Oh I know. I'm just saying, putting that gif up in the OP and changing the thread title is something I expected from one of the mods or something.
Kotaku Rumor: Microsoft 6 months behind in game production for X720 [Pastebin = Ban]
- Thread starter shinobi602
- Start date
Oh I know. I'm just saying, putting that gif up in the OP and changing the thread title is something I expected from one of the mods or something.
This thread is based on an article that is speaking of multiple sources.
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
Is this true? I thought MS always just had a timed exclusive deal with Bioware.
Golden State series has been great. Love me that Curry.
Six months behind sounds bad on the face of it, but in reality, it's probably a nice thing, as long as it means MS gives the studios the six months, and doesn't just ship a bunch of unfinished crap, which I doubt they would.
Launch is expensive, how many people are buying a new system with more than a couple of games? I've never understood the people who're critical of only having a few strong titles at launch, that's all I'd want personally. Drip everything else out over the year. Knack is the kind of thing I would never buy at launch, but in a barren summer release? Far more tempting.
Launch is expensive, how many people are buying a new system with more than a couple of games? I've never understood the people who're critical of only having a few strong titles at launch, that's all I'd want personally. Drip everything else out over the year. Knack is the kind of thing I would never buy at launch, but in a barren summer release? Far more tempting.
Giant Panda
Member
Just because Pachter dismisses it doesn't mean GAF should.
The first ~10 pages of this thread contain corroborating statements by multiple GAF insiders - it's not just the author of the article that's claiming MS to be behind schedule.
Pachter neither read the Kotaku article nor did he have any actual insight: He made a generalized statement based on a headline. The fact that we have multiple insiders confirming delays means adding an universal Pachter statement would be contrary to the threads information.
Baconsammy
Banned
We also had multiple sources confirming that you couldn't play a next Xbox game if you had no internet connection.
I should say "we have multiple sources" since it's not been confirmed or officially denied yet.
What does this have to do with anything?
We don't actually know whether that rumour (always online) is true or not, and it may actually be a part of Microsoft's development kit or console specifications or it could have been part of their plans some time ago and discarded in the meantime. Even if the next Xbox doesn't contain always online DRM, the rumour may still have been true.
This is much more straightforward, and much less fraught with the potential for false understanding to form through passing the rumour from ear to ear (and it doesn't really matter all that much for the end product, but it's still interesting).
Probably because the thread devolved into list wars.
Do you actually have any rational reason for now disbelieving, or is it just that you don't want to believe in what you don't like to hear?
The fact that Microsoft may now be behind schedule (who knows if it is true or even still relevant) doesn't mean the end product will be bad - it's just of interest for the moment. There's still plenty of time.
Aquamarine
Member
Except the problem here is that you can look at the game credits and infer generalities about Microsoft's contracts with Epic.
Take a random example of Microsoft's involvement in Gears of War 2.
Microsoft Game Studios Staff, Gears of War 2:
----Executive Producer
----Producer
----Development Manager
----Software Development Managers
----Art Director
----Media Production Director
----Filter Artist
----Lead Design Director
----Design Directors
----Audio Director
----Audio Production Director
----Sr. Sound Designer
----Sound Designer
----Story Writer
----Story Editors
----User Research
----Print/Web Design Lead
----Print/Web Print Production
----Web Design Production
----Test Managers
----Project Test Lead
----Single Player Test Lead
----Multiplayer Test Lead
----Software Development Engineer Lead
----Software Test Engineers
----Software Development Engineers
----Reserves Team Leads
----Reserves Testers
----Business Managers
----Finance Manager
----Global Group Product Manager
----Global Product Manager
----Global Public Relations Manager
----Legal and Corporate Affairs
----International Program Manager
----Website Manager
----Website Lead Developer
----Website Developers
----Website Writer / Video Producers
----Website Community Content Manager
----XNA Live Server Management
1. Microsoft Game Studios contributed that development staff to Gears of War 2's production. AND, it is explicitly stated in the credits that Microsoft "managed the finances" for Gears of War 2's production.
2. An exclusivity contract is widely known that keeps the existing Gears games (Gears 1, Gears 2, Gears 3, Gears Judgment) exclusive to Microsoft's ecosystem
3. Joint Microsoft / Epic copyrights show up here and there, indicating co-dependence within existing titles
Therefore, we can infer that Microsoft at least partially funded the development of the game and has a say when it comes to EXISTING assets from the Gears franchise.
Stop implying that I "know nothing" about exclusivity contracts.
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
Even if the development issues are true I don't think it will be a big deal whatsoever in the grand scheme of things. Plus all those rumors stem from February.
Psycho_Mantis
Banned
People only believe in the ones that have been verified by mods to have insiders access.
R3TRO
Member
Oh no, I just prefer to use facts not rumors;Just my preference, but since we don't have any facts I understand.
Well, firstly, I would be very surprised if MS didn't fund Mass Effect 1, secondly, I didn't say they weren't exclusive, I said you don't know, and you don't. If you'd have speculated, that would have been one thing, but you just stated your guess as if being fact, and it's not.1. Microsoft Game Studios contributed that development staff to Gears of War 2's production. AND, it is explicitly stated in the credits that Microsoft "managed the finances" for Gears of War 2's production.
2. An exclusivity contract is widely known that keeps the existing Gears games (Gears 1, Gears 2, Gears 3, Gears Judgment) exclusive to Microsoft's ecosystem
3. Joint Microsoft / Epic copyrights show up here and there, indicating co-dependence within existing titles
Therefore, we can infer that Microsoft at least partially funded the development of the game and has a say when it comes to EXISTING assets from the Gears franchise.
Stop implying that I "know nothing" about exclusivity contracts.
I think the more interesting question is what will happen with Gears if the rumours of Epic focusing on engine development and exiting games development turn out true: That would allow Microsoft to buy up the franchise and develop it as a "real" first party title.
I wouldn't expect Gears to go multi-platform (aside of PC) any time soon.
Aquamarine
Member
The issue was around Gears of War being called a "1st-party IP." I think I've sufficiently proved that it's not simply an IP that Epic can just port to other consoles willy-nilly.
Current Gears of War games are dominant on Xbox and fundamentally intertwined with Microsoft. Epic may hold the rights to develop future titles independently of Microsoft, but the relationship for existing titles is more complicated than saying "it's a third-party IP."
But regardless, I'll accept what you say as no, I do not have access to confidential Microsoft contract agreements.
It's interesting to think that Microsoft definitely has some leverage when it comes to negotiations. Can you imagine a future Gears title doing well NOT on Xbox?
dragonbane
Member
If Epic really owns the IP they can make future Gears games without Microsoft easily. They won't do that however, because the audience for Gears is on the Xbox and Microsoft funded the development. There is really no incentive to go to another publisher. Microsoft knows that, so they can let Epic keep the IP and feel happy, while knowing they will probably get all the exclusive Gears games they want. There could be other deals in place, but I doubt MS needs it.The issue was around Gears of War being called a "1st-party IP." I think I've sufficiently proved that it's not simply an IP that Epic can just port to other consoles willy-nilly.
Current Gears of War games are dominant on Xbox and fundamentally intertwined with Microsoft. Epic may hold the rights to develop future titles independently of Microsoft, but the relationship for existing titles is more complicated than saying "it's a third-party IP."
But regardless, I'll accept what you say as no, I do not have access to confidential Microsoft contract agreements.
It's interesting to think that Microsoft definitely has some leverage when it comes to negotiations. Can you imagine a future Gears title doing well NOT on Xbox?
So looking at it realistically Gears is pretty much a 1st party IP at this point. However, going by the actual definition, Gears is definitely not a 1st party IP.
Brad Grenz
Member
MS has first refusal rights on future Gears games. Basically, if Epic wants to make another game in the franchise they can't publish it anywhere else unless MS passes first.
I think MS must f helped fund the first game but BioWare retained the rights to the IP (and possibly other things like the code).
They may have had an agreement in the past but I think Mass Effect 3 was released on Xbox 360, PS3 and PC at the same time.
AranhaHunter
Banned
MS has no ownership, there's no joint copyright for Gears:
http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pw...Z8WdBQIj_fpy4H9PUt8e&SEQ=20130514124328&SID=1
Epic also owns the trademark for the Gears of War series
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfiel...h&a_search=Submit+Query&a_search=Submit+Query
You got a source? Mark Rein said, 'Epic owns Gears IP, can do what we want with it'
Furthermore, Epic would love to have Gears on PS3 and everywhere, but MS has given them really good, compelling reasons not to do so.
That's not to say Gears will release on PS3 or PS4, but Epic can do whatever they want with it, including current games.
specialguy
Banned
That's really doubtful. MS likely paid to contractually lock those games up as exclusives. The only thing in question would be future games hypothetically (hell for all we know MS has signed up the next 3 already, i doubt it, but you get the point)
The series seems on the downslope anyway, although I'd LOVE to see it reinvigorated with a graphically spectacular next gen version.
Melchiah
Member
If the rumor is true, the development is six months behind, but the launch time appears to stay the same, which isn't a good thing for the 1st party launch games. There isn't six months extra, there's six months less to polish the games.
A variety of different games for launch ensures there's something for everyone's taste. After all, those two games you'd buy might not interest everyone else.
hey dudeNope. I'm standing by the GDDR5 claim. Guess you'll find out, in a couple weeks
la flama blanca
Banned
I think this whole event confirms to me how behind MS is and how Sony caught them by surprise. The PS4 is slated for a November release while MS is "later this year" along with the lack of games shown in this initial reveal(maybe saving what they can salvage for E3) just shows how poised Sony is in this generation.
Also,
Lolz.
Also,
Nope. I'm standing by the GDDR5 claim. Guess you'll find out, in a couple weeks
Lolz.
It was a bad conference but you're really reaching dude.
You're being ridiculous (what's new).
The games MS showed make perfect sense, this was the event that would be in the mainstream media and they showed the franchises that have the biggest userbases. The fact they have 15+ exclusives for the first year suggests no they're not behind schedule at all.
fastford58
Member
No way it is gddr5. After the hullabaloo about the ps4 ram, there is no way MS would not have made a point of matching that talking point during the reveal.
RustyNails
Member
It's really interesting because I believe this is kind of the similar situation Sony was in with regards to PS3 just before it's release. Xbox 360 looked more agile, friendly to work with and had a fresh quality to it, whereas PS3 was this big black behemoth of a beastly thing, and in order to work it, you better bring your fucking game.. Kinda like Muhammad Ali vs Joe Frazier. Amazing how roles have changed. Now PS4 looks like the nimble Ali and X One looks like the imposing Frazier.
I don't know why I made that boxing analogy.
la flama blanca
Banned
So where was the actual gameplay? They had the time and money to +1 Sony and didn't. That's not indicative of anything to you? And lol at you taking their PR BS and throwing it back at me.
How is saying they have 15+ exclusives BS PR? 0_O they either do or they're lying.
No I don't think it matters when E3 is 3 weeks away and will be focused on games and gameplay.
SOE is the biggest waste ever. Do they even make money for Sony? Almost 700 people (linkedin says 680) are you shitting me? No one buys their games. Whats the point?
Better to have 3 teams over at SSM and ND then to waste resources on SOE. imo
EDIT:Sorry for bumbing this thread. I don't know how I ended in here. Someone quoted in different thread I thing, then when I hit on original quote it probably led me here. I was in awe about how many ppl SOE had, wasn't paying attention.
They make free to play games that are very popular and actually do make money. MMO investment is extremely expensive and if SOE didn't make money, they would have shut down long ago. They are currently in the process of creating the next everquest which, in the MMO community, is very highly anticipated. The reveal is set for August 2nd.
Please tell me this is a troll post.
SOE doesn't suck anymore. Keep up with the times. Planetside 2 has been a hit and is being ported to the PS4. Everquest Next looks like it's shaping up to be a wonderful sandbox MMO from the little that we've heard so far. Those two games are using their proprietary Forgelight engine. DCUO has been a success ever since it went F2P and is now being ported to the PS4.
Interfectum
Member
what a waste of a bump
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
It may cost these consoles an inital bump but the games for both systems will benefit from being delayed. Really they only need a handful of titles stretched across the main genres to launch.
As a gamer who owns a launch system though, this will suck. i don't want to fall into the trap of buying shitty games just to pass the time until the actual good stuff comes out. On a side note, I would have thought we would have seen more news about quick and dirty ports to PSN and XBLA by now. The opportunity is ripe for devs to make a quick cash in by filling a void near launch.
As a gamer who owns a launch system though, this will suck. i don't want to fall into the trap of buying shitty games just to pass the time until the actual good stuff comes out. On a side note, I would have thought we would have seen more news about quick and dirty ports to PSN and XBLA by now. The opportunity is ripe for devs to make a quick cash in by filling a void near launch.
SeventhSon
Member
Would it be reasonable to take this rumor as adding weight to today's XBL rumor? http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=705280
Sinthor
Gold Member
Heh, I must be one of the only people out there to think that Lair wasn't as bad as the wrap it gets. It wasn't perfect, but I didn't have any control problems and actually enjoyed it. Then again, anything with dragons like that had a leg up in my mind.
Oh well.