Think people need to get over the idea of them getting out of hardware. It makes them a crap load of money and has done since the 360 days. This is simply a way to get live elsewhere
MS bringing Gamepass to The Switch? (and perhaps other consoles?)
- Thread starter TeKPhaN
- Start date
I think it shows how tribal we are. We buy to support our team, not our self interest. It’s all silly. Andy you’re right. It’s not logical. It’s emotional. I’d say these people need some counseling but then I feel like so much of our society is wired similarly. Despite its lack of logic, Microsoft will have to message carefully because these gamers who feel like Phil Spencer cheated on them is a real thing.
It is clear that Microsoft has abandoned the sport of the console wars. They conceded to Sony and are trying their damndest to lock down this new niche. I think it’ll end up best for most people in he long run.
I bought Xbox early this gen not because I loved that junky looking hardware. It was for the controller, Xbox Live and Halo. Now Xbox ecosystem is enhanced by Game Pass and backwards compatibility. As long as those things can be carried forward to some platform in some way cost effectively, don’t care about the rest. Counting hardware is a bit outdated.
It is clear that Microsoft has abandoned the sport of the console wars. They conceded to Sony and are trying their damndest to lock down this new niche. I think it’ll end up best for most people in he long run.
I bought Xbox early this gen not because I loved that junky looking hardware. It was for the controller, Xbox Live and Halo. Now Xbox ecosystem is enhanced by Game Pass and backwards compatibility. As long as those things can be carried forward to some platform in some way cost effectively, don’t care about the rest. Counting hardware is a bit outdated.
EA already has a subscription service, Ubisoft has already experimented with streaming AC Odyssey to switch, if they all start streaming or offering sub services it will basically make GP irrelevant because MS doesn't make enough of their own games, that's why I think this "Netflix of video gsmes" isn't really as promising as some make it out to be, there is nothing stopping publishers from doing it themselves and 3rd parties have a lot more for people to play than MS or Sony would on their own. Not to mention that Netflix actually isn't in the best shape financially, they have a ton of debt, they are going to have to continue to raise prices and probably cut down on the amount of content they make, they can't continue doing things they way they are forever. That doesn't mean that it's a straight up comparison of course but there are a lot of reasons to be skeptical of how the subscription model will apply long term to gaming especially if more 3rd parties start adopting their own services.
Well, I didn't mean it quite that way. Emotional preferences can be as good or better than sheer logic sometimes. We often do things more out of emotional motivations, rather than just cerebral analysis -- that's just how people are built. We don't usually do things just based on dispassionate "reasons," we do them because we feel a certain way. Emotions are usually more powerful motivators than factual analysis. And that's not always a bad thing -- emotions aren't just dumbly there, they exist because they provide important information (what we like/dislike, value/disvalue, etc.), which mere cerebral analysis sometimes misses.
In fact, I share some of this emotional response myself. I like traditional console hardware. I like the experience of plugging in a dedicated console and playing games on it, including games made exclusively for that console. I've been doing that for 20 years, and I like that model. When I hear about a digitized future where everything is a "service" and games are streamed on hypothetically perfect networks, or all-you-can-eat subscription services that emphasize quantity over quality, I feel bored and disinterested. It's not at all inspiring to me. It leaves me feeling dead inside (j/k).
I think there are too many unknowns at this point to say one way or the other if this makes sense. We need to see some definite details - until then it's just conjecture.
If you aren’t interested in streaming or PC gaming, Xbox consoles are still the only way you’ll play Halo Infinite, Fable or Ninja Theories next game. Those won’t run on potatoes. Nothing changes for those types of gamers...except Microsoft has more money and more incentive to keep reinvesting in more content than before.
But...:since Microsoft conceded plastic wars, Phil Spencer cheated on them. He’s a good for nothin, two timing piece of ****.
But...:since Microsoft conceded plastic wars, Phil Spencer cheated on them. He’s a good for nothin, two timing piece of ****.
The question is how many people are going to be interested n those games? Halo's popularity is on the decline, Fable (my fav MS exclusive) has been mistreated and abused and Ninja Theory has gotten a lot of acclaim for their last game (I couldn't bring myself to finish it but it was well made) but I don't think it was a huge seller by AAA standards, yeah it sold well for an indie game but I don't think it hit even 2 million, plus PS4 sales were a big chunk of what it did sell and those will be erased for their next game.
Ninja Theory is very hit an miss, but I really enjoyed Hellblade.
Fable is an interesting one. I am very curious, if the rumours are true, to see what Playground Games does with it. I am expecting a well made, well polished heavy on content game...that is the expectation the Horizon series delivers.
All those games will be as interesting as the next offering. No reason to expect all this talent Microsoft is hiring to suddenly become crappy because they work for Microsoft. Spencer is giving all the executives at those studios autonomy to do what’s best and even encouraged risks.
343 replaced a lot of their top people with other well established industry vets while expanding. Listening to Bonnie Ross’s interview...I think she gets it.
Microsoft is poaching a lot of high end people. If Obsidian keeps Boyarski and Cain after Outer Worlds, they have enough top tier people (with Josh Sawyer) to have two good teams...which is the rumor.
Ninja Theory has hired a lot of people. They were under 100 when bought. 20 worked on Hellblade. They are now at 140.
Initiative is stacked at the top.
Rare was under 100 during the prime of SoT development. They are now at 250.
InXile is hiring and aiming for AAA production values.
Undead has gone from small Indie to AA sized studio since prime of SoD2’s development.
Playground is on a massive hiring spree.
Rumors from same source that leaked Playground and Obsidian that Microsoft has multiple LOIs out there. That means they’re closing in on more studios.
Games are as good as the talent behind them. Xbox has gone from small market team budget to Yankees budget. They’ve recruited a lot of big names. I’d trust the talent they’ve brought to Intiiative to make Barbie interesting.
Most of the studios they picked up were smaller studios with not a lot of hits behind them, that's why they all came fairly cheap. That doesn't mean those studios can't all pump out great games in the future, especially if they are staffed up and allowed to make games they want to make. I still don't trust 343 to do anything special with Halo, they've done two games and the second one was worse than the first. I only play halo for the story and they really screwed that up royally the last two games.
Problem is people are tired of waiting. MS has a massive hill to climb, If they aren't showing off top tier quality games ,that aren't Halo, Gears, Forza, in the run up to next gen then they won't be climbing anything.
That is true of all their big Ips, though.
Turn 10 went from a genre leaading company to a shadow of their former selves.
Gears 4 showed stagnation, lack of ideas or creativity.
You would think given how reliant they are on these frandhises that they would push for greatness, not just, 'oh! That'll do.'
Aren't they skipping Forza this year to basically do just that?
Gears 4 played it safe but was still great(after the first part with all the robots anyways)
Gears 4 played it safe but was still great(after the first part with all the robots anyways)
No. All Turn 10 are doing is rectifying all their ignorant crap....and taking their sweet ass time in doing so.
By the time next gen starts Forza 7 might be a product that should've launched.
I feel turn 10 are burning themselves out, I’ve met Dan Greenawalt after they finished F5/6 and he looked he hadn’t slept in weeks. Anyways, yeah they need to take a step back to collect themselves and borrow/steal ideas from other games.
Gears 4 just played it safe, just dipping their toes really/hopefully
Yep, they need more time to freshen up and I’m sure they’re dabbling with the next Xbox dev kits
The problem with T10 is ignorance.
How on earth they thought that removing class hoppers, class Rivals leaderboards would go down well I don't know.
How they thought the laggy ass menues would go down well is a mystery.
The inclusion of dumb vehicles just to pad numbers...a bunch of which they had to ban from online racing.
Still used the same busted track limits. You would have thought they would have changed this back when they had to add Tire walls to stop track cutting.
Leagues are still as far from a league system as you can get.
Still no race regs, even after nearly a decade of the community asking for a penalty system.
But lets forget all that and try and force MTs into the game via the dumb driver customisation loot box s***show.
Obsidian, Playground and Ninja Theory aren’t small. Initiative is building a mega studio. Rare has almost tripled in size from where they were 3 years ago. Not a small studio.
343 is quite different. I’ve listened to Josh Holmes slightly throw the studio under the bus in an interview after he left and then Bonnie Ross’s most recent IGN interview kind of backs him up. Team was asked to build something bigger than what the game engine could handle in the time frame given. They’ve spent a few years rebuilding the platform to make it easier for the creative people to implement their ideas. They’ve also expanded and grabbed some top tier talent. Not the same studio. Not the same tools. Think it’ll be very interesting to see what they can do with a bigger team, better leads, better engine and 5 years to work on one game.
Past is the past. This gen is over. They’ll be in good shape in 2020 which is what’ll matter. With the way technology is allowing their platform to move across devices, they’ll be able to capitalize as soon as the content releases. They don’t need people to hold off buying PS5s and Switches to hit their goals. Not with how mobile their platform is now.
Phil Spencer November 2018:
No. There are certain scenarios where streaming a game is the best answer. On a console, the best scenario for you is to download that game and play. If you are on a PC that’s capable of downloading and playing that game, download and play that game. Not all devices are capable of playing the most great fidelity games that we see here on the show, so streaming is an option in those scenarios, and there are some scenarios of like instant start and trials where maybe streaming on a device could be interesting, but I think for years and years the best way to play a game on a console will be to download that game and play it. The same thing on PC. I think streaming is something that’s further out in terms of it becoming a really mass market where everybody is doing it, and even way further out before it’s the best way to play that game, if it ever is.
I just think it’s about giving you a choice as a player, not about replacing what you do today.
https://www.spieltimes.com/news/phi...eaming-will-replace-traditional-anytime-soon/
I am glad Phil is committed to Xbox hardware as the priority.
No. There are certain scenarios where streaming a game is the best answer. On a console, the best scenario for you is to download that game and play. If you are on a PC that’s capable of downloading and playing that game, download and play that game. Not all devices are capable of playing the most great fidelity games that we see here on the show, so streaming is an option in those scenarios, and there are some scenarios of like instant start and trials where maybe streaming on a device could be interesting, but I think for years and years the best way to play a game on a console will be to download that game and play it. The same thing on PC. I think streaming is something that’s further out in terms of it becoming a really mass market where everybody is doing it, and even way further out before it’s the best way to play that game, if it ever is.
I just think it’s about giving you a choice as a player, not about replacing what you do today.
https://www.spieltimes.com/news/phi...eaming-will-replace-traditional-anytime-soon/
I am glad Phil is committed to Xbox hardware as the priority.
I am wondering where JinCa got the contract showing the price MS paid for those studios. He said they got them all cheap. Looking forward to seeing that purchase contract here on Union.
He basically just said the obvious, anything else was a flatout lie.
He isn't commited at all. He already told you that when he said 'he doesn't care about selling hardware.' Hardly something you say if you are infact commited to hardware.
They’re committed to hardware because they have to be for the console enthusasts because it’s still a major factor in mindshare for now. They don’t care about hardware sales. They do care about Xbox Live users, Game Pass subscribers and soon, Xcloud users. They’ll keep supporting hardware because they have to and have the resources for it. Cannot leave out the advantages they have with Google closing in fast.
Edit: need to clarify what I mean. They care about plastic sales as a means to get their software, subscriptions and services in front of you. They’ll take any advantage they have over Google. Right now they have no advantages over Sony in this space yet it’s a major competitive advantage when trying to beat Google to the punch.
So they care...but only if you’re not buying their stuff on other platforms. If this is their only way, they care. If you subscribe to Game Pass on PC or Nintendo, they’re ok losing plastic sales for that.
Last edited:
Which becomes even less relevant with their "super mobile" software. Basically they are commited to getting their services on as many platforms as possible, hardware is just an inconvenience.
It is inconvenient and not their ultimate goal but they’re committed until it’s not necessary. I believe when hardware becomes less relevant, Xbox will be a luxury product sold at a real profit like Surface or Xbox Elite controllers. Today it’s still important....at least to maintain those 40 million gamers that haven’t switched to Google Steam. Maybe move some PC gamers who will take advantage of a cheaper upgrade.
Despite this inconvenience, I’m expecting the most aggressive hardware launch they’ve had since OG Xbox. Will be sold at a loss. They are more afraid of Google today than Sony back in 2001 when they were taking a bath on Xbox’s sold. Even though they’re not in the hardware business, they are going to over-level every weapon they have for the cloud wars.
Anaconda, which is apparently their new X, is a fine direction to have along with an entry level model which takes them another 10 years out. They are clearly more committed to hardware long term which is a good thing. We know Sony and MS want to stream games and focus on getting more service revenue but they will continue to have hardware consoles for the foreseeable future.
“Their services” so not necessarily their games, kinda like game pass or the ms store on windows??? GP on Windows is kinda weak even with some of their first party titles on there