• 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.

Phil Spencer: We're upping our investment with first party and committed to innovate

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hawk269

Hawk269

Member
Sotha_Sil said:
They need to bring back OG Xbox franchises - Crimson Skies, Blood Wake, and Mechassault. I guess they tried and failed with Phantom Dust. Gunvalkyrie might be another intriguing one to dig up.

They would be unique games in the marketplace if handled right.
Click to expand...

And Midtown Madness 4. And I will be laughed at but I would love an Azurik sequel.
 
T

Trago

Member
blakep267 said:
I think what he's saying is the AAA big budget stuff would be service based. That's not to say they won't come with SP campaigns. Gears halo and Crackdown all have SP campaigns. But they would have MP segments built for longer tales

Then smaller budgeted games would be SP only. Your Ori's, recore's etc
Click to expand...

And honestly, I'm not totally against that. Uncharted and The Last of Us do SP and MP really well. But I still don't want them to shy away from bigger budget stuff like Quantum Break.
 
Salty Hippo

Salty Hippo

Member
Gemüsepizza;235234342 said:
Of course they are not "ditching" SP games, and they will still release SP-only games. Who seriously believed otherwise? The more important question is, how many, and how big will those games be? Because from this interview, it seems like their focus isn't on such games at all. And he did not say anything that makes me believe otherwise yet. He is just dancing around the issue, giving PR answers to softball questions.
Click to expand...

Exactly. That "Yes" could mean even a multiplatform game for all we fucking know, the question has no specificity of any kind, be it exclusivity, budget or quantity.

"We are not ditching". Well no shit Sherlock, I'd hope you aren't because if you did you'd be a complete jackass. How about answering with "We are still comitted to it" instead of "We're not setting it on fire"?
 
C

chaosmaster(1)

Member
SneakersSO said:
One of the big strengths of the original Ori for MS was that they let Moon make the game they wanted to make on their timetable & budget, thanks to it being a digital-focused title. No need to overbudget like MS has done with so many of their other publishing efforts. I'm personally really looking forward to seeing Moon's follow-up myself.



Same here. If they don't want to go all-in on SP games, at least pursue smaller, digital ventures that don't need a large return on investment.
Click to expand...



Yup since they want to go heavy towards service games they should invest in smaller SP games like Ori as well as Recore esque projects. The execution of Recore was bad but they idea of AA SP titles isn't. They also not completely abandon the idea of a story driven AAA game in the portfolio.

They should still try to build a couple, they shouldn't completely abandon the idea in investing in one of those. They can pursue GaaS but that doesn't mean that that's all they have to fund. I don't see why they wouldn't want at least one title on the caliber as something like Horizon in their portfolio.
 
CassidyIzABeast

CassidyIzABeast

Member
Hoo-doo said:
How is this in any way worthy of this drive-by response? Because that's basically what Spencer is saying and what the entire thread is about.
Click to expand...
That's not what Spencer said. He said unless you're the hugely successful like Horizon or Zelda, its really hard for a story-based SP game survive in the current market so he hopes experimentation with Game Pass can help create more opportunities for story-driven SP games. That's all he said.

Somehow a comment about wanting more story-driven SP games turned into focusing on GaaS.
 
nekkid

nekkid

It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Sony said:
So? Sequels aren't determined by how many years are in between. Halo 5 still feels very good to play. I wouldn't mind a late 2018 Halo 6.
Click to expand...

Especially if they give it a Scorpio refresh.
 
T

Thorrgal

Member
Zedox said:
He's just saying that they are probably going to sell the Single Player games on Game Pass than just sell it traditionally like Zelda and Horizon. Not "not making games like Zelda or Horizon" which many people are taking away.
Click to expand...

People are taking that away because that is EXACTLY what he's saying. SP are not worth the hassle for MS.

I'm looking for an excuse to jump back to Xbox but they are pushing me away...why should I buy an Scorpio if my favourite type of games are not a priority to them??

I have 499$ tucked away for it but I'm seriously considering getting a Switch instead and try out my first Zelda Since the NES one
 
MilkyJoe

MilkyJoe

Member
Thorrgal said:
People are taking that away because that is EXACTLY what he's saying. SP are not worth the hassle for MS.

I'm looking for an excuse to jump back to Xbox but they are pushing me away...why should I buy an Scorpio if my favourite type of games are not a priority to them??

I have 499$ tucked away for it but I'm seriously considering getting a Switch instead and try out my first Zelda Since the NES one
Click to expand...

This whole thing reminds me of how Major Nelson had to champion the always online and TV crap at the xbone reveal. I fear people up a rung are pulling his strings with all this.
 
E

EdgeXL

Member
For the love of all that is holy, Phil never said MS was abandoning single player games. He was making a comment in the industry itself. He even confirmed that MS would still make SP games.
 
J

jelly

Member
EdgeXL said:
For the love of all that is holy, Phil never said MS was abandoning single player games. He was making a comment in the industry itself. He even confirmed that MS would still make SP games.
Click to expand...

Did he frame it as the industry instead of Xbox because they are weak and non interested in that front?

There might be nothing to it but when he talks like that it looks like he is side stepping the issue and trying to answer the question that sounds okay and honest but doesn't necessarily apply to his Xbox platform.
 
Z

Zedox

Member
Thorrgal said:
People are taking that away because that is EXACTLY what he's saying. SP are not worth the hassle for MS.

I'm looking for an excuse to jump back to Xbox but they are pushing me away...why should I buy an Scorpio if my favourite type of games are not a priority to them??

I have 499$ tucked away for it but I'm seriously considering getting a Switch instead and try out my first Zelda Since the NES one
Click to expand...

No, that's not EXACTLY what he's saying...but whatever, e3 is coming up.
 
J

justsomeguy

Member
Hawk269 said:
What Crytek was able to do on a launch title, with not fully developed SDK, still having the Kinect resources not removed and all was simply amazing and for me it is still one of the most visually impressive games this gen so far...
Click to expand...

Agreed. And yet at the time I think it was more "lol 900p" and "jank kick gif".
 
Salty Hippo

Salty Hippo

Member
EdgeXL said:
For the love of all that is holy, Phil never said MS was abandoning single player games. He was making a comment in the industry itself. He even confirmed that MS would still make SP games.
Click to expand...

Even if they do it's beside the point. "Still make" doesn't mean they aren't heavily cutting back on those games, which is what he has implied multiple times in those tweets. That's what people are taking issue with. It's not that hard to understand.
 
MisterR

MisterR

Member
RPGam3r said:
While your post was good, this is not true. Brand recognition and purchases based on strong brands is very much a real thing.
Click to expand...

His point was that consumers should be worried about getting games they wasn't. Not worried about how strong the fucking Xbox brand is.
 
B

Beerman462

Member
Hoo-doo said:
How is this in any way worthy of this drive-by response? Because that's basically what Spencer is saying and what the entire thread is about.
Click to expand...

It's a ridiculous notion. HALO, Gears, Dead Rising, Quantum Break, Sunset Overdrive, Recore, Ryse, ect... all strong single player games.

Sony had an unusually amazing quarter with Horizon, Nier, Nioh and Persona. One of those is first party and the other three are Japanese developers that chose not to release on Xbox One most likely, because of the lack of XB1 sales in Japan and the rest of the world. How big is the market for those games in areas where the Xbox is doing well? Probably not enough to warrant a release and if MS decided to pony up to publish they would probably lose money for a small bit of good press.

Everyone acts like Sony is solely pumping out these games, but that's not the case. They are doing great and their first party releases have been really good. MS need to step their game up, but anyone that thought they were going to abandon or greatly diminish single player games is just delusional. The only people reading into that quote to that extent are fan boys looking for ammo for console warz.
 
B

Beerman462

Member
MarveI said:
LOL.
Click to expand...

I should have said SP focused. To be honest. I still consider them to be strong except for maybe ReCore. I haven't played it, but I heard it doesn't finish strong at the least.

I would like to add that even though people didn't like it, Microsoft bought exclusivity for Rise of the Tomb Raider for 3 months and console exclusivity for a year. That at least proves they care about single player experiences.
 
J

jelly

Member
Beerman462 said:
It's a ridiculous notion. HALO, Gears, Dead Rising, Quantum Break, Sunset Overdrive, Recore, Ryse, ect... all strong single player games.

Sony had an unusually amazing quarter with Horizon, Nier, Nioh and Persona. One of those is first party and the other three are Japanese developers that chose not to release on Xbox One most likely, because of the lack of XB1 sales in Japan and the rest of the world. How big is the market for those games in areas where the Xbox is doing well? Probably not enough to warrant a release and if MS decided to pony up to publish they would probably lose money for a small bit of good press.

Everyone acts like Sony is solely pumping out these games, but that's not the case. They are doing great and their first party releases have been really good. MS need to step their game up, but anyone that thought they were going to abandon or greatly diminish single player games is just delusional. The only people reading into that quote to that extent are fan boys looking for ammo for console warz.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't care that Microsoft might lose out by courting and maybe help publish a game like Nier, Nioh, Persona on Xbox. They should for their consumers as it makes their platform more attractive and competitive.

The problem with your list, Remedy has gone multiplatform with their next game, Crytek aren't much these days and won't sell Ryse to MS, Insomniac are doing Spiderman for Sony and Microsoft don't care about another Sunset game. Dead Rising wasn't well received. They rushed Recore out. The main issue is, now what?

Bring on E3.
 
D

David___

Banned
Beerman462 said:
I should have said SP focused. To be honest. I still consider them to be strong except for maybe ReCore. I haven't played it, but I heard it doesn't finish strong at the least.
Click to expand...
Except Halo and Gears aren't single player focused. They're, at least for the current iterations, Gaas. It just so happens these service games had a single player mode.
I would like to add that even though people didn't like it, Microsoft bought exclusivity for Rise of the Tomb Raider for 3 months and console exclusivity for a year. That at least proves they care about single player experiences.
Click to expand...

Not really. They wanted an answer to Uncharted first and foremost since they can't produce one themselves.

Second, if they cared about single player they wouldn't have bought TR in the first place since they would've had a possible answer to Uncharted in development beforehand
 
M

MarveI

Member
Beerman462 said:
I should have said SP focused. To be honest. I still consider them to be strong except for maybe ReCore. I haven't played it, but I heard it doesn't finish strong at the least.

I would like to add that even though people didn't like it, Microsoft bought exclusivity for Rise of the Tomb Raider for 3 months and console exclusivity for a year. That at least proves they care about single player experiences.
Click to expand...

I mean I enjoyed most of those SP games you mentioned. Except Halo 5. But I don't think any of them were particularly strong. They clearly care about providing us with SP experiences. The problem is their decision making is poor. Which is why Sony is doing a great job. I would compare it to Marvel/DC in that Marvel (Sony) has a plan, clear vision with a focus on quality first and foremost and makes the right decisions hiring the right people to lead their projects whereas MS reminds me of DC with no clear vision or great decision making and just fund familiar/obvious projects (Bats, Supes vs Halo,Gears) hoping that would bring them critical and financial success.
 
B

Beerman462

Member
David___ said:
Except Halo and Gears aren't single player focused. They're, at least for the current iterations, Gaas. It just so happens these service games had a single player mode.


Not really. They wanted an answer to Uncharted first and foremost since they can't produce one themselves.

Second, if they cared about single player they wouldn't have bought TR in the first place since they would've had a possible answer to Uncharted in development beforehand
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why Gaas is such a boogey man other than MS said it. As long as the game has a strong single player component which HALO and Gears do, I fail to see how say Gears is that much different than Uncharted or TLOU. I say this as someone who has never finished a Gears game, but the story was well received and the game play was a template for third person shooters at the beginning of last gen. I loved TLOU and played the MP for quite awhile, but the paying to get guns and load outs was the highest caliber of bullshit.

The fact that they wanted an answer to Uncharted proves they care about single player and view it as an important part of their business. They just chose a different avenue to fill out their line up, It's not a hard concept. Trying to twist to mean anything other than that is just a justification of a preconceived notion.

MarveI said:
I mean I enjoyed most of those SP games you mentioned. Except Halo 5. But I don't think any of them were particularly strong. They clearly care about providing us with SP experiences. The problem is their decision making is poor. Which is why Sony is doing a great job. I would compare it to Marvel/DC in that Marvel (Sony) has a plan, clear vision with a focus on quality first and foremost and makes the right decisions hiring the right people to lead their projects whereas MS reminds me of DC with no clear vision or great decision making and just fund familiar/obvious projects (Bats, Supes vs Halo,Gears) hoping that would bring them critical and financial success.
Click to expand...

No doubt they are slipping right now. I think bringing Gears back was a mistake, but I also think it's along the same lines as UC4. Unnecessary, but still a good game. I will have to give Gears 4 a try someday maybe, but I already have so many games to play and no time to do it. Horizon is an incredibly bright spot for Sony and Microsoft doesn't have that right now.
 
J

jelly

Member
I think he just said there wasn't a lot on the horizon so don't expect surprises just more of what we know like Forza 7, Crackdown, State of Decay, Sea of Thieves, Cuphead, Ori 2.

It's honestly a pretty good line up but nothing unknown and possible one or two might be games that get built up like Sea of Thieves which might not sit well. I'm hoping Crackdown is a complete game and not some online beta.
 
D

DriftingSpirit

Member
Here is what Shinobi said -

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=228022587&postcount=957
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=228023617&postcount=973
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=228029463&postcount=1009

Shinobi just has not heard of any secret games and he isn't sure where they would come from in terms of third party partnerships. I wouldn't take that as meaning there is nothing though. Just that nothing had been circulating around back in January. Which is still interesting but yeah.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Xbox CEO Phil Spencer - "We have no plans to bring Xbox Game Pass to PlayStation or Nintendo."
2 3
149
11K
Crayon replied
  • Locked
Phillip W. Spencer III”Phil Spencer on Helldivers 2 Not Being on Xbox: 'I'm Not Exactly Sure Who It Helps'”
News
0
5K
gokurho replied
Phil Spencer - "We've put a lot of money into the market, over a billion dollars a year supporting third-party games coming into Game Pass"
Business 2 3 4 5
227
14K
iHaunter replied
Phil Spencer on what the hell is happening in the games industry and why exclusives have become a risky business
Business Game Dev 3 4 5 6 7
301
21K
ProtoByte replied
Phil Spencer says FFVII Intergrade and FFXVI on Xbox is up to Square Enix
Game Dev Hardware Platform 2 3
123
8K
Stafford replied
Top Bottom