DarkMage619
$MSFT
Well if we are talking first person shooters, MS led the way with Doom.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
HoofHearted
Member
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
Xbox one messed up their momentum badly. They couldnt expand their 1st party studios, which they needed it badly.
What they did with OG xbox and X360 is impressive. Hope they bring that energy back to XBS consoles.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
I think early on they had a vision of bringing PC style hard core gaming to consoles and they had a lot of success with that. But as PC gaming became secondary to console gaming in general they have lost their defining characteristic and have failed to find that new 'thing' that is the mark of their brand.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
That and corporate meddling.
They tried to convert xbox as entertainment device, and that backfired badly. And the chase for kinteic didnt result in to a positive thing too.
Had they stopped chasing after those two, Xbox would have been in different position.
If he uses GPT, he would instantly become the smartest person in the room.Damn, we need native GAF chat GPT integration to make all of thicc's posts readable.
Here is one from GPT. Some of his suggestion is badly needed for xbox. Especially part 6.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Microsoft 10 years ago had plenty of studios. The problem is they all basically floundered and haven't been very productive, and they rested on a relentless cycle of sequels rather than mixing in some new IP.
They of course could have continued to grow, but they didn't. And their studio talent diminished greatly, especially when Bungie left.
Money and resources only work so far. Just because you buy Bethesda it isn't a sure thing that Redfall or Starfield are the next big hits that put Xbox back into focus for consumers. Activision won't as well. It's far more difficult than that, and takes institutional knowledge/history over more than a decade with each studio getting progressively better.
The trends we've seen with MS studios is not good, and the solution of throwing money at a problem is not a valid solution at all unless you have management in place that can effectively utilize that investment rather than burning through it
feynoob
Banned
False. MS didnt have alot studios back then.
They had small studios that were capable of AAA games, and the rest were indie games. They needed studios that were capable of AA-AAA titles.
Most of their current studios were bought during xbox one.
Current studios, not counting zenimax.
These are the studios which was either closed, left, or merged.
Varteras
Member
Microsoft's Decisive Games Team Working on "Beloved Strategy Game" - IGN
A job posting reveals a new studio working on the next installment of a mystery franchise.
Came and gone. Barely knew anything about them.
Also all these studios that never went anywhere. Just like Victoria Studios.
feynoob
Banned
Varteras
Member
MS crushed their hopes while they were chicks.
Yeah it was wild to see so many upstart studios popping up and then they just vanished. I'm sure that was about the time Microsoft almost shut Xbox down.
Varteras
Member
10 days left for popcorn time. We wait for your findings CMA.
What are you wearing for the event? I need to buy something. None of my dresses fit me anymore
feynoob
Banned
I might have to order it from amazon.What are you wearing for the event? I need to buy something. None of my dresses fit me anymore
Found it.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09JC7P41N/?tag=neogaf0e-20
Ordered. It will be here on tuesday.
Last edited:
RickMasters
Member
Given the doom and gloom, mood of some...Id say wear black.What are you wearing for the event? I need to buy something. None of my dresses fit me anymore
Varteras
Member
Given the doom and gloom, mood of some...Id say wear black.
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
Dude, again, it's not about what types of games they specialize in genre-wise. Making industry-leading, standard-setting games can be of any genre. I mentioned Super Metroid, Shenmue, Gran Turismo, Halo as just examples. All different genres.
It's about making games that do something, at least one thing, in terms of game design or production values (usually both) that is among the top of your peers at some point in the industry. When Super Metroid came out, there was no other platforming game with its level of exploration, adventure, and atmosphere, and it went on to influence/define an entire subgenre. When Shenmue came out, there was no other game with an open world with its level of interactivity, at its production values, on the market. It clearly had influence in many open-world games after it. When Gran Turismo came out, there was simply no other racing game in the industry doing its type of realistic racing simulation and having its sheer amount of vehicles in a streamlined package; it literally set the standard for car racing simulators that's still being used today. And when Halo came out, it raised the bar significantly for FPS games on console and actually helped put them on par with FPS games on PC for once, and set the standard for FPS games in terms of controls and story, clearly influencing lots of FPS games that came after.
This has nothing to really do with what games certain companies specialize in, I don't know why you keep thinking that.
Damn, we need native GAF chat GPT integration to make all of thicc's posts readable.
They can never beat the real deal
feynoob
Banned
Then what is it that you are trying to say?
That MS didnt make those games?
Because I cant follow your logic here.
feynoob
Banned
sleep buddy. We still have no news.
Nothing yet?
Varteras
Member
I think he means that Xbox hasn't managed to produce as many games that have either started trends or set new bars for game design as PlayStation or Nintendo have. Which has helped create an enduring, global perception of both brands in a way Xbox hasn't managed to match. Even such games not made by them were often associated with them, which contributed to the perception.
Danjin44
The nicest person on this forum
Varteras
Member
feynoob
Banned
I think that is the issue with him.
Xbox is weak that regard, which I pointed out to him. But their gameplay makes up that weakness. Even though their games aren't the top in their prespective, they still bring something which Sony and Nintendo doesnt bring to their games.
Not to mention that Xbox is more of live service platform at this moment. That makes it a unique platform, compared to Sony and Nintendo.
Some gamers like SP, while others love live service games.
Varteras
Member
Perception is so very important and Xbox has certainly built a perception of being a platform that is more geared towards multiplayer gaming. I think his point may be, though, that PlayStation and Nintendo quite simply have a perception of having a high level of quality that Xbox doesn't have. In a way that overshadows any strength of the brand. But I'll let him speak for himself at this point. I'm not sure I'm doing anything more now than typing because I like how my words look.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
Yours is much better.Perception is so very important and Xbox has certainly built a perception of being a platform that is more geared towards multiplayer gaming. I think his point may be, though, that PlayStation and Nintendo quite simply have a perception of having a high level of quality that Xbox doesn't have. In a way that overshadows any strength of the brand. But I'll let him speak for himself at this point. I'm not sure I'm doing anything more now than typing because I like how my words look.
Xbox got the perception of dude bro console.
Varteras
Member
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
It's in part to do with this. Flight Sim is a fucking amazing game and accomplishment, and gets support continuously. If it was in a popular genre it would be one of the flagship games of the generation. But it's a flight sim, so it is recognized and then quickly dismissed. AoE4 is another amazing game but it's an historical RTS (and not yet on xbox). Their best games have often been in genres that console audiences broadly don't give a fuck about.
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
No. I'm saying Microsoft have made some of those types of games. Again, I mentioned Halo and Gears originally, also mentioned Flight Simulator and Forza Horizon.
My point is that they have not produced near the number of these sorts of games as Sony, Nintendo or (when they made hardware) Sega, historically, and that's the part which is of importance here.
Yes, that's what I've basically been saying. Industry-leading, standard-setting games in one or more areas relating to game design and/or production values (usually both) when compared to peers, and having notable influence on games either of the same genre or just in general for at least a period of time if not multiple generations.
Sony, Nintendo (and I would also say, Sega) have more of these types of games to their name than Microsoft. And I would agree, in the cases of Sony & Nintendo it's also helped with global perception, even with 3P games that become strongly associated with their platforms that Sony or Nintendo otherwise had no hand in making (look at how many people consider MGS a PlayStation/Sony game for example, even though it was made by Konami, or Tomb Raider in a similar way even though that was Core Design/Eidos, etc.).
I would say if Flight Sim did more to innovate in its genre space then it wouldn't need to be a different genre to get mainstream appeal. They could have done so much more with the Top Gun: Maverick promotion for example, like actually build out a cool, cinematic story campaign inspired by the film. Instead it was just like a plane or two. And AoE4 may be a great RTS, but at the end of the day it's "just" another RTS; what does it do specifically in terms of some notable game design or production values, that would clearly put it ahead of other RTS games on the market and influence them in some aspect of design or production?
Because if it did such things, it could probably even have influence transcending its genre and maybe inspire other games. Those are the kind of qualities industry-leading, standard-setting games seem like they should have IMO, and platform holders should put out more of those over a generation than 3P because they have more advantages in resources, typically. I fee like Nintendo and Sony manage that, but Microsoft hasn't for over a decade, and that's a problem.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Pretty sure at this point we already know CMA is going to approve without conditions and also suggest MS buy EA, Take 2, Ubisoft, and Square Enix...10 days left for popcorn time. We wait for your findings CMA.
They'll probably go ahead and grant pre-approval for those acquisitions so they don't have to review the rest anymore. Kill 6 birds with one stone, that's what I call efficient!
Last edited:
First off, I never said PlayStation was the reason the visual pack was canceled. That's your imagination.
The update was cited as Xbox and PC only for the simple reason that it was a Bedrock Edition add on, and at the time, Sony did not agree to have the Bedrock update on PlayStation.
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
That wasn't owned by Xbox when the IP was created and was multiplatform for MacOs too, and was originally developed on Opengl which ties in with the MacOS version.
I'd also argue that the original Operation Flashpoint Cold war crisis' influence is being gifted to Halo in your statement too. Looking at current CoD and BF gameplay scale and options, today all have more in common with Operation Flashpoint, a game which never gets a mention but massively broke new ground in 2001, and had been in development for a decade before that IIRC.
You said for parity (with PS) . Real reason was that they ditched xbox one back then and teased new "non parity" in the same paragraph with new hardware announcements. Sony did not agree to have the bedrock update, right, right. Come on. Let's not be silly. They didn't agree to an unrelated policy where MS held the bedrock update ransom, which wouldn't have even guaranteed the Super Duper Graphics Pack. Even when they agreed to that policy they didn't get the Bedrock update for a year, then when they got the Bedrock update the xbox one and PC exclusive Super Duper Graphics Pack was dead and an exclusive Series X raytracing update was being shown.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
But isn't MS what made halo the way it is?
Without Xbox, we wouldn't be having some of these core mechanics.
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
The point I made about Minecraft bedrock on PS4 using the PS4 SDK's DirectX wrapper is possibly the crux of the point PlayStation are complaining about to the CMA. Microsoft have an awful habit of taking emerging GPU technologies - transparent open methods - and giving them a stupid name and making them slightly different and opaque within the DirectX API. RT is the latest rxample of that problem where developers have said RT with DirectX is below par, and yet we can only assume that in future PlayStation will have to update their DirectX wrapper to use their RT inefficiently on Cod and Minecraft via those proprietary calls, thereby degrading perception of their hardware, as they have stated to the CMA.
Last edited:
mrmustard
Banned
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
God no, the success of Halo is all Bungie, and if anything Microsoft buying it held it back IMO. Anecdotally I was set to buy the game at launch on PC until the acquisition, but then had no interest in giving Microsoft money for a game that was - IMO at the time - degraded being moved to directx and control pad - when I tried it. The independent success of Destiny suggests they had more to offer the industry working independently IMHO.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
I specifically said 'parity across all devices'
How you inferred 'PlayStation' from this is frankly baffling. Am I being trolled here?
Because you said this:
When we are talking about MS wanting parity on PS or not. What would be weird otherwise if we're talking about Xbox one S/X and PC?
They didn't really want parity on Playstation. The thing was announced as Xbox One and PC exclusive. It was officially canned due to technical hurdles on the xbox one and Xbox series being right around the corner. In the same cancellation press release they teased sharing the Xbox Series X raytracing update.
Last edited:
SoloKingRobert
Banned
9 more days left (26th April) before the CMA final verdict
Varteras
Member
I'm curious if they plan on waiting all the way until the deadline for whatever reason.
PaintTinJr
Gold Member
Are Microsoft still publicly lobbying with the Newpaper and tube adverts here in the UK for the merger, or has that now stopped that they have it in the bag - according to some in this thread?
If they are still lobbying, what would that mean in all likelihood?
feynoob
Banned
We would see articles, instead of ads.
My point has always been that MS has long since been focused on parity across all devices, with architectural limits in mind. Nowhere did I mention or insinuate PlayStation. I actually had mobile in mind as the key constraint when I made that post.
Because at the time of announcement, Minecraft Bedrock edition was exclusive to Xbox and PC, on console. Thanks to Sony blocking it off PlayStation.
How could they announce it for PlayStation when Sony made that impossible?
So let me get this straight. You think it was canned to maintain parity with mobile? where it wasn't announced or planned to come to anyway. That didn't have a crossplay issue did it? It was never able to run a super duper graphics pack. You think it wasn't announced on PS because Sony was to blame for Bedrock. Meanwhile they tease the mobile parity breaking xbox series raytracing updates in the cancellation:
"we're stopping development on the pack, and looking into other ways for you to experience Minecraft with a new look.
Minecraft is available on a wide range of platforms, and we're constantly trying to make the most of the technical architecture of each one. We'll be able to share more on that subject very soon."
You think they want non-parity but parity across devices including mobile? All this to not just admit that The Super Duper Graphics Pack was an xbox and PC exclusive from the beginning, not planned for mobile, or PS. That was canned due to technical difficulties on xbox one and them not getting it out on time for Scorpio, seeing it as obsolete with the update they were soon to show for Xbox Series.
Last edited:
nikolino840
Member
Zathalus
Member
As far as I recall, there was no PC version until the acquisition. Halo was being developed for Mac like the Marathon games before it. Microsoft buying them led to the PC version coming out.
If it wasn't for Microsoft the likely result was that Bungie either went bankrupt or was purchased by someone else.
While I agree with the restrictions of a controller, moving to DirectX was obviously a upgrade in 2001. DirectX 8.1 was the only graphics API that had a standard model for Programable Pixel and Vertex Shaders, OpenGL would not have that for a while. Bungie had a ongoing partnership with Nvidia since before the Microsoft aquisition so I doubt much changed for them technology wise. Heck the original version of Halo was used to advertise GeForce 2 cards.
- Status