Support NeoGAF

[Shmuely Bully]

That list is a bit oversimplified and unfair in some regards (i.e. Press Play's Max game was supposed to be very good, besides LocoCycle Twisted Pixel have a very decent catalogue) but yeah, it's alarming how they've been in the industry for 13 years and are yet to really lay solid foundations for their first party output. Buying exclusives like Titanfall and Tomb Raider only accentuates that perception; that money should be invested in their own studios and brands, not paid to keep games out of their competitors' hands.

Sony started to really invest in their own line-up of studios during the PS2 era, and that's now really paying dividends for them. They've been through a tough time in the last couple of years with Kaz really cutting away the fat, but I think the plan is what they've ended up with is a more streamlined and effective line-up. MS needs to spend a couple of years remodelling their teams in a similar way and then maybe by the time the next gen rolls around they'll be fighting fit and able to slug it out with Nintendo and Sony's first-party output effectively.

I think that buying exclusivity of previous multi-plat games helps Microsoft in the short-term, but hurts them in the long-term by giving them an easy way to avoid actually building up first and second-party talent. Sony gets a lot of praise for their first-party stuff lately, but their second-party offerings aren't exactly poor either.

It would be good to see them change that, but I don't think that Microsoft as a company has the necessary culture to do it. They've almost always favored acquisitions over building things from the ground up, I mean hell..MS-DOS was a CP/M clone and Internet Explorer was a licensed derivative of Mosaic. Since then they've improved some, but things like the Skype and Nokia acquisitions show they're still not above trying to solve their problems by just throwing money around.

All that being said, even if they turned it around tomorrow it would probably take them more than a generation to be in any position to compete with Nintendo and Sony's first-party output. Nintendo has been doing it for decades, Sony has been doing it for nearly as long too if you count Imagesoft and it wasn't until last gen that Sony's first-party really developed a reputation for excellence outside of Gran Turismo.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

For all the complaints about MS, there is no denying year 1 of Xbox One vs. PS4, they have been very competitive with Sony on the games and console functionality part and probably will be next year. Of course MS is going to do whatever it takes to be competitive in the sales portion so if MS has to use TR flesh out its games library in order to get to year 3 and allow "first party" games to be a part of the library so be it. That is the nature of the business.

I have an issue with that statement. In my eyes that is the very problem, there isn't enough coming next year that is compelling enough to buy an Xbone, assuming all multiplats look and run better on PS4 to boot.

 

[Vorg]

Looking back at 13 years of Microsoft's first party, I mostly get warm feelings from thinking about all the wonderful moments I've had with Microsoft games over the years, and all those wonderful moments that are yet to come. Things have especially been looking great lately, so excuse me for not feeling the need to complain.

How so? Genuinely curious.

 

[tkalamba]

Well please tell us these facts it's missing. That's the point of this conversation.

People have been throughout the thread.

The OP throws in the whole NFL deal, which is a Microsoft wide sponsorship with benefits for both parties. Coaches using Surface tablets, ad space during games for MS etc. It's money the company would have spent and would have had nothing to do with development.

Then they say that MS brings nothing to the industry, when they popularized online play on console with Live, gave us internal hard drives etc. They brought many features which are now the norm across the industry. They are now trying to bring something new with the cloud, and we've seen some promising hints from Crackdown and stuff mentioned by Kampfheld on this very forum (who was verified). They brought indie gaming to console.

Then mentioning buying their way into the industry, when that isn't exclusive to MS, everyone will buy studios, and MS had created some studios themselves. It ignores IP's MS still technically owns, like Viva Pinata. And makes no mention of recent new IP's like Scream Ride or Project Spark or any of the other recently announced titles.

It ignores the Crackdown series altogether, which we have seen last gen and we're seeing again this gen.

TitusGroan has probably said it a few times in this thread. Much better than I have.

 

[flkraven]

I am trying to formulate a response to OP, but I have no clue what is trying to be discussed here. Seems like this is just a quote from someone who clearly has a strong opinion, and is framing an argument to support that opinion. It clearly revises history to ignore things that were succesful for Microsoft (ie. Viva Pinata, Forza Horizon) and it ignores MS published titles like Mass Effect (some call this second party, but others, Sony included, consider it first party).

 

[vcc]

WOW, hold on a minute.
Microsoft bought bungie, remember that, they let them go because they wanted their independence back. ,Microsoft could have said no, but they rewarded bungie with their freedom for making halo as big as it is.
You are writing it as Microsoft is a monster, which they ain't.

Have they handled rare properly ? No, but that doesn't make them a bad publisher.

You can't constrain people. They can just quit and reform a studio a la Infinity ward -> Respawn. It made more financial sense for MS to accept the reverse buy out and get some money for the change rather than see the team walk out and reform.

The issue is that they still only wanted them for Halo. Sony let's their studios off the sequel leash. Naughty Dog wanted to do something other than uncharted and Sony back that decision and they created the last of us. MS shows a huge risk aversion to that and prefers to keep their cash cows rolling rather than letting their studios breath.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

How so? Genuinely curious.

I would like to know too.

 

[PureXbox]

Actually i didn't get the point of your Nintendo ancient stories.
Are you suggesting Nintendo core business is not gaming?

No. You said "Gaming is Nintendo only business."

I was suggesting that it is not. Because it is not.

See this Microsoft has sunk $3 billion in 10 years.

How do you rationalize this?

If Microsoft goal is just to make money.

There are many more easier ways to make money.

I rationalize it by not every single business ever being successful. Just because you decide to try to make money, doesn't mean that you just do.

 

[Doffen]

OP quote didn't mention Viva Piñata. The entiere post is invalid, in my opinion.

 

[Admodieus]

This trend played a huge part in my decision to go PS4 this gen. Last generation (and even back into the original XBox), they had a stable of games that hit every genre: from MechAssault and Crimson Skies in the early days of Live to Lost Odyssey and Viva Pinata on the 360. But for the last year or so of the 360 (and now with the One) it's just Forza, Halo, Gears, and occasionally Fable.

 

[vcc]

OP quote didn't mention Viva Piñata. The entiere post is invalid, in my opinion.

Both games occurred early in the 360 lifespan when MS cementing their lead. There hasn't been anythign since 2008 because Rare was gutted and MS didn't care to put out niche titles.

 

[Leflus]

I certainly agree that Microsoft has made a lot of mistakes over the years, but Drek's post is so full of hyperbole and subjective conclusions presented as fact that I can't take it seriously.

Here's my thoughts:
Microsoft's first party stable is basically as strong as it was at the beginning of last gen:

Lionhead = Lionhead
Turn10 = Turn10
Bungie = 343 Industries
Rare = Twisted Pixel, Press Play and Team Dakota (TP, PP and TD are small teams)
FASA = Black Tusk Studios
Carbonated Games = Lift London
Ensemble Studios = ???
??? = Kinect Rare

-I've tried to compare genres of each studio as good as I can.
-The comparisons have nothing to do with the quality of the games, so there's no need to respond with "LOL HALO 4 SUX BRO".
(I feel that some of the studio replacements are better while some are worse, but that's obviously just my personal opinion.)
-PC studios have been left out of the equation since this is obviously a console centric thread.
-App studios like Soho and BigPark and secret/dormant studios such as Platform Next and LXP have been left out of the equation as well.

My takeaway from the current state of Microsoft Studios is that they've neither decreased nor increased the breadth of their internal studios. They've simply switched out some of their studios with new ones.

..which is more of a negative than a positive when I think about it. They should definitely have used last gen to expand and grow their lineup of first party studios.
Devs like Bioware, Pandemic and Redlynx would have made great addititions to Microsoft Studios, and those are just the ones that popped into my head as I was writing this post.

I could probably make a long list of Microsoft's mistakes, but I'm just going to focus on the ones that grinds my gears the most:
-Internal devs focusing on social/multiplayer-focused experiences. Lionhead was the last bastion of story-driven, single-player focused games, but they transitioned to "games as a service" and multiplayer with Fable Legends.
-Lack of long term planning:
1. Hesitant to greenlight Crackdown 2, rushed it to the market once it was greenlit. And hey, it sure would have been nice to have a studio with sandbox expertise ready when they finally decided to make CD2 (*cough* Pandemic *cough*).
2. Moneyhatting Tomb Raider when it's obviously going to be released for the competitor's console later down the line.
3. Denied FASA time and resources to make a singleplayer for Shadowrun 360.
4. Released PGR4 in the two week window after Halo 3 had been released, even though Forza 2 had already been released that year and that they could easily have delayed PGR4.
-Little to no interest in trying to prey on people's nostalgia.
1. Rallisport Challenge HD, PGR HD, Midtown Madness HD
2. Rare games in HD (Killer Instinct is a nice start, though)
3. XBLA games in HD. Splosion Man, Kinect Party, The Maw, Iron Brigade, Joy Ride, State of Decay etc.
Hell, they should take a look at some of the indie games as well. Summer of Arcade: Nostalgia Edition could have been a cool promotion on Xbox One.

That said, Microsoft Studios puts a lot of stock into their development partners. I think it's kind of foolish to completely gloss over stuff like Forza Horizon, State of Decay, Killer Instinct, Sunset Overdrive and Quantum Break
when they're obviously important games for the Xbox brand.

Plus, there are a few other things they've done right:
-PressPlay, Twisted Pixel and Team Dakota are imo a decent replacement for early 2000s era Rare.
-Diverse lineup of games with Killer Instinct, Project Spark, Ori, Sunset Overdrive, Quantum Break, Scalebound and of course Fable, Forza, Halo and Gears.
-They got rid of Don Mattrick and put Phil Spencer in charge. Plus, they're giving people like Chris Charla and Ken Lobb more time in the spotlight
-Getting people like Chris Seavor and Kev Bayliss to work with them again, even if it's just small parts in Project Spark and Killer Instinct 2013
-Putting together 343 Industries and creating a great shooter for the 360. (I liked Halo 4, sue me)
-They're still supporting the 360, even though it's almost 9 years old. Might not be as good as Sony's support for the PS3 in recent years, but it sure as hell beats Nintendo's support for the Wii.
-ID@Xbox is finally starting to gain traction (the parity clause has got to go, though)

All in all, I'm cautiously optimistic about the potential of Microsoft Studios (both internally and externally developed games). I think that they're on the right track, but I also realise that they could easily take a wrong turn 2 or 3 years from now.
At the very least, I'm interested in seeing where they will go in the future.

Sorry for the long and messy post. This subject isn't something you can summarize in two or three sentences.

 

[thewhitehawk]

Sony also made the PS3 an absolute nightmare to programme for, and pretty much spat in the face of every third party developer with their demands for how PS3 games should be made. Countless PS3 games still run like ass compared to their 360 releases. Microsoft also worked on games like Lost Odyssey and Blue Dragon, which were the absolute opposite of shooters.

Let's not act as if Sony did no wrong last generation. They started it by flipping the bird at both consumer and developer, then desperately trying to make up for it over the years.

I didn't say Sony did no wrong in the previous generation, but Sony's wrongdoings don't right Microsoft's. Sony was arrogant, expensive, demanding, lied and was generally out-of-tone with most of their markets.

Despite their mistakes, Sony maintained a steady stream of quality software from start to finish of the console's life cycle. Microsoft invested heavily in exclusive titles, and then stopped doing so almost completely in the last years. The Xbox 360 was great when I purchased and had a lot of games in genres that appealed to me. I bought the console sold on the quality of its library and afterwards the number of reasons to own the console steadily decreased. They invested into diverse genres of games, and then stopped doing so whenever they wished and I was left with a large paper-weight.

I don't see Microsoft trying to fix their mistakes. I see them making the same mistakes: money-hatting exclusives instead of investing in a steady and quality-filled stream of games. At some stage, like before I fully expect them to stop funding exclusive games from third-parties and losing what little identity they have other than Halo, Forza, Fable and Gears of War.

Microsoft seems to be handling their entertainment division as a means to sell hardware with a tied-in service, not as a way to sell entertainment. They seem to only care about the software/service royalties and the service whereas Sony and Nintendo have deep commitments in terms of development studios and release cycles to keep selling and providing quality original entertainment.

It's the difference between wanting to buy success and wanting to build success. Obviously building success also implies investing in it, but it's a cost that can bring returns of higher-quality, that can breed value and original content and bring a lot value to a platform that can't be obtained anywhere else. It's also a bigger insurance of continuous quality releases whereas an exclusivity deal for a specific title holds little to no guarantee of future titles by the same team or with the same level of quality.

It's the difference between short-term returns and long lasting quality. Microsoft's software outside of some of those exclusive franchises has not been regular. A lot of their studios have been grossly mismanaged and they have gained many ill-feelings and distrust from smaller or independent studios due to the way their managed their XBLA store. Many of those same studios are now flourishing, producing and releasing their best titles across a plethora of Sony and Nintendo or smartphone platforms and I honestly believe these small studios will produce most of the best titles of this console generation. I'd argue they already are.

 

[Shmuely Bully]

Then mentioning buying their way into the industry, when that isn't exclusive to MS, everyone will buy studios, and MS had created some studios themselves. It ignores IP's MS still technically owns, like Viva Pinata. And makes no mention of recent new IP's like Scream Ride or Project Spark or any of the other recently announced titles.

Nobody is criticizing Microsoft for buying studios, they're criticizing them for buying studios and then wasting their IP or canning them altogether after one or two games that aren't massive successes.

People are hard on Sony sometimes for shutting down Studio Liverpool and Zipper Interactive, but both of those had multiple chances over the period of a decade to return to real relevance and couldn't. How many chances did Ensemble get? Halo Wars was a million-seller that followed multiple other million-sellers and they were still kicked to the curb.

 

[Coulomb_Barrier]

I certainly agree that Microsoft has made a lot of mistakes over the years, but Drek's post is so full of hyperbole and subjective conclusions presented as fact that I can't take it seriously.

Here's my thoughts:
Microsoft's first party stable is basically as strong as it was at the beginning of last gen:

Lionhead = Lionhead
Turn10 = Turn10
Bungie = 343 Industries
Rare = Twisted Pixel, Press Play and Team Dakota (TP, PP and TD are small teams)
FASA = Black Tusk Studios
Carbonated Games = Lift London
Ensemble Studios = ???
??? = Kinect Rare

-I've tried to compare genres of each studio as good as I can.
-The comparisons have nothing to do with the quality of the games, so there's no need to respond with "LOL HALO 4 SUX BRO".
(I feel that some of the studio replacements are better while some are worse, but that's obviously just my personal opinion.)
-PC studios have been left out of the equation since this is obviously a console centric thread.
-App studios like Soho and BigPark and secret/dormant studios such as Platform Next and LXP have been left out of the equation as well.

My takeaway from the current state of Microsoft Studios is that they've neither decreased nor increased the breadth of their internal studios. They've simply switched out some of their studios with new ones.

..which is more of a negative than a positive when I think about it. They should definitely have used last gen to expand and grow their lineup of first party studios.
Devs like Bioware, Pandemic and Redlynx would have made great addititions to Microsoft Studios, and those are just the ones that popped into my head as I was writing this post.

I could probably make a long list of Microsoft's mistakes, but I'm just going to focus on the ones that grinds my gears the most:
-Internal devs focusing on social/multiplayer-focused experiences. Lionhead was the last bastion of story-driven, single-player focused games, but they transitioned to "games as a service" and multiplayer with Fable Legends.
-Lack of long term planning:
1. Hesitant to greenlight Crackdown 2, rushed it to the market once it was greenlit. And hey, it sure would have been nice to have a studio with sandbox expertise ready when they finally decided to make CD2 (*cough* Pandemic *cough*).
2. Moneyhatting Tomb Raider when it's obviously going to be released for the competitor's console later down the line.
3. Denied FASA time and resources to make a singleplayer for Shadowrun 360.
4. Released PGR4 in the two week window after Halo 3 had been released, even though Forza 2 had already been released that year and that they could easily have delayed PGR4.
-Little to no interest in trying to prey on people's nostalgia.
1. Rallisport Challenge HD, PGR HD, Midtown Madness HD
2. Rare games in HD (Killer Instinct is a nice start, though)
3. XBLA games in HD. Splosion Man, Kinect Party, The Maw, Iron Brigade, Joy Ride, State of Decay etc.
Hell, they should take a look at some of the indie games as well. Summer of Arcade: Nostalgia Edition could have been a cool promotion on Xbox One.

That said, Microsoft Studios puts a lot of stock into their development partners. I think it's kind of foolish to completely gloss over stuff like Forza Horizon, State of Decay, Killer Instinct, Sunset Overdrive and Quantum Break
when they're obviously important games for the Xbox brand.

Plus, there are a few other things they've done right:
-PressPlay, Twisted Pixel and Team Dakota are imo a decent replacement for early 2000s era Rare.
-Diverse lineup of games with Killer Instinct, Project Spark, Ori, Sunset Overdrive, Quantum Break, Scalebound and of course Fable, Forza, Halo and Gears.
-They got rid of Don Mattrick and put Phil Spencer in charge. Plus, they're giving people like Chris Charla and Ken Lobb more time in the spotlight
-Getting people like Chris Seavor and Kev Bayliss to work with them again, even if it's just small parts in Project Spark and Killer Instinct 2013
-Putting together 343 Industries and creating a great shooter for the 360. (I liked Halo 4, sue me)
-They're still supporting the 360, even though it's almost 9 years old. Might not be as good as Sony's support for the PS3 in recent years, but it sure as hell beats Nintendo's support for the Wii.
-ID@Xbox is finally starting to gain traction (the parity clause has got to go, though)

All in all, I'm cautiously optimistic about the potential of Microsoft Studios (both internally and externally developed games). I think that they're on the right track, but I also realise that they could easily take a wrong turn 2 or 3 years from now.
At the very least, I'm interested in seeing where they will go in the future.

Sorry for the long and messy post. This subject isn't something you can summarize in two or three sentences.

Strong as at the start of the beginning of last gen? Sure, maybe.

Now compare that first-party stable to Sony's and you'll find the problem.

 

[Jeronimo Jones]

Too bad it isn't entirely accurate, and misses many facts.

The thing is, if there are only a few examples of MS fostering productive 1st party developer relationships in 13 years, then my conclusion will remain that they generally aren't committed to that strategy... which is what I'm talking about, regardless of advertising deals and whatever innovations they made to console gaming.

 

[Doffen]

Both games occurred early in the 360 lifespan when MS cementing their lead. There hasn't been anythign since 2008 because Rare was gutted and MS didn't care to put out niche titles.

And how do they not count in Microsoft's 13 years of first party games?

 

[Exploratory]

I have an issue with that statement. In my eyes that is the very problem, there isn't enough coming next year that is compelling enough to buy an Xbone, assuming all multiplats look and run better on PS4 to boot.

Their biggest IP releases next year.

 

[Spottiettiedop]

Strong as at the start of the beginning of last gen? Sure, maybe.

Now compare that first-party stable to Sony's and you'll find the problem.

What games are you actually comparing?

 

[watership]

They gave the NFL more money for a fantasy football app than Take 2/Rockstar spent on Grand Theft Auto 5. Let that sink into your head when you excuse their lack of first party studios as "taking time".

WAT?

That's not correct. The money was also more NFL and MS business than just the Xbox deal. Like using Surface devices on the sidelines during games etc and Microsoft Azure software in the backend of their new videostreaming archives.

 

[KampferZeon]

Gaming is far from Nintendo's only business. They started out making Hanafuda cards then found they could make money by making arcade games a double-handful of decades down the line, then home consoles and games. Then they started a sub-business of licensing the characters they developed so you can sit around in your Mario underwear eating Mario cereal, while watching a Mario cartoon on TV and then play the home version of Mario before taking your portable version of Mario with you in your Mario backpack, so that later on when you're talking to your friends about Mario, you can all whip out your consoles so you can all play Mario some more. Don't forget to turn your Mario nightlight on when you put your Mario pyjamas on and go to sleep wrapped in your Mario sheets, so the Boos don't get you!

No. You said "Gaming is Nintendo only business."

I was suggesting that it is not. Because it is not.

your 1st reply about Nintendo is just complete fiction.

Nintendo's only business is gaming is true. Hanafuda cards are ancient and have no relevance in this discussion.

Nintendo 3 major hardware revenue are Home Consoles, Handhelds and Others ( Accessories ) and they are all gaming related.

The other revenue is from software

I rationalize it by not every single business ever being successful. Just because you decide to try to make money, doesn't mean that you just do.

To each their own then.
By your quasi - logic I guess Microsoft can keep doing this and lose money for the next 100 years.

 

[abadguy]

How so? Genuinely curious.

Having a bunch of games you're looking forward to playing coming to a console you own id a great thing i would imagine.

 

[vcc]

Microsoft's first party stable is basically as strong as it was at the beginning of last gen:

Which wasn't that strong. The height of their first party studios was a few years into the 360 generation and even then it was not as strong as Sony or Nintendo's internal studios.

 

[Leafhopper]

And how do they not count in Microsoft's 13 years of first party games?

No one reads the OP.

 

[Angelus Errare]

They could have gotten 343i working on Halo without making them into a studio for which the only purpose is making Halo games (and Halo TV shows, and special Halo apps, and Halo remakes, and Halo branded underpants, and Halo breakfast cereal). They will run 343i into the ground just like they were trying to run Bungie into the ground, I guarantee it.

Halo isn't even that big a seller any more. The Last of Us, a brand new IP, sold almost double Halo 4 (7+mill to 4+mill).

 

[vcc]

And how do they not count in Microsoft's 13 years of first party games?

I'm not discounting them, I'm saying It exemplifies their poor strategies with their internal studios.

 

[JaggedSac]

The entire Xbox division has done nothing but cost Microsot billions, so I'm not sure where you're getting this from.



Because Project Spark, Scalebound, Quantum Break, Titanfall and D4 are all safe bet sequels.

This thread is just getting ridiculous now. We have always been at war with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia. We have always...

Lol

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

People have been throughout the thread.

The OP throws in the whole NFL deal, which is a Microsoft wide sponsorship with benefits for both parties. Coaches using Surface tablets, ad space during games for MS etc. It's money the company would have spent and would have had nothing to do with development.

This I knew was more than what the OP was saying and I understand the Xbox only benefited that deal. So this isn't my main concern.

Then they say that MS brings nothing to the industry, when they popularized online play on console with Live, gave us internal hard drives etc. They brought many features which are now the norm across the industry. They are now trying to bring something new with the cloud, and we've seen some promising hints from Crackdown and stuff mentioned by Kampfheld on this very forum (who was verified). They brought indie gaming to console.

The thread mostly touches on the gaming aspect of Microsoft, not their technical achievements. Apple isn't the biggest company in the world because they made the smartphone, it's the commitment they brought afterwards propelling it into a huge brand that did it. Microsoft brought a lot of technicals and changed the way we play games today, however now that they have done that, we are looking forward to what they have promised us before and yet still have not completely committed to that promise.

Then mentioning buying their way into the industry, when that isn't exclusive to MS, everyone will buy studios, and MS had created some studios themselves. It ignores IP's MS still technically owns, like Viva Pinata. And makes no mention of recent new IP's like Scream Ride or Project Spark or any of the other recently announced titles.

It ignores the Crackdown series altogether, which we have seen last gen and we're seeing again this gen.

We all know about these franchises, but who's the studio behind Viva Pinata? What are they doing now? Have they created any games outside of that franchise? That's the first step. Project spare is new, there's no doubt. Will the development team behind project spark still be around for a new upcoming IP down the line? Same for scream ride. Crackdown, look at it. We aren't even getting a full sequel but something somewhat of a remaster. Where is the trust to make a part 3?

TitusGroan has probably said it a few times in this thread. Much better than I have.

Titus has been in this thread chatting up Microsoft technical achievements as well as bringing up the IPs they have coming up without taking the time to realize we have seen this before. Then he has also compared it to Sony as if we are giving Sony a free pass from doing the same thing. There is a clear difference between Sony and Microsoft. The reason why we are asking where Microsoft first party is, is because Sony showed us that building your own regardless of position is what builds confidence in gamers. If all we are looking forward to during this generation is which one of our favorite third party company sold to the highest bidder than what new creative and ambitious projects can come from the talents of the guys we put our money behind, then we won't like gaming moving forward.

It's one thing to make it seem like for one situation, everyone should suck it up and go, but it's another to completely dismiss exactly how this can hurt overall the impact of gaming if one is allowed to do something that another will be forced to play ball with.

 

[ChosenPredator]

The sad part to me is how they had a first party game for every genre in Xbox and abandoned it.

Air combat
Rally racing
Tennis
Football
Skateboard
Arcade racer
Fantasy
Fighting

And some were great games.

Now most of those genres are dead, not just at Microsoft but the entire industry.

Yup, the original xbox had tons of balls to make new IPs when 360 was around that changed because of the ultra success of a few titles, I also think with that expanded audience they could of brought back a few of those older games so a wider audience could experience them. Microsoft has rare has their own IPs they could basically be a version of nintendo if they felt like it...i just hope they understand that now.

 

[Leflus]

Strong as at the start of the beginning of last gen? Sure, maybe.

Now compare that first-party stable to Sony's and you'll find the problem.

Well, yeah. Their stable of internal devs is weaker than Sony's and Nintendo's. Their partnerships with external devs kind of evens it out though.

I somewhat adressed it in my previous post. They should have acted when they had the chance (Bioware, Pandemic and Redlynx, for instance.)

Which wasn't that strong. The height of their first party studios was a few years into the 360 generation and even then it was not as strong as Sony or Nintendo's internal studios.

Not sure what you are talking about here. Those were actually the worst years for Microsoft's first party stable:

Bungie became independent in 2007
FASA got closed down in 2007
Carbonated Games got closed down in 2008
Ensemble Studios got closed down in 2009

Even if we discount Carbonated Games (small studio), that still leaves Bungie, FASA and Ensemble.

 

[eighty(one)]

As I said in the other thread, you can also add in those foolish enough on the japanese side of the industry to indulge the Microsoft 'tease then delete' routine.

Sega brought plenty of exclusives early on to Xbox, but once Microsoft hit it big with Halo they realised they didnt need them as much and essentially pushed them away. Lure Shenmue 2 to your platform exclusively (in NA!) then observe the end. Chromehounds and Condemned also rounded out the 360's early days, but then as usual, no deals to be made.

Mistwalker made two great RPG games for 360 when Microsoft wanted to try tackling Japan, but once it seemed like a lost cause, they of course cut and run and left the Gooch to the wolves rather than try and build on anything. I remember being mad hyped for Cry-On. Oh well, disconnect all ties and flush repeatedly!

Then things get even stickier when the Kinect money was thrown out to anyone with cupped hands. The particularly telling example of recent times is SWERY and D4. Like other devs, went all in on Kinect, only now that focus is gone-zo, they probably wont trot this game out much at all. Maybe at TGS?

Yukio Futatsugi in particular seems like some sort of ragdoll when it comes to MS Japan. Phantom Dust never even made it as far as Europe and that was about as far as his tenure went with MS directly other than overseeing. He's quoted on Wiki with:

before then adding himself to the Kinect dogpile and the bizarre delay Crimson Dragon 'enjoyed'. Now I'm not even sure if he's attached to this Phantom Dust re-do or if its just been handed to a western dev to create.

The long list of casualties may now of course include Kamiya with Scalebound. Think MS is planning on supporting Platinum and giving real marketing exposure? History thinks otherwise!

MS sure does offer money, but its never in line with commitment and longterm plans. Its always a pick-me up quick boost out of a situation, and who cares what bodies hit the floor once they cut those lifelines. Sure gaming business isn't a charity, but goddam if Microsoft's list of victims isn't more than a little displeasing.

Your assessment (alongside the OP), were the exact reasons why I shifted to Sony and PS4 (was only 360, no PS3 last gen), for this new generation.

I realized all of this, while (also mortified at the DRM + NSA decisions) MS' lackluster commitment to IPs and studios left a gaping hole, in contrast to Sony, as next gen was incoming.

These posts further reinforce my PS4 choice.

 

[vcc]

Well, yeah. Their stable of internal devs is weaker than Sony's and Nintendo's. Their partnerships with external devs kind of evens it out though.

I somewhat adressed it in my previous post. They should have acted when they had the chance (Bioware, Pandemic and Redlynx, for instance.)

Not sure what you are talking about here. Those were actually the worst years for Microsoft's first party stable:

Bungie became independent in 2007
FASA got closed down in 2007
Carbonated Games got closed down in 2008
Ensemble Studios got closed down in 2009

Even if we discount Carbonated Games (small studio), that still leaves Bungie, FASA and Ensemble.

The 360 launched 2005. early 2007 their internal studios were doing well.

 

[Barack Lesnar]

Microsoft brings nothing to this industry other than dump trucks of money.

They brought Xbox Live to this industry, and in doing so they forced Sony to make a real online service (PSN). That statement is just wrong. PSN would be a fraction of what it is today if not for MS and Live.

 

[FacelessSamurai]

They could have gotten 343i working on Halo without making them into a studio for which the only purpose is making Halo games (and Halo TV shows, and special Halo apps, and Halo remakes, and Halo branded underpants, and Halo breakfast cereal). They will run 343i into the ground just like they were trying to run Bungie into the ground, I guarantee it.

Halo isn't even that big a seller any more. The Last of Us, a brand new IP, sold almost double Halo 4 (7+mill to 4+mill).

TLOU didn't even sell 5 million on PS3 while Halo 4 sold more than 9 million copies. What the fuck kind of bullshit is this?

 

[Jessie.Bristol]

They could have gotten 343i working on Halo without making them into a studio for which the only purpose is making Halo games (and Halo TV shows, and special Halo apps, and Halo remakes, and Halo branded underpants, and Halo breakfast cereal). They will run 343i into the ground just like they were trying to run Bungie into the ground, I guarantee it.

Halo isn't even that big a seller any more. The Last of Us, a brand new IP, sold almost double Halo 4 (7+mill to 4+mill).

Halo 4 sold much more then 4 million, numbers right now sit at 8.94 million. Where are you getting 4+ from?

 

[NewEraBlood]

They could have gotten 343i working on Halo without making them into a studio for which the only purpose is making Halo games (and Halo TV shows, and special Halo apps, and Halo remakes, and Halo branded underpants, and Halo breakfast cereal). They will run 343i into the ground just like they were trying to run Bungie into the ground, I guarantee it.

Halo isn't even that big a seller any more. The Last of Us, a brand new IP, sold almost double Halo 4 (7+mill to 4+mill).

Except you pulled those numbers out of your ass. TLoU sold a little under 5 million, while Halo 4 barely broke 9 million.

If people should be upset about anything it's MS not taking care of Mech Warrior, Shadow Run, Perfect Dark, Conker, Banjo, Age of Empires, and Fable. With MCC and what has been stated about Halo 5, Halo is the ONLY IP other than Forza they're not neglecting.

 

[vcc]

They brought Xbox Live to this industry, and in doing so they forced Sony to make a real online service (PSN). That statement is just wrong. PSN would be a fraction of what it is today if not for MS and Live.

The original team brought a lot of idea from the PC side of gaming into the console side. Don Mattrick came in later and bungled a lot of it. Many of the original team have left.

 

[Shmuely Bully]

They brought Xbox Live to this industry, and in doing so they forced Sony to make a real online service (PSN). That statement is just wrong. PSN would be a fraction of what it is today if not for MS and Live.

Do you really believe that Sony wouldn't have responded to the emergence of Steam and mobile without Microsoft in the console space? I don't. XBL and PSN both are the inevitable next stage of trends that began decades ago.

 

[Leflus]

The 360 launched 2005. early 2007 their internal studios were doing well.

....but I wasn't talking about 2005-era 360.

The 360 side of my comparison is from after they bought Lionhead (april 2006), but before they shut down FASA and lost Bungie.

Edit: "A few years into the generation" means late 2007 to me. That's why I was confused by your post.

 

[vcc]

Do you really believe that Sony wouldn't have responded to the emergence of Steam and mobile without Microsoft in the console space? I don't. XBL and PSN both are the inevitable next stage of trends that began decades ago.

Competition with MS certainly accelerated that trend. Without that competition I doubt they would have rolled out PS+ or built out the infrastructure as much as they did. Corporation tend to be lazy when they're winning.

 

[vcc]

....but I wasn't talking about 2005-era 360.

The 360 side of my comparison is from after they bought Lionhead (april 2006), but before they shut down FASA and lost Bungie.

Well there are 2 things, at the very start they weren't particularly strong. At their height a few years in they were still behind Nintendo and Sony in output; although at that point it looked like they would get there eventually. Then it declines into what we see now.

For a long term strategy they need to stop throwing money around buying 6m exclusives and start to invest in their internal studios. Being #2 or #3 without much first party output will be bad for the XB1. The exclusives will get pricier as the disparity grows between them and the PS4. So they need to spin up their first party game engine.

 

[DarkJedi24]

Well this has become a fun thread.

Microsoft's reliance on pursuing third party exclusivity deals, while closing down more studios than they create has been reductional to the industry as a whole. The argument can made about this SOP being sound in a micro-setting, but that doesn't mean that these practices should be supported. That being said, this has forced competitors to step up their first party development game, which has lead to a positive outcome for consumers.

While it would be reductive to think that has resulted in the sales gulf we have witnessed so far, I am fairly certain that more consumers that disagree with Microsoft's approach to content creation when given a competitive alternative.

 

[kevin1025]

The sure fire hits will always be more important, unfortunately. That's why they kept Halo and bought up Gears, that's why Forza and Fable (to an extent) are here to stay. But sometimes the most interesting things aren't the big tentpole games. The reason I love Rare, at least back in the day, was for their offbeat games. Look at Viva Pinata. It wasn't for everyone, but it was a damn fine game if it dedicated time to it. Why not make another one? Look at Sony. They're making their big games, but they also have their small ones, and those are super interesting.

I've said it in a few threads now, but if they're killing off the Rare of old, why not keep a few small teams and have them make small-tier downloadable games? If we want to go into pipedream land, why not get them to make a Banjo-Kazooie sequel that looks like the HD versions on XBLA and not have it be a massive $60 boxed copy? They could make small games and be a nice addition rather than a Kinect farm.

Ori and the Blind Forest is a step in the right direction, but if they don't stop blindly swinging with the big franchises and ignoring potentially interesting shots, that gap with Playstation 4 will only widen. They grabbed Rise of the Tomb Raider to directly compete with Uncharted 4, which makes sense but really puts too much pressure on Tomb Raider, something that will only lessen what it will likely be.

 

[blakep267]

The sure fire hits will always be more important, unfortunately. That's why they kept Halo and bought up Gears, that's why Forza and Fable (to an extent) are here to stay. But sometimes the most interesting things aren't the big tentpole games. The reason I love Rare, at least back in the day, was for their offbeat games. Look at Viva Pinata. It wasn't for everyone, but it was a damn fine game if it dedicated time to it. Why not make another one? Look at Sony. They're making their big games, but they also have their small ones, and those are super interesting.

I've said it in a few threads now, but if they're killing off the Rare of old, why not keep a few small teams and have them make small-tier downloadable games? If we want to go into pipedream land, why not get them to make a Banjo-Kazooie sequel that looks like the HD versions on XBLA and not have it be a massive $60 boxed copy? They could make small games and be a nice addition rather than a Kinect farm.

Ori and the Blind Forest is a step in the right direction, but if they don't stop blindly swinging with the big franchises and ignoring potentially interesting shots, that gap with Playstation 4 will only widen.

Big franchises move consoles though. The ps4 isn't doing great because of its quirky games. It's doing great because it was cheaper and played multiplats better

 

[A_Gorilla]

this was in the tomb raider thread wasnt it ?

yall tomb raider dudes should relax. you will get to play it in 2016 according to insiders so stop cluttering the forums with your crybaby posts

Thread-whining is a ban-able offense dude.

 

[kevin1025]

Big franchises move consoles though. The ps4 isn't doing great because of its quirky games. It's doing great because it was cheaper and played multiplats better

That's very true. I guess I meant more in the "keeping the attention" in between those franchises, rather than relying on multiplatform games and having those franchise games every fall.

 

[twobear]

I specifically responded to you pointing out what Microsoft is doing now. Not what they did ten yeas ago, what they are doing now with the games they are publishing. If you're not going to respond to that, at least have the courtesy to not ignore my reply to suit your agenda.

I'm sorry I had a long-ass reply written but it was kind of harshly worded and I decided against posting it all because it felt lame of me to fume this much.

But in general, you're wrong, I don't want to hate MS. I want to say that they're doing awesome stuff, that they enrich the gaming market by being in it, and that the choice to not buy their products was very difficult and took me more than five seconds worth of thought.

Unfortunately none of these things are true. They are putting in a bare minimum level of effort into the industry. I'm not going to say they're doing a good job just because they've finally realised after five years of sitting on their asses that they're going to have to put some work in to earn my patronage. I'm going to drag them for filth until I'm convinced they've changed their MO. And yesterday's Tomb Raider shenanigans undid a lot of the good will they've earned over the last three months.

TLOU didn't even sell 5 million on PS3 while Halo 4 sold more than 9 million copies. What the fuck kind of bullshit is this?

Halo 4 sold much more then 4 million, numbers right now sit at 8.94 million. Where are you getting 4+ from?

Except you pulled those numbers out of your ass. TLoU sold a little under 5 million, while Halo 4 barely broke 9 million.

If people should be upset about anything it's MS not taking care of Mech Warrior, Shadow Run, Perfect Dark, Conker, Banjo, Age of Empires, and Fable. With MCC and what has been stated about Halo 5, Halo is the ONLY IP other than Forza they're not neglecting.

Hi guys, someone already corrected these figures. I took them from Wikipedia. I'm happy to admit they were inaccurate.

 

[TitusGroan]

Titus has been in this thread chatting up Microsoft technical achievements as well as bringing up the IPs they have coming up without taking the time to realize we have seen this before. Then he has also compared it to Sony as if we are giving Sony a free pass from doing the same thing. There is a clear difference between Sony and Microsoft. The reason why we are asking where Microsoft first party is, is because Sony showed us that building your own regardless of position is what builds confidence in gamers.

Sony's first parties gave us Killzone Shadowfall and Knack. Fucking Knack. Their first party wheelhouse is not some stable of nothing but thoroughbreds when they had even SSM and Polyphony putting out underwhelming sequels to games last gen.

You act as if there's some clear objective difference between Sony and Microsoft's first party studios, and I would argue otherwise. They have their good studios, and they have their studios who have been consistently less great. For as much as rare has fallen,they at least managed to put out games at a timely pace last gen, which is more than can be said for Sony Japan.

 

[MUnited83]

it sold 3.1 million on its first day

there is no fucking way tlou sold more than halo 4

im guessing it sits at 8-9million now

I don't think so. The online died pretty fucking quickly and word of mouth was bad. Would be surprised if it even catched up to TLOU.

 

[Leflus]

Well there are 2 things, at the very start they weren't particularly strong. At their height a few years in they were still behind Nintendo and Sony in output; although at that point it looked like they would get there eventually. Then it declines into what we see now.

More like:
2006-2007: When MS' first party stable was at it's best last gen
2007-2009: Decline
2009-2013: Slow climb back up again. Twisted Pixel, PressPlay, 343 Industries, Black Tusk Industries, Team Dakota
2014: Back to 2006-2007 levels.

For a long term strategy they need to stop throwing money around buying 6m exclusives and start to invest in their internal studios. Being #2 or #3 without much first party output will be bad for the XB1. The exclusives will get pricier as the disparity grows between them and the PS4. So they need to spin up their first party game engine.

100% agreed. The Tomb Raider moneyhat is imo the worst mistake MS have made since they designed the Xbox One. Especially now that it's been revealed that the deal has a "duration".