Relieved to read this. The way the article had it focused out of context had me more than a bit tilted since I read it.
Last edited:
The Xbox Onesie
- Thread starter TAVIS206
- Start date
Relieved to read this. The way the article had it focused out of context had me more than a bit tilted since I read it.
I don't know what genre Minecraft is but I know it's neither a sport nor a shooter and is the best selling Xbox 360 game of all time.
Lets analyse
- Amped: Freestyle Snowboarding
- Azurik: Rise of Perathia
- Blood Wake
- Dead or Alive 3
- Fuzion Frenzy
- Halo: Combat Evolved
- NFL Fever 2002
- Oddworld: Munch's Oddysee
- Project Gotham Racing
- Blinx: The Time Sweeper
- Kakuto Chojin: Back Alley Brutal
- MechAssault
- NBA Inside Drive 2002
- NBA Inside Drive 2003
- NFL Fever 2003
- NightCaster
- Quantum Redshift
- Rallisport Challenge
- Shenmue II
- Sneakers
- Whacked!
- Jockey's Road (Japan Only)
- Amped 2
- Brute Force
- Counter-Strike
- Crimson Skies: High Road to Revenge
- Grabbed by the Ghoulies
- Inside Pitch 2003
- Kung Fu Chaos
- Links 2004
- Magatama (Japan Only)
- Midtown Madness 3
- NBA Inside Drive 2004
- NFL Fever 2004
- NHL Rivals 2004
- N.U.D.E.@ Natural Ultimate Digital Experiment (Japan Only)
- Project Gotham Racing 2
- Tao Feng: Fist of the Lotus
- The Wild Rings (Japan Only)
- Top Spin
- Voodoo Vince
- Xbox Music Mixer
- Blinx 2: Masters of Time and Space
- Fable
- Halo 2
- Kingdom Under Fire: The Crusaders
- MechAssault 2: Lone Wolf
- Phantom Dust (Japan Only)
- Rallisport Challenge 2
- Sudeki
- Conker: Live & Reloaded
- Double S.T.E.A.L. The Second Clash (Japan Only)
- Fable: The Lost Chapters
- Forza Motorsport
- Jade Empire
- Kingdom Under Fire: Heroes
- Kameo: Elements of Power
- Perfect Dark Zero
- Project Gotham Racing 3
2007
- Blue Dragon
- Crackdown
- Forza Motorsport 2
- Fuzion Frenzy 2
- Halo 3
- Mass Effect
- Project Gotham Racing 4
- Project Sylpheed
- Scene It? Lights, Camera, Action
- Shadowrun
- Tenchu Z
- Viva Piñata: Party Animals
- Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts
- Fable II
- Gears of War 2
- Kingdom Under Fire: Circle of Doom
- Lips
- Lost Odyssey
- Ninja Gaiden II
- Scene It? Box Office Smash
- Too Human
- Viva Piñata: Trouble in Paradise
- You're In The Movies
2010
- Alan Wake
- Crackdown 2
- Fable III
- Halo: Reach
- Kinect Sports
- Kinectimals
- Kinect Adventures
- Kinect Joy Ride
- Lips: I Love the 80's (Europe Only)
- Lips: Party Classics
- Dance Central 2
- Forza Motorsport 4
- Gears of War 3
- The Gunstringer
- Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary
- Kinect Disneyland Adventures
- Kinect Sports: Season Two
- Dance Central 3
- Fable: The Journey
- Forza Horizon
- Halo 4
- Kinect Nat Geo TV
- Kinect Rush: A Disney-Pixar Adventure
- Kinect Sesame Street TV
- Kinect Sports: Ultimate Collection
- Kinect Star Wars
- Nike+ Kinect Training
Last edited:
2014
Xbox : 16 out of 58
360 : 9 out of 70
Xbone: 4 out of 29
In the last 17 years, 20% of First party games have been single player only. Of those 29, 10 of them did eventually get a multiplayer mode in sequels.
In the last 10 years, 15%. In the last 5 years only 4 games out of 44.
To answer your question, it's because over 90 % of Microsofts first party games have a multiplayer mode of some sort...and the 4 that didn't did sell a over a million.
- Fable Anniversary
- Warface: Xbox 360 Edition
- World of Tanks: Xbox 360 Edition
- Forza Horizon 2
- Halo: The Master Chief Collection
- Kinect Sports Rivals
- Minecraft (Xbox One)
- Project Spark
- Sunset Overdrive
- Forza Motorsport 6
- Gears of War Ultimate Edition
- Halo 5: Guardians
- Rare Replay
- Rise of the Tomb Raider
- ScreamRide
- State of Decay: Year-One Survival Edition
- Ori and the Blind Forest
- Dead Rising 4 (Co-published with Capcom)
- Forza Horizon 3
- Gears of War 4
- Quantum Break
- ReCore
- Halo Wars 2
- Forza Motorsport 7
- Sea of Thieves
- Crackdown 3
- State of Decay 2
Xbox : 16 out of 58
360 : 9 out of 70
Xbone: 4 out of 29
In the last 17 years, 20% of First party games have been single player only. Of those 29, 10 of them did eventually get a multiplayer mode in sequels.
In the last 10 years, 15%. In the last 5 years only 4 games out of 44.
To answer your question, it's because over 90 % of Microsofts first party games have a multiplayer mode of some sort...and the 4 that didn't did sell a over a million.
You're missing Phil's point.
He EXPLIXITLY stated that there are exceptions to the rule, and mentions Zelda and Horizon.
Just because you can mention two SP games that sold well, it's just as easy to mention 20 multiplayer/Gaas that have sold 5million +.
No-one is disputing that Uncharted sold well. But again, it's easy to list others that significantly underperform.
But I'd also point out the other multiplayer games that underperformed too. TF2, street fighter, most modern MMO that launch with a sub...
It's easy to make an argument if you rush in blindly mate, but actually read the source material.
The outrage about this has been blown out of proportion and like flies to poop the fanboys have taken it as canon. No where in that interview did Phil say that SP games would not be a focus.
Didn't he say and I quote ''“You’ll have things like Zelda that’ll come out, and they’ll do really well, but they don’t have the same impact that they used to have'' ? Knowing very well that it's bigger than ever both in terms of sales and exposure/audience. So not only do they have the same impact I'd even go as far as saying the impact is bigger too. That was my point.
Now if he had said it's hard because only great games sell well and have that same impact whereas a decade ago any SP game could sell well and have that impact regardless of its quality then yeah Phils right. But that's not what he's saying in that quote. I mean would Phil have made that comment if Zelda was on the X1 and had a 1:1 attach ratio with that big of an exposure ? Be honest with yourself here for a moment.
Yeah and it seems to be mostly on NeoGAF where it's really bad in terms of that. Didn't see those kind of reactions on Reddit for example. At first in that thread the second quote wasn't even posted yet. So only the part about Zelda and Horizon and people somehow concluded MS wasn't interested in story driven games anymore and thus they weren't interested in Scorpio anymore, lmao. All under the perception that GaaS must mean MP focus only.
Hopefully MS can clear some things up during their E3 show. Would be nice to shut some people up about stuff.
As usual, people miss the point. He's not saying big, epic SP experiences like Zelda or Horizon don't sell well. For one thing, user bases are increasing and gamer engagement is up. He's saying they don't have the same impact as they used to have. They're impact on the industry, the people making them, isn't the same as it was. It's becoming harder and harder to sustain, whereas longer term gamer engagement in GaaS has been impactful for monetization and sustainment. He clearly makes the point that the model, in its current form, doesn't make sense for many of those SP experiences though, and he's interested in figuring out a way to better sustain them in a way that makes sense.
Personally, I like his idea of something similar to Netflix, a subscription service that would allow you to play content as it is made, especially his referencing of Xbox Games Pass, indicating a subscription to cover multiple titles this way. I personally feel like Netflix delivers some of the best content around, and if they can figure out something similar, than count me in.
Ironically, the outcry is misplaced because he's actually saying he wants to find a healthy way to sustain story driven SP experiences.
Personally, I like his idea of something similar to Netflix, a subscription service that would allow you to play content as it is made, especially his referencing of Xbox Games Pass, indicating a subscription to cover multiple titles this way. I personally feel like Netflix delivers some of the best content around, and if they can figure out something similar, than count me in.
Ironically, the outcry is misplaced because he's actually saying he wants to find a healthy way to sustain story driven SP experiences.
Xbox Game Pass and EA Access are basically straight up definitions of games as a service. The service is access to a library of games in exchange for a subscription fee. The market will determine the value and success of that service.
Personally I think that's a subscription service. Netflix is the service. Breaking Bad isn't a TV show as a service.
GaaS is I believe is a video game that encourages the purchase of additional content outside of the initial expenditure, whether that initial expenditure is free or paid. Anything with paid DLC.
Multiplayer is incidental. I couldn't label a game with multiplayer a service if there's nothing more to sell.
Its foolish to read this and come to the conclusion that they are not going make SP games anymore but its silly to read this and think that their commitment will be as high as ever
After I first read the snippets posted on Neogaf, I was disappointed with what Phil said. After reading the entire article for myself, I realize how badly out of context it was taken.
Sony's 1st party sticks to what they do best. They have movie studios. They have been perfecting narrative driven, scripted games for years and have perfected the model. MS's competitive advantage is not in that area. I'd argue story-telling is the weakest aspect of even their best franchises. Their strength is services and ecosystem and they can use those to do things that 3rd parties will not.
What MS is doing with Crackdown, what they did with Forza Driveators...what they did to change online multiplayer with Halo 2 in the past...that's where they need to play with their investments. They've flushed money down the toilet with Ryse, SSOD, Quantum Break and Scalebound....even if a couple of those games were decent. Those games did nothing to sell Xbox's or improve the brand.
That said, Spencer needs to be more careful with what he says before he has something to show. The hardcore base still wants some less profitable fan service games in there. The base is still expecting a RPG and for MS to eventually use the licenses of Battletoads, Banjo and Perfect Dark in meaningful ways. Can MS tie a story driven RPG or platformer into GAAS? It's not impossible...but until they can demonstrate it, gamers will assume the worst. Based on the year after year demise of their 1st party under Mattrick, gamers have a right to be skeptical.
- The fact that extremely high budget "one and done" games are no longer a sustainable business model is not new news or a Phil Spencer concept
- Focusing on GAAS does not mean that single player games are gone
- One and done games work better as part of a bigger service (whether than be tied to a multiplayer game like Halo or episodic on Game Pass)
- Single player games can still bring gamers in however it's the GAAS aspects of games that keep them coming back
Sony's 1st party sticks to what they do best. They have movie studios. They have been perfecting narrative driven, scripted games for years and have perfected the model. MS's competitive advantage is not in that area. I'd argue story-telling is the weakest aspect of even their best franchises. Their strength is services and ecosystem and they can use those to do things that 3rd parties will not.
What MS is doing with Crackdown, what they did with Forza Driveators...what they did to change online multiplayer with Halo 2 in the past...that's where they need to play with their investments. They've flushed money down the toilet with Ryse, SSOD, Quantum Break and Scalebound....even if a couple of those games were decent. Those games did nothing to sell Xbox's or improve the brand.
That said, Spencer needs to be more careful with what he says before he has something to show. The hardcore base still wants some less profitable fan service games in there. The base is still expecting a RPG and for MS to eventually use the licenses of Battletoads, Banjo and Perfect Dark in meaningful ways. Can MS tie a story driven RPG or platformer into GAAS? It's not impossible...but until they can demonstrate it, gamers will assume the worst. Based on the year after year demise of their 1st party under Mattrick, gamers have a right to be skeptical.
Exactly, it's neither of the two. Sony will undoubtedly let ND, GG, Santa Monica, Bend keep making SP games because they just shine at that and they probably are not a studio for MP games. MS does not have this and the times they tried via a third party it didn't exactly succeed. It's gonna be a mixture now and if that's the case I am OK with that.
By the way, I've been wondering. Would you guys like 343 to be put on a different project? They can keep it a Halo game but give the FPS Halo a break after 6 and make a KOTOR / ME like Halo game. Apparently 343 consists of a huge amount of people, why not split the team and let one work on the FPS while the other team works on Halo in a different genre. I wish MS would consider this.
And to think we got Sunset Overdrive because of Mattrick, or am I mistaken? To be fair, Spencer gets a lot of praise for turning things around drastically and that's well deserved but he hasn't yet exactly shown that same kind of love, commitment to bringing in new exclusives. Now yes it was great that he visited Japan and hopefully we'll see some results of that soon(please let Code Vein be for Xbox too) but in his years he also canceled games like Phantom dust, Fable Legends, Press Play new game and studio, Project Spark and Scalebound. We will never know the exact reasons and it's probably with good reason but man, that has been quite a lot of bad news for Xbox gamers.
The way he turned things around for the console, hopefully he can manage to do that for exclusives as well.
Last edited:
Yes! 100 x's yes! This is coming from someone who's favorite all time gaming franchise is still Halo. It would not only be good for the portfolio but it would be good for Halo. Would keep the franchise fresh.
Peter Monoloux just did a really cool interview (IGN Unfiltered) and he talked about studios becoming restricted to one IP. He says when that happens, these creative people get bored and no matter the talent, when developers get bored they don't do great work. The big problem with Halo is that the developers are stuck between pleasing the long time base and spreading their creative wings. I think that's why they so badly wanted to change the gameplay and move away from MC.
I think not only should MS allow their developers to work on different projects, they should rotate their mainline franchises between different development teams. You don't want creative people to get stuck on a hamster wheel or check the box. I think the reason why the industry feels fatigue with Halo, Gears or and Forza is because the developers are.
For me it's like when my hometown sports franchise that's struggling fires the GM and hires someone beneath him. There's hope...especially when the new guy says the right things. Spencer has gotten the other things right so hopefully the games are next. MS has been off track with their 1st party for about 8 years so there's a lot to fix.
No. Its a form of trolling. You don't see this outrage at Nintendo for releasing another Zelda, Ubisoft for Ghost Recon, or Activision for CoD.
Especially since we're on Uncharted 13 and god of war 11 . Gears of war 4 is the 6th.
Its surprising how Horizon has sparked such a faux crusade that games with multiplayer are the devil, especially since the other Horizon game has a much higher metascore in part due to a comprehensive multiplayer....and took half as long to make.
Last edited:
To be fair some of those sequels were quite different than the previous games in the franchise. In the case of Naughty Dog, they were allowed to work on a new franchise before going back to UC4.
No doubt there are trolls doing their thing but I can also admit that MS's big pillar franchises need to regain their magic. I'm hoping that the next Gears and Halo take the core gameplay and do something fresh with it. Linear corridor shooters with big water cooler moments are a dime a dozen now.
Horizon:ZD is one of the most over-rated games this gen. Good...but not great. I beat it and found the gameplay to be average and forgettable. The reason is the world is so static with terrible AI, average physics and invisible walls. I would love for MS to take an open world, story driven RPG and make it dynamic with their Azure servers. MS could get creative and make something persistent that allows both single and multiplayer. The Destiny model doesn't have to be relegated to multiplayer only. How cool would it be to be playing the Witcher 3 and then some unexpected large event happens in the world that hits every Witcher 3 player at the same time no matter where they're at in the game and the AI of the NPCs evolves over time?
MS could do this without scaring people into thinking they will get nickel and dimed. Create a static version of a game but allow gamers to subscribe, for a fee, to a persistent version of a game. I might be in the minority but I'd like to see GAAS become part of some single player campaigns. Right now the reason why there's this perception that MS is bailing on single player games is because gamers think GAAS=multiplayer. GAAS could do a lot to make single player games fresh. There will be plenty of static, story driven games from 3rd parties. MS should carve out their own niche.
Its hard to picture the studio built to make Halo making something that isn't Halo but I would like to see it. Make Halo 6 that is set up to be supported for a little longer in terms of MP, then something new, and then come back for Halo 7. Worked for Naughty Dog. I think a few extra years between Halos could build that added excitement.
I think Horizon Zero is a good game but it will never reach the money that halo 5 did and still going.
Really good post. I played Horizon at my brother's place on his Pro and while I thought it looked absolutely fantastic, I couldn't exactly get into it in terms of gameplay. It has a great start but the gameplay itself really didn't feel as fun and engaging as many other games do for me. Now to be fair I haven't played it for hours yet, so I can't properly judge it but it has only wowed me in a huge way graphically speaking.
What you said about MS and GaaS sounds good to me. I'd be very interested in games like that. Still fully singleplayer but with events happening to everyone playing. Crackdown has immense potential and I hope so damn much they will blow us away with it. I would be very ok with it if it's basically like the first one with some new features, great graphics and physics and fun missions but how awesome would it be if it contains a certain something, a feature I guess that will make us all say "oh damn, now this is something I haven't seen before. This is really interesting" and that could be related to the whole GaaS thing.
I have to admit that when I read that interview I wasn't happy because I will always place a good story-driven game over MP. I'm just a huge SP gamer but then I read that second quote where he actually says both MP and SP are critical for Xbox,that put me at ease. Unless he means that only smaller indie game will be story driven for them and not AAA, but I really doubt that.
It's just bizarre how quick some people are jumping to conclusions, especially, mostly on GAF. Saying they were interested in Scorpio but not anymore now that Xbox doesn't care about SP anymore. I think these people never wanted a Scorpio in the first place.
I think the best examples of GaaS from MS would be Halo 5 and Forza Horizon 3. There is the SP, enclosed portion, then a long period of support with new content added continually, giving people a reason to stay invested in a purchase and stay in that ecosystem. That's great to me. Don't see how that constitutes doom and gloom for SP. Just more longevity.
I think there has to be a balance. It's true that single player games are a risk, and sales of a game are definitely important. I also think of consoles having an identity wrapped around some key experiences. Arguably, some of those console-defining games need to be single player experiences.
Obviously the sales of single player games have mixed results, especially for Microsoft. So far with Xbox One, you have Ryse, Sunset Overdrive, and Quantum Break (putting Halo and Gears campaigns aside for the purpose of this discussion) that really stood out as AAA. These are solid efforts, but not exactly console-defining material, IMO. I don't think they should give up, though. I still think they really could use a boost in the single player domain. I am of the belief that they could really use at least one new, big SP title every year out two, but that's just me. So yeah, still kind of bummed by P Spencer's comments.
Mainly, my beef is really that I'd rather them focus on developer innovation, rather than dictate what to make by sales-driven agenda. I keep hearing that Scorpio is the place to play 3rd party games. Great, but where's their Horizon ZD or Uncharted? They still need to define this thing other than Forza, Gears, etc. I'm not hating, but rather HOPING they really have something special, going forward. I can't wait to see some good games at E3, but they really need to bring it, now more than ever, perhaps.
Obviously the sales of single player games have mixed results, especially for Microsoft. So far with Xbox One, you have Ryse, Sunset Overdrive, and Quantum Break (putting Halo and Gears campaigns aside for the purpose of this discussion) that really stood out as AAA. These are solid efforts, but not exactly console-defining material, IMO. I don't think they should give up, though. I still think they really could use a boost in the single player domain. I am of the belief that they could really use at least one new, big SP title every year out two, but that's just me. So yeah, still kind of bummed by P Spencer's comments.
Mainly, my beef is really that I'd rather them focus on developer innovation, rather than dictate what to make by sales-driven agenda. I keep hearing that Scorpio is the place to play 3rd party games. Great, but where's their Horizon ZD or Uncharted? They still need to define this thing other than Forza, Gears, etc. I'm not hating, but rather HOPING they really have something special, going forward. I can't wait to see some good games at E3, but they really need to bring it, now more than ever, perhaps.
Sea of Thieves is their open world adventure game. Gears is their Uncharted, more aptly Uncharted is Sony Gears, albeit discontinued
Last edited:
Oh and let's not forget that Studio Gobo partnered with MS recently. We should get more info soon. There were job listings for a third person action game, but also Free2play was mentioned. But they also partnered with Ubisoft. So it's a bit unclear what is what here right now.
It was said back on page 2, but it is worth repeating - they are not dumping story driven games.
People need to remember too for every great story based game, there are many that are "meh" at best.
People need to remember too for every great story based game, there are many that are "meh" at best.
Well its not like they haven't tried. I am surprised Sunset Overdrive wasn't a bigger hit though. The best hope for the next big thing as an exclusive is going to be Rare because everyone else is locked into a franchise.