these games were made by indie devs...>.<

Rip Rare Replay I am genuinely saddened by this news. Master Chief Collection on Switch would have been amazing (and impossible even given their friendship lets be honest)

@gamekill I would love it. I have more than 250 hours on botw on switch, is a masterpiece, and I would love to see it running at 60fps in 4K on xbox. It would be gorgeous.

The only Xbox exclusives I would have been interested in were the older Halo titles (1-3, Reach and ODST) and Rare Replay. MS barely has any exclusives worth their salt anyway, I don't blame them for holding tightly too them.

And the older Halo games are coming to PC anyway - they will be the first games I buy on Steam in years.

Darn it. No Minesweeper or Solitaire for the Switch.

@Kainbrightside Psychonauts 2 is being built with Unreal engine 4, so I hope they can port it

What a PC is for.

Not going to waiting around hoping Ori and the Will of the Wisps hits the Switch someday. $10 PC Game Pass will have all the microsoft games anyway.

@Joeynator3000 They're a subsidiary of Xbox game studios, so yeah. They count as first party.

By the way people, do you know many times a company has said "No plans"? Calm yer butts, lol

I had no plans to play FE for three hours straight today, either. But it still happened.

Double Fine just recently said that they don’t plan to stop producing titles for other consoles, and that their recent acquisition by Xbox doesn’t change their plans.

Weird that this article puts them in with the companies that are apparently going to be moving to just Xbox development after their prior commitments are taken care of.

I don’t even know why companies bother responding with PR anymore. There’s nothing that can be said in today’s internet landscape that won’t get twisted into a myriad of different interpretations so that you’re better off saying nothing at all and let everyone just shrug and speculate. The end result seems to be the same.

No plans... yet. More PR speak.

@Agramonte which is precisely why they are releasing Ori one Switch. People who don’t want to wait will probably get Gamepass on PC, phone xCloud, or even a Scarlett next year. Good business move on MS’s part

This is just some PR talk and nothing more.

I'm pretty sure it's PR speak for "Sony ain't gettin' nothing from us".

@gamekill Honestly, that might not be such a good idea. Because then people would want Mario and Pokémon and Smash and... well, you get the picture.

HOWEVER, if there was a dead IP Microsoft wanted to breathe some life into that Nintendo has zero interest in (F-Zero, Earthbound/MOTHER, etc.)… that's where I see Nintendo becoming a bit more lenient. (Provided that it still shows up on el Switch-o, of course.)

Translation : We are saying this so you don’t get your hopes up so that when we finally reveal something you’ll be appropriately excited.

You bring a few minor exclusives to the Switch and it makes you money. Why WOULDN'T you keep doing that? Especially considering this is an easy way to get into the Japanese market since they have zero market share here.

@imgrowinglegs Either DF is flat-out lying, or there's some sort of disconnect going on here.

This being Microsoft... both of these are very viable conclusions.

Its funny how this surprises people. What did you think was going to happen?

Uh-huh... just like Nintendo had "no plans" to release new Switch hardware. Or like how Insomniac (now a Sony joint) "always" valued their independence.

Plans change, people. Plans change.

A friend of mine and I were talking about what putting a few key exclusives on Nintendo consoles does for the exposure on the Japanese markets.

I am pretty sure I read that Cuphead specifically is doing real well out there

Honestly, I buy Microsoft waning its support for Nintendo's platform. If we get one more port after Ori, it'll probably be a complete edition of Killer Instinct 2013

Besides, Microsoft kinda has its hands full at the moment, with having to develop a brand new next-gen Xbox console, and having to also impress with its initial launch lineup (which we know Halo will be a part of so thats a good sign), in addition to having to implement the entire libraries of the previous 3 Xbox consoles into its backwards compatibility feature. They really have to impress with this launch given how mehhhhh the Xbox One launch was

If that means shifting their focus elsewhere, its really going to benefit them in the long run in regards to Scarlett's success.

To be honest, Halo doesn't seem right for the Switch, unless it's the originals.

It would be too bad if they didn't release the Master Chief Collection on Switch. It would be such a perfect fit. But then again this could just be they have "no plans" to announce anything yet. I see this as corporate speak on their end similar to Nintendo stating there would be no new hardware at E3 and then a month later two new revisions. But then again that was probably one of the worst kept secrets in video games.

@biglittlejake Right, Microsoft would likely have you buy their hardware to play the latest games anyway. But with the original Halo games I don't really see those as system sellers at this point. They could even sell them individually at $10 each and likely get a lot of sales on Switch. The other game that would be great would be RARE Replay especially with Banjo coming to Smash. It would be a great nostalgia trip for longtime Nintendo fans and nice to see them on a handheld.

"No plans" just means "we're not telling." I am more than certain there will be Ori and the Will of the Wisps on the Switch in one or two years after it launches on XBox One and PC.

I’m just hoping that future Double Fine games will come to Switch some day. And of course Rare Replay

I understand it. While it's good to take games to as much people as possible, losing an exclusivity makes your console less appealing. Microsoft can't afford it.

Sigh... I love how you twist your articles around statements like these, NL.

There goes my hope for Rare Replay, but to be fair I wouldn't be surprised if they change their minds again when they see how well Ori is going to sell.

"flexibility for developers to insure a fair and fun experience."

Wow, you can get insurance for anything these days...

Like Nintendo said they have no plans to release Switch revisions and then suddenly the Switch Lite is announced. I would be very surprised if nothing happens to support the release of Banjo in Smash.

That's okay, I have a PC.

If their acquisitions are developing for next gen xbox, then I doubt a Switch port would be in the works anytime soon. Still, I wouldn't rule out any more 'commitments' to be honoured. I can't remember seeing so much goodwill between two consoles ever. Made me feel warm and fuzzy. Really hope it continues.

No problem with that. Exclusives sell consoles. Microsofts problem had been it had hardly any worthwhile exclusives this gen but now they are working on that they want to keep their future exlcusives on their own console, same as Nintendo and Sony.

Damn I was so hoping one day we could get a fable 2 remasterer wirh Cross platform.

Well if those recently acquired studios aren’t going to be making any cross-platform games in the future I can see this being the end of the road for some really great studios.

Rip Double Fine, Ninja Theory, et all...

what i would like to see is a future join partnership of Microsoft and Nintendo where Nintendo is free to decide the games she wants to make with infinite resources from Microsoft.
And Microsoft to make the hardware.

Thats what I want.

Well they have to keep some exclusives. Lol.

Sony, however are becoming more and more like a dinosaur these days.

@Flugen imagine a Zelda game on an Xbox One X for instance.

@Anti-Matter hmmmm, enough already we get it you hate M-rated games, leave the rest of us that don't to enjoy it ok.😊.

All plans change as soon as money is involved.

Time will tell... let's just see. They could have just said "we have nothing to announce currently" instead of "no plans..." With all the good publicity they received for playing nice this statement from them seems abit poorly thought out...

Battletoads?

That makes sense, they need games for Xbox, Windows and Xbox Cloud. I think it is weird that they release games on Steam when they have their own shop for PC, yeah, a shop that could be improved but it shouldn't be that difficult to do. Games on Switch made a bit more sense because it's a totally different platform and they have released games for Nintendo handheld consoles for a very long time.

Kudos to Microsoft for making possible console cross-play because Sony didn't want to. I'm looking forward to seeing Scarlett.

@Flugen Some times, it's the limitations that drive creativity.

@gamekill Very good question. Would Nintendo fans be happy if Nintendo's games were released on Xbox or they only want other companies' games to be released on Switch?

@belmont Yeah, Nintendo's recent games running on Xbox One X would be very impressive visually.

But we only want rare replay

I feel like getting Will of the Wisps at the very least makes sense. Why give us the first game months before the second game comes out without the intention of letting people see an end to the story in its entirety?

@Nico07
Gamepass is 14.99, all of those games are on there(even Banjo). I would expect the classic Halo in a set would sell for about 29.99. Rare Reply I believe was 29.99. I used to have an Xbox One A, I wanted to play Banjo Kazooie and the classic Star Wars games. I was horrible at the class Star Wars Battlefronts, Banjo was entertaining. I never knew Banjo and Yoka Laylee were so similar, I did not know Banjo for the 64.

Did anyone actually think MS bought Obsidian so they could keep making cross-platform games while facing criticism that "XBox has no exclusives?"

@Ralizah
I'm still holding out hope for Rare Replay. Surely they have to know that a huge audience for the games in that collection are diehard Nintendo gamers. Plus maybe they could use that as an excuse to release it but not other exclusives? I know, I'm desperate and dreaming and still hurting from Microsoft getting Rare all those years ago! It still boggles my mind that Nintendo didn't snatch up Rare when they had the chance. Their games, along with Nintendo's, are literally what floated the N64 to selling as much as it did. SMH

@gamekill I don't think that would ever happen, kind of like you probably will never see Halo on Switch. There are games that are synonymous with brands, and those will probably not turn up multi-platform. However there are titles that are not as brand imbued that you could probably cross swap easier, though I can't think of any off top of my head that would be great on xbox. Nintendo has so many more properties their known for though, while I feel Xbox doesn't have quite as many "Brand" properties besides like Halo & Gears of War.

Well i would imagine that Microsoft is waiting to see some love back from Nintendo.

Kinda all seems one way at the moment.

@westman98 "We have no plans to further expand our exclusive first party games to other consoles."

@gamekill I would be annoyed, bit I dont want all xbox games on switch either. I love how game consoles build an identity with their games, but Im aware that Im in the minority.

@Kriven With the exception of Sony, film makers don't make playback devices at all. Your example would be more relevant if Samsung, LG, Toshiba, RCA, Panasonic, Philips, etc all started a division to also make movies to sell that would only play on their players via a proprietary format. Sony's done that. And they also do it for video games. The others haven't. Or maybe more precisely your idea would be that MS, Sony, and Nintendo should get out of the games business and focus only on making hardware. MS tried that, but the "XBox has no exclusives" has hurt them with customers, and Sony and Nintendo sell because of their games, not their hardware. Sure they could both just make PC games from now on and leave it to Dell, Apple, and others to make the gaming hardware. Though Sega's not doing so hot with that.

For better or worse the current console ecosystem is built upon "platforms with exclusive games" - and for worse, with Epic, Stadia, etc, PC is heading that way too.

I think we're heading further from your scenario rather than closer. MS and XBox tried edging toward what you describe this generation and it hurt them badly with consumers, for whatever reason.

Was only a matter of time.

Nintendo really offered nothing in return, so no surprise Microsoft jacked.

They don't need to have plans right now for them to have plans at some point in the future.
Though right now I'm struggling to remember anything else they got that I want.

@Madder128
What exactly ought Nintendo offer them in return? :9
I mean, aside from marketing assistance and the 70% of revenue from every sale on their platform?

imagine this partnership going so well that a 1party switch game appears on the xbox. its a dumb idea, but who knows!

Weren't there several leaks about them gearing up to bring Xbox Live to Switch?

At pr Stand point I understand this.
Annyway I got most exclusives I want annyway, yes I still hope for rare replay but otherwise Im not interested in other ms games (only scalebound but thats sadly canceld lol)

@Pod Microsoft were clearly looking for a Nintendo IP on xbox.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with that, but that was clearly the goal.

@Madder128
I think you're reading something into their motives that never existed.

If Microsoft wanted Nintendo first party games on their platforms, they'd need to do a lot more than allow some of their footman studios to publish on what Microsoft clearly considers an inferior handheld.

There has been Microsoft properties on DS, 3DS, and Wii U. Publishing some colorful indies on Switch is a way of making money on an eager audience, not a way of licensing Nintendo property.

@Kriven It's not a cheap potshot. You're comparing an ecosystem where hardware vendors have studios to make games for the explicit purpose of tying them to their hardware as a promotional reason to chose their hardware over others, and thus exclusives exist, to an ecosystem where the companies making hardware do not own studios for the purpose of creating exclusive content to promote their proprietary player format, and thus no exclusives exist.

In comparing those ecosystems what you're really saying is you just want a universal PC format and the end of consoles. Wanting that, from a consumer perspective, is understandable, but it's contrary to the economic functioning of the console industry, and worse, new companies are entering the PC industry with the goal of making it more like the current console industry, with independent exclusive platforms (thank Epic/Tencent.)

Standard hardware and OS means only one, or more likely none of the console companies stay in the hardware business. Everything just moves PC and cloud. There's already a standard hardware and OS. Why would either of the 3 console vendors make consoles in such climate? MS could just sell Surface, Sony would have no need to make mini PCs, they already sold Vaio years ago because that doesn't work for them. Nintendo wouldn't even begin with selling mini PCs. There's already 2 dozen companies doing that.

Meanwhile, Apple even sells PCs that have their own proprietary ecosystem and refuse to settle on a common OS with everyone else, and is thriving.

But we've already established that's not what consumers actually want anyway. XBox One would have been the darling of the generation without exclusives and only timed exclusives. Instead, consumers derided the platform as "no point, it has no exclusives, might as well just buy Playstation." People wanted them to make exclusive games to trap people into the ecosystem and didn't find the platform attractive without them existing.

I do agree with you on streaming, and even MORE exclusives through platform locks. But that was my point, it's going to get worse and instead of 3 incompatible platforms we'll have 10, and instead of paying $400 each you'll get to pay $180/each/per-yr for all of them.

Though I also think that streaming is a pipe dream, that omits far too much of the potential market to become the defacto standard. Step away from the US coasts and it's virtually impossible to use. And even on the costs it's a patchwork. And the important part is that's not going to change, any time this decade, and likely, any time this lifetime. Couple that with the liklihood the performance-oriented hardcore gamers will roundly reject it from the start, and you're left with a niche of non-hardcore average spenders in the industry, but not for huge swaths of geography at all, and in the right geography it depends on living on the "right" street.

I don't see streaming games becoming more than an optional niche for quite a long time, Though that may make the exclusives thing even worse.

I mean knowing Microsoft they will probably put xCloud on the Switch, so at least you could stream the games, though you'd need to own an Xbox unless you want to pay for the service

@Kriven "not one single conversation on the Internet has ever been constructive."
Thank goodness you refuse to buy into hyperbole!

It's not about having third parties muscle console vendors into a standard. When third parties have that level of power over platforms, EA is what you end up with. That's been their end game since the 80's.

That still side steps the issue though. Even if that were successful, and UbEAvision 2k got to dictate what the console platform would be. Why would Nintendo stay in the business? Why would Sony stay in the business? Nintendo at least would have reason to be a major publisher/studio. Sony ONLY has their game studios to push their ecosystem. No ecosystem to push, no reason to hold onto studios. And for MS, it would be status quo...but no reason to push "XBox" they could just push Windows. What you're really talking about is a practical end of consoles entirely.

Fair point about PlayStation and exclusives. But it still misses the point. Sony holds onto Naughty Dog, Guerilla, etc, etc to have bargaining chips with which to sell Playstation, not because they really want to be a games publisher as a business goal. If you take away the ability for them to use those games to sell Playstation, they either jettison the studios, or jettison all of it. Sony of all companies needs to hold onto the status quo of the exclusives. Nintendo technically could endure as just a publisher, but I don't believe they have any intention of doing so.

I get what you're saying, and as a consumer that would be great. But the real practical matter is consoles exist as exclusive-driven closed ecosystems. To change that to an "open platform", none of the current console vendors have any incentive to continue at all. It's really a call to end consoles, and just make PC/mobile gaming the standard.

There's another dark side to that. Without the platform holders sinking mega budgets into games to recoup with the lock-in with hardware, either budgets shrink, or like current third party games, those games join the modern world of mtx & loot boxes to survive.

Could we all still game on Alienware type boxes made by random companies with our Steam/Epic/Origin/UPlay/GoG/Stadia/XCloud accounts and subscriptions? Sure. But couldn't we already do that and just skip Sony and Nintendo's exclusives which likely would cease to exist at least in the forms we know them in that world anyway? Those games exist for the point of selling the platform. They don't exist without the platform. Nintendo being the lone partial exception that could become a "5th major publisher", but there's a lot of business problems with that idea, and instead would probably become a subscription service + store/launcher with exclusive games, anyway.

@Kriven
I get what you are saying and I honestly think those are all valid points from a consumer's perspective in the immediate and short terms. But also there is the matter that competition drives technology/improvements forward.
Imagine all we had was a single platform, say the gaming PCs in the 90s that did not even have a 3D-graphics card, and still used CDs (600mb size)... we would be stuck with that until now.
Competition from various different angles is what keeps content evolving.

Then you may reply "competing PC makers would make better PCs where the games run better". Well the truth is if the consumers could enjoy the exact same games, and have all the same experiences, on their existing PCs the majority would not bother getting a new PC.

That is why ultra-resolution TVs are taking decades to break into the market. That is also why PS4 Pro is a tiny fraction of the market. Or super top of the line graphics cards take years to be put to use. People just won't spend hard-earned money on new hardware unless they feel they NEED to.

If someone NEEDS the Switch for playing Smash Bros, he/she WILL skip expensive lunch meals, or drinking at bars, or buying new clothes, to make money for the Switch.

So as I said, as a consumer I agree with you; right now I have sold my Switch because I needed the money for real life stuff, and I have a pile of games stored back home that I CANNOT play, even though I do have a PC and a 3DS. Does it feel bad? Yes it does. I wanna go on playing my Zelda and my Closed Nightmare cards.

@Kriven
But would you be ok playing the same 16-bit games and miss out on anything that came after that? PS1-2-3-4, N64-Gamecube-Wii-WiiU-DS-3DS, VR headsets, etc etc? Hardware makers are huge companies wanting to make a profit. They keep pushing forward because they want people to buy the next hardware, but they need to put that hardware to use hence the new games..
It is a pretty difficult situation to define as "good" or "bad "all in all.

@BlueOcean Its not only the raw power, its that it would have the assets to make it 10 steps better in all sections (graphics, quality, cinematics, size etc).

Nintendo needs to seriously see that power is an important part in a game. Not the only important thing but a much appreciated section.

I would Kill to have an XBOX like console with Nintendo games in it. The could both have mass profit and fame. And it would be a noticable rival in the upcoming video game generation where Google and Sony will give their best. My opinion.

@Flugen I agree. Nintendo games would be much better on something like Xbox One X. Better resolution, frame rate, high-quality assets, fewer technical restrictions, remember deers disappearing in front of you in Breath of the Wild? Frame rate tanking in Korok's Forest?

I wonder what will happen with Nintendo once Scarlett and PS5 are out. Will Switch get third-party games? Will new Nintendo's games feel even more restricted? Why is Nintendo a third-party publisher on Android and iOS but not on the most powerful hardware? Why does Nintendo insist on making underpowered overpriced hardware?

@Madder128 That's right, Nintendo takes but not give.

@BlueOcean I understand the reasoning why they didn't, but I honestly think Microsoft thought Nintendo would throw them something.
Anything in fact.

@Madder128 I honestly believe so, especially Phil Spencer who is friendly and open-minded in public and in private. I bet he was expecting Nintendo to be less rigid and less stingy. Microsoft allowed Nintendo to include Jetpac on Wii U through Donkey Kong 64. Would Nintendo have done the same for Microsoft? From the outside, Microsoft (at least since Phil is boss) is flexible and friendly and Nintendo is paranoid and defensive. Remember what Nintendo did with the youtubers and how far they went to shut ROMs sites down. They spend more money threatening people than developing new games.