The Xbox Onesie

[Mcmasters]

I think Phil makes pretty straight forward comments on things he can. He's also pretty damn transparent on a lot. From my observation it seems like no matter what he states, people either read too much into it or, nothing he says is good enough. He's gone on record so many times stating the same s*** over and over and over, because gamers simply believe he's just speaking PR so he's full of it, or they read too much into what he says and muddies up his original statement. Nine times out of ten, it's usually people not believing him because it's just "PR speak." It's beyond ridiculous at this point.

 

[Andy]

I'd say he made a pretty clear statement.

Okay. See, to me, it's a vague statement of intent for the whole industry, and he's not saying a whole lot. There are certainly no specifics whatsoever attached to this. It is a statement about what he'd "like to see." Okay, I grant you that taken out of context -- forgetting that he just finished talking about how other companies are good at SP games but it's been really tough, really hard for MS; and forgetting the general context of recent history (i.e., declining new IP annoucements, studio closures, game cancellations, etc.) -- this remark sounds like a nice reassurance. But there are no specifics at all here. It's just a vague statement about what he'd like to see in the industry. Doesn't mean he's going to pursue it with vigor. Doesn't say anything about what shape it might take (e.g., SP in the form of lower-budget games, perhaps, or indies? who knows).

We'll know more at E3. Until then, you can find me in Missouri.

 

[Kvally]

Okay. See, to me, it's a vague statement of intent for the whole industry, and he's not saying a whole lot. There are certainly no specifics whatsoever attached to this. It is a statement about what he'd "like to see." Okay, I grant you that taken out of context -- forgetting that he just finished talking about how other companies are good at SP games but it's been really tough, really hard for MS; and forgetting the general context of recent history (i.e., declining new IP annoucements, studio closures, game cancellations, etc.) -- this remark sounds like a nice reassurance. But there are no specifics at all here. It's just a vague statement about what he'd like to see in the industry. Doesn't mean he's going to pursue it with vigor. Doesn't say anything about what shape it might take (e.g., SP in the form of lower-budget games, perhaps, or indies? who knows).

We'll know more at E3. Until then, you can find me in Missouri.

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2017/05/01/spencer-talks-horizon-zero-dawn/

Spencer’s comments were somehow misconstrued as some people thought he was undermining the success of the aforementioned games and single-player experiences as a whole. In response, Spencer took to Twitter to clarify that this isn’t what he meant.

“Horizon Zero Dawn is great,” he remarked. “As an industry, we should want single-player to be healthy. Today, as a genre, we see fewer single-player [games] being built.” Spencer said he wasn’t downplaying anything and lamented those who turn “everything into console wars.” “I love playing single-player games,” he continued. Interestingly, he also revealed during one exchange that Sony sent him a Collector’s Edition of Horizon Zero Dawn.

 

[Andy]

I didn't take him as undermining the success of SP games; yeah, that's not what he was saying at all. He seemed to be congratulating those studios for pulling it off, in a time when fewer and fewer companies can.

Lucky man, to get the Collector's Edition for free. He must have connections in the industry or something.

I hear what he's saying. I think he's a guy who genuinely likes games and enjoys SP gaming. However, I don't think this about Phil's personal tastes in games. I think this about 1) the industry trend; follow the money, 2) MS's series of financially disappointing results investing in this area, 3) MS's relative lack of studios and the fact that most of their energy seems to go to churning out sequels to their established franchises; 4) MS's leadership and board of directors and 5) what I think Yankee mentioned, that MS is more of a software/services company, not plugged into the "creative vibe" in a way Sony is. (p.s. Oh yeah, and 6, the recent history of cancellations, closures).

I think it's about those factors, not about Phil's personal tastes.

 

[Edge BC]

It's so sad he needs to clarify what he said when it was very clear to begin with.

 

[Frozpot]

Okay. See, to me, it's a vague statement of intent for the whole industry, and he's not saying a whole lot. There are certainly no specifics whatsoever attached to this. It is a statement about what he'd "like to see." Okay, I grant you that taken out of context -- forgetting that he just finished talking about how other companies are good at SP games but it's been really tough, really hard for MS; and forgetting the general context of recent history (i.e., declining new IP annoucements, studio closures, game cancellations, etc.) -- this remark sounds like a nice reassurance. But there are no specifics at all here. It's just a vague statement about what he'd like to see in the industry. Doesn't mean he's going to pursue it with vigor. Doesn't say anything about what shape it might take (e.g., SP in the form of lower-budget games, perhaps, or indies? who knows).

We'll know more at E3. Until then, you can find me in Missouri.

Missouri, huh? Silver Dollar City?!

I hope you are wrong. My whole deal is that his statements aren't much to go on, and we will just have to see what they have for us at E3. I have been fine with their offerings, and coupled with Scorpio's implied performance for 3rd party, I am content with the company so far. I do hope to see more though...

 

[Andy]

It's so sad he needs to clarify what he said when it was very clear to begin with.

Poor Phil. He's so misunderstood.

 

[Edge BC]

Poor Phil. He's so misunderstood.

More like poor readers..

 

[Mcmasters]

It's so sad he needs to clarify what he said when it was very clear to begin with.

Exactly.

 

[Mcmasters]

Okay. See, to me, it's a vague statement of intent for the whole industry, and he's not saying a whole lot. There are certainly no specifics whatsoever attached to this. It is a statement about what he'd "like to see." Okay, I grant you that taken out of context -- forgetting that he just finished talking about how other companies are good at SP games but it's been really tough, really hard for MS; and forgetting the general context of recent history (i.e., declining new IP annoucements, studio closures, game cancellations, etc.) -- this remark sounds like a nice reassurance. But there are no specifics at all here. It's just a vague statement about what he'd like to see in the industry. Doesn't mean he's going to pursue it with vigor. Doesn't say anything about what shape it might take (e.g., SP in the form of lower-budget games, perhaps, or indies? who knows).

We'll know more at E3. Until then, you can find me in Missouri.

lol

 

[timmy-boy]

I like Phil Spencer, he is a proper gamer and genuinely wants good for all the industry. The problem is we have been hearing about him saying they upping investment in first party or first party is critical but they have not shown that yet. I really hope this E3 he shows us that investment he is always talking about. The thing is Sony and Nintendo never talk about more investment in their studios or games they just let their games do the talking and Microsoft needs that to happen this E3. Keep your mouth shut, show confidence in your games and then talk about the investment.

 

[OneBadMutha]

I believe Phil was head (or VP) of MS Game Studios since 2008. He's been in leadership positions over 1st party development for nearly a decade. This isn't about "Hey, Matrick really screwed things up, give us some time to fix it." Phil has been a big part of this decision making for a long time.

Big difference in being the head guy. Starts with primary vision, market segmentation they want to target, how they manage people, communication and brand that's being established. Mattrick and Spencer appear very different in those regards.

I don't know a lot of effective leaders who can't communicate and who don't listen. Mattrick seemed to struggle with both. Not sure how that guy got the head job outside of the fact he's smart. Being smart doesn't equate to success in that position.

 

[OneBadMutha]

I like Phil Spencer, he is a proper gamer and genuinely wants good for all the industry. The problem is we have been hearing about him saying they upping investment in first party or first party is critical but they have not shown that yet. I really hope this E3 he shows us that investment he is always talking about. The thing is Sony and Nintendo never talk about more investment in their studios or games they just let their games do the talking and Microsoft needs that to happen this E3. Keep your mouth shut, show confidence in your games and then talk about the investment.

I disagree. I think the fact that Spencer is willing to put himself out there and communicate is one of his strengths. At the very least, gamers know they're being heard. As a long time Xbox gamer, I felt Mattrick was deaf to the core gamer Xbox was built on. That is the guy that told hardcore gamers to go F themselves and keep playing on 360 when they questioned his messaging.

 

[Dno69]

What no one seems to be mentioning is that there was/is an incredible gaming journalists and gamer bias that also thrived by slamming anything Microsoft. Any who denies that is in denial themselves. And because of that bias, I don't feel it's completely fair to say with certainty that MS exclusives like QB, Recore or even Ryse or SO were failures bases on their own merits. Each of them were good to great games with a solid foundation for ongoing franchises. I've been a gamer practically all my life. I know s*** games. Not one of the four mentioned were s***. In fact, far from it. In my opinion, this whole generation has been in question from the beginning. And because of this bias, nearly every review or criticism of the Xbox brand should be taken with a healthy dose of skepticism.

I never played Recore. I bet I would like it.

I liked the other 3. But none were hits. I liked Ryse the best and it's not considered a great game.

I can see the appeal of SO. But I've never been a big fan of Insomniac.

 

[Kvally]

I never played Recore. I bet I would like it.

I liked the other 3. But none were hits. I liked Ryse the best and it's not considered a great game.

I can see the appeal of SO. But I've never been a big fan of Insomniac.

I have SO. Not a fan. But I like the Resistance series. Probably because I am a shooter fan.

 

[hrudey]

Now we're getting somewhere. 60 million people would take 1 Uncharted or Horizon campaign over 20 Halo multiplayers though. Gamers vote with their wallets. Well, that's what Xbox fans go to slogan was when 360 was beating up on PS3 last gen anyway.

Yeah, if you could point to sales figures that said Uncharted as a series was anywhere near 60 million in sales, let alone 60 million different people (rather than many people buying each game) I'd give your point some merit. But you're you, and you're playing your schtick 183% of the time you post (a figure that is not only impossible, but even made up is closer to accurate than that 60 million garbage).

 

[Zcythe]

I like Phil Spencer, he is a proper gamer and genuinely wants good for all the industry. The problem is we have been hearing about him saying they upping investment in first party or first party is critical but they have not shown that yet. I really hope this E3 he shows us that investment he is always talking about. The thing is Sony and Nintendo never talk about more investment in their studios or games they just let their games do the talking and Microsoft needs that to happen this E3. Keep your mouth shut, show confidence in your games and then talk about the investment.

Nah, one of the best things about MS is their communication with the community. The opposite can be said here as well. Sony and Nintendo don't communicate enough, and they rely too much on single player content without legs. Sony particularly relies on way too much overly pretentious SP experiences and doesn't do enough in the other arena. I hate long development cycles too, which is the real reason I stopped gaming on those platforms.

Say what you want about MS, but they excel at supporting the community and adapting when they need.

 

[TDbank24]

I didn't take him as undermining the success of SP games; yeah, that's not what he was saying at all. He seemed to be congratulating those studios for pulling it off, in a time when fewer and fewer companies can.

Lucky man, to get the Collector's Edition for free. He must have connections in the industry or something.

I hear what he's saying. I think he's a guy who genuinely likes games and enjoys SP gaming. However, I don't think this about Phil's personal tastes in games. I think this about 1) the industry trend; follow the money, 2) MS's series of financially disappointing results investing in this area, 3) MS's relative lack of studios and the fact that most of their energy seems to go to churning out sequels to their established franchises; 4) MS's leadership and board of directors and 5) what I think Yankee mentioned, that MS is more of a software/services company, not plugged into the "creative vibe" in a way Sony is. (p.s. Oh yeah, and 6, the recent history of cancellations, closures).

I think it's about those factors, not about Phil's personal tastes.

We should just take Phil's comments at face value. These guys are right. The blue kool-aid is strong this gen. I battle with it every day. I'm never giving up on Xbox though. This is going to be a big E3 for Microsoft. They will have some surprises and the heavens will part with tasty NeoGAF tears raining down. Scorpio is coming and it's going to be glorious. You just have to believe, Andy.

It's not like Microsoft hasn't tried this gen. Ryse, Sunset Overdrive, and Quantum Break were some of the best experiences i've personally had this gen. They didn't light the world on fire sales wise but that's no big deal. If Microsoft doesn't see those titles worthy of a sequel i'm sure they'll find something for Xbox gamers to get behind. Either way, give me Halo, Gears, and Forza and some multiplats in 4k and i'm there for Scorpio. The rest is just the cherry on top. I have a feeling Microsoft will shock the world though.

 

[Andy]

I like Phil Spencer, he is a proper gamer and genuinely wants good for all the industry. The problem is we have been hearing about him saying they upping investment in first party or first party is critical but they have not shown that yet. I really hope this E3 he shows us that investment he is always talking about. The thing is Sony and Nintendo never talk about more investment in their studios or games they just let their games do the talking and Microsoft needs that to happen this E3. Keep your mouth shut, show confidence in your games and then talk about the investment.

Yup.
Yup.
Yup.
Exactly.
Stop yer yapping and show me the games.

 

[Edge BC]

We should just take Phil's comments at face value. These guys are right. The blue kool-aid is strong this gen. I battle with it every day. I'm never giving up on Xbox though. This is going to be a big E3 for Microsoft. They will have some surprises and the heavens will part with tasty NeoGAF tears raining down. Scorpio is coming and it's going to be glorious. You just have to believe, Andy.

It's not like Microsoft hasn't tried this gen. Ryse, Sunset Overdrive, and Quantum Break were some of the best experiences i've personally had this gen. They didn't light the world on fire sales wise but that's no big deal. If Microsoft doesn't see those titles worthy of a sequel i'm sure they'll find something for Xbox gamers to get behind. Either way, give me Halo, Gears, and Forza and some multiplats in 4k and i'm there for Scorpio. The rest is just the cherry on top. I have a feeling Microsoft will shock the world though.

 

[Andy]

Big difference in being the head guy. Starts with primary vision, market segmentation they want to target, how they manage people, communication and brand that's being established. Mattrick and Spencer appear very different in those regards.

Are they? Mattrick was a doof, but I believe Donny boy generated more new IPs than Phil.

Although I agree there's a V's worth of difference between VP and P, I'm still not buying the "Phil's only had the reigns for 3 years, give him time" thing. He's been in a leadership position over the game studios for 9 years and full captain of the ship for 3 and a half. They looked ok at the start of the gen but have looked increasingly weak over the past couple years.

I don't know a lot of effective leaders who can't communicate and who don't listen. Mattrick seemed to struggle with both. Not sure how that guy got the head job outside of the fact he's smart. Being smart doesn't equate to success in that position.

No argument there. Being smart doesn't equate to success in anything except IQ tests.

 

[Andy]

Sony and Nintendo don't communicate enough,

Wait. I thought Sony's success was attributable to the fact that they instructed PS owners exactly what to do, and they did it, like puppets. I'm confused (and joking).

and they rely too much on single player content without legs.

Legless games. So sad. Games in wheelchairs. Disabled games. Versus the fully functional human beings of Games as Service.

But how come I don't hear anyone complaining about these legless games that they rely on?

I love the Uncharted and TLoU DLC, btw. Just because you're SP doesn't mean you can't stretch it out, provide more income.

Sony particularly relies on way too much overly pretentious SP experiences and doesn't do enough in the other arena. I hate long development cycles too, which is the real reason I stopped gaming on those platforms.

Yeah, I'll grant you that some of the stuff on PS can be a bit pretentious at times. Depends on your tolerance for that stuff. I'm an artistic sort of person at heart, so I've got a fair amount of tolerance for it. I appreciate their wide artistic palette -- not all of it works, but when it does, man it's good (e.g., Journey). I like the wider variety and the willingness to experiment and take risks, creatively, even if a lot of it falls flat. By comparison MS seems fairly low-brow to me and risk-averse, conservative, middle of the road (as a rule; I know there are exceptions, like Ori or Cuphead).

 

[Andy]

We should just take Phil's comments at face value. These guys are right. The blue kool-aid is strong this gen. I battle with it every day. I'm never giving up on Xbox though. This is going to be a big E3 for Microsoft. They will have some surprises and the heavens will part with tasty NeoGAF tears raining down. Scorpio is coming and it's going to be glorious. You just have to believe, Andy.

It's not like Microsoft hasn't tried this gen. Ryse, Sunset Overdrive, and Quantum Break were some of the best experiences i've personally had this gen. They didn't light the world on fire sales wise but that's no big deal. If Microsoft doesn't see those titles worthy of a sequel i'm sure they'll find something for Xbox gamers to get behind. Either way, give me Halo, Gears, and Forza and some multiplats in 4k and i'm there for Scorpio. The rest is just the cherry on top. I have a feeling Microsoft will shock the world though.

Damn you, I'm back for half a week and you change colors.

 

[TDbank24]

Damn you, I'm back for half a week and you change colors.

You can join the cause too, Andy. Plenty of room on the Scorpio train.

 

[Andy]

You can join the cause too, Andy. Plenty of room on the Scorpio train.

Haha, that is a pretty accurate picture of how I would look, if told that.

 

[Zcythe]

Wait. I thought Sony's success was attributable to the fact that they instructed PS owners exactly what to do, and they did it, like puppets. I'm confused (and joking.)

[/QUOTE ]

Nah. Sony's success can be attributed to brand loyalty, mixed messaging from MS at launch, and some good old fashioned fear mongering for the most part. I don't generally buy into the persecution deal, but let's be real, if MS tried to launch with the lineup that Sony did, they would have been straight up b!tchslapped for it. I don't really blame Sony, it worked spectacularly. Just about all their initial marketing/messaging was essentially them being the antithesis of MS. They saw an opportunity and jumped on it, all the while drawing attention away from the weak launch window. Again, kudos to them.

Legless games. So sad. Games in wheelchairs. Disabled games. Versus the fully functional human beings of Games as Service.

But how come I don't hear anyone complaining about these legless games that they rely on?

I love the Uncharted and TLoU DLC, btw. Just because you're SP doesn't mean you can't stretch it out, provide more income.

Have you not read the thread? My comment that you quoted is not the only one expressing such impressions. Regardless, I don't know you or the company you keep, so I neither know why you haven't heard it from anyone, nor do I genuinely care either. I expressed my opinion. God forbid it differs from your own. Such a delicate matter. Good for you that you love those games. I don't find them particularly compelling, but varying opinions/preferences and all that. Some of my favorite gaming experiences were SP, but after finishing them I rarely desired to play them more than once. That's just honesty. However, my best gaming experiences have almost always been social.

Yeah, I'll grant you that some of the stuff on PS can be a bit pretentious at times. Depends on your tolerance for that stuff. I'm an artistic sort of person at heart, so I've got a fair amount of tolerance for it. I appreciate their wide artistic palette -- not all of it works, but when it does, man it's good (e.g., Journey). I like the wider variety and the willingness to experiment and take risks, creatively, even if a lot of it falls flat. By comparison MS seems fairly low-brow to me and risk-averse, conservative, middle of the road (as a rule; I know there are exceptions, like Ori or Cuphead).

Don't really have an opinion on it other than I really like the content on Xbox, and it's all really just subjective preferences. I tend to like people and the very strong social experiences on a lot of MS's stuff, the good competitive experiences, the community engagement. I also don't have a particularly strong sense of entitlement, so it's probably easier for me to enjoy games for what they are as long as they are fun.

 

[OneBadMutha]

Are they? Mattrick was a doof, but I believe Donny boy generated more new IPs than Phil.

Although I agree there's a V's worth of difference between VP and P, I'm still not buying the "Phil's only had the reigns for 3 years, give him time" thing. He's been in a leadership position over the game studios for 9 years and full captain of the ship for 3 and a half. They looked ok at the start of the gen but have looked increasingly weak over the past couple years.

A lot of positive things have happened under their new leadership in 3 years. If they didn't, people wouldn't be cutting Spencer slack. Many gamers understand that games take a long time to develop. Horizon took 5 years. Before Horizon, Sony was struggling with the big stuff they publish outside of a Naughty Dog sequel and Bloodbourne...which both used safe formulas based on previous games from those developers. If the money that was going towards Fable Legends and Scalebound went towards Perfect Dark and a true Fable game, lineup would look very different.

People are sleeping on their upcoming games. This upcoming slate of games are really the first ones this gen that have spent almost their entire development cycle under this team. If these all bomb, it'll be fair to pull the fire alarm. I just think your talk is premature before they come out.

 

[Andy]

Zycthe, no, I haven't heard anyone complaining about Sony's SP games -- outside of Xbox fanboys here that is. What I see in the wider world is Sony getting plenty of praise for these SP games by the gaming community and press. That's why MS is getting the backlash lately, after all. It's basically, "Sony has these great games coming out their ears. Where are yours?"

That's why Phil is out 'splainin.

 

[Kvally]

Sony had a few good games the first few months of the year. They had zilch last August through early December. While MS was killing it during that time frame. I was worried about purchasing my Pro because it sat there with no games during that time. How soon we forget that Sony's line up every late summer and fall they are in wasteland. For the rest of 2017 I am looking forward to the upcoming Xbox games and not at all for more Uncharted DLC and a GT prologue. Yet earlier this year I was enjoying the PS releases and not the Xbox releases.

I don't understand how memories are so short.

 

[Andy]

A lot of positive things have happened under their new leadership in 3 years. If they didn't, people wouldn't be cutting Spencer slack. Many gamers understand that games take a long time to develop. Horizon took 5 years. Before Horizon, Sony was struggling with the big stuff they publish outside of a Naughty Dog sequel and Bloodbourne...which both used safe formulas based on previous games from those developers. If the money that was going towards Fable Legends and Scalebound went towards Perfect Dark and a true Fable game, lineup would look very different.

If wishes were fishes... Speaking of fishes, I'm still hoping for a Fable game, maybe by Rare.




What they did with Fable really chafed me.

This upcoming slate of games are really the first ones this gen that have spent almost their entire development cycle under this team. If these all bomb, it'll be fair to pull the fire alarm. I just think your talk is premature before they come out.

That's fine, you keep the faith. I've lost it and need it restored.

E3 should be interesting.