Riky
$MSFT
So the game will actually arrive earlier than if it was kept in house with all the recruitment needed, just like I said many many pages ago.
So the game will actually arrive earlier than if it was kept in house with all the recruitment needed, just like I said many many pages ago.
Is this game 3rd or 1st person? I loved both Perfect Dark and Zero. I remember the sweet launch night
I'm hoping for third person myself.
Confirmed first person already via their initial reveal interview.
The 1st group is better for the longterm though because they would be able to operate on their own in a year or so without needing an AAA studio like Crystal Dynamics to come in and do the heavy liftingAnd that all makes perfect fucking sense. Sounds to me like people in the first group were trying to have some glory type shit, make a big name for themselves as a new studio, them doing it all themselves and establish themselves as the next big thing or whatever they were thinking. Whereas the second group sounds like they were willing to put their egos aside and just acknowledge that they needed to use help and support studios to get up to speed and get their staffing situation solved sooner rather than later so they could get to working on a game.
Second group doesn't seem to care what people say about who will get the credit in the end, or will be seen as having the larger role, or whether this prevents them from being seen as the primary developer. They just want to make an ambitious game, and feel like Crystal Dynamics can help them achieve that faster. 2nd group were the ones who were thinking more rationally.
I don't know if I'm being harsh with the 1st group, but they could have just grown later on. What's the issue with bringing in a top tier studio like CD to follow the vision you guys had planned out for the game? Why not bring in CD, and in the process of doing your thing with CD slowly grow as time as the roles are needed? I don't get why having a top tier AAA studio ready to go was something that was so heavily frowned upon by the first group. It's nuts.
I was wishing it was in 3rd person too. A futuristic 3rd person shooter in the Perfect Dark world sounds way more appealingsigh....oh well
I was wishing it was in 3rd person too. A futuristic 3rd person shooter in the Perfect Dark world sounds way more appealing
A lot of good points in this post, and a lot of truth about the industry now.This isnt a Microsoft problem. Nearly ALL AAA studios seem to be struggling to put out games. There is a reason why we have a total of ZERO next gen only games on Xbox and it's not just because MS first party studios failed. None of the third party studios are ready. Even Bethesda which used to make games every 3-4 years has now taken 7 years to make Starfield. And yes, I know Fallout 76 came out in 2018 but lets face it, the main team was working on Starfield.
Even Sony studios have had a horrendous gen. BP and Housemarque werent even Sony owned when they released their next gen games. Ratchet is pretty much the only next gen game released by Sony's internal studio and will be the only one until Spiderman comes out in late 2023.
Bioware is missing in action since 2019. It's been 3 years. Nothing. Suicide Squad has taken 7 years and will be delayed to next year. It looks last gen as fuck anyway. Then you have Kojima who is typically very productive but for some reason has nothing to show 2.5 years after shipping death stranding. Crystal Dynamics is only just starting pre-production on next gen Tomb Raider and now that will be delayed by years thanks to Perfect Dark. Naughty Dog is nowhere to be found. It's been almost 2 years since they shipped TLOU2 and nothing. Not even factions which is most likely last gen. They were very productive releasing 3 AAA games last gen. Even shipping TLOU2 within 3 years of shipping Lost Legacy.
This is an industry wide problem. It just looks worse for MS because they havent had the best track record with first party. I would love to blame Phil for making Forza Horizon 5 and Halo Infinite Last gen, but Sony's entire lineup this year is cross gen. Every third party game is cross gen. Hell, I have no doubt that the next RE game, the next FF game, the next Star Wars Jedi Fallen order game, and the next AC game will all be cross gen. Nitnendo hasnt released a Zelda, Mario or Metroid game since 2017. Those are their only AAA franchises so they've basically had nothing for an AAA only gamer like myself.
No one knows how to make games anymore so they make the same thing over and over again. No offense to Horizon or Elden Rings, but my god, they both felt pretty much identical to their predecessors. Elden Rings especially. I was like I cant go through any Souls mode trauma. The game looks like a PS3 game. Ratchet felt like a PS3 game with CG quality graphics and some fancy loading gimmicks. Halo felt like Halo 1. The new Metroid is literally 2D. What is this 1995? Forza Horizon 5 felt like FH3. Im like what is different here?? A grappling hook? Mexico? GT7 finally added a single player mode thats been in the series since its inception and we are like OMG, such innovation!
Games have stagnated. Devs have stopped innovating. That isnt on Microsoft, Sony or Ubisoft. It's the devs. They need a kick up the ass, not nurturing.
A lot of good points in this post, and a lot of truth about the industry now.
I am loving Elden ring and it’s more than what I expected but I see your point in some way. Thanks for the perspective, which I didn’t think of in some ways.
sigh....oh well
The 1st group is better for the longterm though because they would be able to operate on their own in a year or so without needing an AAA studio like Crystal Dynamics to come in and do the heavy lifting
That's also a good point. I say Crystal Dynamics is good for the short term to get a game out as soon as possible but now we're hearing it might be a soft reboot so either way we're looking at 2025 - 2027 for a releaseBut I don't see why they couldn't work on growing to become that while working with Crystal Dynamics.
Microsoft first announced the studio in 2018, and in that time up until the game's announcement in 2020, all the way up to 2021, they still had about less than 70 people. It seems it was much too early for them to be able to meet their lofty ambitions for Perfect Dark without help outside their own hiring, and Crystal Dynamics brings in up to 500 people according to LinkedIn.
Do we want The Initiative to make a much smaller, episodic style game that doesn't get the budget and team it deserves due to the expected growing pains that come with a new studio, or do we want them gunning for the very height of their biggest ambitions using Crystal Dynamics right out the gate.
Please ... Even if you're part of the 'creative process' does not always mean you own the IP rights, like with Mass Effect, where MS were part of the 'creative process' or where the developer just changed the title like with Project Gotham Racing, never mind SEGA Europe were part of the 'creative process' in MSRSecond party doesn't exist, this board has gone over this, industry workers have confirmed this. It's first or third party.
Returnal was made in direct conjunction with Sony. So was Demon's Souls. There is a reason they own it.
Starfield is not really an MS game because they had nothing to do with the inception of the game. They were not part of the creative process.
Your summary of what the current publishers are doing is wrong, and your definition of "next-gen" is short sighted and bad.
I think you under-estimate how long it can take to fill specialist tech roles. I have spent over a year trying to fill significantly less specialised positions in tech, it's going to be ridiculously tough when you have 100s of positions to fill. I would imagine that it would be much easier to fill a position if you already have some completed projects and a tangible track record behind you rather than an unproven startup. No matter how much money is behind the studio it would still be a risk to go and work there. I think the route they went was probably the right one, no shame in contracting in assistance until you find your natural groove.The 1st group is better for the longterm though because they would be able to operate on their own in a year or so without needing an AAA studio like Crystal Dynamics to come in and do the heavy lifting
The first group were sold a different vision initially. When you are headhunted, told you’ll have essentially a blank chequebook, total creative freedom, and as much time as needed, you join and want that to happen.And that all makes perfect fucking sense. Sounds to me like people in the first group were trying to have some glory type shit, make a big name for themselves as a new studio, them doing it all themselves and establish themselves as the next big thing or whatever they were thinking. Whereas the second group sounds like they were willing to put their egos aside and just acknowledge that they needed to use help and support studios to get up to speed and get their staffing situation solved sooner rather than later so they could get to working on a game.
Second group doesn't seem to care what people say about who will get the credit in the end, or will be seen as having the larger role, or whether this prevents them from being seen as the primary developer. They just want to make an ambitious game, and feel like Crystal Dynamics can help them achieve that faster. 2nd group were the ones who were thinking more rationally.
I don't know if I'm being harsh with the 1st group, but they could have just grown later on. What's the issue with bringing in a top tier studio like CD to follow the vision you guys had planned out for the game? Why not bring in CD, and in the process of doing your thing with CD slowly grow as time as the roles are needed? I don't get why having a top tier AAA studio ready to go was something that was so heavily frowned upon by the first group. It's nuts.
A lot of good points in this post, and a lot of truth about the industry now.
I am loving Elden ring and it’s more than what I expected but I see your point in some way. Thanks for the perspective, which I didn’t think of in some ways.
Wow it's unfair to put that much pressure on a studio that hasn't released a game together yet, MS is definitely part of the blameJust watched Jez Cordon's 2 cents on the issue. And I agree with his assessment. And literally he iterates that internally the people who were hired sounds like Phil or whoever sold them like Snake oil salesman. They said the right things in terms of developer freedom being agile to make smaller projects within the studio. Similar to Moon studios guys behind Ori. But once officially Microsoft made the announcment about them making AAAA style titles and perfect Dark being the first AAAA, I think the veil of what Microsoft wanted finally was pulled.
So this is 100% not developer issue, it's a Microsoft issue in how they set this developer up expectation wise.
I feel really bad now, Microsoft literally set this studio up to have issues in how they structured them.
I really hope other studios are not getting mixed messaging from Microsoft higher ups in what they expect and when they expect it.
Its an independent ego. You dont want another group taking part of your project.So 50% of staff at The Initiative didn't believe in the approach they're taking with Crystal Dynamics.
Not helped by branding them a AAAA rival to Naughty Dog.Looks like a trainwreck sorry
Or writing on the wall.Its an independent ego. You dont want another group taking part of your project.
Its an ego thing. It's happens in the work force alot.Or writing on the wall.
50% is not just an "ego" thing.Its an ego thing. It's happens in the work force alot.
In my job, we didn't like when 2nd shift were added to our shift. Since that meant competition for us.
Its an ego thing.50% is not just an "ego" thing.
They supposedly knew the scenario going in, one co-studio is out and another is in. There is definitely some issues going on outside of just "ego."
Everything in life can be boiled down to ego, it's rather reductive, innit.Its an ego thing.
You dont make a fuss about other groups joining the project, unless you are over protective about your job.
Half of them let go of their ego to work with CD, while the other didn't.
While the other half got full of themselves, because of the talents in the room.
That is what happens, when you collect high talented people, with no one to lead.
Personally, I feel like help should have been in-house not contracted. People from Naughty Dog and Insomniac see the benefits of a more curated experience, so this is unfortunate news. Sure, getting a game done early is one thing, but having a team that you work with everyday creates a good dynamic for most studios.So the game will actually arrive earlier than if it was kept in house with all the recruitment needed, just like I said many many pages ago.
Initiative update: I've added 2 more confirmed departures to the list (and corroborating a few more).
The initiative is like PSG football team. All world class, with full divas.Everything in life can be boiled down to ego, it's rather reductive, innit.
Personally, I feel like help should have been in-house not contracted. People from Naughty Dog and Insomniac see the benefits of a more curated experience, so this is unfortunate news. Sure, getting a game done early is one thing, but having a team that you work with everyday creates a good dynamic for most studios.
They also juiced every ounce of power of the PS4. What's you're point?Naughty Dog used over 2000 people for TLOU2.
They also juiced every ounce of power of the PS4. What's you're point?
They also juiced every ounce of power of the PS4. What's you're point?
That is not the example to use. Tlou2 had assets ready, unlike PD.Naughty Dog used over 2000 people for TLOU2.
Where in the heck did you come up with that conclusion? You pulled that out of your ass. Frankly this entire post is so absurd I'm not even sure how to address it. I think you entirely missed the point in regards to MS and Starfield and the comparisons. Like entirely.Please ... Even if you're part of the 'creative process' does not always mean you own the IP rights, like with Mass Effect, where MS were part of the 'creative process' or where the developer just changed the title like with Project Gotham Racing, never mind SEGA Europe were part of the 'creative process' in MSR
It's amazing the double standards on this board. When a game is in trouble is MS not being able to handle a project, but when its Bay 3 or Prime 4 it take your time, I can wait. When MS buys a studio it's them being desperate and can't set up their own, but when SONY buys most of its In-House studios it's brilliant and to be celebrated
Just watched Jez Cordon's 2 cents on the issue. And I agree with his assessment. And literally he iterates that internally the people who were hired sounds like Phil or whoever sold them like Snake oil salesman. They said the right things in terms of developer freedom being agile to make smaller projects within the studio. Similar to Moon studios guys behind Ori. But once officially Microsoft made the announcment about them making AAAA style titles and perfect Dark being the first AAAA, I think the veil of what Microsoft wanted finally was pulled.
So this is 100% not developer issue, it's a Microsoft issue in how they set this developer up expectation wise.
I feel really bad now, Microsoft literally set this studio up to have issues in how they structured them.
I really hope other studios are not getting mixed messaging from Microsoft higher ups in what they expect and when they expect it.
Of course this is true, but this doesn't match your earlier rhetoric. Also scores are pretty meaningless in terms of "90+". I mean, what is an 89 vs a 90? Especially given the current reviewer climate.I think most people will wait to see the actual game, if it releases Fall 2024 and is a 90+ game then obviously some good calls were made, if its 2026 and works out a 60% MC then the process can be pulled apart.
Since we haven't seen a single gameplay screenshot it's far to early to pass judgement.
Yep, makes total sense. Giving Phil a new title of "CEO of MS Gaming"? Since he managed Rare so well. It's a legit question.I swear many video game jounalist and podcasters are missing the boat when it comes to this one question.....
How will MS manage all 7,000 studios going forward, considering they will need to feed GamePass constantly.
Bro, dial back on that ego™ just a tad.Of course this is true, but this doesn't match your earlier rhetoric. Also scores are pretty meaningless in terms of "90+". I mean, what is an 89 vs a 90? Especially given the current reviewer climate.
But you will never know what the alternative game was that was the vision of the original team that was lauded and praised up and down before they started leaving ... at which point the faithful are casting out those same people. So you can't really say if the "right choice" was made. You can only evaluate if a good game came out of a team.
And again, all I've ever said is that people leaving en masse, is generally a bad sign of a work environment. Which it is. So we basically have confirmation that there are issues inside the development of this game. That's it. We don't know how the game is going to turn out, and yes, we can wait and see. That is all reasonable and good.
But that is not what is being said by a group of people in this thread. It's become nearly impossible to just have a discussion on this board. And if that's the case, what's the point? I'd rather just enjoy my stuff. You know, everything, because I have PS, Xbox, and Switch. Because I'm not a toolshed that picks a side and digs in his heels and I like all of it.
Rare doesn't want to do their own IPs. Or else, they would have done new banjo, Conker, and PD.Yep, makes total sense. Giving Phil a new title of "CEO of MS Gaming"? Since he managed Rare so well. It's a legit question.
It's going to be so interesting to see where this has all landed in five years.
Of course this is true, but this doesn't match your earlier rhetoric. Also scores are pretty meaningless in terms of "90+". I mean, what is an 89 vs a 90? Especially given the current reviewer climate.
But you will never know what the alternative game was that was the vision of the original team that was lauded and praised up and down before they started leaving ... at which point the faithful are casting out those same people. So you can't really say if the "right choice" was made. You can only evaluate if a good game came out of a team.
And again, all I've ever said is that people leaving en masse, is generally a bad sign of a work environment. Which it is. So we basically have confirmation that there are issues inside the development of this game. That's it. We don't know how the game is going to turn out, and yes, we can wait and see. That is all reasonable and good.
But that is not what is being said by a group of people in this thread. It's become nearly impossible to just have a discussion on this board. And if that's the case, what's the point? I'd rather just enjoy my stuff. You know, everything, because I have PS, Xbox, and Switch. Because I'm not a toolshed that picks a side and digs in his heels and I like all of it.
Still stings, that oneLets not forget motherfucking phantom dust 2. They couldve had something great.