• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

To the people who are concerned about xbox this gen, this is what they will have this gen so far. Plus activision, if the deal is done.

22•22

Doesnt need recognition
Why no Monster Hunter Rise a 60fps. Enhanced 4k Ace Combat 7? MHW at 1080p instead of 900 etc Lol I'm getting old
 
Last edited:

Belthazar

Member
It's like Microsoft saw Playstation's "Greatness Awaits" tagline and tried to imitate it way too hard... Greatness seems to always be waiting, with Xbox always having those promising lists and always failing to deliver half of it. I mean, Crackdown 3 was once part of such lists and we know how it turned out.
 
Last edited:

dvdvideo

Member
Some of you actually think ms tied up 90 billion dollars on an acquisition that "might" go through? Lol
Ms has purchased Activision, it's just a matter of exactly when the sale is complete, not if.
Then we can watch in 2 or 3 years when Cod suddenly becomes xbox exclusive and y'all can react in shock and horror that they said it wouldn't happen.
 

kingfey

Banned
It's like Microsoft saw Playstation's "Greatness Awaits" tagline and tried to imitate it way too hard... Greatness seems to always be waiting, with Xbox always having those promising lists and always failing to deliver half of it. I mean, Crackdown 3 was once part of such lists and we know how it turned out.
Difference is, some of those new studios are top notch in term of delivering great games.

As long as they don't rush fast and take time, we might get good games.
 

Moses85

Member

TL;DR quick list​

  • 343 industries: Halo Infinite
  • Compulsion Games: Project Midnight
  • Double Fine: Unannounced projects, Psychonauts 2
  • inXile: Project Cobalt, Wasteland 3 updates
  • Mojang: Minecraft updates, Minecraft Dungeons updates, two unannounced projects
  • Ninja Theory: Project Mara, Hellblade II
  • Obsidian Entertainment: Grounded, Avowed, The Outer Worlds 2, unannounced project
  • Playground Games: Forza Horizon 5, Fable
  • The Coalition: Gears of War, unannounced project
  • Rare: Sea of Thieves updates, Everwild
  • The Initiative: Perfect Dark
  • Turn 10: Forza Motorsport 8
  • Undead Labs: State of Decay 3
  • World's Edge: Age of Empires IV, partner projects
  • Bethesda Softworks: Starfield, Elder Scrolls VI, Fallout 76 updates
  • id Software: Unannounced projects
  • Arkane Studios: Deathloop, RedFall
  • Tango Gameworks: Ghostwire Toyko, unannounced project
  • Machine Games: Indiana Jones, Wolfenstein III
  • ZeniMax Online: Elder Scrolls Online, unannounced projects
  • Xbox Publishing: Project Indus, Project Dragon, Project Belfry, Project Shaolin, As Dusk Falls, Contraband
Angry Benedict Cumberbatch GIF
 
That is the fate for video games. We have no idea the end game for most games. Your favorite games could be canceled at anytime.

Though, this type of list is something for fans to look for.

They are basically saying, you will get these games if you buy xbox this gen.

More like you may get these games; again some could be cancelled, or revealed to be one thing and then re-revealed to be something completely different.

It's not unique to MS, but in terms of major publishers they've done this more than others over the past decade. I personally don't care much about game lists though because it won't indicate anything about the quality of the games, especially if they are new IP and/or come from studios with not the best track records.
 

kingfey

Banned
More like you may get these games; again some could be cancelled, or revealed to be one thing and then re-revealed to be something completely different.

It's not unique to MS, but in terms of major publishers they've done this more than others over the past decade. I personally don't care much about game lists though because it won't indicate anything about the quality of the games, especially if they are new IP and/or come from studios with not the best track records.
The problem is that you are making quality term as absolute for gaming.

Quality means nothing, if the product is barebone.

Look at bethesda elderscroll and fallout. Janky, but does produce results.

I think it's time we use that term to judge everything.

I mean, my most enjoyable games were games, that aren't quality in this age.
 

BadBurger

Gold Member
I don't think many are concerned with the potential of their various studios. We all know they have a lot they're working on and most of it will probably bear tasty fruit eventually. It seems the uncertainty and disappointment concerns the rather light catalog of quality exclusives since the start of last gen, coupled with them seemingly not going to have anything else for 2022 (outside of some Game Pass grabs I am assuming).

For Xbox-only gamers there isn't much there. Meanwhile in Sony and Nintendo land they seem to be unable to stop producing quality exclusives or getting exclusive deals. Sony made advancements in peripherals and audio, even a VR kit. Even Valve of all companies is generating excitement with their terrifically-engineered Deck and advancements at a software level to make games perform better via Proton. It just seems like outside of really pushing a subscription model for consoles, Microsoft hasn't done much of note since the 360 days. They still even have pretty much the same old controller that still needs batteries like a Walkman from 1999.

Don't get me wrong, I am not all doom and gloom when it comes to Microsoft. But in many ways, on the console front anyways, it feels like all they've been doing is acquiring studios while their two largest competitors have been advancing in numerous ways while pumping out great exclusives.
 

kingfey

Banned
No need to throw a list if your are Confident in their output. To me, reminding others sounds like “concerned”.

Never ever you see PS fans making all kinds of threads with list to remind others.
Why do I bother with PS output?

You guys eat up their stuff, plus if I say something about them, I will get banned anyway. No need to get involved with them.

As for reminding, we literally had tons of post from those people, comparing xbox one to this gen.

I am coming this from a neutral prospective.
 
No need to throw a list if your are Confident in their output. To me, reminding others sounds like “concerned”.

Never ever you see PS fans making all kinds of threads with list to remind others.
Sony doesn't usually announce games 5+ years ahead of release. So Sony fans don't have stuff like Hellblade or Everwild they can use in list wars for half a decade or more before those games ever become reality.
 
The problem is that you are making quality term as absolute for gaming.

Quality means nothing, if the product is barebone.

Look at bethesda elderscroll and fallout. Janky, but does produce results.

I think it's time we use that term to judge everything.

I mean, my most enjoyable games were games, that aren't quality in this age.

Well there is subjective quality and objective quality; your most enjoyed games is based on your subjective taste for what you deem quality. But when you take the larger market into account, if there is a general consensus on what is quality, then you can claim that is a more objective statement of quality since it's dealing with the gaming audience as a whole arriving at an agreed-up conclusion, so there must be certain markers between them that are shared and therefore can be measured.

Even a product being "barebones" can be a subjective opinion. Some people would say a bullet-hell shmup is barebones and then use that to say it's not high quality, while someone else could spend years playing that game learning the perfect patterns and aiming to get the highest score possible. To that person, the game isn't "barebones" at all, because they don't value amount of content as the main mark of quality, rather the depth of what content is there.

They do release some other stuff too. I'm not a CoD multi-player player, but the last few campaigns have looked interesting to me (even if the CoD die hards didn't seem to like them much). I'd definitely take a look cold war if it gets added to GP. Maybe we'll see them do a crash like remake for another early 3d franchise. I thought the insane collection was great.

They really should do a proper Banjo-Kazooie 3 before thinking about another Crash or Spyro though, IMO. They have to right that wrong as a part of their legacy, now they have the means to do it.

I don't think many are concerned with the potential of their various studios. We all know they have a lot they're working on and most of it will probably bear tasty fruit eventually. It seems the uncertainty and disappointment concerns the rather light catalog of quality exclusives since the start of last gen, coupled with them seemingly not going to have anything else for 2022 (outside of some Game Pass grabs I am assuming).

For Xbox-only gamers there isn't much there. Meanwhile in Sony and Nintendo land they seem to be unable to stop producing quality exclusives or getting exclusive deals. Sony made advancements in peripherals and audio, even a VR kit. Even Valve of all companies is generating excitement with their terrifically-engineered Deck and advancements at a software level to make games perform better via Proton. It just seems like outside of really pushing a subscription model for consoles, Microsoft hasn't done much of note since the 360 days. They still even have pretty much the same old controller that still needs batteries like a Walkman from 1999.

Don't get me wrong, I am not all doom and gloom when it comes to Microsoft. But in many ways, on the console front anyways, it feels like all they've been doing is acquiring studios while their two largest competitors have been advancing in numerous ways while pumping out great exclusives.

This is kind of how I feel, too. When you look back there's so much the 360 and OG Xbox did to standardize innovations in gaming that we take for granted now, like broadband network play and a digital-oriented entertainment center hub (they were the first console-wise to have a Netflix app, for instance). Standardizing things on the tech side like unified shaders and built-in HDDs, with even some early games showing off the capabilities (Blinx the Cat).

The XBO was completely gimped in terms of tech innovation outside of maybe the 32 MB eSRAM, but that was more a band-aid to make up for other deficiencies versus something to add to an already excellent design. People celebrate GamePass and yes, it has some good value, but it's mainly just another form of software delivery. Instead of buying a physical copy in a store, or a digital copy on a storefront, you're essentially "renting" a digital copy to play tied to a subscription. Quick Resume is just a system-level save state, and you can technically emulate it on PC (at least with retro game emulator frontends). xCloud has potential to innovate with game design but it's been very slow to see examples of it outside of Flight Sim (which mainly used it for background asset streaming to increase fidelity).

Just starting to feel like they started prepping for this gen a year or two too late; maybe that period when Microsoft scaled back R&D funding (and funding in general) to Xbox division was more problematic than initially thought, because I feel like some of the things we've been seeing now with internal studio management struggles, lack of consistent exclusive content etc. all stems back to decisions made in that specific period.
 
Last edited:

On Demand

Banned
These lists and pretty studio logos keep being made as if that means anything. It doesn’t.

Listing all these games over and over doesn’t guarantee anything of quality. So it’s still a waiting game to prove if any of those will actually be good.

Xbox was already getting games from Activision and Bethesda so nothing has change there. People are only bragging about games they never cared for before because they’re exclusive now.

Lastly....MS was already bad at handling their small amount of studios. There shouldn’t be any confidence in them handling over 20.
 

kingfey

Banned
Obviously

It's just old mate kingfey kingfey is in such a severe state of buyer's remorse and sadness that they're trying to perform damage control over a "problem" that isn't there to people who don't take this "problem" as seriously and to heart as they do.

It's funny to watch.
Whatever fits you.
 

MikeM

Member
What was the last game they released? What is the next?
Thats only a piece of their revenue stream. They make revenue elsewhere, so again not sure what the concern is.

In terms of just purely xbox/pc only games- they will have more once the deal for Activision closes. These deals don’t usually see any return until 2-3 years after closing once projects are released. Gamepass users will benefit most most likely.
 

kingfey

Banned
Well there is subjective quality and objective quality; your most enjoyed games is based on your subjective taste for what you deem quality. But when you take the larger market into account, if there is a general consensus on what is quality, then you can claim that is a more objective statement of quality since it's dealing with the gaming audience as a whole arriving at an agreed-up conclusion, so there must be certain markers between them that are shared and therefore can be measured.
Most market for video games are casuals. Making your games over complicated doesn't result you in higher audience.

I respect developers who go beyond that. But when you add unnecessary contents, for the sake of quality, you will lose the appeal for your game.


Even a product being "barebones" can be a subjective opinion. Some people would say a bullet-hell shmup is barebones and then use that to say it's not high quality, while someone else could spend years playing that game learning the perfect patterns and aiming to get the highest score possible. To that person, the game isn't "barebones" at all, because they don't value amount of content as the main mark of quality, rather the depth of what content is there.
Its subjective, it's why most studios do what they want.
The problem arises, when certain group tries to insert that term, to justify good games.
That doesn't work for majority of video games.
 

kingfey

Banned
Kinda meant on GAF. I've have a daily quota of 15 seconds on Twitter. Most of that logging in, reading the first tweet and closing the app.
For me right now, I use it mainly for sports. Much better content, than whatever the hell video game section is.
 

MikeM

Member
Most market for video games are casuals. Making your games over complicated doesn't result you in higher audience.

I respect developers who go beyond that. But when you add unnecessary contents, for the sake of quality, you will lose the appeal for your game.



Its subjective, it's why most studios do what they want.
The problem arises, when certain group tries to insert that term, to justify good games.
That doesn't work for majority of video games.
Elden Ring/SoulsBourne are the exception I guess.
 

kingfey

Banned
Elden Ring/SoulsBourne are the exception I guess.
Elden ring is the casual game now. You dont sell 13m that fast.
Even my casual brother did more gameplay than me. And he doesn't even like souls games.
 
Last edited:
Most market for video games are casuals. Making your games over complicated doesn't result you in higher audience.

I respect developers who go beyond that. But when you add unnecessary contents, for the sake of quality, you will lose the appeal for your game.

You'd be surprised how much time casuals put into games like Candy Crush and Madden, or COD and Fortnite. Those may be very casual-friendly games but the core fanbase who play them do so religiously, and part of the reason is because of depth in game mechanics. They learn the games inside and out, and mainly play just those games for most of the year.

It's kind of why I think terms like "casual gamers" are too generic. You can kind of have two types IMHO: one who may only play a very small handful of games per year (Fortnite, COD, Madden) but plays them religiously. The other would be those who buy a lot of games per year, but only partially play most of them, and barely complete any of them (or if they do, go for the bare minimum in completing them not mastering game mechanics or getting all 100% of the content, etc.).

If you think about it, both of those could be called casual gamers but we're always quicker to assume the person who buys stuff like Elden Ring, HFW, GT7, Sifu, Halo, Zelda etc. hardcore or core gamers....but they may not play much of any of those or complete any of them! In comparison to that why should the person who may only play Madden or COD each year, but has mastered all the game mechanics and 100%s them each and every time, be called a casual?

Its subjective, it's why most studios do what they want.
The problem arises, when certain group tries to insert that term, to justify good games.
That doesn't work for majority of video games.

Well most studios actually have to do what their publishers and/or funders deem worth it; they tend to have control over most of the creative choices but not all of them.
 

MikeM

Member
You'd be surprised how much time casuals put into games like Candy Crush and Madden, or COD and Fortnite. Those may be very casual-friendly games but the core fanbase who play them do so religiously, and part of the reason is because of depth in game mechanics. They learn the games inside and out, and mainly play just those games for most of the year.

It's kind of why I think terms like "casual gamers" are too generic. You can kind of have two types IMHO: one who may only play a very small handful of games per year (Fortnite, COD, Madden) but plays them religiously. The other would be those who buy a lot of games per year, but only partially play most of them, and barely complete any of them (or if they do, go for the bare minimum in completing them not mastering game mechanics or getting all 100% of the content, etc.).

If you think about it, both of those could be called casual gamers but we're always quicker to assume the person who buys stuff like Elden Ring, HFW, GT7, Sifu, Halo, Zelda etc. hardcore or core gamers....but they may not play much of any of those or complete any of them! In comparison to that why should the person who may only play Madden or COD each year, but has mastered all the game mechanics and 100%s them each and every time, be called a casual?



Well most studios actually have to do what their publishers and/or funders deem worth it; they tend to have control over most of the creative choices but not all of them.
Yep. I have about 20% of my friends list between both systems that only play Warzone. Not a game more.
 

kingfey

Banned
You'd be surprised how much time casuals put into games like Candy Crush and Madden, or COD and Fortnite. Those may be very casual-friendly games but the core fanbase who play them do so religiously, and part of the reason is because of depth in game mechanics. They learn the games inside and out, and mainly play just those games for most of the year.

It's kind of why I think terms like "casual gamers" are too generic. You can kind of have two types IMHO: one who may only play a very small handful of games per year (Fortnite, COD, Madden) but plays them religiously. The other would be those who buy a lot of games per year, but only partially play most of them, and barely complete any of them (or if they do, go for the bare minimum in completing them not mastering game mechanics or getting all 100% of the content, etc.).

If you think about it, both of those could be called casual gamers but we're always quicker to assume the person who buys stuff like Elden Ring, HFW, GT7, Sifu, Halo, Zelda etc. hardcore or core gamers....but they may not play much of any of those or complete any of them! In comparison to that why should the person who may only play Madden or COD each year, but has mastered all the game mechanics and 100%s them each and every time, be called a casual?
The only reason people call them casuals, is because they buy less games. People who buy alot of games call themselves hardcore players.
In reality, these people don't even finish their games, like how casuals finish their games.

Its mostly buy it. Platinum or full trophy if it's good. Or leave the game after 2-3 hour.

People who play those games for too long are called hardcore gamers. But that is not a term we use it now.




Well most studios actually have to do what their publishers and/or funders deem worth it; they tend to have control over most of the creative choices but not all of them.
Yup. They have the final say, if they paid for development.
Its why most games are controlled and don't reach the potential which the devs had for.
 
Yep. I have about 20% of my friends list between both systems that only play Warzone. Not a game more.

And there it is in effect. I'm only playing two games really ATM (dabbling with others inbetween them though) and it'll probably remain that way until mid-summer, but by the time I'm done with them I'll have thoroughly seen everything they have to offer and mastered at least most of the intricacies of their systems.

But by a lot of standards today I'd be considered a casual because I don't play every big AAA Day 1. Kinda blame FOMO.

The only reason people call them casuals, is because they buy less games. People who buy alot of games call themselves hardcore players.
In reality, these people don't even finish their games, like how casuals finish their games.

Its mostly buy it. Platinum or full trophy if it's good. Or leave the game after 2-3 hour.

People who play those games for too long are called hardcore gamers. But that is not a term we use it now.

True it used to be that "hardcore" was for people who played and mastered the hardest games, or were the best at them, not necessarily how many games you bought. But I guess as the industry became larger and larger money-wise then the role of "whales" who spend a lot in the hobby naturally increased alongside that, and the definition changed.

Yup. They have the final say, if they paid for development.
Its why most games are controlled and don't reach the potential which the devs had for.

True to an extent but also to be fair, some devs need those types of pubs and investors involved so they can keep the project moving at a steady pace, or that certain potentially-destructive game mechanics or ideas don't find their way into the final product. I don't think too much of either (purely creator-driven, purely publisher-driven) is the right model; there has to be a balance, figuratively speaking.

In practice it's maybe more like 70/30 dev/pub respectively, or at least that's the most maybe a publisher or investors should have in terms of say in the product. Gaming's a creative-driven industry in terms of the actual product, creatives still need to have majority say.
 
Top Bottom