• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Phil Spencer thinks this is Xbox's best generation so far

Status
Not open for further replies.
Best time period for the Xbox brand was undeniably 2006 -10. Then it petered out the end of that generation, started this one off horrible and things have just been lackluster since then.

It's can't be argued that in mindshare, sales and exclusive release quality the Once has been getting smoked, a far fall from the early 7th generation glory days. And a spec bump in the fall isn't going to change that.
 
neoglow said:
Of course he's going to say that and defend his product even if he doesn't think so himself, although it would be funny if he just said "you know, you're right, Xbox is shit this gen"

I do have this opinion myself, Xbox has lost its way this gen compared to Playstation. See what happens with Scorpio I guess.
Click to expand...

Of course a gaming executive is going to get into twitter arguments with gaming journalists?
 
Exclusivity wise this has been one of the worst in recent memory. This will be an important E3 for them to show something.
 
76IOQad.gif


I mean he obviously has to say something but it's just clearly not true. Poor Phil.
 
Biggest mistake this gen for them was losing COD marketing rights. In general Xbox doesn't have much marketing for anything anymore. Sony pretty much marketing all the big games and obtaining console exclusive after console exclusive on top of that. Xbox getting outspent like crazy.

Also losing Bungie and all that Kinect nonsense just paved the way even further for Sony to beat them down.
 
Lorcain said:
I agree with what Jason was saying in the original comments that Phil responded to. Scorpio is MS's opportunity to be bold and shake things up in a positive way. It can just be a monster enhanced XBO, or it could be that and a living room box for great PC titles too.

I loved my Xbox 360. I've never felt a strong reason to get an XBO. The PS4 is killing it with exclusives now. It's not even close. That's why I think the Xbox division needs to look past this current iterative generation and be bold with the Scorpio. Do something different.
Click to expand...

The original point by Jason is about their software output and attitude towards it compared to Sony. Not hardware. but what is being bold and different ? What would you like to see?
 
Kill3r7 said:
Kind of ironic coming form a poster with a Tearaway avatar. Let me know when they fund Tearaway 2. I agree that Sony has always been willing to fund games that might not sell incredibly well but usually most if not all of these games sell relatively well in Japan. Assuring them of at least a fair chance to recoup some of their initial investment, which was my point.
Click to expand...

Well they are funding Dreams which is to most people a game that will mega bomba and is most certainly more expensive then Tearaway.
 
I mean 360 was clearly the best generation for Xbox but Jason's comments are also pretty hyperbolic so it's only a slightly dumb comment followed by another slightly dumb comment. But then what else is he going to say to that, of course in the position he's in he's going to try suggest things are great.
 
mysteriousmage09 said:
With MS 1st party for 2017 and beyond, they have...

-Halo Wars 2 (343 Industries) in collaboration with Creative Assembly
-Sea of Thieves (RARE)
-Forza 7 (Turn 10 Studios) Not announced yet but we all know it's coming

There are titles like Crackdown 3 and Cuphead coming to Xbox One exclusively but as to the point, MS does not own those studios and those games are not being made internally.
Click to expand...

But why must we always move the goal posts for these titles when Microsoft and Phil Spencer have said countless times that these types of relationships are considered first party. Phil has explicitly said that he prefers these partnerships, working on first party ip, and releasing first party titles. Microsoft doesn't own the developer of Forza Horizon, yet 3 have been released, they've been consistently great, and are synonymous with Microsoft/Xbox. Microsoft didn't own Epic when they made 4 Gears games, yet they defined that 360 generation.

If you compare apples and oranges and use a metric that doesn't really jive well with Microsoft's strategy, you get tiny lists like yours. But if you genuinely want to look at Microsoft's first party output for 2017 and beyond, it looks more like this:

Halo Wars 2
Forza 7
Sea of Thieves
State of Decay 2
Crackdown 3
Phantom Dust Remaster
Fable Fortune
Gigantic
Voodoo Vince Remaster

And I won't even include games like Ashen, Cuphead, and Below etc etc. Likewise, obviously 2018 will bring another Forza title, the next Halo entry, etc.
 
Well the games that made XBox popular are pretty much all there on Xbox One: Halo, Gears, and Forza. The only thing missing compared to last gen are some niche Japanese games so I wouldn't say they are doing any worse. It's just that those games that put them on the map aren't resonating with consumers as much as they used to. If you're an Xbox only gamer, then you're probably happy with what you got otherwise you would have probably purchased a PS4 by now.
 
Maybe he should cancel more games to make it fair. The only issue with this Xbox generation is that it's almost too good.
 
Dweebo said:
Exclusivity wise this has been one of the worst in recent memory. This will be an important E3 for them to show something.
Click to expand...

Prepare for disappointment..... Sea of Thieves, Crackdown 3, Halo 6, Forza or Forza Horizon sequel, a couple 3rd party showcases and any of those shown with Project Scorpio in my crystal ball. Lots of salt and cheers from the fanboys.
 
Schrier is right though. The reason I havent upgraded to a Pro yet is because I have been holding out until the Scorpio is fully revealed. If the Scorpio is basically a Steam box but with the MS storefront and retains the flexibility in terms of graphic settings and comes witth some sort of universal pc emulation I would buy it over the Playstation in a heartbeat.
 
It's pretty crazy, the console space the past few generations.

The Xbox 360 was such an insanely good system, and the PS3 started off so poorly, that people just completely wrote off Sony. But if you look at the track records of both companies:

Xbox: Alright
Xbox 360: God tier
Xbox One: mehhhhh

PS1: God Tier
PS2: Super Omega God Tier
PS3: started of meeeehhhhh and became decent by the end
PS4: It's not God Tier yet, but it's damn good.


The track record would impose that Sony simply has a misstep with the ps3, but 3 consoles in, the thought starts to creep in that Microsoft just simply lucked out on the 360.
 
I'll never understand why CEO's will say stuff like this, when any intelligent, educated person can see right through it.

The only person this will convince is the die hard fans and advocates of your system. And they've already bought one anyway. So just say nothing.

If I were Microsoft i'd be changing the conversation, kinda like Sony did last gen. Start investing in new studios. Pump out exclusive games, fresh IP's. Then you can actually say you have the best exclusive games or something along those lines. Lying like this does nothing for your brand.
 
I think Phil should be happy that he managed to turn around the mess that Don Matrix left behind. I think the Xbox brand has been on a rebound and will only get bigger when the Scorpio gets released. Also, they are doing some interesting things with the Widows 10 store on PC.
 
mysteriousmage09 said:
MS' biggest issue is they 100% banked on 3rd party devs to do everything for them. Ryse was Crytek, Killer Instinct was Double Helix Games / Iron Galaxy, Sunset Overdrive was Insomniac, ReCore was Armature Studio / Comcept, Ori was Moon Studios, and so on. Sony obviously has been making deals with many 3rd party devs all the same but the big thing that comes around in the end, Sony has a plethora of in-house devs with a barrage of games coming just from them.

Not to start a list wars but to make a point on the 1st party only games from Sony game studios for 2017 and beyond.

-Gravity Rush 2 (SIE Japan Studio)
-Horizon: Zero Dawn (Guerrilla Games)
-Dreams (Media Molecule)
-Days Gone (SIE Bend Studio)
-GT Sport (Polyphony Digital)
-MLB The Show 17 (SIE San Diego Studio)
-God of War (SIE Santa Monica Studio)
-The Last of Us Part II (Naughty Dog)
-Knack 2 (SIE Japan Studio)

Also Sucker Punch should be due to finally showcase their new game. Add on the exclusive titles from the 3rd party devs and undisputed Japanese support, it's clear why Jason said what he said.

With MS 1st party for 2017 and beyond, they have...

-Halo Wars 2 (343 Industries) in collaboration with Creative Assembly
-Sea of Thieves (RARE)
-Forza 7 (Turn 10 Studios) Not announced yet but we all know it's coming

There are titles like Crackdown 3 and Cuphead coming to Xbox One exclusively but as to the point, MS does not own those studios and those games are not being made internally.

The main point for all of this is while the 3rd party strategy was working very well for MS earlier this generation, once they lost market share by a grand amount, 3rd party devs would have to be insane to make exclusivity deals with them at this point and ignore the over 50 million and rising PS4 install base. Simply releasing Scorpio with all its theoretical power won't do anything if they can't get any devs on board which seems extremely unlikely as per the reason I stated above. Which is also why Jason said they need to take a unique approach with Scorpio instead of charging headlong into Sony trying to steal their market share. It's simply not going to happen. Hell, by the time Scorpio actually releases, I wouldn't be surprised if PS4's install base is around 65+ million.

Game preferences and all that aside, it's clear as day who currently has the momentum. MS needs far more than a powerful new box.
Click to expand...

Well said. The problem is corporate philosophy and focus. From the very beginning, Sony's priority was a games console, first and foremost. From hardware to developer relations, that was the focus. On top of that, Sony has maintained and cultivated (not perfectly, mind you. RE: Studio Closures) a talented group of in-house developers who are given the freedom to design new IPs and take risks.

But Sony's doubling down on what they do best: cinematic single-player driven games, because MP-driven games just haven't given them the huge levels of success that other franchises have (Battlefield, Call of Duty, Destiny, Halo, Gears of War, etc). That being said, the ease-of-development and strength of the PS4 hardware has made the console home to those big 3rd party MP games, freeing Sony of the "responsibility" if you will, of having to find the next big MP game. Hence they are free to build on their strengths.

Meanwhile, Microsoft is still suffering from:
A) Taking focus off of in-house development starting back at about 2009
B) Launching a console hilariously tone-deaf to the wants and needs of an established, and more importantly, faithful userbase
C) Launching a console sadly hobbled by said tone-deaf designs, from a hardware perspective
D) A series of projects, both new IPs and sequels/spiritual successors that have either failed commercially (flops) and failed developmentally (cancellations). Costly failures in most cases, given the rising costs of AAA development.

So MS now seems to be turning to their "strengths," MP-driven titles with the Games-as-a-Service model, as can be inferred by their latest moves. The issue is that that's not where the market seems to be. As powerful as Scorpio will be, in terms of consoles, that won't help them if the market isn't interested in their vision for gaming.

Spencer and his Xbox crew are in an unenviable position, frankly. They've made strides in turning around the Xbox One and repairing some damage to the brand, but the true measure of how the Xbox ultimately fares will be in how the long-game is played.
 
I mean, of course his answer (even if not really needed) was expected to be pure PR speak. But I don't understand why he couldn't just say sth. along the lines of "We'll continue our efforts to make Xbox One the best generation of all " or whatever. That is what I would have expected.

Painting a vague picture with an absolute describing your product's history so far is just kinda bs as an answer, when the whole discourse in gaming has been about quite the opposite for some weeks.

And I don't think this answer really shows willingness to change some strategies or evokes a positive outlook of the product for your customers/ consumers in general.

I think he shouldn't have said anything or should have done way better.
 
d9b said:
Wasn't Specer high up the chain of command back then? He was there too you know.
Click to expand...

He was there and onboard with the direction Xbox went in & is currently on. He's a yes guy - tells ya what you want to hear, does whatever MS higher-ups want him to do.
 
I would like to see MS improve the convenience of PCs.

Sony isn't trying to compete with them anyway and MS doesn't seem interested in competing with them either.
 
Ricky Ricardo said:
Well said. The problem is corporate philosophy and focus. From the very beginning, Sony's priority was a games console, first and foremost. From hardware to developer relations, that was the focus. On top of that Sony has maintained and cultivated (not perfectly, mind you. See studio closures) a talented group of in-house developers who are given the freedom to design new IPs and take risks.

But Sony's doubling down on what they do best: cinematic single-player driven games, because MP-driven games just haven't given them the huge levels of success that other franchises have (Battlefield, Call of Duty, Destiny, Halo, Gears of War, etc). That being said, the ease-of-development and strength of the PS4 hardware has made the console home to those big 3rd party MP games, freeing Sony of the "responsibility" if you will, of having to find the next big MP game. Hence they are free to build on their strengths.

Meanwhile Microsoft is still suffering from
A) Taking focus off of in-house development starting back at about 2009
B) Launching a console hilariously tone-deaf to the wants and needs of an established, and more importantly, faithful userbase
C) Launching a console sadly hobbled by said tone-deaf designs, from a hardware perspective
D) A series of projects, both new IPs and sequels/spiritual successors that have either failed commercially (flops) and failed developmentally (cancellations). Costly failures in most cases, given the rising costs of AAA development.

So MS now seems to be turning to their "strengths," MP-driven titles with the Games-as-a-Service model, as as can be inferred by their latest moves. The issue is, that's not where the market seems to be. As powerful as Scorpio will be, in terms of consoles, that won't help them if the market isn't interested in their vision for gaming.

Spencer and his Xbox crew are in an unenviable position, frankly. They've made strides in turning around the Xbox One and repairing some damage to the brand, but the true measure of how the Xbox ultimately fares will be in how the long-game is played.
Click to expand...

Now this is a good post, sums it up well. Spencer has a tough job.
 
Ricky Ricardo said:
Well said. The problem is corporate philosophy and focus. From the very beginning, Sony's priority was a games console, first and foremost. From hardware to developer relations, that was the focus. On top of that Sony has maintained and cultivated (not perfectly, mind you. See studio closures) a talented group of in-house developers who are given the freedom to design new IPs and take risks.

But Sony's doubling down on what they do best: cinematic single-player driven games, because MP-driven games just haven't given them the huge levels of success that other franchises have (Battlefield, Call of Duty, Destiny, Halo, Gears of War, etc). That being said, the ease-of-development and strength of the PS4 hardware has made the console home to those big 3rd party MP games, freeing Sony of the "responsibility" if you will, of having to find the next big MP game. Hence they are free to build on their strengths.

Meanwhile Microsoft is still suffering from
A) Taking focus off of in-house development starting back at about 2009
B) Launching a console hilariously tone-deaf to the wants and needs of an established, and more importantly, faithful userbase
C) Launching a console sadly hobbled by said tone-deaf designs, from a hardware perspective
D) A series of projects, both new IPs and sequels/spiritual successors that have either failed commercially (flops) and failed developmentally (cancellations). Costly failures in most cases, given the rising costs of AAA development.

So MS now seems to be turning to their "strengths," MP-driven titles with the Games-as-a-Service model, as as can be inferred by their latest moves. The issue is, that's not where the market seems to be. As powerful as Scorpio will be, in terms of consoles, that won't help them if the market isn't interested in their vision for gaming.

Spencer and his Xbox crew are in an unenviable position, frankly. They've made strides in turning around the Xbox One and repairing some damage to the brand, but the true measure of how the Xbox ultimately fares will be in how the long-game is played.
Click to expand...

Good posts 👍🏻
 
d9b said:
Wasn't Specer high up the chain of command back then? He was there too you know.
Click to expand...

Yes, there's even an interview of him saying almost the same as Mattrick about "get a X360 guys if you don't like the XBO". No idea why people insist that he is any different.

HOWEVER, the Trump = Phil Spencer comparisons are beyond any logic. I mean people, come on, don't be so ridiculous :/
 
Kaako said:
Without 3rd parties, they would not survive. Your opinion is not controversial and 3rd party has always been vital to their survival. They just have to actually invest more in their own internal stuff, is all.
Click to expand...

They should invest some into internals but not too much that it takes away from 3rd party investment. Put out a unique IP every once in a while but don't lose track of 3rd party. Your console still needs a steady stream of games from other sources.
 
Papacheeks said:
Don't forget knack 2, and they funded the PS4 port of Tearaway.
Click to expand...

Knack sold better than any of the games we have been discussing, so no point in discussing a game that sold over at least 1 million units. I made the comment about Tearaway 2 because Tearaway Unfolded bombed in Japan, well really everywhere. So making a sequel to it would show a strong desire to fund games regardless of concerns about market viability. I love the game and would gladly take a sequel.
 
prwxv3 said:
Sony does not care if it's a game that won't light the charts on fire. They want your game on their system. How are Ms supposed to compete in software when they don't share that same value?
Click to expand...

More often than not, it end up being the proper approach to gradually win the generation. Even if a lot of those games are niche, they exist and once people make their research as to which console to buy, the Playstation library will stand out.

The fact that the Xbox exclusives aren't setting the charts on fire doesn't help, that's for sure. The market has shifted so that having a shooter as your flagship series is ill-advised given the insane competition (juggernauts such as Call of Duty, Battlefield, Destiny and now Overwatch).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

DF Direct Q+A: Phil Spencer Retires From Xbox... So What Happens Next?
13
433
PauloRoberto replied
Thank You Phil Spencer Thread
2
98
1K
ZoukGalaxy replied
IGN Best games of 2026 so far . . .
2
54
604
HRK69 replied
Laura Fryer - Phil Spencer and Me
2
62
1K
Bonfires Down replied
Phil Spencer kicks off Xbox's 25 year anniversary with video and logo
2 3
122
2K
OLED_Gamer replied
Top Bottom