-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Phil Spencer: Looking to open new studios or acquiring them / Future of Xbox (Streaming?)
- Thread starter jbug617
- Start date
A financially successful GAAS, according to their metrics of RoI.
It would hardly be surprising if FFXV's post-release content rollout was more profitable to Square than Hitman's.
Xbox is far from dead in Australia, Brazil and Mexico.
Guys the resetERA user bear force one has spoken. It's over. Phil should start creating his resume.
So how long before MS puts their wireless receiver chip in Rokus and smart TVs so that you can hook up your existing controllers to play over their streaming service, that they will dub Xbox Anywhere. Or just lump it in Play Anywhere.
I fancied flinging some petrol on the fire this afternoon, lol
I think he was being a bit sarcastic here. It's not easy at all to 'just find' developers like Naughty Dog out there - If it would be, you can be sure publishers would immediately try to sign them up. Naughty Dog has been in business for over 20 years, time they used to hone their skills, their pipelines, their studio culture and their tech, etc. If you build a new studio, you can't expect that studio to just be what Naughty Dog is from Day 1. Similarly, it's incredibly hard to find top talent out there. The industry is still incredibly small. If you've worked in the games industry for a while, you usually know the folks that 'matter', the folks that really push games so that they can actually get released. If making games would be simple and everyone could do it, we wouldn't see so many cancellations year in and year out (the majority of which never even reaches the public).
On top of that, some studios out there are very specialized. Some studios are good at a very specific thing, so asking them to make a new IP or even continue an existing IP and deliver an amazing single player experience while also delivering an amazing multiplayer experience while also being able to actually make an IP matter... well, good luck with that. Talent really matters, which is why it's often weird to me that gamers don't understand why a certain studio that used to be great in the 90s can't just make 'one of their old games on the same level of quality' anymore. I always use this example: Say you manage The Beatles. Now after 15 years of them making amazing shit, all the original members leave the band, but you still own the brand. So you hire new folks. John, Paul, Ringo and George are gone and instead you've now got Billy, Jim, Bob and Frank. Would you expect them to just be able to pick up where the original members left things? No, of course not. Talent matters, experience matters. A single person in a studio leaving can drastically affect the quality of what the studio is making. It's a very volatile thing and that's also why publishers promote the company, not individuals, cause the general public finding out that someone that mattered left cold dramatically affect sales. Very few of the geniuses in the games industry are actually known for exactly that reason.
Here's a controversial statement that might make me look like a pompous ass, but I'll say it anyway: Right now I doubt there's any studio out there that can match what Moon is doing in terms of high-end 2d content. As a publisher, even if you're willing to, let's say, pour 50 million bucks into a new studio to then make a competitive product to Ori, chances are you'd end up with a product that can't match what we're doing, simply because it takes time and experience to get to a level where you can produce that kinda stuff. It's not just all about money, even for publishers, it's about finding the right people that actually have the talent and the maturity to actually deliver a product in time and in quality. And there aren't that many folks out there that have that kinda knowledge, otherwise they'd already have been gobbled up.
Last edited:
Agree with you 100%, thats exactly how I took it from what Phil said. Just bored in the office and wanted to see how others would take to it :)
And your Beatles analogy is fantastic by the way, cant really argue with that at all.
At least he's making clear acknowledgement here that 1P is the one remaining missing link. And I don't think anyone could argue with that. So, it seems like that's where the focus lies now that X is out.
If all goes well, we are three years from seeing the efforts in this area. Most likely, we're five or six years away from seeing anything. Acknowledgement is important but there is a shitload of work that needs to be accomplished before their first party is where it needs to be. Years more to be where it should be.
What I get from this tweet is that the hardware was stopping them from investing in first party, does that even make sense? How are the two teams even related?
I don't think he's saying that. He's saying that he's happy with where they are at with 3 out of the 4 areas, but acknowledges that 1P is still a gap.
And the weak hardware has been a major issue with XBO, both in terms of providing strong 1P game experiences (just look out how poor H5/G4/QB run on XBO compared to X) and also in attracting talent to develop for the platform. The hardware proposition was an issue from day one, with XBO being way behind PS4 - and then even further behind when you consider Sony has had Pro out for a year too.
Actually even without any change, next year will be their best 1P line-up in a few years (not difficult I realise), providing everything hits as expected - we're bound to get FH4 and Halo 6 (or some variant) at the end of next year too, in addition to Sea of Thieves, Ori 2, State of Decay 2, Crackdown 3, and whatever other smaller stuff they might unveil. Of course Sony also has one of their strongest 1P years in a long time too, with God of War and Spider-Man being the two that will have the biggest impact, so Microsoft still has a lot of work cut out for them.
Last edited:
Really? I'd imagine each division have a separate budget
But it doesn't really make sense, why did the work on first party start now that the hardware is improved? Did Sony stop making games when they were making the Pro?. All I'm saying is that you can work on all aspects together, it doesn't have to be one at a time like Microsoft is doing.
I'm not sure what you mean, hardware team certainly are not the same as first party.
Last edited:
There is one pot of money for the entire Xbox/entertainment devices division. How you distribute that is another matter, and more of that pot will have gone to the hardware team.
And Phil hasn't said that work on 1P has only just started. If that was the case, they wouldn't have any 1P games releasing next year. They do.
Last edited:
It doesn't make any sense, but apparently that's how they're doing it. It seems quite reactionary, which means ultimately they will probably continue to only have middling success with the brand.
Are you really saying they blew most of their budget on hardware so now they are waiting for the pot to replenish to invest in games? Just how low are their budget that they can't support both? Why doesn't that happen with other platform holders? That explanation really doesn't make sense to me.
all those first party games have been announced 1-2 years ago, I wouldn't count them as an example of investing in first party
Here is the thing. Do to poor luck and delays, Microsoft hasn't had any first party games this year. They had Forza, Halo Wars 2, a downloadable platformer and some remasters.
They haven't stopped making games they've just had the perfect storm of delays, closures and cancellations hit them all in the same time frame. I think what Phil is alluding to here is that when he got the gig as Xboss he had three pillars to focus on: Hardware, Services and Games. The first two are now in the bag and now the last part of the jigsaw is the games. Looking at what Phil and the team have done with the S, the X, the Eltite controller etc and also with things like BC, refunds, gifting,UI overhauls etc I think they have deserved the time to show us what they got! :)
It does make sense when you consider the primary differences between Xbox and Playstation; namely that Xbox has fewer internal FP studios and so the desired additional "games" investment would have to go to 3rd party exclusivity deals and/or the establishment of new studios (all of which are rather expensive).
Clearly, Microsoft Game Studios didn't just stop making games while they were investing the majority of their budget on developing the XB1X hardware. The known in-house devs continued making Halo/Forza/Gears and they continued funding the established indie and third party studio partnerships, e.g. for games like Cuphead.
What I understand Spencer saying is that now the HUGE hw investment is out of the way, they can sink the majority of their next few year's budgets into opening new studios, funding 3rd party exclusives etc..
It's easy to look at Xbox and Spencer's statements and think, "well Sony has been able to invest in both software and hardware", but that ignores the fact that MS is starting off from a majorly disadvantaged position of needing to burn millions in capital expenditure, opening new studios, to widen their FP games production pipeline, whereas Sony with their stable of veteran studios merely has to cover ongoing studio overheads to deliver a consistent and stead stream of quality FP games.
MS will have to spend an inordinate amount of money to match Sony's FP output, and so that spend will have to compete with the literal billions that is required for hardware development investment.
(Curiously, I wonder whether this will impact their hardware dev schedule for the next-box? We may end up seeing a PS5 launch a full year ahead of XB4)
No, I'm not saying that at all!? I've just said, and I repeat:
All the games releasing on PS4 next year were announced 1-2 years ago too. That's not really the point, without knowing everything MS has in the pipeline. For example, they haven't even announced Halo 6 but we know it must be in the works for 2 years now. So if that hasn't been announced, then they're obviously no longer feeling the need to announce things as early as they have done previously.
Their 1P line-up next year is likely to be:
Sea of Thieves
Ori: Will of the Wisps
Crackdown 3
State of Decay 2
Halo 6
Forza Horizon 4
That's not a bad year at all. Halo 6 could be very special indeed with the 3 year development time, FH4 is almost guaranteed to be a hit, and we have Thieves and Ori, both of which are fresh. State of Decay was a cult hit, so there's potential there too. But the fact is that's a major release every two months, so Phil's going to be working on 2019 right now, rather than worrying too much about 2018.
Last edited:
The hardware changes could have also included costs associated with turning a discrete hardware into an ongoing platform with backward and forward compatibility. That's probably not cheap.
No offense, but this explanation is still really hard to swallow, what is stopping them from using all the budget on the next Xbox again? This generation is coming to an end and platform holders are surly working on the next console now.
Also, I don't really think anyone is doubting there will be another gears, halo and forza, when I hear Microsoft is investing in first party more I think of new IPs not ongoing franchises.
Edit: pswii60 "most of that pot will have gone to the hardware"
Let's just say this now: Microsoft probably has a lackluster fall 2018 lineup if you are hoping for new IP or unexpected games. We'll definitely get FH 4 and potentially get Halo 6 (though I'm not convinced). Spencer said in a pre-E3 interview with IGN that he would announce new IP earlier than established IP so that they can generate hype. If we take that quote to mean "Halo gets announced and released in the same year" but "new IP gets announced in year 1 and released in year 2" then we can't expect any new AAA IP to be released next year.
Why have you put that in inverted commas, when I didn't say that. "More of " != "Most of"
Inverted commas are used when quoting somebody, so make sure the words inside those inverted commas are identical to what was said.
Yes indeed I fully agree. Any new IP will likely not be released in any Fall, so the earliest we could expect is Q1 2019. But I expect we'll see a more 1P announcements next year than we've had for some time.
Actually, this is not actually a thing.
The original XB1's OS already runs in a virtualized environment, so in terms of the software engineering costs associated with virtualizing the Xbox platform, those costs have already been sunk at the beginning of the gen.. MS' forward thinking approach in this regard, means that they can pretty much leverage much of their OS code on subsequent Xbox hardware, because they will only be required to re-write the OS abstraction layers to get everything (including games) running on newer hardware.
Either way, I don't believe that MS' approach with regards to forward compatibility will differ from Sony's next-gen. Both will do BC, however, for MS it would be considerably easier since most of the software heavy lifting is done already.
Jesus dude, what difference does it make? Yes I used a wrong word, my bad, but the point still stands, you're saying hardware team gets more money than first party.
They only release established IP in the Fall this year though, the new IP and less sales games are all releasing in first half of 2018 (Sea of Thieves, State of Decay 2, Crackdown 3) so I think it's still very possible they have a new IP set for Spring 2019 to be revealed at E3 2018 (perhaps Studio Gobo's partnership game they teased in April?)
Thanks for the explaniation. I do however expect that the Xbox One X will be the lower level platform when the Xbox 2 comes out.
You're kinda contradicting yourself there. Saying they haven't had any 1st party games then in next sentence listed some?
They've done a decent amount this year. Whether you like the games and updates or or not is a different story but here's what was released and what budget was spent on:
- Halo 5 development of additional content updates
- Gears 4 content updates/DLC
- Forza Horizon 3 DLC/updates
- Killer Instinct Season 3 DLC/updates, also STEAM release
- Forza Motorsport 7 and DLC
- Phantom Dust
- Halo Wars Definitive edition - also STEAM release
- Halo Wars 2 release and DLC/content
- Pixar Rush Remaster
- Disneyland Adventures Remaster
- Zoo Tycoon Remaster
- Minecraft content updates on mobile platforms, PC, consoles, releases on 3DS/Switch
- Rise of Nations extended edition on Windows Store
- Microsoft Ultimate Word Games
- Microsoft Solitaire on additional mobile devices
- Minecraft Story Mode
- Halo: Recruit
- Paying for updates to enhance various 1st party games for XB1X
- Super Luckys Tale
- PUBG
- Recore Definitive Edition
- Cuphead even though they didn't publish, spent money on development
Again, you can say some of those are minor and such, but it's not like they just didn't release anything. MS Studios was actually fairly busy.
Say's who? They just released a premium conosle a few weeks ago lol
And of course we're getting a new Halo, Gears and Forza just like there will be a new Mario Kart, Smash, Zelda, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, God of War hitting the market. But we're still going to be getting new IP and resurrected or forgotten franchises as can be seen with Ori, Crackdown, Sea of Thieves etc.
Games are coming, one's we know about and one's we don't. Studio's will be built and some will be aquired. Exciting isn't it :)
For goodness sake, I obviously don't know that, it's a hunch. It might be the case that the Xbox division got bigger investment overall, so the hardware team's additional allocation of the pot had no impact on 1P.
What do you think the situation is?
Your post is far too calm and rational :)
I would also like to point out that Don Mattrick and Phil Spencer have both said that Microsoft gave them a $1 billion budget for making new Xbox One games for the first few years. Sony's games budget is likely much bigger. Also, two games made using the budget (Phantom Dust and Scalebound) were cancelled.
The Xbox One X being finished must free up some of the extra budget to use on more games which I think is what he's saying. And since he's a higher up at Microsoft now (he still has to report to Satya Nadella but that's much better than reporting to three different people plus Nadella), HOPEFULLY he can convince them to increase budget.
The Xbox One X being finished must free up some of the extra budget to use on more games which I think is what he's saying. And since he's a higher up at Microsoft now (he still has to report to Satya Nadella but that's much better than reporting to three different people plus Nadella), HOPEFULLY he can convince them to increase budget.
Well actually, this is precisely my concern for Xbox and Spencer, provided we take his comments and their implications about the budgetary spending balance between software and hardware at face value (and I do).
I think it's entirely likely that MS spends this year investing heavily in FP studio establishment, resuming their "next-box" hardware development the following year; meaning that they may launch the XB4 a full year or more after the PS5 (or simply rush to the market with a more conventional/less custom design).
I wouldn't rule out the possibility, but I would be bitterly disappointed if the case were true.
To an extent what he's doing makes a lot of sense. Having the hardware now means that new 1P announcements won't be met with the usual lukewarm reaction of "but it'll be 720/900p and blurry" that a lot of XB1 exclusives got....all the talk about 720p/temporal reconstruction didn't help QB. Not saying it was a great game, but it suffered from that.
Sunset Overdrive was a great game that drowned in the negativity around the XB1 at the time.
The X has the brand and the fanbase buzzing again, in a way that any realistic portfolio of game announcements wouldn't. Now they can secure some exclusives and arguably have a community ready to snap them up, and a more favourable space to launch them.
The question is now all about timing. They need things for 2018 (over and above what is already there) and 2019 - and they need to be revealed by E3 next year. My worry is that they're further behind than that.
Sunset Overdrive was a great game that drowned in the negativity around the XB1 at the time.
The X has the brand and the fanbase buzzing again, in a way that any realistic portfolio of game announcements wouldn't. Now they can secure some exclusives and arguably have a community ready to snap them up, and a more favourable space to launch them.
The question is now all about timing. They need things for 2018 (over and above what is already there) and 2019 - and they need to be revealed by E3 next year. My worry is that they're further behind than that.
I don't know what you are trying to prove here. Sure they have been busy but they haven't been busy releasing many new titles this year. They have been great at supporting their biggest games but they have padded their release list with a shit load of remasters. And PUBG. But how long do they get to keep that exclusive? 6 months?
People seem to not understand that Xbox does not have Microsoft's money. Microsoft gives them a pretty small budget for new games, Phil Spencer cannot just ask for a budget of $15B and build a bunch of games with it. That's why ReCore and other games seem low budget. Because they are. Phantom Dust was cancelled because the studio couldn't do what Microsoft wanted them to do with their budget.
Harware was a pen in the ass. Look at Gears 4 and Halo 5 for example. They were supposed to be top tier graphics / 1080p / next gen feels. I do love these games, still playing them but no "showcase" material (don't get me wrong, they still look good enough). And it was obvious it was harder programing on the One than on the PS4. But now they have the best console out there, easy to work with and the best place to show off / advertise games. If Gears 5 is optimised for the X and scaled down on the basic model, even lower than Gears 4, I bet the bad buzz would be minor. Same thing for Halo 6/whatever. So yeah, now that the hardware is out of the way I guess they just need to bring 1st parties. The big barrier remains time and having the best devs.
Anyway for me Xbox is just a platform that I love, with a variety of games and steady releases. 1st parties are ice on the cake.
Anyway for me Xbox is just a platform that I love, with a variety of games and steady releases. 1st parties are ice on the cake.
For the question of how big their budget was for the first years: https://www.technobuffalo.com/2013/05/31/xbox-one-games-budget-1-billion/
15 games with $1B. That is REALLY low budget.
Last edited:
There was loads of positivity for SO, the fanbase just didn't buy it.
Also that MS doesn't care about beating Sony to console sales, its not significant to their overall business. They are using Xbox as a consumer brand. The fact they are supporting play anywhere, and crossplay shows that success for gaming with MS under Nadella and Xbox under Spencer is not contingent entirely on console hardware sales. Its been obvious for the past two years but the internet commentary can't seem to get past it being a "competition".
Not that I find the number to be hard to believe, but do you have a link to this?
This I do find harder to believe. Remember that MS is primarily a US based company with most of its FP development studios located there. Salaries at MS in general would be comparatively higher than even at other north american development studios.
So I wouldn't be surprised if MS spends more on console game development each year than Sony, despite delivering overall less games.
I doubt this is likely, however, if his new studio investment activities end up yielding a number of mega-hit games, then he may very much see an increase in his operating budget to further invest in profit growth.
Look at how many articles there were talking about its resolution, in a negative light! It ended up with something like an 80 on MC. I'm convinced that game was buried by the negativity around the XB brand at the time.
Sure. https://www.technobuffalo.com/2013/05/31/xbox-one-games-budget-1-billion/ Microsoft gave Xbox $1B to make 15 games. Phantom Dust was cancelled because Microsoft wanted things that they couldn't make with their budget but Microsoft refused to raise it so they cancelled it. Also it's very likely most of that money went towards Halo and Forza because it looks and plays much higher quality than the other games they made.