Jaded Alyx
Member
I see you didn't read the article then.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GamingBolt article on Xbox One exclusive software | What can Microsoft do?
- Thread starter JB2448
- Start date
I see you didn't read the article then.
Uno Venova
Banned
What's happening to the XB1's exclusive lineup is the exact opposite of what should be happening 3/4 years into a consoles life and I actually wonder what kind of consoles you've had in the past if you think this is normal.
RowdyReverb
Member
You raise some good points. It does seem like MS is definitely pivoting away from being the platform with the best exclusives to being the best platform to play multiplatform games. The end goal is the same, getting more people to play games and spend time/money on your console and ecosystem, but the strategy is wholly non-traditional.
And it makes sense, given the different strengths of the various companies. Nintendo and Sony have robust game development divisions, so a traditional strategy works for them and not so much for MS. Microsoft's strength, on the other hand, lies in console software, and recently hardware development, and this play to their strong suit. Clearly going against Sony on their own terms was not going anywhere, so I think it's a smart move
They could try to succeed as a third party platform, although being on the back foot this gen doesn't help that. PS4 plays the same multi platform games and bring the market leader has the advantage of network effect
Xbox one is an affordable way to get gaming on your TV, X1X is coming if you want to make the most of your 4k TV, and their 'play anywhere' offering means you can move to PC and still play your first party games, while simultaneously trying to build use of the windows 10 store
although for that 'play anywhere' to really be attractive they could do with more first party games
Well, it for sure doesn't help their console biz.
Kent
Member
I think it'd do them pretty well to take on more aggressive pushing with non-AAA exclusives and IPs. Smaller things.
Things they can experiment with, which are inherently lower-risk because of them not having a AAA-level budget associated with them. We saw some of this already, with Crimson Dragon, D4, Killer Instinct and ReCore. Some of them flopped, and others didn't.
From there, take the ones that are successful and develop them into more of a staple IP - and importantly, only actually scale up the budget tier if necessary; some kinds of games will never necessitate high-end budget tiers, but can still be extremely successful (Ori is a good example of this).
They could alternatively get a leg-up on drawing interest by using a dormant IP to revive, such as those from the original Xbox era, or licensing from third-party partners in the past (such as Sega).
All signs point to it having been canceled due to the developer not being able to deliver on what they agreed to do, even after two delays.
Things they can experiment with, which are inherently lower-risk because of them not having a AAA-level budget associated with them. We saw some of this already, with Crimson Dragon, D4, Killer Instinct and ReCore. Some of them flopped, and others didn't.
From there, take the ones that are successful and develop them into more of a staple IP - and importantly, only actually scale up the budget tier if necessary; some kinds of games will never necessitate high-end budget tiers, but can still be extremely successful (Ori is a good example of this).
They could alternatively get a leg-up on drawing interest by using a dormant IP to revive, such as those from the original Xbox era, or licensing from third-party partners in the past (such as Sega).
Let's get this out of the way right here: Scalebound wasn't canceled for nothing. It also wasn't canceled out of spite, nor was it canceled out of some malicious desire to kill studios (despite what some people want to believe).
All signs point to it having been canceled due to the developer not being able to deliver on what they agreed to do, even after two delays.
Yearsoflurking
Member
Seems consistent to me, you put out projects they bomb you go back to the drawing board and see what you can do different ( relaunch or new launch). Look at the switch for example. Microsoft should be focused right now on building assets and fan favouritism for the next generation this one is a lost cause
I can barely reply to this. If they can...probably maybe...vague timeframe.
On this message board? Or is past success the only barometer for continuation? Are these titles bombing?
I'd say it was a good idea for their software, but not for their hardware. But if more people buying their games on the Windows Store is helping with lagging console sales, maybe it all evens out.
I sold my Xbox One and now buy their first party games on PC, so I'm one of the ones that switched over. But for new customers, I imagine there's a good chunk that are checking out their games on PC that would not have if they stayed on console.
hydrophilic attack
Member
make up with platinum
microsoft consoles
xbox was replaced by the 360 after four years, and they stopped caring about making 360 exclusives about that long into its life
lots of games up front and then nothing but their heavy-hitters after that is basically their MO
though, to be fair, the situation for XBO is worse than usual
microsoft consoles
xbox was replaced by the 360 after four years, and they stopped caring about making 360 exclusives about that long into its life
lots of games up front and then nothing but their heavy-hitters after that is basically their MO
though, to be fair, the situation for XBO is worse than usual
NOT at all. Forza comes out every year and this gen the sales have been increasing with each release. Now granted Horizon 3 seems to be a bit of a beast so 7 may not sell more than it but it should sell more than Motorsport 6. Especially since it's on W10
Halo still sold really really well. But since is not selling 15 million copies it's a failure. It shipped 5 million by the end of year 2015, that was like 20 months ago. I wouldn't be suprised if it wasn't one of the best selling exclusives his gen. But it's a failure because it's not reaching 3's heights
Gears was around what Judgement launched a in the US and U.K. t. So while it's not doing 3 numbers, for a game in general I would say it's ok, not great. All 3 latest iterations (halo 5, gears 4, Horizon 3) continue to have good played numbers as they are all in the top half of the Xbox most played games where stuff like for Honor, division and ghost recon have all bottomed out.
That's because they're mediocre games...
THey don't need to do software like that to succeed how they are. They should change if they are failing in some way, but they are not.
You may not like to hear it, but their current success has nothing to do with bringing back obscure IP's from 15 years ago.
The Pet of the Month
Member
What's your definition of mediocre? Those games are pretty good, not amazing, but not 5 outta 10s.
I don't think you know what that word means
FUNKNOWN iXi
Member
No multiplayer on competing consoles compares to Halo and Gears for me, so I'll always be ready for new iterations in those franchises. Throw in other games like Ori, Sunset Overdrive, the criminally UNKNOWN indie games like Hopiko, etc. and I'll be satisfied.
The user experience and services offered on Xbox far exceed what we see elsewhere too imo, so games aren't the only reason to play on Xbox; the ecosystem is great.
The user experience and services offered on Xbox far exceed what we see elsewhere too imo, so games aren't the only reason to play on Xbox; the ecosystem is great.
Square Enix's now-departed CEO bad-mouthed sales of the rebooted Tomb Raider, so Microsoft stepped in and paid for a year's exclusivity for its sequel. The game got made, it was profitable, and Sony got a definitive edition a year later. Now a third game in this rebooted timeline is being made, so it worked out for Square Enix, apparently. The up-front seed money from Microsoft was helpful, in other words.
I would love a similar track to happen for Deus Ex, if that was what it would take to get a direct sequel made to Mankind Divided. But the depressing sales of Dead Rising 4 show that this model doesn't always work for the publisher. More to the point, I'm not sure how much it actually helps Microsoft when fans of a series know they just need to wait a year if they would prefer to play it on another console.
I would love a similar track to happen for Deus Ex, if that was what it would take to get a direct sequel made to Mankind Divided. But the depressing sales of Dead Rising 4 show that this model doesn't always work for the publisher. More to the point, I'm not sure how much it actually helps Microsoft when fans of a series know they just need to wait a year if they would prefer to play it on another console.
How Microsoft Can Turn Around their Software Lineup:
1. Move Halo and Gears into Q1/Q2 release schedules. Stop competing with CoD, BF, and Destiny for Holiday sales. Use the first half of the year to own the narrative and let the same third parties everyone gets move hardware at Christmas.
2. Broaden the library. Bring back Fable. Don't outsource it, go snipe talent away from CDPR, Guerrilla Games, etc. and start a new European first party studio that builds the franchise back up. Make use of all the great IPs you're sitting on. The Elder Scrolls games make bank on the Xbox platform and Borderlands did damn well too, Shadowrun could be skinned over either basic mechanic and excel, both have multi-million person audiences who are starved for new games too. Get more productivity out of Rare's IP catalog, Conker should be a recurring staple of the system as an action platformer in a similar vein to Ratchet and Clank. I'd argue Kameo should get more love. Bring back Perfect Dark as a character action/espionage game. Go find someone in charge at Ubisoft and tell them you're teaming up to bring back Splinter Cell as an Xbox exclusive closer to the original trilogy (quadrilogy?) roots.
I could go on. MS has a rich history in this industry, they need to make use of it.
3. Make Windows Store games less shitty. For starters fix your goddamn ports or something, these games should not run as poorly as they do relative to the hardware in the original XBox One v. what they take to run on PC. Second give up on making people pay for online. Let them have the online free and sell XBL via the quality of additional services, like subscriber games services, sales, etc.. I know that last one won't happen because they're drunk on the profitability of XBL, but that's a short term thing if they can't gain better consumer respect for their Windows marketplace.
I'm not even saying to release on Steam here, but bridge the quality gap. And probably strongly consider sacrificing some potential profit to undercut Steam's fees to publishers and gain some allies with a professional, well ran, and reasonably curated marketplace.
4. Deliver a clear hardware vision. Just come out and say that you are a post-generation company and that ultimately the Xbox line will just be HTPCs with a streamlined OS shell. Make that OS shell publicly available and let people build their own even. You'll sell more of the profitable products (controllers and games) and have to spend less money on the less profitable products (console hardware).
1. Move Halo and Gears into Q1/Q2 release schedules. Stop competing with CoD, BF, and Destiny for Holiday sales. Use the first half of the year to own the narrative and let the same third parties everyone gets move hardware at Christmas.
2. Broaden the library. Bring back Fable. Don't outsource it, go snipe talent away from CDPR, Guerrilla Games, etc. and start a new European first party studio that builds the franchise back up. Make use of all the great IPs you're sitting on. The Elder Scrolls games make bank on the Xbox platform and Borderlands did damn well too, Shadowrun could be skinned over either basic mechanic and excel, both have multi-million person audiences who are starved for new games too. Get more productivity out of Rare's IP catalog, Conker should be a recurring staple of the system as an action platformer in a similar vein to Ratchet and Clank. I'd argue Kameo should get more love. Bring back Perfect Dark as a character action/espionage game. Go find someone in charge at Ubisoft and tell them you're teaming up to bring back Splinter Cell as an Xbox exclusive closer to the original trilogy (quadrilogy?) roots.
I could go on. MS has a rich history in this industry, they need to make use of it.
3. Make Windows Store games less shitty. For starters fix your goddamn ports or something, these games should not run as poorly as they do relative to the hardware in the original XBox One v. what they take to run on PC. Second give up on making people pay for online. Let them have the online free and sell XBL via the quality of additional services, like subscriber games services, sales, etc.. I know that last one won't happen because they're drunk on the profitability of XBL, but that's a short term thing if they can't gain better consumer respect for their Windows marketplace.
I'm not even saying to release on Steam here, but bridge the quality gap. And probably strongly consider sacrificing some potential profit to undercut Steam's fees to publishers and gain some allies with a professional, well ran, and reasonably curated marketplace.
4. Deliver a clear hardware vision. Just come out and say that you are a post-generation company and that ultimately the Xbox line will just be HTPCs with a streamlined OS shell. Make that OS shell publicly available and let people build their own even. You'll sell more of the profitable products (controllers and games) and have to spend less money on the less profitable products (console hardware).
CassidyIzABeast
Member
Seems like list war nonsense.
My only home console for the last ten years has been some form of XBox. This is the first year that I felt like this was a mistake. Almost everything I care about is on the PS4 + quite a bit more.
I love Microsoft's commitment to backwards compatibility and believe Sony's treatment of BC is downright shameful. I think the Xbox One X is better designed than the PS4 Pro. The most important thing though, is the games, and I am super jealous of Sony's lineup.
(Comparing to the Switch is super dumb though),
I love Microsoft's commitment to backwards compatibility and believe Sony's treatment of BC is downright shameful. I think the Xbox One X is better designed than the PS4 Pro. The most important thing though, is the games, and I am super jealous of Sony's lineup.
(Comparing to the Switch is super dumb though),
Benefiting the XB1 isn't their priority anymore like it was in 2013-15
What is different about this incremental model compared to Sony?
hydrophilic attack
Member
1. more powerful
2. fairy tales that it will be forward compatible (which would in actuality be a huge drawback, but whatever)
Why is something that's a feather in the cap for PC owners a drawback for console owners?
I like how games will receive some sort of improvement on the X regardless of developer input.
hydrophilic attack
Member
if you want to play more demanding games on your pc, you need to update your hardware roughly as often as new console generations arrive
this is more feasible on pcs which are modular by design
if a hypothetical scorpio successor would require all its games to be playable on the scorpio, that would mean that games would be held back well into the 2020s by a cpu that was frankly too weak in 2013
GTR R35_Supra RZ
Banned
This, should be pinned for ages.
They are rocking the boat in different places, that's all. In any circumstances they can buy, invest anything that moves so any future exclusives its inevitable and we all know it.
No one buys them? Pretty sure they sell fine on Switch / PS4
They just need to be good
digoutyoursoul
Member
Who wouldn't want to see healthy competition between the first parties trying to better each other for our money with better games each year?
List wars usually start around page 6 or 7 in these kinda threads.
Bingo
As nice as SO2 would have been, the game quite clearly didn't do well. MS isn't exactly a charity
Saying that they should open more studios, but when all their new IP's except Ori which is a smaller game has flopped, where's the incentive? Just fund small games like they are doing with Cuphead etc. Ori and now Cuphead has gotten more hype than any of their big AAA new IPs.
I agree they should open more studios for new big AAA IP's... but from a MS perspective why would they? chances are they'll just flop anyway and eventually lead to the closure of the studio.
Uno Venova
Banned
If the exclusives are mediocre and/or not marketed all all of course they will flop.
Papacheeks
Banned
I would like to know how they are killing it profit margin wise in the xbox division? MAtt before he got banned eluded to that not being the case. So did Shinobi before he left Gaf. They may be having better retention for their players. But they are not growing like they should be, and their titles don't sell as much as they used to.
And thats because they don't diversify enough and have a good understanding that you need to build long term not short term. Which unfortunate has been how decisions for the division have been handled.
This generation is almost over, and a XBX is only going to limp
the division along so well. New Playstation console is on the way in a couple years. So the time to show what you were working on all those years should have been presented by now.
Issue is they were one and done and not something they tried to make better with a sequel. But my main point is they didn't have internal studios making something like sunset, or have a relationship with insomniac during xb360 days. They could have if they wanted to. Xbox division right now shows where the root of their main issue is, and that is the brand itself has identity problems because in the beginning they didn't get into originally for just making games. If that were true they would have had so many PC developers under them that they own making games for their console. Their issue is the parent company has too much influence on xbox, and that's why it's in the state/direction it is in. If the parent company wanted it to be it's own thing then it should have been without big wigs influencing decisions. MASS EFFECT should have never gone multiplatform, western RPG's should have been xbox's bread and butter since the xbox is not sold well in certain oversea territories. PC developers should be thriving on xbox making exclusives that really show how creative Xbox let's them be. Like how Sony gives their studios free reins most of the time as long as the game is a proven concept.
Unless they learned anything this generation, I don't see their Portfolio growing next generation by much outside of what we have seen. XBox needs a rebrand/restart and a 4k console isn't helping with that.
I can dig it.
PositiveGamer
Member
That hurts,Sunset was amazing....
Quantum for all its flaws was still very decent.. I even say Gears 4 was really good as well... Halo 5 was questionable..
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
Not much, other than sink millions into investing in new studios and big budget IP which takes years of investment. They're clearly doing the opposite and solidifying their first party output in the most cost effective way possible.
I don't think it's realistic for them to compete with Sony or Nintendo on that front anymore, and it's pretty obvious that they think so too. Their strengths lie elsewhere and they're capitalising on them. Their interest in selling hardware is waning massively from the looks of it. So long as Microsoft has the third party franchises and indies on their platform, the best online services and their first party staples, then they're happy as is. It's the Xbox platform they want to sell you, more so than the hardware itself and whether that's through Xbox One S, Xbox One X or Windows 10, the more people they have using their services the better. From where I'm standing, it looks like they're not interested in the where so much as they are the what.
I don't think it's realistic for them to compete with Sony or Nintendo on that front anymore, and it's pretty obvious that they think so too. Their strengths lie elsewhere and they're capitalising on them. Their interest in selling hardware is waning massively from the looks of it. So long as Microsoft has the third party franchises and indies on their platform, the best online services and their first party staples, then they're happy as is. It's the Xbox platform they want to sell you, more so than the hardware itself and whether that's through Xbox One S, Xbox One X or Windows 10, the more people they have using their services the better. From where I'm standing, it looks like they're not interested in the where so much as they are the what.
It's not the 90s/00s any more. Noone funds sequels to new IP flops.. Games cost way too much to make to do that now Hell, Mass effect might not get another entry because one game didn't do so well and that was an established IP.
Would you really want an internal studio to make something like SO? Studios have their own niches, a game as good as SO can only be done by certain studios/groups of people and Insomniac is the best developer for a Sunset type game. I would rather Insomniac make Sunset than give it off to some random group of developers who may end up botching it up.
Source on Insomniac wanting to team up with MS during 360 days? it's clear they prefer Sony and will side with Sony whenever they can. MS was lucky they even got them for SO in the first place.. so I don't think it's as simple as "they could if they wanted to"
I'm not arguing this at all, I do think they have too much influence but you realise if Xbox was it's own thing it would 100% be dead by now right? The only reason it even survived the RROD fiasco was because of the parents companies money. You can't have it one way or the other depending on the situation..
EA bought Bioware, why would EA keep a game exclusive? what you're proposing just doesn't make sense. I'm sure MS would have liked to keep ME exclusive but the ball was in EA's court for ME2. Unless I'm mistaken here.
Now letting Bungie/Destiny exclusive go is something I can agree with but ME is a completely different situation
As I said man I would love for them to announce the building of even just ONE new studio making AAA new IP's but given how their new IP output this gen has been in terms of sales why the fuck would any executive sign off on that? If I was in his shoes I'd just respond with "I'll just burn the money here instead at least it'll keep me warm". Especially when if you really wanted to do that (which sadly doesn't seem to be the case), you could just hand it off to a third party for a much cheaper price. There's nothing wrong with criticizing them for it but at this point people should see that all they will make smaller, cheaper games like Ori, Cuphead, Recore & have a focus on indies while making the usual suspects. Don't gotta be happy with it (I'm not either) but that's direction things seem to be going when it comes to MS. Maybe if the smaller games like Recore take off we will see it become AAA, but until then I'm not getting my hopes up
chaosmaster(1)
Member
I really want an RPG as well, that's like the one big SP thing I want from them. I'll keep hope for it one day, MS really published some good RPGs like Mass Effect. I feel that the success that western RPGs have had on Xbox means the opportunity is there for MS to publish a big AAA WRPG and find success. They just gotta let it cook.
Sunset Overdrive is one of the finest games this gen tho.
Haven't played Gears and Halo 5, but they reviewed great.
LiquidSolid
Member
Huh? No. Square Enix later said that Tomb Raider 2013 had eventually become profitable for them. Rise of the Tomb Raider was in development for years before the Microsoft deal happened and we've heard from a number of sources that the game would've come out whether that deal happened or not. And the deal didn't work out for them, RotTR sold significantly worse than TR2013.
Papacheeks
Banned
Insomniac is independent.
So? I don't see how that changes what I said.
Just because they're independent doesn't put MS in a situation where "they could have teamed up with Insomniac on the 360 if they wanted to"