Support NeoGAF

[Synth]

The problem here is that Xbox isn't Sony's only competition at all. They're also competing with smartphones, movies, tablets, television, and basically any other entertainment medium that takes time away from console games. So even without Xbox around, they still have to work bloody hard.

I don't really agree. Not that other entertainment devices/mediums are also competition, but more about how hard they'd have to work. There's limited overlap between mediums and device categories, and in many cases they will be complementary, rather than directly competitive. This is why for example Nintendo places a lot of focus on the handheld market, whereas Sony places more on the home console market. Competition for Nintendo in the handheld market is not at all similar to what they face in the home market. The PSP (and later, mobile phones) was the first time in a long time that Nintendo had been given any reason to be concerned within that market. I would argue that without Xbox, other devices like PCs aren't suitable contenders to actually apply the sort of pressure that keeps a market healthy for consumers. The average person simply isn't going to connect their PC to their living room television, or buy one for they're child's bedroom etc. There would still be Nintendo of course, but they've pivoted so far away from attempting to compete directly with either of the other two, that I feel they are only slightly more of a competitive factor than something like an Apple TV is. Both Sony and MS both clearly respond to each other as competition (the entire PS4 is pretty much a direct response to the 360), and I don't really see anyone that strikes as a suitable substitute at this point. The console market simply doesn't appear attractive enough for a new player that could actually stand to compete with Sony to make a go of it from here.

Other mediums especially are poor competition, when they're typically value-adds for the consoles themselves.

Did MS need a gaming division? If you agree that big companies need to grow and branch up, the answer is "yes". So which companies may have interest in branching up: Samsung, Apple, Amazon, some Chinese company. All very unlikely atm, because this market has yet to show that it can support three big players in the long run. But the moment a huge gap emerges, someone might see this as a big opportunity. Just look at Sony: Sega and Nintendo had gaming in their DNA, Sony not a bit, and seemingly out of nowhere they came and conquered.

Sony entered the console market whilst it was clearly an emergent platform. Microsoft only entered as a response to Sony doing so. The companies you listed are all occupied with the current emergent platforms (mobile, tablets, cloud services, etc), and Sony and MS are both looking at that transition for the future. Nobody's going to want to go through an OG Xbox baptism by fire generation for the current market.

 

[SPDIF]

Did MS need a gaming division? If you agree that big companies need to grow and branch up, the answer is "yes". So which companies may have interest in branching up: Samsung, Apple, Amazon, some Chinese company. All very unlikely atm, because this market has yet to show that it can support three big players in the long run. But the moment a huge gap emerges, someone might see this as a big opportunity. Just look at Sony: Sega and Nintendo had gaming in their DNA, Sony not a bit, and seemingly out of nowhere they came and conquered.

MS wanted to ensure that Windows wouldn't be left out of the living room, so yes. You could also make the point that MS had a gaming division before the Xbox was even a twinkle in Gates' eye. I would argue that Samsung, Apple and Amazon don't need a living room console to branch up. Or, in the case of Amazon and Apple, can accomplish it in other ways (Echo, Apple TV). My point is, I don't think there exists a company today that wants or needs to get into the nitty-gritty of console development. They can get into the living room in other ways, without having to compete head on with Sony. Therefore, Sony won't have any direct competition when it comes to ensuring the latest and greatest third-party games are exclusive to their console.

They'd still need to create a great venue to cultivate audiences for those games, though, so in reality I don't feel like much would change at all to what we see in the present day. Sony obviously wants to make money from software sales, so having complete domination of the market could even encourage it to make more games to sell to an even larger audience.

I dunno. I hate this "complacency" thing.

Would they though? If they're the only company to offer a home console that can play those games, what choice do people have? The average consumer doesn't want to go and build a PC. I'm not saying that Sony would have to do no work whatsoever, just that they'd kind of win by default.

 

[Markoman]

Sony entered the console market whilst it was clearly an emergent platform. Microsoft only entered as a response to Sony doing so. The companies you listed are all occupied with the current emergent platforms (mobile, tablets, cloud services, etc), and Sony and MS are both looking at that transition for the future. Nobody's going to want to go through an OG Xbox baptism by fire generation for the current market.

Hm, MS is "occupied" with the exact branches you've mentioned.
We all know the Sony-story. "We have this tech and those bloody Nintendots have betrayed us. Why don't we build our own console." Same thing can happen again.
Company fusions can happen out of nowhere with even more possible contenders.
Thing is, you can't predict what happens in the world of business. If so, please be my friend and I will start buying stocks.

Would they though? If they're the only company to offer a home console that can play those games, what choice do people have? The average consumer doesn't want to go and build a PC. I'm not saying that Sony would have to do no work whatsoever, just that they'd kind of win by default.

Er, if gaming becomes uninteresting because the quality goes down (see early 80s) people might do something else like going outside, playing with their balls. Let's say the two of us sell self-made lemonade in the same street and the lemonade gets better because of our competition. You exit the lemonade business and I think "cool, less work, from now on I will sell my piss to those idiots ". What will happen?

 

[Synth]

Hm, MS is "occupied" with the exact branches you've mentioned.
We all know the Sony-story. "We have this tech and those bloody Nintendots have betrayed us. Why don't we build our own console." Same thing can happen again.
Company fusions can happen out of nowhere with even more possible contenders.
Thing is, you can't predict what happens in the world of business. If so, please be my friend and I will start buying stocks.

Of course MS is occupied with those sectors also. They're more attractive than the traditional console market. Had those sectors been what they are now back in 2000, then we would likely not have an Xbox at all, which is kinda my point.

And yes, we all know the Sony story.. but it's a huge stretch to imagine a similar situation occurring today in all honesty. You can't predict business, but market trends are often much simpler and the traditional console market is something that works for the current contenders (and for 2 of the 3, this is actually pretty arguable) primarily because they're already contending. It doesn't make for a very attractive market to try and enter from level zero. Hell, all of them are effectively already preparing their parachutes (PSNow, Windows Store, Swicth being a hybrid) for the future.

 

[MosquitoSmasher]

The problem with all this is that we have no idea when we're actually going to see a drastic change. If we're going to see one that is, but I sure hope so. Saying first party is critical for Scorpio is kind of a "duh" thing to say. And it's good he acknowledges the first party problem, but he pretty much said the same thing two years ago. Should have been some time to improve that and it didn't exactly happen.

Not sure why and I do wonder if the near future is gonna be any different. I'm looking forward to Scorpio a lot and I hope Crackdown is awesome and Sea of Thieves too but I'll mostly look forward to playing the multiplats the best they can look and perform. Hopefully we can add great new exclusives to that as well eventually. It's clear that he has plenty of good plans for Xbox, and it's really about time to make shit happen. If he actually managed to get several Japanese games to Xbox I'll definitely commend him for that though.

Sony published Nioh in the West so I would say the have investment in it. It might hit PC eventually, but never Xbox. Honestly not a single game on that list is coming to Xbox. Games like Persona 5 being ported are legit LOL worthy. Platinum already recently that NieR Automata is never coming to Xbox.

Did Platinum use those exact words? Wasn't it like, no plans to bring it to Xbox right now? It's bullshit either way. Few months ago they said they wanted to wait and see how the PS4 version would sell and then later they just decided it didn't matter anymore. Come on now.

 

[SPDIF]

Er, if gaming becomes uninteresting because the quality goes down (see early 80s) people might do something else like going outside, playing with their balls. Let's say the two of us sell self-made lemonade in the same street and the lemonade gets better because of our competition. You exit the lemonade business and I think "cool, less work, from now on I will sell my piss to those idiots ". What will happen?

If you can continue selling your piss, whilst at the same time giving people access to the latest and greatest beverages offered by your friends — beverages that you can't get anywhere else — I think you'll do okay.

 

[digoutyoursoul]

I think it relates to this thread a bit, Seamus worked and played a big part in the original Xbox, his comments regarding MS' look on games is interesting and somewhat telling

From 24.47 onwards

https://youtu.be/8xSr70tQzw0

 

[Markoman]

Of course MS is occupied with those sectors also. They're more attractive than the traditional console market, had those sectors been what they are now back in 2000, then we would likely not have an Xbox at all, which is kinda my point.

And yes, we all know the Sony story.. but it's a huge stretch to imagine a similar situation occurring today in all honesty. You can't predict business, but market trends are often much simpler and the traditional console market is something that works for the current contenders (and for 2 of the 3, this is actually pretty arguable) primarily because they're already contending. It doesn't make for a very attractive market to try and enter from level zero. Hell, all of them are effectively already preparing their parachutes (PSNow, Windows Store, Swicth being a hybrid) for the future.

See, and that's exactly my point. The moment they make use of those parachutes, others with the same parachutes available might be tempted to step in. Gaming as a service with an online shop without hardware connected- Amazon will almost immediately bite, because they have gathered expertise in online infrastructure. Once streaming games becomes a viable solution, the entry level for plattform holders is drastically lowered and any company with a frontend and server-farm can pull this off. Oh, and please keep in mind that MS has parachuted deep into enemy territory with W10store and PSNow is already onthe way out.

 

[rokkerkory]

I love spencer but this is where he HAS to come through.

XBL services and scorpio is just a good start, MS has to come through on the thing that matters most, the games!

 

[Markoman]

If you can continue selling your piss, whilst at the same time giving people access to the latest and greatest beverages offered by your friends — beverages that you can't get anywhere else — I think you'll do okay.

Let's be real here. The moment one of my customers yells "Eeek, that's piss!!!" anyone surrounding me trying to do serious business will be fucked aswell.

The point is, a solo Sony might try to sell a 10TF PS6 with 16GB for 1200$ in 2025.
Noone with at least a bare minimum of intelligence will buy that shit. If pricing vs. value sucks, no one is forced to buy.

 

[Synth]

See, and that's exactly my point. The moment they make use of those parachutes, others with the same parachutes available might be tempted to step in. Gaming as a service with an online shop without hardware connected- Amazon will almost immediately bite, because they have gathered expertise in online infrastructure. Once streaming games becomes a viable solution, the entry level for plattform holders is drastically lowered and any company with a frontend and server-farm can pull this off. Oh, and please keep in mind that MS has parachuted deep into enemy territory with W10store and PSNow is already onthe way out.

To extrapolate this analogy quickly... who ever parachutes IN to a plane everyone else just parachuted OUT of?

Yes, the others will make a play for the gaming market in general with stuff like games as a service.. but that's not the traditional model where MS offers Sony competition. We don't talk about Tencent in the same manner as we do MS, Sony and Nintendo, because they don't really serve the same (or even similar) purpose. MS bowing out of hardware (as is commonly discussed/suggested here) is not the same as MS bowing out of gaming. The latter is extremely unlikely, and hasn't even applied to Sega to this day... but Sega is quite clearly not providing Sony with direct competition either. It's quite possible that none of the current big 3 in hardware will have much relevance as gaming transcends dedicated devices... but that's a completely different conversion, and has little to do with anyone dropping into or out of the current console market and supplying ample competition.

And yea, MS' backup plan also meets strong resistance. Nothing they can about that at this point, but try and find their footing as best they can... because at the end of the day, their platform as a whole relies on it. The OS war they won in the 90s has made way for an ecosystem war today, and if they fail there are effectively no generation resets to save them, much like there was little anyone could do about Windows until smartphones and tablets took over.

Let's be real here. The moment one of my customers yells "Eeek, that's piss!!!" anyone surrounding me trying to do serious business will be fucked aswell.

The point is, a solo Sony might try to sell a 10TF PS6 with 16GB for 1200$ in 2025.
Noone with at least a bare minimum of intelligence will buy that shit. If pricing vs. value sucks, no one is forced to buy.

When people talk about the effects of competition, they're not suggesting the victor would become a cartoon villain company overnight. It's the little things... PS+, Xbox 360 BC, funding niche titles to differentiate your platform. Obviously even without competition, you don't then price your product into a completely different market's range.

With that said though, a $600 PS3 probably still would have cleaned up in the absence of an Xbox 360.

 

[SPDIF]

Let's be real here. The moment one of my customers yells "Eeek, that's piss!!!" anyone surrounding me trying to do serious business will be fucked aswell.

The point is, a solo Sony might try to sell a 10TF PS6 with 16GB for 1200$ in 2025.
Noone with at least a bare minimum of intelligence will buy that shit. If pricing vs. value sucks, no one is forced to buy.

If you're going to say that, then at least try to sound real yourself. It seems you're trying to come up with an extreme example just to try and prove a point. Sony aren't stupid. If they have no competition then the last thing they're going to do is launch a console at $1200 — especially after the $599 incident.

If they were stupid enough to do that, and they fail and leave the console market, then what happens? Yes, maybe then, and only then, would a competitor attempt to step in. But then what? We're back to where we started, with one company controlling access to most of the games available on console. What will happen then?

 

[righthandmouse]

If you're going to say that, then at least try to sound real yourself. It seems you're trying to come up with an extreme example just to try and prove a point. Sony aren't stupid. If they have no competition then the last thing they're going to do is launch a console at $1200 — especially after the $599 incident.

If they were stupid enough to do that, and they fail and leave the console market, then what happens? Yes, maybe then, and only then, would a competitor attempt to step in. But then what? We're back to where we're started, with one company controlling access to most of the games available on console. What will happen then?

to be fair. in 10-20 years there won't be any consoles anymore. it will be a on a tv or a box the size of current apple tv.

 

[AzaK]

Another day, another thread about Xbox's first party

They're starting to sound like Nintendo wrt third parties.

 

[Crayon]

The fact that they are weak on first party is getting conflated with their third party support slipping at the same time. It's not like all the ps4 games lately are first party.

 

[rokkerkory]

to be fair. in 10-20 years there won't be any consoles anymore. it will be a on a tv or a box the size of current apple tv.

can u pls check your magic 8 ball to see if trump will get impeached before 2020?

 

[Markoman]

When people talk about the effects of competition, they're not suggesting the victor would become a cartoon villain company overnight. It's the little things... PS+, Xbox 360 BC, funding niche titles to differentiate your platform. Obviously even without competition, you don't then price your product into a completely different market's range.

With that said though, a $600 PS3 probably still would have cleaned up in the absence of an Xbox 360.

Sony asking 600$ for PS3 was not a scam though. They were thinking about what to put into the new console and priced the thing at loss. Turned out that 600$ were too much for the mass market and that's the whole story. In this regard competiton was good because people who could not afford a PS3 still were able to buy a 360. Without the 360 there simply would've been less people gaming overall, but the PS3 still had it's fixed value.
Now you may say, but less people gaming means less games with lower budget. Last gen proved to us that only the thick were getting thicker, so I really don't know about that.

Things get problematic when people like itt suggest that MS should moneyhat 3rd parties.
If that's their only way of competition, then I can live without competition.How do I benefit from this? I'll have to buy a console for moneyhatted game X. I give a bloody shit about those companies. In my dreams I own one box that plays every game out there, period. A pipe-dream, in reality -like everyone else- I will just stick with what suits me best.

 

[righthandmouse]

can u pls check your magic 8 ball to see if trump will get impeached before 2020?

I don't do politics sorry. technology has been making leaps every year. it's only going faster. I have no doubt that TV's in 10-15 yrs will come enabled with gaming. the first company to get hooked up with a good tv will win the race. keyword is good tv, and lg doesn't do gaming yet.

 

[Markoman]

I think it relates to this thread a bit, Seamus worked and played a big part in the original Xbox, his comments regarding MS' look on games is interesting and somewhat telling

From 24.47 onwards

https://youtu.be/8xSr70tQzw0

Everyone should check this out - especially around the 27:00 minute mark. This explains a lot.

 

[Liabe Brave]

Eh. Not really. His point was that a new / unknown studio could surprise us, and that came across well enough. To me, at least.

Especially considering they listed Double Helix (bought by Amazon), rather than Iron Galaxy.

You're right about what he meant to say, but he's wrong about the examples. As I already said, Double Helix and Supermassive had done plenty of AAA games before their "breakout" visibility. If you're looking for that kind of game, you should be looking to established developers, not a bolt from the blue.

So which established studios do you expect Microsoft to have a deal with? As you can see, this is a much harder question to answer than just vaguely saying, "Maybe someone will come out of nowhere."

Personally, I think a possible bet is a smaller-scale Halo spinoff headed by Certain Affinity. They specialize in multiplayer, but I think a co-op campaign is close enough to their wheelhouse. And they've been a side player long enough that they might recently have wanted to up their profile. A strike against this prediction is that they could be busy with contract work on the next Call of Duty.

(The other reason I lean toward this is because 2017 is shaping up to be the first year in over a decade without a Halo or Gears game for the holiday. But perhaps Microsoft is just going to try and make Crackdown a third shooting pillar to alternate with.)

 

[Wesley-Sigma]

Another day, another thread about Xbox's first party

Or the lack of it.

 

[Crayon]

Everyone should check this out - especially around the 27:00 minute mark. This explains a lot.

"Sony is a lot better at this... Sony is funded by people in the music business, the movie business... Who make a lot of money by taking risks with a lot of money."

Sorry for rough paraphrase. I'm on a phone. But yes interesting.

 

[Markoman]

"Sony is a lot better at this... Sony is funded by people in the music business, the movie business... Who make a lot of money by taking risks with a lot of money."

Sorry for rough paraphrase. I'm on a phone. But yes interesting.

No, the part about Office being the most profitable business in human history and how hard it was to explain to the people running this business that you need tons of money for exclusive game x.

 

[Synth]

Sony asking 600$ for PS3 was not a scam though. They were thinking about what to put into the new console and priced the thing at loss. Turned out that 600$ were too much for the mass market and that's the whole story. In this regard competiton was good because people who could not afford a PS3 still were able to buy a 360. Without the 360 there simply would've been less people gaming overall, but the PS3 still had it's fixed value.
Now you may say, but less people gaming means less games with lower budget. Last gen proved to us that only the thick were getting thicker, so I really don't know about that.

Things get problematic when people like itt suggest that MS should moneyhat 3rd parties.
If that's their only way of competition, then I can live without competition.How do I benefit from this? I'll have to buy a console for moneyhatted game X. I give a bloody shit about those companies. In my dreams I own one box that plays every game out there, period. A pipe-dream, in reality -like everyone else- I will just stick with what suits me best.

I know the PS3 at $600 wasn't a scam. The benefits of competitors isn't simply that it prevents companies scamming us, but it also offers the market alternatives when a product doesn't suit them. The $600 price was an issue for many, because they didn't want to have to buy a BluRay player with their games console, much like many didn't want to have to buy a Kinect with their Xbox One. The actual fixed value matters little here. Remember the often joked about Sony quote "next gen doesn't start until we say it does"? That would actually have been true. Whilst $600 is too much for the mass market, so is $400 also. The difference is that at you wouldn't run the risk of losing a huge swath of your customer base to the opposition, had that opposition not existed (both in cases of the PS3 and the XB1). By the time you actually do get to mass market price ranges, the momentum established early on just takes its course.

I don't mean to suggest that competition only brings benefits though. I hate that moneyhatting titles is a thing at all... but on the flipside I'm not under the illusion that a single box that "plays every game" would actually leave many of the games I want to play in existence. Sonic exists as a answer to Mario, because Mario would never appear on a Sega console. Forza exists as an answer to Gran Turismo, because Gran Turismo would never appear on a MS console. Killlzone exists as a response to Halo, because Halo would never appear on a Sony console... etc. As an ecosystem, Valve is in a position where they don't really need to provide exclusive software in order to maintain their dominance. If they did, we'd probably have Half-Life 3 by now.

Overall I thing the positives of competition on the console space comfortably outweigh the negatives. And some of those negatives (like paying for online) would probably be much worse otherwise (no games given as part of the sub). Even the whole paying for online thing only happened because MS created a service good enough for people to be willing to pay, whilst Sega were insufficient competition that generation provoke anyone else into even taking console online gaming seriously.

You're right about what he meant to say, but he's wrong about the examples. As I already said, Double Helix and Supermassive had done plenty of AAA games before their "breakout" visibility. If you're looking for that kind of game, you should be looking to established developers, not a bolt from the blue.

So which established studios do you expect Microsoft to have a deal with? As you can see, this is a much harder question to answer than just vaguely saying, "Maybe someone will come out of nowhere."

Honestly, I think the examples are apt. Even if the studios themselves were not new... if you had said in 2010 "so, who can MS work with to bring new titles to Xbox", do you really think anyone would have said "Double Helix could probably do something with the Killer Instinct IP"? Really?

If the studios simply existing, and releasing games is the bar, then there's a stupid number of studios MS could be potentially working with. You just wouldn't think of their names prior to their "breakout" game.

 

[Synth]

EDIT: double post

 

[ForkNetwork]

Everyone should check this out - especially around the 27:00 minute mark. This explains a lot.

This is great, its interesting how Microsoft"s mentality can hurt the Xbox

 

[Samanosuke Akechi]

Why is Microsoft trying to get Japanese games now for? I mean for the lost part, all I ever read from Xbox fans is that Japanese games are gay, stupid, not real games, pervert games, anime games, and things like that. It's cool he sees importance in Japan, but I seriously doubt it's worth the trouble as the Xbox fan base largely just plays the big western games and fps games.

 

[Banderdash]

Microsoft has had a gaming division long before the xbox came around.

I wonder if this is something Spencer has overcome from Mattric?
Like, there was so much inertia around closing studios and franchises that he's had to work that off. Maybe the guy's only go so much political capital... and he has to spend it carefully?

Like he rebuilt the console... closing out the entertainment division, and Mehdi.
He bought Mojang at horrible expense.
He bought Gears away from Epic.

Spoiler

I lament that we never got to see Shangheist.

He demonstrated a need and a use case for Scorpio...
Maybe Lionhead were beyond saving?
Maybe he can now turn his attentions to rebuilding their first party studios?

Spoiler

I sound like I'm suffering Stockholm syndrome.

 

[LiquidSolid]

I think it relates to this thread a bit, Seamus worked and played a big part in the original Xbox, his comments regarding MS' look on games is interesting and somewhat telling

From 24.47 onwards

https://youtu.be/8xSr70tQzw0

Nice find, that's been my take on Microsoft for a while now. The people who make the real decisions there don't look at games like they're creative works, they look at games like they're software, not that much different from Windows or Office.

 

[Synth]

Why is Microsoft trying to get Japanese games now for? I mean for the lost part, all I ever read from Xbox fans is that Japanese games are gay, stupid, not real games, pervert games, anime games, and things like that. It's cool he sees importance in Japan, but I seriously doubt it's worth the trouble as the Xbox fan base largely just plays the big western games and fps games.

Seriously?...

The "Xbox fanbase" isn't a permanently immutable entity. The reason games like Final Fantasy XV sells so poorly on XB1 in ratio to the PlayStation version when contrasted with how Final Fantasy XIII performed on 360 vs PS3 is because a lack of games intended for the Japanese audience drives those that want to play them away from the platform. The only way "xbox fans don't want Japanese games" becomes true, is because the Xbox doesn't have a suitable lineup of Japanese games to attract fans of those games.

MS isn't so much "trying to get Japanese games now", so much as they're trying to stem the continuing loss of them. Before, despite their failings in Japan, they could reliably assume that most games would hit their platform for a potential worldwide audience. Last gen you wouldn't have expected games like Nier, or King of Fighters to pass up on the Xbox audience. And the only way to make the platform viable for those games again is to do something to kickstart enough of them actually being present on the platform, that someone with an interest in them doesn't feel like they have no choice but to buy a competing console to play them.

 

[StrongBlackVine]

The problem with all this is that we have no idea when we're actually going to see a drastic change. If we're going to see one that is, but I sure hope so. Saying first party is critical for Scorpio is kind of a "duh" thing to say. And it's good he acknowledges the first party problem, but he pretty much said the same thing two years ago. Should have been some time to improve that and it didn't exactly happen.

Not sure why and I do wonder if the near future is gonna be any different. I'm looking forward to Scorpio a lot and I hope Crackdown is awesome and Sea of Thieves too but I'll mostly look forward to playing the multiplats the best they can look and perform. Hopefully we can add great new exclusives to that as well eventually. It's clear that he has plenty of good plans for Xbox, and it's really about time to make shit happen. If he actually managed to get several Japanese games to Xbox I'll definitely commend him for that though.



Did Platinum use those exact words? Wasn't it like, no plans to bring it to Xbox right now? It's bullshit either way. Few months ago they said they wanted to wait and see how the PS4 version would sell and then later they just decided it didn't matter anymore. Come on now.

They made a statement since then and they definitively said it's not coming to Xbox. No more talk about waiting and see how it does on other platforms. Said there is no market for a game like that on Xbox.

 

[rokkerkory]

I don't do politics sorry. technology has been making leaps every year. it's only going faster. I have no doubt that TV's in 10-15 yrs will come enabled with gaming. the first company to get hooked up with a good tv will win the race. keyword is good tv, and lg doesn't do gaming yet.

That isnt the point of this thread and tech already has advanced enough to include gaming in a TV if that market is really there. Sony and samsung tried this in 2014 already.

 

[ForkNetwork]

They made statement since then and they definitively said it's not coming to Xbox. No more talk about waiting and see how it does on other platforms. Said there is no market for a game like that on Xbox.

"There are currently no plans to release on this platform. The main reason for this is that the Japanese market for Xbox One is not strong, so the decision was made to focus on PlayStation 4 rather than to split our efforts across two platforms"

"currently no plans"

That sure doesnt sound like "its definitely not coming to Xbox"

 

[StrongBlackVine]

"There are currently no plans to release on this platform. The main reason for this is that the Japanese market for Xbox One is not strong, so the decision was made to focus on PlayStation 4 rather than to split our efforts across two platforms"

"currently no plans"

That sure doesnt sound like "its definitely not coming to Xbox"

OK I agree that it not as definitive as I thought, but it also doesn't make sense because they already made it for another platform with PC. It also omits the previous stance of seeing how it does other platforms. Finally PC is not big in Japan, but that didn't stop them from porting it there almost day one which is the exact opposite of what they did with FFXV. Seems like excuses instead of flat out saying it's not coming, which it most likely won't. So not definitive as stated, but highly unlikely it happens. And lets be honest late port of NieR Automata to a market that already doesn't buy JRPGs would sell like shit.

 

[TheSadRanger]

It really burns my buns how MS handled both Treasure and Platinum.

Remember when they cancelled that 360 exclusive Treasure game last gen when it was supposedly halfway done. :/

 

[Markoman]

Seriously?...

The "Xbox fanbase" isn't a permanently immutable entity. The reason games like Final Fantasy XV sells so poorly on XB1 in ratio to the PlayStation version when contrasted with how Final Fantasy XIII performed on 360 vs PS3 is because a lack of games intended for the Japanese audience drives those that want to play them away from the platform. The only way "xbox fans don't want Japanese games" becomes true, is because the Xbox doesn't have a suitable lineup of Japanese games to attract fans of those games.

MS isn't so much "trying to get Japanese games now", so much as they're trying to stem the continuing loss of them. Before, despite their failings in Japan, they could reliably assume that most games would hit their platform for a potential worldwide audience. Last gen you wouldn't have expected games like Nier, or King of Fighters to pass up on the Xbox audience. And the only way to make the platform viable for those games again is to do something to kickstart enough of them actually being present on the platform, that someone with an interest in them doesn't feel like they have no choice but to buy a competing console to play them.

This whole Japanes-games-on-Xbox discussion is running in circles and I'm repeating myself: I bet there's a simple and very obvious reason why so few Japanese titles hit X1 and it has nothing to do with lack of communication or MS or Japanese Pubs just beeing stupid for leaving money on the table. Let's take Koei as an example: Nioh started development during PS3 days and Sony had their fingers already in it. Then you have games like Samurai Warriors or One Piece Warriors that never came to Xbox and it looks like the next Dynasty Warrior game won't come to Xbox as well. No one cried about that.
Now people say "but of course no one is going to buy those games, if they don't release on Xbox" and "of course Xbox could do better if it had Japanese games", which to me sounds completely moronic at this point. Once again, Xbox has been around for 15 years with strong Japanese support for the most part. In this timeframe X1 never got a foot into the Japanese market and Japanese games have traditionally sold bad on Xboxes. What I take from this is that Xbox has an extreme Western-centric fanbase to a point were it seems like smaller Japanese titles are not profitable on that plattform. That's all we can get out of this story. It may work for Japan's flagship titles like FF and MGS, but not for every game. With all said and done, I believe,if we assume that Sony may be behind this, that a bottle of warm Sake is enough to convince a Japanese Pub to not risk a port.
MS is much more risk averse than before and Japanese Pubs seemingly, too.

 

[Mario007]

Microsoft has had a gaming division long before the xbox came around.

I wonder if this is something Spencer has overcome from Mattric?
Like, there was so much inertia around closing studios and franchises that he's had to work that off. Maybe the guy's only go so much political capital... and he has to spend it carefully?

Like he rebuilt the console... closing out the entertainment division, and Mehdi.
He bought Mojang at horrible expense.
He bought Gears away from Epic.

Spoiler

I lament that we never got to see Shangheist.

He demonstrated a need and a use case for Scorpio...
Maybe Lionhead were beyond saving?
Maybe he can now turn his attentions to rebuilding their first party studios?

Spoiler

I sound like I'm suffering Stockholm syndrome.

Im not sure how many times this needs to be said but Spencer was the one in charge of MS first party under Mattrick. The state of MS first party rests fully on Spencer.

 

[spannicus]

This whole Japanes-games-on-Xbox discussion is running in circles and I'm repeating myself: I bet there's a simple and very obvious reason why so few Japanese titles hit X1 and it has nothing to do with lack of communication or MS or Japanese Pubs just beeing stupid for leaving money on the table. Let's take Koei as an example: Nioh started development during PS3 days and Sony had their fingers already in it. Then you have games like Samurai Warriors or One Piece Warriors that never came to Xbox and it looks like the next Dynasty Warrior game won't come to Xbox as well. No one cried about that.
Now people say "but of course no one is going to buy those games, if they don't release on Xbox" and "of course Xbox could do better if it had Japanese games", which to me sounds completely moronic at this point. Once again, Xbox has been around for 15 years with strong Japanese support for the most part. In this timeframe X1 never got a foot into the Japanese market and Japanese games have traditionally sold bad on Xboxes. What I take from this is that Xbox has an extreme Western-centric fanbase to a point were it seems like smaller Japanese titles are not profitable on that plattform. That's all we can get out of this story. It may work for Japan's flagship titles like FF and MGS, but not for every game. With all said and done, I believe,if we assume that Sony may be behind this, that a bottle of warm Sake is enough to convince a Japanese Pub to not risk a port.
MS is much more risk averse than before and Japanese Pubs seemingly, too.

Sony sending Sake and a note that says "dont do it" lol

 

[Markoman]

Sony sending Sake and a note that says "dont do it" lol

The joke gets even better when closing your eyes and imagining this scenario,lol

 

[spannicus]

The joke gets even better when closing your eyes and imagining this scenario,lol

Already 2 steps ahead of you lmao

 

[Synth]

This whole Japanes-games-on-Xbox discussion is running in circles and I'm repeating myself: I bet there's a simple and very obvious reason why so few Japanese titles hit X1 and it has nothing to do with lack of communication or MS or Japanese Pubs just beeing stupid for leaving money on the table. Let's take Koei as an example: Nioh started development during PS3 days and Sony had their fingers already in it. Then you have games like Samurai Warriors or One Piece Warriors that never came to Xbox and it looks like the next Dynasty Warrior game won't come to Xbox as well. No one cried about that.
Now people say "but of course no one is going to buy those games, if they don't release on Xbox" and "of course Xbox could do better if it had Japanese games", which to me sounds completely moronic at this point. Once again, Xbox has been around for 15 years with strong Japanese support for the most part. In this timeframe X1 never got a foot into the Japanese market and Japanese games have traditionally sold bad on Xboxes. What I take from this is that Xbox has an extreme Western-centric fanbase to a point were it seems like smaller Japanese titles are not profitable on that plattform. That's all we can get out of this story. It may work for Japan's flagship titles like FF and MGS, but not for every game. With all said and done, I believe,if we assume that Sony may be behind this, that a bottle of warm Sake is enough to convince a Japanese Pub to not risk a port.
MS is much more risk averse than before and Japanese Pubs seemingly, too.

Yes, the Xbox has been around for 15 years, without really having anything to show for it in Japan (though, if you compare the 360's performance in Japan to the XB1, it's quite clear that they've lost ground there as well). That isn't the same as saying they haven't seen any success with Japanese titles.

Games like Ninja Gaiden, Bayonetta, Street Fighter IV, Final Fantasy XIII and the like did plenty well on 360. To act like the Xbox One's situation is just "par for the course", and not a result of MS later neglecting the audience (once they gave up making a serious push for Japan itself as a market), is far more moronic than suggesting that a lack of games for an audience will eventually result in very few buyers for those games remaining on the platform. After all, there was a time when Nintendo home consoles had a strong audience for pretty much any genre of game. Who's fault is it really that's no longer the case? The publishers? The people buying their consoles? No... it's Nintendo's, for making their platform less appealing for 3rd parties over the years.

They dug themselves into the current situation with Japanese support, and eventually it'll start to encroach on their western support also, as people continue to opt for a platform that caters successfully to both, rather than to one. So it's on them to work out a solution. I don't know what that solution is, and it's very likely to lose them money in the short term... but deciding to settle for only the players you have, and not work to reach those you don't is a pretty stupid strategy to go with.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Sony sending Sake and a note that says "dont do it" lol

Microsoft can easily counter this with a signed picture of Hironobu Sakaguchi.

 

[tiredheadcrab]

Yes, actions speak louder than words and Phil has been all talk since taking over.

Thats laughable at best.

 

[Sydle]

Im not sure how many times this needs to be said but Spencer was the one in charge of MS first party under Mattrick. The state of MS first party rests fully on Spencer.

Except that's not entirely true. MS has always been known for having a ton of structure and intra-competition and Xbox was no different. Spencer was over the NA studios since 2009, but Peter Molyneux was over MS EMEA studios as the creative director starting in 2009 after Spencer moved back to the states to MS HQ. Phil Harrison reported directly to Mattrick when he was hired and took over MS EMEA in 2012, when he had them switch to games as a service focus.

Everything from March 2014 forward was under Spencer as Head of Xbox though, so closing studios like Press Play and Lionhead, as well as cancelling the Phantom Dust remake and Scalebound are attributable to him.

 

[Markoman]

Yes, the Xbox has been around for 15 years, without really having anything to show for it in Japan (though, if you compare the 360's performance in Japan to the XB1, it's quite clear that they've lost ground there as well). That isn't the same as saying they haven't seen any success with Japanese titles.

Games like Ninja Gaiden, Bayonetta, Street Fighter IV, Final Fantasy XIII and the like did plenty well on 360. To act like the Xbox One's situation is just "par for the course", and not a result of MS later neglecting the audience (once they gave up making a serious push for Japan itself as a market), is far more moronic than suggesting that a lack of games for an audience will eventually result in very few buyers for those games remaining on the platform. After all, there was a time when Nintendo home consoles had a strong audience for pretty much any genre of game. Who's fault is it really that's no longer the case? The publishers? The people buying their consoles? No... it's Nintendo's, for making their platform less appealing for 3rd parties over the years.

They dug themselves into the current situation with Japanese support, and eventually it'll start to encroach on their western support also, as people continue to opt for a platform that caters successfully to both, rather than to one. So it's on them to work out a solution. I don't know what that solution is, and it's very likely to lose them money in the short term... but deciding to settle for only the players you have, and not work to reach those you don't is a pretty stupid strategy to go with.

You don't get my point. If anything Xbox is a thorn in the eye of Japanese Pubs.
Think about it this way: Who was the driving power in the console business before MS entered the scene? What happened last gen? Answer: A complete turn-around. Western games dominating the console market by a large margin and MS was a big part of that (millions spend on marketing deals with EA, Activision...). Japanese Pubs couldn't keep that level of insanity that was going on. So, please give me a reason why Japanese devs should help MS in diversifying their library now.

 

[Anticol]

The next Playground game, the next Double Helix, the next Supermassive.

You are clueless my friend.

 

[Synth]

You don't get my point. If anything Xbox is a thorn in the eye of Japanese Pubs.
Think about it this way: Who was the driving power in the console business before MS entered the scene? What happened last gen? Answer: A complete turn-around. Western games dominating the console market by a large margin and MS was a big part of that (millions spend on marketing deals with EA, Activision...). Japanese Pubs couldn't keep that level of insanity that was going on. So, please give me a reason why Japanese devs should help MS in diversifying their library now.

Currently there's very little reason for Japanese developers to want to aid MS in any way. But that's really more a case of MS currently offering them little (especially in regards to userbase and audience) than it is Xbox actively being a detriment to their livelihood. Western developers took over the scene, because their games generally have more global appeal. It was basically inevitable as the market expanded, and games became less and less of a hobbyist interest. Rockstar was always going to make GTA huge, and others were always going to learn from it. Same with studios like Bungie with Halo and Infinity Ward with Call of Duty. The only real hand Xbox had in this shift was being the first console to more closely align the development environments between console and the PC market where the western studios had typically thrived up to that point. That's a done deal now though, with all consoles having rather standard specifications with nothing really exotic about any of them. The days of hardware designs like the PS2 or Sega Saturn are never coming back, and nobody should want them to imo. Also, for the record, western developers are still in control. Sony being on top doesn't change this, and they'll push Call of Duty, Red Dead Redemption and Destiny a million times more prominently than any 3rd party Japanese game globally.

If the strengthening of Western publishers were something that Japanese developers were truly scared of, then Nintendo would be the best horse to back, as their hardware designs effectively stifle the AAA ambitions of the large western publishers. What you certainly wouldn't be doing is making Steam your 2nd choice port destination.

 

[wapplew]

You are clueless my friend.

That's the whole point, we are clueless about what studios MS might hired.
Clueless =/= doesn't exist.

 

[Banderdash]

Im not sure how many times this needs to be said but Spencer was the one in charge of MS first party under Mattrick. The state of MS first party rests fully on Spencer.

Man, I've run a department... when my boss said jump, I still had to jump.

 

[Quasar]

Sounds like they are screwed then. Otherwise there should have been talk about new 1st party teams built and working on games. Yet more forza, halo and gears is not going to save you Microsoft.