By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Arcturus on 31 October 2013
Edit Thread
J_Allard said:

http://www.oxm.co.uk/65227/you-dont-need-to-own-studios-to-make-great-games-argues-xbox-one-boss/

 

"I think to some out there there's a fixation with which studios you own, which studios you work with, and for better or worse I'm not fixated on that," he told IGN as part of the latter's Podcast Unlocked.


"I lived through the Xbox 360 generation and we had a great relationship with Epic, and we built Gears of War, and really that franchise was born on the Xbox 360 and hit incredible heights on the Xbox 360. And whether we owned Epic or simply worked with Epic was not part of the conversation [about whether] that game was going to be great."



More at the link. I gotta say I agree with him. Some people make a big deal about buying games versus "making them yourself" but I think it's a bunch of BS. Is there really any difference between MS paying Crytek to make Ryse, and Sony paying Naughty Dog to make Last of Us? Not at all. You form partnerships, you foster ideas, you create good games. The partnerships MS had on 360 this gen were amazing, both at retail and on XBLA. In fact when the retail side of things dried up a little bit, all of the XBLA partnerships kept my 360 stocked with great exclusives.

So do you guys view it differently? When you buy Ryse, or when you bought the amazing State of Decay, is it somehow different than when you played through Halo or Forza?

If you're funding the development of a game from the start, I don't really see a difference as you mentioned. Buying exclusivity rights after development (or near the end of development) is different though.