Phil Spencer: You don't have to own studios to make great games

[pokoko]

Seece said:

pokoko said:

Seece said:

pokoko said:

That doesn't make any sense.  He's talking about quality.  You can't judge the quality of a studio that has never made a game.  If you want to say, "wait and see before judging," that would be different.

On topic, I dislike the practice of buying exclusive rights to a game that was going to be multi-plat.  However, partnering with a studio from the start, like Nintendo did to create W101, is a good thing.

I don't see anywhere him talking about quality?? Which is entirely subjective anyway, it's not like MS put out unplayable shit. Black Tusk has a lot of talent there, they're not gonna put out a 60 metacritic rated game ...

"over 10 years in the industry and their first party lineup is by far the worse of the big three."

Seems to me that he's either talking about the quality of the studios or the quality of the games.  Either way, you can't count something that has shown zero results.  I actually applaud Microsoft for what they've done with building up first party studios but that simply isn't something that can be judged at this point.

He's talking about size, otherwise it's his opinion and that doesn't really equate to anything ;)

Like I said, Black Tusk is a studio MS have built from the ground up, it disproves his theory MS buy everything. End of.

Why on earth would you assume "worse" is relative to size?  Normally, you would use "smallest".  If he did mean it relative to size, then he used the wrong term.  Regardless, I'm not interesting in fighting over something I don't even care much about.  However, saying "end of" like that, that's annoying, almost as bad as the people who use "/thread".