Phil Spencer: Fewer 3rd party exclusives, focus is on 1st party

[ArchangelMadzz]

sasquatchmontana said:

ArchangelMadzz said:

Saying we want co-op and we get to decide because we're giving you money is not a collaborative effort.

And how could you prove that? I'm not challanging you to, i'm just saying how are you going to prove that it isn't? And how can you prove something like Bloodborne is? When did I say bloodborne was? I'm saying there's no evidence to claim that Microsoft had any hand in creating Gears.

ArchangelMadzz said:

If I was a billionaire and a studio wanted to make a movie and I said 'That actor is actually really good, give her more screentime and a bigger role' and she becomes a major hit. I can take some credit but it's by no means a 'collaborative' effort. The studio still did all the direction, lighting, cinematography, editing etc. 

I'd say that depends on the size of the contribution. Robert Downey Jnr. was inspired casting for Tony Stark in Iron Man, without which we might not have the MCU today. Whoever decided that was a genius and is easily the biggest contribution to IM and may be the singularly most important decision in how the MCU continued.  Do we even know the name of the guy who did the lighting?

It's certainly up for discussion, but unless you can prove it you can't make a blanket statement about such things. I'm not the one making the claim that Microsoft made a collaborative effort, I'm saying them potentially saying 'we want co-op' does not make it a collaborative effort.

ArchangelMadzz said:

BB, Order and Until Dawn are exactly the same as Microsoft with Halo, Gears etc.

I'd say Halo and Gears are at opposite end of the spectrum. Microsoft acquired a team and a year and a half later a phenomenon was born. With Gears, Microsoft didn't acquire that team, they just made it happen. When the chance arose, they brought it in house.

They were involved with each years before release, but ownership just came it different times. Anyone with a big wallet can buy a team after they make a brilliant thing.

ArchangelMadzz said:

But a lot of Sony's flagship IP's are things created by their internal, owned studios. Like Uncharted, GT, Infamous, God of War, LBP, Killzone (Horizon is looking to kick Killzone's ass though) Driveclub, Motorstorm (if we evern get another one) Never mind going back in time and looking at Jak and Daxter, Crash team Ico's games etc. 

It is literally undeniable Microsoft have a similar level of IP created from their own internal studios. The only big one I can think of is Forza.

• Infamous, LBP, Motorstorm, killzone were IPS from 3rd party studios Sony purchased later (in some cases, years later) after release of said games...so Fable, Gears must count right?
• Uncharted, Horizon and Driveclub were all from studios Sony already owned from an earlier purchase....just like MS already owned Bungie and Rare when they made Halo and VP and KS and Sea of Thieves.
• Yes, GT and gow were legit built from the ground up, just like Forza and Kinect Adventures.

I wasn't aware of the first bullet point. Then no Infamous, LBP, Killzone and Motorstom do no not count. But Dreams, Horizon, Driveclub or a new IP that sucker punch comes up with does. Because not all publishers are willing to let a developer move on from a flagship series.

A game takes a long time to concept and create. Halo existed in form before Microsoft aquired Bungie. If Microsoft aquired Bungie, and afterwards they created the concept of Halo and Microsoft gave them the green light then it would count. I'm not sure what KS is, and Sea of Thieves definitely counts. Hopefully it's good because it looks quite interesting!
 
I did say Forza was created from the ground up by a Microsft studio.. Oh yes Kinect Adventures, how could I forget such a masterpiece. My bad, it's such a big IP that we always look forward to it, every time one comes out.. no, it's not a big IP. It sold a lot as it was bundled with a Kinect, but if you see Kinect Adventures in the same light as Forza then I don't know what to say..