Great write-up, but a point of assumption that you're mistaken on. Anything with "MS Studio" will always refer to first-party content. MS Studio Global Publishing is just a name referring to 2nd-party funding of games.
MS already has an "internal publishing team" for 3rd-party content. It's basically just "Microsoft", which is the label they use when they publish 3rd-party games on behalf of the developer/publisher ( but it's not a first-party title ) like with Dead Rising 4 or Tomb Raider. This was also their publishing/distribution model back in X360 days, where indies had limited self-publishing options, which is why MS was listed as the publisher/distributor for games like Spelunky & Fez.
I see, thank you for the correction! Also, what I meant was, out of those three pillars I stated, that one would see Microsoft ensure that they weren't passing up games that could be on their platform and go through means to accomplish that more frivolously like they did in the Xbox 360 era. I don't think Final Fantasy 13 would be on Xbox 360 if Microsoft didn't show some type of interest, given how badly JRPGs sold on the platform (this is an example I'm getting at). Sony publishes many third-party exclusive games outside of Asia, for example. That point was simply something that, by whatever means, Microsoft could do (and should, according to the "gameszz" narrative) with getting more games of any type on the Xbox platform.
Agreed from start to finish with this.
Correct a mondo, all of it.
This is all correct.
The only thing I'd add is the prevailing discomfort that the PS3 had a genuine competitor in "that machine built by that company that makes shitty operating systems". Since the OG Xbox there has always been that underlying opinion that MS has no place in the console market.
Not to doglike but nice wrote up except for global publishing which someone corrected. I do agree they need to set up a team or something to maybe assist with ports or port funding to get Japanese and more obscure games in the platform. Even if it doesn't result in game sales for said games, it raises the perception that they are about those games and are trying to bring any game they can to their fans
While I'm a new member, I have been lurking on GAF for an awful long time and I must admit, this post is very well written, logical and is incredibly hard to argue against.
Its hard to disagree with anything you said.
Shame its some 40odd pages deep. I hope more get to see it.
Thanks, guys! I wrote that really late and honestly am surprised I was able to string it together.
This post is basically:
"Your annecodotal evidence is inherently false, let me put up my annecodotal evidence instead."
Surprised it's getting so much praise, especially with the naive, "make every game not Sony/Nintendo contract appear on Xbox" idea.
No, sir. The anecdotal evidence in my post, like talking about my store and selling in my store, were a tiny part of my post. The beginning of my post was all factual, from Microsoft getting deserved backlash, to the stigma that lured for a long time (and exists to this day). My post was responding to him saying xbox fans are shouting from the rooftops about true 4K vs fake 4K being the game changer, when that is something only a disgruntled Sony fan with tinted shades might see, and what I said Xbox fans might ACTUALLY feel, which judging from the responses, might be true. Also, why do you brush aside my other 2 "pillars" on what Microsoft should be focusing on, and focus on the only one the one you call "naïve?" I explicitly asked for thoughts on that pillar as that is one I'm not too sure about, and the gist of that pillar is Microsoft should do what Sony does and focus on getting all sorts of games on their console. Sony even has a team that asks what kind of games would we like to see on PlayStation. Microsoft seems more corporate. What is so wrong with saying Microsoft should focus on this (by some means)? I had no idea what the Global Publishing really was and put 2 and 2 together but was corrected and responded to that above.
Yep, it's a bunch of hurt feelings, followed by idealistic nonsense. If it was that easy to get every game on the Xbox, then they'd probably be doing it now and if MS's plan is to continue releasing slightly more powerful consoles a year or so after the next Playstation, I don't think that's a great plan. I don't think they want to give a super strong PS brand a year on the market with the PS5 alone against the Scorpio.
Whoa, slow down there warrior. You clearly did not read my post correctly. It has nothing to do with my feelings, and more to do with responding to said post with an actual idea of what it may be, which again from responses was correct. And idealistic nonsense? The fact that you say my entire post consists of hurt feelings and idealistic nonsense projects greatly, and your post history rounds it up nicely. You admittedly do not currently own an Xbox One, talk about PS4 sales and Sony "winning" E3, and complain about Switch "port beggars," nonstop, so I guess I am a fool for even responding to you!
It's a Rah Rah Xbox in an Xbox thread, no harm done
May I ask you to show me where in my post you got even the slightest hint of "rah rah Xbox?" Thank you.
I think you're projecting just a little.
I followed the ps4 and xbox one launch very closely on Neogaf (obsessively may be more close the truth if I'm being honest) and my observation was based on how a section of Neogaf reacted to ps4's technical superiority - and still do to this day to a certain extent.
Your post seems to be based mostly on your own personal feelings / biases.
The person I was responding to from the beginning, it seems! Listen, you're telling me about projecting when you clearly are a loyal and happy Sony fan and have been for a long time; maybe that is why you happen to observe things the way you have? You know, tinted shades and all? No disrespect, as there is nothing wrong with being a fan at all. Everybody sees things based off their own biases, let's not kid ourselves here, but the gist of my post aside from my anecdote is factual. The rest (my 3 pillars Microsoft should focus on) is my opinion on what they should do, but there is nothing wrong or biased about that. Microsoft deservedly bought upon themselves what took place and the rest is history. Logically, it makes sense that you may view Xbox fans and/or media being defensive, and came to your conclusion. But to talk about projection like your post I was responding to isn't that as well, is silly.
Liliana Eileen can say all that about Scorpio but she's forgetting that Sony will have their PS5 announcement this E3 and releasing next year.
That was a good post and I didn't detect many lies. If power mattered then it still does now. It remains a valid complaint though that MS really needs to improve their first party. They more or less promised to do exactly that, but doubtful we'll see it at this E3. Especially after what Matt said.
Haha, yep. Here is my personal prediction:
E32017: Scorpio, scorpio, and scorpio. Oh, and here is a roadmap we will be working on (games) because we understand the criticism. Look at these games coming this holiday to your Xbox.
E32018: Games, games everywhere. You wanted games? Here you go. GAEMMZZZZ.
