Indiana Jones’ launch is imminent as I write this, and the game is absolutely fantastic. I’ve been playing it myself over the past week, and in our Indiana Jones and the Great Circle review, we lauded the game’s authenticity and rare “AAA” chops in an under-served genre.
I think some non-Indiana Jones fans might find the gameplay loop a bit odd admittedly, the focus on exploration and puzzles and “archaeology” is a departure from Machine Games’ high-octane Wolfenstein shooter series. However, we’re not here to talk about what might seem odd about the game today. We’re here to talk about the odd fact that Microsoft is advertising it on Battle.net right now.
Battle.net is Blizzard’s iconic launcher. The platform was developed out of pure necessity to facilitate its pioneering online games, such as Warcraft and StarCraft. Over the years it has evolved into a social platform that powers games like Diablo IV and World of Warcraft, but it has also featured third-party games occasionally too.
Since Blizzard merged with Activision, Call of Duty itself began appearing in Battle.net, ending the “Blizzard-exclusive” nature of the platform. With Microsoft now owning Activision-Blizzard in its entirety, it’s apparently evolving again, complete with Xbox Game Pass integration and now, Xbox games too.
So we have to ask, what’s going on here? Is it a big deal? Is it a simple experiment, or part of a grander plan? Let’s explore, for fun.
Battle.net IS better than the Xbox PC app …
I wrote an article some months ago about what Microsoft should do with the Xbox app on PC.
For those who don’t know, the Xbox app on PC is how Microsoft delivers its PC Game Pass service, which gives you hundreds of games on a relatively small monthly fee. It also, like Battle.net, gives you access to your Xbox network friends. It now also allows you to connect up your Battle.net and Activision accounts, so that you can play games like Diablo IV from the Xbox PC launcher instead of Battle.net.
Yeah … it’s getting a bit weird.
The issue for the longest time with the Xbox app on PC was its quality. It was slow, it was missing features, it sometimes had issues delivering games, and also had issues connecting up DLC or providing mod access. Yet, Microsoft soldiered on, improving the app incrementally over the years to the point we’re at today.
Previously, I’ve argued that perhaps Microsoft should ditch the Xbox app for PC and just go all-in on Battle.net itself, using Battle.net as the vehicle for delivering PC Game Pass and Microsoft’s vast and greatly expanding library of games. Battle.net has a monstrous amount of digital footfall. Generally, you need to launch the app to access updates for games like Overwatch 2, Diablo IV, World of Warcraft, StarCraft 2, and so on. Also, it’s where you’d typically buy DLC for those games, such as the recent Vessel of Hatred expansion for Diablo IV.
Therein lies some of the issues Microsoft has with Battle.net, and why it’s getting a bit “weird” with its overlapping launchers.
Microsoft has committed itself to a strategy known commonly as “Xbox Play Anywhere,” by which you can buy any Xbox-developed game and also use that same license to play the game on PC. Microsoft has also gradually convinced third-party developers to jump on board too. The recent Final Fantasy Pixel Remaster Collection, for example, has Xbox Play Anywhere. Many games hitting Xbox Game Pass also come with Xbox Play Anywhere as standard. But as of writing, it’s not always the case with Blizzard’s content.
I wrote recently about how Warcraft 1 and 2 are absent from the Xbox app on PC, but they’re also absent from PC Game Pass, which seems to break Microsoft’s pledge to bring its first-party content to the service day one. Additionally, Diablo IV “Vessel of Hatred” was not cross-buy, forcing Xbox players to buy the expansion twice if they wanted to access their Xbox Game Pass version of the game across Xbox Series X|S or PC gaming handhelds like the ASUS ROG Ally or Lenovo Legion Go.
And sure, a lot of this stuff is likely teething problems and integration timelines. Most likely Microsoft is working towards getting Blizzard games fully integrated with Xbox and PC Game Pass. But it begs the question, do we really need two launchers if we’re moving towards both of them doing the same thing?
… but the Xbox PC app has gotten A LOT better, and is future-proofed too.
It’s true that the Xbox app for PC has gotten better. It’s a ton faster than it was previously, even some of my recent complaints about chat windows loading slowly seem to have been addressed to some degree. It delivers games consistently. The features have improved too (although… what I wouldn’t give for cloud saves indicators). It has a compact mode for those PC gaming handhelds now too, although getting into the app in the first place can be a pain with all the launchers Lenovo and ASUS put on top of their devices.
In any case, that’s part of the issue here too. Microsoft has been developing the Xbox app for PC specifically for multi-device use scenarios. It has Xbox Cloud Gaming built into it, for low-power devices that can’t run Xbox PC games natively. It’s far better than Battle.net on touch screens too. Trying to sign into Diablo IV on Battle.net via ASUS ROG Ally is not exactly an intuitive experience. Battle.net is designed all up for desktop PC scenarios, which you could argue is one of its strengths over the Xbox PC app, which tries to do a lot of stuff for different people.
That’s what led me to question previously, perhaps Microsoft should just ditch the Xbox PC app and go all-in with Battle.net. Chat and socials via Battle.net is far faster and more deeply integrated with the games themselves. The brand is iconic too, and synonymous with PC gaming. And then, of course, is the users. There are tens of millions of users streaming through Battle.net every day. I’m sure the Xbox PC app is no slouch in its own right, given the huge volume of content on offer, but what if they were merged?
What if Battle.net had a growing library of third-party content from Xbox and beyond? Would all the extra noise hurt Blizzard’s games? I’m sure that’s what some of these experiments are designed to determine.
🔥The hottest post-Cyber Monday deals🔥
An experiment that might go nowhere, or hints of a bigger plan?
Avowed is fully integrated into Battle.net, complete with the ability to play it without a purchase via a linked PC Game Pass account. Indiana Jones, however, is literally just a banner ad that links out to Xbox.com. It’s not unusual for Battle.net to offer ads for random stuff, but it’s odd considering Microsoft is already offering another one of its games here. Why not both?
Indeed, I suspect the efforts here revolve entirely around experimentation, foisted on Blizzard by a Microsoft keen to figure out what to actually do with its Battle.net platform. I know from discussions with Microsoft figures at events over the past year that Blizzard is a huge area of focus for Xbox, from utilizing dormant IP (hello StarCraft) to investing in getting some of its smaller franchises to the next level. But obviously, Battle.net is a huge asset in its own right, representing monstrously high engagement in a competitive PC gaming landscape.
Could shifting the PC Game Pass audience to Battle.net boost Game Pass in general? Could moving Microsoft’s vast library of games to Battle.net help boost Blizzard’s other franchises? Could third-party partners like EA and Ubisoft or even indie studios benefit from Microsoft moving over to Battle.net? Would it actually be cheaper than continuing to make the Xbox app for PC “happen?” Is Battle.net just a better brand for growing a PC store to compete with Steam or Epic Games?
What I don’t think, is that Microsoft corporate will want to maintain both platforms simultaneously long term.
I’m sure all of these questions are running through Microsoft’s analysts’ minds right now. It could all wind up being nothing, but it could be a hint at a potential grander plan that could grow Battle.net into a much, much broader platform.
