S.T.A.G.E. said:
sales2099 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Core games or not they still sucked. They aren't investing in core games the way they should be. |
Certainly making a better effort then Nintendo.
But XBLA seems to be where they are taking risks with new content. Spelunky is a MS published game, coming out next week, getting great reviews.
|
Microsoft has proven that they've tried with high risk titles and failed too many times, which is why they always take the cheap route with XBLA. High reward for low risk. They only care to invest in proven franchises which literally are less than a handful. They aren't good at making exclusives and two generations is proof of that enough for the blind. Nintendo doesn't make enough core titles but when they pump out a Metroid, Zelda, Mario or any of their stable it tends to be a hit. My only worry for them is making a new IP.
|
High reward with low risk.........literally the dream spot for any company to aspire to, in this case creating great experiences at a fraction of the cost at a fraction of the price for us gamers. Its metacritic score also carries as much weight as a big budget game because fun is fun and quality is quality no matter the polygon count. And your making it sound like a bad thing......
I also see nothing wrong with investing in proven franchises that gamers want. Seems they know their boundaries. Big budgets go to franchises the fans want and care about. New ideas, fresh gameplay, and variety now lies in XBLA. Beats investing tens of millions into a game thats literally hit or miss.
Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.
