-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The success of Xbox One won't ride on Gears of War and Halo- it's all about new IP
- Thread starter SOR5
- Start date
killatopak
Member
uhhh. it's actually both.
DriftingSpirit
Member
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
It's a tough one because if you step back and look, Microsoft hasn't had the best track record at launching new IP. Over the past decade, the only new IP they've created that have had any kind of staying power are Gears and to a lesser extent Crackdown.
This generation has been pretty brutal with Ori being the only new IP I can think of from them that's been commercially successful. We're now left with a company that realistically, only has 4 major first party studios and three of them are stuck in a cycle of working on the same IP. I'm not sure Microsoft's problem is an easy one to solve, but I do feel like the old falsehood of them being too heavily reliant on Halo, Forza and Gears is actually starting to hold true. Problem is, can you blame them for playing it safe?
This generation has been pretty brutal with Ori being the only new IP I can think of from them that's been commercially successful. We're now left with a company that realistically, only has 4 major first party studios and three of them are stuck in a cycle of working on the same IP. I'm not sure Microsoft's problem is an easy one to solve, but I do feel like the old falsehood of them being too heavily reliant on Halo, Forza and Gears is actually starting to hold true. Problem is, can you blame them for playing it safe?
Devilgunman
Member
How can you forget possibly one of the most successful new IP this gen? I know you know what it is.
First party wise?
I know that they did produce new IPs (and that they own a few of them) but they have to start building new things internally, giving 90% of the new IP projects to second party studios is not a viable strategy on the long-term.
It's been 3 generations that they are in the console market and they have "only" 3 studios working on three IPs (Halo Gears and Forza forever) + Rare.
Nightengale
Member
For new IPs to take off in a trend-setting/system-seller way is so hard these days. Games of that calibre tend to be games that captivate almost immediately and does so many things well in execution, and that one-two combo of perfection is rare.
I mean, Watch_Dogs, Division, NMS and Titanfall were such games. They came out the gate with their reveal instantly captivating audiences.
Splatoon?
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
Overwatch.
And I wouldn't call No Man's Sky a successful new IP by any stretch of the imagination. Not when it's incredibly likely that a large amount of consumers are likely to think twice about buying whatever Hello Games makes next.
dreamcastmaster
Banned
Even giving it away free with GWG has not made a lot of people excited for it. They cant do much more than that to give the game exposure.
Goose_Se7en
Banned
I have noticed that this generation as well. It literally has flipped over from last gen. Last gen PS3 was in the Xbox One's position and Sony had to dig deep because 3rd parties weren't entirely on board with the PS3. This forced Sony to rely on its 1st and 2nd party studios and it's why we got so many 1st party offerings.
This gen it's sorta flipped a bit. PS4 has the CoD exclusives DLCs, the times DLCs with Destiny, the marketing deals with the Battlefronts etc but very little 1st and 2nd party output compared to last gen.
Nightengale
Member
Shit, for some reason OW didn't register in my mind as a new IP. My brainfart defaulted to "successful spin-off of cancelled Titan MMO"
My bad.
Blam
Member
Excuse me No Man's Sky is definitely not a successful IP. That shit got refunded so fucking hard m8
Blackleg-sanji1
Banned
Plz don't let gaf fuck up your perception it indeed was a successful new ip
Doug Heffernan
Member
That's your opinion.
It's a very viable strategy. What changes sunset overdrive if they owned insomniac? What's different about QB or even forza horizon (they don't own playground games.)
As always owning a studio feels more like a checkoff for debate rather than it meaning anything when it comes to us getting games.
What they do next doesn't retroactively make no man's sky not a success. Isn't it all selling well? 2nd place last month?
I agree MS need a really good WRPG to fill out their line up. Its the one area they are lacking in sorely. Though I'm not sure Fable has the longevity and credibility to sell anymore. A new IP would be best imo.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
Microsofts biggest problem is they refuse to launch new IP outside the 3 biggest months of the year. A perfect example is titanfall, which became a resounding success because of it.
There is no point releasing games like Sunset, Recore, Ryse at a time where people only want to play the biggest and the best.
Quantum break might have spooked Microsoft but the fact remains, new IP do better in the first 6 months of the year than in the last.
There is no point releasing games like Sunset, Recore, Ryse at a time where people only want to play the biggest and the best.
Quantum break might have spooked Microsoft but the fact remains, new IP do better in the first 6 months of the year than in the last.
Nightengale
Member
Better is definitely a subject of opinion.
Diverse though? If you consider all the Japanese games and Asian-exclusive titles that GAF doesn't care about like Super Robot Wars, diversity is in Sony's favour in a way I could consider not really a matter of opinion.
Not that diversity means anything if no one cares for it.
The only big title that I've felt MS went "all in" with is Sunset Overdrive (and they didn't really) and with new IP you have to go "all in" and make the game seem like this event that people can't possibly miss out on. This is how Titanfall was launched, it was how Destiny launched, it was how NMS launched and how Watch Dogs and The Division launched and how Horizon will launch next year. It basically has to be too big to fail.
A big problem for Microsoft is that they haven't had a single product that could have the appeal and justify being "too big to fail". If Sea of Thieves wasn't a cartoony pirate game then maybe it would have a chance.
For Sony Bloodborne was pretty much there and was very successful for them, but i don't think it would be considered big enough for a western third party publisher honestly. The reason that I'm focusing on the huge successes and not something on the scale of Bloodborne is that Microsoft has demonstrated over the past 10 years that anything less than a mega hit is not quite sufficient for them and won't get a sequel. By mega hit I'm talking at least 4 million+ on one platform.
A big problem for Microsoft is that they haven't had a single product that could have the appeal and justify being "too big to fail". If Sea of Thieves wasn't a cartoony pirate game then maybe it would have a chance.
For Sony Bloodborne was pretty much there and was very successful for them, but i don't think it would be considered big enough for a western third party publisher honestly. The reason that I'm focusing on the huge successes and not something on the scale of Bloodborne is that Microsoft has demonstrated over the past 10 years that anything less than a mega hit is not quite sufficient for them and won't get a sequel. By mega hit I'm talking at least 4 million+ on one platform.
Because Remedy will no longer be making single player focused games just for Xbox platforms and Insomniac's two (big) games after Sunset Overdrive are PS4 exclusives.
Second party deals are important but they can't be a replacement for owning first party studios. Both are needed.
This.
So, typical gaming article with zero facts, figures, or any data whatsoever to back it up.
And no, the very premise of the article is completely wrong. The success of a console rides on its marketing. Microsoft completely fucked up their launch and basically every mainstream marketing push since then, that's why the X1 is in the toilet. If they would have stayed the course that they set with the first 5 years of the 360 they would be actually competing with Sony, if not outright beating Sony, but instead they misjudged the market and tried to aggressively expand what a "console" is and in trying to get non-gamers to purchase an X1 they completely alienated their base.
Conversely, Sony has been on-point with the PS4's marketing. They correctly judged what the average gaming consumer wants to see and just keeps delivering it to them. Sony wasn't really concerned with trying to grow the consumer base, they knew the market was there and that it was big enough to sustain their business. So they went about recapturing existing consumers that they had lost to the 360.
Sony getting the Call of Duty exclusivity switched to PS4 was another major marketing coup for them.
If you need any further proof, look at the complete disaster that is called the Wii U. I honestly cannot believe that they went forward with the Wii U. The entire idea from the name to the fact that it shares peripherals with the original Wii and so on would cause total market confusion. And oh look, it did. The average consumer thinks the Wii U is the gamepad and that it is an addon for the existing Wii and no one is going to pay $300 for that. Also consider that for $100 more you can get a much better value proposition in the PS4. It's completely obvious to anyone in the biz why the Wii U failed.
Finally, all the games mentioned in the article aren't going to sell anywhere near the amount of units as Halo, Gears, or God of War. And honestly, God of War really isn't even on the same level as Halo. It doesn't move units like Call of Duty/Battlefield/Madden.
I would say the most successful new IP this gen is probably Destiny because they are trading on the Bungie and Halo names plus it had an ungodly expensive marketing push. I wouldn't be surprised to learn they spent a lot more on the marketing than actual development costs, as that's standard operation procedure for AAA shooters.
AAA devs know how to make a good game, where good = millions of units sold. It isn't rocket science, there's a known formula that they follow that equals sales success. The trick to taking a good game and making it a huge franchise is marketing the game correctly, which is actually harder than anyone on GAF gives credit to.
Obviously, there can still be successes by word of mouth like the Souls series, but that's actually rather rare and we are discussing normal market conditions (not outliers) when considering overall console success.
And no, the very premise of the article is completely wrong. The success of a console rides on its marketing. Microsoft completely fucked up their launch and basically every mainstream marketing push since then, that's why the X1 is in the toilet. If they would have stayed the course that they set with the first 5 years of the 360 they would be actually competing with Sony, if not outright beating Sony, but instead they misjudged the market and tried to aggressively expand what a "console" is and in trying to get non-gamers to purchase an X1 they completely alienated their base.
Conversely, Sony has been on-point with the PS4's marketing. They correctly judged what the average gaming consumer wants to see and just keeps delivering it to them. Sony wasn't really concerned with trying to grow the consumer base, they knew the market was there and that it was big enough to sustain their business. So they went about recapturing existing consumers that they had lost to the 360.
Sony getting the Call of Duty exclusivity switched to PS4 was another major marketing coup for them.
If you need any further proof, look at the complete disaster that is called the Wii U. I honestly cannot believe that they went forward with the Wii U. The entire idea from the name to the fact that it shares peripherals with the original Wii and so on would cause total market confusion. And oh look, it did. The average consumer thinks the Wii U is the gamepad and that it is an addon for the existing Wii and no one is going to pay $300 for that. Also consider that for $100 more you can get a much better value proposition in the PS4. It's completely obvious to anyone in the biz why the Wii U failed.
Finally, all the games mentioned in the article aren't going to sell anywhere near the amount of units as Halo, Gears, or God of War. And honestly, God of War really isn't even on the same level as Halo. It doesn't move units like Call of Duty/Battlefield/Madden.
I would say the most successful new IP this gen is probably Destiny because they are trading on the Bungie and Halo names plus it had an ungodly expensive marketing push. I wouldn't be surprised to learn they spent a lot more on the marketing than actual development costs, as that's standard operation procedure for AAA shooters.
AAA devs know how to make a good game, where good = millions of units sold. It isn't rocket science, there's a known formula that they follow that equals sales success. The trick to taking a good game and making it a huge franchise is marketing the game correctly, which is actually harder than anyone on GAF gives credit to.
Obviously, there can still be successes by word of mouth like the Souls series, but that's actually rather rare and we are discussing normal market conditions (not outliers) when considering overall console success.
Nightengale
Member
The challenge with 2nd-party deals moving forward ( which won't be visible in the short-term, but I think will quickly make itself apparent in the next few years ) is imo the thinning of independent studios capable of AAA production games.
I mean, look at ReCore. That game was a huge leap from Armature's previous games ( Arkham Blackgate), but the limitations of a 50-person team is apparent in ReCore. Given development limitations, it was a game that was never going to effectively compete with 200+ developed AAA products.
I mean, in the medium term, we've already seen Ready-At-Dawn and Remedy step back from being potential 2nd-party partners as they do their own thing. That is 2 less studios for MS/Sony to fund a high-budget externally developed game from an already small-ish pool of independent devs capable of AAA.
I mean, look at ReCore. That game was a huge leap from Armature's previous games ( Arkham Blackgate), but the limitations of a 50-person team is apparent in ReCore. Given development limitations, it was a game that was never going to effectively compete with 200+ developed AAA products.
I mean, in the medium term, we've already seen Ready-At-Dawn and Remedy step back from being potential 2nd-party partners as they do their own thing. That is 2 less studios for MS/Sony to fund a high-budget externally developed game from an already small-ish pool of independent devs capable of AAA.
They have both. There are other studios to contract. Doesn't remedy have more than one game in development? For an unannounced console?
ScaryShark
Banned
That'd be the surprise of 2017 and maybe several other years.
March of the Crabs
Member
New IPs seem to bomb on Xbone. Sunset Overdrive's failure makes me sad and I'm loving Recore, but I doubt it will see commercial success. I guess it's not for lack of trying. I hope Sea of Thieves does alright.
As much as I love Gears of war, it's the only Microsoft series, I now like with the Forza Horizon one, it's not enough to please me and the fact that all their series are going to PC are a real problem for Xbox One value, I think Microsoft need to release better AAA games and exclusively to their platform, not a clunky AAA like Quantum break or a weak AA like Recore but really good new IP, i'm dreaming though, it won't happen.
Jaded Alyx
Member
But Splatoon was not established and sold more than Halo 5.
What's the pool of devs now? I can think of:
Insomniac
Platinum
Respawn
Playground
Ninja Theory
Armature
Cyberconnect 2
What else? It's debatable whether Armature should be up there like you say because they're too small for AAA. I'm not sure what Ninja Theory's current structure is but they might be too small now as well.
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
Yup. Was going to say, it's an unsustainable model.
mejin
Member
This seems backwards to me. The people who are loyal to the brand because of the established franchises are going to buy the system regardless of whether those franchises are launch titles or they come down the pipe 2 or 3 years later. However, the people who are on the fence or don't care about the established franchises would be turned off from the system if that's all they came out the gate pushing.
wapplew
Member
But Killer instinct proved it worked, both time.
Forza horizon, Ratchet and Clank, second party have many sucess story, they just need to be sucess with first attempt and it will be sustainable after that.
Nightengale
Member
Sumo Digital and Obsidian are up there as well imo.
LiquidSolid
Member
Who needs facts when you can just make up your own narratives and pretend they're true. Sony still releases plenty of games this gen, they've already released 10 games so far this year (not including the Gravity Rush remaster). The only noticeable change they've made is that they're far more willing to delay their major games and make them better, which is probably a direct result of how successful they've been this gen (compared to last gen when they would rush out games like Uncharted 3 that clearly needed more time).
Anyway, I think the concerning thing about Microsoft Game Studios is that over the last few years, they've really seemed to shrink quite a bit. Lionhead and Press Play were closed down, Twisted Pixel went indie again, Remedy's off doing their own thing and Insomniac's back with Sony (while doing some Oculus stuff on the side). Unless they've got a bunch of external deals we have no clue about, their potential lineup looks pretty thin these days.
Oh yeah, I could see Obsidian as a decent fit for MS apart from I heard they had a shitty experience with them a while ago and the bridge is burned?
I couldn't imagine them doing a title that didn't release on PC myself.
notworksafe
Member
MS is all about Play Anywhere now. I think Obsidian could work with MS and still put out their game on PC
Gamezone
Gold Member
State of Decay sold very well. Quantum Break and Ryse was mediocre and repetitive games. Can't expect them to sell good.
They have 3 first party studios working exclusively on one franchise each and Rare who haven't released a non-Kinect game for almost a decade. There aren't enough first party studios and within that stable there isn't enough diversity. I was able to play Forza, Gears and Halo on my 360, I'd like to see something new.
Darryl M R
Member
But I want a new Fable game so badly. 
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
You've picked three of the only strong cases for it out of dozens of failures though. It's not easy to launch a new IP so saying "they just need to be a success" doesn't really cut it.
Summarizes current events pretty well. Usually I'd say that 1st party/exclusives aren't as important as they used to because it's true, they're not. But when you're in the position of weakness, it pays well to start establishing new blockbuster franchises. It can't be said that Microsoft hasn't tried though, but I think part of the issue is that they have a dearth of studio's available to them both internally and externally. Horizon for example looks like it'll do incredibly well. Similarly to Uncharted, if Microsoft wanted to great their own open world RPG, they have no one to actually make that kind of game for them. Which is how deals like the Tomb Raider one come about, which didn't really pay off for them and is, again, unsustainable.
wapplew
Member
It's not easy to launch a new IP, first party or not.
A successful new IP is sustainable, first party or outsource. MS outsourcing new IP is a valid strategy.
And they've delivered new things this gen. Whether you like them is another thing.
They aren't less exclusive just because they contracted a studio to make them instead. Microsoft clearly has a way they like to make their exclusives and there's nothing inherently wrong with it. We're still getting the games.
Yes it is.
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
I disagree because has been mentioned, you're seeing an increasing number of studios that cannot facilitate the creation of a big budget new IP. Like my example above, if Microsoft wanted to create an open world RPG like Horizon, who would make it for them? They have no internal studios equipt for that, and SE, CD Projekt Red or Bethesda certainly aren't going to do it for them. If they wanted to make something like Uncharted or TLOU, who would make it for them now that Remedy has moved on?
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked