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

Forums - Microsoft - MS made 'Conscious' effort to downplay Kinect at E3

Millenium on 02 July 2012

Ah nearly as bad as Vita absence and Wonderbook at Sony's press... Not quite, but close.



Around the Network
sales2099 on 02 July 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Core games or not they still sucked. They aren't investing in core games the way they should be.

Certainly making a better effort then Nintendo. 

But XBLA seems to be where they are taking risks with new content. Spelunky is a MS published game, coming out next week,  getting great reviews. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 on 02 July 2012
Heavenly_King said:
BasilZero said:
At least it wasnt Wonderbook.

They got USHER!!! YEAH!! XD


Usher worked properly. Atleast he didnt glitch the hell out. 

Jokes



Yay!!!

S.T.A.G.E. on 02 July 2012
sales2099 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Core games or not they still sucked. They aren't investing in core games the way they should be.

Certainly making a better effort then Nintendo. 

But XBLA seems to be where they are taking risks with new content. Spelunky is a MS published game, coming out next week,  getting great reviews. 


Microsoft has proven that they've tried with high risk titles and failed too many times, which is why they always take the cheap route with XBLA. High reward for low risk. They only care to invest in proven franchises which literally are less than a handful. They aren't good at making exclusives and two generations is proof of that enough for the blind. Nintendo doesn't make enough core titles but when they pump out a Metroid, Zelda, Mario or any of their stable it tends to be a hit. My only worry for them is making a new IP. 



sales2099 on 02 July 2012
S.T.A.G.E. said:
sales2099 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Core games or not they still sucked. They aren't investing in core games the way they should be.

Certainly making a better effort then Nintendo. 

But XBLA seems to be where they are taking risks with new content. Spelunky is a MS published game, coming out next week,  getting great reviews. 


Microsoft has proven that they've tried with high risk titles and failed too many times, which is why they always take the cheap route with XBLA. High reward for low risk. They only care to invest in proven franchises which literally are less than a handful. They aren't good at making exclusives and two generations is proof of that enough for the blind. Nintendo doesn't make enough core titles but when they pump out a Metroid, Zelda, Mario or any of their stable it tends to be a hit. My only worry for them is making a new IP. 

High reward with low risk.........literally the dream spot for any company to aspire to, in this case creating great experiences at a fraction of the cost at a fraction of the price for us gamers. Its metacritic score also carries as much weight as a big budget game because fun is fun and quality is quality no matter the polygon count. And your making it sound like a bad thing......

I also see nothing wrong with investing in proven franchises that gamers want. Seems they know their boundaries. Big budgets go to franchises the fans want and care about. New ideas, fresh gameplay, and variety now lies in XBLA. Beats investing tens of millions into a game thats literally hit or miss. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

Around the Network
Sal.Paradise on 02 July 2012

Microsoft..see me after class...



S.T.A.G.E. on 02 July 2012
sales2099 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
sales2099 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Core games or not they still sucked. They aren't investing in core games the way they should be.

Certainly making a better effort then Nintendo. 

But XBLA seems to be where they are taking risks with new content. Spelunky is a MS published game, coming out next week,  getting great reviews. 


Microsoft has proven that they've tried with high risk titles and failed too many times, which is why they always take the cheap route with XBLA. High reward for low risk. They only care to invest in proven franchises which literally are less than a handful. They aren't good at making exclusives and two generations is proof of that enough for the blind. Nintendo doesn't make enough core titles but when they pump out a Metroid, Zelda, Mario or any of their stable it tends to be a hit. My only worry for them is making a new IP. 

High reward with low risk.........literally the dream spot for any company to aspire to, in this case creating great experiences at a fraction of the cost at a fraction of the price for us gamers. Its metacritic score also carries as much weight as a big budget game because fun is fun and quality is quality no matter the polygon count. And your making it sound like a bad thing......

I also see nothing wrong with investing in proven franchises that gamers want. Seems they know their boundaries. Big budgets go to franchises the fans want and care about. New ideas, fresh gameplay, and variety now lies in XBLA. Beats investing tens of millions into a game thats literally hit or miss. 


It is not a dream spot. To have to lower the quality of games just to make a profit is pushing nothing. It's just smart is all itis, the way games are moving isn't moving upwards or downwards, just in a the same place its always been to be quite frank. Microsoft fails at titles because they aren't a creative company. Microsoft is only at their best when they find a proven project and invest in it. Microsoft could leave the gaming industry and still publish games and profit off of those. They did it before they even came into the race. I could care less whether they stay or go to tell the truth, outside of Halo and Gears they are irrelevant to the cause of gaming. Don't take this to heart, this is just my opinion. Outside of functional online and Halo Microsoft has brought aggressive marketing the likes Sony and Nintendo have never dealt with. If they are to learn a lesson from them it is that. I've invested enough in Microsoft for two generations and their best games imho dont come from them.



Hibern81 on 02 July 2012

I guess you could say it was a complete "DisKinect"!



"Games are a trigger for adults to again become primitive, primal, as a way of thinking and remembering. An adult is a child who has more ethics and morals, that's all. When I am a child, creating, I am not creating a game. I am in the game. The game is not for children, it is for me. It is for an adult who still has a character of a child."

 

Shigeru Miyamoto

theprof00 on 02 July 2012
Millenium said:
Ah nearly as bad as Vita absence and Wonderbook at Sony's press... Not quite, but close.

Sony was downplaying the wunderbuk, that's why you think it sucks.

On topic:

Ms wasn't just downplaying Kinect, doh-ho-ho. They downplayed the 360, core gaming...they even downplayed their guest entertainment. Before, we gave you cirque du soleil, but moving on you'll just be getting Usher.

They made a conscious effort to up-play name-dropping, things you don't careabout, pop culture references, texting, and reading factoids about the games you're playing while you play them.



Farsala on 03 July 2012

Although I am not a big fan of kinect, it is kinda BS that MS would give less support to their 150$ accessory that everyone bought.