Quantum Break was a mistake. They should have invested the money in a game with multiplayer or an MMO like The Division.
Tomb Raider is a good game but as far as I know the audience is more on Playstation than on Xbox.
NPD Sales Results for April 2016 [Sony, MS, & Nintendo refuse to comment on hardware]
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Quantum Break was a mistake. They should have invested the money in a game with multiplayer or an MMO like The Division.
Tomb Raider is a good game but as far as I know the audience is more on Playstation than on Xbox.
No, I doubt I will. All of their open world games are dreadful and I haven't purchased a game from them since Unity, which I felt was so unacceptable that I swore I was done. And I have been.
Ubisoft no longer makes games that appeal to me so I left them behind.
CosmicQueso
Member
Nevermind.
Japanmanx3
Member
When I think Ubisoft all I think is Rayman. Or PoP08 sequel proper...
Unknown?
Member
Tomb Raider's audience is on PlayStation and PC. Xbox has never been a big console for that series.
XO was down YOY with a cheaper price, makes me wonder how bad it would have been if it didn't get that temp price drop and crazy deals from GameStop. PS4 was flat despite being cheaper this year but I'd image a small chunk of that was due to people buying the Uncharted PS4 or just waiting for Uncharted to buy a PS4 in general.
Oh I agree on their uninspired open world design but I'm pretty excited about For Honor. Since it's not really a grindy open world copy pasta it seems unique enough to merit a purchase from me. But fair enough if you disagree.
I'm OK with no challenge, I just don't find them fun at all. Just repetitive slogs and I'm not into bar filling.
Oh you edited
Absolutely not, I would argue that Microsoft needs more games like Quantum Break to diversify the types of games they have to offer. Even if it's another shooter it still has other areas to it that balance that out like the heavy narrative focus and the time powers.
Besides Sea of Thieves MAY be doing a Division/Destiny type of thing already.
As for the Tomb Raider thing, even if that is the case I think there's a big enough audience to not ignore. The fact that it was sandwiched between a bunch of huge games certainly didn't help it though.
CosmicQueso
Member
I'm OK with no challenge, I just don't find them fun at all. Just repetitive slogs and I'm not into bar filling.
Oh you edited
Agree with you, but still like them sometimes.
Edited for the rankings bit because life is short.
Jack The Nipper
Banned
The new Rainbow game is fantastic. Ubi ban isn't a good thing to do when there are talented devs/games that are under them that dont make what you are describing.
Far Cry Games do have fantastic small areas as their main objective areas to be fair. Rayman is also really good if you sink time into it, wonderfully designed
Far Cry Games do have fantastic small areas as their main objective areas to be fair. Rayman is also really good if you sink time into it, wonderfully designed
kinoki
Illness is the doctor to whom we pay most heed; to kindness, to knowledge, we make promise only; pain we obey.
While I think that a game like Division/Destiny with the same framework would have sold and been received better I don't think Remedy is the right developer for it. We'd end up with another Fable-situation where a shutdown is inevitable when you force your developers to make games they don't want to make.
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
Of what IP?
Dash_Riprock
Member
What did Division do wrong that Destiny did right? From what I remember, Destiny's word of mouth was terrible in its first few months (I myself played the beta but never bought the game after hearing all the bad shit) yet based on what I've seen that game is still going strong, while Division looks to be dead or dying already.
Ubisoft will also be putting out South Park Fractured But Whole which despite not enjoying their bread butter open world releases there is absolutely no way I will be missing that after the stellar Stick of Truth.
They have their place but the shared design really starts to loose its appeal after so many times doing the same things in a different place. At this point I think a lot of ppl are just completely burnt out on their formula.
Man those sure are some bold assumptions you are making about something you have no actual knowledge of and some conspiracy theories about swaths of other members too for good measure. Must be nice being able to speak with such confidence from a place of total ignorance.
They have their place but the shared design really starts to loose its appeal after so many times doing the same things in a different place. At this point I think a lot of ppl are just completely burnt out on their formula.
Man those sure are some bold assumptions you are making about something you have no actual knowledge of and some conspiracy theories about swaths of other members too for good measure. Must be nice being able to speak with such confidence from a place of total ignorance.
Theyve got time to ruin For Honor - its the most interesting thing Ive seen them show since the original showing of The Division. Wish they had an alpha/beta already - even though they arent similar if NiOh turns up first Ill probably forget For Honor exists...
Still seem the most creative of the big third party publishers though
ps3ud0 8)
mejin
Member
Easy to say it now. Quantum Break was one the best promises for XB1 since...ever. No one expected to bomb like it did.
Agree 100% with diversity.
But Sea of Thieves is uninteresting as hell, no hype at all like RoTR and QB had before launch.
I'm surprised about the poor sales, but personally I never thought would be a big success.
They should at least develop a multiplayer mode.
The only thing that they've fucked up so far with For Honor is the inclusion of the good ol god awful obtrusive Ubisoft'd UI. I'm just hoping there will be options to turn all the extraneous ui widgets and effects off. I will never understand their fixation with immersion breaking ui design. It drives me absolutely insane.
After the demo Nioh immediately became one of my most anticipated releases this year. It came out of nowhere. I cannot wait to play that game. I actually miss playing the alpha. It had some rough patches but the core mechanics were absolutely solid and I couldn't get enough of the art design/setting.
mejin
Member
AAA games with no multiplayer is a huge risk nowadays, especially for new ips. Sad situation.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
Make sure the core gameplay loop was not only robust, but grindy without being frustrating.
People might not like this but not being on PC helps alot too.
The other option is making it a 40+ hour open world game, which you see a lot.
It's a value proposition issue.
Well...
- Destiny actually has excellent core gameplay design. It actually feels great to play.
- It had the advantage of not having a very PVP focused endgame with literally game breaking exploits resulting in an unbalanced mess of an experience.
- It had genuinely compelling loot design both in effect and appearance unlike the Division which was confined to very narrow aesthetic.
- Despite having little content Destiny did have a significantly larger variety of content available for endgame players.
So yea there's quite s lot that Destiny did better.
Agree. Games pretty much need multiplayer or at least some replayable mode after finishing a (single player) game.
Edit: Nirolak's post is good. I agree that this is probably the reason for many AAA single player focused games being open world this gen.
Nightengale
Member
New IP, if they're open-world games can (for now) get away without having a multiplayer component to it.
Harder sell for smaller titles that want to play in the AAA field though.
Harder sell for smaller titles that want to play in the AAA field though.
Division fell off my radar because of all the exploits that killed dark zone for me. Add in a boring end game loop for PvE and I had to get rid of it.
CosmicQueso
Member
Another way of looking at options of what AAA will be made in the future it is, sadly, consumables.
Within the next two years, the vast majority of AAA games will feature mtx purchasable consumables.
If you can think of a game that could support consumables in some fashion, that game has a chance of being made.
It's the next big push.
Within the next two years, the vast majority of AAA games will feature mtx purchasable consumables.
If you can think of a game that could support consumables in some fashion, that game has a chance of being made.
It's the next big push.
This is horribly depressing. All the more reason to avidly support the games that don't. I'll be doing my part.
To be honest, I would be fine Single Player focused story games that were heavily discounted because they featured micro transactions. If $60 is too much because they don't have online, then don't split resources and teams to force online. Make a change in business strategy.
Sigh. First awful overpriced DLC now purchasable consumables...
Rex went over some points but I already stated some in the previous page. The mechanics of Destiny are excellent, the gunplay was so good that even during its content-starved launch, we just kept hammering at the same old bounties over and over because it felt so damn good to shoot things.
The Division's shooting is nowhere as satisfying.
There's also the matter of loot. With Destiny, you can personalize your avatar, express yourself through mix-n-match different set pieces + armor shaders. You'll never look like anything different than a hobo in The Division.
He's talking about brand loyalists, who'll stick with Xbox no matter what. Basic argument is majority of non brand loyal consumers have voted for PS this gen leaving Xbox with dismissing returns as it relies more on more on those already loyal to the brand with no way to reverse the set market momentum (i.e. Nothing MS do will likely reverse trend).
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
We are way past that point where even if every MMO-lite game with MTX failed, we will still be swamped with them for the foreseeable future.
basically get used to your indie overlords because they are really the only ones who won't be doing it. Even then, that's only a select few.
I knew this was going to happen when the generation started. I'm pretty firm in my belief this will be my last one because of it. Ill still buy Indies and the odd game my PC can run, but I can't see myself buying the ps4s/XBO successors. It will just be a waste of money.
Ehh... This is very overboard. This describes the Wii U -- not the Xbox One.
The PS4 is doing better but that doesn't mean the the Xbox One is userbase is simply "Xbox fans" like the Wii U is "Nintendo fans"; There's still too much third party support/sales for it to be the case.
Shooters/sports games last gen did FAR better on the Xbox 360 than PS3 (bigger split than Xbox One vs. PS4) but that didn't mean the PS3 userbase in America was simply "PlayStation fans" either.
I thought I'd list out the $60 retail new IP console games this generation that sold 3+ million units.
3 million units is generally considered the "this is definitely worth keeping" bar by major publishers.
I'm being generous and counting things like "Tom Clancy" and "Lord of the Rings" as new IPs for our purposes.
Known:
- The Division: Open world online third person shooter loot RPG
- Destiny: Hub based online first person shooter loot RPG
- Watch Dogs: Open world GTA-style game with a variety of multiplayer modes.
- Titanfall: Online competitive first person shooter. Multiplayer only.
- Shadow of Mordor: Open world action adventure game based on popular license released at opportune time. Singleplayer only. Looking at job postings, it doesn't look like multiplayer is coming to the sequel, so we can see how this sustains.
- Splatoon: Multiplayer focused competitive third person shooter with a side campaign.
Presumed:
- Overwatch: It's not out yet, but Activision Blizzard is expecting it to sell over 3 million on the first day. Online multiplayer first person shooter with no campaign.
Borderline:
- The Crew: Online multiplayer open world racing game. Ubisoft said it had 3 million players, but it's not clear how many unique copies that maps to. We know it had previously shipped at least 2 million units.
- Bloodborne: Action RPG with online and open world elements. Very closely tied to successful series. Not clear if it passed 3 million as the last update was 2 million before the holidays.
Am I missing anything?
3 million units is generally considered the "this is definitely worth keeping" bar by major publishers.
I'm being generous and counting things like "Tom Clancy" and "Lord of the Rings" as new IPs for our purposes.
Known:
- The Division: Open world online third person shooter loot RPG
- Destiny: Hub based online first person shooter loot RPG
- Watch Dogs: Open world GTA-style game with a variety of multiplayer modes.
- Titanfall: Online competitive first person shooter. Multiplayer only.
- Shadow of Mordor: Open world action adventure game based on popular license released at opportune time. Singleplayer only. Looking at job postings, it doesn't look like multiplayer is coming to the sequel, so we can see how this sustains.
- Splatoon: Multiplayer focused competitive third person shooter with a side campaign.
Presumed:
- Overwatch: It's not out yet, but Activision Blizzard is expecting it to sell over 3 million on the first day. Online multiplayer first person shooter with no campaign.
Borderline:
- The Crew: Online multiplayer open world racing game. Ubisoft said it had 3 million players, but it's not clear how many unique copies that maps to. We know it had previously shipped at least 2 million units.
- Bloodborne: Action RPG with online and open world elements. Very closely tied to successful series. Not clear if it passed 3 million as the last update was 2 million before the holidays.
Am I missing anything?
Hypothetically speaking, the logic would be that if MS sells off the entire XBox brand, they need as many IPs under the umbrella as possible to make it more attractive while maximizing the selling price.
OrbitalBeard
Member
One thing to note about Bloodborne is that it surpassed Sony's expectations. So even though it didn't sell 3 million units, they're probably interested in continuing the series.
Very likely, yes. With Bloodbore, most Souls fan are likely leaning towards Playstation for their souls thirst.
Really? You didn't think it would be a big success? You very much did actually.
You were also pretty sure it would beat Ratchet and Clank, a successful franchise in itself ;D
This is revising your own previous confident beliefs mate
Right, but the idea of the cutoff was more using a universal bar that influences market trends instead of having to assess each product by a single publisher's expectations.
Like I'm sure Stellaris is super awesome for Paradox, but it's not something EA or Take-Two is going to look at when deciding what to greenlight.
Dark Souls itself already covers that bar as well which is why I noted the connection.
wapplew
Member
MS as a platform holder is perfectly fine, multiplat still sold healthy enough for third party to keep the support.
MS as a publisher might need some adjustment. Their ten pole are on decline and yet to found any new franchise success.
But they have many success people forget, their smaller titles like KI and Ori are doing well, maybe they should focus more on that.
Maybe start more smaller budget project that only need to sell 500k-1m, less 75m project.
MS as a publisher might need some adjustment. Their ten pole are on decline and yet to found any new franchise success.
But they have many success people forget, their smaller titles like KI and Ori are doing well, maybe they should focus more on that.
Maybe start more smaller budget project that only need to sell 500k-1m, less 75m project.
MasterMongoose
Member
I think you got them all, but to be fair how different is it really than PS360 at this point in time? 2.5 years out we had (presuming the sales #s you're talking):
Mass Effect (Bioware RPG)
Assassin's Creed (open world)
Gears of War (MP shooter)
Rock Band (guitar hero)
Bioshock (System Shock successor)
Uncharted/Resistance (two shooters from beloved devs)
Crackdown (open world, Halo 3 beta)
Dead Rising (open world, zombies)
The Darkness? Lost Planet?
I'm not really seeing any point here other than if we included Nintendo you would obviously see that Nintendo's new IPs are languishing and few and far between. None of those games except Rock Band are particularly risky. I'm sure there's PC games I'm forgetting but this is NPD stuff anyways.
It's part of the debate going on about what elements new IPs need to succeed on the market this generation as opposed to a raw new IP count, hence the listing of what each one is.
If we compare to your list, there are actually some notable trend differences. A lot of those lacked multiplayer and/or weren't open world, and several were being sold on the strength of a short-ish linear campaign.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
That's nonsense. Remedy made the right type of game. No need for a shoehorned in multi-player mode that has no business being in there in the first place. They focused on what mattered and made one of the best games I've ever played.
Blackleg-sanji1
Banned
Point is more so what those IPS did to be successful
No, I used the current geographical data. But I really doubt that it changed significantly enough in 2 weeks time to affect these rough estimates in any meaningful way (I remember having a look at it a few week back and it was basically the same).
Nintendoland.....I guess
Agreed about the first part (I haven't played it yet) - there is definitely no need to shoehorn multiplayer games despite the popular saying that MP is a necessity for games to sell well, etc. Some of the problems with this is I think QB did not have nowhere near the interesting star power (Shawn Ashmore isn't exactly going to sell stuff based on his resume) - and that feels like a lot of money that may have gone to waste. The plans for the TV show probably wasted a lot of money AND time. Ultimately these things likely had Remedy take longer than needed. Also, I've said this time and time again when people were excited about new trailers - the trailers were really poor IMO - they didn't showcase the game well from what I've heard.
OrbitalBeard
Member
Ah, I see.
-Pyromaniac-
Member
and it's a totally valid one. In canada we are paying 79.99 for new games and it's extremely hard to pull the trigger on a game that I'll just play the ~12 hour single player for and never touch again. Even if I would love the game and the developer. That's a large amount of money if you're not a baller. Even 60 bucks for america is a lot.
It doesn't always have to be tacked on multiplayer or open world game filled with filler but there just has to be a lot to do or good reasons to go back to a game. And I'm someone who will still make exceptions, I'm sure a lot of casual consumers don't and just stick with stuff they know they'll get value out of.
They've only been teasing the game so far though, E3 is but a few weeks away so there's plenty of time to get that ball rolling.