You know what my response back then was to the, but it's cheap for a blueray player? I don't want a blu Ray player, I want a games console. And 600 is too much for a games console. Sometimes you gotta consider the market you are selling to. Sony was selling it as a games console. It should be priced as such. If the tech they want to put in makes it too expensive for what the market they are aiming for will pay, especially if it doesn't really help the purpose they are selling it for, maybe that tech is too expensive to put in it. That was one of the problems with the vita too. Nice piece of tech for the price but still priced too high for a handheld. They should have sacrificed something to make it cheaper (I vote the back touchpad). Of course it would have also helped if they SoA didn't forget it existed and actually marketed it
-
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.
Microsoft mismanagement ofthird party partnerships leaving developers in a bad state?
- Thread starter nynt9
- Start date
You know what my response back then was to the, but it's cheap for a blueray player? I don't want a blu Ray player, I want a games console. And 600 is too much for a games console. Sometimes you gotta consider the market you are selling to. Sony was selling it as a games console. It should be priced as such. If the tech they want to put in makes it too expensive for what the market they are aiming for will pay, especially if it doesn't really help the purpose they are selling it for, maybe that tech is too expensive to put in it. That was one of the problems with the vita too. Nice piece of tech for the price but still priced too high for a handheld. They should have sacrificed something to make it cheaper (I vote the back touchpad). Of course it would have also helped if they SoA didn't forget it existed and actually marketed it
I would say that it's bit outdated information, though not wrong altogether. The Game Outcomes Project reported 169 participants using a form of Agile vs 53 using Waterfall (and 44 other / ad-hoc). Out of tens of studios and producers I know, I can only count 2 that really use a Waterfall methodology (and those actually do use it with good reason, and apparently with good outcome). So it's not uncommon, but Waterfall has been losing ground for years, and a form of Agile is the standard in the industry these day.
This. People seem to want a black and white answer for a grey mess where there practically are now answer, not even grey ones. That doesn't mean that there aren't unethical shit happening, or ruthless people, or lack of talent, but you sure as hell are not going to be right pointing it from the outside. For example even for the Lionhead case pointed out here, even the people that worked there have had completely different viewpoints and reasons (from personal anecdotes, not from the articles).
To put it simply, it's a bit of both. You need to cap your investment to ensure you make a return on it. From the developers point of view, they agree to milestones which they think is achievable with as much planning as they can do, but it just doesn't happen (always usually the case in anything software).
If MS are telling a development house to change so much without the backing to support it, then they're in the wrong, but you should have a strict change management process to ensure that doesn't happen.
LordRaptor
Member
In my experience the reduction of Waterfall is from new entrants to the market in mobile / web games who are formed by 'traditional' software developers and use the methodologies they are familiar with, not the adoption of Agile by incumbent 'core' game developers, but again - anecdotal, take with a pinch of salt etc.
digoutyoursoul
Member
With a weak launch line up and a shit online infrastructure at the time. I certainly didn't feel I was getting my money's worth.
Anecdotal, but makes complete sense. Especially considering the amount of mobile/web games compared to your big console/PC titles.
That is definitely true as well; the mobile industry has been great for pushing for better production methodology, work-life balance and more, but continuing on the personal insight, I did count well-known AAA studios and the only waterfall examples were one mobile studio, and one larger non-mobile studio. Even going by GDC talks about production from various large studios, it should be quite apparent that actual agile methodologies have been adopted for a quite a while.
EDIT: Actually, I can remember a 3rd studio that used (or uses, I don't know about the last 2 years) Waterfall, but seemingly with disastrous results too.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
It was most definitely a mistake to design a product at that price, I wasn't arguing against that but more about the notion that it shows that a dominant Sony would be too cocky or arrogant since they lost a huge amount of money doing it by design.
Weak compared to what?
Were those AAA studios the studios what see successes though?
I'd imagine your large houses like EA/Ubisoft have all embraced Agile. Especially when they're churning out yearly releases like FIFA.
Ah, you pretty much answered that in your edit.
Yeah, most definitely. But as the Games Outcome Project points out; Agile or production methodologies don't seem be the mainfactor, where as culture is the key to success (which I, as Producer, wholeheartedly agree with).
I should say though, that these studios and AAA in general, still have way too much legacy baggage from Waterfall days and the general history of project management, production management, and product management (not to mention HR, and business planning) that cause for common issues to be repeated over and over again.
What I'd say with that though, is that from my own experience, Agile promotes a good culture within development just from the formalities which bring all the teams and all the different groups around the businesses together.
For example, we've recently migrated our BA's to integrate within our Agile metholodigies and within the teams themselves and the difference we saw with that was huge.
Really insightful discussion.
Yeah, I wholeheartedly agree. For me, agile also tends to drive discussion towards culture, even if not completely consciously. Though if you truly adopt and live agile manifesto for example, it does already define parts of your culture in detail.
EDIT: I guess it's getting a bit derailing, but on-topic I should also mention that MS or parts of it's gaming division are certainly not foreigners to Agile and or Scrum.
LordRaptor
Member
The "auteur" concept of game development doesn't mesh particularly well with anything other than Waterfall.
e:
Also - of course - the concept of regular stakeholder review has real logistical issues where your stakeholder is in Redmond and your development team are in Kyoto
Yeah, unfortunately it seems like Japan (and Asia in general) tends to be behind the western developers when it comes things like production methodologies, ownership and work-life balance. That's mostly based on hearsay (I only personally know of the bigger studios, and it's very much what you'd expect) Though there too Mobile studios have taken the charge in pushing the ways of working and culture forward, and for example Platinum has been pushing things forward (as you can read more in their Hansoft case study: https://hansoft.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/PlatinumGames_Hansoft-Case-Study.pdf , though it doesn't contain the actual steps they've taken).
Definately not. I'd even say they're one of the prowesses of Agile. Taking their insider builds as a example, they're clearing using Agile and they're using it well. From how Windows was released and showed to the public, it seems they switched over with W8 and properly embraced in within 10?
From their persepective though, if they're in the process of neogatiating a new game with a development house, would they really force them to migrate to use a new metholody and delay the start of the project by many months? They'd want to play it safe and let them stick to what they're used to.
Even if they did convince a development house to use Agile, who'd pay for it? MS wouldn't want to fork out for an entire business to change process when they're seeing no direct return on that investment. You could argue that it'd give them better results long-term, but how would they know they couldn't deliver in their current structure if they've proved to do so?
Interesting case study considering what we're talking about here. Considering when this migration happened, I wonder if Scalebound was included/migrated, or simply they fell flat on their face with it?
Halo (Saved Bungie from bankruptcy), Mass Effect, Gears of War.
But I guess none of these are good IPs in your mind, eh?
Stallion Dan
Member
There was no extra content on the disc, or extra features for PS3.
360 let you co-op online, so did PS3. PS3 just let you do it with PC players.
It's about Scalebound, given that JP Kellams was the Lead Producer on the title and responible for adpoting the agile methodologies at Platinum (given that at over 100 developer strong, the Scalebound was bigger in scale than any previous Platinum title).
EDIT: Completely forgot that it was a public presentation, but this is a good resource on the matter: http://www.slideshare.net/HansoftALM/platinumgames-and-hansoft-the-road-to-agility.
Thanks, I'll check that out!
I wont claim to speak for them, but It could be that they feel Microsoft was less than instrumental in the success of those brands when compared tothe developers who created them.
The Spencer tweets
"I won't abandon signing independent studio projects but I agree first-party internal studios are critical"
"It hurt me as well and to the community I apologize. I want everything we start to turn out great, to take risks, create diversity"
ring quite hollow in light of these cancellations plus cancelling Black Tusk's new IP and turning them into a Gears house and 343 into a Halo house (though we saw that one coming).
They don't have any third party partnerships lined up (and anything new would probably take at least 2 years to get to fruition from an E3 announcement), their first party studios are all working on known things, Crackdown 3 is a no-show (along with its "power of the cloud") so his words seem too little, too late. Surely we'll get updated on some of these at E3 this year, but what we observe to be happening doesn't match what he's saying.
Many in this thread have said it's not Phil, his hands are tied by upper management, and I can believe that, but either way their gaming division seems like there's some managerial confusion/conflict going on in there. The announcement of the Scorpio is also rather confusing given the direction they seem to be gravitating towards with their decisions, but that's a different topic I guess.
Back to third parties, are there any active AAA third party games at work at Microsoft right now? Would these cancellations and the fallout make it less likely for new third parties to enter into deals with them?
"I won't abandon signing independent studio projects but I agree first-party internal studios are critical"
"It hurt me as well and to the community I apologize. I want everything we start to turn out great, to take risks, create diversity"
ring quite hollow in light of these cancellations plus cancelling Black Tusk's new IP and turning them into a Gears house and 343 into a Halo house (though we saw that one coming).
They don't have any third party partnerships lined up (and anything new would probably take at least 2 years to get to fruition from an E3 announcement), their first party studios are all working on known things, Crackdown 3 is a no-show (along with its "power of the cloud") so his words seem too little, too late. Surely we'll get updated on some of these at E3 this year, but what we observe to be happening doesn't match what he's saying.
Many in this thread have said it's not Phil, his hands are tied by upper management, and I can believe that, but either way their gaming division seems like there's some managerial confusion/conflict going on in there. The announcement of the Scorpio is also rather confusing given the direction they seem to be gravitating towards with their decisions, but that's a different topic I guess.
Back to third parties, are there any active AAA third party games at work at Microsoft right now? Would these cancellations and the fallout make it less likely for new third parties to enter into deals with them?
Shpeshal Nick
aka Collingwood
Is this a fucking serious post? Like. Seriously?
I mean you may potentially have a skerric of an argument if we're strictly talking Gen 8. But since Xbox entered the market?
Then your question indicates lunacy.
foolishoptimist
Member
Didn't PS3 Portal 2 have actual steam feature integration? It definitely came with a PC Steam key to download PC version.
Pretty sure it had a Move control scheme too, but that may have been patched in.
digoutyoursoul
Member
Doesn't Phil Spencer answer to Terry Myerson? I remember this a few months ago, could be fuck all
http://uk.businessinsider.com/micro...-app-happy-kevin-turner-left-2016-7?r=US&IR=T
Hey, Ori caters to everybodyAnd Ori is one of the biggest indie hits out there judging by review scores and sales numbers!
It's always tough to see a news article like that. Scalebound never really appealed to me and I found it kinda shocking how it performed at Gamescom, but unless you hear both sides of the story, I always think it's unfair to judge. The game has been in development for a long, long time, so I'm guessing not everything went smoothly in development.
Aaand Ori has a sequel? Nope.. so it was a fluke and we'll never see it again. New IP's for non dudebros in the non American Market are a risk for the board. So they won't greenlight them anymore. Especially now that with Tramp in power it's even more flag waving "AMERICA FUCK YEAH!" as a crowd. The board doesn't want any risk taken, and just wants "money!".
SO you'll get even less risks taken and more of the same that: "we know that our fans like Brown Graphics With Lens Flares and Terrorists Shooters, so why don't we get more of that!?". Especially with ValueAct on the board.
I don't know if I'm falling for something here but...if anyone knows whether an Ori sequel is coming or not, it would be him.
Humdinger
Member
I am confident Ori will get a sequel. It was a real feather in MS's cap, one of their highest-rated games this gen. I don't have links but I thought I'd read it was under development. E3 will tell.
Also, as much as I dislike how narrow MS's exclusive catalog is becoming, some of this rhetoric is a bit overblown.
Barrel Cannon
Member
Hopefully not, as much as we all like to blame Microsoft as a whole, a shakeup in their video game divisions management seems to be needed. They do not seem to know how to identify and build IPs anymore nor do they seem to now how to execute their goals properly or even communicate them well. Its crazy how different their gaming division is now compared to the early years of the 360 and the OG xbox years
That's a really odd assertion. Any recognizable definition of auteur would put a single person's vision above all other considerations in producing a title, suggesting that their constant feedback on the work in development should result in changes to direction, not that a document drafted day one would be the authoritative description of what the team was doing.
agile is a stupid fad and i'll be happy when it's over. in game design it just removes any chance of 'bump the lamp' moments and the personal touches and effectively turns it into an assembly line.
oh your feature can't be implemented in two weeks? well we can't fit it into a sprint, so cut it, bye, and don't bring it back up
oh your feature can't be implemented in two weeks? well we can't fit it into a sprint, so cut it, bye, and don't bring it back up
Ori sequel was leaked last year, it's called Ori and the will of the wisps or something.
Outrun
Member
This is a joke right?
The person you are answering is a part of the Ori team, I believe.
Scrum is not the only agile methodology, and anyone who applies any process blindly without understanding the need to think about the consequences of a decision is asking for trouble. Taken completely literally, traditional waterfall processes would have you finish coding, test to find all the problems, and then ship what you've got without actually going back to code and fixing anything. You can make similarly limiting assertions about any approach to managing a project.
Don't think he realized it lol
Memorabilia
Member
Lol what?
I don't think you'll find many Trump fans on GAF, but holy baby bejesus this post reads like performance art. Somebody please tell me this isn't real.