Support NeoGAF

[Nightengale]

What about the rest of you?

There is the part where Xbox doesn't get 3rd-party exclusives that PlayStation/Nintendo can get due to various reasons, but I'll skip that and get to two main areas.

1. Flagship franchise fatigue/Reinvention of the pillar franchises

I really liked Halo until ODST. I've dabbled in Reach/4/5, but it never hooked me after the initial trilogy. I've always hated Gears. I buy one Forza/MLB/GT game in an entire generation, often waiting for the one that has the best balance of value/content/evolution.

So to me, I would say that when it comes to story-driven experiences, at best I can deal with 3-4 games of the same formula before I'm tired of it, even if the games make improvement to the mechanics. By the time the 4th/5th games rolls about, I want it to feel wholly new and fresh.

Freshness doesn't mean OMG INNOVATIVE MECHANICS, but it could very easily be a reframing of perspective or something that makes something old feel fresh. For example, I'd say Forza Horizon 3 was a game that successfully freshened it up "enough' where I really really love that game, even if the core of the game is still the same old Forza Horizon.

I've not gotten that from Halo and Gears. And while Forza is great, it is a one-and-done per generation franchise for me because it's fun, but not something I sink 100 hours into.

2. New AAA IP/Revival of old IPs/Renewed portfolio of exciting new games

This is self-explanatory. More games that tickle my fancy and excite. Something new that legitimately feels like they're the next pillar franchise. Unique games that feel like a risk. Strong narrative experiences.

From MS this gen, those games were Titanfall, Sea of Thieves, Sunset Overdrive & while it looked like shit in gameplay, Scalebound. Games that from the opening reveal, looked ambitious, sounded ambitious and wanted to deliver on something that isn't just a reskin of something that we're familiar with on the platform.

 

[HussiZooT]

Titanfall was a showcase for xbone. It did launched for 360 as well, but it wasn't a launch game either.

And I disagree about Crackdown 3. The first was well loved and the sequel was asked a lot, when MS finally decided to do it the developers weren't available anymore and Crackdown 2 happened, and now they are giving us the proper sequel we asked, far from being them over exploring the same franchise.

As for new ip they started the gen with Ryse, Sunset Overdrive, D4, Max and the Curse of Brotherhood, the aforementioned Titanfall, Quantum Break, Project Spark, and even had Garden Warfare as a timed exclusive. If that wasn't enough to win you or anyone else over honestly I don't think there's much they can announce at E3 that will.

Oh yes, my bad. Titanfall was for X-Box One. Replace that with Mass Effect and Crackdown. I was super interested in both these games when I was looking to upgrade from my PS2.

Also, Ryse was on PC, so was Quantum Break. So I got to play both of them regardless of not owning an X-Box. Sunset Overdrive, while being fun, didn't compel me to buy an X-Box One. Project Spark isn't my type of game - never liked Little Big Planet either.

What I feel X-Box One has been missing is bombastic exclusives that stand out. Quantum Break tried but it couldn't live up to expectations and I love Remedy - they created Max Payne after all, my all-time favourite series.

I'm super pumped for Crackdown 3 as I've always been the one waiting for a game with massive destruction since nothing has whet my destruction appetite after Red Faction Guerrilla and Armageddon. But it's still not a brand new IP.

Maybe I'm being unclear with what I expect from X-Box Scorpio's first party support. I guess I just want brand new IP that is narrative heavy with a proper AAA budget and an overall experience that takes me back to the Gears of War, Mass Effect 1 and original Halo days.

 

[LukasTaves]

Hey I got a question, been looking and haven't found anything newer but is Xbox still being shielded by Microsofts Android patents? I know as of 2014 they were making 2 billion a year just on patents for Android phones and it was used to prop up the division Xbox and windows phone was in.

It wasn't Xbox that needed the shield from Android patents. 360 printed tons of money, and there were more stuff driving the profits down of that division than Windows Phones.

For a base of comparison Xbox Live alone also made 2bi a year during 360 days, and that when almost 100% of game purchases were at retail (with the exception of xbla which was purely digital and dlc). Add the fact that about a year later after launch they were already making money of 360 hardware (and likely only took that much due rrod), and that 360 used to sold way more games than ps3 and it's easy to see how they printed money with that console.

 

[Nightengale]

As one of the more vocal "negative nancies" in this thread, I'll just say this first.

I know I've been more vocal about what my dissatisfaction are rather than what I'm satisfied with, but that simply comes with my personal taste of the games I like.

As someone who enjoys this hobby, not just from playing the games I like, but being excited/hyped for E3s conferences and game reveals, even when I haven't invested myself a new Xbox/Switch, I'm still very excited to see the next slate of announcements to tip me over the scale.

If any of you have seen my "comparison chart" that compares respective E3's announcement slate, why I have been disappointed with MS's E3 is very clear. Phil's reasoning to never repeat 2014 ever again is understandable given what happened to PD and SB, but it doesn't change the fact that E3 2016 was a huge disappointment (for me), especially after it was massively hyped by Phil.

So you'll have to forgive me if I'm skeptical. broadly. Even then, my prediction list that I've posted before iterated what I think will be an "ok" show. The quality of what's revealed will ultimately matter.

If I think it's good, I'll say it's good. If I think it's bad, I'll say its bad. I spend my time here a lot because while there are low points in this thread, I enjoy the discussion of what to look for and analyse potential line-ups and setups for E3 and this thread have been civil.

I have better time than trying to make you all feel bad for liking Xbox by hurrrr durrrr nothing Xbox announce will be gooooood it's all shit.

 

[R_thanatos]

Huh? I was saying they can announce 20 games and people (certain people) will still shit in the thread just "because". I am NOT saying that they are going to announce 20 games. My point is that you can see that there are certain people that come into MS threads just to shit in them. We have people that clearly state "I have no interest in MS or Xbox or anything they announce/show", but yet they come into almost every MS post to just take a big dump for no reason. My post was directed to the fact that almost every MS thread turns to shit...I know the MOD's do their best to right the ship and have done this, but more times than not threads just get littered with shit posts.

Xbox One is my preferred system and I am hoping that they show some good first party games, but to those that have ZERO interest, I wish they would just take the high road and stay out of a thread for something they have ZERO interest in. For example, I have ZERO interest in Persona 5 or any Persona game, but I don't randomly go into Persona threads to post since I have zero interest and never really had. You have to admit that MS threads seem to attract certain people that seem to have a sworn allegiance to shit post.

Granted, there are those that are genuine Xbox Fans that have felt a bit disheartened about the 1st party line up and I have no issue with that....my point is that MS can come to E3 and have a great showing for Scorpio, show 20 New games, even quality, AAA type of games and we will still have people that zero interest coming into the thread with their..."meh, none of those interested me or anything MS has to offer".

You can't complain about people with no interest or people shitting thread "just because" when there are still huge complains and problems the xbox need to overcome.
Like with scorpio, aside from digital foundry converage , we know little about it , so you can't blame people from being cautious. Untill microsoft shows his cards at E3 , people not being sold or being critical of the thing is perfectly normal

The situation in your exemple at the end hasn't happenned yet.. while your complains and your passion might be genuine , you're too early

 

[Synth]

The situation in your exemple at the end hasn't happenned yet.. while your complains and your passion might be genuine , you're too early

It kinda does happen on a rolling basis though. I'm constantly reading people's claims that MS only has Halo/Gears/Forza, as though they never release anything else ever. Then you point out all the new IPs (or revivals) released for XB1 up to now, or how the current release schedule contains Crackdown 3, Sea of Thieves, Cuphead, etc and the "meh, those are of no interest" is very often the response. It's perfectly fine to not be interested in all of these games of course... but until called on it, a lot of posters simply attempt to write them out of history entirely.

 

[DriftingSpirit]

What about the rest of you?

Jade Empire. Scorpio would be considered.

But dreams aside, I think more action, RPGs, platformers, adventure type stuff would get me interested. Things in the vein of Fable, Banjo and what not.

The problem with Microsoft's core exclusives is that they are in genre I like the least. I don't like FPS and I don't like racing. I wouldn't mind playing Gears but it certainly isn't something I'm dying to play since I don't play much TPS either.

 

[Solaire of Astora]

I don't know if this has been asked but for all the PS4 and PS4 Pro owners...

What exactly should Microsoft do to get you to buy their console as well. I know people want exclusives, but what type of exclusives will make you dig into your wallet and shell out money for an X-Box?

If I remember correctly, when X-Box 360 launched, I was still primarily a PlayStation guy. But games such as Gears of War, Mass Effect, Crackdown and Alan Wake, all of them really persuaded me to get myself an X-Box. I did eventually trade it in for a PS3 after I got my 3rd RROD in a span of 6 months.

But what I'm saying is, Microsoft had brand new, original IP when they launched the 360. I didn't see anything too compelling with the X-Box One yet. So when the Scorpio launches, I want more unique/original/new AAA exclusives and not just a sequel to Gears or Halo or Forza or Crackdown.

Spoiler

Maybe then I'd chip in.

What about the rest of you?

If I may chime in, I would like to see a return to the og Xbox days, where Microsoft funded a lot of new IPs. Back then, I had a gaming pc, ps2, GameCube and Xbox, and while I currently have a gaming pc, switch, wii u, ps4, ps3 and ps vita, I genuinely have little interest in picking up an Xbox one. As of right now, the only Xbox one games that really interest me are sunset overdrive, ori, forza horizon and the mainline forza series. I know that ori and forza horizon 3 are available on pc now and I definitely would have already bought ori, but my pc isn't really working right now.,. And don't ask me what's wrong with it, I'm a compete noob when it comes to these things. I bought it off a friend who built it himself years ago. He sold it to me and built himself a new rig. When we both have some free time, I'll ask him to take a look at it and figure out what's wrong with it.

I've mainly been a playstation guy for the past 16 years or so. MGS was the game that I just had to play, and mgs2 and mgs4 got me to jump in early with the ps2 and ps3, respectively. I was lttp on the wii u, so I'm currently catching up on the things I missed there. My wife surprised me with a switch as an early 30th birthday present and I'm enjoying Zelda and really looking forward to splatoon 2, Mario odyssey and hopefully a shit ton of portable indie games. Ps4 was a no brainer and I really couldn't be happier with it.

I missed out on a 360, which was a little painful in retrospect, because most of my friends were playing there. As a result, I have never played a gears of war game, so I have no attachment to the series. Maybe I'd really enjoy it? I don't know, I've never played it. But for what it's worth, I'm not really much of a shooter guy anyway. Can't stand COD, wasnt the slightest bit interested in destiny (or killzone or resistance, for that matter). I owned halo 1 and 2 for my OG xbox back in the day, and while I had some fun with them, I never finished either. I do enjoy a little bit of battlefield/battlefront from time to time, but that's mostly because all of my friends play it and I enjoy the aerial combat while a large-scale battle unfolds beneath me.

I know I'm probably missing something here, but there really is very little that interests me on Xbox, and I feel my bases are pretty well covered by everything else. That's not to say Microsoft is doomed/should go out of the console business/etc. I don't think that should happen at all. They cater to a lot of people. Just not to me.

Honestly? I feel like the Western big budget, AAA games market is not really for me anymore. I tend to enjoy indie games, RPGs and games made in Japan more nowadays. But there are some exceptions, of course. I'd love it if Microsoft diversified a little with some lower budget projects. Recore seemed to be a step in the right direction, but that was just one step. More please.

Spoiler

Ironically, despite being pretty much what I'm asking for on paper, Recore didn't really look that great to me. That said, I love that Microsoft went there, and I would love to see them try again.

 

[Plague Doctor]

I said it before in this thread and will agin.

Phil, come through, Fable entry and single player. Go big on it. If you flip flop from your previous statements about having apprehension of SP games to make that happen I am will pick up an xbox.

This is a lay up.

It is possible to cater to multiplats, multiplayer, AND single player experience. These things do not need to be exclusive to one another or come at an expense to the others in your library offerings. Your competition does it, and so should you.

 

[KORNdoggy]

It kinda does happen on a rolling basis though. I'm constantly reading people's claims that MS only has Halo/Gears/Forza, as though they never release anything else ever. Then you point out all the new IPs (or revivals) released for XB1 up to now, or how the current release schedule contains Crackdown 3, Sea of Thieves, Cuphead, etc and the "meh, those are of no interest" is very often the response. It's perfectly fine to not be interested in all of these games of course... but until called on it, a lot of posters simply attempt to write them out of history entirely.

i think a big issue is that what they are releasing in addition to the pillar franchises are kind of an unknown quantity even now. cup-head does look great, but it's an indie game, the same sort of indie game people would bitch about getting "free" on PS+ or XBLA (just go into the PS+ threads and see the endless complaining over great indie games). it just comes with the territory that something 2D isn't going to get the sort of excitement gears of war or halo used to.

sea of thieves is still pretty obscure and gives off a "no mans sea" vibe for a lot of people. i think until that games premise and gameplay loop is more obvious/interesting, it's not going to garner much interest.

as for crackdown, as much as i loved the first one, it is a sequel to a disappointing second game, and hasn't had anything shown of it for over a year. at this point i honestly find it weirder when people are super excited by something like crackdown 3 because we literally haven't seen anything of it. it's like being excited over a CGi trailer, i'll never understand that either. but i'm sure that will change this E3 when it's show off.

 

[Synth]

i think a big issue is that what they are releasing in addition to the pillar franchises are kind of an unknown quantity even now. cup-head does look great, but it's an indie game, the same sort of indie game people would bitch about getting "free" on PS+ or XBLA (just go into the PS+ threads and see the endless complaining over great indie games). it just comes with the territory that something 2D isn't going to get the sort of excitement gears of war or halo used to.

sea of thieves is still pretty obscure and gives off a "no mans sea" vibe for a lot of people. i think until that games premise and gameplay loop is more obvious/interesting, it's not going to garner much interest.

as for crackdown, as much as i loved the first one, it is a sequel to a disappointing second game, and hasn't had anything shown of it for over a year. at this point i honestly find it weirder when people are super excited by something like crackdown 3 because we literally haven't seen anything of it. it's like being excited over a CGi trailer, i'll never understand that either. but i'm sure that will change this E3 when it's show off.

This isn't the point though. Like I said, it's understandable for the games to not appeal to someone for various reasons... but until they're actually cited explicitly, usually in response to the 14857th claim that MS only releases Halo/Gears/Forza, people act like the games flat-out aren't existing. Cuphead, indie, sure... but Sea of Thieves, whether it interests you or not, is a clearly substantial release, as is Crackdown 3, as is State of Decay 2... Having no clue what you actually do never caused anyone to pretend No Man's Sky wasn't even a thing, and coming off a disappointing previous entry never stopped Killzone. There's a difference between being interested in releases, and outright ignoring them, to push some claim that they don't attempt to even create games outside of 3 IPs.

 

[Lady Gaia]

Can we stop this Xbox looses money circle jerk. It couldn't be any further away from the truth. Xbox has been profitable for a very long time now.

It's extremely difficult to tell from the outside. Revenue figures are easy to come by, but net income at a granular enough level is much more closely guarded. Mostly what we have is a lot of speculation, some positive and some negative. If there's any hard evidence regarding profitability of the Xbox division one way or another I'd be very interested.

Not that it matters to me as a consumer so long as they're willing to invest in a solid hardware platform and deliver unique experiences I find compelling. They earned my business two generations in a row, and I've been close to jumping in a few times this generation but I'm not there yet. It's hard to believe E3 is right around the corner. Tick, tock.

 

[Nightengale]

This isn't the point though. Like I said, it's understandable for the games to not appeal to someone for various reasons... but until they're actually cited explicitly, usually in response to the 14857th claim that MS only releases Halo/Gears/Forza, people act like the games flat-out aren't existing. Cuphead, indie, sure... but Sea of Thieves, whether it interests you or not, is a clearly substantial release, as is Crackdown 3, as is State of Decay 2... Having no clue what you actually do never caused anyone to pretend No Man's Sky wasn't even a thing, and coming off a disappointing previous entry never stopped Killzone. There's a difference between being interested in releases, and outright ignoring them, to push some claim that they don't attempt to even create games outside of 3 IPs.

People who claim MS is only Halo/Gears/Forza generally aren't worth paying any attention to.

 

[Team Andromeda]

MS have tons of money Just about any other company the Xbox would be dead. No way they could sustained the loses xbox has had. So Sega is a terrible comparison to MS.

You mean like SONY, who lost Billions not that long ago. MS been making money from its XBox division this and last gen (more even if not for the TROD) . It was in the original XBox days it wasn't.

Nintendo too has lost millions and millions just the other year. So this focus on MS does make me laugh

 

[Papacheeks]

People who claim MS is only Halo/Gears/Forza generally aren't worth paying any attention to.

Issue is when they go outside of those franchises they have issues on games like QB, Recore,(even though they didn't make it)sunset overdrive under performing.

They don't have faith in many thing's outside of proven franchises, and history from last generation proves that especially close to the end of 2012.
They didn't try to acquire, or keep good relationships with PC developers for future titles or possibly franchises they could have be synonymous with xbox.

That's on them that they have in essence cultivated a audience that is specific to US/UK. It's their issue for doubling down on MP, while not at least creating new experiences and gaining studios/teams now losing them.
Sony has had that issue as well this generation. But I can't say that the studios Sony closed didn't get a chance to work on new projects(even though the projects some of them worked on were somewhat forced upon them).

I'll eat crow this E3 if I see a slew of new IP's from MS that are not entirely focused on MP.

 

[Team Andromeda]

billions in the bank =/= billions to burn. at the end of the day they still have investors that they need to keep happy. and those investors would love to see xbox dead and buried since it's where MS lose the most cash. yes MS have a billion dollar corporation, but that doesn't mean they will continue to pour cash on the fire just to keep it burning. so how much they have in the bank isn't really relevant at all otherwise we'd still have lionhead games to look forward to and scalebound would be releasing this year, becasue hey, it's just money right, why not throw more cash at failing businesses, that always works out well. lol

Think like you SONY would have killed off its PlayStation division and also it's TV vision, which were losing millions the other year and hey lets close SONY Cambridge, lets close Evolution Studios, let's close Zipper Interactive its only money and people's jobs. That's ok, its MS that can't close down studios or drop games.

Luckily investors don't live in fanboy's worlds

 

[leeh]

It's extremely difficult to tell from the outside. Revenue figures are easy to come by, but net income at a granular enough level is much more closely guarded. Mostly what we have is a lot of speculation, some positive and some negative. If there's any hard evidence regarding profitability of the Xbox division one way or another I'd be very interested.

Not that it matters to me as a consumer so long as they're willing to invest in a solid hardware platform and deliver unique experiences I find compelling. They earned my business two generations in a row, and I've been close to jumping in a few times this generation but I'm not there yet. It's hard to believe E3 is right around the corner. Tick, tock.

That's just being negative for the fun of it. It's 9 billion of revenue without large investment. Like, Scorpio isn't going to cost that much.

What could Xbox have done to turn 9 billion into a loss? Even if they wrote off Fable/Scalebound in that year, that's potential of maybe 100~ mil loss, not 9,000 mil.

 

[Blackleg-sanji1]

Think like you SONY would have killed off its PlayStation division and also it's TV vision, which were losing millions the other year and hey lets close SONY Cambridge, lets close Evolution Studios, let's close Zipper Interactive its only money and people's jobs. That's ok, its MS that can't close down studios or drop games.

Luckily investors don't live in fanboy's worlds

I mean.. you kinda are right now? All that was pretty unnecessary and how stuff gets started in the first place. Could've easily countered him without
A)bringing up Sony
&
B)making yourself look worse than he/she

 

[R_thanatos]

This isn't the point though. Like I said, it's understandable for the games to not appeal to someone for various reasons... but until they're actually cited explicitly, usually in response to the 14857th claim that MS only releases Halo/Gears/Forza, people act like the games flat-out aren't existing. Cuphead, indie, sure... but Sea of Thieves, whether it interests you or not, is a clearly substantial release, as is Crackdown 3, as is State of Decay 2... Having no clue what you actually do never caused anyone to pretend No Man's Sky wasn't even a thing, and coming off a disappointing previous entry never stopped Killzone. There's a difference between being interested in releases, and outright ignoring them, to push some claim that they don't attempt to even create games outside of 3 IPs.

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.

 

[Maximilian Kolbe]

Call me crazy, but I feel like saving scorpio reveal for E3 means there's not much in the "games" category. The discussion that'll happen will revolve around the console, it's price and so on... With some games sprinkled in. Here's hoping I'm wrong.

Wat? they already revealed like 90% of Scorpio, all it left is just the design, price and release date(this may won't even tell us in E3 btw, since Xbox One didn't told us the release date til August 2013), you seriously think this 2/3 parts will take loads of time.?

 

[R_thanatos]

Wat? they already revealed like 90% of Scorpio, all it left is just the design, price and release date(this may won't even tell us in E3 btw, since Xbox One didn't told us the release date til August 2013), you seriously think this 2/3 parts will take loads of time.?

Yeah , E3 is going to be :
-final design
-games
-pricing at the end.

it needs to happen in this order

if it doesn't , then microsoft will have messed up somewhere

 

[RichiRamjag]

It kinda does happen on a rolling basis though. I'm constantly reading people's claims that MS only has Halo/Gears/Forza, as though they never release anything else ever. Then you point out all the new IPs (or revivals) released for XB1 up to now, or how the current release schedule contains Crackdown 3, Sea of Thieves, Cuphead, etc and the "meh, those are of no interest" is very often the response. It's perfectly fine to not be interested in all of these games of course... but until called on it, a lot of posters simply attempt to write them out of history entirely.

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.

Think like you SONY would have killed off its PlayStation division and also it's TV vision, which were losing millions the other year and hey lets close SONY Cambridge, lets close Evolution Studios, let's close Zipper Interactive its only money and people's jobs. That's ok, its MS that can't close down studios or drop games.

Luckily investors don't live in fanboy's worlds

You can't call people fanboys after writing a post like this.

 

[Team Andromeda]

I mean.. you kinda are right now? All that was pretty unnecessary and how stuff gets started in the first place. Could've easily countered him without
A)bringing up Sony
&
B)making yourself look worse than he/she

I'm just trying to correct fanboys nonsense. If SONY or MS have 2 flops consoles in a row and lose billions and billions, they'll back out, they have other area's and interests to fall back on, but they are not, both corps can see how important getting that TV space is

Looking over that. MS and SONY will open and close studios, so will the likes of EA and so on... It happens and as always happened for as long as I can remember. Its one of the few area's Nintendo does best. It hardly closes down any studio to their credit

 

[Synth]

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:

Halo, Gears and Forza?

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.

 

[DriftingSpirit]

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.

This is true but I think Sony has found a good way to make up for their weakness. They rely on big third parties to carry the MP/GaaS load for them.

I think MS tried to make up for their weakness in that SP only field early in the gen but nothing really came of it. I think it is fine if MS centers MP/GaaS for their games. I think they just need to continue looking for a way to cover that other area.

 

[Thebeardofknowledge]

Can we stop this Xbox looses money circle jerk. It couldn't be any further away from the truth. Xbox has been profitable for a very long time now. It's also very important to their business strategy/model leverages their enterprise tech stacks.

You better go back and read more earning reports

 

[LukasTaves]

I think MS tried to make up for their weakness in that SP only field early in the gen but nothing really came of it. I think it is fine if MS centers MP/GaaS for their games. I think they just need to continue looking for a way to cover that other area.

They really haven't stopped though, neither Crackdown or State of Decay are games as service. Yeah, they have multiplayer (more specifically coop) but the previous entries are basically campaign only entries, and there's nothing so far that shows they turning into services, except perhaps for Crackdown now having a full blown mp mode.

Their announcements for the last few years weren't game as services as well, recore, dr4, scalebound, forzas, Halo wars 2 etc... None of them were services with the exception of Sea of Thieves.

Yeah, they seem to be big on Mp, but it's not that far off from sony putting multiplayer on all their franchises too, they just give it usually a bigger focus.

 

[leeh]

You better go back and read more earning reports

I did, and posted a breakdown, why don't you go read it and not post FUD? When you've done that, come back to me with a complete explanation to why the financial report isn't too great.

You know, as your beard has all that knowledge in it.

 

[Liliana Eileen]

I did, and posted a breakdown, why don't you go read it and not post FUD? When you've done that, come back to me with a complete explanation to why the financial report isn't too great.

All he does is post FUD as well as picks and chooses who to reply to, if at all.

 

[Synth]

This is true but I think Sony has found a good way to make up for their weakness. They rely on big third parties to carry the MP/GaaS load for them.

I think MS tried to make up for their weakness in that SP only field early in the gen but nothing really came of it. I think it is fine if MS centers MP/GaaS for their games. I think they just need to continue looking for a way to cover that other area.

Honestly, whilst I think MS hasn't done as well with publishing overall compared to Sony over the last few years, I don't think there's much difference in the way the libraries are being plugged by third-parties. On the multiplayer side, you have your Overwatch, your Destiny, your Call of Duty, etc that fill in for the sort of games MS would provide, but Sony don't tend to (Halo and Gears)... but then on the other end, you still have your Assassin's Creed, your Witcher 3, your Batman Arkham Knight, your Grand Theft Auto etc that ensure fans of single player games on Xbox are hardly left without shit to play. If gaps in the library were the real concern, then the only one of the three that would really come into any shit would be Nintendo, whose lack of third-party support does leave huge holes in its library for large amounts of the audience. The only real hole in the Xbox library is Japanese-focused games.

 

[DriftingSpirit]

They really haven't stopped though, neither Crackdown or State of Decay are games as service. Yeah, they have multiplayer (more specifically coop) but the previous entries are basically campaign only entries, and there's nothing so far that shows they turning into services, except perhaps for Crackdown now having a full blown mp mode.

Their announcements for the last few years weren't game as services as well, recore, dr4, scalebound, forzas, Halo wars 2 etc... None of them were services with the exception of Sea of Thieves.

Yeah, they seem to be big on Mp, but it's not that far off from sony putting multiplayer on all their franchises too, they just give it usually a bigger focus.

I didn't say they stopped. I said they need to continue.

MP on all their franchises? I'm not sure I agree with that.

 

[RichiRamjag]

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.

I'm sorry, but thats bullshit. As a big switch fan, those threads are pure craziness. Early in the gen, PS threads were toxic with the "ps has no games" nonsense. I'm more than willing to admit that there are fanboys ongaf and that some people can be hyperbolic, but this "everyone has it out for xbox" stuff is nonsense.

In regards to halo/forza/gears, it's somewhat understandable based on MS's big advertising pushes for those games. It does sometimes seem (and I say this as someone with two xboxs in his home) that they focus mainly on those titles. Knowing that their respective devs are meant to only work on those titles going forward doesn't help matters. Anyone with a bit of sense knows that xbox has games that aren't halo/gears/forza. As I mentioned earlier, it doesn't help that when xbox tried branching out, those games didn't do well. It's hard for me to be overly critical towards them when taking that into consideration, but I still hope to see them take risks.

Honestly, whilst I think MS hasn't done as well with publishing overall compared to Sony over the last few years, I don't think there's much difference in the way the libraries are being plugged by third-parties. On the multiplayer side, you have your Overwatch, your Destiny, your Call of Duty, etc that fill in for the sort of games MS would provide, but Sony don't tend to (Halo and Gears)... but then on the other end, you still have your Assassin's Creed, your Witcher 3, your Batman Arkham Knight, your Grand Theft Auto etc that ensure fans of single player games on Xbox are hardly left without shit to play. If gaps in the library were the real concern, then the only one of the three that would really come into any shit would be Nintendo, whose lack of third-party support does leave huge holes in its library for large amounts of the audience. The only real hole in the Xbox library is Japanese-focused games.

That's a big problem this gen. The libraries are so similar that it makes it hard to justify both. Sadly, too many people feel like they need to justify it one way or the other when both are great options.That still doesn't mean that MS's first party output isn't worth discussing.

 

[DriftingSpirit]

Honestly, whilst I think MS hasn't done as well with publishing overall compared to Sony over the last few years, I don't think there's much difference in the way the libraries are being plugged by third-parties. On the multiplayer side, you have your Overwatch, your Destiny, your Call of Duty, etc that fill in for the sort of games MS would provide, but Sony don't tend to (Halo and Gears)... but then on the other end, you still have your Assassin's Creed, your Witcher 3, your Batman Arkham Knight, your Grand Theft Auto etc that ensure fans of single player games on Xbox are hardly left without shit to play. If gaps in the library were the real concern, then the only one of the three that would really come into any shit would be Nintendo, whose lack of third-party support does leave huge holes in its library for large amounts of the audience. The only real hole in the Xbox library is Japanese-focused games.

I was leaning more toward exclusive content. Stuff like QB, Ryse, etc... I think MS needs more partnerships like that. An effort to really go after that SP sector and create something they can call their own.

It hasn't worked out too well up to this point but I think continuing to do stuff like that would help support their main efforts (MP/GaaS).

 

[FinaruDensetsu]

The xbox victim playing is kind of pathetic. It's legit criticism that their first party output has been a bit weak. It's why there are articles written about it.

Stop being defensive and just be confident. I think MS will blow it out of the water in a month. At that point you'll hear way less criticism except from the few truly crazy fanboys anyway.

 

[MisterR]

I don't know if this has been asked but for all the PS4 and PS4 Pro owners...

What exactly should Microsoft do to get you to buy their console as well. I know people want exclusives, but what type of exclusives will make you dig into your wallet and shell out money for an X-Box?

If I remember correctly, when X-Box 360 launched, I was still primarily a PlayStation guy. But games such as Gears of War, Mass Effect, Crackdown and Alan Wake, all of them really persuaded me to get myself an X-Box. I did eventually trade it in for a PS3 after I got my 3rd RROD in a span of 6 months.

But what I'm saying is, Microsoft had brand new, original IP when they launched the 360. I didn't see anything too compelling with the X-Box One yet. So when the Scorpio launches, I want more unique/original/new AAA exclusives and not just a sequel to Gears or Halo or Forza or Crackdown.

Spoiler

Maybe then I'd chip in.

What about the rest of you?

For me personally. I want more variety. I had an Xbone but traded it in to get a Switch. I'd love a new single player Fable, some more RPG type games, something like their own Ratchet and Clank would be cool. Maybe something cool and different like Until Dawn. There is just so much variety on PS. Xbox needs to mix it up a bit, in my opinion.

 

[Thebeardofknowledge]

I did, and posted a breakdown, why don't you go read it and not post FUD? When you've done that, come back to me with a complete explanation to why the financial report isn't too great.

You know, as your beard has all that knowledge in it.

Q1 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 5%
Q2 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 3%
Q3 FY 2017 gaming revenue was up 4%

Yeah they're killing it so far this fiscal year

 

[RichiRamjag]

The xbox victim playing is kind of pathetic. It's legit criticism that their first party output has been a bit weak. It's why there are articles written about it.

Stop being defensive and just be confident. I think MS will blow it out of the water in a month. At that point you'll hear way less criticism except from the few truly crazy fanboys anyway.

It's like this on the reddit too lately. Gotten kind of out of hand. I can barely visit and I'm not even all that critical of xbox as of late.

 

[Ricky Ricardo]

The xbox victim playing is kind of pathetic. It's legit criticism that their first party output has been a bit weak. It's why there are articles written about it.

Stop being defensive and just be confident. I think MS will blow it out of the water in a month. At that point you'll hear way less criticism except from the few truly crazy fanboys anyway.

There's a difference between some of the legitimate criticism you'll see posters like Nightengale write up versus the clueless fanboy drivel individuals like TheBeardofKnowledge bring in.

Pointing those things out doesn't and shouldn't automatically point to "persecution complex," it should be a note that the conversation should be steered back to being objective.

 

[JaggedSac]

Q1 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 5%
Q2 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 3%
Q3 FY 2017 gaming revenue was up 4%

Yeah they're killing it so far this fiscal year

Profitability was what was being discussed. What you posted does not tell about profitability.

 

[Synth]

I'm sorry, but thats bullshit. As a big switch fan, those threads are pure craziness. Early in the gen, PS threads were toxic with the "ps has no games" nonsense. I'm more than willing to admit that there are fanboys ongaf and that some people can be hyperbolic, but this "everyone has it out for xbox" stuff is nonsense.

No, don't get me wrong... it's pretty common around the launch of most consoles, because at those times, there often actually is a rather small offering of stuff. If I cite 3 Nintendo published Switch games, then at this point in time, that's exhaustive... even if its also perfectly reasonable considering how new the platform is. That's different from citing 3 IPs amongst 20+ in year 4.

There's bullshit about each manufacturer, that's true... I'm not trying to claim everything is stated negatively regarding Xbox here, but positively about Sony and Nintendo (though, there are individual posters I would definitely level that accusation at). What I'm saying is that there isn't a "Halo/Gears/Forza"-esque sideswipe that happens in every thread for any console/manufacturer.

I omitted the rest of your post, because there isn't really anything else I disagree with in it.

I was leaning more toward exclusive content. Stuff like QB, Ryse, etc... I think MS needs more partnerships like that. An effort to really go after that SP sector and create something they can call their own.

It hasn't worked out too well up to this point but I think continuing to do stuff like that would help support their main efforts (MP/GaaS).

In regards to exclusive stuff... I would then argue that Sony doesn't really have third-parties filling in for those areas then... unless there's a bunch of games I'm either unaware of, or am forgetting that fit the criteria. It's multiplatform games in both scenarios that I'd say compensate for the huge budget productions that each console manufacturer releases, and it's only really marketing deals rather than actual exclusivity that's used to sway the audiences to their favour.

 

[Papacheeks]

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.

Difference is they approach online multuiplayer differently. Sony tried many times with Killzone, early days of socom on ps2, ratchet and clank, Resistance series, god of war and kind of fell on their faces. So they concentrate on Single player experiences which I think is at the heart of any console. But that seems to not be Microsoft's MO.
If you don't have internet let's say or at least good internet because of whatever reason(region,geography ect.) what are you playing on your system from xbox?

Halo 5 is a 4-5 hour campaign that isn't that great, gears of war 4 campaign is ok, QB is pretty hit or miss, sunset overdrive is decent. Really third party seems to be where MS let's single player games fill that void.

But those games can be bought on everything else. Same can be said about sony's approach to Multiplayer. They let third party pick up the slack. Difference is there's only a couple games from MS that add to the value of xbox multiplayer software.
While in the single player experience Sony not only has really high quality experiences only found from their internal studios, they also have Japanese third party support that have in the past year or so been putting out top tier quality games.
So even if you don't have the best internet or reliable internet your can play a slew of of great western third party, eastern third party, indie, and fantastic first party single player experiences on Playstation that you can't get on xbox.
MS has done nothing to fill that void from eastern third party, and Sony's first party when it comes to high quality single player experiences.

Profitability was what was being discussed. What you posted does not tell about profitability.

Then Operating Profit should be discussed not Revenue.

 

[FinaruDensetsu]

There's a difference between some of the legitimate criticism you'll see posters like Nightengale write up versus the clueless fanboy drivel individuals like TheBeardofKnowledge bring in.

Pointing those things out doesn't and shouldn't automatically point to "persecution complex," it should be a note that the conversation should be steered back to being objective.

That's understandable. But I'm seeing a lot of whiny posts about how neoGAF as a whole is so against the Xbox. Frankly, as someone who's very positive about the Xbox it's very tiring. It sounds super defeatist and is just flat out annoying. You can block the people who are obviously just huge playstation fanboys (we all know who they are) and have an actual discussion with the people with legitimate points.

For those people, if you think gaf as a whole is that biased and unfair to xbox why would you continue to be here? Do you see a bunch of sane people just posting day in and day out trying to have a rational discussion about trump in r/donald? Come on.

 

[Banjo-Kazooie]

Q1 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 5%
Q2 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 3%
Q3 FY 2017 gaming revenue was up 4%

Yeah they're killing it so far this fiscal year

Revenue Is different than profit bruh

 

[leeh]

Q1 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 5%
Q2 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 3%
Q3 FY 2017 gaming revenue was up 4%

Yeah they're killing it so far this fiscal year

There's nothing wrong with any of that...

 

[Liliana Eileen]

Q1 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 5%
Q2 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 3%
Q3 FY 2017 gaming revenue was up 4%

Yeah they're killing it so far this fiscal year

You're only digging a deeper hole, but carry onward.

 

[RichiRamjag]

Difference is they approach online multuiplayer differently. Sony tried many times with Killzone, early days of socom on ps2, ratchet and clank, Resistance series, god of war and kind of fell on their faces. So they concentrate on Single player experiences which I think is at the heart of any console. But that seems to not be Microsoft's MO.
If you don't have internet let's say or at least good internet because of whatever reason(region,geography ect.) what are you playing on your system from xbox?

Halo 5 is a 4-5 hour campaign that isn't that great, gears of war 4 campaign is ok, QB is pretty hit or miss, sunset overdrive is decent. Really third party seems to be where MS let's single player games fill that void.

But those games can be bought on everything else. Same can be said about sony's approach to Multiplayer. They let third party pick up the slack. Difference is there's only a couple games from MS that add to the value of xbox multiplayer software.
While in the single player experience Sony not only has really high quality experiences only found from their internal studios, they also have Japanese third party support that have in the past year or so been putting out top tier quality games.
So even if you don't have the best internet or reliable internet your can play a slew of of great western third party, eastern third party, indie, and fantastic first party single player experiences on Playstation that you can't get on xbox.
MS has done nothing to fill that void from eastern third party, and Sony's first party when it comes to high quality single player experiences.



Then Operating Profit should be discussed not Revenue.

This assessment is pretty much spot-on.

 

[Thebeardofknowledge]

Profitability was what was being discussed. What you posted does not tell about profitability.

Revenue Is different than profit bruh

Fair enough

But Doesn't MS hide Xbox behind the personal computing ? So there is almost no real way to tell if Xbox is profitable or not ?

Fair enough

But Doesn't MS hide Xbox behind the personal computing ? So there is almost no real way to tell if Xbox is profitable or not ?

There's nothing wrong with any of that...

You're only digging a deeper hole, but carry onward.

Please tell me how profitable Xbox was each quarter and there operating expenses for those quarters I listed then

 

[Papacheeks]

I know the saying there's no smoke without fire, but that's based on silly analysts and nothing tbh.

Let me say it this way, in-terms of sheer revenue, Xbox made 1.2 billion more than windows in '16, made more than double the revenue of Surface and is 40% of the size of their largest division (Office).

It isn't going anywhere. You know guys, if you kept up with financials when people here seem to claim to know so much, you'd get a completely different picture of what Xbox means to MS. It's a god-damn powerhouse. You don't give up a division which as so much of a fan culture behind it and generates 9 billion in a year.

EDIT: Sauce https://www.microsoft.com/investor/reports/ar16/index.html

Revenue is not direct profit it is things sold through retail among other channels.

Net Profit is what we want to actually be looking at. Also need to look at operating expenses for xbox division as well.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

Q1 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 5%
Q2 FY 2017 gaming revenue was down 3%
Q3 FY 2017 gaming revenue was up 4%

Yeah they're killing it so far this fiscal year

but what about MAU

 

[Thebeardofknowledge]

but what about MAU

So MUA makes money and everything else doesn't ?