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

[MB1025]

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.

You also have to look at it like this.

Microsoft is, and always will be, 20 plus years behind Nintendo and a console generation behind Sony. I think that needs to be put into perspective when we talk about MS's path to building up first party Studios. They are around 20 studios now with some studios having multiple teams. That number is where Sony was at this gen/last gen. So Microsoft is right on target with their studios.