Support NeoGAF

[ChosenPredator]

Whenever i see someone say "microsoft brings nothing to this industry"...it bothers me so much but I'm not the type of person to debate it good enough because I don't think I have that much knowledge..I do know from a players perspective I had some of my favorite gaming experience on the original xbox...i thought how they handled the online world and connecting everyone together was amazing they did so much right when everyone thought they were just going to be a failure..anyways I want that microsoft back the one that had all those classic games i loved

 

[Jomjom]

So is Sony ponying up the funds to gain Bloodborne as an exclusive scummy? It's not a direct sequel, but it's definitely a spiritual successor to Demon's Souls/Dark Souls, and there are a legion of fans on Xbox and PC platforms gained across Dark Souls 1 and 2 that won't be able to play it. Yes, Sony has a hand in the development and funding of the game, but considering the franchise's success and its influence on the industry, it's safe to say that a Demon's Souls/Dark Souls-esque game was in the works regardless of Sony's involvement. The means through which money switches hands is different between Tomb Raider and Bloodborne, but the end result is the same for both. The platform holders effectively purchased exclusive rights to a game, and fans exclusively gaming on competing platforms are adversely effected.

I personally don't see anything wrong with either scenario. I agree 100% with Phil Spencer. The platform holder's duties lie solely with consumers of its products. The fact that fans on competing platforms are adversely effected by it's business decisions should not cross their mind. It's business at the end of the day, but then again, consumers are perfectly in their right to complain. I just disagree with there being some kind of moral code to exclusivity,

When that RotTR splash screen comes up I better see the Microsoft Game Studios logo on there along with some MGS personnel in those credits if you are going to compare it to Bloodborne.

Bloodborne is SCEJapan Studio x FROM by the way if you didnt know. Will TR be SE x MGS?

Also Demon's Souls was PS3 exclusive and this is a spiritual sequel to that. Dark Souls would not even exist if not for the cult popularity of Demon's Souls. Can you say that about Tomb Raider and an association with Xbox?

 

[atr0cious]

salt.

The difference is that for every Uncharted or Mario, there is a Gravity Rush or Wonderful 101. MSFT killed a new IP to put out another set of Gears games. No thanks. And his post is showing that if MSFT didn't start in the 10 years they've been doing this, why would they start 'investing' now?

And people are complaining because MSFT continued to hold to their lies until forced to say it was timed. At least read the thread.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

Sure you don't build a first party stable overnight, but in MS' case when they hell are they going to start?

Lets recap:
Started Turn 10, who went on to make Forza, the one truly original IP from Microsoft to ever succeed.

Bought Bungie when Halo was months from release, had them port it to Xbox, cancelling a much hyped PC version which did later arrive, not to mention the Mac version Bungie had been promising.

Purchased FASA as part of another acquisition in 1999. After doing very little with the Shadowrun and MechWarrior IPs on the Xbox family of consoles closes FASA in 2007, licences out all their worthwhile IPs to small studios.

Bought Rare in 2002, since they have mined the Perfect Dark, Banjo, and Conker IPs with zero success, made one new mascot IP for Xbox 360's launch that never got a follow up despite being a pretty solid (kid friendly) game (Kameo, FYI). Have since been largely relegated to Kinect titles, weren't even the ones who made the Killer Instinct reboot.

Purchased Lionhead in 2006. Proceeded to have them make nothing but Fable games, including a crappy Kinect Fable game. Stopped making PC versions entirely, games progressively got further and further away from the original concept for Fable. A large number of staff has been laid off over the past two years, another large group up and left with Molyneaux, which if it was anything like his departure from Bullfrog to found Lionhead constituted his core staff he's had everywhere (i.e. the real talent in the studio). Making yet another Fable game that is even further removed from the original premise.

Started up 343 studios as a replacement for Bungie when Bungie wanted out as opposed to eternally making nothing but Halo. Now 343 makes nothing but Halo, only not as well as Bungie. The game they wouldn't let Bungie make, Destiny, is now the most pre-ordered game yet. Winning?

Disbanded Ensemble Studios, Aces Studio, MS Flight Team, MS Victoria Studio (never released anything) and Carbonated Games. Have in the last several years purchased BigPark (absorbed into MS Game Studios), Twisted Pixel (who's next game was a full blown stinker), Press Play (nothing of note, so basically shuffling deck chairs with this and closing Carbonated).

Also, Black Tusk isn't new. It's Microsoft Vancouver. They just cleaned house and renamed it after Vancouver went years without finishing anything. Black Tusk is doing an admirable job keeping that history alive.

This is just a quick sample of how MS has handled their first parties. Forza is the only new IP they've generated and maintained worth a shit in their entire time as a console first party. Everything else was bought, mismanaged, and typically shuttered.

Buying their way into the industry with the Xbox with Bungie, Lionhead, etc. is one thing. Sure, you need meaningful exclusives and that was the fastest way to get them. They've been in the console business for nearly 13 years now though. The proof is in the pudding. Microsoft has never shown a commitment to developing their own legitimate first party stable. They closed much of what they did start with the Xbox during the X360 generation because Sony's failure to deliver with PS3 allowed them to pick off former exclusives and have a comparable 3rd party library at a lower price, so they weren't needed. The only significant reinvestment they've ever shown in software development was for Kinect, which they've now pulled back on nearly completely as well.

Microsoft brings nothing to this industry other than dump trucks of money. They're in the video game industry for all the wrong reasons. Making and selling video games is a secondary part of the business model and that has been the case from day one. Originally it was a Sony denial tactic. As Sony fell on hard times and the X360 emerged as a successful product they used XBL to turn it into a marketing push where their real customers were advertisers and games were just the gateway to get people in the door looking at all the ads. The XB1's original concept took this to the next level planning to have Kinect effectively mining data from within our homes while we lived around the system. Obviously the blow back was too great to continue that little project, but that was the original intent and Microsoft stated as much during a conference for their advertising partners.

Instead of this (which probably cost them $50M or better), Titanfall (which also likely cost them $50M or better) the stated NFL deal at $400M, and buying the Gears IP from Epic (likely a solid $50-$100M price tag) Microsoft could have funded over a half dozen of the biggest, most expensive AAA exclusives EVER. They gave the NFL more money for a fantasy football app than Take 2/Rockstar spent on Grand Theft Auto 5. Let that sink into your head when you excuse their lack of first party studios as "taking time".

Where has this fantastic poster been all my life? Been really impressed with these posts, Drek. To the point, zero bullshitting, and written well every time.

Btw, I can't remember but was Viva Piñata Rare?

Whenever i see someone say "microsoft brings nothing to this industry"...it bothers me so much but I'm not the type of person to debate it good enough because I don't think I have that much knowledge..I do know from a players perspective I had some of my favorite gaming experience on the original xbox...i thought how they handled the online world and connecting everyone together was amazing they did so much right when everyone thought they were just going to be a failure..anyways I want that microsoft back the one that had all those classic games i loved

I think the post that Drek made that I quoted above makes it really clear on that it isn't about the IPs on Microsoft systems, the quality of Live at the time above their competitors, or that they didn't have any positive impact on the player base.

It's just, outside of Xbox Live and how it shaped console online play for better or worse, Microsoft hasn't brought much of note to the industry like its competitors have from consoles to PC. As Drek shows, Microsoft throws their weight in cash around to let others do the work for them, and proceeds to run them to the ground or can them depending on what comes first.

Again, it isn't to demean what those associated brands brought to gamers, just that Microsoft didn't bring that themselves nor knew how to make the best of what brought them that love from consumers.

 

[licktheenvelope]

Whenever i see someone say "microsoft brings nothing to this industry"...it bothers me so much but I'm not the type of person to debate it good enough because I don't think I have that much knowledge..I do know from a players perspective I had some of my favorite gaming experience on the original xbox...i thought how they handled the online world and connecting everyone together was amazing they did so much right when everyone thought they were just going to be a failure..anyways I want that microsoft back the one that had all those classic games i loved

Hey I was completely on board with Microsoft (even through the RROD nonsense) but what Sony did during the PS3 era of shame Microsoft is at this gen (in a slightly different manner).

Pretty much ever since Microsoft got heavy into funding kinect they completely lost what made gaming great trying to chase the Wii dragon of 'casual gamers' and now this 'center of living room' nonsense. It wont work, your games console needs to be the best gaming console out there and the Xbox One is not that.

Another thing I have a problem with is blanket statements like "what they bring to the industry"... what they want is money and they made a truck ton through the 360 on their sub fees for Gold.

Another issue is all the '1st person studio' talk. Some crazy individual on here tried to claim Microsoft had more 1st person studios than Sony working on more games...

So here's the lists:

Microsoft:

Almost completely dedicated kinect studios:
-Good Science Studio – Kinect Adventures, Kinect Fun Labs
-Kids and Lifestyle Entertainment – Xbox Fitness
-Leap Experience Pioneers – In-house Kinect development team
-Platform Next Studios – Pioneering experiences on Kinect
-Xbox Live Productions – South Park Let's Go Tower Defense Play!, South Park: Tenorman's Revenge, Avatar Kinect
-Rare Ltd. – Banjo-Kazooie series, Viva Piñata, Kameo: Elements of Power, Conker, Kinect Sports
-Soho Productions – Kinect Sesame Street TV, Upload Studios
-Press Play – Max: The Curse of Brotherhood, Project Totem

Mobile/Tablet/Indie type games:
-Microsoft Studios – Mobile Gaming – ilomilo
-Lift London – Cloud digital games for tablets, mobiles and TVs
-Press Play – Max: The Curse of Brotherhood, Project Totem
-BigPark – Joy Ride series, Kinect Sports: Season Two, Multiple applications for Xbox One
-Twisted Pixel Games – The Gunstringer, LocoCycle, 'Splosion Man series

Actual Studios Making full games:
-343 Industries – Halo series
-Team Dakota – Project Spark
-Turn 10 Studios – Forza Motorsport series
-Lionhead Studios – Fable series, Black & White series
-Black Tusk Studios – Gears of War series

Game IPs under dev (we know about):
- Halo, Project Spark, Forza, Fable, Gears.

Sony:

Vita Development/Indie type games/Project Morpheus:
-Project Siren- Creators of Siren and Gravity Rush
-PlayStation C.A.M.P. - Creators of Tokyo Jungle and Rain
-J.S.E.D.D. - Creators of Soul Sacrifice and Freedom Wars
-SCE London Studio - Sing Star + Project Morpheus Games

Studios making full games:
-Naughty Dog - Uncharted, The Last of Us
-Bend Studio - Working on Unannounced PS4 Game
-SCE Foster City Studio- Work on Infamous
-SCE San Diego Studio - MLB The Show
-SCE Santa Monica Studio - Working on The Order 1886 + Everybody's Gone to the Rapture + Unannounced PS4 Game
-Sucker Punch Productions - Infamous
-Evolution Studios - Drive Club
-Guerrilla Games - Killzone + Unannounced new PS4 IP
-Guerrilla Cambridge - Unannounced PS4 game
-Media Molecule - Little Big Planet, Tearaway, Unannounced PS4 game
-Team Ico part of Japan Studio- ICO and Shadow of the Colossus, the Last Guardian
-Polyphony Digital - Creators of Gran Turismo.

Game IP's under dev we know about: Grand Turismo, Uncharted, Drive Club, MLB The Show, Infamous, The Order 1886, Killzone, Little Big Planet, Tearaway Unfolded, The Last Guardian (as funny as that is) + at least 4 new IP's have been strongly hinted at from Guerrilla, Media Molecule, Santa Monica and Bend...


------------------

You will note the number of studios Microsoft has dedicated to making video games...

 

[kaching]

The part that got me was how he seemed to leave out the billion said to be invested into gaming by MS.

He probably left it out for the same reason why you felt the need to frame it as "said to be" invested - because there's little to show for the fact that is has "been said".

If he really wants to be "informative" why not get into exactly "why" MS closed the studios they did?

Because it's completely irrelevant to his point if you bothered to read and try to understand it properly. Why they were closed isn't important, the impact it has on 1st party output is.

It just seems like the garden variety fanboyish posts of painting the corporation you hate as the devil while propping up the corporation you like as some angelic charity organization.

Again, you should try to read a little more closely. He says nothing of the sort. This is nothing but breathless hyperbole on your part.

 

[Imm0rt4l]

So is Sony ponying up the funds to gain Bloodborne as an exclusive scummy? It's not a direct sequel, but it's definitely a spiritual successor to Demon's Souls/Dark Souls, and there are a legion of fans on Xbox and PC platforms gained across Dark Souls 1 and 2 that won't be able to play it. Yes, Sony has a hand in the development and funding of the game, but considering the franchise's success and its influence on the industry, it's safe to say that a Demon's Souls/Dark Souls-esque game was in the works regardless of Sony's involvement. The means through which money switches hands is different between Tomb Raider and Bloodborne, but the end result is the same for both. The platform holders effectively purchased exclusive rights to a game, and fans exclusively gaming on competing platforms are adversely effected.

I personally don't see anything wrong with either scenario. I agree 100% with Phil Spencer. The platform holder's duties lie solely with consumers of its products. The fact that fans on competing platforms are adversely effected by it's business decisions should not cross their mind. It's business at the end of the day, but then again, consumers are perfectly in their right to complain. I just disagree with there being some kind of moral code to exclusivity,

bloodborne my dude? False equivalency much?

 

[klee123]

bloodborne my dude? False equivalency much?

Just grasping for straws.

The fact that he's equating TR which is an established third party IP originally announced as multiplat game to Bloodborne which was co developed by Sony and From Software and was announced as a PS4 exclusive day 1 is just sad.

Then again, it seems a lot of the people defending this exclusivity is trying to use Bloodborne as an argument point.

 

[Zen]

I think it is because some people view it as "Not Dark Souls 3" or something.

CD'S Facebook page
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10152661169129271&id=8277214270
Unrelated Tomb Raider stuff is getting hammered by angry fans, wow

Man, I think it is safe to say that CD will not let SE do this kind of things again. I imagine there are some livid e-mails going around.

 

[conman]

Microsoft brings nothing to this industry other than dump trucks of money. They're in the video game industry for all the wrong reasons. Making and selling video games is a secondary part of the business model and that has been the case from day one. Originally it was a Sony denial tactic. As Sony fell on hard times and the X360 emerged as a successful product they used XBL to turn it into a marketing push where their real customers were advertisers and games were just the gateway to get people in the door looking at all the ads. The XB1's original concept took this to the next level planning to have Kinect effectively mining data from within our homes while we lived around the system. Obviously the blow back was too great to continue that little project, but that was the original intent and Microsoft stated as much during a conference for their advertising partners.

Absolutely agree, and I refused to subscribe to XBL for that very reason.

However...

The 360 became the go-to entry-level system for the HD era despite MS's focus on advertising and subscription revenue. Even if it wasn't the intended outcome, the PS4 is now reaping the success of the 360. Many new consumers became HD-ified gamers thanks to the 360, and many went with Sony's console this time around because of MS's missteps with the Xbone.

While I agree that MS's strategy is generating revenue through advertising and subscription partners (rather than directly through game-related sales) and I also agree that their tactic is to throw enough money at a new enterprise to brute force it into success, gamers and game publishers have managed to do quite well on MS's platforms. MS brings much more than "dump trucks of money," but I do agree that gaming isn't their priority.

Gaming has succeeded despite MS, not because of them.

 

[rokkerkory]

Again, they aren't paying for people to play a game... they are paying for others to not play a game.

Exclusives... how do they work? MS is only company that does exclusives? At least it's timed.

 

[marianitten]

Sure you don't build a first party stable overnight, but in MS' case when they hell are they going to start?

Lets recap:
Started Turn 10, who went on to make Forza, the one truly original IP from Microsoft to ever succeed.

Bought Bungie when Halo was months from release, had them port it to Xbox, cancelling a much hyped PC version which did later arrive, not to mention the Mac version Bungie had been promising.

Purchased FASA as part of another acquisition in 1999. After doing very little with the Shadowrun and MechWarrior IPs on the Xbox family of consoles closes FASA in 2007, licences out all their worthwhile IPs to small studios.

Bought Rare in 2002, since they have mined the Perfect Dark, Banjo, and Conker IPs with zero success, made one new mascot IP for Xbox 360's launch that never got a follow up despite being a pretty solid (kid friendly) game (Kameo, FYI). Have since been largely relegated to Kinect titles, weren't even the ones who made the Killer Instinct reboot.

Purchased Lionhead in 2006. Proceeded to have them make nothing but Fable games, including a crappy Kinect Fable game. Stopped making PC versions entirely, games progressively got further and further away from the original concept for Fable. A large number of staff has been laid off over the past two years, another large group up and left with Molyneaux, which if it was anything like his departure from Bullfrog to found Lionhead constituted his core staff he's had everywhere (i.e. the real talent in the studio). Making yet another Fable game that is even further removed from the original premise.

Started up 343 studios as a replacement for Bungie when Bungie wanted out as opposed to eternally making nothing but Halo. Now 343 makes nothing but Halo, only not as well as Bungie. The game they wouldn't let Bungie make, Destiny, is now the most pre-ordered game yet. Winning?

Disbanded Ensemble Studios, Aces Studio, MS Flight Team, MS Victoria Studio (never released anything) and Carbonated Games. Have in the last several years purchased BigPark (absorbed into MS Game Studios), Twisted Pixel (who's next game was a full blown stinker), Press Play (nothing of note, so basically shuffling deck chairs with this and closing Carbonated).

Also, Black Tusk isn't new. It's Microsoft Vancouver. They just cleaned house and renamed it after Vancouver went years without finishing anything. Black Tusk is doing an admirable job keeping that history alive.

This is just a quick sample of how MS has handled their first parties. Forza is the only new IP they've generated and maintained worth a shit in their entire time as a console first party. Everything else was bought, mismanaged, and typically shuttered.

Buying their way into the industry with the Xbox with Bungie, Lionhead, etc. is one thing. Sure, you need meaningful exclusives and that was the fastest way to get them. They've been in the console business for nearly 13 years now though. The proof is in the pudding. Microsoft has never shown a commitment to developing their own legitimate first party stable. They closed much of what they did start with the Xbox during the X360 generation because Sony's failure to deliver with PS3 allowed them to pick off former exclusives and have a comparable 3rd party library at a lower price, so they weren't needed. The only significant reinvestment they've ever shown in software development was for Kinect, which they've now pulled back on nearly completely as well.

Microsoft brings nothing to this industry other than dump trucks of money. They're in the video game industry for all the wrong reasons. Making and selling video games is a secondary part of the business model and that has been the case from day one. Originally it was a Sony denial tactic. As Sony fell on hard times and the X360 emerged as a successful product they used XBL to turn it into a marketing push where their real customers were advertisers and games were just the gateway to get people in the door looking at all the ads. The XB1's original concept took this to the next level planning to have Kinect effectively mining data from within our homes while we lived around the system. Obviously the blow back was too great to continue that little project, but that was the original intent and Microsoft stated as much during a conference for their advertising partners.

Instead of this (which probably cost them $50M or better), Titanfall (which also likely cost them $50M or better) the stated NFL deal at $400M, and buying the Gears IP from Epic (likely a solid $50-$100M price tag) Microsoft could have funded over a half dozen of the biggest, most expensive AAA exclusives EVER. They gave the NFL more money for a fantasy football app than Take 2/Rockstar spent on Grand Theft Auto 5. Let that sink into your head when you excuse their lack of first party studios as "taking time".

Perfection.. I would love to see a SONY/NINTENDO version of this.. just to see the big picture.

 

[Bold One]

Even she gets bombarded with tweets

she was a terrible VA for the last game

 

[BrassDragon]

Sure you don't build a first party stable overnight, but in MS' case when they hell are they going to start?

Lets recap:
Started Turn 10, who went on to make Forza, the one truly original IP from Microsoft to ever succeed.

Bought Bungie when Halo was months from release, had them port it to Xbox, cancelling a much hyped PC version which did later arrive, not to mention the Mac version Bungie had been promising.

Purchased FASA as part of another acquisition in 1999. After doing very little with the Shadowrun and MechWarrior IPs on the Xbox family of consoles closes FASA in 2007, licences out all their worthwhile IPs to small studios.

Bought Rare in 2002, since they have mined the Perfect Dark, Banjo, and Conker IPs with zero success, made one new mascot IP for Xbox 360's launch that never got a follow up despite being a pretty solid (kid friendly) game (Kameo, FYI). Have since been largely relegated to Kinect titles, weren't even the ones who made the Killer Instinct reboot.

Purchased Lionhead in 2006. Proceeded to have them make nothing but Fable games, including a crappy Kinect Fable game. Stopped making PC versions entirely, games progressively got further and further away from the original concept for Fable. A large number of staff has been laid off over the past two years, another large group up and left with Molyneaux, which if it was anything like his departure from Bullfrog to found Lionhead constituted his core staff he's had everywhere (i.e. the real talent in the studio). Making yet another Fable game that is even further removed from the original premise.

Started up 343 studios as a replacement for Bungie when Bungie wanted out as opposed to eternally making nothing but Halo. Now 343 makes nothing but Halo, only not as well as Bungie. The game they wouldn't let Bungie make, Destiny, is now the most pre-ordered game yet. Winning?

Disbanded Ensemble Studios, Aces Studio, MS Flight Team, MS Victoria Studio (never released anything) and Carbonated Games. Have in the last several years purchased BigPark (absorbed into MS Game Studios), Twisted Pixel (who's next game was a full blown stinker), Press Play (nothing of note, so basically shuffling deck chairs with this and closing Carbonated).

Also, Black Tusk isn't new. It's Microsoft Vancouver. They just cleaned house and renamed it after Vancouver went years without finishing anything. Black Tusk is doing an admirable job keeping that history alive.

This is just a quick sample of how MS has handled their first parties. Forza is the only new IP they've generated and maintained worth a shit in their entire time as a console first party. Everything else was bought, mismanaged, and typically shuttered.

Buying their way into the industry with the Xbox with Bungie, Lionhead, etc. is one thing. Sure, you need meaningful exclusives and that was the fastest way to get them. They've been in the console business for nearly 13 years now though. The proof is in the pudding. Microsoft has never shown a commitment to developing their own legitimate first party stable. They closed much of what they did start with the Xbox during the X360 generation because Sony's failure to deliver with PS3 allowed them to pick off former exclusives and have a comparable 3rd party library at a lower price, so they weren't needed. The only significant reinvestment they've ever shown in software development was for Kinect, which they've now pulled back on nearly completely as well.

Microsoft brings nothing to this industry other than dump trucks of money. They're in the video game industry for all the wrong reasons. Making and selling video games is a secondary part of the business model and that has been the case from day one. Originally it was a Sony denial tactic. As Sony fell on hard times and the X360 emerged as a successful product they used XBL to turn it into a marketing push where their real customers were advertisers and games were just the gateway to get people in the door looking at all the ads. The XB1's original concept took this to the next level planning to have Kinect effectively mining data from within our homes while we lived around the system. Obviously the blow back was too great to continue that little project, but that was the original intent and Microsoft stated as much during a conference for their advertising partners.

Instead of this (which probably cost them $50M or better), Titanfall (which also likely cost them $50M or better) the stated NFL deal at $400M, and buying the Gears IP from Epic (likely a solid $50-$100M price tag) Microsoft could have funded over a half dozen of the biggest, most expensive AAA exclusives EVER. They gave the NFL more money for a fantasy football app than Take 2/Rockstar spent on Grand Theft Auto 5. Let that sink into your head when you excuse their lack of first party studios as "taking time".

Clear, well-argued and informative posts like this is why I'm on Neogaf. Preach it, brother.

Gaming press, take note - seeing the patterns and historical context is worth far more than jumping on the hype train of the day.

 

[I Wanna Be The Guy]

she was a terrible VA for the last game

She really wasn't. She was pretty much the only one in the game that did a fantastic job. No complaints about her from me.

 

[Bold One]

She really wasn't. She was pretty much the only one in the game that did a fantastic job. No complaints about her from me.

maybe not terrible, just bland and meh

her accent sounded like an American trying to do an English accent, which is weird because she is English

 

[Pseudo judo]

There is definite failure in MS attempt at first party studios but as far as it relates to TR and it's timed exclusivity, its a red herring, a way to distract and attempt to legitimize the hate towards a pretty standard exclusivity deal.

 

[Steroyd]

There is definite failure in MS attempt at first party studios but as far as it relates to TR and it's timed exclusivity its a red herring, a way to distract and legitimize the hate towards a pretty standard exclusivity deal.

In 2014 with "rising dev costs" this goes against the trend that was set last generation where all the headliners were about games going multiplatform.

I mean taking away that Sony lost exclusivity of Final Fantasy, Metal Gear Solid, GTA etc after over a decade of exclusivity, MS lost Bioshock, Mass Effect and Elder Scrolls exclusivity in the same generation.

For gods sake, MGSV got announced for Steam last week.

 

[Poona]

she was a terrible VA for the last game

Yeah, her accent seemed a bit off.

Anyway, Keeley Hawes forever!

 

[Pseudo judo]

In 2014 with "rising dev costs" this goes against the trend that was set last generation where all the headliners were about games going multiplatform.

I mean taking away that Sony lost exclusivity of Final Fantasy, Metal Gear Solid, GTA etc after over a decade of exclusivity, MS lost Bioshock, Mass Effect and Elder Scrolls exclusivity in the same generation.

For gods sake, MGSV got announced for Steam last week.

Bucking a trend does not make this deal something extraordinary. Even if it did, so what?

 

[JaseC]

Man, I think it is safe to say that CD will not let SE do this kind of things again. I imagine there are some livid e-mails going around.

CD is a subsidiary of Squeenix.

 

[Zok310]

she was a terrible VA for the last game

I only remember her screaming. You could have literally muted her and got through the game just fine.

 

[Steroyd]

Bucking a trend does not make this deal something extraordinary. Even if it did, so what?

Yes it is extraordinary when near every AAA dev has the sell 10m or bust mentality all through last gen.

And if Tomb Raider goes back to post PS1 sales again and SE cans the series then poof, no more Tomb Raider and it can join the likes of Crash Bandicoot, Megaman etc.

 

[Bundy]

Sure you don't build a first party stable overnight, but in MS' case when they hell are they going to start?

Lets recap:
Started Turn 10, who went on to make Forza, the one truly original IP from Microsoft to ever succeed.

Bought Bungie when Halo was months from release, had them port it to Xbox, cancelling a much hyped PC version which did later arrive, not to mention the Mac version Bungie had been promising.

Purchased FASA as part of another acquisition in 1999. After doing very little with the Shadowrun and MechWarrior IPs on the Xbox family of consoles closes FASA in 2007, licences out all their worthwhile IPs to small studios.

Bought Rare in 2002, since they have mined the Perfect Dark, Banjo, and Conker IPs with zero success, made one new mascot IP for Xbox 360's launch that never got a follow up despite being a pretty solid (kid friendly) game (Kameo, FYI). Have since been largely relegated to Kinect titles, weren't even the ones who made the Killer Instinct reboot.

Purchased Lionhead in 2006. Proceeded to have them make nothing but Fable games, including a crappy Kinect Fable game. Stopped making PC versions entirely, games progressively got further and further away from the original concept for Fable. A large number of staff has been laid off over the past two years, another large group up and left with Molyneaux, which if it was anything like his departure from Bullfrog to found Lionhead constituted his core staff he's had everywhere (i.e. the real talent in the studio). Making yet another Fable game that is even further removed from the original premise.

Started up 343 studios as a replacement for Bungie when Bungie wanted out as opposed to eternally making nothing but Halo. Now 343 makes nothing but Halo, only not as well as Bungie. The game they wouldn't let Bungie make, Destiny, is now the most pre-ordered game yet. Winning?

Disbanded Ensemble Studios, Aces Studio, MS Flight Team, MS Victoria Studio (never released anything) and Carbonated Games. Have in the last several years purchased BigPark (absorbed into MS Game Studios), Twisted Pixel (who's next game was a full blown stinker), Press Play (nothing of note, so basically shuffling deck chairs with this and closing Carbonated).

Also, Black Tusk isn't new. It's Microsoft Vancouver. They just cleaned house and renamed it after Vancouver went years without finishing anything. Black Tusk is doing an admirable job keeping that history alive.

This is just a quick sample of how MS has handled their first parties. Forza is the only new IP they've generated and maintained worth a shit in their entire time as a console first party. Everything else was bought, mismanaged, and typically shuttered.

Buying their way into the industry with the Xbox with Bungie, Lionhead, etc. is one thing. Sure, you need meaningful exclusives and that was the fastest way to get them. They've been in the console business for nearly 13 years now though. The proof is in the pudding. Microsoft has never shown a commitment to developing their own legitimate first party stable. They closed much of what they did start with the Xbox during the X360 generation because Sony's failure to deliver with PS3 allowed them to pick off former exclusives and have a comparable 3rd party library at a lower price, so they weren't needed. The only significant reinvestment they've ever shown in software development was for Kinect, which they've now pulled back on nearly completely as well.

Microsoft brings nothing to this industry other than dump trucks of money. They're in the video game industry for all the wrong reasons. Making and selling video games is a secondary part of the business model and that has been the case from day one. Originally it was a Sony denial tactic. As Sony fell on hard times and the X360 emerged as a successful product they used XBL to turn it into a marketing push where their real customers were advertisers and games were just the gateway to get people in the door looking at all the ads. The XB1's original concept took this to the next level planning to have Kinect effectively mining data from within our homes while we lived around the system. Obviously the blow back was too great to continue that little project, but that was the original intent and Microsoft stated as much during a conference for their advertising partners.

Instead of this (which probably cost them $50M or better), Titanfall (which also likely cost them $50M or better) the stated NFL deal at $400M, and buying the Gears IP from Epic (likely a solid $50-$100M price tag) Microsoft could have funded over a half dozen of the biggest, most expensive AAA exclusives EVER. They gave the NFL more money for a fantasy football app than Take 2/Rockstar spent on Grand Theft Auto 5. Let that sink into your head when you excuse their lack of first party studios as "taking time".

Amen!
Great, great post.
Seems like you forgot Digital Anvil and Ensemble Studios?

 

[cameron]

she was a terrible VA for the last game

She was. But she is attractive and can promote the game during award shows and other public appearances. I'd imagine this aspect was more important than her VA ability when they were casting.

 

[Pseudo judo]

Yes it is extraordinary when near every AAA dev has the sell 10m or bust mentality all through last gen.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that mentality is good for AAA development and no this MS deal has made Chrystal Dynamics less hungry as a developer?

And if Tomb Raider goes back to post PS1 sales again and SE cans the series then poof, no more Tomb Raider and it can join the likes of Crash Bandicoot, Megaman etc.

If the game sells poorly it's because no one bought it because it's crap, it was released at an inopportune time or gamers decided to backlash over the exclusivity deal. The backlash aspect is possible, petty but possible. If gamers let the series die over that it says much more about the attitude of the gaming masses then it does about the exclusivity deal itself.

 

[Faith]

Sure you don't build a first party stable overnight, but in MS' case when they hell are they going to start?

Lets recap:
Started Turn 10, who went on to make Forza, the one truly original IP from Microsoft to ever succeed.

Bought Bungie when Halo was months from release, had them port it to Xbox, cancelling a much hyped PC version which did later arrive, not to mention the Mac version Bungie had been promising.

Purchased FASA as part of another acquisition in 1999. After doing very little with the Shadowrun and MechWarrior IPs on the Xbox family of consoles closes FASA in 2007, licences out all their worthwhile IPs to small studios.

Bought Rare in 2002, since they have mined the Perfect Dark, Banjo, and Conker IPs with zero success, made one new mascot IP for Xbox 360's launch that never got a follow up despite being a pretty solid (kid friendly) game (Kameo, FYI). Have since been largely relegated to Kinect titles, weren't even the ones who made the Killer Instinct reboot.

Purchased Lionhead in 2006. Proceeded to have them make nothing but Fable games, including a crappy Kinect Fable game. Stopped making PC versions entirely, games progressively got further and further away from the original concept for Fable. A large number of staff has been laid off over the past two years, another large group up and left with Molyneaux, which if it was anything like his departure from Bullfrog to found Lionhead constituted his core staff he's had everywhere (i.e. the real talent in the studio). Making yet another Fable game that is even further removed from the original premise.

Started up 343 studios as a replacement for Bungie when Bungie wanted out as opposed to eternally making nothing but Halo. Now 343 makes nothing but Halo, only not as well as Bungie. The game they wouldn't let Bungie make, Destiny, is now the most pre-ordered game yet. Winning?

Disbanded Ensemble Studios, Aces Studio, MS Flight Team, MS Victoria Studio (never released anything) and Carbonated Games. Have in the last several years purchased BigPark (absorbed into MS Game Studios), Twisted Pixel (who's next game was a full blown stinker), Press Play (nothing of note, so basically shuffling deck chairs with this and closing Carbonated).

Also, Black Tusk isn't new. It's Microsoft Vancouver. They just cleaned house and renamed it after Vancouver went years without finishing anything. Black Tusk is doing an admirable job keeping that history alive.

This is just a quick sample of how MS has handled their first parties. Forza is the only new IP they've generated and maintained worth a shit in their entire time as a console first party. Everything else was bought, mismanaged, and typically shuttered.

Buying their way into the industry with the Xbox with Bungie, Lionhead, etc. is one thing. Sure, you need meaningful exclusives and that was the fastest way to get them. They've been in the console business for nearly 13 years now though. The proof is in the pudding. Microsoft has never shown a commitment to developing their own legitimate first party stable. They closed much of what they did start with the Xbox during the X360 generation because Sony's failure to deliver with PS3 allowed them to pick off former exclusives and have a comparable 3rd party library at a lower price, so they weren't needed. The only significant reinvestment they've ever shown in software development was for Kinect, which they've now pulled back on nearly completely as well.

Microsoft brings nothing to this industry other than dump trucks of money. They're in the video game industry for all the wrong reasons. Making and selling video games is a secondary part of the business model and that has been the case from day one. Originally it was a Sony denial tactic. As Sony fell on hard times and the X360 emerged as a successful product they used XBL to turn it into a marketing push where their real customers were advertisers and games were just the gateway to get people in the door looking at all the ads. The XB1's original concept took this to the next level planning to have Kinect effectively mining data from within our homes while we lived around the system. Obviously the blow back was too great to continue that little project, but that was the original intent and Microsoft stated as much during a conference for their advertising partners.

Instead of this (which probably cost them $50M or better), Titanfall (which also likely cost them $50M or better) the stated NFL deal at $400M, and buying the Gears IP from Epic (likely a solid $50-$100M price tag) Microsoft could have funded over a half dozen of the biggest, most expensive AAA exclusives EVER. They gave the NFL more money for a fantasy football app than Take 2/Rockstar spent on Grand Theft Auto 5. Let that sink into your head when you excuse their lack of first party studios as "taking time".

The simple truth hurts me so much.

 

[Pseudo judo]

Amen!
Great, great post.
Seems like you forgot Digital Anvil and Ensemble Studios?

The post is a very well written and thought out red herring. It's foundation is based on the supposition that if MS had robust and vibrant first party game development that they wouldn't have bothered to get a timed exclusivity deal for Tomb Raider. Which, of course, MS most certainly would if it thought it bettered their current position.

 

[//DEVIL//]

I have a question. I read the OP and the title and it says time exclusive. Yet, there was another thread where Spencer said they are co developing the game.

how can a game MS is co-developing end up on a Sony platform ?

unless they are talking about PC maybe ? is there is something I am missing here ?

 

[Replicant]

This is why I always look at MS' intention in entering the gaming industry with contempt. Their action in buying 3rd party titles instead of creating their own implies that they have little to no vested interest in the industry in the long run. Buying 3rd party titles instead of fostering their own studios and development ensures that they can bail out easily if they decide their fight for living room dominance is no longer in their interest.

Vile and disgusting through and through. They did not changed then, have not changed now, and likely will not change at all in the future. This is one company whose products and services, even those outside gaming, I will avoid at all costs. And this latest situation only strengthen my belief that not forgiving them post DRM shenanigans was the right course of action for me.

 

[Wereroku]

I have a question. I read the OP and the title and it says time exclusive. Yet, there was another thread where Spencer said they are co developing the game.

how can a game MS is co-developing end up on a Sony platform ?

unless they are talking about PC maybe ? is there is something I am missing here ?

Both companies send technical help to third parties just look at the ice team on Sony's side. It doesn't mean they are developing it. This is a timed exclusive unless Microsoft goes out and pulls a titanfall if that happens you will see another tweet saying sorry ps4 no tr for you ever. The cd blog even confirmed it until they changed their wording.

 

[//DEVIL//]

Both companies send technical help to third parties just look at the ice team on Sony's side. It doesn't mean they are developing it. This is a timed exclusive unless Microsoft goes out and pulls a titanfall if that happens you will see another tweet saying sorry ps4 no tr for you ever. The cd blog even confirmed it until they changed their wording.

the CD team confirmed what ? its time exclusive for Xbox one first then other consoles ?

 

[digoutyoursoul]

she was a terrible VA for the last game

Why are people giving her abuse over this news ? Makes no sense

 

[CouchMaster]

maybe not terrible, just bland and meh

her accent sounded like an American trying to do an English accent, which is weird because she is English

Her accent was off in Californication too, maybe an effect of spending too much time in America?

 

[Pie and Beans]

maybe not terrible, just bland and meh

her accent sounded like an American trying to do an English accent, which is weird because she is English

Born in England sure, but spent most of her life in America so thats her accent. To any brit, it sounds like the atypical american "I AM SPEEKIN THE BRITOSH!!" put on voice, except for a whole game when previous Lara actors had been the real deal.

Combined with over-acted grunting and breathing, it was an ear disaster all round.

 

[Nightengale]

I have a question. I read the OP and the title and it says time exclusive. Yet, there was another thread where Spencer said they are co developing the game.

how can a game MS is co-developing end up on a Sony platform ?

unless they are talking about PC maybe ? is there is something I am missing here ?

Spending money on development =/= co-development.

Put it this way, unless Spencer comes and say the words "Rise of Tomb Raider is a full console exclusive/lifetime/indefinite to Xbox', it's coming to Playstation.

 

[EGM1966]

Sure you don't build a first party stable overnight, but in MS' case when they hell are they going to start?

Lets recap:
Started Turn 10, who went on to make Forza, the one truly original IP from Microsoft to ever succeed.

Bought Bungie when Halo was months from release, had them port it to Xbox, cancelling a much hyped PC version which did later arrive, not to mention the Mac version Bungie had been promising.

Purchased FASA as part of another acquisition in 1999. After doing very little with the Shadowrun and MechWarrior IPs on the Xbox family of consoles closes FASA in 2007, licences out all their worthwhile IPs to small studios.

Bought Rare in 2002, since they have mined the Perfect Dark, Banjo, and Conker IPs with zero success, made one new mascot IP for Xbox 360's launch that never got a follow up despite being a pretty solid (kid friendly) game (Kameo, FYI). Have since been largely relegated to Kinect titles, weren't even the ones who made the Killer Instinct reboot.

Purchased Lionhead in 2006. Proceeded to have them make nothing but Fable games, including a crappy Kinect Fable game. Stopped making PC versions entirely, games progressively got further and further away from the original concept for Fable. A large number of staff has been laid off over the past two years, another large group up and left with Molyneaux, which if it was anything like his departure from Bullfrog to found Lionhead constituted his core staff he's had everywhere (i.e. the real talent in the studio). Making yet another Fable game that is even further removed from the original premise.

Started up 343 studios as a replacement for Bungie when Bungie wanted out as opposed to eternally making nothing but Halo. Now 343 makes nothing but Halo, only not as well as Bungie. The game they wouldn't let Bungie make, Destiny, is now the most pre-ordered game yet. Winning?

Disbanded Ensemble Studios, Aces Studio, MS Flight Team, MS Victoria Studio (never released anything) and Carbonated Games. Have in the last several years purchased BigPark (absorbed into MS Game Studios), Twisted Pixel (who's next game was a full blown stinker), Press Play (nothing of note, so basically shuffling deck chairs with this and closing Carbonated).

Also, Black Tusk isn't new. It's Microsoft Vancouver. They just cleaned house and renamed it after Vancouver went years without finishing anything. Black Tusk is doing an admirable job keeping that history alive.

This is just a quick sample of how MS has handled their first parties. Forza is the only new IP they've generated and maintained worth a shit in their entire time as a console first party. Everything else was bought, mismanaged, and typically shuttered.

Buying their way into the industry with the Xbox with Bungie, Lionhead, etc. is one thing. Sure, you need meaningful exclusives and that was the fastest way to get them. They've been in the console business for nearly 13 years now though. The proof is in the pudding. Microsoft has never shown a commitment to developing their own legitimate first party stable. They closed much of what they did start with the Xbox during the X360 generation because Sony's failure to deliver with PS3 allowed them to pick off former exclusives and have a comparable 3rd party library at a lower price, so they weren't needed. The only significant reinvestment they've ever shown in software development was for Kinect, which they've now pulled back on nearly completely as well.

Microsoft brings nothing to this industry other than dump trucks of money. They're in the video game industry for all the wrong reasons. Making and selling video games is a secondary part of the business model and that has been the case from day one. Originally it was a Sony denial tactic. As Sony fell on hard times and the X360 emerged as a successful product they used XBL to turn it into a marketing push where their real customers were advertisers and games were just the gateway to get people in the door looking at all the ads. The XB1's original concept took this to the next level planning to have Kinect effectively mining data from within our homes while we lived around the system. Obviously the blow back was too great to continue that little project, but that was the original intent and Microsoft stated as much during a conference for their advertising partners.

Instead of this (which probably cost them $50M or better), Titanfall (which also likely cost them $50M or better) the stated NFL deal at $400M, and buying the Gears IP from Epic (likely a solid $50-$100M price tag) Microsoft could have funded over a half dozen of the biggest, most expensive AAA exclusives EVER. They gave the NFL more money for a fantasy football app than Take 2/Rockstar spent on Grand Theft Auto 5. Let that sink into your head when you excuse their lack of first party studios as "taking time".

Wow - what a post. Not going to be popular with some but I think it does paint a stark picture and it's hard to argue with the conclusion it makes.

MS have squandered a direction and a momentum that was promising (going all the way back to the OG Xbox when they invested in Live, online and games like Splinter Cell and Halo) and peaked with the high point of 360 performance to chase a vision that is no longer relevant (console box as home hub) and the notion of a huge casual market they saw with Wii (Kinect and its games) while failing to maintain a suitable stable of studios producing great exclusive content for their platform and by extension maintaining their focus and relevance as a leading providing of videogame consoles and games.

Now, post the reversals, they're playing catch up in the market and are and struggling to recover that momentum. Most big true exclusives are clearly a long way in the future while Kinect is now a dead dodo from a gaming perspective and they are falling back on having to try and buy their way again in the meantime as they are obviously worried about the constantly growing install base gap between XB1 and PS4.

The issue is the market is different - deals like TR Rise are going to be viewed as heavily negative outside the most ardent Xbox fans, anything that seems like a dick'ish move is going to continue to hurt a brand that has been damaged and hasn't yet recovered. It's obvious these moves aren't going to attract people towards them but push them away. They're dead end plays in the current market.

MS would do well to make clear how it plans to invest for stability, focus on real exclusives its bringing to the table like Scalebound, Crackdown and yes Halo/Forza and follow Sony's lead on exclusive side content or timed content as being far better received in the market.

I can understand the temptation to use tactics like TR Rise (and let's not forget TitanFall going from timed to full out moneyhat) and their desire to re-use tactics from last gen that worked then - secure it timed and hide it and secure it later in the development cycle when you can judge whether you think it will be popular.

But the market simply isn't responding the same way. Sony seems to be reading the market better and has been making it clear (or allowing developers to do so) what's timed, what's not and why. There is no real confusion over No Man's Sky or Hellblade and it's setting a tone of visibility that the market clearly prefers; MS trying to hide what's going on is directly clashing with the market and just brings a negative response.

They've changed since the reveal of XB1 and recovered in many areas IMO, but it''s clear they still have work to do to align better to this gen's market and what it expects. The initial backlash should have made one thing clear to MS : if the market rejects you then you're looking at horrible console sales. They need to stop giving the market reasons to reject them and this deal is another and I say that from the objective and observable reaction.

Whatever we think in GAF or argue doesn't matter that much - but it's clear the general market is mostly negative about this and that should be a big warning for MS to change their approach. The last thing they need is another wave of widespread negative sentiment and TBH they're gifting Sony with an easy PR/market perception win every time they do (still so odd how the roles have reversed since last gen but that's another thread).

 

[Steroyd]

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that mentality is good for AAA development and no this MS deal has made Chrystal Dynamics less hungry as a developer?

I'm saying in the face of the mentality that devs had last gen complaining about rising dev costs and needing to sell 5m copies to break even, which causes them to sell their game to everyone available (see shitty cross gen outstaying its welcome), this doesn't make sense on any level.

If the game sells poorly it's because no one bought it because it's crap, it was released at an inopportune time or gamers decided to backlash over the exclusivity deal. The backlash aspect is possible, petty but possible. If gamers let the series die over that it says much more about the attitude of the gaming masses then it does about the exclusivity deal itself.

Not neccesarily, Resident Evil 4 had universal acclaim the Gamecube was dirt cheap but Capcom felt the need to port it to PS2 where it sold better, fanbase and which regions it sells can be a factor.

Ultimately this is the risk SE has, the game has to be critically acclaimed with word of mouth that lasts the duration of the exclusivity deal otherwise what would have been day one purchases are now looking toward whatever new shiny game is out at the time.

 

[TheOddOne]

There is nothing really wrong with Drek’s post, but it’s a fairly one-sided look at the issue.

The thing that breaks Drek’s post is that assumption that they made foothold into the industry by buying up studios, even two of those studios were actively seeking to be acquired, and there before is evil. That logic doesn’t quiet work, because Sony, by the same logic, also bought themselves into the industry by buying out studios. In total they have acquired 7 studios, not including 4 they closed, that were independent. That sounds like they are evil right? No, they saw promise in those studios and wanted them to exclusivity create for them. See, you can twist anything to your advantage and that above post just outright did.

A big part of that post also forgets that the past experiences for MS has resulted in them to not going acquiring crazy and that has benefitted both gamers and developers. They approach companies now for publishing deals, some with IP ownership or others with publishing rights. The beneficial thing is that those companies are less dependent on an overlord, the independence means they can do multiple projects on multiple platforms, especially emerging platforms that always catch Microsoft off guard. Good for gamers, as they get to see developers getting tied down to one platform. It’s also a good way for both the publisher and developer to feel each other out, if it works, it works but if it doesn’t then the studio doesn’t go under or gets forced to work on one IP forever. This sounds like a theory, right? Well, look at Gears of War, Mass Effect (Before getting acquired by EA), Scalebound, Alan Wake, Sunset Overdrive, Ori, Quantum Break. And this isn’t going to be the last. The post also assumes that by this deal that Microsoft will not make any new IP, which is already been disproven by SO, QB, Ori and so on. Again, a lot of assumptions.

Their handling of acquired studios has been terrible, and they are not going to do any of those big purchases anymore. They have however started their own internal development studios, like 343 and Team Dekota for example, their homegrown studios with their own regime. Most of them are unproved though, so they are nothing to be shouting as a huge plus. It’s better than them buying up studios, gutting them and closing them; that’s for sure.

 

[Foffy]

Took like 10 minutes bro, I type FAST.

1. The Wii kicked the shit out of both the PS3 and Xbox 360, so how did Nintendo drop the ball by releasing a platform with major mass market penetration? We might have actually seen significant industry growth into non-traditional demographics if 3rd parties actually backed up the Wii with top tier software.

2. The competition vacuum will always fill itself in. If Microsoft wasn't so clearly joining the fray Sega might have felt more confident making a successor to the Dreamcast. If they were to drop out now I'd bet on Amazon and/or Samsung moving to fill the void by the start of next generation.

More importantly, video games are media and compete in a larger market for consumer expendable income and free time with movies, books, music, and especially with games on smart devices.

The "competition" argument is nothing more than a strawman. MS wasn't a legitimate competitor when Sony released the single most successful, most industry beneficial platform of all time with the PS2. The hardware was for the time relatively obtuse (though now multi-core arch is standard) but provided a level of technical control that resulted in games far surpassing what we all expected from the silicon (like super sampling for anti-aliasing in Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance). All third parties were welcome, royalties were the only cost of entry. Sony didn't try to muscle people out of the way of their titles. In short when Sony dominated the market they ran things with a truly laissez-faire attitude that benefited everyone.

In fact, Microsoft has been overtly anti-competitive of late towards indies, due to their previously strict publishing criteria that forced all indies to work with established publishers. Meanwhile Sony was open to self publishing, and as a result Sony has scooped up a ton of free "exclusives" entirely thanks to not being dicks. So how did MS help competition there by driving small devs into Sony's open arms?

Look, I've owned both the first Xbox and an Xbox 360. I bought an Xbox before a Gamecube that generation, about a month after release, and then got all my 3rd party titles on it. Loved the system as Microsoft went out of their way to court PC developers which gave a different feel to the library. I bought the 360 before all the other systems last generation and bought most of my 3rd party games there as well. I've wanted MS to succeed in this industry from day one because if they were to honestly engage with us gamers some amazing things could result from it.

Instead they continue to try finding alternative ways to monetize the gaming industry instead of simply servicing gamers. Sony had horrible 1st party support on the PS1 and relied entirely on 3rd party exclusives (gained through more friendly hardware than Saturn, cheaper media and royalties than N64, and a healthy marketing partnership budget), but come the PS2 generation they used their strong market position to begin building their 1st party. They started working with Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Sucker Punch, made Level 5 what they are today, etc. etc. and came out the other side with a very respectable first party stable that outright saved them and made a PS3 worth owning last generation.

All I'm saying is that if Microsoft isn't willing to do the same thing, which they clearly weren't when a very similar position presented itself mid-last generation and they instead shuttered studios, they aren't adding value to the industry. At least from the standpoint of the gamer. Maybe 3rd parties because they can get those fast cash handouts, but for gamers they aren't bringing us enough new content and aren't showing any long term commitments to the industry.

Even the fully funded, MS published exclusives like Sunset and Scalebound are 3rd party developers on one-off deals that MS can walk away from just like they did to Crackdown. They really had something there and instead of recognizing it late in development and signing Realtime Worlds up for a sequel they let it slip by, RtW got another project, and Crackdown 2 was a cobbled together mess.

The tl;dr version: stop buying exclusives, start making your own games. If they lack the first party muscle to do it themselves then buy software studios who need a hand. Yager has been scuffling to find consistent funding, show a commitment by buying the studio and letting them make something totally new. The ex-Vigil guys are homeless once again, why not scoop them up and make an all new 3rd person action game (or buy Darksiders an actually save a franchise a la Nintendo and Bayonetta)? I could go on. Talent is out there. 3rd parties are gun shy when it comes to funding the tier just shy of AAA, so do what Sony did during the PS2 era and scoop up a bunch of those studios for entirely new IPs. Stop buying games OFF other systems and buy new IPs ON your system.

Ding ding ding. This, compounded with your previous post, absolutely summarizes Microsoft's anemic approach the last few years, especially compared to the other major players.

 

[Widge]

The post also assumes that by this deal that Microsoft will not make any new IP, which is already been disproven by SO, QB, Ori and so on. Again, a lot of assumptions.

Ok. Just looking at that.

SO - not Microsoft's IP, I would not be surprised if that went to PC at least.
QB - or new Remedy game / Alan Wake successor - I would expect them to put out at least one title
Ori - isn't that across to PC too

I think the point here is MS are incredibly bad as securing a distinct portfolio of games, lulled into a false sense of security where everybody chose them as the third party platform of choice. Both on developer and and consumer side.

All it takes is the pendulum to swing and that dries up in an instant, leaving you exposed. Hence the sly drive to portray Tomb Raider as an exclusive.

They do make games, they don't make very many in comparison to their competition.

 

[Hellshy.]

There is nothing really wrong with Drek’s post, but it’s a fairly one-sided look at the issue.

The thing that breaks Drek’s post is that assumption that they made foothold into the industry by buying up studios, even two of those studios were actively seeking to be acquired, and there before is evil. That logic doesn’t quiet work, because Sony, by the same logic, also bought themselves into the industry by buying out studios. In total they have acquired 7 studios, not including 4 they closed, that were independent. That sounds like they are evil right? No, they saw promise in those studios and wanted them to exclusivity create for them. See, you can twist anything to your advantage and that above post just outright did.

A big part of that post also forgets that the past experiences for MS has resulted in them to not going acquiring crazy and that has benefitted both gamers and developers. They approach companies now for publishing deals, some with IP ownership or others with publishing rights. The beneficial thing is that those companies are less dependent on an overlord, the independence means they can do multiple projects on multiple platforms, especially emerging platforms that always catch Microsoft off guard. Good for gamers, as they get to see developers getting tied down to one platform. It’s also a good way for both the publisher and developer to feel each other out, if it works, it works but if it doesn’t then the studio doesn’t go under or gets forced to work on one IP forever. This sounds like a theory, right? Well, look at Gears of War, Mass Effect (Before getting acquired by EA), Scalebound, Alan Wake, Sunset Overdrive, Ori, Quantum Break. And this isn’t going to be the last. The post also assumes that by this deal that Microsoft will not make any new IP, which is already been disproven by SO, QB, Ori and so on. Again, a lot of assumptions.

Their handling of acquired studios has been terrible, and they are not going to do any of those big purchases anymore. They have however started their own internal development studios, like 343 and Team Dekota for example, their homegrown studios with their own regime. Most of them are unproved though, so they are nothing to be shouting as a huge plus. It’s better than them buying up studios, gutting them and closing them; that’s for sure.

True Sony did buy up studios back in the day but then they started to build their own stable.the point of dress post was not that Ms bought up studios but never took the next leep or at least not in a serious way. Ms didn't go crazy buying up studios and creating their own stable bc they like to play it safe.Sony takes risks,they have back then and they do know while ms continues to play it safe.

as for this billion dollars ms has to spend on gaming,we already know they probably used a lot of cash with these fifa bundles an sea deals but we have no clue how long that cash is suppose to last. Is that what they have for this gen? Did they use a chunk for t her nfl deal? What division of ms sealed the deal, if it was xbox division I would be inclined to think they already spent a large portion of that billion already.

 

[TheOddOne]

Ok. Just looking at that.

SO - not Microsoft's IP, I would not be surprised if that went to PC at least.
QB - or new Remedy game / Alan Wake successor - I would expect them to put out at least one title
Ori - isn't that across to PC too

I think the point here is MS are incredibly bad as securing a distinct portfolio of games, lulled into a false sense of security where everybody chose them as the third party platform of choice. Both on developer and and consumer side.

All it takes is the pendulum to swing and that dries up in an instant, leaving you exposed. Hence the sly drive to portray Tomb Raider as an exclusive.

They do make games, they don't make very many in comparison to their competition.

Does it matter that it’s coming to PC? I still don’t understand how that is seen as a negative. Either people really have an overly attachment to it being tied to the platform, it fail but still have the satisfaction that it’s only on that platform? Which is weird, because you would strive for the IP to get a healthy sales; so it could lead to a new game or new IP for the same developer. Seems like a weird thing for somebody who calls himself a gamer that cares about games and its developers to be fixed with or to dismiss as “Oh, it’s also coming for the PC so no benefit for the platform”.

The thing is, that whole logic of not investing in new or revamping the old is already been disproven by the actions in year one of new console. They introduced three new AAA IP’s So (Publishing), QB (They own the IP) and ScaleBound (Also IP owner); the brought back franchises like Killer Instinct and Phantom Dust; have invested into smaller titles like Ori (Also IP owner);and they keep developing their mainline games like Halo, Forza and Fable. This is just again, in the first year.

If this was around 2011, all those arguments would be totally utterly valid; now, however, that is a whole other story.

True Sony did buy up studios back in the day but then they started to build their own stable.the point of dress post was not that Ms bought up studios but never took the next leep or at least not in a serious way. Ms didn't go crazy buying up studios and creating their own stable bc they like to play it safe.Sony takes risks,they have back then and they do know while ms continues to play it safe.

as for this billion dollars ms has to spend on gaming,we already know they probably used a lot of cash with these fifa bundles an sea deals but we have no clue how long that cash is suppose to last. Is that what they have for this gen? Did they use a chunk for t her nfl deal? What division of ms sealed the deal, if it was xbox division I would be inclined to think they already spent a large portion of that billion already.

There is nothing safe about both those strategies though, both are huge investment that could go either way. Microsoft learned the hard way, their strategy didn’t work.

That is a lot of assumptions though, again with Drek’s post it talks in absolutes; much like when people were so certain that 90% of the games they were making were Kinect games. Which again, was proven wrong; even when the evidence clearly didn’t point that way.

 

[Bold One]

Yeah, her accent seemed a bit off.

Anyway, Keeley Hawes forever!

Dont know who that is, but I am scared to google image search it

I only remember her screaming. You could have literally muted her and got through the game just fine.

Yeah but like an idiot I thought that just maybe she would have something interesting to say, there were times I forgot I was playing a Tomb Raider game, Lara has never really been an interesting character.

She was. But she is attractive and can promote the game during award shows and other public appearances. I'd imagine this aspect was more important than her VA ability when they were casting.

Well now that just aint right... do gamers even care or recognise a good majority of VAs in the industry, I always thought people cared more about the devs i.e Kojima, Miyamoto some other japanese guys and the hipster indie dev collective

Why are people giving her abuse over this news ? Makes no sense

I am with you on this one, no clue why they would think she has an input on platform exclusivity

Her accent was off in Californication too, maybe an effect of spending too much time in America?

yeah looking out my window right now, I would have stayed California too

Born in England sure, but spent most of her life in America so thats her accent. To any brit, it sounds like the atypical american "I AM SPEEKIN THE BRITOSH!!" put on voice, except for a whole game when previous Lara actors had been the real deal.

Combined with over-acted grunting and breathing, it was an ear disaster all round.

Rise of the Tomb Raider- OT - I can't do this

 

[BruiserBear]

Sure you don't build a first party stable overnight, but in MS' case when they hell are they going to start?

Lets recap:
Started Turn 10, who went on to make Forza, the one truly original IP from Microsoft to ever succeed.

Bought Bungie when Halo was months from release, had them port it to Xbox, cancelling a much hyped PC version which did later arrive, not to mention the Mac version Bungie had been promising.

Purchased FASA as part of another acquisition in 1999. After doing very little with the Shadowrun and MechWarrior IPs on the Xbox family of consoles closes FASA in 2007, licences out all their worthwhile IPs to small studios.

Bought Rare in 2002, since they have mined the Perfect Dark, Banjo, and Conker IPs with zero success, made one new mascot IP for Xbox 360's launch that never got a follow up despite being a pretty solid (kid friendly) game (Kameo, FYI). Have since been largely relegated to Kinect titles, weren't even the ones who made the Killer Instinct reboot.

Purchased Lionhead in 2006. Proceeded to have them make nothing but Fable games, including a crappy Kinect Fable game. Stopped making PC versions entirely, games progressively got further and further away from the original concept for Fable. A large number of staff has been laid off over the past two years, another large group up and left with Molyneaux, which if it was anything like his departure from Bullfrog to found Lionhead constituted his core staff he's had everywhere (i.e. the real talent in the studio). Making yet another Fable game that is even further removed from the original premise.

Started up 343 studios as a replacement for Bungie when Bungie wanted out as opposed to eternally making nothing but Halo. Now 343 makes nothing but Halo, only not as well as Bungie. The game they wouldn't let Bungie make, Destiny, is now the most pre-ordered game yet. Winning?

Disbanded Ensemble Studios, Aces Studio, MS Flight Team, MS Victoria Studio (never released anything) and Carbonated Games. Have in the last several years purchased BigPark (absorbed into MS Game Studios), Twisted Pixel (who's next game was a full blown stinker), Press Play (nothing of note, so basically shuffling deck chairs with this and closing Carbonated).

Also, Black Tusk isn't new. It's Microsoft Vancouver. They just cleaned house and renamed it after Vancouver went years without finishing anything. Black Tusk is doing an admirable job keeping that history alive.

This is just a quick sample of how MS has handled their first parties. Forza is the only new IP they've generated and maintained worth a shit in their entire time as a console first party. Everything else was bought, mismanaged, and typically shuttered.

Buying their way into the industry with the Xbox with Bungie, Lionhead, etc. is one thing. Sure, you need meaningful exclusives and that was the fastest way to get them. They've been in the console business for nearly 13 years now though. The proof is in the pudding. Microsoft has never shown a commitment to developing their own legitimate first party stable. They closed much of what they did start with the Xbox during the X360 generation because Sony's failure to deliver with PS3 allowed them to pick off former exclusives and have a comparable 3rd party library at a lower price, so they weren't needed. The only significant reinvestment they've ever shown in software development was for Kinect, which they've now pulled back on nearly completely as well.

Microsoft brings nothing to this industry other than dump trucks of money. They're in the video game industry for all the wrong reasons. Making and selling video games is a secondary part of the business model and that has been the case from day one. Originally it was a Sony denial tactic. As Sony fell on hard times and the X360 emerged as a successful product they used XBL to turn it into a marketing push where their real customers were advertisers and games were just the gateway to get people in the door looking at all the ads. The XB1's original concept took this to the next level planning to have Kinect effectively mining data from within our homes while we lived around the system. Obviously the blow back was too great to continue that little project, but that was the original intent and Microsoft stated as much during a conference for their advertising partners.

Instead of this (which probably cost them $50M or better), Titanfall (which also likely cost them $50M or better) the stated NFL deal at $400M, and buying the Gears IP from Epic (likely a solid $50-$100M price tag) Microsoft could have funded over a half dozen of the biggest, most expensive AAA exclusives EVER. They gave the NFL more money for a fantasy football app than Take 2/Rockstar spent on Grand Theft Auto 5. Let that sink into your head when you excuse their lack of first party studios as "taking time".

While this post is well worded, and makes some good points about Microsoft's motivations and behaviors over the past decade, couldn't some similar observations be made about Sony? Sony got into gaming as a denial to Nintendo, and other electronics companies poking their head into the gaming arena? Couldn't someone argue that Sony had non gaming intentions behind some of their consoles? Pushing DVD? Pushing Bluray? Pushing CELL? Pushing 3DTVs they were trying to sell?

They've also closed their own number of studios over the years. Bought Zipper, drove them into the ground making Socom games, and then dissolved them when they stopped making money. Isn't that kind of how this industry works? Studios make games that don't sell, studio goes out of business.

 

[rakkadakka]

Remember guys, MS in consoles for moneyz.

Sony in consoles for the heart.

 

[djshauny]

Remember guys, MS in consoles for moneyz.

Sony in consoles for the heart.

Ha

Yeah right lol

 

[omonimo]

While this post is well worded, and makes some good points about Microsoft's motivations and behaviors over the past decade, couldn't some similar observations be made about Sony? Sony got into gaming as a denial to Nintendo, and other electronics companies poking their head into the gaming arena? Couldn't someone argue that Sony had non gaming intentions behind some of their consoles? Pushing DVD? Pushing Bluray? Pushing CELL? Pushing 3DTVs they were trying to sell?

They've also closed their own number of studios over the years. Bought Zipper, drove them into the ground making Socom games, and then dissolved them when they stopped making money. Isn't that kind of how this industry works? Studios make games that don't sell, studio goes out of business.

Welp. No, not this generation. Sony seems to have learned from their past errors, MS not at all. Waste money in a timed exclusive will not help xbone, like the first xbox in the past.

 

[abadguy]

Remember guys, MS in consoles for moneyz.

Sony in consoles for the heart.

Well they are a non profit organization after all. All proceeds from gaming go to the "fluffy kitten fund".

 

[Poona]

Dont know who that is, but I am scared to google image search it

Lol. It's not that scary! Keeley Hawes is a British actress who has done the voice for Lara in Legend, anniversary, underworld and Guardian of Light. I feared they had dropped her by the wayside due to their love affair with Camilla Luddington. Seems all is good though as Keeley is returning for Temple of Osiris. Which I'm really glad as I think out of Lara's whole history she is the definitive version.

It seems they're going to continue to use Keeley for confident iconic Lara, and leave Camilla to do scared little Lara. Still wish Camilla sounded more like Keeley though or at least learn to sound a little more British.