Support NeoGAF

[aliadiere25]

First-party?

 

[boomcrab]

Psychonauts 2 + Grounded + Pentiment have more gameplay in their little finger than the cINEmatIC eXpeRIencE this forum seems to deem as success (which I'll never understand).

God I hope they don't chase that boring market for peoples that want white/yellow paintings to tell them where to jump/grab. Or nonstop talking to explain puzzles

It's funny how these types of claims are always being made here on this forum and others. Just because a game has cinematic sequences to it doesn't mean the whole game is one giant 'simulator'. GOW Ragnarok is very cinematic, yes, but there is so much gameplay beyond what the trailers show, what the youtuber streams, etc. The same could be said of other big PS exclusives as well. I find it humorous that you think pentiment and psychonauts has more gameplay than some of those games.
Tell me you've never taken the time to play an actual ps game without telling me you've taken the actual time to play a ps game.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Oh yeah, a medieval storybook with good writing is the same as nonstop talking protagonist that explain to you brainlets what to do next. It's the same.

Oh yeah, a pure walking simulator with no gameplay mechanics whatsoever and where you are talking to people constantly is the same as a game that actually has action based and RPG mechanics to it. But oh no, the latter game has a protagonist at your side that's always yapping so therefore it's a non-game. Big brain post right here.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Oh yeah, a medieval storybook with good writing is the same as nonstop talking protagonist that explain to you brainlets what to do next. It's the same.

Who ever saw Doublefine's Psychonauts as that description. The delusion is incredible.

Maybe you should try playing Psychonauts 2, oh my god basic gameplay with good art design and humor (and if you don't think the game is cinematic… maybe you dont know what cinematic means). Pentiment is a storybook with good writing how incredible, such dense gameplay.

Fuck outta here, if MS hadn't purchased them you wouldn't be trying to make them into what they aren't. Go play Baldurs Gate 3.

 

[Torrent of Pork]

The way I see it is that Sony are the undisputed masters of what they do, which is great if you like 3rd person cinematic action adventure games.

MS has invested in a wide net of generas with RPGs, survival, multiplayer GaaS, first person shooters, third person shooters, RTS, turn based strategy, MMORPG, immersive sims, family friendly games, indie darlings, dungeon crawlers, etc.

This is not a criticism of Sony, as they've obviously found great success in their formula, but their very pretty games have bored the absolute shit out of me for years.

 

[johnjohn]

Maybe you should try playing Psychonauts 2, oh my god basic gameplay with good art design and humor. Pentiment is a storybook with good writing how incredible, such dense gameplay.

Fuck outta here, if MS hadn't purchased them you wouldn't be trying to make them into what they aren't. Go play Baldurs Gate 3.

Salt salt salt cope cope cope

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Maybe you should try playing Psychonauts 2, oh my god basic gameplay with good art design and humor. Pentiment is a storybook with good writing how incredible, such dense gameplay.

Fuck outta here, if MS hadn't purchased them you wouldn't be trying to make them into what they aren't. Go play Baldurs Gate 3.

Thing is, there's nothing wrong with those MS games. They're perfectly fine for what they are. Just like HFR, they are smaller scale titles. Sony has them via exclusives or partnerships/funding too with things like Kena, Stray, and SiFu.

But they are nowhere near what people expect to be the crowning achievements that are the bread and butter of the platform that keep people wanting to stay engaged with their ecosystem. The more the Xbox fanbase tries to deflect against games like GOW or TLOU for being "walking simulators" (or whatever such nonsense), the more they are going to be left behind. Just because these games have phenomenal presentation doesn't mean they are bereft of gameplay.

It's a weak talking point to deflect the cold, hard truth and sad reality that Microsoft Games studios is FAR behind on aspects of production that make games universally and broadly appealing. Starfield is literally generations behind in comparison and it really shows. Hell, in starfield literally all you do is walk from one empty soulless location and loading screen to the next, trying to fetch some stupid quest item while interacting with some boring ass cornball NPC and MAYBE you get into some janky combat on the way. It is comically bad. But some people think this is actual gameplay/charm? Okay. Whatever floats your boat. Starfield is a far bigger offender of the "walking simulator" than any game I've played on Sony's side, including a literal walking simulator with Death Stranding that has far more meaningful depth in the mechanics it offers that have an influence on the world they created.

 

[Ozriel]

It's funny that people are expecting a new Crash or Spyro.......they bough Rare 20 years ago and still no new Conker or Banjo games. So.....no....it aint happening, other than some remasters

What's the link between Rare's choice not to revisit their old IP and what Beenox and Toys For Bob would like to do?

You and others have gone full "look at the sales, it means this is what people want, it means it's quality" real hard all of a sudden. Wonder if you have the same perspective when it comes to other games and how do the goal posts move when it comes to hardware?

I don't recall claiming sales were a good analogue for quality. Saying Call of Duty games sell well despite mixed reviews doesn't translate to "sales means quality".

I'll leave the warring over hardware sales to you. I've never participated in that mess

 

[Ozriel]

Thing is, there's nothing wrong with those MS games. They're perfectly fine for what they are. Just like HFR, they are smaller scale titles. Sony has them via exclusives or partnerships/funding too with things like Kena, Stray, and SiFu.

But they are nowhere near what people expect to be the crowning achievements that are the bread and butter of the platform that keep people wanting to stay engaged with their ecosystem. The more the Xbox fanbase tries to deflect against games like GOW or TLOU for being "walking simulators" (or whatever such nonsense), the more they are going to be left behind. Just because these games have phenomenal presentation doesn't mean they are bereft of gameplay.

It's a weak talking point to deflect the cold, hard truth and sad reality that Microsoft Games studios is FAR behind on aspects of production that make games universally and broadly appealing. Starfield is literally generations behind in comparison and it really shows. Hell, in starfield literally all you do is walk from one empty soulless location and loading screen to the next, trying to fetch some stupid quest item while interacting with some boring ass cornball NPC and MAYBE you get into some janky combat on the way. It is comically bad. But some people think this is actual gameplay/charm? Okay. Whatever floats your boat. Starfield is a far bigger offender of the "walking simulator" than any game I've played on Sony's side, including a literal walking simulator with Death Stranding that has far more meaningful depth in the mechanics it offers that have an influence on the world they created.

Thank you for detailing precisely why Microsoft has chosen to build out and flesh out their first party studios. AAA tentpole games, right?

Looking forward to more games from studios that are yet to drop their output post acquisition.

 

[Gavon West]

People have been pretending Microsoft are new to the games industry as a reason to justify the ABK acquisition, and we all know that isn't true. If you include PC gaming, MS have been in the industry since the early '80s.



Who gives a crap about most of the Microsoft games when it comes to cultural mindshare? Very few people are big upping games like Flight Sim, Gears Tactics, As Dusk Falls (lol), RedFall (LOL), Age of Empires. Forza just launched and peak CCU on Steam was something like 3.5K, doesn't seem like a lot of people care about the game.

Microsoft's problem is, and has been for a long time, that very little of their games have big cultural mindshare and what few do, aren't even associated with them by the masses. Minecraft is big, but no one thinks of Microsoft when they talk about or play Minecraft. Microsoft's own brand image in entertainment is not a great one, they aren't seen as "cool" or "fun" the way Sony and Nintendo are.

They may have just bought COD but it'll be many years before the IP is strongly associated with MS, if ever. Same with games like Diablo 4 (which is effectively dead in its own right), Overwatch (same), Tony Hawk, even Crash Bandicoot and Spyro. Yes the Xbox sycophants will hype and cheer Phil Spencer's name (now) with those games and so will the AI bots that get made for astroturfing, but the vast majority of real people won't.



COD is creatively dying. It also won't have the selling power it did anymore once Sony withdraws marketing support. Candy Crush has seen declining revenue, and is also arguably creatively stagnant. Not that mobile games need to do much creatively to earn lots of money.

You're spouting off a bunch of hypotheticals and "whatif's" my guy. You may not think box games have had any significant cultural mindshare but that doesn't account as fact. It counts as your opinion. You state CoD is creatively dead. That doesnt equate to the numbers we see in sales every year. Its still the top selling IP EVERY. SINGLE,. YEAR.

Candy Crush is still raking in hundreds of million to billions every year and is the 3rd biggest mobile IP on the planet. Again, you come off like what you're stating is fact when it reality its just your opinion. That only stretches about as far as your car lot -- maybe?

Its hilarious how when any publisher gets bought, suddenly they've been on the decline and their IP power is dwindling into an abyss with gamers. Kind of convenient, no?

 

[FoxMcChief]

Who's this nerd? Doesn't look like the kind of bro that would miss real man games like Call of Duty or Crash Bandicoot.

 

[Evil Calvin]

What's the link between Rare's choice not to revisit their old IP and what Beenox and Toys For Bob would like to do?



I don't recall claiming sales were a good analogue for quality. Saying Call of Duty games sell well despite mixed reviews doesn't translate to "sales means quality".

I'll leave the warring over hardware sales to you. I've never participated in that mess

Toys for Bob is no more. They are a COD support studio. And MS dictates what games get worked on. Rare of 2001 is not Rare of 2023. Even if the studio wanted to make a new Conker game it would be up to MS not Rare.

 

[FoxMcChief]

Imagine going back in time few years and posting on NeoGAF that one day Fallout, Doom, Elder Scrolls, Diablo, Call of Duty etc. will be Microsoft's first party franchises. Nobody would believe you.

I would. When I go to Vegas, I bet it always on green.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

It's funny how these types of claims are always being made here on this forum and others. Just because a game has cinematic sequences to it doesn't mean the whole game is one giant 'simulator'. GOW Ragnarok is very cinematic, yes, but there is so much gameplay beyond what the trailers show, what the youtuber streams, etc. The same could be said of other big PS exclusives as well. I find it humorous that you think pentiment and psychonauts has more gameplay than some of those games.
Tell me you've never taken the time to play an actual ps game without telling me you've taken the actual time to play a ps game.

I bet you they're the same type who hyped up As Dusk Falls & Plague Tale: Requiem, and are big-upping Hellblade 2.

The latter of which has outright shown NOTHING but walking and scripted spear-chucking you've seen in a million games already. It's an actual definition of a walking simulator but I've seen plenty who otherwise try crapping on Sony's games as walking sim, hyping Hellblade 2 as the second coming of Christ.

Thing is, there's nothing wrong with those MS games. They're perfectly fine for what they are. Just like HFR, they are smaller scale titles. Sony has them via exclusives or partnerships/funding too with things like Kena, Stray, and SiFu.

But they are nowhere near what people expect to be the crowning achievements that are the bread and butter of the platform that keep people wanting to stay engaged with their ecosystem. The more the Xbox fanbase tries to deflect against games like GOW or TLOU for being "walking simulators" (or whatever such nonsense), the more they are going to be left behind. Just because these games have phenomenal presentation doesn't mean they are bereft of gameplay.

It's a weak talking point to deflect the cold, hard truth and sad reality that Microsoft Games studios is FAR behind on aspects of production that make games universally and broadly appealing. Starfield is literally generations behind in comparison and it really shows. Hell, in starfield literally all you do is walk from one empty soulless location and loading screen to the next, trying to fetch some stupid quest item while interacting with some boring ass cornball NPC and MAYBE you get into some janky combat on the way. It is comically bad. But some people think this is actual gameplay/charm? Okay. Whatever floats your boat. Starfield is a far bigger offender of the "walking simulator" than any game I've played on Sony's side, including a literal walking simulator with Death Stranding that has far more meaningful depth in the mechanics it offers that have an influence on the world they created.

One of the few things I can give MS credit for is that they do have a number of AA games being worked on in-house that seem like traditional games. It's something I feel Sony really need to bring back, especially if they are trying to be less reliant on 3P and need content to fill out their release schedule. Sony arguably had the best roster of AA-type games of any platform holder ever during the PS3 generation, but they started slowly scaling back. And now, the majority of that from them when it comes to console exclusives, is through 3P partnerships.

However, Microsoft's biggest problem, more evident than ever, is quality control and delivering a product that actually lives up to expectations. They simply can't do it. And because they can't do it, they fall behind in cultural mindshare.

Thank you for detailing precisely why Microsoft has chosen to build out and flesh out their first party studios. AAA tentpole games, right?

Looking forward to more games from studios that are yet to drop their output post acquisition.

"Build out" no cut the cap. They didn't build any of this. They purchased Ninja Theory, Double Fine, Obsidia, inXile, Bethesda, iD, Tango Gameworks, Playground, Blizzard, Toys for Bob, King and countless others.

You want to see the extent of what studio culture Microsoft can build in-house? Look at Turn 10, with a racing game that despite coming a full year after GT7 looks worst in several areas and has gimped its own gameplay loop for GaaS monetization and heavy grinding. Look at 343i, who are a laughing stock alongside Halo and have killed that IP more than any competitors ever could. Look at the studio they made to do Perfect Dark reboot, a studio so terribly managed I already forgot their name and like 70% of the people jettisoned out ASAP.

That's what happens when Xbox, under current leadership, try building something out from within. And if you can't build right, you can't manage right. So them ousting Kotick is ironically one of the worst moves for ABK because there isn't anyone currently at Microsoft Gaming who can manage that load nearly as successfully.

You're spouting off a bunch of hypotheticals and "whatif's" my guy. You may not think box games have had any significant cultural mindshare but that doesn't account as fact. It counts as your opinion. You state CoD is creatively dead. That doesnt equate to the numbers we see in sales every year. Its still the top selling IP EVERY. SINGLE,. YEAR.

...who cares? I'm a hobbyist of the industry, friend. Sales numbers only mean so much. I wouldn't be playing games if they didn't creatively stimulate me. So I'm not gonna be a bean-counting cheerleader for these companies pretending them buying stuff somehow makes me richer, when it doesn't.

When it comes to games which push the industry forward one way or another creatively, modern-day Microsoft are at the bottom of the pail, and that is an actual fact. Games like Halo used to lead the FPS genre, now they're also-rans. COD might still be the top-selling FPS game on the market but it's resorted to remaking older games to do so because the team's ran out of new ideas.

Candy Crush is still raking in hundreds of million to billions every year and is the 3rd biggest mobile IP on the planet. Again, you come off like what you're stating is fact when it reality its just your opinion. That only stretches about as far as your car lot -- maybe?

Like I said, I'm not a bean-counting cheerleader, so how much money Candy Crush brings in doesn't suddenly make it a quality gaming experience or a cornerstone of the industry creatively. Otherwise any number of casino games could be in this same conversation.

The only thing stuff like CC highlights is the danger in a mega-conglomerate like Microsoft having ownership over that type of IP and chunk of gaming market revenue. Because if (or better to say, when) Microsoft screws everything up, those games can see massive drops in revenue and that will negatively impact the financial growth and stability of the entire industry.

Its hilarious how when any publisher gets published, suddenly they've been on the decline and their IP power is dwindling into an abyss with gamers. Kind of convenient, no?

Zenimax were struggling both financially and in critical market successes when Microsoft bought them. ABK were hit with damning scandals and stagnation in some of their games with Microsoft bought them.

Hate to break it to you, but Microsoft's MO has been to buy publishers when they're on the decline and struggling. That's how they do things. Whether that decline is long-term or just a temporary issue, it doesn't matter. Microsoft wait to pounce when their prey is weak, and sweep in.

If Sony had the same M.O I'd be saying similar, but they don't. They bought Bungie as they were revitalized and doing well with Destiny 2. They bought Psygnosis when they were still growing into a powerhouse. Sony aren't predatory with buying 3P game publishers the way Microsoft has exhibited.

 

[SteelCurtain 59]

Who gives a crap about most of the Microsoft games when it comes to cultural mindshare? Very few people are big upping games like Flight Sim, Gears Tactics, As Dusk Falls (lol), RedFall (LOL), Age of Empires. Forza just launched and peak CCU on Steam was something like 3.5K, doesn't seem like a lot of people care about the game.

Microsoft's problem is, and has been for a long time, that very little of their games have big cultural mindshare and what few do, aren't even associated with them by the masses. Minecraft is big, but no one thinks of Microsoft when they talk about or play Minecraft. Microsoft's own brand image in entertainment is not a great one, they aren't seen as "cool" or "fun" the way Sony and Nintendo are.

They may have just bought COD but it'll be many years before the IP is strongly associated with MS, if ever. Same with games like Diablo 4 (which is effectively dead in its own right), Overwatch (same), Tony Hawk, even Crash Bandicoot and Spyro. Yes the Xbox sycophants will hype and cheer Phil Spencer's name (now) with those games and so will the AI bots that get made for astroturfing, but the vast majority of real people won't.

As a gamer, why should I care at all about "cultural mindshare"? There are games I love that very few care about (Battleblock theater, Quantum Break, Super T.I.M.E Force, etc. etc.) and games I love that tons of people love (Skyrim, GTA V, Witcher 3, etc. etc. etc.) When I'm playing a game I don't really care if it's popular or rated high on metacritic, or what anybody else thinks of the game. As long as they're not failing financially to affect the games, if they're making games that I enjoy, that's really all that matters as far as I'm concerned. I say this as somebody who owns all 3 systems (and a PC) and has multiple games I love from each console basically every gen. I won't deny that I have a preference (bias if you want to call it that) towards Xbox but I play the games I want to play and I don't think cultural mindshare should ever be a factor in determining the quality of a game

 

[Ozriel]

"Build out" no cut the cap. They didn't build any of this. They purchased Ninja Theory, Double Fine, Obsidia, inXile, Bethesda, iD, Tango Gameworks, Playground, Blizzard, Toys for Bob, King and countless others.

'build out' in this case clearly refers to increasing their first party count.
Whether it's Setting up from scratch or purchasing already acquired studios, it all ends up in the same thing. They had a handful of studios before, now they have a lot more.

You want to see the extent of what studio culture Microsoft can build in-house? Look at Turn 10, with a racing game that despite coming a full year after GT7 looks worst in several areas and has gimped its own gameplay loop for GaaS monetization and heavy grinding. Look at 343i, who are a laughing stock alongside Halo and have killed that IP more than any competitors ever could. Look at the studio they made to do Perfect Dark reboot, a studio so terribly managed I already forgot their name and like 70% of the people jettisoned out ASAP.

That's what happens when Xbox, under current leadership, try building something out from within. And if you can't build right, you can't manage right. So them ousting Kotick is ironically one of the worst moves for ABK because there isn't anyone currently at Microsoft Gaming who can manage that load nearly as successfully.

Turn 10 has made lots of successful racing games in the past, with top notch efficiency. They've made missteps in their newest release, but it's utterly daft to say that defines them. They've tried something new and different with the GaaS approach that hasn't clicked as well as it should have. But you're literally attacking them over an 85% MC rated game. Was it a black mark against Sony when GT Sport landed at 75% Metacritic rating?


The Initiative's teething pains even helps make the case for MS strategy of acquiring existing, well established studios.

But this is a cherry picked list, anyway. For obvious reasons you've shied away from adding Playground games to this list. New studio affiliated with MS from the start, and they're making the most popular racing games in the market. Or even Coalition who are perhaps the industry's premier UE devs.

Zenimax were struggling both financially and in critical market successes when Microsoft bought them. ABK were hit with damning scandals and stagnation in some of their games with Microsoft bought them.

Hate to break it to you, but Microsoft's MO has been to buy publishers when they're on the decline and struggling. That's how they do things. Whether that decline is long-term or just a temporary issue, it doesn't matter. Microsoft wait to pounce when their prey is weak, and sweep in.

If Sony had the same M.O I'd be saying similar, but they don't. They bought Bungie as they were revitalized and doing well with Destiny 2. They bought Psygnosis when they were still growing into a powerhouse. Sony aren't predatory with buying 3P game publishers the way Microsoft has exhibited.

I struggle to understand the point you're making. It's now a bad thing for them to buy studios when the price is most advantageous? And you say it's 'predatory'?

 

[Buggy Loop]

Maybe you should try playing Psychonauts 2

I have, and it's a wild ride with varied stories, settings and over the top creativity, time flew by. Amazing level design. Nothing quite like it out there.

oh my god basic gameplay with good art design and humor (and if you don't think the game is cinematic… maybe you dont know what cinematic means)

Basic gameplay? A platformer with good powers for puzzles. Not sure what's your platformer reference, do tell.

Pentiment is a storybook with good writing how incredible, such dense gameplay.

Fuck outta here, if MS hadn't purchased them you wouldn't be trying to make them into what they aren't.

Its a murder mystery adventure and the gameplay is tight for exactly what it is. Certainly kept me more awake than all Sony ports on PC so far.
There's more to gameplay than slapped on crafting systems with meaningless skill trees or redundant open world events.

Branching narratives IS gameplay, impacts & interactivity of your actions and decisions IS gameplay. Its not because you didn't smash buttons to get to the result that there's no thoughts in the mechanics behind the game.

Go play Baldurs Gate 3.

Sure did

And I'm also hyped for other cRPG power houses with InXile & Obsidian entertainment. I cared for them before any buyouts or shit you guys want to throw for something to stick on me. I backed these guys on kickstarter for all their games when they were in a market that didn't care for them. Larian is king right now especially with BG3, but i like pretty much all cRPGs these guys made. I haven't skipped one. Where's the support for Avowed & Clockwork revolution to stand out in cRPGs and wish them success? Oh right, this forum just shits on everything microsoft touches now.

Reminder on 1st post of thread i replied to : "Yet they have yet to release a good game in decades."
58 like, 18 fire, 14 LOL, 5 praise the sun, 3 thoughtful, nearly a 100 agreeing with that insane post. You guys are mental. This is borderline UNGA BUNGA tribal dance around microsoft at a stake. Since hanging on gaming-age since 99, i don't think i've ever seen this forum so one sided.

 

[SteelCurtain 59]

I struggle to understand the point you're making. It's now a bad thing for them to buy studios when the price is most advantageous? And you say it's 'predatory'?

The smart companies wait until the price is most expensive before buying them, obviously

 

[FoxMcChief]

Man. You guys and your walls of text. It's the fucking weekend.

 

[Ozriel]

The smart companies wait until the price is most expensive before buying them, obviously

I couldn't believe what I was reading

 

[Gavon West]

I bet you they're the same type who hyped up As Dusk Falls & Plague Tale: Requiem, and are big-upping Hellblade 2.

The latter of which has outright shown NOTHING but walking and scripted spear-chucking you've seen in a million games already. It's an actual definition of a walking simulator but I've seen plenty who otherwise try crapping on Sony's games as walking sim, hyping Hellblade 2 as the second coming of Christ.



One of the few things I can give MS credit for is that they do have a number of AA games being worked on in-house that seem like traditional games. It's something I feel Sony really need to bring back, especially if they are trying to be less reliant on 3P and need content to fill out their release schedule. Sony arguably had the best roster of AA-type games of any platform holder ever during the PS3 generation, but they started slowly scaling back. And now, the majority of that from them when it comes to console exclusives, is through 3P partnerships.

However, Microsoft's biggest problem, more evident than ever, is quality control and delivering a product that actually lives up to expectations. They simply can't do it. And because they can't do it, they fall behind in cultural mindshare.



"Build out" no cut the cap. They didn't build any of this. They purchased Ninja Theory, Double Fine, Obsidia, inXile, Bethesda, iD, Tango Gameworks, Playground, Blizzard, Toys for Bob, King and countless others.

You want to see the extent of what studio culture Microsoft can build in-house? Look at Turn 10, with a racing game that despite coming a full year after GT7 looks worst in several areas and has gimped its own gameplay loop for GaaS monetization and heavy grinding. Look at 343i, who are a laughing stock alongside Halo and have killed that IP more than any competitors ever could. Look at the studio they made to do Perfect Dark reboot, a studio so terribly managed I already forgot their name and like 70% of the people jettisoned out ASAP.

That's what happens when Xbox, under current leadership, try building something out from within. And if you can't build right, you can't manage right. So them ousting Kotick is ironically one of the worst moves for ABK because there isn't anyone currently at Microsoft Gaming who can manage that load nearly as successfully.



...who cares? I'm a hobbyist of the industry, friend. Sales numbers only mean so much. I wouldn't be playing games if they didn't creatively stimulate me. So I'm not gonna be a bean-counting cheerleader for these companies pretending them buying stuff somehow makes me richer, when it doesn't.

When it comes to games which push the industry forward one way or another creatively, modern-day Microsoft are at the bottom of the pail, and that is an actual fact. Games like Halo used to lead the FPS genre, now they're also-rans. COD might still be the top-selling FPS game on the market but it's resorted to remaking older games to do so because the team's ran out of new ideas.



Like I said, I'm not a bean-counting cheerleader, so how much money Candy Crush brings in doesn't suddenly make it a quality gaming experience or a cornerstone of the industry creatively. Otherwise any number of casino games could be in this same conversation.

The only thing stuff like CC highlights is the danger in a mega-conglomerate like Microsoft having ownership over that type of IP and chunk of gaming market revenue. Because if (or better to say, when) Microsoft screws everything up, those games can see massive drops in revenue and that will negatively impact the financial growth and stability of the entire industry.



Zenimax were struggling both financially and in critical market successes when Microsoft bought them. ABK were hit with damning scandals and stagnation in some of their games with Microsoft bought them.

Hate to break it to you, but Microsoft's MO has been to buy publishers when they're on the decline and struggling. That's how they do things. Whether that decline is long-term or just a temporary issue, it doesn't matter. Microsoft wait to pounce when their prey is weak, and sweep in.

If Sony had the same M.O I'd be saying similar, but they don't. They bought Bungie as they were revitalized and doing well with Destiny 2. They bought Psygnosis when they were still growing into a powerhouse. Sony aren't predatory with buying 3P game publishers the way Microsoft has exhibited.

The scandals are irrelevant. Gots nothing to do with the numbers....

That said, Zenimax weren't struggling to the point that they needed saving if I remember the detail correctly. Its also not the reason Microsoft bought them.

...so you're saying that the second wealthiest company in the world ONLY invested in all of these companies because they were struggling? Does that even make sense in the investment world? Where are you getting this information from bro?? Lol

And, I'm gonna be frank here: not a chance in hell would you be screaming from the rooftops about this acquisition if the shoe was on Sony's foot. You probably dont even believe you write that line of crap. At least, I hoe you dont.

At the end of the day though, all this bickering about the ABK deal is irrelevant. ABK were shopping around to be bought. The biggest interested parties were Microsoft and Facebook. This wasn't a hostile takeover - although many are treating it as if it were. This isnt a monopoly either. Microsoft is still only #3 behind Tencent and Sony.

So why is there so much discourse over the deal? I mean, I know the reason but, do you? Genuine question.

And bruh, please, if i hit you with empirical facts again, and you come at me with some "so what If I only have my personal feelings and opinions?" I seriously gonna block your ass. That was weak AF. We dont typically vibe on opinions on this forum but I think you're better than that. Don't disappoint me.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

As a gamer, why should I care at all about "cultural mindshare"?

Because games that have lots of cultural mindshare, are probably also big influences on the games you actually enjoy, if they aren't one in the same already. It also increases the chance of more of those types of games being made and release, so that you as a gaming individual, have more games to your liking.

And cultural mindshare, doesn't just mean what's popular with most people. IMO it also goes into games that have profound positive impacts on other game developers through the industry, either as a whole or in a given genre. Stuff like Mario 64 for example, has a ton of cultural mindshare both with gamers (since it's a Mario game), and developers, since it helped lay a lot of standards for 3D third-person games.

So while you may or may not personally care for Mario 64 (just hypothetically speaking), chances are it's had a big influence on games you DO care a lot about, and that's why cultural mindshare is so important.

There are games I love that very few care about (Battleblock theater, Quantum Break, Super T.I.M.E Force, etc. etc.) and games I love that tons of people love (Skyrim, GTA V, Witcher 3, etc. etc. etc.) When I'm playing a game I don't really care if it's popular or rated high on metacritic, or what anybody else thinks of the game.

But your Quantum Break, as one example, was heavily influenced by Sony's third-person action-adventure games from the PS3 era like Uncharted and TLOU, and other games like RE4, or Gears of War. Because all of those games I just mentioned had a lot of cultural mindshare, so they influenced games like Quantum Break.

As long as they're not failing financially to affect the games, if they're making games that I enjoy, that's really all that matters as far as I'm concerned.

There's two ways that could happen and I think you're looking at it from the obvious POV. But there's the less obvious POV where a game is affected by corporate politics, to where the budget and funding get scaled back, and that negatively affects the final quality.

Modern Microsoft are perfectly representative of that IMHO, looking at what's happened with RedFall and Forza (and even Starfield), in the state those games were released. Or the Xbox version of Ghostwire: Tokyo. All of those are games which seem they were affected by finances and dev time (either pure dev time or QA time) being cut heavily.

I say this as somebody who owns all 3 systems (and a PC) and has multiple games I love from each console basically every gen. I won't deny that I have a preference (bias if you want to call it that) towards Xbox but I play the games I want to play and I don't think cultural mindshare should ever be a factor in determining the quality of a game

With all due respect, I don't care if you own all three systems and PC. As you just said, you can still have a preference, you're going to naturally gravitate to one of those platforms more than the others. Having a preference or bias is no problem actually, as long as it doesn't lead to a negative bias towards things outside of your preference.

You can prefer Xbox all you want, just as long as you don't use that to hate towards PlayStation, or Nintendo, or even PC. I am not even saying Microsoft don't release any good games: they do. Flight Simulator is a good game (well, simulation). Forza Horizon 5 is a good game. Starfield is at least decent.

But let's also be real here: none of those games are going to really inspire any notable games going forward, or be part of the zeitgeist among the majority of gamers. None of them aside from Flight Simulator can easily be pointed to as being industry-leading or standard-setting in their given genre, or industry as a whole, in one metric or another. None of those games are going to make most "Top 100" lists for games of all time, or this century. Maybe a Top 100 for this decade, but we've got six more years to go.

'build out' in this case clearly refers to increasing their first party count.
Whether it's Setting up from scratch or purchasing already acquired studios, it all ends up in the same thing. They had a handful of studios before, now they have a lot more.

"Everything's relative" no it's not. There are levels to this and in Microsoft's case they've gone to the most market-disrupting method to try bulking up their 1P output. Keep in mind, they were already struggling with the teams they had pre-Zenimax.

Rather than taking care of the issue at the root and then growing from there, they've gotten the world's biggest band-aids and are trying to patch up the symptom of their problems instead of truly curing them. As long as their upper-level management in the gaming division remains as-is, the problems we saw manifest from 2015-2020 (or even earlier considering the effects of Kinect), will just re-appear down the road.

Only next time, it'll affect a hell of a lot more studios, and that's the sad part in all of this.

Turn 10 has made lots of successful racing games in the past, with top notch efficiency. They've made missteps in their newest release, but it's utterly daft to say that defines them.

Their output has been mostly stagnant in creative aspects even if they have remained relatively solid games up to tis point. It's not that the new Forza defines them, it's that the new Forza shows even they are a victim of sorts to Microsoft's shift towards service-based gaming models.

They've tried something new and different with the GaaS approach that hasn't clicked as well as it should have. But you're literally attacking them over an 85% MC rated game. Was it a black mark against Sony when GT Sport landed at 75% Metacritic rating?

I'm not attacking them at all. I'm saying the problems with the new Forza are reflective of larger-scale management and direction problems with Microsoft Gaming, and that's down to the leadership, and the vision they want to move gaming towards. By all accounts the new Forza should've lapped GT7 in the dust. In reality, at best it's keeping pace in some aspects and falling behind in quite a lot of others.

And yes, GT Sport was a black mark for Sony when it launched, that's why they spent a few seasons to improve the game. The fact it had no single-player traditional content pissed off a LOT of core GT fans back in the day, that's why GT7 was such a refreshing return to form.

The Initiative's teething pains even helps make the case for MS strategy of acquiring existing, well established studios.

They had teething pains because Microsoft doesn't know shit about creating, cultivating, nurturing and growing big studios from the ground-up. The acquisitions are the quick-fix solution, but only in theory.

Microsoft's problems with studios like The Initiative do not inherently justify buying out publishers. Yes, publishers, not studios. No one really had issue when they purchased Ninja Theory, Double Fine, Obsidian, inXile, or Compulsion. But Microsoft then realizing "hey, Matt Booty sucks ass! He can't manage these studios. So let's just buy publishers outright!" was what led to them buying publishers instead.

It's their way of running from the root of the problem, and just throwing other stuff on top of it because they have F-you money and feel they can buy their way out of their own studio management incompetence.

But this is a cherry picked list, anyway. For obvious reasons you've shied away from adding Playground games to this list. New studio affiliated with MS from the start, and they're making the most popular racing games in the market. Or even Coalition who are perhaps the industry's premier UE devs.

1: Forza Horizon is not the most popular racing game on the market. Mario Kart and GT are much more popular, and have been. So you're going to have to be more specific with that claim.

2: I didn't include Playground because they've mostly stuck to what they were good at. But now that you mention them, sure: Fable. What's going on there? Why was the footage from the Showcase just CG renders giving an impression of gameplay without there actually being any gameplay? Why have some notable writing leads departed from the project? Why does THAT game now need outside help from another 3P developer to get it across the finish line?

And WRT Coalition, their creative output has stagnated. That's why reception to Gears 5 was a big muted, and why they need a big creative shakeup. Only, we've had rumors that one of their other projects, a new IP, has been shelved. Honestly them remaking Gears 1 and 2 would be a good move in the short-mid term for that IP just to re-familiarize themselves with what made it click in the first place. Then have them work on a new IP simultaneously.

But, this is modern-day Microsoft we're talking about here. So none of that will happen.

I struggle to understand the point you're making. It's now a bad thing for them to buy studios when the price is most advantageous? And you say it's 'predatory'?

I'm saying Microsoft have a history of buying publishers (we can say studios, too, I mean they bought Double Fine when they were struggling) when they are at a low point. ABK acquisition wouldn't have happened if the scandals didn't break out. Why did those scandal suddenly hit after Mike Ybarra went over to Blizzard? The world may never know...

That's also why I feel the ABK deal in particular is predatory, because Microsoft pounced on it not only after the scandals broke, but after publicly acting like they were going to take a "firm stance" in re-evaluating their business relationship with ABK, only for that to turn out to mean they're buying them wholesale. Oh and Kotick gets out of having a case pressed against him, thanks to Microsoft. Isn't that lovely? /s

 

[kingfish]

Thank you for detailing precisely why Microsoft has chosen to build out and flesh out their first party studios acquire an obscene amount of historical IP and studios, making their ecosystem the only way to play them. AAA tentpole games, right?

Looking forward to more games from studios that are yet to drop their output post acquisition.

Fixed.

 

[DavJay]

Not if they force it on Gamepass Day 1 and eviscerate it's revenue base

Bobby himself took the stand at that FTC trial and testified that he didn't like Gamepass and it was bad for ABK properties and their revenue models

But it's not exclusive to gamepass. It's still available everywhere and will be on switch too. They'll be fine.

 

[adamsapple]

People have been pretending Microsoft are new to the games industry as a reason to justify the ABK acquisition, and we all know that isn't true. If you include PC gaming, MS have been in the industry since the early '80s.



Who gives a crap about most of the Microsoft games when it comes to cultural mindshare? Very few people are big upping games like Flight Sim, Gears Tactics, As Dusk Falls (lol), RedFall (LOL), Age of Empires. Forza just launched and peak CCU on Steam was something like 3.5K, doesn't seem like a lot of people care about the game.

Microsoft's problem is, and has been for a long time, that very little of their games have big cultural mindshare and what few do, aren't even associated with them by the masses. Minecraft is big, but no one thinks of Microsoft when they talk about or play Minecraft. Microsoft's own brand image in entertainment is not a great one, they aren't seen as "cool" or "fun" the way Sony and Nintendo are.

They may have just bought COD but it'll be many years before the IP is strongly associated with MS, if ever. Same with games like Diablo 4 (which is effectively dead in its own right), Overwatch (same), Tony Hawk, even Crash Bandicoot and Spyro. Yes the Xbox sycophants will hype and cheer Phil Spencer's name (now) with those games and so will the AI bots that get made for astroturfing, but the vast majority of real people won't.



COD is creatively dying. It also won't have the selling power it did anymore once Sony withdraws marketing support. Candy Crush has seen declining revenue, and is also arguably creatively stagnant. Not that mobile games need to do much creatively to earn lots of money.

People will associate CoD with MS when they boot up MW3 and see the Xbox Games Studios splash screen

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

MS has lost this generation's battle, but likely "won the war" with their acquisitions. In contrast, Sony seems to be dumping, or at least neglecting, their first party titles in favor of chasing some high dollar, low effort GaaS garbage.

Next gen there won't be any reason for me personally to keep investing in PlayStation, especially if they go all digital, because my investment with them is through physical discs while I'm digital in the Xbox ecosystem.

 

[Syphon Filter]

People crying and bitching here while I'm all excited for the next doom on gamepass
Doom is where it's at
Doom eternal is the goat of single player FPS games

you can rent games now. no need to wait. doom eternal is awful and an insult to the franchise.

 

[Riky]

Not if they force it on Gamepass Day 1 and eviscerate it's revenue base

Bobby himself took the stand at that FTC trial and testified that he didn't like Gamepass and it was bad for ABK properties and their revenue models

You do realise that if it does come to Gamepass day one then those customers are paying Microsoft for access?

I know it's blindingly obvious but some people seem to be missing it.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Forza has "gimped gameplay loop for GaaS monetization" thicc_girls_are_teh_best ? What does that even mean? You do realize that between Forza and GT, that GT is the one that will sell you credits for real money? Please explain what kind of "GaaS monetization" you're upset about here.

Also, you are speaking from an extreme level of ignorance with regard to Forza, as if your comment about GaaS monetization didn't make it obvious enough. You keep claiming there's this mentality recently at MS for GaaS titles and Turn10 has now fell victim to that, but Forza has been heavy on GaaS elements since like Forza 6. They used to sell you credits and loot boxes and shit. Compared to what it used to be, there's nothing "GaaS monetization" in Forza.

You're also being over dramatic about the grind, but again we all know this is because you've probably just read impressions from certain people you're predisposed to listen to and haven't actually played the game to any deep level.

 

[Torrent of Pork]

You do realise that if it does come to Gamepass day one then those customers are paying Microsoft for access?

I know it's blindingly obvious but some people seem to be missing it.

Don't you know, every single one of the 30 million some odd GamePass subscribers is still creating a new MS account every single month to take advantage of the $1 trial period that doesn't exist anymore.

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

Who's this nerd? Doesn't look like the kind of bro that would miss real man games like Call of Duty or Crash Bandicoot.

He's the legendary matchmaking kid teabagging your face while fucking your mum loading the next lobby. Show some respect.

 

[FoxMcChief]

He's the legendary matchmaking kid teabagging your face while fucking your mum loading the next lobby. Show some respect.

Jimmy Thompson?

 

[BlackTron]

It's not mind blowing considering it's Microsoft who owns them.

My reaction was mind blown at how much talent and potential can be wasted.

 

[BlackTron]

This is just blatant straw manning.

Never did I say "Money is everything". But to act like money isn't super f***ing helpful, especially in an industry as expensive as this, is just foolish.

He's right, you usually imply that MS's finances are some sort of indication of success.

Of course money is always good to have, but it can't fix stupid. Of course, it can pay for being stupid for as long as you have more of it to flush down the toilet. Which in the case of MS is the only reason Xbox exists. The other guys have to actually be successful for their money, and reinvest it back into more products that in turn make more money. You know...management.

MS doesn't have to do that. They can just bail themselves out and buy their enemies until they stop getting off on it and you're left with a shattered industry.

So you are 100% right that money "helps".

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

More logos than games. They still need to figure out how to release game that aren't disappointing.

 

[Quillerz]

Seeing that picture gives me the same vibes as seeing in a Middle Eastern 7 star hotel, where they're desperate for you to be impressed at what they've made, when really all they've done is spent insane amounts of money.

MS have bought 2 massive publishers for their back catalog more than anything else. They have a terrible track record under Phil at creating strong Xbox associated IP - I expect this to continue as these studios will be asked to basically do sequels and remakes for the next few years.

 

[BattleScar]

That's what is needed to compete.

Why do they need all this to compete with Competitors with a fraction of this number of First-Party studios?

 

[StereoVsn]

I see a big lot of names, but numbers mean nothing from them lol. Their management is beyond fetid.
They should learn from Nintendo.

No, no, according to Financial Times they need to buy Nintendo, so they can compete or show up Japan or something. Would be career defining moment for sure!

 

[ADiTAR]

If I were Microsoft, I would have 3 big games a year, and tons of smaller experimental ones through-out. I would build an engine and share it across the board.

 

[Elder Legend]

 

[adamsapple]

First-party?

Yes, like Activision and Bethesda. First party studios.

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

I'd like to see Xbox pay Unreal to develop specific xbox tools, features and combine hardware designs with Cormack levels of optimisation specifically for a new Xbox console and handheld series of products. Include dedicated support direct from Unreal for all xbox studios and we're getting somewhere.

 

[Silver Wattle]

This is all I see from OP.

 

[StealthGoblin]

What's mind boggling is people wanting a company with lots of mismanagement and zero creativity to control more developers.

That is the main issue for me. They are objectively the worst of the big three yet the consolidation is happening because of them.

Currently I'm unaffected as I don't play Bethesda or Activision games, but this nonsense is going to kick off soon with other big companies and it'll get messy.

 

[jasondefaoite]

This is all I see from OP.

Firefox user? Likely it's Settings - Privacy and Security and you have it set to strict which disables cross site scripting. Setting to standard will load the image.

 

[Skifi28]

This is all I see from OP.

To be fair, gay porn is pretty good these days indeed.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Yep. They've sure spent a lot of money recently.

 

[Forth]

I just want them to assign a Halo Infinite team that'll start adding single player campaign seasons. It's a decent story and all it needs is new biomes added with story beats that take it to detect places
Just keep building on what you have.
Also please give your teams a kick up the arse and demand more regular updates.

 

[Jigsaah]

People can't seem to humbly take an L.

What happened to "GG"? Two little letters make a world of difference.

GG Xbox. You did it...now let's see what you can do with it. No more excuses.

 

[aliadiere25]

Yes, like Activision and Bethesda. First party studios.

I know. But they're not Xbox first-party studios regardless of what people claim.