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

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

EspadaGrim said:
tiffac said:

I don't think MS has the same view as Spencer because if I am not mistaken, MS actually increased their 1st party studios to make exclusive games for the X1.

Edit: Not saying there is any wrong in what he is saying but I kind of felt he is down playing the benefits of having a 1st party studio(s) a bit.


A majority of their new studios were built from the ground up and not bought although i wish that they would buy Remedy.

I think Remedy is one of those good examples of what Spencer is talking about.



Around the Network
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.

He's talking about size, otherwise it's his opinion and that doesn't really equate to anything ;)

Like I said, Black Tusk is a studio MS have built from the ground up, it disproves his theory MS buy everything. End of.



 

Seece said:
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.

He's talking about size, otherwise it's his opinion and that doesn't really equate to anything ;)

Like I said, Black Tusk is a studio MS have built from the ground up, it disproves his theory MS buy everything. End of.

Why on earth would you assume "worse" is relative to size?  Normally, you would use "smallest".  If he did mean it relative to size, then he used the wrong term.  Regardless, I'm not interesting in fighting over something I don't even care much about.  However, saying "end of" like that, that's annoying, almost as bad as the people who use "/thread".



After owning both PS3 and 360 I can say that there is absolutely nothing Sony produces gamewise that will ever shift me to purchse a Playstation over Xbox first. Nothing.

God Of War is still my faveourite Sony exclusiive.
Uncharted is a good series. Not Amazing or anything imo. But thats largely down to some poor story IMO that just didnt grab me in the way other games did this generation.

The Lat Of Us I desperately wanted to love. But to this day I am stationary at 81%. Ive sold the game to get GTA5. Which IMO blows TLOU away for both fun and story.

Which brings me to my point.

I have played all the big hoo haa games Sony has. And while good, did not fill and would never fill te void left by Halo, Gears, Lost Odyssey, etc that I played on 360.

People just have to accept Sonys first party offerings arent viewed by every gamer as the best or amazing.

I thought Gears Of War series although having a basic Sci Fi story was actually told in a brilliant way. It was light hearted, funny, had awesome characters and Gears 3 showed it could be emotional also. For example Id rather play Gears 3 again for story than play TLOU.

That doesnt make me wierd. It doesnt make me wrong. It makes me human. Alot of people buy Gears or have bought Gears and love the story. Theres still people today who go online to play 4 player coop singleplayer Gears 3. You can always find a game straight away.

Halo IMO is the best videogame story ever. I dont care if noone here agrees. Plenty of fans proved Halo is loved for its story. Halo 4 is the fastest and best selling Halo game of alltime. Timeframes aligned its outselling Reach and Halo 3.

I'm sure Ryse will be an awesome game. Same with DR3 and Killer Instinct. I simply could not buy a PS4 for example instead off an Xbox One for Killzone. That francise has zero draw for story for me and is just another shooter. Even KZ2 wihc I thought was the best Killzone gave me no attachment whatsoever to the characters. I didnt even remember the protaginist a day after I completed it.

So yeah. Im not attached to Sony's exclusives in anyway except for God Of War. Wich craps all over Uncharted/TLOU and Killzone for me.



No..But it does help.



Around the Network
Seece said:
bananaking21 said:
Seece said:
bananaking21 said:
well microsoft have shown quite clearly that they buy talent instead of creating or developing it. over 10 years in the industry and their first party lineup is by far the worse of the big three.

Turn 10, 343, Black Tusk, Dakota, Big Park, Good Science, Victoria and Redmond all say differently. MS prefer to cultivate their own studios and will only buy studios they have good relationships with and want to be bought.


Black Tusk havent even made a game yet and you list them? what a joke. MS's first party offers on the 360 paint a clear picture of how strong their first party dev line up is. compare those to sonys and nintendos and you will be in a very big surprise if you think MS is on par with sony and nintendo

Of course I fucking list them, they're a studio MS have bult from the ground up and it disproves your theory, why the hell wouldn't I list them? Whether they put out an amazing game or not is anothet topic, I'm disputing what you said.

I didn't say MS is on par with Sony or Nintendo, where did I say that?

MS have done a lot of ground work these past 3 years and it'll show on Xbox One.

you having to put Dakota, big park, Victoria and Redmond pretty much shows that MS clearly prefers to buy their talent instead of developing it. Sure Turn 10 has proved to be a fantastic studio. and 343 handled their first big game pretty great. but other than that? you list a studio (black tusk) that has no game under its belt. you seem to take that i mean that MS never created any studios, maybe i should have added said that they very much prefer to buy talent instead of creating it. look at the 360's list of exclusives and tell me what MS prefers to do, buy talent or create it? look at the xbox one exclusive games and answer the same question. 

@bolded: when and if it ever shows, then come talk to me if i say this, but until then you have no legs to stand on. naming a dev that made kinect joy ride and another that made kinect star wars certainly dont help you out.



Kyuu said:
I see First Party titles as "guaranteed exclusives" There is no guarantee that Gear of War franchise will remain an Xbox exclusive because Microsoft doesn't own either Epic nor the rights to the Gears of War IP.

That, and some fans like to brag that their console's corporation makes the better games.

 

 

Not saying that they own the right because I have no idea how Gears Of War was made but if they did pay Epic to make Gears Of War for Xbox 360 how do they not own the rights?



It's very simple, if you own a studio it is FAR more likely to keep producing games

I partially bought the 360 for Lost Odyssey, but because of the nature of the deal there was no sequel...

But you know with many of the exclusives, the sequels are not going to be exclusive, so buy for franchises that are owned by the platform holder, not those that are just going to be a one off or those that are going to come again

I just don't trust M$ to keep buying games from 3rd parties. I trust Sony to not close their main first party studios (though they have closed a few, they have expanded others)



Pretty sure that paying for exclusivity on every game a studio make is way more expensive than buying the whole studio, but his point still makes sense.

That said, it's no news.



Kyuu said:
Vasto said:
Kyuu said:
I see First Party titles as "guaranteed exclusives" There is no guarantee that Gear of War franchise will remain an Xbox exclusive because Microsoft doesn't own either Epic nor the rights to the Gears of War IP.

That, and some fans like to brag that their console's corporation makes the better games.

 

 

Not saying that they own the right because I have no idea how Gears Of War was made but if they did pay Epic to make Gears Of War for Xbox 360 how do they not own the rights?


I think a publisher would own the rights to the said game they're publsihing, but not necessarily the IP (The Franchise)

http://www.1up.com/news/gears-of-war-ps3-epic-love

I talked two weeks ago with a 'people can fly' dev about Gears of war and they claimed that MS not owns the IP but they have some power about the Gears of war franchise, he named a name of a contract that only allows a new Gears of war game if MS allows it.   Basically if Epic wants to make GEOW for Wii U MS can decide if it will come trough or not.  He also stated to me that Sony and Epic are working on something.     Well if you want to believe him and my word that is your choice though :).