Shadowblind said:
heruamon said:
Reasonable said:
heruamon said:
Reasonable said:
As someone who's just purchased a 360 I certainly hope to see more new IP. My only real concern with the console, which held me back from getting one for a while, was the relative paucity of what I think of as true exclusives - Halo, Gears, etc. - vs what I thought of (still do TBH) as 'maybe' exclusives, like Bioshock, Mass Effect, GTA Episodes, etc.
I mean, the overall library is strong, and there are a lot of good exclusives, but still, I would like to see a couple more IPs being tried by MS.
|
Which is what I really can't understand, since they HAVE the IPs. They also HAVE alot of developers who can work on them, in a second party arrangement as well, but once again, it's a lack of anything resembling common sense at M$GS, which, imho is nothing more than a empty moniker!
|
I think, arguing their (MS) case a bit, its a function of their roots. I think MS focus is the HW/SDK/infrastructure with the goal of saying to developers - we have good hardware, it's easier to develop for, and we have (via Live) the better infrastructure to support you for online, XLBA, etc. You provide good games.
In terms of competing in the console world where exclusives traditionally defined the console, I think MS have always taken the approach of trying to support a small number of key titles then either agree exclusives (a'la Alan Wake and Gears) or take the 'get it first on on platform' approach with timed exclusives/DLC.
I can understand that, but like you I'd prefer them to lay off the timed side - which I don't like as a gamer and which I don't see as really being in my long term better interests - and focus more on either expanding their first party or creating more arrangements such as those which delivered Mass Effect originally, Alan Wake, Gears, etc.
I think a lot will depend on 2011 in that regard. Sony right now for me has the much better lineup of traditional - i.e. non Move/Kinect focused - titles. Kinect is selling really well and will demand a lot of focus least sales collapse due to lack of support. So... I think 2011 MS will have to decide where their focus is between Kinect / traditional and how much they need to continue to combat Sony 1st party titles.
I guess now I have Wii/PS3/360 I'm covered any which way - but with all consoles I'd prefer to see each party (which really means Sony/MS for me) focus more on competition via differentiation and new titles rather than timed stuff or relying on established big multi titles like CoD.
I feel Sony is bringing me a lot of new titles I can only get on PS3 next year, and I'd like to see MS in a similar position as well. Not sure my bank manager would agree though.
|
Sony ALWAYS looks to deliver more exclusive content, heck...look at 2010...GOW3, GT5, etc...but it's just that M$ doesn't release info early...under estimate and over perform I guess. I think a policy of having timed exclusives is fine, but there needs to be a balance between those titles, and full console exclusives. It allows developers to push the possible on the console, and deliver a unique gaming experience. M$ seems to hves no shortage of $$$ to spend, so why not front a developer $7-8 million to get started working on an exclusive...Sony does it all the time, and nobody seems to even blink at it. Even with a stock engine like Unreal, you can deeply customize it to bring alot to the table for a game...i.e. Mass Effect 2. With the current $$$ in revenue and profits M$ is making off gaming, I think there is going to be an internal push for this...the problem is that development of software takes 2-3 years...so maybe they started working on stuff in 2008-2009, but we won't know anything about it until E3-'11.
|
Microsoft desperately needs to work on the quality of their internal games. Banjo Kazooie, Perfect Dark, and Viva Pinata could have become great (reboot) franchises if done right, along the lines of Jak and Daxter, Halo, and Animal Crossing. No exactly of course, but in those same realms of success.
And then the games turned out 'good', nothing close to 'great' new IP, like Gears.
Crackdown could have turned out to be a fantastic superhero-GTA alternative. It faired better, but the game itself wasn't incredible.
It seems to me that they tried to make new IPs originally, or reboot old ones, and it just didn't work out for them because they didn't return enough quality. They probably think this is the fault of trying out a new IP, but its not that at all. MS needs to learn that if you make a quality game, market it well, people will buy it. You can't just rely on the brand name of games whose prequels came out so much earlier.
And then you can make it a franchise. They did it with Gears, I don't see why they can't continue quality. Then again, it may just have been Epic.
|
