If Sea of Thieves Succeeds?

[FlashBack]

DonFerrari said:

Azzanation said:

Mate Halo gets released yearly however those devs aren't locked into making Halo games. Those devs are contracted to make 1 or 2 and they normally change after that. 343 is the brand designed to make Halo games, and they release them every 3 years. Halo makes a ton of money and expect no less with Halo 6. Look up how much Halo 5 made for MS and you will be shocked. You know why Halo profits so much and the sales seem to be less than the previous game? its because Halo isn't bundled as much as they use to be and Digital sales also take into account. Profits > Sales numbers. 

Disney have made 3 Star Wars movies since they purchased the franchise. 343 have made 3 Halo Games when they were formed. So what's your point?

It doesn't matter what Cobolt and Scrolls are, they are games released by Mojang so your point is invalid.

So what recent games have PD made outside of GT?  

You should be thanking MS for letting Rare make something new not bash them for locking devs into IPs and worried for future games if SoTs is successful.

I for one am looking forward to SoTs if your not. And I will be really happy if Rare support the game years on end.

All companies milk there big IPs if you see it as milking. Its just Halo is a lot bigger than the IPs you probably play which most likely die off and stop selling after awhile. Halo continues to profit massively and MS would be loving it.

Halo is no different to Mario, Zelda and Pokémon for Nintendo. Huge followings allow for more games made. That's the way it is. CoD releases a mainline CoD game yearly that different devs make. Halo mainline is made every 3 years with an exception of a spin off in between. 

The proof of Halo 5 sales will be those 70% digital attach ratio or the some Billion revenue that used the revenue of the console as well? Sure sure, go there. Let's pretend Halo 5 is even bigger than Halo 3. Still doesn't change the fact that 343i is stuck to Halo and that Bungie left because they were done with Halo.

Your analogies are the most exquisite... so both titles having being release a same number of times by one developer is meant to mean anything?

Your points to deflect are fantastic. So a game made by a small team inside the dev proves they have the freedom to dev what they want?

If you were to ask before GTS, you would be asking "what game PD released recently" because it didn't release any game in the last 4 years? Their contract haven't change as far as we know, so they having released and worked on different games than GT in the past and having no evidence of they wanting to do other thing and not being allowed doesn't prove at all that they aren't allowed to. Again let's go by comparison to ALL Sony devs, not a single one of then is mandated to release a specific game or be stuck on a franchise, not even the ones that answer directly to SEI, so why would the only case be the one that isn't even under SEI? Would that be because you want it to be?

I'm not thanking or bashing MS for locking then to it. You have been rolling this crazy notion during all this conversation. I'm stating what is observable about MS practices.

Also, seems like you have to at least open your eyes to what is outside of MS and see that not all devs do it like this.

Please prove any Zelda being almost yearly or Mario 3D or 2D... the fact that a game have a Mario, Zelda or Pikachu character doesn't make that a milked franchised, at most a milked char.

Snoopy said:

Every successful game gets milked. Even games like overwatch and counter strike go gets milked because they push microtransactions like crazy. In this industry which we should know about hardly anyone takes chances on new ips. Sure we got pubg, overwatch and destiny that are now popular but those games required a lot of advertisement money.

Nope, not every franchise and not in the same way. There are plenty of successful games from Sony and other 3rd parties that released a number of games and while still successful finished. 

Snoopy said:

Like what? All their games look like reskins/mods of TLOU and Uncharted. Hell, the new GOW game looks like the TLOU in many ways. Has the same plot where you have to guide a kid around and similar mechanics. Just another linear third-person action adventure game.

Owww man, if you want to go this way we can then go to say all games are the same because you use inputs to play.

Snoopy said:

Can you disprove me?  A simple google search will show a lot of people agree with me. Here is a quote from a forum user that hits the nail on the head. 

Same graphics
Old man with a young kid
Same melee animations
Same camera angle
Same stiff walk animation

 

http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/so-they-basically-reskinned-the-last-of-us-for-the-new-god-of-war.454786363/

So a lot of people agreeing with you makes it true? So I guess it's true MS should leave the gaming business.

Machiavellian said:

This is a very interesting observation and I must say I agree.  I was watching the new trailer for GOW not to long ago and a few things stood out to me.  First it doesn't feel like a GOW game.  The gameplay was not appealing to me as it moved away from the combo fun of its roots to this slow slog type of gameplay which is not what I was expecting.  Do not get me wrong the game looks great but as a GOW fan, the change in direction is a huge let down.  I am not sure if I am excited about the new GOW but since I have played them all, I will get it.  I just might not get it day one.

Didn't know you had platined the game and knew everything from the gameplay even this long before release.

People always think they know better than the developer. The game looks great and combat is much improved. GOW has never been about combos so that guy does not know what he is talking about. It was never the fastest game either though his attacks vary based on weapon. An axe is not a fast weapons and there will be other weapon s in the game, but it looks so smooth regardless so there is nothing to complain about.