Support NeoGAF

[Dragon]

Video Games Live, you know the Xbox live branch for PC ? Except for ME

What does that have to do with anything?

Now if we're talking about funding, it makes no sense for MS not to put them on PC so in that way it's good. I just find it hard to take things seriously when things like Mass Effect are considered MS exclusives.

 

[tkalamba]

Resource allocation?

This is purely speculative, but I figure MS thought they'd be better off focusing their attention on hammering out exclusives for the next gen to entice buyers of the new console vs risk seeing declined sales on the tail end of the current generation.

If Ryse didn't get pushed to the X1, and say Forza (Not saying Forza 5 was ever a 360 game, just using as an example) was another 360 game, the X1 would be seeing a lack luster launch. Holding them back for a new console and let support fall for the old console could very well see more new consoles sold.

Sony on the other hand gambled on more last gen sales, releasing exclusives late in the game like the Last of Us. Now imagine if Last of Us was a PS4 exclusive title available at launch instead. The PS would have a more enticing launch lineup, but waning exclusive support for the PS3.

It'd be a gamble either way for either manufacturer. Each likely weighed the pros and cons, and each took a different approach.

Sony is seeing a benefit with the PS3 with continued sales late into the generation, but it can also be seen as hurting the PS4 with fewer exclusives in comparison, which could sway some buyers one way or the other.

Xbox on the other hand is hurting late gen as many resources would have been allocated to the next gen instead, but can be rewarded with a more varied exclusive lineup early in the game for the next gen.

As a note, this is all speculation, I really don't know either way, but this is the way I see it.

 

[Rad-]

I just looked at the credits.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJIWGBBcsng

No.

Credits always include a lot of extra. That 32 -> 45 amount I threw earlier was straight from the lead developer's mouth in a Finnish interview.

 

[Skilletor]

Lost Odyssey :'(

Sold very well for a non-FF, non-Pokemon, non-DQ JRPG.

 

[MysticGoujon]

Xbox exclusives sell well precisely because they're fussy about what they actually green-light.

FWIW, Microsoft bring out a large amount of first party games and a good variety to boot, I don't think there's really a complaint to be made here.

 

[Hindle]

I'm annoyed at the way they've treated Rares old IP. If they don't have any intention to make more games in the Perfect Dark series or Banjo, then they should sell the franchises back to the original developers.

 

[GrizzleBoy]

MS seems a bit too unstable and thinly spread at the moment.

They have a buttload of things they're trying to do and have too many battles to fight against pretty tough competition.

There's the whole internal organisation re-shuffle, the whole Windows re-imagining to compete in other computing sectors that are into PC market share, becoming a hardware vendor as well as having to deal with a console war.

Hopefully soon the pieces of the puzzle begin to fall into place and they can concentrate on consolidating what they have instead of just spending time trying to get all their new things working in the first place.

 

[StuBurns]

Credits always include a lot of extra. That 32 -> 45 amount I threw earlier was straight from the lead developer's mouth in a Finnish interview.

I'm not talking about the people not listed as being employed by Remedy, it'd be massively bigger if I did.

I'm annoyed at the way they've treated Rares old IP. If they don't have any intention to make more games in the Perfect Dark series or Banjo, then they should sell the franchises back to the original developers.

But MS own Rare? How can they sell them to themselves?

 

[Garrett 2U]

I'm annoyed at the way they've treated Rares old IP. If they don't have any intention to make more games in the Perfect Dark series or Banjo, then they should sell the franchises back to the original developers.

:,( RIP Rare

 

[diffusionx]

I'm annoyed at the way they've treated Rares old IP. If they don't have any intention to make more games in the Perfect Dark series or Banjo, then they should sell the franchises back to the original developers.

The original developers are... Rare. They're not going to sell it to themselves.

If by original developers you mean actual people, the problem is that MS may not want to make a game now, but they might change their minds in the future. Holding onto IP is basically free. If the pop culture of 2025 sees a desire for more ugly googly-eyed animal mascots in collectathon platformers, MS can very easily start making a game. Not so much if they sold it for beans to Tim Stamper or whoever 10 years prior.

 

[Hindle]

I'm not talking about the people not listed as being employed by Remedy, it'd be massively bigger if I did.

But MS own Rare? How can they sell them to themselves?

A lof of the original staff left, but they still make games. If they required the rights, they could form a new team and there would be more Banjo or PD.

 

[Derrick01]

FWIW, Microsoft bring out a large amount of first party games and a good variety to boot, I don't think there's really a complaint to be made here.

What???

 

[BibiMaghoo]

Gears of War is on PC.
Alan Wake is on PC.
Fable is on PC.
Mass Effect is on PC, and the other Mass Effect games are on PS3 as well.

These are not exclusives in any sense of the word.

To be fair, Gears 2, 3 and Judgement are actual exclusives, as is Fable 2. These are on no other platforms.

 

[szaromir]

Resource allocation?

This is purely speculative, but I figure MS thought they'd be better off focusing their attention on hammering out exclusives for the next gen to entice buyers of the new console vs risk seeing declined sales on the tail end of the current generation.

If Ryse didn't get pushed to the X1, and say Forza (Not saying Forza 5 was ever a 360 game, just using as an example) was another 360 game, the X1 would be seeing a lack luster launch. Holding them back for a new console and let support fall for the old console could very well see more new consoles sold.

Sony on the other hand gambled on more last gen sales, releasing exclusives late in the game like the Last of Us. Now imagine if Last of Us was a PS4 exclusive title available at launch instead. The PS would have a more enticing launch lineup, but waning exclusive support for the PS3.

It'd be a gamble either way for either manufacturer. Each likely weighed the pros and cons, and each took a different approach.

Sony is seeing a benefit with the PS3 with continued sales late into the generation, but it can also be seen as hurting the PS4 with fewer exclusives in comparison, which could sway some buyers one way or the other.

Xbox on the other hand is hurting late gen as many resources would have been allocated to the next gen instead, but can be rewarded with a more varied exclusive lineup early in the game for the next gen.

As a note, this is all speculation, I really don't know either way, but this is the way I see it.

Very reasonable post.

 

[tradeoff]

Halo, Fable, Gears are no doubt incoming. Then they will probably do a new Banjo and maybe Perfect Dark, both in blockbuster fashion. KOTOR III may be bankrolled by Microsoft like they did Dead Rising 3... who knows. If Ryse does numbers, don't be surprised to see Ryse II in two years. Titanfall will prove to be a huge stroke of genius on Microsoft's part.

Those will probably be enough for the first couple years of XB1. I expect more investment in things like Kinect Fitness as well to broaden the install base.

 

[Hindle]

:,( RIP Rare

I disagree completely.

Rare are still very much a revelent studio, who have had a lot of success this gen. It's just the success they've had, has been with a new audience.

 

[Into]

- Since 2001, MS has sold over 50 million Halo games.

- The Gears of War games sold around 6 million copies each.

- The Mass Effect games sold around 3 million copies each on the 360 (I'm including these here because the first was published by MS)

- Fable 2 sold about 3.5 million, while Fable 3 sold around 5 million copies.

- Alan Wake has sold more than 2 million copies

- The Forza games have sold over 10 million copies. Forza 4 itself sold around 4 million.

These numbers are eerily similar to Chartz numbers, a banned site here.

The only one that does not fit perfectly is Alan Wake, as their claim 1.22.

What i could find was that Forza 4 sold

Forza 4 is estimated to have sold a little over 2 million during the 10 month period of its release 12 months ago.

http://gamer.blorge.com/2012/11/05/...-million-encroaching-on-forza-lifetime-sales/

Its possible that Forza has sold more, but i struggle to find any data for these numbers. Would love to see them if anyone has them

 

[Marvel]

Microsoft bring out a large amount of first party games and a good variety to boot, I don't think there's really a complaint to be made here.

The hell did I just read?

 

[Hindle]

What???

Just because you didn't like Kinect and completely ignore the software? A lot of people liked MS output this gen.

 

[ShapeGSX]

Frankly, I don't think MS really cares about games. Xbox is just a vector to get an app store in your living room.

That's all game consoles have ever been. Games are just "apps," after all.

 

[conman]

Exclusives are expensive to make, and they sell fewer copies than big-budget multiplatform. Very hard to sustain. You have to be willing to take a loss for the sake of pushing the platform. Or, in the case of Nintendo, you have to be willing to milk your IP and produce them faster and at lower cost than in the past.

The first approach is no longer MS's strategy, and they've shown that they're willing to let studios go if they prove unprofitable. Sony has been more willing to take these risks. The second approach (Nintendo's) seems to fit in with their Kinect strategy. We'll see what happens this next gen.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

Thats the one thing you can hold against ms, they really lack first party catalog. It doesnt really stand up to ninty or sony, they should go nuts again like they did launch of 360 and pile on the exclusive games, it will sell boxes better than get map packs first bollocks theyve bought.

While Sony have a lot of 'almost-theres' like Starhawk, PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale and ModNation, I'd rather a publisher try and fail like Sony, than just not bother like MS, who have coasted by predominantly on Gears, Halo, Fable and Forza for most of this generation.

Seems to me because it is seriously expensive.

They paid 50 Million for timed exclusive DLC, from a third party.

That is mega bucks. Imagine the cost of ten games.

That was GTA though; no ordinary game. DLC for games that are not GTA or COD will not cost anything like that much.

 

[HigherLevel]

They've never had a stable number of developers internally to work on many big titles. They have built up their studios the past few years and we should start seeing the results of that pretty soon. Phil Spencer specifically stated they have opened up 5 new studios in the past few years at E3.

 

[StuBurns]

A lof of the original staff left, but they still make games. If they required the rights, they could form a new team and there would be more Banjo or PD.

Tracking people is when it gets kind of tricky to me.

It's like how some people argue that Valve didn't make lots of their games, because they bought the talent that did.

You could sell the IP rights to the creative director/s of Perfect Dark, but do they have more claim to them than lots of the other staff?

You never know when this stuff could come back. Let's say Insomniac's relationship with MS goes really great, and MS want them to make a 3D platformer in the vain of Mario 64, they have the perfect IP for them to do that with.

It can kind of suck to feel like someone is sitting on an IP of value, but you never know when a project or relationship is just fit to see that franchise return.

 

[Mr.Speedy]

Didn't they announce they were going to have 10 - 15 exclusives in 2014?

 

[Derrick01]

Just because you didn't like Kinect and completely ignore the software? A lot of people liked MS output this gen.

Oh yeah kinect, I forgot about that garbage. Alright so other than kids' shovelware they didn't exactly have a lot of variety in the last half of the generation.

 

[flkraven]

The hell did I just read?

Is there also a picture that compares units sold between psmove with kinect?

 

[DocSeuss]

My understanding of the situation is that it went something like this:

2008: Lack of payoff on the original Xbox (which they expected), coupled with RROD problems, amplified by the economic collapse inmeant Microsoft started going "um, so yeah, maybe we can't afford games."

2009 - 2010: Cancellation and refusal to greenlight plenty of games; double down on what works, stop being super inventive (in terms of interesting AAA exclusives, Microsoft kind of destroys the competition; games like Nuts & Bolts, Trouble in Paradise, etc are amazing and fascinating)

2008 - 2010: Shut down PC-primary studios, because while Steam had begun to pick up (first major Steam sale was December 2007, but the BIG sales wouldn't hit until 2010), it wasn't picking up fast enough, and "PC GAMING IS DEAD." So bye bye FASA, Ensemble, ACES, etc.

2010: Microsoft isn't failing, they're actually selling their AAA franchises pretty well. Kinect becomes the fastest-selling electronic device of all time. Microsoft's development focuses on Kinect, which is making obscene amounts of money for them. Alan Wake only ships like 500,000 games in its first month, because Rockstar decided to randomly change RDR's release date at the last minute and screw them over.

Work begins on the Xbox One.

2011: The games that would have begun development in 2008/2009 aren't released because the worries of those years held them back.

Games are greenlit for the Xbox One.

2012: The games that would have begun development in 2009/2010 aren't released because things aren't going well.

Games are being developed for the Xbox One.

2013: Xbox One is announced. Microsoft reveals more exclusives in a conference than anyone else, completely blowing away the competition. Sony fans shout that TGS will be their deliverance, and then nothing happens.

2014: Microsoft releases a bunch of cool games that don't sell at all because the console's $100 more, the performance is significantly less than the competition, and people are just really buttmad as they can be at Microsoft because they're dumb.

2015: Microsoft is convinced new, interesting exclusives are meaningless, despite releasing some games that will be fondly remembered for years to come (but not Ryse), so they cancel future exclusive development.

2016: It doesn't matter, the world ends due to some Eskimo prophecy no one knew about 'cause it was at the bottom of the arctic circle. But just before that happens, Microsoft announces the rebirth of Ensemble and Age of Empires IV.

2017: We live in space. The One was our salvation. Dance Central saved the 489,672 people who bought the Xbox One.

 

[Nightengale]

Didn't they announce they were going to have 10 - 15 exclusives in 2014?

Within the first twelve months of launch, 15 from Microsoft Studios. (which includes published titles )

They're coming out the gate with 'Ryse, Forza, DR3, CD, ZT, KI3, Lococycle & P.Golf'.

So they're releasing half of their 15 exclusives at launch.

And then the coming titles for 2014, are Minecraft : XB1 Edition, Below, Halo 5, Xbox Fitness, D4, Max : Curse of Brotherhood, Project Spark.

Sunset Overdrive & Quantum Break, probably one of these two games have a chance of being a 2014 game, but my suspicion is one of them will fall to 2015.

Black Tusk is obviously 2015, and Fable Legends seem to be the case as well.

 

[makingmusic476]

Microsoft's line up consists mostly of high sellers becsuse the ones that have low to medium tier sales get dropped. It's not like they magically make all their games sell 3+ million.

 

[Phat Michael]

Oh yeah kinect, I forgot about that garbage. Alright so other than kids' shovelware they didn't exactly have a lot of variety in the last half of the generation.

Keep moving them goalposts mate.

 

[Duxxy3]

It's just part of their cycle.

Support exclusives the first year or two and then coast the rest of the way.

 

[Uno Venova]

Smaller stable and overall pretty rigid in what concepts they want to publish. All about the blockbusters they are.

 

[oVerde]

Black Tusk project is PD. Believe.

 

[model13]

Well they definitely have some exciting exclusives announced for the first year. Hopefully they will continue this longer than theu did with the 360. They have been hinting at releasing more Rare IPs as well which could be some exciting possibilities (would love Wizards and Warriors, NARC, or Blastcorps).

 

[Derrick01]

Keep moving them goalposts mate.

It's not really a goalpost to exclude kinect games since most gamers don't give any shits about them at all, they're barely games in many cases and they target the casual gamer. Not exactly the types of games people are talking about when they beg MS for more games.

If it helps you sleep at night I exclude Move games too.

 

[SwiftDeath]

Work begins on the Xbox One.

2011: The games that would have begun development in 2008/2009 aren't released because the worries of those years held them back.

Games are greenlit for the Xbox One.

2012: The games that would have begun development in 2009/2010 aren't released because things aren't going well.

Games are being developed for the Xbox One.

2013: Xbox One is announced. Microsoft reveals more exclusives in a conference than anyone else, completely blowing away the competition. Sony fans shout that TGS will be their deliverance, and then nothing happens.

Are you trying to argue that MS had no new IP exclusives after 2010 on X360 because they all got moved to the XB1?

Because I find that hard to believe, furthermore that would still imply what 2 or 3 new IP?

Ryse, Sunset Overdrive? KI and Crimson Dragon are spiritual successors so kind of new IP, kind of not

It just seems so little for such a long time period

Forgot to mention State of Decay that was a good one but is now going PC. So console exclusive I guess

 

[TheRagnCajun]

They're investing a billion dollars on exclusives, something like 13-15 in the first year.

That can't be right.

Assuming a budget of 50million per game that would be over 260 exclusive titles in development

 

[MysticGoujon]

The hell did I just read?

I'm struggling to understand why the playstation is relevant to this thread?

 

[FlyStarJay]

they sell well cause there are:

• Few Exclusives, meaning more more money for marketing
• They had a larger install base
• Most of their exclusive were shooters or racing so easy to market and popular

I would like to see MS doing something like little big planet, or something that is new/creative

 

[tkalamba]

they sell well cause there are:

• Few Exclusives, meaning more more money for marketing
• They had a larger install base
• Most of their exclusive were shooters or racing so easy to market and popular

I would like to see MS doing something like little big planet, or something that is new/creative

Like project spark?

 

[Hindle]

Tracking people is when it gets kind of tricky to me.

It's like how some people argue that Valve didn't make lots of their games, because they bought the talent that did.

You could sell the IP rights to the creative director/s of Perfect Dark, but do they have more claim to them than lots of the other staff?

You never know when this stuff could come back. Let's say Insomniac's relationship with MS goes really great, and MS want them to make a 3D platformer in the vain of Mario 64, they have the perfect IP for them to do that with.

It can kind of suck to feel like someone is sitting on an IP of value, but you never know when a project or relationship is just fit to see that franchise return.

I'm more optimistic then ever that they'll take those IPs more serious this gen. Mainly due to what they've done with KI.

They've owned the Rare licences for 12 years now, and I've only seen one PD and Banjo in this time. For the rest of Rares licences there's been nothing. To essentially buy a studio then proceed to keep classic IP ransom is unacceptable, and it's my biggest grievance with MS

 

[Zalman]

Wow.

 

[SwiftDeath]

I'm struggling to understand why the playstation is relevant to this thread?

Everything is relative. The best way to judge an offering is to compare it to its closest competitor. If there was only one TV set available for purchase, what's the point in talking specs about it?

Same idea applies to consoles

 

[FlyStarJay]

Like project spark?

Yup, something like that. But we see how much it makes for ms, if they will support it for long.

 

[UNCMark]

they sell well cause there are:

• Few Exclusives, meaning more more money for marketing
• They had a larger install base
• Most of their exclusive were shooters or racing so easy to market and popular

I would like to see MS doing something like little big planet, or something that is new/creative

You're in luck. Project Spark is coming early next year.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

Exclusives move consoles and they add a lot to the brand. The Xbox association to Halo, Gears, Fable and (for a not insignificant amount of time) Mass Effect made it the go-to console for loads of people in the early years of the current gen.

Multiplat form sell consoles as well and that's evident by the PS3 outselling the 360 because of GTA5 bundles.

 

[Nightengale]

That can't be right.

Assuming a budget of 50million per game that would be over 260 exclusive titles in development

Not one billion a year. It's more likely to be one billion across multiple years, including marketing.

Halo 4 alone cost 100 million, due to the massive marketing push it got.

 

[twobear]

I'm not suggesting that this isn't particularly accurate (I pretty much gave up on my 360 around 2010-2011), but I wonder how far it's skewed by the fact that Sony doesn't release games on PC whereas MS do.

 

[DocSeuss]

Are you trying to argue that MS had no new IP exclusives after 2010 on X360 because they all got moved to the XB1?

Because I find that hard to believe, furthermore that would still imply what 2 or 3 new IP?

Ryse, Sunset Overdrive? KI and Crimson Dragon are spiritual successors so kind of new IP, kind of not

It just seems so little for such a long time period

Forgot to mention State of Decay that was a good one but is now going PC. So console exclusive I guess

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. Microsoft realized there's no point to releasing BRAND NEW IPs the same year they'd release their new console. Microsoft tends to want significantly larger sales than Sony's comfortable with (see: Infamous 3 releasing after 1 and 2 sold so poorly, which really sucks, because Infamous is SO GOOD), so that's kind of a dumb idea.

It takes two and three years--Microsoft tends to have lengthier dev cycles, which is why their games are so much better than the competition's--for games to go from inception to release. So when you start working on a game in 2010, you're thinking about what it's going to be like in 2013. If you're targeting 2013 for a Xbox One release (and MS was targeting 2014, it's worth noting--which makes me wonder if that's why Forza 5 doesn't look like the best thing ever and is running late, and why they're not launching with Halo 5), then yeah, you might go "okay, no more Xbox 360 games."

The 360 games we should have seen in 2010, 2011, 2012 would have begun development in 2007, 2008, and 2009--when the economy was collapsing.

I'm sorry, but I don't think you know what a spiritual successor is: Ryse and Sunset Overdrive don't have ties to anything, Killer Instinct is a sequel/reboot, and Crimson Dragon is a spiritual successor. But who cares? It's still a new IP.

That can't be right.

Assuming a budget of 50million per game that would be over 260 exclusive titles in development

Your math is weird.

One billion = 20 $50m games.