Support NeoGAF

[Ar¢tos]

You're still slowly but surely going to witness the fruits from the studios that were acquired pre-Activision Blizzard during the 2nd half of this generation.

I can't wait Ninja Theory next year's MS paid Iceland vacation video! Hellblade 2 vidoc!

 

[Three]

They still are funding third parties to make games for Xbox.

I'll help you out:

https://twitter.com/XboxPublishing

Sure they are but you don't see the irony of saying wait a decade to see the fruits of these acquisitions and at the same time suggesting people are enforcing your support of acquisitions because it is quick?

The quickest thing would have been to actually fund some first party or third party games for xbox before, for Xbox Series release, instead of waiting for it to be ridiculed and pretending you're buying up the industry IPs because you're struggling to compete, and that people should wait until 2033 to see something. They didn't go the quickest route at all.

 

[RedC]

They acquired studios and publishers to acquire more content in a quicker time. Not create it.

If they're paying for and owning it, then they are solely responsible for continuing to create new content for old IPs and funding new IPs, and if they are unsuccessful then they are solely responsible.

 

[Vox Machina]

Canceling a version of a game mid-development, halting any further releases of a franchise on a platform it is historically found on, and that multiplatform publisher never again releasing new IP on a platform they pretty much always did, is all the same result. Arguing otherwise is splitting hairs.

So a hypothetical Infinity Ward new IP should be released on Playstation (for instance) simply by virtue of them being owned by ABK?

 

[Varteras]

Get ready for the flip flopping as games release every game that isn't a success will be blamed on MS and every game that has success will be attributed to the dev's prior to the buy out. You can't lose an argument if you play both sides that's called intellectual honesty in this thread.

Let me show you much critical reception matters to how impactful a game was.

Ya kinda need your games to land with a lot of people. Especially those beyond your current userbase. You don't move the needle otherwise. You also need that more than every few years when your competitors seem to always deliver a big game or two every year.

You don't need a hypocritical argument at all to show why Hi-Fi Rush or Pentiment don't matter when the topic is Xbox changing the situation.

 

[RedC]

Sure they are but you don't see the irony of saying wait a decade to see the fruits of these acquisitions and at the same time suggesting people are enforcing your support of acquisitions because it is quick?

The quickest thing would have been to actually fund some first party or third party games for xbox before, for Xbox Series release, instead of waiting for it to be ridiculed and pretending you're buying up the industry IPs because you're struggling to compete, and that people should wait until 2033 to see something. They didn't go the quickest route at all.

Waiting a decade to see Xbox at the peak of its powers was also including Activision Blizzard and all of its studios into Microsoft and PC, Xbox, Cloud, and Mobile.

And Xbox is likely to acquire more studios and possibly another publisher in the future.

Microsoft is playing the long game.

 

[graywolf323]

Sure they are but you don't see the irony of saying wait a decade to see the fruits of these acquisitions and at the same time suggesting people are enforcing your support of acquisitions because it is quick?

The quickest thing would have been to actually fund some first party or third party games for xbox before, for Xbox Series release, instead of waiting for it to be ridiculed and pretending you're buying up the industry IPs because you're struggling to compete, and that people should wait until 2033 to see something. They didn't go the quickest route at all.

if anything it'd be easier to argue that Microsoft may have purposely sacrificed short-term success for Xbox this gen with a focus on instead long-term gain with their goal of driving PlayStation out of business so they can dominate the industry like they do in several others

RedC isn't incorrect in that sense, Microsoft is clearly eyeing 10 years from now as their goal & they have the money to take the losses in the meantime

edit: after all what's another lost gen to Xbox if in a gen or two they completely dominate the cloud gaming future they expect to happen? they'll have the IPs and infrastructure to do so now & as long as they don't fuck up CoD like they did with Halo they'll definitely make it exclusive in 10 years to further push that goal (can't have users playing the most popular annual game on other platforms if their goal is to force them into the Xbox ecosystem)

 

[Vox Machina]

They didn't go the quickest route at all.

They're taking all routes at the same time. They're funding third-party exclusives, funding new development studios, and acquiring.

 

[adamsapple]

I'm beginning to see what Chiggs meant when he said maybe it's time to think about closing the thread.

 

[Topher]

I'm beginning to see what Chiggs meant when he said maybe it's time to think about closing the thread.

Starting to feel that way myself seeing all the mental gymnastics going on.

Disregard

 

[RedC]

Let me show you much critical reception matters to how impactful a game was.

Ya kinda need your games to land with a lot of people. Especially those beyond your current userbase. You don't move the needle otherwise. You also need that more than every few years when your competitors seem to always deliver a big game or two every year.

You don't need a hypocritical argument at all to show why Hi-Fi Rush or Pentiment don't matter when the topic is Xbox changing the situation.

One game of that magnitude may not move the needle on its own, but the totality of these games that provide diverse experiences to so many smaller groups does within a business model that includes subscription of a service and the promise of consistent new content on it.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

When Sony makes games exclusive to Playstation, are they cancelling the Xbox version?

Come on help a fella out. I try my best to avoid the wrath of mods but then you gotta post dumbshit like this

 

[reinking]

If they're paying for and owning it, then they are solely responsible for continuing to create new content for old IPs and funding new IPs, and if they are unsuccessful then they are solely responsible.

??? How does that change that they acquired them to acquire content in a quick time frame? Continuing to create content for old IPs will take time, right?

 

[graywolf323]

I'm beginning to see what Chiggs meant when he said maybe it's time to think about closing the thread.

Starting to feel that way myself seeing all the mental gymnastics going on.

eh I'm gonna disagree, why should the thread be closed just because there's some users intentionally derailing things with the mental gymnastics?

 

[Heisenberg007]

I'm beginning to see what Chiggs meant when he said maybe it's time to think about closing the thread.

Mods watching you potentially destroy GAF engagement rate.

 

[Varteras]

So a hypothetical Infinity Ward new IP should be released on Playstation (for instance) simply by virtue of them being owned by ABK?

Would that game have most likely released on PlayStation prior to Xbox buying them? Based on ABK's history, absolutely. So, now that Microsoft owns them, if that game doesn't release on PlayStation, which it likely won't, that means that games were indeed taken away. Like, I don't know what angle you can even try that doesn't make you look stunningly obtuse. Unless the purchased publisher continues to release their games on every platform that they normally did, then yes. Games were taken away. I don't care, personally, but arguing otherwise is just silly.

 

[Three]

They're taking all routes at the same time. They're funding third-party exclusives, funding new development studios, and acquiring.

If they were why do we need to wait and justify acquisitions then?

 

[RedC]

??? How does that change that they acquired them to acquire content in a quick time frame? Continuing to create content for old IPs will take time, right?

I didn't disagree with your first statement, only with you saying they aren't creating it.

 

[Topher]

eh I'm gonna disagree, why should the thread be closed just because there's some users intentionally derailing things with the mental gymnastics?

Yeah, you are right. A few arguing in bad faith shouldn't shut down the conversation.

 

[drganon]

Waiting a decade to see Xbox at the peak of its powers was also including Activision Blizzard and all of its studios into Microsoft and PC, Xbox, Cloud, and Mobile.

And Xbox is likely to acquire more studios and possibly another publisher in the future.

Microsoft is playing the long game.

 

[RedC]

 

[Three]

Waiting a decade to see Xbox at the peak of its powers was also including Activision Blizzard and all of its studios into Microsoft and PC, Xbox, Cloud, and Mobile.

And Xbox is likely to acquire more studios and possibly another publisher in the future.

Microsoft is playing the long game.

Playing the long game that's the short game to you. Make up your mind. If it was playing the long game for content you've just contradicted yourself by saying it's the quickest.

 

[Vox Machina]

If they were why do we need to wait and justify acquisitions then?

Games take a long time to make? Is this a surprise to you?

 

[Varteras]

One game of that magnitude may not move the needle on its own, but the totality of these games that provide diverse experiences to so many smaller groups does within a business model that includes subscription of a service and the promise of consistent new content on it.

The magnitude of impact a single Zelda or God of War has makes even 20 or 30 Pentiments meaningless. If you don't regularly deliver big games that makes the industry buzz, it matters little.

 

[Three]

Games take a long time to make? Is this a surprise to you?

Not a surprise to me at all but it's a surprise to MS it seems.

He's trying to suggest MS realised this now and not before they released a new console so now they have to buy up the industry to make things quick. If they had funded first party or third party games prior they wouldn't need to justify acquisitions and a decade wait to see 'fruit'/games.

 

[Vox Machina]

Would that game have most likely released on PlayStation prior to Xbox buying them? Based on ABK's history, absolutely. So, now that Microsoft owns them, if that game doesn't release on PlayStation, which it likely won't, that means that games were indeed taken away. Like, I don't know what angle you can even try that doesn't make you look stunningly obtuse. Unless the purchased publisher continues to release their games on every platform that they normally did, then yes. Games were taken away. I don't care, personally, but arguing otherwise is just silly.

So Insomniac, by virtue of not being owned by a Publisher at the time of purchase, making games exclusive to Playstation immediately after producing a game for Xbox, is a-okay, but a hypothetical Infinity Ward new IP being non-exclusive (PC baby) to Xbox is somehow not?

I'm sorry I'm just not buying what you're selling.

Not a surprise to me at all but it's a surprise to MS it seems.

I'm pretty sure Microsoft is unsurprised by modern production cycles. If their only goal was to win the console wars you may have a point, insofar as their recent acquisitions haven't paid off much for the Xbox Series consoles, but they pivoted years ago to include PC as a first-party platform, and PC doesn't have "generations" that you need to "win" to appease console warriors.

 

[RedC]

Playing the long game that's the short game to you. Make up your mind. If it was playing the long game for content you've just contradicted yourself by saying it's the quickest.

Once again I said PEAK OF THEIR POWERS. It is going to take time and if they acquire more publishers and studios in the next several years; it is going to take more time to see them at the PEAK OF THEIR POWERS.

However, that does not mean you will not see a gradual shift in the diversity, quantity, and quality of games during this time.

 

[drganon]

Playing the long game that's the short game to you. Make up your mind. If it was playing the long game for content you've just contradicted yourself by saying it's the quickest.

I'm beginning to think our buddy redc isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed.

 

[ChiefDada]

 

[RedC]

The magnitude of impact a single Zelda or God of War has makes even 20 or 30 Pentiments meaningless. If you don't regularly deliver big games that makes the industry buzz, it matters little.

I'm sorry, does Nintendo and Sony have the exact same business model and ambitions Microsoft has in the gaming market?

 

[Varteras]

So Insomniac, by virtue of not being owned by a Publisher at the time of purchase, making games exclusive to Playstation immediately after producing a game for Xbox, is a-okay, but a hypothetical Infinity Ward new IP being non-exclusive (PC baby) to Xbox is somehow not?

I'm sorry I'm just not buying what you're selling.

Don't try to "SonyToo" me, son. We're talking about what happens when a platform holder buys a third-party. One way or the other, you made sure they either never release games anywhere else, or only if you agree to let them. You don't have to buy anything. It's true regardless of your feelings.

I'm sorry, does Nintendo and Sony have the exact same business model and ambitions Microsoft has in the gaming market?

I'm sorry, did their strategy work and not need a huge franchise like Call of Duty to try and change stagnating subscriptions for a service that has been around since 2017 and hasn't shifted the marketshare? You need big impactful games if your competitors are dropping big impactful games. There is no way around that.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Microsoft is playing the long game.

Almost like they're in a unique position to spend... on a thought experiment™

 

[Ar¢tos]

Don't try to "SonyToo" me, son. We're talking about what happens when a platform holder buys a third-party. One way or the other, you made sure they either never release games anywhere else, or only if you agree to let them. You don't have to buy anything. It's true regardless of your feelings.



I'm sorry, did their strategy work and not need a huge franchise like Call of Duty to try and change stagnating subscriptions for a service that has been around since 2017 and hasn't shifted the marketshare? You need big impactful games if your competitors are dropping big impactful games. There is no way around that.

Interesting thought. If Halo Infinite has not been a delayed turd and Hellblade and Fable weren't in development hell and had already released with good reviews, would they be trying to buy Activision right now?

 

[drganon]

Once again I said PEAK OF THEIR POWERS. It is going to take time and if they acquire more publishers and studios in the next several years; it is going to take more time to see them at the PEAK OF THEIR POWERS.

However, that does not mean you will not see a gradual shift in the diversity, quantity, and quality of games during this time.

" Just wait till the next decade and a few more publishers, then we can finally compete! "

 

[Drell]

So Insomniac, by virtue of not being owned by a Publisher at the time of purchase, making games exclusive to Playstation immediately after producing a game for Xbox, is a-okay, but a hypothetical Infinity Ward new IP being non-exclusive (PC baby) to Xbox is somehow not?

I'm sorry I'm just not buying what you're selling.

Yeah Windows is a free OS not owned by anyone... That and your whataboutism is not an argument.

 

[Banjo64]

It does not work? It's established strategy when acquiring a business. To suggest that MS is going to make no effort to retain Activisions top talent just seems silly.

Have Microsoft ever displayed an ability to identify or retain talent

Look up all the studios that were acquired and when. Then look up what video games that were currently under contract for multiplatform and DLC or timed PS5 exclusive they had to fulfill before finally moving onto new game projects that were exclusive to Xbox/PC.

Then look at how long video game production cycles have increased during that time.

Here's some help:



It's almost as if you're being disingenuous with this argument

What people fear, in particular Sony. is when all these studios are fully assimilated and synergized with Microsoft, focused on quality Xbox/PC exclusives, and operating on all cylinders at peak efficiency.

This won't happen overnight.

However, let's see where Xbox is in 2033.

I think that should be the fear for Xbox fans to be honest.

 

[Three]

I'm pretty sure Microsoft is unsurprised by modern production cycles. If their only goal was to win the console wars you may have a point, insofar as their recent acquisitions haven't paid off much for the Xbox Series consoles, but they pivoted years ago to include PC as a first-party platform, and PC doesn't have "generations" that you need to "win" to appease console warriors.

We're not talking about MS' strategy for gaming revenue or how much xbox contributes to it.

RedC's point was xbox "at the peak of power" in 2033 and he's suggesting people are somehow justifying these acquisitions because this was the quickest route for content since people were ridiculing xbox and the "wait till next year". I suggested that this was contradictory because he is both saying wait until 2033 and that acquisitions are quick for content. Even though a bunch of MS acquisitions happened in 2018 and we've been waiting, he's still saying wait until you see xbox in 2033.

I said the quickest would have been to fund some first party or third party games before hand and this would have been quicker than justifying acquisitions and saying wait until 2033. You jumped in saying they do that too, which is true to some extent, but if they were getting satisfactory content why would they be getting ridiculed, why would people need to wait or need this "quick" content fix of acquired games that were coming to xbox anyway?

Point being nobody is justifying acquisitions by saying xbox has done a poor job of getting content for xbox right now. Xbox could have got content earlier without any of this.

 

[graywolf323]

Yeah, you are right. A few arguing in bad faith shouldn't shut down the conversation.

I mean I get where you were coming from, I've said it before but it's exhausting dealing with these disingenuous tools constantly having to correct falsehoods that keep getting spread in here, even when one alt gets banned it seems like another 3 take their place and start spouting the same crap

 

[Ar¢tos]

We're not talking about MS' strategy for gaming revenue or how much xbox contributes to it.

RedC's point was xbox winning in 2033 and he's suggesting people are somehow justifying these acquisitions because this was the quickest route for content since people were ridiculing xbox and the "wait till next year". I suggested that this was contradictory because he is both saying wait until 2033 and that acquisitions are quick for content. Even though a bunch of MS acquisitions happened in 2018 and we've been waiting, he's still saying wait until you see xbox in 2033.

I said the quickest would have been to fund some first party or third party games before hand and this would have been quicker than justifying acquisitions and saying wait until 2033. You jumped in saying they do that too, which is true to some extent, but if they were getting satisfactory content why would they be getting ridiculed, why would people need to wait or need this "quick" content fix of acquired games that were coming to xbox anyway?

Point being nobody is justifying acquisitions by saying xbox has done a poor job of getting content for xbox right now. Xbox could have got content earlier without any of this.

Sumo Digital are available to be hired by anyone to make games, and they make them relatively quick with decent quality. If Sony can afford them, so can MS. If MS was so desperate for quick content they could have hired them for 2 or 3 games, since they are a massive studio.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Sumo Digital are available to be hired by anyone to make games, and they make them relatively quick with decent quality. If Sony can afford them, so can MS. If MS was so desperate for quick content they could have hired them for 2 or 3 games, since they are a massive studio.

Instead, they made them suffer with Crackdown 3 because MS backed themselves into a tech demo wall of Power of the Cloud™ bullshit that the game ended being nothing like originally shown physics or graphics wise. "Quick, we need Terry Crews to promote this turd, everyone loved those Old Spice commercials, and gamers stink."

 

[FoxMcChief]

 

[The Last One]

However, let's see where Xbox is in 2033.

Releasing games on PlayStation.

 

[DeepEnigma]

You have pineapple and anchovies on those pizzas, don't you?

 

[Varteras]

GET NAKED! We need the token nude guy!

Spoiler: Be the hero!

 

[drganon]

Instead, they made them suffer with Crackdown 3 because MS backed themselves into a tech demo wall of Power of the Cloud™ bullshit that the game ended being nothing like originally shown physics or graphics wise. "Quick, we need Terry Crews to promote this turd, everyone loved those Old Spice commercials, and gamers stink."

 

[tryDEATH]

Let me show you much critical reception matters to how impactful a game was.

Ya kinda need your games to land with a lot of people. Especially those beyond your current userbase. You don't move the needle otherwise. You also need that more than every few years when your competitors seem to always deliver a big game or two every year.

You don't need a hypocritical argument at all to show why Hi-Fi Rush or Pentiment don't matter when the topic is Xbox changing the situation.

So I can assume you will be praising Xbox and MS for stepping up and making Starfield what it is when is launches based on what you said. Can't wait for it.

 

[Punished Miku]

Sumo Digital are available to be hired by anyone to make games, and they make them relatively quick with decent quality. If Sony can afford them, so can MS. If MS was so desperate for quick content they could have hired them for 2 or 3 games, since they are a massive studio.

Tencent purchased Sumo a while ago.

 

[Varteras]

So I can assume you will be praising Xbox and MS for stepping up and making Starfield what it is when is launches based on what you said. Can't wait for it.

I'll praise the game if I like it. Not because of some console warrior nonsense.

 

[GHG]

Starting to feel that way myself seeing all the mental gymnastics going on.

Nah, it should 100% be left open.

With the way things are going at the moment some people are just slow roasting themselves and will no longer be around when the CMA make decisions.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Tencent purchased Sumo a while ago.

They're still third party.