By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Microsoft comments on lack of new Xbox 360 exclusive IPs

smroadkill15 on 22 January 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Jay520 said:
@STAGE

I want to respond to you, but your points seem unorganized. What is the main idea that you're trying to get across? Microsoft has a weak first-party? The Xbox 360 is a casual console? Microsoft is neglecting it's userbase?

Which is it? It seems like you're trying to argue multiple ideas, with no clear focus on any of them.


I have to argue so many points because the defense squad uses so many variables. XBLA, when thats not what the point is about. Kinect  when that isn't the point. The point SHOULD be about strong IP's and blamers response to the lack thereof. Microsoft has had a couple, but has given up on them because they dont sell Gears or Halo numbers. Falling back on third parties is not a good idea and even though they had their own IP's Sony learned that lesson, but has since put Microsoft in a rough spot when it came to first and second party IP's.


I just don't understand why your complaining so much about a console you rarely play. I only own one system this generation and I'm  completely satisfied with what I have to play. You own multiple systems and your bitching about not having enough games to play. Just play your damn games and be happy. 



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 22 January 2012
TheNoobHolocaust said:
Mr Puggsly said:
TheNoobHolocaust said:
Mr Puggsly said:
The PS3 gets praise for getting so many exclusives, but it should be noted most of them aren't particularly great and have modest sales. Some of their IPs have even seen a sharp decline.

Ultimately, the 360 has Halo, Gears, Forza, Fable, and Kinect. I personally think that outweighs Sony's line up which is why 360 is still going strong.


I don't know man, maybe its just me but I'm the kind of person that would rather consistently hit in the green than hit a hole in one every once in a while.

I see what you're saying, but multiplat games are more appealing than most of Sony's line up.

So while 360 doesn't get as many 1st party exclusives. I can't say there is a lack of quality titles on the 360 thanks to 3rd parties.


I have to agree here, 360 really shines with 3rd party games like Gears and L4D. As far as multiplats, for a long time PS3 was getting the short end of the stick. I like to think thats changed now, there aren't many differences between the two versions of really any multiplat game.

If there are its not noticeable, one of the few exceptions would be Skyrim, the framerate issues are fairly noticeable, but it certainly isn't gamebreaking and is already being patched.


Nothing a PS3/PC combo cant fix either.



S.T.A.G.E. on 22 January 2012
smroadkill15 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Jay520 said:
@STAGE

I want to respond to you, but your points seem unorganized. What is the main idea that you're trying to get across? Microsoft has a weak first-party? The Xbox 360 is a casual console? Microsoft is neglecting it's userbase?

Which is it? It seems like you're trying to argue multiple ideas, with no clear focus on any of them.


I have to argue so many points because the defense squad uses so many variables. XBLA, when thats not what the point is about. Kinect  when that isn't the point. The point SHOULD be about strong IP's and blamers response to the lack thereof. Microsoft has had a couple, but has given up on them because they dont sell Gears or Halo numbers. Falling back on third parties is not a good idea and even though they had their own IP's Sony learned that lesson, but has since put Microsoft in a rough spot when it came to first and second party IP's.


I just don't understand why your complaining so much about a console you rarely play. I only own one system this generation and I'm  completely satisfied with what I have to play. You own multiple systems and your bitching about not having enough games to play. Just play your damn games and be happy. 


Yes....give in to what you're saying. Disregard the point of the topic. Nah...lol...I wont. :)



Jay520 on 22 January 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Jay520 said:
@STAGE

I want to respond to you, but your points seem unorganized. What is the main idea that you're trying to get across? Microsoft has a weak first-party? The Xbox 360 is a casual console? Microsoft is neglecting it's userbase?

Which is it? It seems like you're trying to argue multiple ideas, with no clear focus on any of them.


The point SHOULD be about strong IP's and blamers response to the lack thereof. Microsoft has had a couple, but has given up on them because they dont sell Gears or Halo numbers. Falling back on third parties is not a good idea and even though they had their own IP's Sony learned that lesson, but has since put Microsoft in a rough spot when it came to first and second party IP's.



I'm curious as to why you think Microsoft's approach isn't a good idea.

The numbers show that consumers enjoy buying multiplats in huge numbers, while only buying a few big exclusives. Microsoft's realizes this and they do their part in providing consumers with the few big exclusives while 3rd parties make the multiplats. This leaves the core satisfied. They then use their remaining resources to develop games to reach a more casual market. A market that is often ignored by 3rd parties. So, using Microsoft's strategy, one has the core satisfied and the casuals satisfied.

The only dissatisfied are the consumers infactuated with exclusives. They probably represent a very small portion of gamers. Most people probably don't know Xbox exclusives other than Halo & Gears, similarly, most people probably don't know Playstation exclusives other than Gran Turismo, Uncharted, & God of War. Considering how a company can't satisfy every group of people, I'd say Microsoft did a good job of satisfying all but a small group of consumers.

I'm curious as to why you think this is a bad strategy. As long as consumers keep getting good games, I don't see how what they're doing is bad. I'm not saying they're perfect, but to imply that their strategy is bad would be a mistake.

ZaneWane on 22 January 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
smroadkill15 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Jay520 said:
@STAGE

I want to respond to you, but your points seem unorganized. What is the main idea that you're trying to get across? Microsoft has a weak first-party? The Xbox 360 is a casual console? Microsoft is neglecting it's userbase?

Which is it? It seems like you're trying to argue multiple ideas, with no clear focus on any of them.


I have to argue so many points because the defense squad uses so many variables. XBLA, when thats not what the point is about. Kinect  when that isn't the point. The point SHOULD be about strong IP's and blamers response to the lack thereof. Microsoft has had a couple, but has given up on them because they dont sell Gears or Halo numbers. Falling back on third parties is not a good idea and even though they had their own IP's Sony learned that lesson, but has since put Microsoft in a rough spot when it came to first and second party IP's.


I just don't understand why your complaining so much about a console you rarely play. I only own one system this generation and I'm  completely satisfied with what I have to play. You own multiple systems and your bitching about not having enough games to play. Just play your damn games and be happy. 


Yes....give in to what you're saying. Disregard the point of the topic. Nah...lol...I wont. :)

not happy with xbox then sell it



Around the Network
Skeeuk on 22 January 2012

360 doesnt have as many games simple as. i actually find it funny that many users try to defend this by saying microsofts approach is better.

imo the more choice on the shelfs will always be the best option for gamers, having the same alternating games year after year is getting boring now



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

Jay520 on 22 January 2012
Skeeuk said:
360 doesnt have as many games simple as. i actually find it funny that many users try to defend this by saying microsofts approach is better.

imo the more choice on the shelfs will always be the best option for gamers, having the same alternating games year after year is getting boring now


I don't think many users here are trying to argue that Microsoft's approach is better. I think most people are saying it isn't bad and doesn't leave most gamers unsatisfied.

Skeeuk on 22 January 2012
Jay520 said:
Skeeuk said:
360 doesnt have as many games simple as. i actually find it funny that many users try to defend this by saying microsofts approach is better.

imo the more choice on the shelfs will always be the best option for gamers, having the same alternating games year after year is getting boring now


I don't think many users here are trying to argue that Microsoft's approach is better. I think most people are saying it isn't bad and doesn't leave most gamers unsatisfied.


but what would you want? thats the question

if 360 over the course of the year had at least a retail exclusive a month that would be better for you as there may be something you might buy. obviously you cant buy every single one but you have the choice on the shelfs, it should be like ps3's lineups ie, few bigger games for the year few medium titles and possibly even some niche rpg's chucked in. if 360 had lineups like that combined with all the multiplats it would be a win for you.

thats my take on it anyway



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

smroadkill15 on 22 January 2012
Skeeuk said:7
360 doesnt have as many games simple as. i actually find it funny that many users try to defend this by saying microsofts approach is better.

imo the more choice on the shelfs will always be thhttp://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/reply.php?id=139026&quote=4392108e best option for gamers, having the same alternating games year after year is getting boring now

That is where your actually wrong. According to Wiki, looking at the entire retail library on the 360 there are a total of 883 games on the 360. 129 exclusive, 79 console exclusive, and 671 multiplat. On the Ps3 there are a total of 699 games. 109 exclusive, 90 console exclusive, and 500 multiplat. I know these numbers are not %100 correct and it does include upcoming games for both systems, but it still proves the 360 has more overall games that the Ps3. I tried comparing the number of PSN games and XBLA, but it never told me a number for PSN. On XBLA there are a total of 459.  



Mr Puggsly on 22 January 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Mr Puggsly said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


The first three years of the 360's life had variety and then it all went down hill after that. It all changed as soon as the third party games they were getting were no longer seen as exclusives and they were stuck fending for themselves. They rode out the deals they made this gen and cashed in on Gears of War. It was the same games from that point forward. Shooter, shooter, shooter. I'm also hearing they want another shooter thats like Uncharted 3.  Awesome Microsoft, way to think for yourself. :)

Hmmm... strange.It seems you're saying the 360 lacks variety. Because I look at the 360 library and I see plenty of variety.

MS may want an Uncharted clone. But lets not forget Uncharted is a Tomb Raider clone. Most of Sony's IPs lack originality.

Also, who makes more shooters than Sony? Killzone, Resistance, Uncharted, Mag, Socom, Syphon Filter, are some off the top of my head. I think Sony fans like to pretend PS3 isn't a shooterbox as well.

Sorry if MS isn't putting out the variety you want. But their platform offers plenty of variety as a whole. More than enough to justify a purchase which is why it has sold so well.


You know just as well as I do that Sony only made TPS and shooters this gen to attract the American audience. Outside of that they've never depended on shooters. Microsoft ALWAYS has. The only time Microsoft had variety was the first three years when they had very little competition. DIspute it if you will, but think about it first. The 360 was my first console this gen so I think I know. Its about the games for me so you can bet I was pissed Sony started off horribly and when Nintendo was lacking games I was all over it. When left alone Microsoft can't hack it, which is why Sony HAS steamrolled them in core IP's.  I agree with balmer that making a AAA IP is no easy thing, but Sony makes it look easy. Theres a difference and whether or not Microsoft has their act together and people think Sony titles are mediocre, they are just missing out on a great variety of experiences. I'm not missing out on anything on the 360, for the past three years I only have to wait once or twice (sometimes three times) a year to sink my teeth into something on that platform. Since 2008, I've never had to worry about Sony. I cannot blame Microsoft from a business perspective for taking the easy route. 

They only made TPS shooters to attract Americans? Bullhit. Almost all of Sony's games are designed to appeal to western audiences. Its 3rd parties that gave their platforms success in Japan. Sony has been very dependent on shooters, its their best selling genre on PS3.

Sony has steamrolled them in core IPs? An argument of quality vs quantity. Of all the Sony IPs this gen Uncharted is the only series that's noteworthy to me. But even with that said I'm not much of a fan.

Most of Sony's AAA titles aren't much to brag about. 3rd parties deliver significantly better games on a regular basis. Which is why I spend more time playing 3rd party games over Sony's titles. I don't know why you got such a rock hard erection for Sony, but the vast majority of us gamers just see average and mostly forgettable games coming from Sony.

Saying MS is taking the easy route out is stupid. Nobody cares if you enjoy personally enjoy their exclusives, millions of us do. Just bear in mind you're a fan of the platform trailing behind its competition and their spectacular exclusives hasn't changed that.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)