Support NeoGAF

[Trago]

But its not just Uncharted or Zelda, it's also FFXV, P5, Nier, Nioh, Horizon, etc... One common thing among these games is high review score (excepting for FFXV, but that one is a bit of a different animal due to the FF brand). Now, look at MS efforts in that regard. They just haven't delivered any good games, not to mention great ones.

Yep.

Recore? Didn't make a splash.
Quantum Break? Didn't make a splash.
Tomb Raider exclusivity? lol
Sunset Overdrive? Nope.
Dead Rising 4? Nope.
Ryse? Shit.

And so on and so on. I agree that these games didn't set the world on fire. But the point I'm trying to make is that even though I disagree with Phil's quote, his perspective is understandable. Literally everything they've tried just didn't work out. Now for some reason they think service games are the way to go.

 

[M.D]

Microsoft late to the party going all in on the hottest trend other companies have already capitalized on while neglecting a portion of their existing user-base

Stop me if you've heard that one before!

 

[ElBoxyBrown]

Yeah, in between of Gravity Rush 2, Yakuza Zero, Nier, Nioh, Horizon, MEA (well, this one kind of sucks admittedly), P5 and other SP games this quarter (I don't have the Switch otherwise there is Zelda) plus plethora of SP PC games, there is so much time to play boring, same MP Destiny like grindfests.

You can hate all you want but games as a service is selling. People are buying it. It's here and a smart investment to go forward with.

 

[Omnistalgic]

That's the thing tho, they look at the sales and think "Well shit, people don't want these single player games from us, better pelt them with more MP focused service games".

But I agree, if they upped their game and pumped out single player games that were comparable to Uncharted or Zelda, then more people would notice. Judging from his comments, that won't be the case.

yeah, gotta do something, I mean, there's only but so many "play everyday for a year" games I can even pick up. I'm a SF player, a Destiny Player again once the sequel launches. I play FF14 with my wife (which you can spend eternity in a MMO) I'm getting my Switch to play at work and with my family. I hardly have time for my big RPG's anymore tbh, but I still have P5 and Witcher 3 waiting for me, and of course the smaller 15-20 hour experiences like Gravity Rush or Nier 2. Gotta round out that first party with a little something for everyone.

But I get it, if Sony's already taking the lead there I guess its the equivalent of trying to make a competitor to Mario or Pokemon lol. They have to nail whatever MP experience they are aiming for though, because competition is cray. I still feel it's easier to just tell a great story with memorable characters around a good gameplay loop. Today so much of your time is up for grabs with enticing play all year games. Overwatch, fighting games, Mario Kart and Smash Brothers, and my goodness, if you're a PC gamer, sheesh...

Phil has a tough road ahead to make MS first party stand out.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

He's right in a sense that not a lot of publishers are doing it, and most are now chasing that service games model, but that's to a company like sony's advantage. They are becoming known for these big, high production, cinematic high quality SP experiences that you can't really find anywhere else, and allows them to round out their games library. I think that's smarter than just trying to get in on the MP/service games chase.

 

[Sjefen]

Exciting news, I wonder when we will see the fruits of this investement, maybe next years E3.

 

[Hero]

I personally agree with Phil on the topic of single-player games. While I really enjoy games like Zelda, Mario, Horizon, and The Last of Us they don't exactly keep me coming back to a given platform. A game like Zelda is something I might re-play every year or so, but in between I'm generally playing something like Halo or Overwatch on a regular basis.

Sony realized pretty early this gen that their in-house studios are best at narrative-driven games. It's why PS4 relies so heavily on marketing deals for third party service-based games. All in all they struck a really good balance.

Microsoft needs someone to develop single-player experiences that will help fill out their library. As it stands they're pitting their own service-based titles against third party offerings and people feel its all too similar. I don't believe that 343 or the Coalition will magically turn into Naughty Dog, but they could let new and existing teams splinter off into smaller projects.

Games like Zelda, Mario, Horizon, and TLoU are games that drive people to buy a system since they are exclusives.

Like I couldn't honestly ever recommend someone getting an Xbox One over a PS4 at any point since both systems launched.

 

[Gestault]

What's even funnier they are talking about the new Zelda... which sold more copies then Switches sold. No, no impact at all beyond driving Switch sales to sell every single piece of hardware Nintendo managed to produce.

If he just mentioned Horizon: Zero Dawn it could be argued, but the moment he put Zelda there the argument went from "eh..maybe" to "this is absolutely laughable".

This is a reading comprehension thing; he's citing those as excepetions, but that otherwise, single-player isn't as in-demand and it had been. He's not saying that Zelda or Zero Dawn weren't big impact.

 

[LukasTaves]

He said, "There are systems for those who want big budget SP games. They're called the PS4 and Nintendo Switch."

Wow, very troubling indeed.

He is just talking about the success Sony and Nintendo had. He says it's crutial for them as a platform to make sure SP games can thrive on Xbox as well.

“We’ve got to understand that if we enjoy those games, the business opportunity has to be there for them. I love story-based games. I just finished [LucasArts-inspired RPG] Thimbleweed Park – I thought it was a fantastic game. Inside was probably my game of last year. As an industry, I want to make sure both narrative-driven single-player games and service-based games have the opportunity to succeed. I think that’s critical for us.”

 

[StereoVsn]

Quick point. There isn't a Zelda with every Switch. People bought Zelda twice, and bought Zelda before they could get their hands on a console. Not to downplay the impact, its massive! But just want to fact-check the hyperbole.

Anyway, what's happening is gaming is diversifying! More people are playing. As many are playing big single player games as years ago, but others are playing mobile games, multiplayer games.

What Phil Spencer is saying is ridiculous, and its an extremely ill omen for the future of Xbox, He's completely mis-reading the market.

No, there are literally more copies of Switch Zelda sold then Switch hardware. Whether people buy multiple copies or buy SE and regular or SE and digital or buy the game before the console is irrelevant.

It's not the "sit on the couch" experience with a PC. It's too much work.

Is this sarcasm? I have a tough time judging on GAF lately. If not, then I don't know what the hell magic I am using playing games on my TV from my couch using DS4 and Steam controllers.

Edit:

He is just talking about the success Sony and Nintendo had. He says it's crutial for them as a platform to make sure SP games can thrive on Xbox as well.

he is clearly indicating that MS will not be doing large SP AAA games. Indies are great and all, and I love quite a few of those (like the recent Cosmic Star Heroine) but that's not what we are talking about here.

 

[JP]

Are single player games really that difficult a space to compete in? It's not something I've ever really thought about.

We only ever play single player games and I really do get the sense that he's essentially telling me to not buy an Xbox and go and play elsewhere. I do already own one but it so rarely get's used that we will be selling it over the next few weeks.

 

[Jumeira]

Upping investment is important but have a established and functioning infrastructure is better.

Agreed, they had to work on their platform, tech and hardware before creating content for it, which seems sensible. Feels like theyre in a good place now to take advantage of the good work theyve done here.

 

[Toni]

Microsoft late to the party going all in on the hottest trend other companies have already capitalized on while neglecting a portion of their existing user-base

Stop me if you've heard that one before!

Exactly.

This is where they are at right now.

This decision will probably materialize 2 to 3 years from now.

They reacted much too late. Its the typical Microsoft reaction to their products and why they haven't had any impacting successes on ther fronts other than Windows.


They just don't have the ability to read markets.

 

[nycgamer4ever]

It's not the "sit on the couch" experience with a PC. It's too much work.

I get the perception. But Pc gaming is no longer a sit at your desk thing. It's so easy these day to just connect a hdmi cable to your tv and use a wireless controller. But i totally understand why some would shy away from PC gaming given the reputation.

 

[Nightengale]

The fact that Phil is saying "as an industry" instead of "as a publisher" tells you all that needs to be said, really.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

Isn't that what first party is for though? To make the decisions publishers won't? Everyone else is already making service based games

 

[NolbertoS]

Don't feel sorry. "There are systems for those who want big budget SP games. They're called the PS4 and Nintendo Switch."

I'm an Xbox owner, as well as Sony and Nintendo console owner. I want to play my Xbox badly, but it hasn't been touched since Sunset Overdrive was released. Maybe when Phantom Dust comes out, I might boot it up for nostalgia, but I think it was a waste of an investment on my part. I wanted Scalebound and A new Fable someday, but now that seems like a foregone conclusion.

Edit: i don't think I'm the only owner who's concerned on this direction Phil is taking Xbox now, when the market and consumers wanting more exploration and big world games.

 

[Omnistalgic]

The king of talk has nothing on the true king.

But seriously give my Xbox something new please, it hasn't been touched since gears 4 and the next time I will is for my copy of Logan on 4k in a few weeks.

Logan was so sad and depressing I'm not sure I could even watch that again. Also, didn't think the over-the-top violence really meshed fit with the theme that well.

Good movie though.

 

[Gamezone]

They become rare because you don't care, Microsoft.

 

[illamap]

Well you could add story to these coop/multiplayer/online simulation games as well. Speaking of single-player games i always wondered what does the gameplay add to the story. Story adds context and meaning to gameplay and enables games like witcher 3 from becoming total bore, but whats the benefit vice versa?

 

[digoutyoursoul]

Well the fanboys on twitter have already started the E3 2018 narrative which just pisses me off to be honest

I have never known a brand like this for first party and the gaming output

The Xbox has so much potential I hate seeing it wasted, the people who the execs listen to the most on social media kiss their ass, it's unbearable, nothing constructive comes from it. "It's fine, everything's fine"

 

[Trago]

He's right in a sense that not a lot of publishers are doing it, and most are now chasing that service games model, but that's to a company like sony's advantage. They are becoming known for these big, high production, cinematic high quality SP experiences that you can't really find anywhere else, and allows them to round out their games library. I think that's smarter than just trying to get in on the MP/service games chase.

For fuck sake this strategy is working wonders for Sony, but for some reason Microsoft thinks that more service based games are the solution. Third parties already fill that void for the casual audience. First party should be making up for what's lacking on their platform. Narrative based single player games, or at least something of a balance.

 

[Nirolak]

Yep.

Recore? Didn't make a splash.
Quantum Break? Didn't make a splash.
Tomb Raider exclusivity? lol
Sunset Overdrive? Nope.
Dead Rising 4? Nope.
Ryse? Shit.

And so on and so on. I agree that these games didn't set the world on fire. But the point I'm trying to make is that even though I disagree with Phil's quote, his perspective is understandable. Literally everything they've tried just didn't work out. Now for some reason they think service games are the way to go.

Toward the last sentence, presumably that's because their games that actually succeed are Halo, Gears, and Forza.

 

[Dark Cloud]

Yep.

Recore? Didn't make a splash.
Quantum Break? Didn't make a splash.
Tomb Raider exclusivity? lol
Sunset Overdrive? Nope.
Dead Rising 4? Nope.
Ryse? Shit.

And so on and so on. I agree that these games didn't set the world on fire. But the point I'm trying to make is that even though I disagree with Phil's quote, his perspective is understandable. Literally everything they've tried just didn't work out. Now for some reason they think service games are the way to go.

Maybe their talent at their studios aren't good enough? Maybe their culture and philosophy isn't there for great single player experiences?

 

[Gator86]

Yep.

Recore? Didn't make a splash.
Quantum Break? Didn't make a splash.
Tomb Raider exclusivity? lol
Sunset Overdrive? Nope.
Dead Rising 4? Nope.
Ryse? Shit.

And so on and so on. I agree that these games didn't set the world on fire. But the point I'm trying to make is that even though I disagree with Phil's quote, his perspective is understandable. Literally everything they've tried just didn't work out. Now for some reason they think service games are the way to go.

The problem is most of those games aren't especially good though. Outside of SO and Tomb Raider, I'm not sure I'd pay actual money to play anything else on that list.

 

[DriftingSpirit]

Those games might not all sell well and light the world on fire but they still get people to purchase a PS4. Someone might be interested in Detroit and Until Dawn. Those won't light up the sales chart but it'll get consumers to buy a PS4 over an Xbox. I doubt MS has learned this as it sounds like Phil is focused more on how they sell.

Not everything needs to be a 5 million seller

Agreed, the individual groups may be small, but they are notable as a collective. With support from bigger games, you build a big community that is interested in all sorts of stuff. It shouldn't just be a sell big or bust situation.

 

[Zedox]

It seems to me that they are going to put exclusive Single Player games on Xbox Game Pass. That way it would bolster their subs (which is a big part of the end game) and they can show to third parties to put their games on their service (which in part will again bolster their subs...the Netflix way). They will still sell the big multiplayer games as they do now but when those sales go down, they'll put them on XGP (just like the movies). This is why they made Xbox Play Anywhere a thing and want game devs to build for Windows 10. They want the PC market as well as the console market to buy into these subs (and PC market is huge and they couldn't get PC to buy into a sub through Live, so gotta go another route). If you can get the PC market and the console market to buy into these subs, you then have a huge market for subs that give you money monthly.

I mean, to me, if they put two GOOD (key) games on the service a year, I would buy into the sub as it is equivalent to $120 and that's how much the service is.

Monthly Revenue:
10mil subs = ~100mil to split
20mil subs = ~200mil to split
30mil subs = ~300mil to split


Quarterly Revenue:
10mil subs = ~300mil to split
20mil subs = ~600mil to split
30mil subs = ~900mil to split

Annual Revenue:
10mil subs = ~1.2bn to split
20mil subs = ~2.4bn to split
30mil subs = ~3.6bn to split

Now obviously it would be crazy for them to get 30mil subs...but I'm sure that's what they are looking at when they announced the service. They have to be the ones to put good exclusive titles on there. It being cheap already helps with parents but to get the hardcore you need to put out good games. I can definitely see how putting riskier titles like Single Player games could thrive on that service.

#WeWillSeeAtE3

 

[Chobel]

The fact that Phil is saying "as an industry" instead of "as a publisher" tells you all that needs to be said, really.

Mind explain what you mean here?

 

[Chamber]

LOL! Okay, where were y'all when they were publishing AAA single player games this generation? Because most of them didn't make any impact. So maybe his perspective is a bit understandable.

Maybe keep trying? Uncharted 1 sold 117k in it's debut month, would Uncharted 2 have even existed under the MS umbrella? It's pretty rare for a new IP to come out of the gates like Horizon did.

 

[george_us]

That's what I'm hearing as well. You like single player, get yourself a PS4 or Switch.

Not good enough, Phil. Just not good enough.

This is why I feel like MS is going to continue to get their teeth kicked in by Sony for the foreseeable future unless another PS3 situation happens. MS just doesn't get that you need a wide variety of software regardless of whether the genre you choose is super popular or not. This is something Sony recognized right away back in the PS1 days yet MS still struggles to comprehend.

 

[StereoVsn]

You can hate all you want but games as a service is selling. People are buying it. It's here and a smart investment to go forward with.

Sure, they are selling.... except what is selling are the big multiplats. Destiny, Division, Rainbow Six (surprisingly), that latest Ghost Recon, CODs, Battlefront/Battlefield, etc... You know what's not selling, Gears and Halo.

 

[GHG]

Basically.

Sums up why they've been losing me for some time now. Meanwhile I just bought a ps4 pro to play horizon in the best way possible and intend to get a Switch at a later date to check out Zelda.

These games sell systems. Do they not want to sell hardware anymore?

 

[tiredheadcrab]

I will just copy and paste what I wrote in their first party thread.

So to what phil is saying about single player games and GaaS. I think MS will of course make more single player games. Looking at Halo 6 it will obviously have a single player campaign and will hopefully be better than halo 5's mess. Hopefully they can market that as a good selling point like bungee did and then hook people into the multiplayer. Same with Gears. Crackdown is an open world game and will probably have a single player campaign. The hook that keeps players around in that game will be the multiplayer.

I do still think they will invest in single player only games. They did a $40 recore, they could pull a $40 banjo game and it can still be amazing and fun.

I think it is stupid for MS to be chasing Horizon zero dawn, as that does cost money and time. Lots of time, like 5-6 years was put into that game. It payed off so well, but nothing guarantees that anymore. Sony is in a far better position to take a huge risk like Horizon. MS is playing a strength that they have had for a very very long time. There is nothing wrong with making their future games a GaaS as long as they dedicate themselves to great story telling as well.

 

[Blackleg-sanji1]

Toward the last sentence, presumably that's because their games that actually succeed are Halo, Gears, and Forza.

When you look at there output that's truly the only first party games making waves since the ones release. A shame really.

I will just copy and paste what I wrote in their first party thread.

Why would Sony be in a better position to take risks?

 

[wapplew]

Yep.

Recore? Didn't make a splash.
Quantum Break? Didn't make a splash.
Tomb Raider exclusivity? lol
Sunset Overdrive? Nope.
Dead Rising 4? Nope.
Ryse? Shit.

And so on and so on. I agree that these games didn't set the world on fire. But the point I'm trying to make is that even though I disagree with Phil's quote, his perspective is understandable. Literally everything they've tried just didn't work out. Now for some reason they think service games are the way to go.

REQ pack money must so good for Phil to double down.
Gamer voted with their wallet, that's what they'll going to get.

 

[Okami Haundo]

Games like Zelda, Mario, Horizon, and TLoU are games that drive people to buy a system since they are exclusives.

Like I couldn't honestly ever recommend someone getting an Xbox One over a PS4 at any point since both systems launched.

Exclusives alone aren't what drive people to buy systems. If they were, Sony wouldn't need marketing deals for games like Red Dead, Destiny 2, Battlefront 2, and Call of Duty...

Yeah, in between of Gravity Rush 2, Yakuza Zero, Nier, Nioh, Horizon, MEA (well, this one kind of sucks admittedly), P5 and other SP games this quarter (I don't have the Switch otherwise there is Zelda) plus plethora of SP PC games, there is so much time to play boring, same MP Destiny like grindfests.

You make a great point. Early in the year is when single-player focused titles like that can really shine. But what happens when people finish playing those games? Service-based games thrive all year long. Games like those that you mentioned above do not.

It's a great example of why Xbox feels so "meh" at this time of year though. They don't really have a unique first-party offering that draws attention in the early months. They've instead relied on sales of the big titles that release in fall.

 

[DNAbro]

Maybe one of the reasons Sony is doing better is the amount of single player driven games that don't appear on Xbox? One game may not have huge impact, but a constant stream of them does.

 

[OléGunner]

The quotes give that impression, but he actually clarifies on and say the opposite:

Interesting quote.
Is he alluding to mainly let indie SP games do all the heavy lifting for that kind of experience?

Sorta seems like it and fits in with their strategy of scaling back SP driven games.

Yep.

Recore? Didn't make a splash.
Quantum Break? Didn't make a splash.
Tomb Raider exclusivity? lol
Sunset Overdrive? Nope.
Dead Rising 4? Nope.
Ryse? Shit.

And so on and so on. I agree that these games didn't set the world on fire. But the point I'm trying to make is that even though I disagree with Phil's quote, his perspective is understandable. Literally everything they've tried just didn't work out. Now for some reason they think service games are the way to go.

I hear you. They've tried (maybe not to their max ability) but like you point out nothing has particularly made waves necessarily like an Alan Wake or Gears.

The issue with this strategy is the GAAS model is becoming very competitive (Destiny 2, Overwatch, Wildlands etc) and they could struggle to grab users from other service games if they put out co-op/MP software that's merely ok.

Whatever GAAS games they have in the pipeline genuinely need to knock it out the park.

Edit: I should point out stuff like Forza Horizon 3 and Halo 5 MP has been tremendously executed by many accounts.

 

[family_guy]

They said this a year or two ago didn't they?

 

[Nightengale]

Mind explain what you mean here?

He's saying both story games and GAAS games can succeed in the market place but the way he's saying it, sounds more like he wants to make the marketplace vibrant enough for both to succeed but not saying that they themselves are making investments to be successful there.

As in "it doesn't make a lot of business sense for our tentpole games but other studios with different business goals? Go ahead!"

 

[gatti-man]

Yeah Phil, you talked me out of Scorpio. After thinking about it I'm not investing in a games a service console. If I want that I can get it on PS4 just fine.

 

[jayu26]

No he didn't. He actually praises them and saying that outside those exclusive games developers are struggling.

Not everything has to sell like those games. A million here for Nioh, a million there for NieR, couple of million for Persona is good enough because publishers of those games budgeted those games accordingly and kept their expectations in check. There is no reason a decent version of Recore type game can't be successful. But you have to cultivate that audience. Nioh and NieR doesn't happen overnight.

 

[Gamezone]

As much as I love SP games I've to agree with Phil... and I hate it.

Didn't The Last of Us and Uncharted 4 do well? You can't publish hot garbage like Quantum Break and expect it to do well.

 

[Ouroboros]

Can we please have an exclusive JRPG from Mistwalker please?

 

[LukasTaves]

The problem is most of those games aren't especially good though. Outside of SO and Tomb Raider, I'm not sure I'd pay actual money to play anything else on that list.

So you didn't played those games and are saying they are no good?

 

[spookyfish]

He sure talks a lot.

When do we see some action?

 

[jmaine_ph]

I hope devs don't stray away from story driven games. It's what I love most as I get older and I think a market is there if you are making great games.

 

[KingdomHeartsFan]

Yea I don't believe Phil anymore, he's been saying stuff like this for so long with no results and that's with them announcing games that are years off.

 

[nycgamer4ever]

He is just talking about the success Sony and Nintendo had. He says it's crutial for them as a platform to make sure SP games can thrive on Xbox as well.

I don't know what he is trying to say but he downplays the importance of the competition's efforts with AAA single player games and then in the same breath says he loves those types of games, and his goal is to make they get more of them, when in fact under his watch Xbox has done the exact opposite. My head is spinning.

 

[Chobel]

He's saying both story games and GAAS games can succeed in the market place but the way he's saying it, sounds more like he wants to make the marketplace vibrant enough for both to succeed but not saying that they themselves are making investments to be successful there.

Oh I get it , thanks!