Support NeoGAF

[Captain Toad]

What other game this generation they had that reviewed badly please name them.

Well, last year, let's go over all their AAA first-party games.

Hmm, you're right. They didn't have any poorly reviewed games, as they released a total of zero.

The number of bad games really isn't a big issue. It's the number (or lack thereof) of GOOD games that matters.

Redfall seems like a big deal because they haven't released a big AAA game in 18 months and it's been "wait for Starfield and Redfall" for a long time.

 

[Varteras]

Ahhhh good guy Sony ! Microsoft corporate devil ! Sony buys organically and with righteousness. Jesus this boils down to Sony has had their stable of studios longer. Microsoft literally had to start all over the only original studios they had were turn to and 343 coming out the 360 era everything else was bought recently. That’s where they messed up they relied heavily on 3rd parties and deals and it’s biting them. In a scenario where they had a stronger first party they could afford experimental dubs. But they have to continue on this is their first bad reviewed game this generation so let’s close the Xbox business lol.

Since almost the halfway point of Xbox 360's life, Xbox has largely failed to produce games that truly excite gamers across the board. Their highest quality franchise, Forza Horizon, caters to a specific crowd. Racing games usually do that. So despite the high quality of those games, they don't typically move the needle. It doesn't matter how well you score with critics if the game just doesn't excite a large swath of gamers. Ask Media Molecule how Dreams went for them.

Xbox mostly lacks those titles that stir positive conversation about the brand in a way that makes the gaming community think they must have it. Flight Simulator, Hi-Fi Rush, Pentiment... these may be great games for the critics. But they're not the kinds of games that would create midnight launch lines in the middle of Winter. The games whose franchises previously did, like Halo Infinite, have lost that pull, too.

This isn't a recent problem. It's arguable that this has been going on for about 13 years now. And in that time, every time Xbox looks like it's about to gain some momentum, it gets brickwalled by another disappointing release or another long period of very little. Xbox just doesn't have a Super Mario, Uncharted, Zelda, Last of Us, Smash Bros, God of War, Pokemon, or Spider-Man. Yes. You NEED that caliber of games when your competitors keep bringing them and you need them on a regular basis if you want to compete.

Regardless of what excuse for WHY Xbox has arrived at this point, it's still their fault. It is a company with hundreds of billions in cash and assets. 20+ years in the console space. Longer than that in the industry in general. They had ample time to grow their teams and capabilities the way Sony and Nintendo did. This isn't about one bad game. This is about a long history of Xbox failing to excite people for anything longer than a flash in the pan. You have to keep that fire burning.

The further away we get from a time Xbox was actually competitive, the less patience or care people have for the brand. To the point where people think they should just hang it up. Personally, I'm not there. I love watching these companies fight each other for my time and money. It takes a lot to pull me away from World of Warcraft. Something that Xbox hasn't managed to do in a long time.

 

[Stare-Bear]

Microsoft turns every studio into a Halo/Forza/Gears machine.

Mark my words, Arkane is going to be the new 343 and stuck with Halo after the failure of RedFall.

 

[Represent.]

Microsoft is trying to buy Naughty Dog, Sony is trying to buy the studio that will become the next Naughty Dog.

MS is trying to buy IP, Sony is buying potential and talent.

Sony’s approach will win out in the long run.

I thought MS would be more successful in the short term, but after Redfall I’m really not even sure about that.

 

[R3claimer117]

Halo Infinite. It is in the post you responded to. Halo Infinite launched in 2021.

Halo infinite is sitting at an 87 on meta critic are you saying that 87 is a bad review? Lmao what?! Halo Infinite is a great game it wasn’t content wise at launch if it had all the modes and content it had now at launch it would have scored in the 90s.

 

[Skifi28]

Microsoft is trying to buy Naughty Dog, Sony is trying to buy the studio that will become the next Naughty Dog.

MS is trying to buy IP, Sony is buying potential and talent.

Sony’s approach will win out in the long run.

Not necessarily. Speaking hypothetically, If they are allowed to buy half the industry and starve their competition of content there would be no long run for Sony's investment in talent to pay off.

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

Seems like they're both so busy trying to wow gamers with graphics and features, but they ended up being creatively bankrupt in the process. That's why aaa gaming is mostly shit right now. *looks at titles like Forspoken and Redfall and Godfall and Saints Row.

I know there are exceptions like ER, Hogwarts and BotW/TotK, but they are few and far between this generation.

 

[Bonfires Down]

Holy lord why are you all so obsessed with what Phil Spencer and Microsoft is doing? Sell your Xbox if you don’t like it and move on with your life.

 

[Barakov]

MS only has themselves to blame. They had the luxury in the 360 era, I wonder what changed

The people that made the Xbox into what it was left and the management changed which led to a lackluster XB1 and(so far anyway) Series consoles. Also some PR snafus didn't help much either.
*cough* * cough*

 

[Alebrije]

Microsoft is desesperate buying companies that do not share between them a corporate culture.
They just want fast IPs.

Sony is preparing developers for Playstation 6 ,7 and 8 the same way they did on the PS3 era for 3,4 and 5 From the current great Sonys IPs. I just see GOW and Ratched , Grand Turismo and Spiderman in those systems. TLOU and Uncharted will be gone and surely ND will deliver 1 or 2 new IPs.

Microsoft is a case, they had Gears,Halo, PC ports and basically were the kings of multiplayer..but after 360 they reset all and went to oblivion...

 

[FrankWza]

Holy lord why are you all so obsessed with what Phil Spencer and Microsoft is doing? Sell your Xbox if you don’t like it and move on with your life.

It says Sony right there in the title

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/microsoft-and-sony-are-both-aquiring-studios-left-and-right-but-with-completely-different-goals-and-philosophies.1656115/

 

[Yoboman]

Talent can be acquired by money.
MS can just hire those people and pay them double of Sony salary.

Worked out well for the Initiative

 

[feynoob]

Worked out well for the Initiative

As long as phil and co are there, any talent is useless. With competent management and MS money, those mistakes wont happen. The only reason why Xbox is this down is due to that.

Xbox would have been in difference place had they had a reliable management. Especially with that MS cash.

 

[Loomy]

Halo infinite is sitting at an 87 on meta critic are you saying that 87 is a bad review? Lmao what?! Halo Infinite is a great game it wasn’t content wise at launch if it had all the modes and content it had now at launch it would have scored in the 90s.

You're crazy if you think Halo Infinite was well received at launch. A game so underwhelming at launch that 343 leadership got decimated. A launch that caused Matt Booty to admit they "stumbled at the finish line".

That game?

 

[R3claimer117]

You're crazy if you think Halo Infinite was well received at launch. A game so underwhelming at launch that 343 leadership got decimated. A launch that caused Matt Booty to admit they "stumbled at the finish line".

That game?

They stumbled with content and missing modes the game itself was great no one said the game was bad people wanted more content and game modes to play again if it had the content it has now at launch it would have been a 90 or higher rated game. It’s not like Microsoft doesn’t have those this generation cause they have games that are. The idea a game who’s meta score is 87 is bad is just fanboy fodder.

 

[Captain Toad]

Seems like they're both so busy trying to wow gamers with graphics and features, but they ended up being creatively bankrupt in the process. That's why aaa gaming is mostly shit right now. *looks at titles like Forspoken and Redfall and Godfall and Saints Row.

Redfall is the only game on that list that is first-party.

And you think it is trying to wow gamers with graphics and features?

 

[Captain Toad]

They stumbled with content and missing modes the game itself was great no one said the game was bad people wanted more content and game modes to play again if it had the content it has now at launch it would have been a 90 or higher rated game. It’s not like Microsoft doesn’t have those this generation cause they have games that are. The idea a game who’s meta score is 87 is bad is just fanboy fodder.

Yeah and Skyward Sword is a 93 Metacritic.

Halo Infinite is not beloved as you are making it sound. Fans have been very forthcoming with their displeasure in how 343 seems to further ruin the franchise more with each release. Their post-launch content has been pretty pitiful.

 

[R3claimer117]

Yeah and Skyward Sword is a 93 Metacritic.

Halo Infinite is not beloved as you are making it sound. Fans have been very forthcoming with their displeasure in how 343 seems to further ruin the franchise more with each release. Their post-launch content has been pretty pitiful.

Lol again that’s not based in fact just fanboy fodder.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

Microsoft can't just throw money at Xbox forever. Shareholders get impatient.

 

[DavidGzz]

The difference is their checkbook and how they are managing their acquisitions. It seems that Sony are better at making sure who they own focus on making what they are good at. Microsoft seems to take some hippy approach of letting who they buy be a free spirit and it isn't working out. Sony is only going small cause they can't afford to go big, don't kid yourselves.

 

[Chiggs]

Microsoft can't just throw money at Xbox forever. Shareholders get impatient.

The problem is that other divisions have been covering for Xbox for quite some time now...and will likely continue to.

If this was any other company, Xbox would be tossed out on its ass.

 

[Varteras]

Sony is only going small cause they can't afford to go big, don't kid yourselves.

Sony could go big. They absolutely have the ability to purchase a major publisher. Capability is not the issue. It's how much is Sony willing to do to make it happen and is it worth the hassle? They have to consider that regulators could very well block any such purchase, depending on how large they try to go. Also, Sony isn't going to spend money like that if they don't have to. Being a market leader affords them perks in negotiations and sees pretty much any major multiplatform release getting the most attention on their platform. They would also concern themselves with large acquisitions not working out for them, even if regulators allowed it. A failure to ROI would be much more damaging for them than Microsoft.

 

[RCU005]

Their competition is all they think about when making acquisitions.

That’s the biggest problem Microsoft has ever had, not just with Xbox but with everything.

They always focus on the competition instead on focusing on doing something great for themselves, and most importantly, believe on their own products and strategy.

But that has always been their way of working. When they wanted to enter gaming, first thing they did was buying Bungie to take Halo away from Apple.

Then, their only purpose was to beat Sony; not making great games, not making a great console, not getting consumers, just beat Sony. If you don’t believe me there’s a documentary in YouTube. They say it themselves. They only wanted to beat Sony.

And with Xbox 360, they openly say that their focus was to remove games from Sony as much as they can.

 

[El Pistolero]

Microsoft is trying to buy Naughty Dog, Sony is trying to buy the studio that will become the next Naughty Dog.

MS is trying to buy IP, Sony is buying potential and talent.

Sony’s approach will win out in the long run.

I thought MS would be more successful in the short term, but after Redfall I’m really not even sure about that.

It is reasonable for Sony to pursue their acquisition strategy because it has served them well so far; allowed them to put a strict control over maintaining quality; ensured the cohesiveness of the WWS and Playstation culture; hit a great return to cost ratio; and kept talent within, as much as possible.
MS are understandably in the "acquiring IPs" mode. They have not succeeded in creating or cultivating IPs, while pivoting toward a model that requires lots and lots of it, with the need to show results sooner rather than later. Acquiring big publishers serves that exact purpose, with the added benefit of getting MS a comfortable hands-off approach, which would allow them to benefit from the advantages of housing multiple beloved franchises without having to be involved in the creative process: A win for them. I think that their strategy should still bear fruit in the short-term, though I doubt its validity in the medium to long term...But who knows?

 

[Moriarty1889]

Sony acquires studios and has them put out great new games. MS acquires studios and they cease to produce anything good or anything at all. Crazy but true.

 

[DavidGzz]

Sony could go big. They absolutely have the ability to purchase a major publisher. Capability is not the issue. It's how much is Sony willing to do to make it happen and is it worth the hassle? They have to consider that regulators could very well block any such purchase, depending on how large they try to go. Also, Sony isn't going to spend money like that if they don't have to. Being a market leader affords them perks in negotiations and sees pretty much any major multiplatform release getting the most attention on their platform. They would also concern themselves with large acquisitions not working out for them, even if regulators allowed it. A failure to ROI would be much more damaging for them than Microsoft.

Sony can't go big as easily as MS can. Better? I didn't know it needed to be specified why. It's simple logic. They have to take all those factors in considerations you mentioned. They are playing different games for a reason. 75 billion is way too much for them to spend. If they had the money, I'd have more faith in them doing something great with ABK than MS at this point.

 

[Varteras]

Sony can't go big as easily as MS can. Better? I didn't know it needed to be specified why. It's simple logic.

 

[Loomy]

Lol again that’s not based in fact just fanboy fodder.

Lol, yeah. Leadership got shuffled and almost 100 people got laid off because of 'fanboy fodder'.

 

[LakeOf9]

Sony makes creative works of art across all media and understands that talent is what matters. They pay not for big IP or publishers that make headlines but for talent and capability.

Microsoft makes spreadsheets for office drones and understands nothing other than big number equal good, and so buys whatever the biggest thing it can buy is, with no regard for how to manage the acquisition properly and utilize it to the fullest.

 

[SlimeGooGoo]

Microsoft wants quantity to add value to their cloud service when they go all-out by 2030.
They may or may not know what to do with all those IPs by then.

Sony can't afford to acquire gigantic studios like Microsoft can, so they have to choose a different strategy.
Unfortunately part of that strategy was moving away from Japan, which was one thing they could have an edge over Microsoft now.

Now Japan is Nintendo-land, and Sony has a tough opponent in the west.

 

[ulantan]

Microsoft wants quantity to add value to their cloud service when they go all-out by 2030.
They may or may not know what to do with all those IPs by then.

Sony can't afford to acquire gigantic studios like Microsoft can, so they have to choose a different strategy.
Unfortunately part of that strategy was moving away from Japan, which was one thing they could have an edge over Microsoft now.

Now Japan is Nintendo-land, and Sony has a tough opponent in the west.

What opponent in the west? They don't have one, Microsoft hasn't offered competition in a decade.

 

[R3claimer117]

Lol, yeah. Leadership got shuffled and almost 100 people got laid off because of 'fanboy fodder'.

Still making irrelevant points to what was said. Yes leadership got changed it’s been long overdue. Also that was due to frustration over multiplayer content. So nothing I said has been refuted except for more console fodder. Absent of all the modes and multiplayer content game still sits at 87.

 

[SlimeGooGoo]

What opponent in the west? They don't have one, Microsoft hasn't offered competition in a decade.

The Xbox One gen is over already, drop that narrative.

Microsoft is *much* more aggressive this gen and their big acquisitions reflect that.
They have a long term plan for the cloud and this is just the beginning of that.

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

Redfall is the only game on that list that is first-party.

And you think it is trying to wow gamers with graphics and features?

What does it matter if it's first party or not? Forspoken was made just for PS5.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Sony wants to cultivate and grow studios to be successful and make established IP.

MS just wants to buy established studios and their IP (hoping) to basically just buy success outright.

Two very different ways of spending their money to make money.

This is nonsense. It’s silly how Sony always gets a pass for buying studios because oh no they aren’t buying talent, they’re “cultivating”. Meanwhile when MS buys a developer and expands it with new teams of employees and new studios to work in, nah they are just buying talent.

But exactly what IP is MS buying for “outright success”? AFAIK the only sequels that have been released from a studio they bought Psychonauts 2 and Wasteland 3. Both were already in production long before the acquisitions and neither are huge franchises that scream “outright success”. The rest of the games released have been new IP.

Obsidian has released two small scale new IP and are working on a huge new IP.

Playground is working on MS’s own Fable IP.

InXile is rumored to be working on a big game for a MS IP.

Bethesda has released Redfall, Deathloop, HiFi, and Ghostwire. All new IP. Coming later this year is Starfield, another new IP.

Ninja Theory released a new IP Bleeding Edge, are working on another new IP, and a sequel to Hellblade, which we all know is a massively popular IP.

Your opinion is like.. the exact opposite of reality. In every Redfall thread you have people wishing Arkane had focused on already existing IP but instead they made something new.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Talent can be acquired by money.
MS can just hire those people and pay them double of Sony salary.

Spoken like someone who really doesn't get how to run a business.

Ultimately, the games business has a finite amount of revenue it can generate in any given year, that number has some give, but it's not limitless despite growth.

You double your operating costs with no guarantee that you're going to necessarily generate significantly more revenue, and you do this for 4-6 years at a time, all you're going to do is minimize your margins if not take a loss on games, and there is no guarantee that you'll keep that talent because they still want more money year in and year out.

If the average salary for an engineer is 150K and you say, hey we'll pay you 300K, that engineer wants a salary increase of at least 3 percent a year, by the time the game is out assuming it has taken 6 years to make the game, your cost for that engineer (minus benefits) is 1.59 million dollars compared to 800K. Now multiply this by 300. One game cost (engineers only) 477 million dollars compared to the other game which costs 240 million. That 477 million dollar game has to sell 6.8 million copies at 70 dollars just to break even (not factoring in other costs such as marketing) compared to the other game that only needs to sell 3.4 million to break even.

The more employees you're talking about the largest this margin expands... the more studios you do this with the more likely you are to have games that aren't hitting their marks. It's not diversified at all.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

For Xbox? Yes, for the company as a whole? No.

If they can afford to do a $70 billion dollar cash deal for activision how many timed exclusive deals do you think that gets you? Meanwhile as time goes on Microsoft as a business is still making 10's of billion's of dollars a quarter in the background.

They could easily afford to do a timed AAA exclusive every single month and it wouldn't make a dent on their finances. Not smart business (not that purchasing Activision for the quoted amount is smart business either), but they could do it.

"Bleed dry" my arse. Somehow Sony can afford to do it but if Microsoft were to do the same thing it would bankrupt them. Poor Microsoft.

This is another mistaken attitude.

Microsoft having 70 billion dollars to acquire an asset doesn't mean they have 70 billion dollars for exclusivity deals. These aren't assets and their ROI isn't the same. Once you buy a company like Activision their entire revenue flow becomes yours. Exclusivity deals just means that the revenue you get from royalties and the increased hardware revenue are yours... That's night and day different.

 

[feynoob]

Spoken like someone who really doesn't get how to run a business.

Ultimately, the games business has a finite amount of revenue it can generate in any given year, that number has some give, but it's not limitless despite growth.

You double your operating costs with no guarantee that you're going to necessarily generate significantly more revenue, and you do this for 4-6 years at a time, all you're going to do is minimize your margins if not take a loss on games, and there is no guarantee that you'll keep that talent because they still want more money year in and year out.

If the average salary for an engineer is 150K and you say, hey we'll pay you 300K, that engineer wants a salary increase of at least 3 percent a year, by the time the game is out assuming it has taken 6 years to make the game, your cost for that engineer (minus benefits) is 1.59 million dollars compared to 800K. Now multiply this by 300. One game cost (engineers only) 477 million dollars compared to the other game which costs 240 million. That 477 million dollar game has to sell 6.8 million copies at 70 dollars just to break even (not factoring in other costs such as marketing) compared to the other game that only needs to sell 3.4 million to break even.

The more employees you're talking about the largest this margin expands... the more studios you do this with the more likely you are to have games that aren't hitting their marks. It's not diversified at all.

If a company is a competent enough, they will know what to do.
Your thinking is too shallow here.

These talents could create their own studio and develop their own games. But for that to happen, you need competent people.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Hopefully these teams produce something worthwhile and aren’t on GaaS duty, which is Sony’s big new focus. Firewall was established five years ago and I can’t find any mentions of a game they created. Can’t say I’m impressed.

I think this is just a story being spun to give the illusion of what both seem to be doing. In reality I’m sure there’s plenty of industry veterans on the Bethesda and id side - so really it’s likely just a matter of one side buying cheaper teams over the other.

Considering that talent comes and goes like we’ve seen with Arkane - nothing is ever set in stone. These teams will change as well. The one bonus for Microsoft being they gained some strong ip for their money.

I think the point here is that Sony by investing wisely can buy a studio for pennies on the dollar like Sucker Punch, generate an IP like Ghost of Tsushima, be very successful in the gamespace, but then also try to take that IP and expand it to other media.

Microsoft however takes a company like Sucker Punch AFTER they've made Ghost of Tsushima, rushes them to make Ghost of Tsushima 2, sees the game underperform but ultimately paid significantly more for the same studio.

I think we're going to see whether Sony's investments actually pay off or not. If you look at the PS2 days when they bought Naughty Dog, Incognito, and Guerrilla games. They basically hit a grand slam, one home run, and struck out with 3 at bats.

During the PS3 generation, they bought sucker punch, media molecule, bigbig studios, evolution studios, zipper interactive. That's a home run, a triple or a double and three strike outs at five at bats.

So they've definitely had mixed results, but generally very positive. Their last major acquisition to have great results is Insomniac, but the story hasn't been told there yet. Want to see if they an create their own major IP rather than needing Marvel properties.

But I think we can expect out of the purchases at least 1 home run or grand slam and probably at least one triple or double. They're acquiring far more studios than they have in the past, but with less experience in said studios.

 

[ulantan]

The Xbox One gen is over already, drop that narrative.

Microsoft is *much* more aggressive this gen and their big acquisitions reflect that.
They have a long term plan for the cloud and this is just the beginning of that.

What narrative I'm looking at the numbers they have been getting dog walked since the gen began.

 

[begotten]

And you think it is trying to wow gamers with graphics and features?

Soulless acquisition graphics vs organic acquisition graphics.

 

[El Pistolero]

The difference is their checkbook and how they are managing their acquisitions. It seems that Sony are better at making sure who they own focus on making what they are good at. Microsoft seems to take some hippy approach of letting who they buy be a free spirit and it isn't working out. Sony is only going small cause they can't afford to go big, don't kid yourselves.

Financially, they definitely can. You won't convince me that a company the size of Sony would not be able to go after bigger targets (bigger than the studios they acquire, that is...)! Why they don't could be for a myriad of reasons, which have little to do with their finances (or, at least, not only!).

 

[GHG]

This is another mistaken attitude.

Microsoft having 70 billion dollars to acquire an asset doesn't mean they have 70 billion dollars for exclusivity deals. These aren't assets and their ROI isn't the same. Once you buy a company like Activision their entire revenue flow becomes yours. Exclusivity deals just means that the revenue you get from royalties and the increased hardware revenue are yours... That's night and day different.

Activision has averaged an annual net income of ~$3 billion over the last few years. I'll leave it to you to do the maths.

None of this needs to make financial sense for Microsoft, that's not how they have operated the division since it's inception. But when we are talking about what Microsoft have the capacity to do vs Sony we should at least be factual. There is nothing that Sony does with their money that is out of reach of Microsoft's capabilities.

Microsoft's only consistent enemy since they have been in the console business is their own decision making.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Financially, they definitely can. You won't convince me that a company the size of Sony would not be able to go after bigger targets (bigger than the studios they acquire, that is...)! Why they don't could be for a myriad of reasons, which have little to do with their finances (or, at least, not only!).

Sony's appetite for acquisitions is very dependent on the growth of the video games market.

They're a fairly small company relative to some of their competition and video games is only an element of their business.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Activision has averaged an annual net income of ~$3 billion over the last few years. I'll leave it to you to do the maths.

None of this needs to make financial sense for Microsoft, that's not how they have operated the division since it's inception. But when we are talking about what Microsoft have the capacity to do vs Sony we should at least be factual. There is nothing that Sony does with their money that is out of reach of Microsoft's capabilities.

Microsoft's only consistent enemy since they have been in the console business is their own decision making.

Stopped reading at "None of this needs to make financial sense"

It absolutely does, you just don't realize that. Microsoft has at least twice considered shelving Xbox as a brand.

 

[GHG]

Stopped reading at "None of this needs to make financial sense"

It absolutely does, you just don't realize that. Microsoft has at least twice considered shelving Xbox as a brand.

You can stop reading all you want but the reality is that if Xbox was a division of pretty much 99% of other businesses out there it no longer exists.

They have proven to us that finances don't matter. At least up until this point in time anyway.

 

[Captain Toad]

What does it matter if it's first party or not? Forspoken was made just for PS5.

Forspoken was announced as a TIMED exclusive before it launched.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Activision has averaged an annual net income of ~$3 billion over the last few years. I'll leave it to you to do the maths.

None of this needs to make financial sense for Microsoft, that's not how they have operated the division since it's inception. But when we are talking about what Microsoft have the capacity to do vs Sony we should at least be factual. There is nothing that Sony does with their money that is out of reach of Microsoft's capabilities.

Microsoft's only consistent enemy since they have been in the console business is their own decision making.

Sony, being a Japanese company, can buy Japanese studios/publishers (if they are willing to sell), while this is much harder, and in some cases nearly impossible for MS, regardless of how much money they have.

 

[GHG]

Sony, being a Japanese company, can buy Japanese studios/publishers (if they are willing to sell), while this is much harder, and in some cases nearly impossible for MS, regardless of how much money they have.

And how many have they acquired?

 

[Captain Toad]

video games is only an element of their business.

We are talking about Sony? Because, videogames are a MUCH more important part of their business than MS.