S.T.A.G.E. said:
sales2099 said:
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.
|
It is not a dream spot. To have to lower the quality of games just to make a profit is pushing nothing. It's just smart is all itis, the way games are moving isn't moving upwards or downwards, just in a the same place its always been to be quite frank. Microsoft fails at titles because they aren't a creative company. Microsoft is only at their best when they find a proven project and invest in it. Microsoft could leave the gaming industry and still publish games and profit off of those. They did it before they even came into the race. I could care less whether they stay or go to tell the truth, outside of Halo and Gears they are irrelevant to the cause of gaming. Don't take this to heart, this is just my opinion. Outside of functional online and Halo Microsoft has brought aggressive marketing the likes Sony and Nintendo have never dealt with. If they are to learn a lesson from them it is that. I've invested enough in Microsoft for two generations and their best games imho dont come from them.
|
"To have to lower the quality of games just to make a profit is pushing nothing"
Games like Trials Evolution and recently Spelunky are certainly quality titles, just not a big budget/high ploygon count game. You just officially associated polygon counts with quality. Nice job.
Ok, so MS is a far better publisher then developer. So what? 360 gets the games and thats all that matters. Who cares if they made it or just published/paid a dev off. But you know MS has also been investing in their own studios as of late.
Irrelevant to cause of gaming? Live says hi......has been literally setting the bar for 2 gens. But thats off topic. You seem to take it personally that MS would rather publish then develop when the games come to it all the same. Your not really even disagreeing with me anymore...you admitted to me MS is doing smart business.
Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.
