Take your own advice. Re-read the post you responded to, which was about the freedom to move onto other things after having delivered a hit and getting out from under an already viable franchise, which your post misses the point entirely just to say Sony makes sequels. Well, yeah, there's nothing wrong with sequels. But Microsoft has this giant blemish on their track record known as Bungie, a studio which, after delivering multiple million selling games... wanted to branch out and deliver something new, and Microsoft's response to them was; paraphrasing, "naw, keep going with the halo thing dawg." Microsoft hasn't had a hit like Halo since, and we don't know exactly how they'd treat a studio that might deliver on that scale again. That's the point you're missing.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Aaron Greenberg: We’re finding the world’s greatest teams and allowing them to operate independently
- Thread starter IbizaPocholo
- Start date
1. It becomes difficult to not release new hardware when the competition is doing it. They may never even make money on the Xbox One X but there is a message sent out to consumers which is more important going forward and that is that they are committed to having the best hardware available.
2. A company does not change immediately. It is even harder for a huge corporate entity with many divisions to do that. Myerson took over several department in 2013. Nadella became CEO in 2014. As a CEO for such a huge entity, you always give departments time to try and figure themselves out before instituting change. That change started last year.
3. I would think that Microsoft's offering is more predictable given how many of their teams are not making current gen games. I would make an assumption that Turn 10, 343i, Playground Games open world game, a Ninja Theory title all make it within the first year of the console launch. Sprinkle that with some second party titles and it does not look too bad.
I think the key to GamePass success will be the signing on of 3rd Party devs for day 1 release on GP. The 1st party studios are probably a given, but I'd love to see some 3rd Party sign on for GP and possibly Play Anywhere on release. Maybe a Bethesda or someone of that ilk.
I dream of a day where this doesn't have to be said anymore.
On topic, I look forward to see what these studios do
Bungie wanted to create another sci-fi FPS space epic with aliens. I can't imagine why MS didn't see value in having competing sci fi shooter franchises ...
So yeah, I guess the whole exchange "yo dawg ..." makes more sense between both parties. Props to MS for allowing Bungie to leave and sign with another publisher. Good guy MS huh?
I think you get the negativity from two camps. One is a bit insecure that a Microsoft with great hardware (done) and great software (work in progress) might be a threat to their platform of choice. The other is the people who unconsciously wrote off Microsoft during the period in which they weren't doing very well, and kind of don't want them to do well because then they'd need to buy another platform in order to avoid missing out. I don't agree but can kind of feel sympathy with the latter since I'm not a fan of owning 4 systems and using 10 million PC clients for my games libraries, hah.
The Coalition (then Black Tusk Studios) were given an option to either continue with the game that they had worked on for two years or take up Gears of War.
Rare has worked on Kameo, Viva Pinata and now Sea of Thieves. They also stated that they are not interested in taking up their former IP.
Forza Horizon saw the light of day because Microsoft bought into an idea from Playground Games.
Microsoft has similarly tried with new IP moreso in the second party space that has not panned out (ReCore, Quantum Break, Ryse) as planned, some like Ori and Cuphead have. Sunset Overdrive was a really fun game that did not sell a lot of copies.
What is important is that Microsoft did not have enough studios to go out and experiment with new IP. 343i, The Coalition and Turn 10 were all handling core games and were single team studios.
It surprises me just how much confidence some people place in the brand considering it's history. At this point they've earned a level of skepticism and it's not going to disappear because they did a few things right. When they start delivering awesome games on a regular basis again, they're going to win a lot of people back.
I often ask myself, "why didn't heavenly sword take off"? What was wrong with it? Guiding arrows with motion controls was sooo fuunnn! While hellblade was good, I feel like they are going to try a God of war contender.. which i feel would be a mistake if they did. They should scrap all previous ideas and start fresh for MS. Them and playground will have to do most of the heavy lifting next gen I feel like.
I'm not disagreeing with the overall point of your post, but wanted to target just the bolded bit. Since Halo released, no console-maker has had a new IP that's found success to the same scale as Halo. Uncharted/Last of Us/Spiderman might ultimately move more units than any single Halo game ever has, but none of these will move as many consoles or prop up their console brand as much as Halo has for Xbox. While it mightn't carry as much weight now, in 2006 Bungie dropping a Halo game meant you'd have ~5 million people lining up specifically for it. Halo's pull still hasn't been matched.
I just hope they make some great sp games as well. Game pass as a concept doesn't support full blown AAA sp games. We will see I guess. Bcz I have no interest in ms exclusives they released recently with a few exceptions like cuphead which was great. That is one field I hope ms catches up with sony someday. A 50-50 focus on sp-online gaas would be great.
I think there's a third camp one that sees Microsoft past and is skeptical of them. I don't have faith in Microsoft keeping with the studios and not dropping the ball which they have done multiple times in the past with multiple generations even with a really successful generation like the 360. Ideally them announcing these studios being bought will end up good but it will be a wait and see approach for many people.
exactly.
"Lets forget about our monster hit IP's and start from sratch! GREAT IDEA!"
It's pretty evident Xbox division has gotten some bigger cheques to push their vision in the last 2 years. Adding their PSX show, buying 4 studios, building a AAA one, and looking for more shows that.
TLOU is as big as Halo. Difference is Xbox relied on Halo (and then Gears) while Sony doesn't need to rely on 1 franchise. You'll see once its sequel hits.
Sony is restructuring Playstation Now to allow for local downloads, essentially a service that goes up against Game Pass. Both services work well for single player games and multiplayer titles.
The monetization scheme is far better and predictable than selling individual copies of games should it get mass appeal.
This. It's perfectly normal that people lost their trust in a company with a notable history of mistakes. Trust must be earned, and while Microsoft is going in the right direction, they aren't there yet.
Last edited:
Time will tell. Looking forward to the next couple years of Xbox software announcements to get a feel for where this new push is going.
More first party investment in software development is a good thing
More first party investment in software development is a good thing
I had to chuckle when I read this:
My first thought was, MS wouldn't greenlight a title like that, so they buy the studio instead lol.
My first thought was, MS wouldn't greenlight a title like that, so they buy the studio instead lol.
Microsoft needs a true vision of what they want their games to be.
I feel like Sony and Nintendo have been very consistent in the types of games they want to make. Nintendo is a company that focuses on the gameplay first and puts everything else around it. Sony has been into cinematic games since the PS1 and I feel they have been consistent in that since then.
I am not sure what Microsofts game DNA is. Pretty sure they don't know either.
I feel like Sony and Nintendo have been very consistent in the types of games they want to make. Nintendo is a company that focuses on the gameplay first and puts everything else around it. Sony has been into cinematic games since the PS1 and I feel they have been consistent in that since then.
I am not sure what Microsofts game DNA is. Pretty sure they don't know either.
I agree and 343 are a prime example of that. One screw up after another, and that with the companies biggest most important franchise.
I like the direction, but im also still very very skeptical when i see 343 screw up regularly like they do.
This is good to hear. I'm glad they have all their top level people buying into the message. This is a far cry from when they were talking about how important new forms of monetization for games are.
That is kind of vague but we will just have to hope that they know what they are doing.
I am just a consumer so it is easy for me to criticize the end product. But coming up with that initial vision and then executing on it is pretty difficult.
I root for most of these companies so I am hoping they figure it out and deliver.
That last part sounds like more interested in GAAS type of games, or games that are more easily consumable on a paid service like GamePass. Which is a huge turn off for me.
My issue with this statement is they still should be able to want to create new IP's with those studios 343i and coalition included. But MS has cultivated a environment that puts a lot of emphasis on brand recognition, and that's where starting from scratch should come from. Gears should be totally different in story, approach. If MS truly had that mentality a long time ago in how developers were able to approach new IP's/projects or re-imagine a series we would have seen a lot more diversity a long time ago.
That's why there is so much skepticism about their new messaging, new studios and what not. And with them talking about game pass and how they want games to fit on that service it's just not something that jives with what their past messaging has been in how they treat their development.
Like what others have said, show us a consistent stream of high quality releases that are not rehashes of IP's that have had a rollercoaster in terms of reception, and iterations.
Last edited:
By sheer volume of unit sales, sure. But that's only one metric. I'm unconvinced that TLOU moved anywhere near as many consoles, DLC sales, merchandise, or subscriptions as Halo did in its prime, or that TLOU2 will either. TLOU2 is totally going to be a sales monster, but I don't think you'll see millions upon millions of people rushing out to buy a PS4 the day it launches the way gamers did with Halo.
It was all a guess hence words like assume - it's all based on what we are aware of 'today', and that is that 2020 is a likely release and Sony are likely to have BC. Not quite sure what else folk can do but speculate.
The assumption on Sony is that they have some 'big hitters' coming out over the launch period which (if BC is included in PS5) means they will have some 'highly anticipated' titles (like Last of Us 2 and Ghost of Tsushima) which might offer some PS5 boosts. Then we have the potential that Horizon 2 could be PS5 only...I'm not sure what else, but like I said, a couple of exclusives plus some boosted big hitters would be good.
MS on the other hand don't seem to have much in the pipeline, of course that could be completely wrong - but looking at these recent moves it's already been suggested there won't be anything (much) ready for launch. I could be totally wrong, I'm sure MS knows what it's doing...and as I said previously they've been working hard making a lot of good noises.
WRT the X, I just meant they could have been making more noises about software earlier - I mean they closed down studios like the one working on Scalebound and then they closed that Project Spark before that...it's only more recently things have been picking up WRT producing games...which is why I think they might be less prepared.
But hey, what do I know!
Even in their confused state and with lack of funding towards gaming, Microsoft put out Forza Motorsport 6/7, Horizon 2/3/4, Gears of War 4, Halo 5, Sunset Overdrive, Ori and the blind forest, Cuphead, and the exclusivity for Titanfall.
They have not had similar quality on Halo Wars 2, State of Decay 2, Quantum Break, ReCore, Sea of Thieves (although it has got better with more content)
How are coming to that conclusion?
Anyway, this was Phil Spencer on first party and single player.
This was Matt Booty on the same interview
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-08-23-why-xbox-bought-ninja-theory
With all these big changes I'm looking forward to seeing how the next xbox pans out. Lets see a nice, consumer friendly comeback MS. So far they have done well getting back on track
Halo is a long standing reason to own an Xbox console, The Last of Us was a brand new franchise.
And...http://insiderp.com/the-last-of-us-remastered-day-1-sales.html
Halo was and is a cultural icon.
Nobody would view TLoU in the same realm.
Talking about Minecraft integration is not making me and others confident in what he also says about content. Also talking about one already established developer like Ninja theory who are known for single player experiences small and large is not addressing any of my concerns. Especially when talking about Playground, 343, coalition and the likes.
Like others have said shows us the games, and people will start to believe in your mission/brand again. Right now it's literally words and promises that have been broken, closed and cancelled within this gen.
Actually with how people rebought last of us on PS4, and seeing the reactions it's reveal got, i would say Last of us is for Sony and single player games as is Halo for MS and multiplayer.
And I would argue at this point Nathan Drake and Uncharted are in the same league as halo in terms of recognition.
I don't really know what they mean with that. 50-100 staff on projects in 2-3 years sounds like games in scale with Gravity Rush 2, Knack 2 and The Last Guardian. Like smaller games. Games that will cost 40 dollars like Mega Man 11.
This kind of attitude towards first party studios could make for a very interesting library of games for Microsoft down the line. I'd certainly want to live in a world where a big publisher like Microsoft were cool with footing the bill on whatever game any given studio wanted to make.
But I think I'll wait for those games to come out before buying into this comment.
But I think I'll wait for those games to come out before buying into this comment.
Nope, you've missed my point I think. I'm saying they have to prove themselves outside of racing. Just the same as ND would have to prove themselves at racing (outside of CTR). It's fine being good at a certain genre but that doesn't then mean they can just knock it out of the park with another. Their strengths lie in open world racing, and right now they have to prove themselves going forward moving away from that.
? We're still waiting on NPD results for September so Spidey's still up in the air, but April and May's NPD (admittedly only a slice of the whole market) showed that though people definitely went out and bought PS4s (presumably for God of War), they weren't in the millions.
The Last of Us 2 reception, while glowing, has been meek compared to Halo 3's. Halo 3 was a landmark event. It was gigantic. 'Finish the Fight', and the 'Believe' ad campaign, the Super bowl advertisements, etc. penetrated the non-gaming public in a way that gaming wouldn't again until Modern Warfare 2.
I would definitely agree that today Nathan Drake is as well known as Halo, but that's a symptom of Halo's waning interest as much as it is Uncharted's rise. Halo at its peak dwarfed Uncharted, and the Last of Us. And no new exclusive ip since has been as iconic since. Even relative to the time, Halo CE meant more to Xbox and console gaming in general, than Last of Us.
Last edited:
Any time I pick up a Playstation console, I am sure Gran Turismo, God of War are coming. I was always sure that Uncharted and Killzone were coming to the Playstation 4 even before they were revealed.
I am always sure that there is a Mario, Zelda, Metroid, coming to a Nintendo console because they are what have defined their hardware from a time before I started gaming.
The lack of diversity was never going to come from 343i, Turn 10 or The Coalition. To have that diversity, especially from first party they would have needed to have more studios, something that they did not have. Established series also rarely ever see a harsh reboot if there is a strong following for the title because more often than not huge shifts to how a game plays is generally there to try and keep a franchise relevant. None of Microsoft's big hitters is irrelevant.
They tried getting that diversity through second party partnerships that mostly did not work out. Last generation those partnerships yielded Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey, Gears of War, Alan Wake, Crackdown, Dead Rising, Ninja Gaiden II, Dead or Alive 4, PGR, Mass Effect along with third party support on games that never made it to the PS3 like Chromehounds.
It is also strange that people want a change to the story of Gears of War yet they already are expanding the arc, they have brought in new characters.
What did people want to see from Microsoft?
1. More investment in games. They have done that by expanding their first party studios.
2. Less mismanagement and less focus on a select few titles.
3. People wanted to see more single player games.
All of those have been addressed. I also like that they took a long term plan instead of the short term solutions that have got them to where they are. But they cannot win because anything positive they do has to be trashed, questioned or doubted. I believe that some of the developers they bought will struggle, and that is normal, but they also have a strong base that they can build on.
Forza has seasons that change once a week. I think this type of model is necessary In order to keep people from subscribing for a month and then canceling after they've had their fill of the game. I'm interested to see what they do with these teams and how much freedom they really give them.
First comment in an Xbox thread, par for the course. Good thing Nintendo and Sony are not doing a billion sequels to their Marios, Zeldas, Uncharteds and so on, and that MS did not release games like Sea Of Thieves in this generation - oh wait.
Yeah and Sony and Nintendo don't have any negativity in their threads lately?
There is a huge amount of content that offers 8-10 hours of single player gameplay being sold for $60. There are games that are done by smaller teams that have that amount of value that are sold for less e.g. Hellblade.
Other threads having bad posts shouldn't mean every other thread also needs to be shit up. Microsoft proved great commitment at this last E3 towards first party games, especially given how all these games will be on Game Pass as well. So it's especially annoying to see the same old GameFAQs-esque trolling in all Xbox threads, yeah.
Thing is Sony Santa Monica has worked on other things outside of God of war, and are able to work on a new IP, which they maybe currently. Guerilla wont return to killzone for a while since they were given a chance and a lot of money/time to develop Horizon. Naughty Dog is free to work on whatever they want. Which is why their catelog history is really diverse from Crash, to Jak, to Uncharted to last of us and beyond. Look at Sucker punch? They chose to make those sequels for Infamous, but now are making a Feudal Japan game.
Where is that with those established studio like 343? You would think after the ups and down of halo over 2 games and a collection that maybe MS would take a step back and let these guys make something their own so when they come back to halo it can be fresh and exciting again.
Buying studios is different then actually hearing seeing things from those studios and knowing the size scale of them. They bought a bunch of studios, but until we see anything it's all vaporware. Same goes for whatever studio Sony is planning to buy/create. You say that your 1-3 list have all been addressed, yet they havn't. Only thing that's been addressed is they spend money to buy studios so they could make more games. And thats something that wont be fulfilled until we see the games. Microsoft has done this before, promise some games, or things to come, then to have them kind of get cancelled, forgotten or closed.
Until we see the fruits of this investment, it's all just words and promises. Which has been Xbox most of all this gen, and some of last gen as well.
User Warned - community whining and cross-forum baggage
This place is possibly worse than GAF when it comes to shitting up threads. A sentence I never thought I would write when this site first formed.
Personally think MS have a long way to go to gain back the lost customers this gen and they really need to bring the exclusives hits that compete with both Sony and Nintendo.
Personally think MS have a long way to go to gain back the lost customers this gen and they really need to bring the exclusives hits that compete with both Sony and Nintendo.
Last edited:
I've always seen the Xbox as the 'competitive online experience' and PlayStation as the 'SP story and unique' experience. That's not to say either console lacks the other, just that if someone asked me which to get I'd be asking which experience they prefer.
Halo is Halo. It's massive - literally Mario levels of icon. Uncharted is 'very popular' by comparison. I'm not trying to start an argument by saying this, but Sony do have several icons of varying popularity but none stand above Halo.