I understand this POV , well , quite well ..
First , even if there is no doubt that those releases are a big deal , from my POV i don't see them as a gamechanger but as a continuation of an ongoing strategy.
It's not a bad thing , mind you ..and anyone saying microsoft hasn't tried some new Ip this gen is stupid
Second , despite the fact that i really liked no man sky , there is no denying that the no man sky hype did more harm than good on similar type of releases across every platform.
Third, as for killzone , one disapointing entry (Killzone 3 ) is not enough to stop a franchise that was already at his 3rd installment ( not counting spin-offs )Even if killzone wasn't critically aclaimed, it still sold well. Same thing with many 3rd party Ips ( Creed 3, mass effect 3 ) When a franchise has taken off the ground off , 1 mistep is not enough for it to crash land
Fourth , it's not like the games aren't existing , it's more , IMO that those games didn't do their jobs to push the brand and have a lasting impact.
Ryse didn't have the impact , sunset overdrive didn't sell well , re-core was destroyed by critics for being an average game.( I think this is correct , please correct me if i'm wrong ) so well i have a hard time to think that crackdown 3 will be different after crackdown 2 or that sea of thives will change that , since that reveal at E3 left me cold.
My fourth argument is more like my personnal opinion of things and i agree that some patterns can be annoying after some time.Still i think that people ignoring those titles aren't doing on purpose, but because the appeal of those titles in not as big as it should be.
Yea, and I'd have no problem with anyone that states various games IPs not having much sway from their point of view. Personally, I've never been into the more cinematic styled games that Sony's most hyped releases tend to be (and this by extension includes stuff like Quantum Break on MS' side), and I've never managed to play all the way through any Zelda ever... but I recognise the differences between games not being for me, and an actual barren lineup.
Each of the three big players clearly has an ongoing strategy. Single-player experiences dominate Sony's... online experiences dominate MS' and family-friendly and local multi experiences dominate Nintendo's... and this has been pretty much consistent for each for the entirety of their console manufacturer existence. Whilst MS has no legit answer for something like Uncharted, with attempts like Quantum Break clearly falling short, the same would apply for Sony with Halo, with Killzone coming up short. And in regards to Killzone, I wouldn't even say only 3 was disappointing... I'd argue the original was also (and then Shadowfall). Crackdown if anything is at 1:1, and people didn't write off Devil May Cry 3, despite the second game being legitimately awful.
Again, I'm not trying to tell you what you should and shouldn't be excited for. Whether No Man's Sky's hype was a good or bad thing isn't relevant. The point was just that "they only have Halo/Gears/Forza" posts turning into "yea, but those games are whatever, because..." posts isn't even something speculative. You can find the former going back to like 2011... and the latter today despite everything that's not one of those IPs released/announce in between.
Happens in any thread. That aside, I don't think anyone is literally saying Xbox only has halo, gears, and forza. People can only understand what they can see and we've barely seen crackdown, I'm excited to play another crackdown, but I'm not happy about what little they've shown. Cuphead is cool, but it shouldn't be hard to understand why it's not inspiring many and they haven't really shown all that much. I understand some posters are hyperbolic, but I can't really fault anyone for not being all that excited about any of those. Information is scarce on each one. It's no wonder people barely acknowledge them.
I purposely refrained from mentioning sea of thieves as I cant go into detail. I understand the position MS is in. They tried to bring content, but it didn't do well. Personally, I thought QB and Recore both looked mediocre from the start, but both got some hype and were underwhelming. They're between a rock and a hard place, but we should at least wait until E3 at this point.
It doesn't happen in any thread though. It happens in any Xbox thread, even if it's completely besides the topic.
As for people not literally saying it only has Halo/Gears/Forza.. I'm not gonna go chasing quotes from previous threads right now, but yes, it does get stated in that exact manner, whether or not hyperbole is the intention.. which is precisely why the discussion then tends to devolve into others listing all the non-Halo/Forza/Gears games as a response. In a thread titled "What does Microsoft have to offer to gamers?".. where literally anything could be cited... the first post is of course:
Now its completely understandable for someone to have no interest in something like Sunset Overdrive, and perhaps that's why they fail to mention it right?... But then it's almost as common to see someone say the reason they have zero interest is simply
because they have "no interest in Halo/Gears/Forza"... so even when discussing what they're not interested in they'll typically filter the entire library down to those games, like nothing else ever existed.
Anyway... I'm kinda ranting now. But yea, "Halo/Gears/Forza" into "None of those interest me" for other IPs (despite Halo/Gears/Forza often not interesting them either) has totally been a thing already, and for some time now.