Japanese Indie Studios:
- Platinum Games
- Level-5
- CyberConnect2
- Arc System Works
- Cave
- Tri-Ace
- Q Entertainment
- Mistwalker
- White Owl
- Acquire
- Comcept Inc
- Grounding Inc
- Experience Inc
- JP Games
Japanese Multi Team Publishers:
- Capcom
- Square Enix
- Sega
- Bandai Namco
- SNK
- Konami
- Koei Tecmo
- Nippon Ichi Software
Almost all of the ports come from publisher decisions and deals made prior to the acquisitions. It's still too early to tell what Xbox' Switch strategy entails.Do you guys think Xbox has to be cautious with that 'good boy Microsoft, all games are being ported to Switch' narrative?
I think it's actually a decent strategy to get all of the remaining titles from the purchased studios out for all platforms. They could theoretically have limited accessibility of titles like Bard's Tale IV to backers but it's good they haven't. But those Hellblade and The Outer Worlds ports... I'm not so sure about those. If the idea is to create fans for these franchises only to have the sequels console exclusive, then this could be a genius move. Exclusive content for Game Pass on console and PC is still important for Xbox even if you are all for removing barriers, why buy so many studios if this wasn't the plan? Cuphead is maybe a different beast because they just saw an opportunity to make some money.
Do you guys think Xbox has to be cautious with that 'good boy Microsoft, all games are being ported to Switch' narrative?
I think it's actually a decent strategy to get all of the remaining titles from the purchased studios out for all platforms. They could theoretically have limited accessibility of titles like Bard's Tale IV to backers but it's good they haven't. But those Hellblade and The Outer Worlds ports... I'm not so sure about those. If the idea is to create fans for these franchises only to have the sequels console exclusive, then this could be a genius move. Exclusive content for Game Pass on console and PC is still important for Xbox even if you are all for removing barriers, why buy so many studios if this wasn't the plan? Cuphead is maybe a different beast because they just saw an opportunity to make some money.
Mick Gordon needs to be doing the OST for basically any action-based game.
I do think they'll become far more aggressive regarding exclusivity once Scarlett and xCloud launch. Right now they are simply trying to maximise their gaming revenue in a challenging period of limbo. They'll no doubt be hugely relieved once E3 2020 hits and they can finally start talking about their next-gen first party games and strategy. This has been a long generation for them, filled with endless negativity following a terrible console reveal they could never shake off. That said, I expect they'll be very nervous next year too, not to make the same mistakes.Almost all of the ports come from publisher decisions and deals made prior to the acquisitions. It's still too early to tell what Xbox' Switch strategy entails.
I do think that it could hurt Xbox if they don't properly explain why those games are coming to PS4 and/or Switch. Some people seem think that these ports are spearheaded by MS, so you've got to wonder how they're going to react if the follow-ups to The Outer Worlds and Hellblade are Xbox/Windows exclusive.
It's criminal that we never got a non-Kinect jetski spin-off from Kinect Sports Rivals.I still want a Nintendoland style game that has all the Kinect Sports modes in it, Kart Racing, Jetski etc. Also, throw in 1v100 and make it a Free Download with cosmetic MTX stuff in it.
They'll just need to add in the « new » avatars (because they've been out for quite some time) because as of now they haven't been really used and they already have cosmetic mtxI still want a Nintendoland style game that has all the Kinect Sports modes in it, Kart Racing, Jetski etc. Also, throw in 1v100 and make it a Free Download with cosmetic MTX stuff in it.
But people on YouTube and Twitter said that Xbox has no games?? /s
To think that MS still aren't done adding studios, Xbox is well and truly on its way to being the Netflix of gaming 👍
Indeed. I'm still a fence sitter when it comes to the Switch rumours. I don't want to dismiss them completely, but there's not enough proof for me to believe in them yet.What is strange is that Ori still hasn't been announced for the Switch despite the rumours earlier this year swearing blind that it was imminent. Indeed, it remains at this point that aside from Minecraft, no game developed from the ground up for first party has been released on Switch.
If anyone at MS cares about Ryse, perhaps.So, with Ryse probably not coming back (hope dies last!), do you think Microsoft could give us a spiritual successor in the form of an Age of Empires spin-off? After all, Ryse was initially known as Codename Kingdoms. Age of Empires has a whole dedicated team now, although I suspect it will be focused on strategy games, so someone else should handle that hypothetical project (Ninja Theory, if they would be interested?).
I personally think Ryse should get a second chance. It was really only because of the initial Kinect stuff that the combat turned out so weird. In the right hands, it could be an amazing series. Graphically amazing, great set pieces, and visceral combat.So, with Ryse probably not coming back (hope dies last!), do you think Microsoft could give us a spiritual successor in the form of an Age of Empires spin-off? After all, Ryse was initially known as Codename Kingdoms. Age of Empires has a whole dedicated team now, although I suspect it will be focused on strategy games, so someone else should handle that hypothetical project (Ninja Theory, if they would be interested?).
MS supposedly wanted to give it a second chance. Doesn't seem likely to happen now.I personally think Ryse should get a second chance. It was really only because of the initial Kinect stuff that the combat turned out so weird. In the right hands, it could be an amazing series. Graphically amazing, great set pieces, and visceral combat.
I may be crazy but Ryse could be the start of the MS God Of War style game. It has all the early hallmarks.
Yesterday Kotaku reported that Ryse 2 had been canned because of a conflict between Crytek and Microsoft over who would own the rights to the franchise.
Eurogamer's own sources confirmed this today. One person close to Crytek told us a pre-production deal for Ryse 2 was on the cards, and that Microsoft wanted to do the deal, but its terms proved a sticking point.
Apparently, in exchange for funding Ryse 2's development, Microsoft wanted to take over the Ryse intellectual property, something Crytek couldn't agree to, so both parties decided not to continue. Retaining IP is important for independent developers, as we've seen from the likes of Bungie with Destiny and Respawn with Titanfall.
MS supposedly wanted to give it a second chance. Doesn't seem likely to happen now.
I mean the question is are MS migrating towards being a publisher of games who also has hardware? I'd argue they might be. If for example Sony and Nintendo would have all MS first party games on their platforms would Spencer and Nadella say no? I don't think they would.
They will be a publisher that also has hardware. I just don't think they see themselves as worrying too much how much hardware they sell or where people use their games or services anymore. And I'm not really sure why any of that is a bad thing. More games, more choice and greater flexibility.
At a recent event I remember Halo 5, Ori, Forza being on the test unit. They said something about a September test if I remember rightly. Tbh, the more testing the better it will be.
I mean the question is are MS migrating towards being a publisher of games who also has hardware? I'd argue they might be. If for example Sony and Nintendo would have all MS first party games on their platforms would Spencer and Nadella say no? I don't think they would.
They will be a publisher that also has hardware. I just don't think they see themselves as worrying too much how much hardware they sell or where people use their games or services anymore. And I'm not really sure why any of that is a bad thing. More games, more choice and greater flexibility.
It's a pretty big update.
Patch notes: https://support.stateofdecay.com/hc/en-us/articles/360031447271-CU-10-The-Bounty-Broker-Update
They are doing a great job supporting the game. Some really significant things listed in patch notes.
If they want to be a third party publisher, they will drop the hardware. It makes no sense to invest millions and even billions in hardware r&d, marketing, and support if it's going to be a console with super limited appeal. They'd be sabotaging their own product, most people would just get another console because of its exclusives, and play Microsoft games on it. PC is different, the audience is simply different, although there exists some overlap. Besides, they have to support their own platform.
It especially makes no sense for them to go multiplatform now, with streaming around the corner. With streaming they don't have to bother with developing all of their games for multiple platforms, they develop once (well, twice), deploy on a single hardware platform in their datacenters, and deliver everywhere through a streaming client. It remains to be seen how wide a net they'll be casting with their streaming services, but at this point it makes far more sense than any extensive multi-console development effort.
I'm just not sure MS are constrained by the old style model anymore...they might see hardware as a way to hook in their core crowd even though its not going to sell lots - and see some initial upfront cost of making that hardware worth it. I think they market on a streaming model and this would fit with that. Let everyone play your games on any platform that will have it, try and hook in enough hardcore to your hardware to spread the word - hope something big catches on....
I mean hardware costs can be reduced - and also like in other sectors you can choose to make the hardware compelling rather than relying on software. People buy a surface for what it is and the console space is not necessarily different if MS can have a point of difference in there.
Whether they are right or wrong I see them moving this way. I think their goal is just to make games and capture audiences and get them into their services models. Whether their hardware sells is likely secondary to them. It isn't like an instant flip - they're going through hybrid stages - but I suspect by mid way into next gen that is where they'd like to be.
Right now we have seen only high quality material from the game, at gamescom she will be back, why so nervous?Anyone else think waiting until September to show off Gears 5 campaign is creating unrealistic expectations for that campaign as a whole? We've seen barely anything of it which makes you think TC have something up their sleeve they don't want to spoil but maybe not. Bad marketing imo.
It was announced early to justify the definitive editions of the entire AoE trilogyAoE4 must be in dev he'll its been so long since it was announced.
People here keep saying MS doesn't games years ahead at E3 yet they did it with AoE4 and possibly with Tactics
I'm not sure about this, 2k only ported the nba titles and civ6 on switch, it sound so strangeHellblade for Switch was already in the making. So waste of money not to finish it and Outer Worlds is not published by MS and was already multiplatform.
It's a pretty big update.
Patch notes: https://support.stateofdecay.com/hc/en-us/articles/360031447271-CU-10-The-Bounty-Broker-Update
They are doing a great job supporting the game. Some really significant things listed in patch notes.
I think you are right in that they don't care if they move hardware, they want people on their service. However, porting their games to every console possible is not getting people on their service. If PS and Switch don't have gamepass or an MS service how does it serve MS's goals?I'm just not sure MS are constrained by the old style model anymore...they might see hardware as a way to hook in their core crowd even though its not going to sell lots - and see some initial upfront cost of making that hardware worth it. I think they market on a streaming model and this would fit with that. Let everyone play your games on any platform that will have it, try and hook in enough hardcore to your hardware to spread the word - hope something big catches on....
I mean hardware costs can be reduced - and also like in other sectors you can choose to make the hardware compelling rather than relying on software. People buy a surface for what it is and the console space is not necessarily different if MS can have a point of difference in there.
Whether they are right or wrong I see them moving this way. I think their goal is just to make games and capture audiences and get them into their services models. Whether their hardware sells is likely secondary to them. It isn't like an instant flip - they're going through hybrid stages - but I suspect by mid way into next gen that is where they'd like to be.
I think you are right in that they don't care if they move hardware, they want people on their service. However, porting their games to every console possible is not getting people on their service. If PS and Switch don't have gamepass or an MS service how does it serve MS's goals?
With the exception of Cuphead all of the games being ported out we're already in development and are largely not published by MS. I think people are going to be dissappointed when this doesn't continue after the initial games already in development don't come to switch or PS.
what store is this? Console or PC?
There is no different store. There's only one Microsoft Store.
Also, creating, manufacturing and maintaining a console is really-really expensive (even to a company as big as MS) just to "not care" about how many they'll sell. Not to mention the cost of porting and anything added to that. It's just doesn't seem financially feasible to invest into something without plans to make profit from it.
I'm about a hundred pages through the new Gears book that came out today, and while reading I found a mention regarding the birth of J.D. by Anya Stroud-Fenix.
For those who don't remember or aren't familiar with this bit of lore, Hoffman mentions in one of the previous books that Anya was a barren woman, meaning she was not able to produce children, one of the reasons she was allowed to eventually become a frontline Gear.
Naturally this raised questions when we found out that she give birth to James Fenix, the son of her and the legendary Gear, Marcus Fenix.
While reading the book today it's stated that Mina Jinn, the Minister of Procreation at the time, made it possible through her program for Marcus Fenix and the late First Minister Anya Stroud to conceive a child.
While many questions still remain about the twenty five years in between the events of Gears 3 and 4, we at least have an answer to how it was possible for Anya to have a child of her own.
I suppose I should have been more careful with my wording. I don't think console sales are their primary metric for the Xbox division. It is important in as much as it serves as an access point to their services but I don't think they care if PC or mobile surpass their console sales. Like I said it's just an access point.Also, creating, manufacturing and maintaining a console is really-really expensive (even to a company as big as MS) just to "not care" about how many they'll sell. Not to mention the cost of porting and anything added to that. It's just doesn't seem financially feasible to invest into something without plans to make profit from it.
Despite working together Mistwalker isn't really what MS has typically looked to pick up, either, as it doesn't have the bandwidth to make anything beyond a mobile game. It's a tiny, tiny studio, and their big games were all co-developed by a larger company. So Lost Odyssey was actually developed by feelplus; Mistwalker was like the creative control agency that shaped the direction of the game, but didn't actually make it. the three Blue Dragon games were the same but with artoon, while The Last Story was AQ Interactive, etc etc.
Like, Mistwalker is a good get in that you get Sakaguchi, but unless MS is willing to put together the time, funding and effort to essentially build a proper team from scratch for them - at which point you might as well set up a studio from scratch - Mistwalker ain't the one. Their headcount is only like 15-20. A lot of Mistwalker, including Sakaguchi, is based out of Hawaiii too, which isn't as useful if you want to develop an actual Japanese-based powerhouse.
Also, creating, manufacturing and maintaining a console is really-really expensive (even to a company as big as MS) just to "not care" about how many they'll sell. Not to mention the cost of porting and anything added to that. It's just doesn't seem financially feasible to invest into something without plans to make profit from it.
I'm pretty sure Mike Ybarra was a big Ryse fan, though not sure if that amounts to much. I'd love a sequel, and would be excited to play one if they ever did it, though it seems unlikely that will happen.
Thanks for the interesting info. I'm curious about that development process since it seemed successful. Is this not a sustainable way to make games? Like could you take any small studio with a strong creative core and contract out the heavy lifting for a AAA game?
comment is garbageThread title is garbage.
Started playing Halo MCC for first time in 2 years yesterday, glad its fixed and being able to define match types is brilliant. All I need is H2A/H3 BTB and I'm good.
You are not a Xbox fan if you think title is garbage.Thread title is garbage.
Started playing Halo MCC for first time in 2 years yesterday, glad its fixed and being able to define match types is brilliant. All I need is H2A/H3 BTB and I'm good.
Thread title is garbage.
Started playing Halo MCC for first time in 2 years yesterday, glad its fixed and being able to define match types is brilliant. All I need is H2A/H3 BTB and I'm good.