-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Xbox 360 'First Party' dev/pub output DID NOT drop in 2nd half after Kinect, but barely changed. People are likely mixing up TP exclusives with FP.
- Thread starter Eddie-Griffin
- Start date
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Hasn't been as good since Gears 3 IMO so I disagree...save Gow 3.
Woopah
Member
The original mass Effect, Alan Wake and the Gears games were all published by Microsoft and so were first party games.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
You know that's not what first-party means.
Lots of projection here disguised as pretending to add content to the thread, but not really.
None of those are MS IP, nor where they released in 2009-late 2010.
Interesting way to dodge something you haven't addressed or support your claims. I don't hate anything, you just don't have ana argument, you entered the thread off topic with a list way after the time frame of discussion when Phil had already brought numerous studios, ignoring the fact he did that because he didn't have any, caused by himself.
You can't actually address this which is why you have avoided doing so and can't respond to a single point I made.
feynoob
Banned
I explained to you this in easy way, yet you went straight for Phil.
Games take time. From planing to production. Small studios can't make a lot of games.
This issue should have been fixed during OG Xbox and Xbox 360. If MS invested in studios like Bethesda, Sega and their 3rd party partnership, Xbox one situation wouldn't have existed at all.
Phil took over a sinking ship. By the time he was the boss, it was too late. He had bloated studios, which weren't putting games like other studios.
Some of those studios were absorbed by other studios like coalition.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
No you didn't. You didn't explain a single thing, you came in with a list off-topic and then skipped the time frame of the discussion.
Would have taken less time if Phil didn't close a bunch of studios, it's also a poor excuse for studios brought 2017-2018 anyway but that's a different issue.
He helped sink the ship further, and then asked for help to plug up the new holes he made in the hull. The sinking ship story doesn't really hold merit for games, which is the subject, but rather for brand perception and services. Problem is he could have done both. Nothing was stopping him from using the 20 studios that were available and streamlining them and letting the projects being worked on finish. What's ironic about the whole thing with what he moved forward he still ended up cancelling or delaying games, even made The Coalition abandon their original IP. While still doing nothing to streamline the studios he brought which is why there have been internal issues, firings, and delays. He could have done that with the studios he had before.
Redneckerz
Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
The thing is why this is even a thread to begin with. You make a multi paragraph statement that's full of subjectivity, based around a past-time topic referencing people from said past-time as an ad populum.
It is an interesting display of writing for sure, but for who is it made in the first place?
FYI - That's not how any discussion works, which is based on varying and consistent pockets of respect for eachother's points of view.
Things like these is why OP was on exodus previously for doing the same thing.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Ghost of Caelid
Banned
I'm an Xbox gamer and I think people look too fondly on the X360 era in terms of exclusives. What made it great was the community more than anything but exclusive wise they still were BARELY better than the Xone era... It's kind of when we only got Halo Gears Fortza and third party deals. Crackdown was great too but the exclusives are not why Xbox did well that generation.
feynoob
Banned
The list shows you all the studios MS owned. Especially at #6.
If you click on each one of them and their games, you will understand the big picture.
Not with those studios quality. The only decent one was consolidated with another studio.
He had a boss, who had a vission. and before that, there was another boss who was managing xbox.
If Phil can go and buy studios, why cant those bosses do the same thing?
We can agree on 3rd party output, but first party studios falls on those bosses before phil. They should have asked MS to invest on their in house studios like Sony did. Its why Ps4 was super strong. Sony in house studios were banging by late ps3, and by the time the ps3 hit the ground, you had these insane games coming out from those studios.
Rykan
Member
This has been explained so many times on GAF especially already. I suggest you look into it a little bit more, it's a very different situation.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Where were you with similar thread made by others?
Again, not content here. Not sure what the purpose of you entering the thread is.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Has nothing to do with the topic, or the time frame discussed in the topic.
You're not basing this off anything, you're guessing, and considering some of those studios were newer, doesn't make sense.
No it doesn't, Phil is the one who forced himself into a position in buying studios, he wasn't buying any studios at all until he had reduced what Xbox had available to a handful. I'm not getting how you aren't realizing this.
The other "bosses" J allard and mattrick co, didn't buy (many) studios because they actually had a good number of studios already, Phil didn't inherit zero studios. That seems to be the issue you keep imagining Phil was given nothing when he himself, created the nothing.
Woopah
Member
First party games are those published by the platform holder. They don't need to own the IP.
Spiderman was a first party game on PS4 and Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 was a first party game on Switch. In neither case were the IP owned by Sony or Nintendo.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
No, that is a nonconsensual definition change, First-party has always meant that the IP is owned and made in-house, if it's an owned IP and made out of house it's a 2nd party studio. Because some people flubbed the definitions and in some parts of gaming it stuck, doesn't mean that the actual definition changed.
Not to mention we are talking about the 360 years here were there was LESS confusion on the issue and it was only starting to become muddy because people kept messing with the terms.
In Spider-mans case, it's a first-party IP because the brand was made in-house by Sony and was licensed. Which meant while they didn't own the IP, they owned the rights to an IP for use of making the game.
feynoob
Banned
Here are the studios which were closed under him and their ouput. Tell me, do you think they would done anything for xbox?
Tell me, how do you think these studios should make big games for XBOX? Especially with those output? Only Lionshead was good, and they fucked up in the process. But the closer was a bad mistake from MS part.
MS needed the big guns in early stage. They needed proven studios to make those games. They didnt invest on them.
Can you say the samething after you have seen this list?
Xbox relied heavily on 3rd party exclusives which they had publishing rights, aside of their own first party studios. That gave the arogance of not needing to invest on their in house studios. It become worse during x360. They even treated rare as kinetic studio.
Dont twist their history.
MS got arrogant from 3rd party game success, and ignored their studios, or the thought of investing on them.
And for last time, read all their studios here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_Game_Studios
Woopah
Member
The definition doesn't work though, as many Nintendo first party games are not made in house in some cases they don't own the IP. Bayonetta 3 for example.
Spiderman PS4 was not developed in-house since Insomniac were not owned by Sony at the time.
Sony do not own Spiderman, but they do own the publishing rights for the Spiderman PS4 game at the time of release. Just like Nintendo owned the publishing rights for Bayonetta 3 and Microsoft owned the publishing rights to Alan Wake.
Edit: In fact you yourself state that Gears of War 3 is a first party game. It is if you use my definition, but it wouldn't be if you use your definition. So you're contradicting your own OP...
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
No twisting is what you're doing, and we already went over this in the other thread, where you had no response either and avoided addressing the REAL list.
This is what Xbox had:
United States
- 343 Industries
- Connected Experiences
- Good Science Studio
- Kids and Lifestyle Entertainment
- Leap Experience Pioneers
- Microsoft Studios – Mobile Gaming
- Team Dakota
- Turn 10 Studios
- Twisted Pixel Games
- Xbox Live Productions
- Lionhead Studios
- Lift London
- Microsoft Studios – EMEA Publishing
- Press Play
- Rare Ltd
- Soho Productions
- BigPark
- Black Tusk Studios (Coalition later)
- Microsoft Studios Osaka
This is what Phil reduced things to at the bottom:
Uniteded States
- 343 Industries
- Turn 10 Studios
Lift London(moved away from being a game studio)- Rare
- Mojang
- The Coalition (formerly Black Tusk)
I don't get this need to keep making up the facts regarding Phil Spencer, he did nothing with the studios instead of cut them so he can look like he was generating more money for Xbox and that he wasn't overspending, he did not replace what he closed, he converted some studios outside of games, and he had newer studios that didn't do anything yet that he also shut down. He then let go of some studios, and switched to hardware and services (One S and X, GP, BC) until he got Nadella to allow him enough money to buyout studios because he wasted too much time in order to built anything.
From when you first posted you presented a list that has nothing to do with anything. You're trying very hard to erase 2014-2017 and pretending that Phil closed down studios due to performance despite not letting many of those studios even perform before he closed them, Lionhead was another one of those where he did it without thinking which even you admitted they regretted closing it.
Meanwhile Phil kept Crackdown 3 alive the whole time of all the games he could have saved.
Let's be honest, he made a bunch of bad moves that hurt the Xbox One after the first year and a half or so, and he had to buy studios, luckily with Nadellas help, to change that.
Phil's buyouts may bear fruits, but there's nothing wrong with admitting he messed up before the buyouts. (Also Rare treated themselves as a Kinect studio)
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Bayonetta 3 isn't first-party.
Right, it's FP NOW, and was 2nd party for the first game, because the first game Sony owned the rights but not the studio, now they own the studio and the rights. This is how it's always worked, same with other licensed games in the past. Most of the confusion of these terms doesn't come from the original terms, it comes from people accepting altered definitions that may be beneficial to listing wars or whatnot.
Barely anything has realistically changed outside of that. FP, 2P, 3P still work the same ways they have always worked, any confusion is usually self-inflicted by people accepting alternatives usually for questionable reasons, and then newcomers or casuals repeat them, and then gaming outlets.
Most people in the 360 era for example were not calling Alan Wake a FP game. That only started getting muddy later for list wars or other circumstances, but the original thoughts of it not being considered FP outside a small group still holds true for the same reasons people didn't consider it one back then, because it didn't qualify,
I think gamers are being way to flexible with changes of definitions for terms, which has resulted in people being confused not just in what is FP or not, but also what games are a genre or not. Rpgs probably taking the brunt of the damage in this case.
Valkyria
Banned
But don’t come here with real data, you are ruining the cherry picked list to push a narrative from the OP.
Warablo
Member
Damn a lot of those sound like Kinect studios like I said.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Only 4 of those were Kinect, one of the 4 converted, so only 3 were still Kinect, to our knowledge, at closure.
Which leaves the other 17.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
Apart from this studio, the rest were not on term of lionhead output.
Your argument falls flat, because these studios arent what xbox needed. They couldnt even release a proper output like lionhead studios. Even some of those studios joined other xbox studios.
Its why I cant take you serious. Look At sony Studios, and tell me those were the studios which Xbox would have went against them? Because that is a dumb logic.
feynoob
Banned
That is what he doesnt understand. Those were small studios meant for small projects.
MS needed big studios who make big games for them, not smaller kinitec games.
Woopah
Member
Many people (including yourself in the OP) were calling Gears of War 3 first party, and that is the exact same situation as Alan Wake. A gane published by Microsoft where they owned neither the developer not the IP.
People weren't waiting for MS to buy the Gears IP before calling them first party games.
Here's Insomniac themselves saying, in 2017, that Spiderman PS4 is a first party game and that the term second party isn't really used much:
And Sony does not own the Spiderman. They just owned the publishing rights to that game (just like Microsoft owned the publishing rights to the original Alan Wake).
We know what games are Nintendo first party ones as they list them as "Nintendo products". Bayonetta 3 is on those lists and Bayonetta Origins will be too. They are first party games
Going by the games publisher works best for telling what is first party and what is third party.
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
You are moving the goal posts, making assumptions with no evidence about the other studios, and are trying to pretend that it make sense for Phil to getting rid of all that staff and infrastructure without building off it.
You're quoting someone, who like you, doesn't know what those studios did, so you're pretending to go along with his claim that it was mostly kinect when only 3 were at that time kinect. It's easy to say that's what they are, but are they? No.
No, you never had an argument, and what I said is true and you've dodged since the start of the thread, now you're moving goal posts. Your list was never relevant to the discussion and skipped years ahead when Phil already brought studios.
The ironic thing is you're making fabricated assumptions about studios you aren't even looking into, for things Phil ended up doing with the studios he brought. Last I checked we were still waiting for games despite Phil buying studios "game ready", interesting.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Except that people were constantly correct back then about Gears being first party due to the marketing, because it wasn't.
Alan Wake was also not called by most a FP game because it wasn't.
You're argument is basically some people poisoned part of the well, so let's poison the whole well, and that doesn't make any sense.
And there are people who say that X game is not a FP game, Insomniac saying something doesn't make it true to the actual definition, that's nothing more than nitpicking tweets, we can do that both ways all day.
Just because some people muddled the definition doesn't mean the definition change, any confusion is self-inflicted, including what you are doing now. Gaming has not moved on from the original definition, even in legal documents, most of the industry still uses the same core definition from FP, 2P, and TP when applicable, and not just in gaming.
What you're doing is basically the same as someone calling games pre-Metroid 1 a Metroidvania game, and then saying because these games are commonly referred to by a loud (but small) group as the new definition for games that play like them, those games released pre-Metroid are now derivatives of the Metroivania "genre" despite those games being older than both franchises. That makes just as much sense.
feynoob
Banned
If a studio cant make those games, then no one should spend money funding their business. Business world is not a charity.
Xbox needs games to compete. Not some toy games.
That is what some of xbox studios were doing late x360 and xbox one.
look at rare.
| Kinect Sports Kinect Sports: Season Two Kinect Sports Rivals |
This is rare we are talking. Not some random ass studio.
What games do you think those studios would have made, if phil didnt close them?
Do you think those studios would have made banger games?
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Again, you don't actually know this but you keep repeating it, while ignoring that Phil after buying studios, still hadn't gotten games out anyway. At least back then he would have had games coming out if he didn't cancel them, and he would have had infrastrture to use for a reorganization, instead he wiped out the whole thing and ended up with nothing, if Nadella didn't say yes to the money he got Phil would still have 4 studios.
We just has a whole year of nothing but delays.
7 years isn't 10, and this has nothing to do with the conversation. Not to mention Rare is only one studio and isn't an example of what Xbox "studios" were doing when most studios on the list weren't making Kinect games.
Again, in that list only 4 were recently at that time involved in Kinect, and one was being converted away from it. I wonder why you won't talk about the other 16-17 studios?
This is the problem with your argument, you don't know. Just like you don't know if the games he is getting from his brought acquisitions will be good until they released. But we don't because we are still waiting.
There were several projects being made we have no idea what they could have been like, we don't know how good The Coalitions original game would have been, we have no idea how the games he pushed aside for Crackdown 3 would have been.
We never found out because he destroyed the whole thing. Then he put himself in a position he was lucky Nadella sided with him on, allowing him to buy studios, and because of how he mismanaged those along with Matt Booty, we still don't know how those will turn out too.
So far the biggest Xbox Series high production games aren't from any acquired studios except Psychonauts 2 which was already in development. MIcrosoft Flight was Asobo, 343i was made from Don and Phil kept, Turn10 was already there, as was Rare.
The other consoles exclusives were lower budget like Grounded and such. We haven't seen the quality of any of these AA-AAA games in development since the original announcements in 2017 onward.
So at the end of the day, Phil destroyed potential that would have been done in 1-2 years from 2014, to cause us to wait 8 years, and still waiting, for the AA-AAA major game releases. But you are pretending he accomplished something?
Azurro
Banned
feynoob
Banned
Those studios cant make those games. That is the point. They are useless in that department.
MS should bought capable studios during old gens. This way, xbox would have had capable studios which can fight neck to neck with PS studios. MS didnt do that.
Phil shouldnt even beg MS for investing on Xbox. What kind of company does that?
10 years since they made non kinetic game, and they made a remaster in that 10 year period.
Rare could have had 3 new games in that process. They were lucky that sea of theives was a hit.
Xbox isnt his company. Its part of MS. MS should have taken care of Xbox studios. Phil had a mess during his reign, and he had a mess of studios in the process.
Coalition become who they were, due to consolidation from other studios.
the studio that made this game are part of coalition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Spark
No mention of don mattrick mess at all,
You are describing the studios which xbox needed the most during xbox one. These are the type of studios that would have helped MS alot.
????
MS bought these studios during 2018-2019.
Phil had a mess to clean. Especially MS big mess.
If MS were to open their chest and bought reliable studios like bethesda during that period, and even CD project.
MS didnt, and Phil had to suffer thnx to that.
That is what I am telling you. MS is the one responsible for this mess.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Back then I hated Microsoft’s strategy of buying timed exclusives. I felt it was the lazy and easy way, versus Sony who was focused on nurturing internal first party development.
And in the end that paid off for Sony big time. They’ve got some of the best internal studios in the industry. Once the timed exclusives dried up Microsoft had little to nothing to show for themselves. Hence the developer/publisher buying sprees we’re seeing now.
And in the end that paid off for Sony big time. They’ve got some of the best internal studios in the industry. Once the timed exclusives dried up Microsoft had little to nothing to show for themselves. Hence the developer/publisher buying sprees we’re seeing now.
Last edited:
Woopah
Member
So to clarify, you believe that Gears of War 3 is not first party and therefore shouldn't be in your own OP right?
My argument is that the developers of Spiderman on PS4 know whether their own game is first party or second party. That is not "nitpicking tweets", it showing what the developer themselves classify the game as.
Likewise Nintendo knows which games are Nintendo products and which games are not. Here's Nintendo talking to their investors about the number of third party and first party million sellers on Wii and DS. There is no separate list for second party. Included in the "first party million sellers" are plenty of games where Nintendo doesn't own the developer and only has partial or no ownership of the IP. That's Nintendo using the same definition as me in a legal document.
Nintendo and Insomniac are not "some people", they are not "a loud (but small) group". They are part of the industry. That's why I'm using their definitions.
Now you could definitely argue that Epic was a second party developer for Microsoft, or that Game Freak is a second party developer for Nintendo. I can see the sense in using the term second party to describe a developer's relationship with a publisher, and have seen that been done in the past.
But I don't think it makes any sense to say that Pokémon Scarlet and Violet are not first party games. Not when Nintendo themselves class Pokémon games as first party.
Out of curiosity, how would you classify the below games (at the time of release) and why?
- Super Smash Bros. Ultimate on Switch
- Astral Chain on Switch
- MLB The Show on PS5
- MLB the Show on Xbox Series
- Death Stranding on PS4
- Halo Reach on Xbox 360
Last edited:
Redneckerz
Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
So if i didn't read these because i have a life, your thread is okay?
Where is your content to begin with?
Eddie definitely cares way too much about the wrong things in life.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
You posted directly in them, you aren't adding anything here. If you don't like the thread then I'm not sure why you posted.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
MS brought the Gears franchise in 2014, which is in the "2nd half" of the 360's life cycle. If you take out gears things are even worse for those who thought FP peaked before Kinect, which proves my entire point to the letter that the output was not actualy much better as people beleive than post-kinect, actually it's arguably worse.
This is pointless because then there would be no real definitions, no rules, and no consistency. We can have 5 devs classify themselves 5 different ways but it's impossible for all 5 of them to be right. We have to use established definitions, definitions that are still used in the majority of cases, and not just in gaming. Otherwise than it's pointless to classify anything at all.
This is all easily traceable too, comes from when the list wars were rampant and people were adjusting terms for inclusivity sakes, this isn't some thing that's been going on for 25 years. You can just go a bit back and see where these changes started becoming more common. It sucks Insomniac decided to go along with it, likely for simplicity sake for some of the louder fans.
They are also not representative of the entire industry on how those terms are used, a point you missed. Which is why this self-classification for whatever reason is pointless, as you can then just have devs say whatever with no consensus.
You mean this Nintendo who mentioned 2nd-party gaming software? This only proves my point that doing these term changes just causes confusion and inconsistency, Nintendo has been back and forth on these terms for years. They haven't been consistent at all and have only relatively recently been removing 2nd-party from their reports long-term.
Even Phil Spencer of Xbox was clear on what 2nd party was before, and then started mixing things around. Granted it made sense because he was trying to defend the lack of output at the time, but it still didn't do anything to clear up confusion when he started being iffy on the matter years after. He's kind of in the middle.
Last edited:
Woopah
Member
Even with them buying the franchise it would not make the game first party by your definition. Yes if you take Gears 3 out it supports your thread's arguement more. I agree with that.
How are you basing what is representative of the entire industry? Looking at the various evidence we've both found I don't think there's every been much consensus across the industry as a whole over what is second party game.
Yes that Nintendo. Their definition of 2nd party is different from yours though, so was Iwata using the term correctly here or was he using it incorrectly?
And here again Phi's definition of 2nd party is different from your definition. And both these definitions are different from those used by Iwata and by Insomniac. So which is right?
First party and third party are reasonably well understood in the industry, but I agree with you there there is no consistency in terms of a second party game. But with so many different combinations of IP ownership, studio owners, shared IP ownership, publishing rights etc. I think it is very difficult to have an exact description of second party game.
I appreciate you taking the time to reply in detail by the way!
Last edited:
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
You keep making claims you can't support and don't actually know. You didn't even SEE output from some of the studios, you keep skipping over any fact you can't address that makes your argument fall to pieces. We know just enough about those studios quality then, as the acquired studios NOW who have yet to release a major game.
The reason why Phil has to beg for support from Xbox is because from 2015 he had nothing coming in, sales fell and became stagnant, he had studios he wasted money on then cancelled, games he wasted money on and cancelled or delayed, lack of TP deals, destroyed infrastructure that would have made it easier to build-up in-house development, spent a crap ton in R&D on two Xbox One revisions and a bunch of services, that's why he had to go to Nadella, convince him it was worth it and then got Nadella to believe whatever he told him to buy these studios starting in 2017.
Now it's almost 6 years later, and we still don't have anything to show for it, which is why Nadella went on Damage control about Xbox sales at two investors meetings, and had went all in with some statements he clearly did not consult with his attorney over before he made them, about the Activision deal.
The problem is you are struggling with the fact Phil made a bunch of mistakes and has been the bulk of the reasons for Xbox's current reputation of a lack of games and poor first party even RIGHT NOW.
Late 2010-2018 isn't 10 years no matter how you slice it. Rare also was not forced to make Kinect, another myth that keeps spreading around. Rare made inect sports which was their most successful game so sequels were inevitable. But again, you dodge the other 17 studios Phil had that weren't working on Kinect. You're trying to distract with Rare to pretend that's all there was, Kinect studios, except that's false.
Again this irrational defense of Phil spencers is odd since you were attacking him for output and games and mismanaging studios yourself in various threads. Until he's called into question compared to his predecessors.
Phil made the mess himself, and as Black Tusk, no, Dakota was not part of the studio, That happened after Phil dismantled the original Black tusk and then formed the Coalition in its place. Many people keep forgetting that Coalition was Black Tusk and was working on a game Phil cancelled to force them to make Gears of War.
Don Mattrick had nothing to do with Phil dismantling 20 studios in a 3.5 year from late 2014 tot he buyouts in 2017. You can't bring this back, it's all on Phil. Phil is still mismanaging studios now. Many complained about it, you've complained about it, why pretend that he's suddenly infallible because he did worse in games and studios than both his predecessors? Actually 3 predecessors.
343i and Turn 10 were already there, what are you talking about? Are you saying that Xbox One needed flight simulator? Again, Phil destroyed studios we will never know the quality of, we can't make up that they weren't based on nothing. Not to mention he let those die in part to save Crackdown 3, I don't think Xbox One needed that.
Yeah, I know, that's why I said "We haven't seen the quality of any of these AA-AAA games in development since the original announcements in 2017 onward."
MS is not the one who decided to not only close 20 studios, but kill the infrastructure, stop TP deal output, switch a ton of money into hardware revisions of the Xbox One, and services that had nothing to do with developing new games.
May I remind you Phil Spencer directly said that he wanted to focus LESS on third-party deals to build up the his First-Party which is WHY they lost the COD deal? Btw, it never happened, and we are still waiting for games in 2022.
Phil in 4 years put Xbox in a worse position than it was, and hasn't improved anything since as of DEC 20th 2022. He's just lucky Game Pass worked so well for this year.
Eddie-Griffin
Banned
Not at the time of release, but at the time MS brought the studio the next Gears games including the remasters of 1-3 were in-house.
But, the point was that if you remove Gears it gets worse, Gears is what makes the list "seem" disputable until you realize that it's not actually supposed to be there.
Are you not able to realize you're arguing against your own point right now and supporting mine that all this back and forth and changing terms has resulted in inconsistency and confusion?
feynoob
Banned
You are blind as fuck, if you can't actually see the games those studios made. And the fact that you are comparing their qualities to studios like ninja theory and obsidian shows that.
You are dumb as hell.fixing that Xbox disaster is now being called destroying it.
I can't believe what I am reading.
adamsapple
can you believe this dude?Living in bubble seems nice
.Kinetic sport is rare most successful game
.I might have been about MS making rare do kinetic games, but this take is hilarious.
This is how started with kinetic, until they ended with Phil. Kinetic was supposed to be stand alone sim game, but don said to make just for kinetic.
And that was the best decision for coalition, as they become a pillar for Xbox.
Dude didn't even bother expanding his 1st party studios.
Who do you think put Phil this mess? A ghost?
Who do you think almost destroyed Xbox? Phil?
MS as the owner of Xbox, the person with the pocket money who bought rare, couldn't expand their fucking in-house studios.
Stop trying to make it all on Phil, and blame the real dipshits who made Xbox what it was during Xbox one.
May I remind you of what they thought of Xbox?
Its nice that Phil is the bad guy in your world.
Shouldn't have engaged with you at all.
Well good luck with those studios.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
fixing that Xbox disaster is now being called destroying it.
I can't believe what I am reading.
It's a very well known thing that around 2013~2014, MS management were seriously considering shuttering the Xbox brand altogether. Either completely shelving it or selling it off to a third party.
It's a miracle Phil managed to convince them to keep it going, let alone allocate funds for more talent acquisitions in the first place.
Last edited:
Woopah
Member
It does get worse if you remove Gears 3. You did the right thing by your definitions by not including Halo Reach, and Gear 3 would be the same. I agree with you that its not supposed to be there if you use your own definitions
My original point had definitions for first party games and third party games, based on who the publisher is. I still believe those terms should be used in that way.
I'm agreeing with you that second party is a nebulous term with different people using different definitions. That's why I don't find it to be a useful term to classify a game (as I said before, I do see some sense in using second party to describe a developer).
You can have different types of first party game (those where the studio is owned or not, those where the IP is owned/shared/not owned, etc.) but the line between what 'counts as a first party game' and what 'doesn't count as first party because its second party' is not clear. That's why its best to just use first party and third party.
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
So sad Wingnut didnt work out,.
Ensemble, Fasa and Lionhead deserved better.
I could imagine in the age of Gamepass Fasa Studio would have had a new Mechwarrior and Crimson Skies game.
Henry Panic
Banned
From this thread, we have people defending Phil Spencer putting Xbox in a dire position of having miniscule First-party output for 4 years since he took over, by saying he convinced CEO Satya Nadella to keep the Xbox brand alive so he can put Xbox in a dire position of having miniscule First-party output for ANOTHER 4 YEARS???
Phil is clearly the master of PR if he can get people to believe this.
Phil is clearly the master of PR if he can get people to believe this.
feynoob
Banned
Wtf are you on?
How the hell do you expect him to put out games, if he isn't getting enough support?
The guy never had the proper studios to print out those games.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Phil is a master at PR, obviously. The problem is that you can't say the rest of his performance has been similarly masterful!
Henry Panic
Banned
So are you asking me a question or insulting me under the pretext of a question?
Phil had control of Xbox as an overseer for two years before Matt even left and took his spot less than a week after he did. He had control of Xbox for 4 years as top brass and 2 years as 2nd from the top overseeing studios before he he got more responsibilities.
You're acting like Phil was some new guy with no influence thrown into the position at random. You and OP are overlooking the fact that Phil is the one who delayed removing Kinect as a bundle for the Xbox One, and making the bad timed exclusive choices with the wrong games.
He destroyed the image of the console further by choosing the broken Assassin's Creed Unity as the leading holiday game bundled with the console, which hurt the brands reputation as everyone ran to buy it at it's cheap holiday price, souring many. He is the one who wasted money on several dead-end games like Quantum Break and released them unfinished, he is the one that created the modern term "console exclusive" to cover-up the lack of actual exclusives, he is the one that slow-walked addressing the Halo Master Chief Collection disaster, and we all know how that turned out. He is also the one who pushed the "did you see it?" Titanfall PR.
He is also the one who pulled away from VR after promising it, he is the one who still tried to keep Kinect around after removing it from bundles, including spending money on deals for late kinect software releases up until 2017, 3 years after Kinect was no longer sold with every Xbox One. He is the one who pushed Cortana voice commands on the Xbox One in 2016, he is the one that caused Xbox to fall behind on indies despite the 360 starting the modern Indie gaming industry, and had to make a new program to catch up with Sony on indies. He is the one who made the then unpopular decision to push releasing Xbox games on PC because the Xbox One had no traction in 2016.
He was always there in an influencing position for the brand. Him taking Matt's place wasn't his first job at Xbox.
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
I think when most people talk about the first party output dropping, they mean 2016 - 2020. When playstation had 2-3 big titles a year and xbox had like a forza and gears.
Similar threads
- Poll