Official MS E3 press conference thread

[betan]

Sigh , can you come up with any xbox 360 titles canceled 3 months before release ?

I don't know, again why are you limiting it to 360?

The getaway and the other game were from sony or sony second party devs. Yet they were still canceled, the futher away a game is the more stuff can go wrong , its very very very rare for a game to be canceled months before release , they will push it out even if its a turd so they can try to make back any money they can .

You can now stop repeating yourself.

the fact is that games getting canceled after repeat e3 showings is just one more thing that can happen with the showing a title so far in advance.

no one asks MS to show games 5 years in advance.

Look at that mag game or whatever from sony , its all cgi , what happens if after another year or two they figure out they can't get the game to work and they either cut out a ton of features or the game is canceled.

Now let's go back and look at FF13.

These are all risks of showing a game before its ready or close to release .

"before it's ready". I agree if they don't show games, either they don't have games, or those games aren't ready to show. Fatigue argument doesn't fly of course. No one expects them to show the whole game.

3 e3's ago spore was the talk of hte town and now everyone is tired of it , i'm sure a ton of people are still waiting for it but look at how little press its gotten this e3 and how no one has named it game of the show . Alan wake is another case , look at hwo long that has been shown at trade shows and its still not out and now there are a ton of other games that are starting to look as good as it is and are getting some of its features put into them , by the time alan wake releases the hype may be gone

On the other side we see more examples like Assasin's Creed, MGS4, FF13, Crysis and many more.

 

[assen]

On the other side we see more examples like Assasin's Creed, MGS4, FF13, Crysis and many more.

Funny you should mention Crysis - because one of the Yerli brothers recently admitted as a mistake the early/long hype period for Crysis, and swore never to unveil a game more than three months away from release.

This is a bit extreme, I admit, but demonstrating games at the target render phase is a crime against gamerhood, and should be met with torches and pitchforks instead of ooohs and aaaahs.

 

[Tap In]

Funny you should mention Crysis - because one of the Yerli brothers recently admitted as a mistake the early/long hype period for Crysis, and swore never to unveil a game more than three months away from release.

This is a bit extreme, I admit, but demonstrating games at the target render phase is a crime against gamerhood, and should be met with torches and pitchforks instead of ooohs and aaaahs.

agreed

the early CGI carrot dangling is annoying IMO

I much prefer the strategy of a little teaser that does not try to imitate game play (not too long before REAL game play can be shown) and I much prefer the real time demos of WIP to the pie-in-the-sky CGI shows.

 

[betan]

Funny you should mention Crysis - because one of the Yerli brothers recently admitted as a mistake the early/long hype period for Crysis, and swore never to unveil a game more than three months away from release.

I especially kept Crysis because despite all the delays, in the end it was critically acclaimed.
But if I were them, I wouldn't show Crysis that much so early. Doesn't mean I wouldn't show it.
Look at FF13 they keep showing it just enough to keep people interested, but not really.

This is a bit extreme, I admit, but demonstrating games at the target render phase is a crime against gamerhood, and should be met with torches and pitchforks instead of ooohs and aaaahs.

I disagree, since as a gamer I never bought or skipped a game because of graphics.
Not that I'm arguing platform holders should show target renders.

 

[Dr. Meaty]

Remember Half-Life for Dreamcast?

All of the store representatives and managers we spoke with say the same thing and at this point, we have to agree with them - Half-Life for Dreamcast seems to be canceled. Again, we're still waiting for the official word from Sierra in hopes that we're wrong and trust me, after delivering a week-long feature with our near final of the game, we really hope we're wrong.

http://dreamcast.ign.com/articles/095/095363p1.html

When Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver 2 was canceled for the Dreamcast, we somewhat understood the decision; the Dreamcast version was still in its preliminary stages of development and with a release date looming in a couple of months, it was either delay the release of the DC version or cancel altogether. Obviously, Eidos decided to cancel the DC version while it was still pretty early. Such is not the case with Half-Life for Dreamcast; only weeks away from its release date, Sierra felt that canceling the game would be less costlier than putting it out on the market. There is some reason to the decision; other than first party titles, the sales of third party DC titles have been rapidly decreasing to the point where even the mighty Capcom is unsure of releasing Capcom Vs SNK 2 in the US. Cutting its "predicted losses in sales", after spending countless hours of development time, seems like a smart business decision, at least from Sierra's point of view.

http://dreamcast.ign.com/articles/095/095905p1.html

I was pissed.

 

[eastmen]

I don't know, again why are you limiting it to 360?

because ms is pushing the new way of doing things and by showing titles that have an extremely good chance of coming out with in the year

You can now stop repeating yourself.

Why if your not going to stop

Btw how is that game africa treating you , really fun to play ?

no one asks MS to show games 5 years in advance.

What game was shown 5 years in advance. Even being nice the getaway barely made it to the 4 year mark . but then again thats the point , why should we want to see games so far in advance we may never see them out on shelves .

Do you hae a date for a game like mag , whens that coming out ? This year ? Next year ? 2011 ?

Now let's go back and look at FF13.

sure , show me a review of ff13 and tell me how it worked out for them. Oh wait it seems to be at least another year off for japanese release. So that will be ist what .... 5th year . Lets see hwo it actually looks when it comes out .

before it's ready". I agree if they don't show games, either they don't have games, or those games aren't ready to show. Fatigue argument doesn't fly of course. No one expects them to show the whole game.

Even if they show games in cgi form you run into the same two problems , Fatigue argument does fly , even in the 1up podcasts they talk about spore and how they just wnat it to come out and they are tired of waiting .

On the other side we see more examples like Assasin's Creed, MGS4, FF13, Crysis and many more

Assaisins creed ? that got at best middle of the road reviews and was largely laughed at by its pittful ending . MGS4 which kept getting pushed back while its graphics continuely decreased from the original level shown in the cgi trailers , FF13 which is stlil not out , Crysis which was attacked for having a crappy second half of the game which ruined the first half and had horrible system performance even on SLI and cross fire rigs costing over a thousand bucks a year after it was released ?

Yes lets look at all of those and prove my point

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

I don't know, again why are you limiting it to 360?

Maybe because this is the MICROSOFT E3 PRESS CONFERENCE THREAD and the only information that should be discussed in here is about the 360?

I think it's a perfectly legitimate discussion to have comparing and contrasting MS's approach with the 360 which has always been "What is available NOW" and Sony's approach with the PS3 which has always been "Please wait we'll prove we're better we swear!".

The problem is that there isn't much factual foundation to nail MS for a 'current' vs 'future' marketing philosophy when each year the 'future' arrives and MS is still able to maintain that 'current' philosophy.

MS says 'this is what you can do today'

Sony says 'This is what you'll be able to do tomorrow'

When tomorrow comes...

MS says 'this is what you can do today'

Sony says 'This is what you'll be able to do tomorrow'

..anyway, this thread has completely degenerated into a battlefield for bias and I understand why it was pruned by the Mods.

If there isn't actually going to be an intellectual debate about the benefit of PROMISES vs PRODUCT then this thread might as well just be locked.

 

[PARANOiA]

*shrug*

Honestly, the Sony folk in here saying "what about 2009" were the same lot saying about 2008 after last year's E3. It's amusing that people still haven't learned, but hey, it's egg on your face.

 

[obonicus]

If there isn't actually going to be an intellectual debate about the benefit of PROMISES vs PRODUCT then this thread might as well just be locked.

Well, the only thing I can see to be debated in regards to MS is their mindshare. By keeping their 2009 releases close to their chest (and no, I don't think Alan Wake or Halo Wars are their GeoW2 equivalent for '09) they give people less reason to buy a 360. And that has been a problem for them: they had a steady lead, and for no reason anyone can pinpoint they're losing momentum, while Sony is still picking up steam*. I mean, we do have reasons, but most of them evaluate to 'Sony is popular because Sony is popular', which doesn't really explain anything.

Not that knowing the promise of future titles would necessarily help sales, but they might: you might argue that folks who bought PS3s in early to mid-2007, when there were no games were doing it because of the promise of future games (which at the time included FFXIII).**

* I'm not saying Sony's crushing MS or anything that drastic.

** This is something people can't agree on, though. You'll hear them argue that people bought the PS3 as a BD player. And yet, very often if these same people have a problem with BD will argue that BD won't succeed because most people who bought a PS3 bought it as a gaming machine.

 

[expletive]

they had a steady lead, and for no reason anyone can pinpoint they're losing momentum, while Sony is still picking up steam*. I mean, we do have reasons, but most of them evaluate to 'Sony is popular because Sony is popular', which doesn't really explain anything.

I think its pretty clear the reason they are losing momentum is because theyve begun to saturate demand at their current pricing.

Sony is at roughly half the install base in NA so I could see where once the library became more desireable their sales would pick up. After all, youre talking about the follow up to a console that sold over 100 million last generation.

 

[obonicus]

I think its pretty clear the reason they are losing momentum is because theyve begun to saturate demand at their current pricing.

I don't think it's clear at all; if it were clear to us, who do not have actual data, it would be doubly clear to the people who have the actual data. A price drop wasn't really a solution to the 360's woes in Europe, for example. Are they saturated there, too, or is it more of the self-fulfilling 'Europe is Sony territory'?

Sony is at roughly half the install base in NA so I could see where once the library became more desireable their sales would pick up. After all, youre talking about the follow up to a console that sold over 100 million last generation.

Except the library hasn't really grown that much. That's part of what's being argued on this very thread: of the expected franchises from the PS2, only R&C, MGS4 and GT5 have been delivered and remained exclusive. PS3 has other good games, naturally, but they're new IPs and, if you're arguing on the merit of the PS2 install base, not really a draw.

There's something else happening; if it really were that simple to solve these problems, they'd be solved by now.

 

[iceberg187]

*shrug*

Honestly, the Sony folk in here saying "what about 2009" were the same lot saying about 2008 after last year's E3. It's amusing that people still haven't learned, but hey, it's egg on your face.

I've brought this up on GAF and other place, not about people complaining, but their philosophy. Ever since the Too Human public at E3's past, you will never see Microsoft show a game too soon ever again, nor talk about it. We know Forza 3 is coming due to that leaked stuff. We know Bungie now has a new Halo game and we know of Alan Wake. 2009 stuff is out of sight and out of mind for Microsoft as far as what they present to the public. As a person that went to school for marketing and works in it, focusing on what you can provide for the year is the best way to satisfy your userbase. Don't make promises on what the future holds. It is all about delivering today.

 

[Zassk]

Well, the only thing I can see to be debated in regards to MS is their mindshare. By keeping their 2009 releases close to their chest ... they give people less reason to buy a 360.

I see it the opposite way: focussing on more 2008 releases than Sony means that MS gives people more reasons to buy a 360 in 2008.

And that has been a problem for them: they had a steady lead, and for no reason anyone can pinpoint they're losing momentum, while Sony is still picking up steam*.

Again, this is simply inaccurate. 360 sales are up significantly over the previous year, even in Europe if we are to believe VGChartz. I don't see a loss of momentum in that. Yeah, Sony's improved by a much bigger percentage - only because this time last year they had awful sales. But let's not lose perspective on the current 360 trend. There are no signs of 360 sales peaking yet.

 

[obonicus]

I see it the opposite way: focussing on more 2008 releases than Sony means that MS gives people more reasons to buy a 360 in 2008.

I can't agree, but we're arguing opinions at this point, so let's not.

Again, this is simply inaccurate. 360 sales are up significantly over the previous year, even in Europe if we are to believe VGChartz. I don't see a loss of momentum in that. Yeah, Sony's improved by a much bigger percentage - only because this time last year they had awful sales. But let's not lose perspective on the current 360 trend. There are no signs of 360 sales peaking yet.

True, but that's not the point. The point is that the PS3 is overtaking the 360 in Europe and in the 360's home territory it can't seem to distance itself from the PS3. And there's very little reason for that to happen: 360 versions of games are often superior, the online experience and OS-integration are still more feature-rich and, as far as I can tell, the RROD issues have mainly been ironed out.

 

[Dominik D]

It's not really opinion, it's common sense. Can you explain why showing CG of a game to be releaser 2009+ is a reason to buy console today? Can you explain why FFXIII going multiplatform is not less of a reason to buy PS3 over 360?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It's not really opinion, it's common sense. Can you explain why showing CG of a game to be releaser 2009+ is a reason to buy console today?

For the sake of argument I'll contribute, though this isn't necessarily my take on the matter - the announcement of an upcoming title can be added incentive to purchase a product now for what is available now and for what is promised in the future. eg. LBP sold me a PS3 back in March or whenever it was. Without that title, I'd have been more willing to put off my purchase. The presence of that title was a guaranteed 'must by' game, which meant I was going to get a PS3 sooner or later. And with my friends having a PS3, I went with sooner. If LBP had not been shown early, I'd have put off getting a PS3 until a killer app (Probably Snowblind Studio next RPG if that ever gets announced) sold it to me. And in owning it now, I have bought more titles than I would otherwise have bought had I waited 6+ months. Now of course LBP was actually shown in engine and not CGI, but the principle can still be the same. Lets take the MAG for example - Sony announced a 'breakthrough' title, and if the idea of 256 player online games appeals, this'll get your attentnion. But how do you inform the userbase of this great game that they'll love? A single line comment 'oh, and by the way we have a 256 player online game coming'? Or do you highlight the game with a trailer as a means to communicate the product, so that people actually hear the message? If we look at Motorstorm, the CGI trailer was a suitable coomuniation of a title that would be out. It wasn't absolutely indicative, but if they didn't show CGI, they'd have shown nothing. And itf they had shown nothing, who would be interested in the platform?!

There is a 'misrepresentation' of games through CGI, but I think, or at least hope, we've learnt our lessons now. CGI is not giving you an impression of what you'll experience in game. It is instead an advert. It's like all these 'whiter than white' washing powders that don't show the real results you get. Or movie trailers that compress all the good bits into a 30 second clip that misrepresents the bulk of the movie experience. Nintendo is a huge culprit for using CGI to advertise their titles at the moment. If people don't care about graphics, why don't they show in-game footage in all their TV ads? Because it's not about showing the product, but marketing it, and creating an anticipation. Trailers try to capture the feel of a game in the footage, to try and convey the emotion of playing in a passive viewing.

The other issue is the advertising of a console based on titles that may never launch, like The Getaway. Anyone who bought a PS3 on the anticipation of playing the Getaway has been shafted. I don't know that that's actually a widepsread problem though, as the number of advertised and then canned titles is minimal. There may be long waits, but when release dates are not given, the buyer should be aware of that possibility.

I suppose in conclusion, thinking aloud, it is the companies' interest to heighten expectations, and the consumers responsibility to moderate expectations. If a company does chose to show more and suffer backlash, it'll either come back to bite them on the butt, or it'll have no consequences and as such there's nothing really wrong with it, from a commercial POV. Examining eastmen's list of titles, I'm seeing plenty of success in those. I don't think sales have been impacted adversely. If AC was hyped and turned out not very good, it still made the sales which is what they were after. Future sales will be affected by experience of that game as was released. It doesn't matter how much pre-release hype there was. So apart from generating some bitterness on internet forums, I don't know that the negative aspects of very early showings are that pronounced.

 

[Acert93]

He's hinting at Rare's version of Mario Kart that was rumored. I think instead it turned out to be Banjo Kazooie Live Arcade.

If MS wanted to hit the mainstream market with something that could appeal to a broad audiance, including gamers, a kart game seems like a no brainer.

Why hasn't this happened?

Rare has Conker, Banjo, and now Viva to make a kart game. With those three franchises there is a bit of creativity that could be had. I am confused why they aren't aggressively re-utilizing assets (like the Banjo or Viva engine) and pumping up their IPs.

Scartching my head here, and not just because I am a kart fanatic.

A new Halo will have to go through a lot of improvements, almost a renewal, a huge evolution (both technically and on gameplay).

Yeah, I think Halo 3 got a fair number of passes in some areas (like other big franchises) because it was a sequal to a successful/popular franchise with a beloved gameplay style/mechanics. But with that story loop closed and a slew of games really pushing forward in regards to the application of new technologies toward the end of gameplay innovation I don't think another Halo game, based on the current design, would be a worthy top tier market product. CoD4 re-invigorated the series and Halo needs something of a similar jarring. Games like Mirror's Edge come to mind, as well as all the cover games (RB6, GeoW, BiA) as well as Endorphine products. Deeing what DICE did with BFBC and the new Red Faction just shows with some effort some really neat stuff can be done. Even the new Far Cry game, which will probably have a lot of short comings, is showing some design growth.

FPS games are a fast evolving genre and any new Halo would really need to re-invent the franchise as far as I am concerned. Of course all the Halo fans will whine with "It isn't broken!"

Rumors are about a squad-based coop shooter with up to 8 players, all of which are simple human and not Spartans like Master Chief. But it could just as well be speculation.

They should look at using the other Spartans in a quasi prequal or whatnot. Dare I saw a squad based shooter where members have different styles/abilities (traditional MC, tactical/cover, stealth/agile, etc) could be very cool.

 

[Carl B]

When I'm reading the word Sony more than the word Microsoft in the Microsoft E3 thread, things are going down the wrong path again.

I understand there's a desire here to discuss the two companies' 'revelation' strategies relative to one another, but since this thread is not a unified E3 conference thread (done obviously on purpose), it'd be nice if people could discuss what MS did well or could have done better on its own terms without bringing in Sony as a reference point that in turn begins to become the discussion itself.

 

[assen]

Rare has Conker, Banjo, and now Viva to make a kart game. With those three franchises there is a bit of creativity that could be had. I am confused why they aren't aggressively re-utilizing assets (like the Banjo or Viva engine) and pumping up their IPs.

Scartching my head here, and not just because I am a kart fanatic.

Rare have their hands full at the moment with two games and their rumored central role in the avatars functionality development. Besides, the XBLA lineup for the rest of the year is stellar.

(wrt: Halo)
...
Games like Mirror's Edge come to mind

Mirror's Edge, a game with NO GUNS? Stay away from my beloved franchise, you freak!

COD4 wasn't such a drastic reinvention of the franchise - it's still a set-piece, on-rail cinematic shooter with special weapon-specific segments, much like COD2 and COD3. Oh, you probably mean multiplayer...

 

[zarbaj]

i would love a next gen kart racer, mario kart isn't cutting it for me anymore.