The new Xbox leadership is relying on external expertise to redefine Microsoft's struggling gaming strategy. Asha Sharma directly responds to former PlayStation boss Shawn Layden's harsh criticism of the current state of the Xbox division by extending an invitation for discussions.
While Sharma, as an industry newcomer, is personally driving the realignment of Xbox, this open exchange marks an unusual break with the otherwise so closed communication of the major console manufacturers.
Layden's harsh criticism of Game Pass
The exchange was triggered by a post from analyst Joost van Dreunen, in which Layden sharply criticized Microsoft's current business model. Layden, who shaped the PlayStation era from the PS3 to the success of the PS4, described the efforts surrounding Xbox Game Pass as an attempt to spin a system whose "diagnosis is unfavorable" and "prognosis is bleak." He even called for a "clarifying post-mortem analysis" to do the entire industry a service.
Sharma's response to this almost devastating analysis was not defensive, but a simple "I would love to chat sometime". reacted, demonstrates their current working mode: listening instead of denying.
Sharma is under immense pressure. She's taking over a brand that's in the midst of an identity shift – away from pure hardware and towards a cross-platform service model. Layden, on the other hand, is a staunch advocate of the classic console business and the exclusive titles that made PlayStation great.
An exchange between these two worlds could have concrete implications for strategy:
- Game Pass Pricing: There are already reports that Sharma is considering a price reduction to boost growth.
- Focus on quality instead of quantity: Layden has often criticized rising development costs in the past. His input could influence how Microsoft approves projects in the future.
- Rebranding: Since Sharma is personally leading the Xbox rebranding, the perspective of a former competitor could help to reposition the brand more sharply.
A breath of fresh air or bewilderment?
It's fascinating to observe that a CEO would so openly seek the advice of a former competitor who has just publicly dismantled her own business model. On the one hand, Sharma demonstrates the necessary humility required as a newcomer to this complex industry. She acknowledges that the "old hands" understand why players develop certain attachments to a platform.
On the other hand, it also seems like an admission that Xbox's internal strategy currently lacks a clear guiding principle. Having to ask their former arch-rival how to get themselves out of this mess means the shock of stagnant subscription numbers runs deep.
This post alone won't save Xbox, but it's a strong sign of a new company culture. Sharma seems willing to slaughter sacred cows like the current Game Pass strategy if the arguments are sound. For us gamers, this means the next phase of Xbox will look radically different from the Phil Spencer era.
Do you believe that someone like Shawn Layden with his "old school" experience can really help Xbox, or has the Game Pass train already left the station for this kind of thinking?
…one could also ask the consumers/buyers… but that's apparently not what it's about; it's only about profit maximization… PROFIT
As if Sony would do any better…
Thomas von Ledebur, yes, they do. 🤷
René Peinhardt PS Plus is also not good
Thomas von Ledebur, yes, actually 🤷
René Peinhardt: Too expensive for what's offered, and it's only a matter of time before the next price increase comes.
Thomas von Ledebur, €13,99 for well over 400 games is too much? Aha, I knew it, you're just one of those casual wannabe "gamers" who wants everything for free. 🤦
Thomas von Ledebur also points out that the extra game catalog only costs €5. The basic features, such as monthly games, online functions, and over 200 GB of cloud storage, etc., cost €8,99, and the game catalog is €5,00. So €5,00 for well over 400 games is too expensive? Dude, you're seriously out of your mind.
René Peinhardt: 400 old things that one has in the closet, as a "casual wannabe gamer" who has been gaming for over 35 years.
René Peinhardt: They keep the good stuff; it never gets in there. They say so themselves.
René Peinhardt: Then you get a digital avatar as a gift for the anniversary. Thanks for nothing.
René Peinhardt, by the way, it's nice that one can have such a mature and objective discussion with you.
Thomas von Ledebur, well then you don't need the extra subscription. 🤦 But the main thing is to complain about something you don't need at all. However, I seriously doubt that you own all the games in the catalog. Besides, I was talking about well over 400 games. So you can't read and understand either. And again. 5,00 EUROS FOR OVER 400 GAMES and you're talking about it being too expensive. If you're not the target audience for the subscription, then just shut up. Nobody's forcing you to subscribe. I know many people who haven't been gaming for very long and who can't necessarily always afford the latest game. They are all completely satisfied with the selection and always have something to play without having to spend a ton of money. The subscription isn't meant for people who buy every game anyway, although I have to say that through the subscription I've discovered games I hadn't even considered, and I actually buy a lot of games, especially first-party titles, day one, and yet the game catalog still surprises me with gems. 🤷
Thomas von Ledebur, you're the one who doesn't have any arguments, just spouts empty phrases. 🤷
Thomas von Ledebur, they keep the good stuff? Dude, you have absolutely no idea what's even in the catalog. Do you really think you're going to get all the first-party titles, day one, for free for five euros? Are you really that stupid? You couldn't make this stuff up. Sony's first-party titles always come to the Extra subscription after a certain time; I'd suggest you open your eyes. Sony never said these games would never come to the subscription; they said there wouldn't be any day one releases to maintain quality. Only a few indie games occasionally get day one releases to boost sales, and there are always some gems among them, and even then, you can't complain for five euros.
Are there any real arguments coming now, or more total bullshit?
Are you seriously complaining about getting a gift? What did you expect? The latest blockbuster game for free? 🤦 You should be grateful you got anything at all. There are plenty of people who are at least thankful for something like this, unlike some ungrateful individual like you.
René Peinhardt, at least I'm not insulting anyone.
Thomas von Ledebur again! ARE THERE ANY MORE ARGUMENTS? Your comments are insulting to my intelligence. 🤦
René Peinhardt: So you're insulting me again, and I'm supposed to respond rationally? It's already stated above. The price is too high for the selection of old games that everyone already knows. Game Pass offers more. Cloud storage is included without a subscription. Unlimited.
Thomas von Ledebur, what exactly does Game Pass offer that's different? What does its game catalog offer for FIVE EUROS? I've refuted all your "arguments" with facts. You can't offer a single counter-argument; you just keep spouting the same nonsense. Besides, this isn't about Game Pass, it's about your statements regarding PS Plus. What's available on Game Pass is completely irrelevant. But fine, if you want. Game Pass also mainly offers older games that everyone already owns, just as you would say. And I'm deliberately only comparing the comparable subscription tiers here. Because even those don't include day-one releases. So, by that logic, you'd have to own all those games too. For day-one releases, you need Ultimate, which is more expensive than Premium, which, to be fair, doesn't include day-one releases, and that's a good thing. Speaking of high-quality first-party titles, Xbox is dumping its first-party games at rock-bottom prices, as evidenced by the poor sales figures and the low quality of the games. Games demonstrably sell terribly on Xbox. Okay, that's not really relevant. With Sony, I get a wide range of games for 5 euros, and above all, high-quality games. Game Pass, in the comparable subscription tier, has a lot more old stuff and junk. The games you could actually enjoy are hidden behind Ultimate. So, again, since you don't seem to understand: where are the arguments for your claims? And no, it doesn't matter that you're simply not the target audience and don't really know what's in the game catalog.
René Peinhardt: I know perfectly well what's in there. I've been a PS Plus subscriber since its introduction in 2010. You don't know me, yet you're attacking me directly. You ignore arguments because you don't want to hear them, and your 5 euros are a naive calculation, since they don't stand on their own. And Premium offers a few even older PS1 and PS2 games—what's premium about that? A factual discussion isn't possible on this basis. PS: I also don't understand why you feel so personally attacked and triggered. Can't you accept other opinions?
Thomas von Ledebur, you're the only one ignoring the arguments. Seriously, do you live in a different world? I'd love to be that out of touch with reality. 🤣
Are you too stupid to understand what I wrote? I have a feeling you're incapable of it. I'll repeat myself one last time. I've refuted every single one of your arguments with arguments and facts. So my 5 euros are just wishful thinking? I've already explained that perfectly clearly. You really lack the cognitive ability to grasp context. You take offense at facts and arguments. 🤣
René Peinhardt: Okay, there's no point in discussing this with you. I get personally insulted in every single one of your posts. That's no basis for a discussion. Keep your opinion; I disagree, and for me, PS Plus doesn't offer enough for the price. Besides, Sony's overall policies aren't any better than Microsoft's. That's my opinion. Incidentally, it's not the arguments that are insulting, but rather statements like "wannabe gamer" or that I'm too intellectually challenged to follow your logic. It's sad that this even needs to be mentioned.
Thomas von Ledebur, by the way, PS Plus hasn't existed in its current form since 2010, but only since June 2022. So you don't actually have Extra or Premium, but Essential, which has absolutely nothing to do with a game catalog or is even comparable to Game Pass. This tier is also called Essential on Game Pass. What's Extra on Sony is Premium on Microsoft, and it actually offers fewer games. Only 200+ games, while Sony offers 400+. Sony's Premium and Microsoft's Ultimate aren't really comparable in terms of price. They're too far apart, although Sony offers 700+ games and Microsoft only 400+, but they do include day-one releases. Ubisoft Classics is already included in Sony's Extra tier. I need Ultimate for that on Xbox.
So, here too I've completely dismantled you. Your arguments are invalid because they don't correspond to the facts but to your pure imagination.
Thomas von Ledebur, these are observations, not insults. I can't help it that you act this way and don't address a single argument, but instead mindlessly repeat the same thing over and over again. That simply demonstrates a high degree of ignorance and cognitive limitations. I can't be held responsible for that. You could have responded intelligently to my comments, and you didn't. You chose to be a petulant child and consistently ignore arguments supported by facts. You present yourself to the world with a certain degree of stupidity and then you're surprised when it's pointed out. You're insulting me yourself, but I've already pointed that out to you, yet you consistently ignore it. You live in your own world, and that's normal for people like you, but then you have to expect some pushback when you spout nonsense that has nothing to do with reality. 🤷
Yeah, go ahead, you alpha male, you completely tore me apart. This isn't about tearing anyone apart, but about having a factual discussion, which you're incapable of. I'm also aware that Plus didn't exist in its current form back then; I'm simply stating that I've been using the service from the beginning. That doesn't mean I'm allowed to have a different opinion than you. I can also drive a different car and listen to different music. Everyone has their own opinion, and that's something we can discuss. I'm not aware that this is a competition to see who's "better."
Thomas von Ledebur: Okay, you don't want to understand. 🤦
This has nothing to do with opinion. You haven't presented a single reasonable argument as to why €5 for 400+ games and €8 for 700+ games is too expensive. You can't back up your weak arguments—which I've refuted with facts—with facts, so they're just empty phrases. You want to have a factual discussion, but you don't even grasp the basics of discussion. Furthermore, it makes no sense that you supposedly have a subscription you don't need at all, since you stated that you already own all these games. That would be the same as me saying Netflix is rubbish because they only have movies I already own and therefore it's too expensive for me. That doesn't make sense because I'm not the target audience and I don't need it. Therefore, my opinion on this is worthless and irrelevant. I couldn't reasonably support this opinion with factual arguments. An opinion must be supported, and you can't. You either don't want to understand that or you can't. I've pointed out to you several times that your statements simply aren't true. Whether or not there's enough in it for you is your opinion, but that has nothing to do with the price. So you're of the opinion that PS Plus Extra/Premium isn't for you, period. But that has nothing to do with the price, as I've already explained to you, and numbers don't lie. 🤷
René Peinhardt: Yes, if that's enough for you, I'm very happy for you. It's simply not enough for me. People are different and have different needs. Your 5-euro argument isn't valid either, because you also have to pay for the rest to get there. That would be like saying, "I don't care what the gas costs, I only ever fill up for 15 euros anyway." But since you won't stop otherwise, I'm happy to agree with you. You've dismantled that cognitively challenged wannabe gamer and can feel good about yourself now. 👍
René Peinhardt: How right you are. I look up to you and your wisdom, my master. P.S. The extra costs 5 euros and is the best thing in the world! I would gladly pay 10 euros for it.
Thomas von Ledebur, definitely. Sony has already sold almost 100 million consoles, ha ha.
Armin Ge I'm talking about the subscription service
Thomas von Ledebur simply runs better
Tobias Ströll: Logically. With significantly more devices sold, the customer base is naturally larger as well.
They should just scrap Game Pass! It's only ruining the games anyway.
And the developers!
Michael Schöls: Oh yeah, ask the developers of Clair Obscure Expedition 33 if it ruined them 🤣
Ralf Eisenkrätzer, it's all about pure game sales, and that's precisely where Game Pass is detrimental, a fact viewed critically by many developers and publishers. For indie developers, it might bring reach, but not real money. Profits are generated through sales, not by freeloaders who only pay a few euros a month, of which the developer only receives a fraction. Clair wasn't successful because of Game Pass, but through sales on PlayStation and PC. It's even been proven that Xbox players buy far fewer games, thus significantly contributing to the scarcity of high-quality first-party titles. 🤷
René Peinhardt, I'd like to see the evidence, especially since there are also opposing views. What I also find highly questionable is that you're now trying to blame the problems of the AAA game industry on Game Pass. Calling people who pay for a subscription "parasites" doesn't exactly demonstrate intelligence. I mean, there are much cheaper ways to get games on PC than Game Pass.
Ralf Eisenkrätzer: It's obvious. You have no clue about the subject matter, so you have to resort to insults. Who's lacking in intelligence now? 🤔🤦
Ralf Eisenkrätzer: I see it like this. There are studios, like the one behind Clair Obscure, that have certainly benefited from it. Of course. But there are also studios and developers who have suffered precisely because of it.
As a studio, I wouldn't allow people to play my work at release through a Game Pass subscription. AAA games cost millions to develop and generate no revenue from this.
That may sound unpopular, yes. But you also have to keep in mind the developers and studios who have invested a lot of time and money in the product.
Markus Bugi, your statement makes it sound like the studios are too stupid to negotiate proper contracts with Microsoft. Did I understand you correctly? Apart from Microsoft's own studios, no other studio is obligated to release its games on Game Pass. You're aware of that, right?
Ralf Eisenkrätzer: No, that's not what I meant at all. But the studios are going under because of this subscription model. That's just a fact. That's all I wanted to say. It's great for gamers. Triple-A titles released on subscription are actually fatal for the studios. Look at Activision now. Call of Duty won't be released on Game Pass. I understand that. And I think it's good that someone is finally doing something about it.
Markus Bugi digger, who owns Activision?
Ralf Eisenkrätzer, dude, what do you want? Seriously? Games on that crappy Game Pass for free? These stupid subscription models are fucking up the studios. Buy the games at full price, or is your wallet too thin to chase after some stupid subscription model and want everything for free on release day? Ugh, I'm sick of guys like you, honestly.
Markus Bugi, you're so easy to provoke, even though that wasn't my intention. You're complaining about GP while PC game consoles are being offered for free. Okay, I've taken note of that.
Markus Bugi, the great savior of the studios. Let me guess, Game Pass is probably also to blame for Ubisoft's financial woes or for the fact that the last Dragon Age wasn't as popular as its predecessors. No, it's not the studios' fault at all; you're making it far too easy for yourself, my friend.
All highly educated but incompetent people—why seek advice from a competitor instead of paying attention to their own community? Surely some ideas and compromises could emerge that are feasible for the company and, above all, for the users. The user should be the focus, because without them, the company doesn't exist. They can continue trying to milk their users, or perhaps take a step towards them; otherwise, they shouldn't be surprised when the community shrinks and potential customers leave. But they take themselves far too seriously, as if they're above the community.
Flo Lüdtke: Simply conducting regular user surveys would be far too easy and obvious. As a top earner, you absolutely have to ask others for advice.
Jus He, exactly that, and then at the competition too 😂
Yes, there are daily surveys from Xbox and its departments; you just have to be an Alpha Xbox Insider. I also get the latest updates before everyone else. Like how to spend Xbox Rewards points directly in the Xbox Store and stuff. Believe me, Xbox knows more than you think 😉
Nice comment. It would be so easy and would also improve the image.
That's just marketing, nothing more. As if they care about what the outcome actually is.
This paragraph is also great:
"an advocate of the classic console business and the exclusive titles that made PlayStation great"
The titles that made PlayStation great are all gone, and what little remains is so distorted that nothing but the name is left. Besides, there are hardly any exclusive games anyway, because Sony got bogged down in its live service.
This guy is from the successful era before the live service. He was actually good at exclusives. It even says so in the text (which, as I'm noticing more and more often, comes across as rather AI-driven).