Does MS need to support more new IPs this gen? *spawn

[Silent_Buddha]

As for MS neglecting their core gamer... well come on, they are!

Huh? Halo 4 isn't meant for the X360 core gamer? A game which MS is heavily investing in. Creation of a new studio just for the Halo series. IE - created a new game studio purely to cater to the core X360 gamer. Likely investing far more into 343i and Halo 4 than they invested to aquire Bungie and fund the original Halo. All those industry luminaries don't come cheap.

No new IP does not somehow equate to neglecting their core gamers. That is just some really bizarre reasoning considering they are likely investing more into their core games now than they have in the past.

Which doesn't mean they aren't ALSO investing more into casual games via Kinect, or gamers of all types via XBLA.

That's what expanding their user base allows them to do. All that extra revenue from the expanded casual demographic that Kinect brings in can help fund projects for all gamers, including core gamers.

It's just bizarre that just because MS is showing off a commitment to casual gamers that people suddenly feel they are neglecting the core gamers.

And somehow people think that just because MS didn't show off any new IP at the E3 conference that there will be no new IP. Does this mean that because Sony didn't show much for the PS Vita at their conference that there will be nothing for the PS Vita this year? Don't be ridiculous.

People these days.

Regards,
SB

 

[bkilian]

I don't find that to be very intellectually honest. Obviously Sony was the only one of the 3 who actually showed some new and fresh content.

I definately agree with Brad with regards to MS's conference, but I think he also gives Sony way too much credit.

All 3 conferences were shitty... Sony's was just less shitty than the other two.

As for MS neglecting their core gamer... well come on, they are! Their focus is completely on casual games and media integration. Lets call a spade a spade. The fact they are pumping out a sequel to Halo is simply the bare minumum they could possible be doing, and lets face it, franchise fatique is getting extremely heavy there (Halo 3, Halo ODST, Hal Reach, Halo CE, Halo 4... all in 6 years? Yeesh... ).. and a sequal to Forza, not even made bu Turn10? Ya, excuse me while I contain my excitement! (well I am still a bit excited, but it's not even turn10!!)

I don't think there's any need to sugarcoat things. MS is clearly not really the manufacturer you can count on anymore to bring new AAA IP's, they have very clearly shifted their console to the mainstream/casual/entertainment focus. That's fine. (Well it would be fine, if the Dashboard wasnt such a complete mess of ad's and other bullshit content) Sony is certainly more attractive for me these days... and I would imagine most early adopters / hardcore gamers would feel the same way.

Yes, Sony showed two new core ips that core gamers might want to play, Microsoft showed 2 new installments of old core ips that core gamers will definitely want to play. Every Halo game they've released has sold in the millions and millions. That's some terrible franchise fatigue right there.

You're absolutely right that Microsoft is concentrating a fair amount of first party dollars on the casual, and 7 years into the platform, I figure it's the right thing to do. We don't need to convince core gamers to buy the console, they already have it, and they have dozens of excellent third party games coming out this year to concentrate on, as well as two new entries in extremely popular old franchises.

I'm with you on the ads in the dashboard though, it just strikes me as boorish.

 

[antwan]

Is this the first time any of you watched a MS E3 keynote?
The Natal/Kinect was the last new innovation / new IP if I'm correct. That attracted a new market for MS. The Xbox core audience? Those are the people who live in the USA. They have bought a few 360 by now, they have been live subscribers for years. They just want to play halo and call of duty online. maybe some gears now and then. Watch some American Football, or American Hockey. Or play a few multiplatform games.

MS would have been DUMB to not cater to that audience; they prove they buy all the franchise titles every year.

The USA is MS's primary market, it's the only market where they are still no1. So they fight hard to keep that market. They rather hand activision millions for getting an exclusive map pack, then to develop new IP. This gets them the most results so it's the safest option.

 

[Vic]

Fact is that Sony tying new IP to the PS3 at this point isn't a good sign for the PS4.

Absolute rubbish You can tell this is the MS thread - what with them being praised for bringing out sequel after sequel, milking franchises to death. The same goes for GOW 4 too.

But at least Sony is backing it's consoles with fresh content, backing it's 'ten-year' claim.

MS seems more interested in Kinetic, and it's results so far have been mixed at best. And far as most gamers go, they aint gonna use a 360 as some all-encompassing media centre when there are much better alternatives out there.

 

[dlm]

I don't know about sales numbers, but my favorite new IPs of this generation weren't first party. They were all third party. Bioshock, Borderlands, Mass Effect, Lost Planet, RDR (technically not a new IP but I'd say it was anyway), Gears, and I'm sure there were many more.

Now, MS might have paid for some of them to be exclusive or timed exclusive or they just were by nature of there being no PS3 during the game launch/development. But I don't see the need for MS to have new 1st party IP.

Did they have any at all this generation? Fable wasn't new, Halo wasn't new, Kameo from Rare? Is that it?

What were we discussing again?

Viva Pinata and Kinectimals as well. Both of which are excellent (VP is still one of my favorite games of this gen).

 

[Brad Grenz]

Nintendo has more first party studios than Sony.

Are you sure about that? And even if they have more studios, Sony employs far more people at their studios (which is what I said).

 

[dlm]

Are you sure about that? And even if they have more studios, Sony employs far more people at their studios (which is what I said).

You said only that "they have more developers." When people say "developer" in games, that usually means "studio" not "person", which I'm sure is the source of the confusion.

Do you have a source for your claim?

 

[Laa-Yosh]

The constant Microsoft bashing by juvenile Sony/Nintendo fanboys is getting pretty effin boring.

 

[Proelite]

Absolute rubbish You can tell this is the MS thread - what with them being praised for bringing out sequel after sequel, milking franchises to death. The same goes for GOW 4 too.

But at least Sony is backing it's consoles with fresh content, backing it's 'ten-year' claim.

MS seems more interested in Kinetic, and it's results so far have been mixed at best. And far as most gamers go, they aint gonna use a 360 as some all-encompassing media centre when there are much better alternatives out there.

No one is praising them. I am defending against the notion that they're abandoning the hardcore when they opened up several internal studios recently and is working on multiple titles.

I also think that the vitriol against MS from clear Sony fans is funny. Isn't it to their advantage that MS milks their franchises to death, loses the hardcore, crash, burn and exits the gaming industry?

 

[Brad Grenz]

I said developers because I meant developers.

 

[Proelite]

I said developers because I meant developers.

In that case, Team ICO has no developers at all.

 

[dlm]

I said developers because I meant developers.

This was already clear. I was explaining where the confusion was so that if you found yourself in this situation again, you wouldn't be surprised when your intentions were misinterpreted.

Not really sure why you felt the need to make a snarky response stating something you already said, adding a net zero value to the conversation.

 

[Brad Grenz]

In that case, Team ICO has no developers at all.

But overall Sony Worldwide studios employs 2700+ people. If you add together all Nintendo's first party studios it's about 1200 people. There aren't great numbers available for MS, but if I (charitably) assume all the new studios working on unannounced projects have on average 200 people each and add that to the known numbers it's still only like ~1400.

The fact that Sony employs far more people in their first party stable than either Nintendo or MS isn't exactly a secret in the industry, or a controversial statement.

Not really sure why you felt the need to make a snarky response stating something you already said, adding a net zero value to the conversation.

Apologies. I misinterpreted your response. I may have been overly sensitive given some of the other posts directed at me in this thread so far. I don't remember the original source, where I had originally heard the factoid, but just going to Wikipedia and following a few links to press releases, etc, bears out my claim.

 

[Brad Grenz]

How many of those people are actually programmers & artists? For all we know half of them are janitors. LOL Sorry couldn't resist. BTW, when did quantity equate with quality? It could be said Microsoft & Nintendo need less people to do the same quality as Sony. Zing Sorry for that one too. LOL

I assume all three companies have some percentage of administrative and support staffers represented in those numbers at roughly equal rates. That doesn't mean they can't be compared. And I never claimed anything about quality. But nice try.

And my apologies for challenging the rampant Microsoft sycophantism. I hadn't realized you all were so insecure about your platform choices.

 

[AzBat]

I assume all three companies have some percentage of administrative and support staffers represented in those numbers at roughly equal rates. That doesn't mean they can't be compared. And I never claimed anything about quality. But nice try.

It's me being funny & not being serious. It's funny how you totally missed the jokes. LOL

And my apologies for challenging the rampant Microsoft sycophantism. I hadn't realized you all were so insecure about your platform choices.

Hey I don't have problems about challenging opinions, ideas & notions, but I think you you went a little too far. BTW, it's a Microsoft thread about E3, how it's not suppose to be self-serving? It's a place us fanboys can enjoy ourselves. However, If you want to express your opinions on how Microsoft has abandoned core gamers or no longers thinks new IP is necessary, then start a new thread about it & crap on them all you want there. But again this is a Microsoft thread about what they showcased at E3. Not your place to unload on them.

Tommy McClain

 

[Brad Grenz]

Talking about what Microsoft showed in their conference is exactly what I did. I don't know why that would have to be segregated from this thread just because I was critical of their direction. If all you're interested in is basking in Microsoft's warm glow, I'd suggest an Xbox fansite.

 

[mrcorbo]

And my apologies for challenging the rampant Microsoft sycophantism. I hadn't realized you all were so insecure about your platform choices.

Is that how you justify your compulsive MS trolling? You feel you're providing balance?

Talking about what Microsoft showed in their conference is exactly what I did. I don't know why that would have to be segregated from this thread just because I was critical of their direction. If all you're interested in is basking in Microsoft's warm glow, I'd suggest an Xbox fansite.

I find it hard to believe that you really don't understand that the reaction you've been getting in this thread isn't a result of you being, "critical of their direction". It's because of your long history of universal negativity towards anything and everything MS-related. You can't be unaware of how that effects how you and anything you post are perceived.

 

[Brad Grenz]

Is that how you justify your compulsive MS trolling? You feel you're providing balance?

I find it hard to believe that you really don't understand that the reaction you've been getting in this thread isn't a result of you being, "critical of their direction". It's because of your long history of universal negativity towards anything and everything MS-related. You can't be unaware of how that effects how you and anything you post are perceived.

And yet so many seem surprisingly tolerant of the compulsive Sony "trolling" from some here. It's a shame I don't have the mystique of being a developer like joker454 or an MS employee like bkilian to cloak myself in. It doesn't seem to matter when I have facts on my side.

 

[antwan]

It's a rather odd question; it implies that MS supported new IP this gen.
Outside of Gears of War and viva pinata, I can't think of any exclusive new IP MS had, unless it was a minigame type of thing from the kinnect, or that mediocre launch game... with the female character (it was by rare I think)

So why would people expect it now?
Are people just trolling MS or what???

 

[Silent_Buddha]

It's a rather odd question; it implies that MS supported new IP this gen.
Outside of Gears of War and viva pinata, I can't think of any exclusive new IP MS had, unless it was a minigame type of thing from the kinnect, or that mediocre launch game... with the female character (it was by rare I think)

So why would people expect it now?
Are people just trolling MS or what???

Seriously? Alan Wake? Kameo? There's probably something else I'm forgetting that isn't Kinect related. But add in Kinect titles which are still full fledged games despite you not liking them, and that grows.

It could be argued that most of the new IP this generation started on X360, likely with some help from MS to get things running. Bioshock, Left 4 Dead, Mass Effect, Saints Row, Dead Rising, Crackdown, Lost Planet, Lost Odyssey, Blue Dragon, Chrome Hounds, Battlestations Midway, Condemned: Criminal Origins, Venetica, The Outfit, The Last Remnant, and that's just what I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there's many others.

Sure some of those eventually came to the PS3, but they all got their start or are still exclusive to the X360. And sure, MS could very well have paid studios for exclusives on some titles. But that isn't much different than footing the bill to develope a title internally. Granted it has a smaller return on investment, but it also has a much lower risk profile.

That some claim there has been little to no new IP on the platform is ridiculous. To claim that X360 is all shooters is even more ridiculous. Look at that list of new IP. There's a lot of games that weren't shooters. If people want to claim that the top sellers are dominated by shooters, that claim also applies to the PS3.

Yes, Sony has more first party exclusive. No doubt. That's pretty hard to avoid when you have more internal studios and very few franchises with the following of the MS backed franchises.

If Sony had a Halo equivalent franchise, you can bet they'd constantly release sequels for it as well. But their best selling franchise is Grand Turismo. Oh crap there goes that theory. It's on, what? The 5th version now? The next most successful franchises for them at the moment are GOW and Uncharted. And, uh, guess what? Yeah, they are getting sequels.

Any publisher or developer that doesn't give consumers what they demand is stupid. MS has a limited amount of internal studios. If consumers demand more Halo (and they absolutely do) then that's one studio tied up. If consumers demand more Fable (and they do) then that's another studio tied up.

And to add to that MS is on a tear introducting bucketloads of new IP to support the new peripheral which people are demanding.

Ergo, just like Sony, MS are attempting to give people what they want. Only Sony hasn't found anything yet that people want quite as much as Halo, so they keep trying. If the positions were reversed and it was Sony that had Halo, they'd keep releasing sequels while MS kept releasing new IP in hopes of getting a mega blockbuster IP that tons of people want to play.

Regards,
SB