Kasumi1970
my name is Ted
this is a bad idea. all this is tell me is 360 coming to the end of it life. and the new system is on it way in 2013. no new games from Microsoft in 2013 for the 360
-
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 told Pachter their E3 focus is on services over games, is this a good idea?
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
With all respect, why bother posting on here if it matters so little? How much do you think the conferences themselves matter 'in the real world?'
You make the very odd assumption that all 360 owners HAVE to like those games. What if they said they didn't like FPSes? I despise this logic; why do we have to be satisfied by this offering? Why are YOU satisfied by this offering? Why on earth would you not want more variety (at least)?
How is that a bad thing?
SpinningBirdKick
Banned
It's a good idea for Microsoft as a business but bad for gamers.
It's late in the generation, there's little innovation, development and publishing bets have to be huge just to compete as a "good quality title".
The odds are that a new IP in a well worn genre will fail to set the world alight as gamers are jaded this late in the twilight years of a console life cycle.
A few bad bets on big titles can easily turn into a financial loss in the tens or hundreds of millions.
So for Microsoft it makes sense to offer services to the existing user base by supplying them with content from elsewhere. There's very little financial risk for them doing this and they still take a decent slice of the profits.
I've seen a lot of "360 has no games" lately but this is a new one...not even 5 games worth buying between XBLA & retail? seriously?
You sound so nostalgic, you must've been a big fan of the system back then and played the hell out of those numerous exclusive games that the 360 had between 2006 & 2009.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
As a 360 owner I can't even keep up with all the exclusive games on XBLA. I just don't have enough time. I'm on the middle of Fez right now and my best friend wants to play Trails tonight.
I just told a friend the other day to get one. He is a casual gamer. Because he already knows at least 5 people in real life who owns a 360, that opens him up to borrowing games from us for the next year and doesn't have to spend a dime. If a controller breaks, he has someone to lend him one. If he has any questions or concerns with it, he has a pool of friends to ask. When he decides to go online... there is a group waiting for him to welcome him with open arms, if he wants to buy a game he can ask his friends for advice on it if they have played it.
Punchpudding
Member
I don't think the point is that you have to be satisfied with the games listed as much as there are lots of games coming out whether or not MS is the company making them. Third parties are driving the majority of sales and they've created the majority of the top games this gen. Is there a real need to be competing with them when you're supposed to be working along side them?
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the third parties driving the sales (though this could become a problem next gen). What I took offence too was the poster's suggestion that those games were enough for every gamer and that anyone being annoyed at a focus on services over games or wishing for games other than sequels to (nearly) tired franchises is worthy of laughter.
Honestly at this stage in the game, if I'm recommending a console, I don't think it matters what you recommend. There are great games for each system.
NullPointer
Member
That does make sense with the caveat that this is a casual player rather than a non-gamer looking for a media device, so the gaming ecosystem is a major selling point.
I'm only concerned with titles I have already purchased or plan to this year.
The only interest I have for the MS conference is for the hilarity and the absurd they use to fall into since they introduced Kinect. It´s the Eurovision of E3.
My only real interest will be watching what they bring for Halo.
Kaz Hirai is my hero.
I've really gone from being called a 'Microsoft fanboy' all the way to a disgruntled veteran. Character development right there chums. Microsoft are doing a great job at alienating their core fans.
Is this even really an argument? Same logic could be applied to all consoles and answers would still vary. Sheesh, we really hit the bottom of the barrel.
The 360 HAS a wide selection. If you choose to ignore it, that's your issue.
Assassins Creed is an FPS? News to me.
My point was, that the 360 has a TONNE of games for anyone, let alone a 360 only owner.
Why would sane people who aren't anything more than trolls actually expect Microsoft to go balls out on a console that is only a year or so away from being replaced, that is number 1 in the region they care about WITHOUT having to spend on 1st party development?
Third parties are more than picking up the slack, and they still have 2 of their biggest and best coming this year.
All this mind you, is ignoring the gold mine on XBLA.
The only interest I have for the MS conference is for the hilarity and the absurd they use to fall into since they introduced Kinect. It´s the Eurovision of E3.
My only real interest will be watching what they bring for Halo.
Pretty accurate, but BLOPS2 is gonna get more than 5 minutes.
Haunted
Member
Do you mean the parody twitter account or the actual person?
statham
Member
shhh
Ah, it's a parody. Sony usually throw punches so it didn't seem out of place.
The only interest I have for the MS conference is for the hilarity and the absurd they use to fall into since they introduced Kinect. It´s the Eurovision of E3.
My only real interest will be watching what they bring for Halo.
I know it's a joke but I can see that happening, with the times altered obviously. Black Ops isn't getting only 5 minutes.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Ignoring XBLA is the only way the "no exclusives" argument has the tiny leg it has to stand on which is obvious why it is ignored in conversations since it invalidates a lot of claims.
Because this gen is not over? Because I want them to actually put some effort into their console in it's latter days rather than not bothering like they did with the Xbox 1? Because I'd want them to at least try to release something different for the people who have spent a fair amount of money on their console? Is there really nowhere between 'balls out' and a reliancy on 3rd parties? Or perhaps they would want to remain No. 1?
And holy fucking shit at your 'the region they care about' comment. Seriously, do you honestly think that Microsoft are happy that they are not selling as strongly in other regions to the point where they won't invest to try and bring that region to their side?
RockmanWhore
Member
I'm always puzzled to see all these third party games on the 360 show, that I'll end up playing on PC or PS3. But I guess it's great for the relationships with the third parties, and as some people said, they don't really need to push the 360 with some expansive first party games.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
Yes, depending on types of games or even franchises they like (not all my friends are hardcore enough to know that some franchises are only available on certain platforms), I have no problem recommending an Xbox 360. Why would anyone? A sheer number of exclusive games means absolutely nothing to most people.
NullPointer
Member
My question related to non-gamers, ie. people looking for an all in one media device. Why is almost everybody missing this?
Of course the system is good for gamers, especially multiplayer gamers. But once you take gaming out of the equation and focus on media capabilities it can't compete with the alternatives.
dskillzhtown
keep your strippers out of my American football
I disagree. I look at my friend's list lately and it is full of people watching Netflix, MLB.tv, Hulu, iheartradio, etc. They aren't playing games. That is where the focus of the next platform will be so set the stage for it now.
I worked at Compaq 15 years ago and was in a meeting talking about the goal for every tech company was the set-top box. The box that would sit in living rooms and be the go to device. That os why Sony got in the console business, that is why Microsoft got in it as well. The 360 has accomplished this goal now. It is games, movies, cable TV, music, social media. It is what all these companies wanted. With Halo 4 and Black Ops 2 coming out this fall, I don't think that games will be ignored, but I think Microsoft is in a mode of expanding the Xbox brand even more. Also, until the next generation starts, the games are going to be few and far between so Microsoft better hype everything else.
I don't hate them for it, the more casuals who buy a Xbox for Netflix, the more installed base which makes it even more attractive for game publishers.
The Kaz thing may be a joke, but that's EXACTLY what's going to happen.
Maybe one more third party game, then they're going to say "everything from here on out is EXCLUSIVE to Xbox 360" tout a bunch of kinect crap with new Media partners, maybe an XBLA game montage, end on Halo 4.
Maybe one more third party game, then they're going to say "everything from here on out is EXCLUSIVE to Xbox 360" tout a bunch of kinect crap with new Media partners, maybe an XBLA game montage, end on Halo 4.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
Because you quoted a post that doesn't mention non-gamers but people who are not into multiplayer gaming?
Well, yeah, there are probably better alternatives for that crowd out there and none of them are game consoles.
InaudibleWhispa
Member
If you dismiss all of their effort with Kinect because it doesn't appeal to you, their 2-3 huge franchise exclusives because they don't appeal to you, their incredibly strong arcade titles for whatever reason then yes. They are overly relying on third party exclusives during the 360's final year. For others, there are many titles in a variety of genres they're playing and looking forward too. It's an entirely subjective argument. For many, Fez and Trials Evolution alone are game of the year contenders.
NullPointer
Member
Yep, take multiplayer gaming out of the equation and that Xbox Live fee is a very significant barrier to entry for the living room media center audience. In fact it'd be my very last choice out of all options.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
I wouldn't recommend any gaming system at that point. I would tell them to get a stand alone Blu-ray player for $99 bucks with Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon video built in.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
How well do single player games play on that?
No I am not. I am dismissing the point that we should be satisfied by the idea that Microsoft shouldn't bother to create any new franchises or that we should even be laughed at for thinking it. I am dismissing the idea that I should be satisfied with three sequels to FPSes, an overflowing genre as it is and a sequel to Assassin's Creed. And I am dismissing the idea that just because a company is nearing the end of it's cycle, I shouldn't expect much more effort on their behalf.
No, I don't care about Kinect, I do care about XBLA-esque titles; in my opinion neither would be likely to keep me satisfied for a full year, especially considering how they tend to appear on Steam for cheaper a few months later anyway.
NullPointer
Member
Well thats kind of the point and the danger I see in MS shifting too much of their focus and energies towards the media playback services. The ONLY time the Xbox is a good option is when you consider gaming, and especially multiplayer gaming, because its the only thing that can begin to justify the Xbox Live Gold service which enables those media playback apps.
If you keep gaming in the equation, and even hardcore gaming then PS3 is a decent option, as well as the Wii (if Nintendo games are your thing), or any iOS solution (if those games are your thing), and only the Xbox if all of your friends have one, for reasons mentioned above.
Take gaming out of it entirely and yeah, who would even look at a console?
So yes, MS has to look at gamers primarily and shoot for a gaming setup that's as accessible as possible to non-gamers in the same household.
If you keep gaming in the equation, and even hardcore gaming then PS3 is a decent option, as well as the Wii (if Nintendo games are your thing), or any iOS solution (if those games are your thing), and only the Xbox if all of your friends have one, for reasons mentioned above.
Take gaming out of it entirely and yeah, who would even look at a console?
So yes, MS has to look at gamers primarily and shoot for a gaming setup that's as accessible as possible to non-gamers in the same household.
Now a days games are pretty even between the two platforms. Sure you'll have a random game like skyrim or AC:R but you can say the same with games like SR3 and prototype 2 on the PS3.
Still hoping you answer my earlier question. =)
Also, and I could be wrong here, but I don't think most here have any issue with disappointment, most of us here should be disappointed IMO. It's the claims that MS has abandoned gaming and that there's nothing left for 360 owners to look forward to.
This is poor reasoning or you assign an very low value to your time. Live has an incredibly low cost. Having everything I use be consolidated in 1 ever-improving device/services is probably worth at least 10x the cost of live to me.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
Are you forgetting or just ignoring people who want to play games not available on non-Microsoft platforms? To be more precise, Xbox, Xbox 360 and whatever their next system will be called.
NullPointer
Member
If I can ask, what are the consolidated services outside of gaming that the Xbox excels at compared to the competition?
OldJadedGamer
Banned
This hypothetical, media hungry, non gaming (well, no online gaming) family is getting out of control.
Each new post I read about this question sounds like the traditional typical Wii buyers.
Then your answer has always been the Wii. Again, there is a reason it sold so well and why MS is constantly chasing after its audience.
NullPointer
Member
I'm purposefully ignoring those who put a premium on playing games, and especially multiplayer games.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
OldJadedGamer
Banned
I can't keep up. The question keeps changing every 5th post.
Uno Venova
Banned
I'm not keen on this idea either, ideally a final year would be a swam song with great exclusives, not slow them down before the next console is even announced, or even close to being announced.
NullPointer
Member
I'm just extra confusing today eh? I started out ignoring them yes, as that's the point of my question. My second quote there was taking a moment to include them just for discussion.
Just go with this one, as you did.
Me said:
lordfroakie
Member
The only interest I have for the MS conference is for the hilarity and the absurd they use to fall into since they introduced Kinect. It´s the Eurovision of E3.
My only real interest will be watching what they bring for Halo.
The list is missing random music+dance game, lionhead title, and last minute surprise
Well then you must not want them to have sequels for those new IPs and continue on making new IPs since the new IPs would have a slim chance of doing well releasing so late into this current gen alongside COD and Halo.
The list is missing random music+dance game, lionhead title, and last minute surprise
I do wonder what their new title will be; I hope the Journey and that Flash game aren't all they're working on.
To get back on topic, I don't mind them dedicating a section of their show to any new features of Live or whatever, but focusing on things that can already be done on other devices even more efficiently (without the subscription) instead of features that actually complement the game are my cue for a toilet break. I have a very bad feeling for the industry if this 'media hub' focus rears its ugly head again.
Halo 4 is the "exclusive swan song".