Support NeoGAF

[LiquidSolid]

This is how the PS3 turned around.

Yes Phil. You know what's up.

Sony took over a decade to get where they were with the PS3, it's not as easy as just flipping a switch and seeing the results in a couple of years.

It's funny. Between Microsoft and Sony, Microsoft is actually the publisher sitting on a gold mine of IPs that they're simply not utilising. Which is why Sony continues to come up with new ones to try and create franchises.

So you'd think that all these years it would have been Microsoft pumping out the 1st party exclusives instead of Sony. Funny how that works. Hopefully this means Microsoft will start to put these IPs to work. From Rare's stable alone they have a shitload sitting there.

Forget stuff like Crimson Skies, MechAssault, RalliSport, N3 (loved those games), Black & White and stuff like that. They're really sitting on a LOT of genuinely worthwhile IPs and if you can combine that with new stuff, they could really build themselves a pretty good library of 1st party exclusives if they so chose to.

Sony have a shitload of IPs, especially from the Psygnosis buyout, so I'm not sure what you're going on about. Doesn't seem like you know what you're talking about. The reason why they focus on new IPs isn't because they don't have any old ones they can milk, it's because a) that's been their strategy since they were founded and b) they're a creative focused publisher, which is something they inherited from Sony Music. It's worked out really well for them so far, why would they change it?

 

[OEM]

I like it a lot. Based Phil

 

[CoG]

Most likely Phil Spencer as the deal happened around E3 last year.

Gamescom 2014.

 

[Se_7_eN]

It’s great to have Tomb Raider as part of our line-up, but investing in first party, you’ll see more of that at gamescom next week, is really core to our strategy."

This is kind of a slap in the face IMO, Square has been commenting on the deal non-stop (I personally think they are nervous about it) and he comes in with "Eh, the deal is alright... Not something we really care too much about though"

Doesn't seem like anyone involved in the deal is very happy.

 

[nubbe]

As much as I'm looking forward to Rare Replay next week, Rare needs to prove they can deliver even *one* decent new product at a time again.

All this talk of two or three different brand new games is crazy to me.

Kameo had potential, but they did not follow up on that
Viva Pinata could have been awesome if it didn't have such a shitty interface that makes it borderline unplayable

MS lacks people that has that genuine feeling for what makes a game intuitive

 

[DeepEnigma]

Phil,

For the love of God, please use the High Heat license and put out an MLB title. Please!

This!

I feel for you Xbox only gamers. MLB The Show is so so good, and a first party High Heat sticking to it's roots would be great!

 

[Ray Down]

Gamescom 2014.

Nah chobel is saying the deal was made around E3 probably after, then we found out at Gamescom.

 

[daTRUballin]

There have been enough hints that I believe it.

I wonder if the Rare Replay team are going to be split up among SoT and project 3, or if they start on something new.

It'd be great if they started on something new, but I dunno. But if there's only 20 people working on RR, then I'm not sure if they are big enough to work on some of the franchises that people want them to revive. ._.

 

[RedSparrows]

This is kind of a slap in the face IMO, Square has been commenting on the deal non-stop (I personally think they are nervous about it) and he comes in with "Eh, the deal is alright... Not something we really care too much about though"

Doesn't seem like anyone involved in the deal is very happy.

'We like the deal, we also think first party is core'. How is that a slap in the face?

People read way too much into this stuff.

 

[etta]

This is kind of a slap in the face IMO, Square has been commenting on the deal non-stop (I personally think they are nervous about it) and he comes in with "Eh, the deal is alright... Not something we really care too much about though"

Doesn't seem like anyone involved in the deal is very happy.

Err, he says their core strategy is first party but it's great they could also get the ROTR deal. You're reading it wrong.

 

[Maintenance]

Gaming's savior. I love Phil Spencer.

 

[Deleted member 471617]

How much is Tomb Raider going to sell? Please tell since you have a crystal ball.
He been saying for a while they are focusing on 1st party support.
http://www.polygon.com/2015/4/20/8456445/phil-spencer-e3-2015-first-party-exclusive-games

So, April 20th was the day he found out about Fallout 4 huh? Now, it all becomes clear. I just find it extremely funny that Spencer wants to concentrate on first party games all of a sudden. I didn't see him saying that a year ago when he was getting Tomb Raider to be a one year timed exclusive. Basically, he sees the disaster that is Rise of the Tomb Raider and now, he's back peddling all of a sudden. Where was this attitude and direction BEFORE acquiring Tomb Raider?

As for the sales for Rise of the Tomb Raider, as of a week or so ago, it was ranked #59th on Amazon's pre-order list. Not sure how accurate it is but the 2013 Tomb Raider and definitive editions have sold a combined 5.88m copies on PC, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360 and Xbox One.

Now, if that's accurate or at least somewhat close, considering that Rise of the Tomb raider is only releasing on Xbox One on November 10th, already has a confirmed release period for the PC and PS4 versions and that it's going against a lot tougher competition than it did back in March 2013, im going to predict that opening week sales will be around 285k. For the month of November, I predict 855k total with there being a slim chance it surpasses the million mark before the end of the year.

Maybe that's good, I don't know but from my perspective, anything less than 1m in sales during it's release week is a failure in my opinion simply because Microsoft paid a huge lump sum of money in order to get it to be a one year timed exclusive.

Of course, this is just my own personal opinion. I'm actually hoping the game itself surpasses the 2013 one but sales wise, it's way too crowded and being on the console with as of now only 13m users compared to as of now 23m users is going to hurt it badly. The competition is a lot stronger now than it was last year of the year before or when Tomb Raider was released in March 2013.

I just think that in the end, Microsoft is going to end up regretting the move which is why Phil Spencer is pushing first party games and that the real winners will be Square Enix for getting whatever amount Microsoft paid them up front and behind them will be Sony as delaying Uncharted 4 could turn out to be a brilliant move.

 

[Sydle]

Kameo had potential, but they did not follow up on that
Viva Pinata could have been awesome if it didn't have such a shitty interface that makes it borderline unplayable

MS lacks people that has that genuine feeling for what makes a game intuitive

They were working on Kameo 2, but cancelled it when they shifted to Kinect development.

I think Kameo could have turned into an amazing adventure franchise, but the time to do that has passed. Hopefully we get a spiritual sequel some day.

It'd be great if they started on something new, but I dunno. But if there's only 20 people working on RR, then I'm not sure if they are big enough to work on some of the franchises that people want them to revive. ._.

Rare has always shifted around people to help on projects depending on what stages they were in, sometimes leaving small core teams of a few people to continue working on prototypes or pre-production of another title.

I think a team of 20 people is enough to do a lot of pre-production (prototypes, general level design, technical requirements, art style, etc.) work on an AA game, especially if the general formula for the game has been previously established. Considering that Yooka-Laylee is a team of like 10-15 people then the Rare Replay team could be just enough to crank out a Banjo game, for example, in about 2 years.

I would not be surprised if Rare starts working with third-party devs like Turn10, 343, and The Coalition have done for their respective franchises.

 

[Kolx]

Using Halo, Gears of War, Forza, Fable franchises as examples for building the best lineup ever isn't really a great one.

 

[Neuromancer]

Can't link them here, but thanks to Dualshockers for the link.

You should be thanking ZhugeEX, it's his video that he posted here earlier lol.

 

[SgtCobra]

I don't care if the games are first, second or third party, just as long as they're good. Bring me the goods Spencer.

 

[ZhugeEX]

You should be thanking ZhugeEX, it's his video that he posted here earlier lol.

Actually you should thank gamecore for doing the interview. I just uploaded the video to youtube.

It's funny though how I posted on GAF, it gets posted on a news site, then back on GAF. haha

 

[Jigorath]

Actually you should thank gamecore for doing the interview. I just uploaded the video to youtube.

It's funny though how I posted on GAF, it gets posted on a news site, then back on GAF. haha

GAF > Internet > GAF

 

[DeepEnigma]

They were working on Kameo 2, but cancelled it when they shifted to Kinect development.

I think Kameo could have turned into an amazing adventure franchise, but the time to do that has passed. Hopefully we get a spiritual sequel some day.

I really enjoyed Kameo.

 

[Disaster Nebraska]

Well no, I don't agree with the notion that Sony only emphasised first party support in the PS3 era; of course they did with the PS1 and PS2. I guess it just "felt" more emphasised due to the lack of previous third party exclusives like Final Fantasy, Tekken, Ominusha Devil May Cry, Kingdom Hearts, Metal Gear Solid (yes I know MGS4 was, but I mean it was the norm with MGS2 being timed exclusives and MGS1/3 being wholly an exclusive), and GTA being timed exclusive too and other third party deals etc

But yeah I get what you mean. And hell, it might just be my subjective preference of Sony's first party output in the PS3 era compared to the PS2. I'm probably in the minority, but regarding the games that I played from each of their now first party studios, I actually prefer the PS3 output over the PS2.

I think there's something to be said about how PS3 "felt" like they were pushing more 1st party stuff. I feel the exact same way. PS3 "felt" like it was pushing more 1st party stuff but if you run the numbers I think it was only because 3rd party offerings were de-emphasized.

And I also prefer the PS3 output compared to PS2.

 

[MatrixMan.EXE]

Using Halo, Gears of War, Forza, Fable franchises as examples for building the best lineup ever isn't really a great one.

With the exception of Tomb Raider its pretty by the books. Forza again, Fable again, Halo again, Gears again. Much more excited about their 2016 line up, personally. Scalebound, Recore and Quantum Break interest me far more. Crackdown is likely next year too, right? Never been a fan of the series but I'm really interested to see how much they can improve it with new hardware. Sandbox games are going to benefit big time from the new boxes.

 

[ST3K3LLY]

That makes sense as it takes time to develop your own stuff so it was faster to pay companies for 1st dibs.

 

[Dynasty]

So, April 20th was the day he found out about Fallout 4 huh? Now, it all becomes clear. I just find it extremely funny that Spencer wants to concentrate on first party games all of a sudden. I didn't see him saying that a year ago when he was getting Tomb Raider to be a one year timed exclusive. Basically, he sees the disaster that is Rise of the Tomb Raider and now, he's back peddling all of a sudden. Where was this attitude and direction BEFORE acquiring Tomb Raider?

As for the sales for Rise of the Tomb Raider, as of a week or so ago, it was ranked #59th on Amazon's pre-order list. Not sure how accurate it is but the 2013 Tomb Raider and definitive editions have sold a combined 5.88m copies on PC, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360 and Xbox One.

Now, if that's accurate or at least somewhat close, considering that Rise of the Tomb raider is only releasing on Xbox One on November 10th, already has a confirmed release period for the PC and PS4 versions and that it's going against a lot tougher competition than it did back in March 2013, im going to predict that opening week sales will be around 285k. For the month of November, I predict 855k total with there being a slim chance it surpasses the million mark before the end of the year.

Maybe that's good, I don't know but from my perspective, anything less than 1m in sales during it's release week is a failure in my opinion simply because Microsoft paid a huge lump sum of money in order to get it to be a one year timed exclusive.

Of course, this is just my own personal opinion. I'm actually hoping the game itself surpasses the 2013 one but sales wise, it's way too crowded and being on the console with as of now only 13m users compared to as of now 23m users is going to hurt it badly. The competition is a lot stronger now than it was last year of the year before or when Tomb Raider was released in March 2013.

I just think that in the end, Microsoft is going to end up regretting the move which is why Phil Spencer is pushing first party games and that the real winners will be Square Enix for getting whatever amount Microsoft paid them up front and behind them will be Sony as delaying Uncharted 4 could turn out to be a brilliant move.

Personally think you are reading too much into it. MS is focusing on 1st party simply because they have to. They don't regret TR because they won't get many more of these chances, also it gives them another well established game they can promote as a 'exclusive' to gamers especially the more casual gamer. I had to explain to my friends that Tomb Raider ain't like Halo and that it will come to the PS4 a year later.

 

[Deleted member 471617]

I'm fully expecting Microsoft to bundle Tomb Raider with the Xbox One console but im sorry, to me, this is a failure and a huge one at that and here's why -

First, Microsoft is basically just going to give away their console with insane deals which if anything undervalues the consoles and makes it look cheap in comparison because when you know your product is good, you don't need to go to that insane level.

Second, if it takes Microsoft packing in Tomb Raider in order for it to sell the console, that's even sadder. Acquiring Tomb Raider to be a one year timed exclusive should be with the thought of "fans will want to play this game and thus will only be able to play it on Xbox One this holiday season and thus, will have to purchase an Xbox One console in order to play the game".

That's how I personally look at it. No way in hell would I pay a crapload of money for a timed(*smh*) exclusive only to pack it in with the console as to me, that defeats the entire purpose of getting people to buy the console in order to play the game.

In other words, a deal like this should be selling the game AND the console separately, not as a bundle. What's even the point in that? A Halo 5 bundle would be a better move.

Sorry but this move has been a disaster since Uncharted 4 was delayed and replaced by Fallout 4 which im sorry, im not a fan of the franchise but even I see it crushing Tomb Raider head to head.

Of course, this is just my own personal opinion. It's different when you pack in a game of an existing first party IP that you own (Halo, Uncharted, etc.) compared to packing in a game you purchased the rights to for a year so it could help sell your console. It's probably just me but that's how I look at it.

 

[LowerLevel]

Can we add Undead Labs under the umbrella too? Yeah, they are making Class 4 on PC too, but I really wouldn't be surprised if it was Windows 10/Crossplay(buy)...

 

[RedSparrows]

So, April 20th was the day he found out about Fallout 4 huh? Now, it all becomes clear. I just find it extremely funny that Spencer wants to concentrate on first party games all of a sudden. I didn't see him saying that a year ago when he was getting Tomb Raider to be a one year timed exclusive. Basically, he sees the disaster that is Rise of the Tomb Raider and now, he's back peddling all of a sudden. Where was this attitude and direction BEFORE acquiring Tomb Raider?

As for the sales for Rise of the Tomb Raider, as of a week or so ago, it was ranked #59th on Amazon's pre-order list. Not sure how accurate it is but the 2013 Tomb Raider and definitive editions have sold a combined 5.88m copies on PC, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360 and Xbox One.

Now, if that's accurate or at least somewhat close, considering that Rise of the Tomb raider is only releasing on Xbox One on November 10th, already has a confirmed release period for the PC and PS4 versions and that it's going against a lot tougher competition than it did back in March 2013, im going to predict that opening week sales will be around 285k. For the month of November, I predict 855k total with there being a slim chance it surpasses the million mark before the end of the year.

Maybe that's good, I don't know but from my perspective, anything less than 1m in sales during it's release week is a failure in my opinion simply because Microsoft paid a huge lump sum of money in order to get it to be a one year timed exclusive.

Of course, this is just my own personal opinion. I'm actually hoping the game itself surpasses the 2013 one but sales wise, it's way too crowded and being on the console with as of now only 13m users compared to as of now 23m users is going to hurt it badly. The competition is a lot stronger now than it was last year of the year before or when Tomb Raider was released in March 2013.

I just think that in the end, Microsoft is going to end up regretting the move which is why Phil Spencer is pushing first party games and that the real winners will be Square Enix for getting whatever amount Microsoft paid them up front and behind them will be Sony as delaying Uncharted 4 could turn out to be a brilliant move.

Come now, surely 290?!!!!!!

As an aside, you're implying Sony delayed UC4 at least in part due to TR. But then you're saying TR won't sell. So why would Sony do that?

Why do I even give a fuck?!

 

[Neuromancer]

Assuming he's telling the truth this is good news for everyone. Less third party games getting snaked from other platforms.

Actually you should thank gamecore for doing the interview. I just uploaded the video to youtube.

It's funny though how I posted on GAF, it gets posted on a news site, then back on GAF. haha

Oh ok haha.

 

[RedSparrows]

With the exception of Tomb Raider its pretty by the books. Forza again, Fable again, Halo again, Gears again. Much more excited about their 2016 line up, personally. Scalebound, Recore and Quantum Break interest me far more. Crackdown is likely next year too, right? Never been a fan of the series but I'm really interested to see how much they can improve it with new hardware. Sandbox games are going to benefit big time from the new boxes.

It's by the books, but they're popular. It's very easy to sneer at 'more of the same', but if they're well made, develop the series sensibly and offer what fans want, that's mission accomplished. If this strategy is then matched by new titles, then that's ideal.

 

[Pez]

Smart man. This creates value for the Xbox brand, which it desperately needs.

The lack of building a strong first party during the 360 era really damned them.

 

[semiconscious]

Gaming's savior. I love Phil Spencer.

so, someone at ms finally using some common sense for a change = 'gaming's savior'? ...

 

[AgentP]

Terrible first post.
I am excited about this Windows 10 + Xbox One cross-play/buy strategy.

Much excite. Why? Sorry, but you sound like a PR person.

 

[Chris1]

Good to hear. Xbox has a lot of unique IP's, it's time to explore them instead of pumping out Forza/Gears/Halo every year like the 360 was in its last few years. Consoles need a solid first party and no better time to try your hardest than when you're in the losing seat sales wise. This years E3 was a great showing and if they keep that up I'll be more than happy personally.

In other words, a deal like this should be selling the game AND the console separately, not as a bundle. What's even the point in that? A Halo 5 bundle would be a better move.

Why would they do that? They make more money off Halo 5 and more people would buy Halo 5 than TR. Most people that buy a TR bundle will also buy Halo 5, but if Halo 5 was to be bundled heavily, how many of them are going to buy TR? only a fraction.

It's a smart move to not bundle brand new first party games heavily during the holidays. They make more money off them than third party and most people will be buying a big game like Halo at the same time so it'll help offset whatever the free game bundles costs & the price drops.

 

[Deleted member 471617]

Come now, surely 290?!!!!!!

As an aside, you're implying Sony delayed UC4 at least in part due to TR. But then you're saying TR won't sell. So why would Sony do that?

Why do I even give a fuck?!

Sony didn't want to delay Uncharted 4 at all but Naught Dog pushed the issue and won. It had nothing to do with Tomb Raider or any other game being released this holiday season but in hindsight, delaying Uncharted 4 could actually turn out to be a brilliant move as March 2016 will be empty, there won't be any Xbox One exclusives going against it and most third party games will stay away from it especially if it's a new IP so compared to Tomb Raider and what it's going up against this holiday season, a move that Sony was against may end up being a huge positive for them.

I don't know why you even give a fuck? LOL. Maybe, it's because we're bored and have nothing else better to do. LOL.

 

[RexNovis]

He truly is the king of telling everyone what they want to hear. If he is planning to invest so much in 1st part why have we seen such minimal growth in their first party studios so far this gen? My guess is that when Phil Spencer says first party he means an IP he owns and not a studio he owns. So if true I'm betting we will see a lot more licensed development by third party studios similar to Gears last gen or Scalebound, Killer Instinct etc this gen.

The problem with this strategy is that it is a limp wristed commitment. What I mean by that is that without investment in studios it is far easier for MS production to come to screeching halt like we saw at the end of last gen. If they invest in studios then they are committed to supporting them long term whereas investing in IPs there is no guarantee that they will continue to support development in the long term.

For those of you reading this whilst grinding your teeth in rage think about this way: right now many are excited for Scalebound as an IP MS owns being developed by a beloved studio (Platinum games). Now imagine tomorrow you wake up to news that MS has decided to purchase Platinum games. You would be ecstatic right? Why is that? Because, in your head, you know that this purchase guarantees future exclusive development and support. It's precisely this reason that a non committal IP investment strategy is less appealing.

 

[Chris1]

He truly is the king of telling everyone what they want to hear. If he is planning to invest so much in 1st part why have we seen such minimal growth in their first party studios so far this gen? My guess is that when Phil Spencer says first party he means an IP he owns and not a studio he owns. So if true I'm betting we will see a lot more licensed development by the party studios similar to Gears last gen or Scalebound, Killer Instinct etc this gen.

The problem with this strategy is that it is a limp wristed commitment. What I mean by that is that without investment in studios it is far easier for MS production to come to screeching halt like we saw at the end of lady gen. If they invest in studios then they are committed to supporting them long term whereas investing in IPs there is no guarantee that they will continue to support development in the long term.

For those of you reading this whilst grinding your teeth in rage think about this way: right now many are excited for Scalebound as an IP MS owns being developed by a beloved studio (Platinum games). Now imagine tomorrow you wake up to news that MS has decided to purchase Platinum games. You would be ecstatic right? Why is that? Because, in your head, you know that this purchase guarantees future exclusive development and support. It's precisely this reason that a non committal IP investment strategy is less appealing.

I'm pretty sure Phil has said before he considers first party games that he owns the IP for. So games like Scalebound, Quantum Break and what not would be first party even though they don't own the studios.

 

[labaronx]

Phil spencer definitely has had a hard job lately.

The one thing i noticed alot is when an rpg or Japanese game gets announced for the ps4 he is bombarded by tweets from xbox one owners demanding he do something to get the game on the console

I first noticed it with street fighter v but the star ocean v tweets he received were nasty

Same after e3 with world of final fantasy and shenmue 3 the twitter barrage was crazy.

I wonder how he'll try to lure in some of those franchises with japan xbox sales so low.

 

[Deleted member 471617]

Why would they do that? They make more money off Halo 5 and more people would buy Halo 5 than TR. Most people that buy a TR bundle will also buy Halo 5, but if Halo 5 was to be bundled heavily, how many of them are going to buy TR? only a fraction.

It's a smart move to not bundle brand new first party games heavily during the holidays. They make more money off them than third party and most people will be buying a big game like Halo at the same time so it'll help offset whatever the free game bundles costs & the price drops.

I actually agree 100% but to actually pay for the game to be exclusive for Xbox One this holiday season and then pack it in with the console that you're trying to sell on its own which is why you paid for the game to be exclusive this holiday season to begin with is just quite simply fucked up to me. That's all.

 

[TomShoe]

As for the sales for Rise of the Tomb Raider, as of a week or so ago, it was ranked #59th on Amazon's pre-order list. Not sure how accurate it is but the 2013 Tomb Raider and definitive editions have sold a combined 5.88m copies on PC, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360 and Xbox One.

Chartzzz Alert

 

[Wynnebeck]

Heh. Ironic.

 

[ZhugeEX]

He truly is the king of telling everyone what they want to hear.

100% agree.

 

[LewieP]

Would be far more interesting if Microsoft's first party output wasn't so focused on the Gears/Fable/Forza/Halo cycle.

 

[funkystudent]

Phil spencer definitely has had a hard job lately.

The one thing i noticed alot is when an rpg or Japanese game gets announced for the ps4 he is bombarded by tweets from xbox one owners demanding he do something to get the game on the console

I first noticed it with street fighter v but the star ocean v tweets he received were nasty

Same after e3 with world of final fantasy and shenmue 3 the twitter barrage was crazy.

I wonder how he'll try to lure in some of those franchises with japan xbox sales so low.

I am still a little shocked Xbox didnt try get persona 5 on there.


Well maybe they did try but it didn't happen for whatever reasons. At least I hope they tried. If they are not trying to get those games on the platform that's acread bummer.


Or who knows. Gamescom is soon and a Xbox version might explain the P5 delay.

 

[alr1ght]

This is good news. 3rd party exclusives are always going to be more expensive if you have smaller marketshare.

 

[DeepEnigma]

He truly is the king of telling everyone what they want to hear. If he is planning to invest so much in 1st part why have we seen such minimal growth in their first party studios so far this gen? My guess is that when Phil Spencer says first party he means an IP he owns and not a studio he owns. So if true I'm betting we will see a lot more licensed development by the party studios similar to Gears last gen or Scalebound, Killer Instinct etc this gen.

The problem with this strategy is that it is a limp wristed commitment. What I mean by that is that without investment in studios it is far easier for MS production to come to screeching halt like we saw at the end of lady gen. If they invest in studios then they are committed to supporting them long term whereas investing in IPs there is no guarantee that they will continue to support development in the long term.

For those of you reading this whilst grinding your teeth in rage think about this way: right now many are excited for Scalebound as an IP MS owns being developed by a beloved studio (Platinum games). Now imagine tomorrow you wake up to news that MS has decided to purchase Platinum games. You would be ecstatic right? Why is that? Because, in your head, you know that this purchase guarantees future exclusive development and support. It's precisely this reason that a non committal IP investment strategy is less appealing.

Damn, sir!

 

[Jigorath]

He truly is the king of telling everyone what they want to hear. If he is planning to invest so much in 1st part why have we seen such minimal growth in their first party studios so far this gen? My guess is that when Phil Spencer says first party he means an IP he owns and not a studio he owns. So if true I'm betting we will see a lot more licensed development by the party studios similar to Gears last gen or Scalebound, Killer Instinct etc this gen.

The problem with this strategy is that it is a limp wristed commitment. What I mean by that is that without investment in studios it is far easier for MS production to come to screeching halt like we saw at the end of lady gen. If they invest in studios then they are committed to supporting them long term whereas investing in IPs there is no guarantee that they will continue to support development in the long term.

For those of you reading this whilst grinding your teeth in rage think about this way: right now many are excited for Scalebound as an IP MS owns being developed by a beloved studio (Platinum games). Now imagine tomorrow you wake up to news that MS has decided to purchase Platinum games. You would be ecstatic right? Why is that? Because, in your head, you know that this purchase guarantees future exclusive development and support. It's precisely this reason that a non committal IP investment strategy is less appealing.

Apparently they've been buying a bunch of studios lately.

 

[DrkSage]

And the truth shall set you free.

Spoiler

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Cruxist]

Good long term decision. If this is truly in ace now, in 2-3 years Xbox will have a killer year.

Now get me a halo wars 2, Phil! Make my dreams come true!

 

[New002]

Certainly is a better long term strategy.

Interview with Phil Spencer at China Joy 2015 (around 6 minute mark): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TtrBgKoU2s



Can't link them here, but thanks to Dualshockers for the link.

Sounds good to me!

How did that work out for Nintendo?

Edit: I think that his back is against a wall and MS can't lock in the third party exclusives like sony can (or even if 3rd parties want exclusivity anymore).

Or maybe he really just wants Xbox to have a strong first-party line-up to strengthen the brand with the added benefit of not having to rely so much on dumping cash to snap up third-party full/time exclusivity.

Not everything has to be looked at in a negative light. In the end time will tell if he's serious about this or not, but I'd like to think he is.

 

[etta]

Much excite. Why? Sorry, but you sound like a PR person.

Errr, what? People can't be happy for cross-buy and cross-play with the fancy new Windows 10 and Xbox One harmony? Damn, I must have missed the memo.

 

[Shin-Ra]

Using Halo, Gears of War, Forza, Fable franchises as examples for building the best lineup ever isn't really a great one.

I'm just amazed he had the balls to use the "best line-up we’ve ever seen" line in an interview answer.

Much excite. Why? Sorry, but you sound like a PR person.

Synergy got me good.

That's true. I was just thinking, maybe with this Windows 10 synergy in play, maybe Microsoft themselves will think about investing more into studios. It would give the Windows Store and edge over Steam if they get AAA exclusives up on it.


Oh look, another arm chair analyst. Have you thought that Microsoft may have bundle plans for ROTR? A $299 Black Friday bundle with ROTR and DE will sell like nuts.

And Loch Doun can't be too happy about this news!

My strategy is more around our own first party franchises, and investing in franchises that we own, and probably fewer exclusive deals for third party content.

Sony needs to change their anti-developer stance on IP ownership or this type of thing is going to keep happening.