Console war. Console war never changes. Or well, maybe a little bit.

You all know the story. Xbox ran away from exclusives a couple of years ago to boost margins, but all it ended up doing was hollowing out their own platform, with first and third-party sales declines while giving away its market share to competitors without so much as a fight.

It started with Sea of Thieves, and ended with Halo itself going to PlayStation, robbing Xbox of, potentially, a reason to exist at all. "If PlayStation has its own exclusives and Xbox's exclusives, why ever buy an Xbox?" Some might ask.

Fast forward to 2026, and things are changing. Incoming Xbox CEO Asha Sharma is intent on giving Xbox exclusives again, starting with Gears of War: E-Day and Clockwork Revolution next year.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

But, at the same time, you can't help but wonder "why" on paper.

This week, Xbox CEO Asha Sharma teased The Elder Scrolls 6, which seems to be subtitled "Sentinel."

Following the tease, debate began spreading across social media about whether or not Microsoft should truly go all in and bring the big guns: for Xbox Helix, would it move the needle if Elder Scrolls 6 or Fallout 5 were console exclusive, or would Xbox simply be cutting its nose off to spite its face?

The argument against Xbox console exclusivity

It feels like the era of hardware subsidization is pretty much over. As the bulk of playtime hours go to games like Fortnite, which have very fickle monetization per user, platform holders are increasingly looking to the point of purchase itself to make money. Sony itself said it will no longer sell PlayStation hardware at a loss, and it seems Xbox is following suit.

In that world, it potentially makes far more sense to meet players where they are. With console hardware more expensive than ever, players are less likely than ever to switch platform or buy multiple consoles potentially.

It's pretty simple, really. By skipping PS5 or Nintendo Switch 2 and taking Elder Scrolls 6 Xbox console exclusive, you're potentially going to be harming the very expensive game's margins and profitability, at least on paper. It's not as if PlayStation's audience would deliver a 100% attach rate for Elder Scrolls 6 or Fallout 5, but there are many millions of potential customers who would potentially simply skip the game were it not available on their platform of choice.

Is turning The Elder Scrolls 6 and things like Fallout 5 into a "loss leader" something 2026 Xbox and Microsoft is willing to do?

The argument for Xbox console exclusivity

Microsoft and others don't really really release data on how many users own both an Xbox Series X|S and a PS5, but some analysts suggest it could be up to 50%. Indeed, I've been told that a lot of the users Xbox sees across its network show up on different platforms, suggesting that even if Elder Scrolls 6 were exclusive, it would still have a pretty huge addressable audience to the tune of tens of millions even without PlayStation.

If Microsoft were to take Elder Scrolls 6 exclusive, it would send a very strong signal that Xbox is truly in it to win it (particularly if Elder Scrolls 6 is actually very good) and, the sales would come in strong regardless. If users can't buy it on PS5, they'd probably either grab it via Steam (which I can't see Xbox ditching any time soon) or their dusty Xbox Series X|S they haven't had any reason to turn on for several years.

By the time The Elder Scrolls 6 launches, Xbox will also have a range of new Cloud Gaming initiatives in the market place too. Direct-to-WiFi Xbox controllers will be available, shaving a non-trivial amount of latency off proceedings. Elder Scrolls 6 exclusivity might not just be a "loss leader" for Xbox Helix or Xbox Series X|S in that context, it could also be a marketing vehicle for "buy-to-own" Xbox Cloud Gaming, which I presume Xbox will be looking to market more seriously by the time the game launches.

If sales could become an issue under a console exclusivity package, Xbox could also take the step of keeping it off Xbox Game Pass Ultimate for a time, similar to what we're seeing with Call of Duty — although I imagine such a move would be pretty unpopular.

Poll: What do YOU think?

I can see both sides of the argument. Xbox Helix would have a massive boost in visibility with a tentpole exclusive like The Elder Scrolls 6 for its launch, but I'm not sure if The Elder Scrolls alone would be enough to convince users to drop a potential $1000 dollars on a video game console in this economy.

Xbox would need a steady cadence of high quality exclusives, and a visible strategy that says "if you buy this; you can expect more of these types of exclusives." The sorta "one offs" here and there with Gears of War: E-Day and Clockwork Revolution aren't going to cut it, I really feel like they need to be all-in and have all studios shoulder the burden of such a strategy, that would take years potentially to ferment.

The other argument is pretty simple: Xbox might end up just harming its studios' potential by limiting access arbitrarily. It's something CEO Satya Nadella touched on in court while explaining to lawmakers why Call of Duty would never go exclusive: the business model revolves around blanket market access.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

The Elder Scrolls is arguably not like that, though ... nor are single player games in general. Xbox, PC, and Cloud Gaming should give Elder Scrolls the addressable audience to do gangbusters regardless. I heard Starfield was profitable before hitting PlayStation, for example, and so was Avowed. But is "profitable" enough for Microsoft shareholders, who are already likely annoyed by Xbox's drag on Microsoft's overall profit margin?

I think Xbox needs exclusive games to survive, and I think The Elder Scrolls 6 going exclusive would give the platform its best chance to make up lost ground over the previous two generations. I think a healthier Xbox is better for the industry, better for third-party developers, and better for Xbox customers in general. It's just unclear whether making The Elder Scrolls 6 exclusive actually would lead to a healthier Xbox ... since it would need to be part of a wider, and more visible strategy that I'm not sure Microsoft has the competitive spirit for in 2026.

At the end of the day: what would PlayStation or Nintendo do if they owned The Elder Scrolls 6 or Fallout 5? I think we all know the answer ...

But, what do YOU think? Vote in our poll above, let us know your thoughts in the comments.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Scrolling through social media recently, I stumbled on a Reel (and I'm sorry; I forgot to save it, so my apologies to its creator for not being able to link out) where a dad was explaining how he cancelled Disney+ and saved money in the long run.

But he did it by buying an Xbox One S.

When it first released, one of the killer features beyond being a slimmed-down, brick-less Xbox One was its 4K UHD Blu-Ray drive. We take it for granted now, but the Xbox One S was the first in the family to get that hardware. For $300 you got the ability to play 4K Blu-ray discs, significantly less expensive than most of the dedicated players out there.

Being an affordable 4K Blu-ray player is still one of the strengths of the Xbox One S; only now, it's generally even cheaper. Though yes, let's acknowledge before anyone says it in the comments, obviously you don't get Dolby Vision.

Seeing the aforementioned Reel made the penny drop. It could actually be a viable way to break free of the endless cycle of subscribing to streaming services and buying digital content that we now know for sure could disappear at any time.

The Xbox One S and physical media has always been a winner

The crux of the Reel that inspired this post was that buying a used Xbox One S, plus picking up their kids' favorite movies used on Blu-ray, was cheaper than a year of the Disney+ plan they were paying for.

Obviously on Disney+ there's a ton of content, but the value is only there if you're consuming it. It'd be like paying for Xbox Game Pass for a full year and playing only one game; it doesn't make sense. In this case, most of the content was never being watched, so it worked out cheaper to cancel and just buy the discs.

But Disney+ is just one service. We went from a world where breaking free of cable TV was exciting and a way to save money by only watching what we wanted without the guff. But now we're in a worse position, because the content is locked behind so many paywalls that by the time you add it all up, you may as well have just had cable.

It's frightening, frankly. Looking at my own bills, I'm subscribed to Netflix, Disney+, TNT Sports on HBO Max, Apple TV+, and Amazon Prime Video, though the latter I don't really count because Prime is worth it just for the free shipping.

But counting the first five, I'm paying at least what I used to pay for my premium TV package back before I became a 'cordcutter.' And I don't even get everything I want when I want it!

I've always been a fan of physical media. I love my games; I love my movies. Hell, I still have a stack of music cassettes and a Walkman. Today's generation may be finding this stuff for the first time; some of us never let it go.

But depending on how much you spend versus how much you actually watch, maybe it does make sense to buy the physical versions of the stuff you actually care about? At least it won't disappear.

Not owning your content isn't really the answer

If you already have an old Xbox One S spare, or even a One X or your current Xbox Series X (sorry, Series S owners), you're already in a prime position. If you don't, you can pick a used One S up right now at least fairly cheaply. Though as ever, location will have an effect on that.

Xbox also had a leg up on PlayStation, remarkably, which didn't have 4K Blu-ray capabilities on any of the PS4 lineup, despite being able to play games at 4K on the PS4 Pro.

It's a prudent thing to think of, though. There's a whole community out here of folks who like to digitize their own media with a Plex or Jellyfin server, but if you have the discs, this is far simpler.

The argument has been brought to light recently by Sony. First by removing video content from its customers' libraries that they had paid for, and then by deciding to end physical game production from 2028. When you buy digital, you have no ownership of your content.

When you buy a piece of digital content, you're buying a license to consume it. But only for as long as you're allowed to, which apparently isn't forever. At least when it's a physical item in your possession, you have the control.

I'm going to deploy my Xbox One S again

I won't be cancelling the various streaming services I subscribe to anytime soon, more's the pity. When you've got two kids who watch most of them regularly, familial bliss is the price to pay for the, well, price. That and I do enjoy some of the content on them you can't get anywhere else.

But if it's a piece of media I care about and want to truly enjoy for years to come, I already lean towards buying a Blu-ray. The quality is better, it's mine, and I can digitize all of my Blu-Ray discs on my PC and toss a copy onto my NAS.

I have been using my Xbox Series X, but I don't generally keep that in the front room attached to my 4K TV. I'd actually forgotten until thinking about this post that I still have my old Xbox One S stashed away. So it's going to be coming out of retirement to live a second life as a full-time movie box. I think I still even have a PDP Xbox remote control somewhere.

But whether it's to free yourself of the streaming services, throw a middle finger up to the digital future being forced upon us, or you just like to own your stuff, the Xbox One S is still a great value way to enjoy high-quality content. Owned, not rented.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.