Xbox Showcase 2023 (June 11th)

Whatever happened to the Perfect Dark reboot that was announced years ago?

Around half The Initiative left last year, suggesting it's not going brilliantly. Games can be a car crash until they're finished, so who knows.

I suspect they're leaning more into the Crystal Dynamics partnership, given they've not backfilled at The Initiative.

 
For heavy hitter titles I expect I don't expect much actual gameplay to be shown for anything other than Starfield and Forza.
 
Haha yea man. I was thinking about “Running in the 90s” but yes lol any of the sound track would work

The possibilities! A Forza Japan barnfind with the B2tF DeLorean, where you hit 88mph while drifting and go back to a cell shaded "running" 90's for a series of events. That would be awesome, and make the game hugely popular with at least ... dozens of people.
 
The possibilities! A Forza Japan barnfind with the B2tF DeLorean, where you hit 88mph while drifting and go back to a cell shaded "running" 90's for a series of events. That would be awesome, and make the game hugely popular with at least ... dozens of people.
Everyone loves initialD lol.

I think the formulaic forza horizon intro where it takes you place to place and
Crazy to crazy to start cell shaded and then eventually it switches into the real cars. Siiick

An anime lover can dream
 
Around half The Initiative left last year, suggesting it's not going brilliantly. Games can be a car crash until they're finished, so who knows.

I suspect they're leaning more into the Crystal Dynamics partnership, given they've not backfilled at The Initiative.


Good to know all hell brole loose sooner rather than later. I was expecting for things not to go well with yet another artificially assembled AAA studio with a AAA project with an established ancient IP to reboot, and voiced such concerns from the get go.

I'm glad they went straight to dev hell that fast, saving the team and MS time. Maybe the second try has some chance of turning into something worthwhile, and perhaps the studio made of those who stuck it out, plus those who got in later might end up having enough comradery by trying right a shipping sink to turn into a cohesive team, unlike the innitial assemblage of random people from all across the industry united by money and vague promises of oportunities for creative flourishing or whatever they were told.
 
Someone else mentioned this in another thread, but New Wolfenstein or Quake would likely be at Quakecon? No harm in teasers and "more at Quakecon" though.
A curious thing that I've noticed is the they usually marked as "Xbox + Bethesda showcase" or something like that, but this event is just an Xbox showcase with Starfield immediately after. I doubt we get any news on a new Bethesda game if they aren't calling it a Bethesda showcase, unless they have totally changed their marketing.
 
A curious thing that I've noticed is the they usually marked as "Xbox + Bethesda showcase" or something like that, but this event is just an Xbox showcase with Starfield immediately after. I doubt we get any news on a new Bethesda game if they aren't calling it a Bethesda showcase, unless they have totally changed their marketing.

This is Branding 101, the first year or so you use both brands, and afterwards you use the primary brand.

I expect the same to happen after the next acquisition completes. For instance it would be "Xbox + Activision/Blizard/King" to begin and then becoming solely "Xbox".
 
A curious thing that I've noticed is the they usually marked as "Xbox + Bethesda showcase" or something like that, but this event is just an Xbox showcase with Starfield immediately after. I doubt we get any news on a new Bethesda game if they aren't calling it a Bethesda showcase, unless they have totally changed their marketing.
All the promo material still shows this is billed as an Xbox Games Showcase leading into Starfield Direct. I'm with you in not expecting any other games at the Starfield Direct.

I've just checked my SGF calendar invite and this combined event will be a two hours long. I expect a least an hour on Starfield, similar to the deep dive Bethesda did for Fallout 4 at 2015's E3.
 
I had never thought of TI as a "typical" studio, more akin to World's Edge more focused on outsourcing etc.
I know everybody in the AAA world is outsourcing this day and age, but if their aim is to further cheap out on game development, it shouldn't be super shocking if they experience extra stumbles, development inefficiencies and lack of driving vision, especially for a new studio.

Makes it all the more annoying seeing Microsoft being willing to spend $70,000,000,000 on Activision when they are trying to skim costs on their existing 1st party studios. All in a time when one of the biggest complaints from their customers and the market as a whole is their lackluster execution on actual games for a long time now.

I'm really fretting for Bethesda's future. They were always reasonably well managed when on their own, but under MS/Xbox, I really dont want them to fall victim to constant mismanagement. I know people say, "Bethesda is still being run as an individual entity just like before", but I really doubt that situation lasts long. They spent $7b on them and I'm supposed to believe they'll still be allowed to run autonomously indefinitely? Come on now.
 
I know everybody in the AAA world is outsourcing this day and age, but if their aim is to further cheap out on game development, it shouldn't be super shocking if they experience extra stumbles, development inefficiencies and lack of driving vision, especially for a new studio.

Outsourcing isn't only about cost. Tapping the readily available talent and resources outside of the core team is a good strategy, if the relationship is managed well.
 
I know everybody in the AAA world is outsourcing this day and age, but if their aim is to further cheap out on game development, it shouldn't be super shocking if they experience extra stumbles, development inefficiencies and lack of driving vision, especially for a new studio.

Makes it all the more annoying seeing Microsoft being willing to spend $70,000,000,000 on Activision when they are trying to skim costs on their existing 1st party studios. All in a time when one of the biggest complaints from their customers and the market as a whole is their lackluster execution on actual games for a long time now.

I'm really fretting for Bethesda's future. They were always reasonably well managed when on their own, but under MS/Xbox, I really dont want them to fall victim to constant mismanagement. I know people say, "Bethesda is still being run as an individual entity just like before", but I really doubt that situation lasts long. They spent $7b on them and I'm supposed to believe they'll still be allowed to run autonomously indefinitely? Come on now.
No AAA game is made by a single studio anymore.

The amount of outsourcing is massive, it’s not about saving money, it’s about actually being able to deliver. It just requires too much work to complete a high end AAA game now.
 
Makes it all the more annoying seeing Microsoft being willing to spend $70,000,000,000 on Activision when they are trying to skim costs on their existing 1st party studios. All in a time when one of the biggest complaints from their customers and the market as a whole is their lackluster execution on actual games for a long time now.
I think this line of thought is somewhat misguided. The thing about large projects with lots of money involved, is that you come face first to economies of scale. Of course they are going to outsource, regardless of any acquisitions or mergers, or anything else going on. Any business is going to produce the best product they can at the lowest cost possible, because costs during production are a large part of the risk involved in releasing a product.
 
The issues involved with attempting to do all development in house are numerous. But a couple of big reasons.
  • The biggest and most important is that everyone is attempting to recruit talent from a relatively small pool.
    • To attract a larger amount of experienced talent would mean poaching from other developers since the number entering the workforce from university, etc. is less than the demand for talent.
    • Do you want to potentially double, triple or quadruple your manpower budget in order to increase your team size by another 25-50%?
      • At that point you're potentially looking at not only poaching from other game developers, but other higher paying developer fields.
  • Expertise. If a studio specializes in a limited number of things or even just one thing, there's a good chance that they can do it better and more cost effectively than you can.
    • Presumably their entire tool chain and workflow will be built around what they specialize in, meaning there is no way to compete on cost (not just money, but more importantly TIME because time is far more valuable in current generation AAA game development cycle than just money.
    • And they are likely to do a better job at it than your studio at the same time.
Sure both of those tangentially hit your monetary budget, but the second especially is more focused on the time budget.

Regards,
SB
 
Back
Top