Phil Spencer Interview: Redfall Reviews, Activision Deal - Kinda Funny Xcast Ep. 137

[Shortbread]

It's easy to hate on a company that is struggling you know what I mean? Why can't you be more like X or Y. It's not really that straight forward. And there isn't only 1 path to success. Sony has done it their way. Nintendo theirs. MS is trying to do it their way and the restrictions placed on them is what puts them into this position. It's a bit like people asking AMD to produce something that is equivalent or better than Nvidia, after following what they do. They're just behind you know what I mean, they didn't put their resources there, and the only way to catch up time, is to buy it. And people don't want them to.

Aren't these restrictions necessary? Microsoft can literally purchase all the major game publishers without breaking a sweat and severely harm competition without proper regulation. The FTC, CMA, and the rest of these regulatory bodies are "suppose" to challenge these types of moves/acquisitions on making sure that the playing field is somewhat balanced and not lopsided (at least in theory). No one is preventing Microsoft from money-hating exclusives (like Sony) or purchasing midsize gaming studios (like Sony). People claim they want competition, but what happens if Sony is pushed out? Then what, they should have made better games (sounds a little hypocritical, don't you think)? Microsoft doesn't need another publisher, what they need, is to stop making boneheaded moves and decisions that affects their brand.

Regardless of peoples feelings about CMA's decision on blocking the acquisition (right or wrong), or reasons for it (right or wrong), however, at the end of the day, the process of arriving at that decision worked (the process that worked all other times for Microsoft, and Sony as well). A legitimate and legal process of sorting these types of things out. Just as CAT will be the legitimate and legal process for Microsoft to challenge CMA's decision (if CAT decides to take it up).

 

[Inuhanyou]

It's Todd Vaughn's job at Bethesda.
Booty's job is within XGS

Bethesda are now apart of MS. There is no justification for MS not overseeing their products years after the paint dries

 

[BRiT]

But MS has billions(being a trillion dollar company) that they can spend on getting exclusives of their own, it just seems they don't want to.

They're trying that but the CMA UK said no.

 

[iroboto]

Aren't these restrictions necessary?

I wasn't referring to mergers.
Just that MS and Apple, at their core are not 'gaming companies'. At least back in 2000, we repeatedly heard over and over how many times MS was going to axe Xbox.
They held onto Xbox, for some reason, I guess it was their only positive consumer reputation, because they are hated for everything else.

This ABK deal and Bethseda really mark a shift in company direction around their investment into gaming and what it means to MS.

but on this note, on acquisitions. They bought the 2 most popular streamers off Twitch. Got no where, and Mixer died. Acquiring stuff is not a guarantee of success.

 

[SmooTh]

Bethesda are now apart of MS. There is no justification for MS not overseeing their products years after the paint dries

While they are part of MS, they act "independently" and this is where MS's "hands off" comes into play.

It's not the first time they've intervened too late because they didn't know something was wrong.

 

[eastmen]

But MS has billions(being a trillion dollar company) that they can spend on getting exclusives of their own, it just seems they don't want to. Remember the interview that came out a year ago where MS were offered Marvel's Spider-man and decided not to take it? Remember the E3 2013 show where they came out with DRM. Remember all the studio buyouts but Xbox have yet to show anything substantial with these new AAA studios? Remember E3 2014/15? Remember Xbox Series X launch?

Xbox should have quality games coming out in droves with all the acquisitions they have done, yet all Xbox console gamers have got since 2013 have been mostly utterly mediocre games on the console. I thought the interview was really telling. He said he gets paid too much for what he does. I agree. Get rid and replace with someone else that's more competent.

He said Xbox is in third place behind PS and Nintendo but he hasn't done anything since he took over that would improve the console's ability to compete with the other consoles. He runs the company like he doesn't care imo. He might have cared at one point but he doesn't care now. He is supposed to be the head of Xbox yet he has let down the console's gamers down imo.

Sure Xbox is more than just consoles, but consoles is the reason MS has decided to push into the gaming market. Yes, they made games before the OG Xbox came out but with the success of the Xbox360, they decided to push into the market. Xbox One was supposed to be the swan song for the company following the success of the Xbox360, yet because they couldn't provide good to great first party games regularly continuing with that trend this generation and then blaming Sony for spending money on exclusives etc. is very disingenuous.

Phil mentions that build great games on the console will not sell consoles. Such BS imo. Sony provided that selling great games will sell consoles. They did that with the PS3 and The Last of Us and the same with PS4 and now PS5 where they provided great games which helped sell the consoles.

Gary is a brown nose kisser imo.

Except purchasing exclusives or timed exclusives require you to continue buying them vs simply buying a studio and then always having those games exclusive. Remember the 13 studios Sony has bought in the last 3/4 years? Why didn't sony keep paying Insominac or housemarque to create exclusives for them vs buying them outright ?

You see the difference right ?

Sony could also have quality games coming out in droves with all their past acquisitions but they continue to purchase more studios.

I disagree with you and claiming MS has only had utterly mediocre games on consoles. They have had good output on the consoles with metacritics well above the 70s on the majority of their games. Even just this year they had Hi-Firush which has a 87-89 metacritic as well as minecraft legends which is around a 70 . What has sony released the so far this year ? Horizon Forbidden west burning shores which is sitting at a 82 ?

I don't have a like or dislike for Phil spencer but since he has moved up they have purchased studios and have purchased bethesda. It's going to provide more content for xbox gamers.


I also think the Redfall stuff is a bit of making a mountain out of a mole hill. They should have killed the game when they purchased Bethesda looking back but you can look at Fallout 76 and esp sea of theives for games that had rocky starts that now have either a loyal following or mega hits.

When Phill says that building great games on console will not sell consoles he is correct. It's not enough just to make a few great games , you need to consistantly build great games over and over and have them release as often as possible. If redfall was a 100% by every and people hailed it as the second coming of the shooter franchises how much would Xbox sales rise ? You think that would have the xbox suddenly outselling the ps5 month in and month out forever? That is why MS wants activison , that is why MS wants to buy other successful studios. That is why sony buys successful studios. Because you always need more content to fill the beast

 

[eastmen]

Has this yet been revealed how many they do from the FTC investigation?

Nope no information has come out to the public. Maybe once MS fights them in court

 

[eastmen]

If Redfall scored higher on their internal tests then their entire evaluation process is broken. The idea that this was a $70 USD game is insane. Also they didn’t jump in and make sure they were getting full support from internal technical resources until very late. So they never identified that the game was bad so they didn’t help them out until it was too late. There’s just something wrong with the Xbox organization. Halo Infinite was an absolute trash fire. I know some people defend it, but the broad reaction was underwhelming. It didn’t have all of the signs of a big AAA title (big budget cutscenes, variety in environments, technical showcase etc). They seem very happy to repeatedly over promises and under deliver. And the worst part is they don’t even seem to be aware that their games are underwhelming until the reviews hit.

They need to make sure their internal studios set a high bar so they can attract talent. That should mean canceling projects that are off the rails. A consumer should see published by Microsoft as a sign of a reasonably high chance of quality.

I think think the issue here is that MS trusted Bethesda's own internal systems for making sure games are on the right path since they are taking a hands off approach. It sounds like they have formed a team that just helps out other devs and it sounds like they have been hiring up and devoting more resources for starfield. Hopefully seeing this they know better than to just leave it be an start running internal audits of where each game is at for each company. Hands off to a point is good but they should still have over all check in to see the progress be it every quarter or bi quarterly or what have you.

I don't disagree, but that wasn't what I was debating. MS saying they can't unseat entrenched competitors is the point I'm getting at, I think Phil's response is valid in that sense. Buying up big properties is just one of the methods they can leverage. They've been very successful with the integration of Minecraft. There's no reason they can do it again. It's going to require a lot more work.

Making video games and making applications are miles apart =P

MS core strength is building platforms, whether it be Windows or Office etc. Even in the console space, platform wise Xbox is way ahead of their competitors. Making content appears to be a struggle for them.

There isn't a single bullet to dislodge any competitors nor may it even be possible. Nintendo is nintendo and their games and ip are beloved by likely 50 years worth of gamers at this point. Even my 74 year old dad loves Mario and he even went ot see the move in thearters the first movie he saw in thearters since he took me to see the Land before time when I was like 4. Nintendo isn't going anywhere they will keep making devices and selling them . Sony also now has a good 30-40 years worth of gamers that will continue buying their product and thety keep purchasing and making new studios to expand their offerings.

When you combine that with Sony likely always going to amd and nintendo likely always going to nvidia constantly moving libraries forward is going to be easier and easier making people less likely to leave the platform.

I think what MS needs to do is to refocus off competitors consoles. No more minecraft or other titles going on those pieces of hardware. Just PC/Xbox and any title they aren't contracted or forced by a government body to release on other platforms should be just PC/Xbox. They should continue to buy studios at a quick pace while expanding and building new internal ones. But even if they build new internal studios the next generation will be in full swing by the time we see any meaningful output by them.

I don't think MS should even bother with capcoms or squares. They need to go after even smaller studios making small to medium titles that are popular and just have them start boosting the exclusive titles on the platform. they need consistent reasons to buy an xbox even if its just a secondary console for gamers. I said years ago they wanted to have a big title every month or every other month. But even one big title a quarter with a few smaller titles releasing around it would be good

Well then Matt should be fired. That said, Phil is Matt's boss isn't he?

Phil, 'In terms of lessons learnt. I'll even go back to the Redfall videos on IGN running at 60fps on PC, at the point knowing that the game was going to be 30fps at launch on consoles. We have to be transparent about what we are showing, what we are showing is representative of what our console customers, committed customers to our brand, financially committed. That they are going to see what they are going to play, that transparency just has to get better. And I am not pointing at anybody but myself.'

The issue is there aren't many people qualified to lead such big teams. I am hopeful that redfall is the only problem child of the bethesda purchase and MS goes through all of Bethesda's current projects and evaulate what they need to be successful be it more time or more people or both.


MS needs to continue purchasing studios , continue creating new studios and to start buying exclusivity deals where it can if we want a competitive market. I also think they need to go big with upcoming hardware projects. I think they really need a Series M and I think if they are looking at a mid gen console replacement they can't just expand on the x. They need to worth with AMD and release a monster with Zen5/6 and RDNA 4 or depending on timing 5. All the while they need to continue to improve windows gaming and xbox app

They need to give gamers reasons to buy into the MS ecosystem. They need to tell people when you buy a game on Xbox you can play it on your tv , you can play it on the go locally on the device , you can stream it on your other device or you can play it on your pc all for one cost with cloud saves for everything.

Not only that but they need all this to come together as quickly as possible so that competitors who are in better situations can't just copy and mimic what they are doing

 

[Inuhanyou]

While they are part of MS, they act "independently" and this is where MS's "hands off" comes into play.

It's not the first time they've intervened too late because they didn't know something was wrong.

Sony also lets studios act independently. But there is a difference between that and not even overseeing basic quality control for something that is supposed to be the face of your brand. They have Bethesda front and center on the Xbox PR marketing logos, they need to act like it

 

[Shortbread]

Just that MS and Apple, at their core are not 'gaming companies'.

Can't the same be said about Sony when they first entered into the [traditional] gaming market? Sure, they provided consumer electronics/goods prior to entering into the game space, but there was no guarantee that they would succeed.

At least back in 2000, we repeatedly heard over and over how many times MS was going to axe Xbox.

Wasn't this mostly fanboy noise from other gaming camps? Even so, during the PS1-PS2 days, many inside Sony didn't want the PlayStation brand to be the leading product of the company, or simply Sony becoming a traditional game company. Many of the old-heads hated Kutaragi, and couldn't wait until he failed.

This ABK deal and Bethseda really mark a shift in company direction around their investment into gaming and what it means to MS.

I really don't buy this. It just seems after XB360 success that Microsoft got real complacent and tried to push unnecessary features and gadgets that many didn't want, and became somewhat combative after the pushback. That shift of purchasing major publishers was out of fright, fright borne out of poor management decisions following XB360's success.

Acquiring stuff is not a guarantee of success.

Since there is no guarantee, why shouldn't gamers (the ones who support CMA's current decision) not worry about ABK's future? If Microsoft's cloud/subscription gaming services fail, is there any guarantees that these purchased game studious become independent again, or does Microsoft close and consolidate most of them into more manageable pieces as a third-party developer?

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Phil is playing the Redfall debacle brilliantly.

 

[iroboto]

Can't the same be said about Sony when they first entered into the [traditional] gaming market? Sure, they provided consumer electronics/goods prior to entering into the game space, but there was no guarantee that they would succeed.

Yes, but they had some key advantages to their platform putting them far into the lead over the competition. That CD was massive, and they got into gaming during a time in which hardware and better hardware would win. Today the game is content, I don't really think having more and more ray tracing power is going to make that type of difference like it did back then. You'd need one hell of a change.
Today the game is content or library, and Sony's not letting off the pedal on that one.

Wasn't this mostly fanboy noise from other gaming camps? Even so, during the PS1-PS2 days, many inside Sony didn't want the PlayStation brand to be the leading product of the company, or simply Sony becoming a traditional game company. Many of the old-heads hated Kutaragi, and couldn't wait until he failed.

No, I don't believe it was. A great deal of many investors thought it was cool but it was a money pit where MS could be using that money elsewhere. This is probably fairly accurate of the time, and I suspect some investors probably still feel this applies.

I really don't buy this. It just seems after XB360 success that Microsoft got real complacent and tried to push unnecessary features and gadgets that many didn't want, and became somewhat combative after the pushback. That shift of purchasing major publishers was out of fright, fright borne out of poor management decisions following XB360's success.

The acquisition of ABK is the largest acquisition in the history of the company. All under Satya they purchased quite a few studios. They just didn't spend this amount back then.

Since there is no guarantee, why shouldn't gamers (the ones who support CMA's current decision) not worry about ABK's future? If Microsoft's cloud/subscription gaming services fail, is there any guarantees that these purchased game studious become independent again, or does Microsoft close and consolidate most of them into more manageable pieces as a third-party developer?

There's no guarantee that they will dominate the cloud market, but that doesn't mean they'll exit the console market. CMA gave them the thumbs up in console market under ruling that they don't have financial incentive to keep their games off Playstation. I would think that 70B investment should not result in them exiting the console market.

 

[Nesh]

That's very assumptious.

I'm sure lower demand also plays a role here, but not providing supply doesn't help either. Nintendo has been around since 1980 and were the only survivor of the console crash.

No it's not, I disagree firmly on this.
A good video game has great game design and everything is secondary to that. Good game design seldom has little care about software or hardware technical knowledge, nor does it have to work together.

Our best and most coveted titles of the last 10 years have largely been indie, because that's where great game design sits. It's when people start expecting more from games than just solid game design, do many games start falling apart.

I mean seriously, don't talk about how you know about making games if you've never made one, or been part of a development team. If you're not aware of the challenges and difficulties or know someone who is actively under pressure to deliver AAA, I don't think you should really be speaking on this. The scope and size of games are massive, and the amount of time and money required to release a polished product up to gamers expectations of what 'AAA' is, is pure insanity and it's largely unsustainable. I have family that work at Ubisoft, and I know PRECISELY why shit falls apart. And none of it have to do with their programmers not knowing how to maximize the hardware.

When you spend over a year or two making a game and it gets to a point to be play tested and it sucks because it isn't fun, and you have to restart to square one and remake the same product in half the time, that's what causes projects to fall apart.

Like why do you seriously think they are STILL making Skull and Bones. After all these years, do you really think it's going to release as an incredible game?
These studios spend all these years making a game, and by the time the game is released, the audience has moved on already.

Why do you think story and RPG based games started becoming so dominant? The story is the main selling point, no one cares that its got dated design as long as the graphics and story are good.

Your whole response is assumptious. Both on the argument that MS has it worse and more challenges in game creation and other aspects than everybody else and in what I am actually saying vs what you say I am saying. And yes I am working in the game industry.
MS doesnt have it worse by any external factor nor comparatively. Your arguments are in the realm of assumption.

 

[mr magoo]

People who say that Microsoft can make same exclusives deals like Sony and secure exclusive titles from third party are wrong. According to Jez Corden from windows central this is not profitable for Microsoft becouse of market penetration. The Xbox simply dosent have the numbers to get same deal as Sony does. So it dosent make sense financially.

I am thinking about why Phil said about losing xbone generation as the worst thing.
I think they are repeating the same issue. If they can’t win or significantly recover by producing enough great games they will lose next generation as well.
If the focus is to stay in business and be competitive (let just skip wining) they should lay foundation for next Xbox generation by producing great games and winning some customers from both Nintendo and Sony. And they are not doing this.

Great interview and I feel sorry for Phil. He sounds like a nice genuine guy who cares. But something is not working and I hope they can figure it out fast.

 

[B-Nice]

Okay.

Please tell me another enterprise solution company that is currently competing in the video game category in which they must produce hardware to sell in stores and software titles in said stores. Who else is doing this? Is Netflix and Amazon selling hardware? Does Apple TV have AAA titles? What exactly do we mean here?

I'm not giving them an excuse that they can't do better, but everyone wants them to compete a very specific way, and I have to ask the obvious question as to why? Other than it’s a way you do not approve of.

I want them to compete by putting out quality titles, which in turn will push Nintendo and Sony to up their game.

Why do you suddenly find this concept difficult to comprehend?

None of anything you’ve said addresses this.

 

[B-Nice]

Also, Sony standing alone in the home console is absolutely no good for any gamers.

 

[eastmen]

People who say that Microsoft can make same exclusives deals like Sony and secure exclusive titles from third party are wrong. According to Jez Corden from windows central this is not profitable for Microsoft becouse of market penetration. The Xbox simply dosent have the numbers to get same deal as Sony does. So it dosent make sense financially.

I am thinking about why Phil said about losing xbone generation as the worst thing.
I think they are repeating the same issue. If they can’t win or significantly recover by producing enough great games they will lose next generation as well.
If the focus is to stay in business and be competitive (let just skip wining) they should lay foundation for next Xbox generation by producing great games and winning some customers from both Nintendo and Sony. And they are not doing this.

Great interview and I feel sorry for Phil. He sounds like a nice genuine guy who cares. But something is not working and I hope they can figure it out fast.

MS already has great games they just don't have great games in the quantity that will move the needle. That is why they continue trying to buy studios so they can keep that content coming. Lets say Avowed is a big hit for them a solid 80-90% how long until the next Avowed ? Outer worlds released in 2019 and we got a teaser for a sequel but its already 3/4 years and we don't have the sequel yet. State of decay 2 is 2018 and the 3rd was announced but the sequel isn't out and on and on. Games take time. If MS has to shoulder exclusives on its own then its going to need a lot more studios. I'd wager they would need at least 1 big RPG a year from their studios , 2 big shooters , a racer and 2 3rd person action games and then a bunch of smaller games. But I doubt they have enough studios to do that outside of the Shooter genre.

I want them to compete by putting out quality titles, which in turn will push Nintendo and Sony to up their game.

Why do you suddenly find this concept difficult to comprehend?

None of anything you’ve said addresses this.

Also, Sony standing alone in the home console is absolutely no good for any gamers.

The problem is that MS can just start making their content exclusive to the xbox app and simply stop producing consoles and they can partner with asus or someone to put out a base spec machine for gamers to buy every 3-5 years. Developing the xbox app further is a lot more cost effective than the R&D , production costs , shipping and all the rest that comes with manufacturing consoles. I know the xbox app isn't as good as steam but its better than the epic store and Ms would have more than enough exclusive games to drive gamers to it if they stop releasing on steam.

I'm not really a big fan of activison games. The last one I might have bought was diablo 3 and the next one is diablo 4 but even I know that MS having all those studios and large franchises will help them compete which at the end of the day is best for all gamers

 

[Nesh]

People who say that Microsoft can make same exclusives deals like Sony and secure exclusive titles from third party are wrong. According to Jez Corden from windows central this is not profitable for Microsoft becouse of market penetration. The Xbox simply dosent have the numbers to get same deal as Sony does. So it dosent make sense financially.

I am thinking about why Phil said about losing xbone generation as the worst thing.
I think they are repeating the same issue. If they can’t win or significantly recover by producing enough great games they will lose next generation as well.
If the focus is to stay in business and be competitive (let just skip wining) they should lay foundation for next Xbox generation by producing great games and winning some customers from both Nintendo and Sony. And they are not doing this.

Great interview and I feel sorry for Phil. He sounds like a nice genuine guy who cares. But something is not working and I hope they can figure it out fast.

The thing is we arent focusing as much as making exclusive deals as it is in their ability to manage their studios, existing IPs and output good games with what they have. MS owned and closed a lot more studios than we are aware of.

But even if we consider making exclusive deals, of course they can, depending on the studio and project. It may not be feasible for example to make the next Final Fantasy or GTA exclusive, but they can approach other promising studios that have talent and make a deal for a new project. Thats how Sony worked with many small studios before they were acquired. When Sony was in an ugly situation with the PS3, they still invested in exclusive projects from third parties (See Insomniac) or bought small studios that showed promise nobody knew (Media Molecule). A lot of these titles didnt sell like hotcakes, some of them had mediocre sales, some flopped but Sony was building an audience. Sony's actual first party blockbusters were few and most people will see a handful of titles (Uncharted, TLOU, GT, Killzone and GoW). But Sony was securing a lot of third party deals too even though the 360 was doing better.

A new game if it is good is going to sell. If MS are really honest about Gamepass, then it should push a title. MS is at a much better situation than Sony were with the PS3. Sony almost went bankrupt as the company was lost in huge debts and bleeding money from almost every division. XBOX's sales to the contrary are healthy and have more resources to gradually build a portfolio of good games. They dont need to make the next super blockbuster or buy off the next super franchise. They need to gradually invest in promising projects, either they are coming from internal studios or studios with promise.

The irony in all this is that during the PS360 time, an argument was made that the PS3 was a better system because of the exclusive first party games and the counterargument was that they arent important because only a small fraction buys those titles and dont drive hardware sales. Now the latter are claiming that Sony's first party games saved Sony.

 

[Billy Idol]

I am a bit late to the party it seems: but I am shocked to read the answer to question 7!! I thought it is mistranslated so I wachted extra the video...I cannot believe that he actually said this infront of everyone?! I think it is absolutely untrue. I think gamers will gravitate towards nice and shiny: you make good games, gamers will follow. However, it sadly shows what is going on with Xbox and why they do not focus on killer games anymore.

I can remember the X360 days, in the beginning, where they had the absolute best games with for instance Gears (especially MP) and Mass Effect - and everyone bought a X360 and wanted to play it. All my best buddies that had absolutely no interest in gaming whatsoever - showed them one round of Gears at one time, next day all had their X360 bought with Gears. PS3 in my opinion only made the comeback when they put out some good games after all.

I truely believe (my opinion) that Xbox can easily turn the tides by focusing on super killer games, exclusives, that are show cases (also graphically). I hope they do. It is sad for me that I have nothing to really look forward to on the Xbox currently and I hope this changes as MS games in the X360 era had a certain coolness factor to them, that made the brand special imo.

 

[iroboto]

I want them to compete by putting out quality titles, which in turn will push Nintendo and Sony to up their game.

Why do you suddenly find this concept difficult to comprehend?

None of anything you’ve said addresses this.

We all want this. No one wants anyone to fail when you consider how much effort goes into this. Nothing I say addresses anything which is correct. But there’s also nothing Phil can say to get people to believe that they are trying their best at MS either.