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

Forums - Microsoft - What if... Microsoft didn't make the Xbox?

The_Sony_Girl1 said:


Yeah, but SOCOM had a fanbase in Sony. Rare on the other hand, did not have a fanbase in Xbox. Perfect Dark Zero could have been more if it wasn't forced as a launch title.

Doesn't change anything ... Publishers aren't the ones who ruin the games. It's the developers and that will fall flat on deaf ears of the anti-Microsoft proponents.

Perfect Dark Zero had MORE than enough time in development. It was originally conceived on the GAMECUBE. Face it, it's clear that Rare was in a decline before Microsoft acquired the team. 



Around the Network
fatslob-:O said:
The_Sony_Girl1 said:


Yeah, but SOCOM had a fanbase in Sony. Rare on the other hand, did not have a fanbase in Xbox. Perfect Dark Zero could have been more if it wasn't forced as a launch title.

Doesn't change anything ... Publishers aren't the ones who ruin the games. It's the developers and that will fall flat on deaf ears of the anti-Microsoft proponents.

Perfect Dark Zero had MORE than enough time in development. It was originally conceived on the GAMECUBE. Face it, it's clear that Rare was in a decline before Microsoft acquired the team. 


You're kidding me. Publishers don't ruin the games? How do you explain that Destiny pulled content? The beta was basically the same as the game, except it actually impressed people. And who ruined that? Activision did. 

Excatly my point. It was originaly for the Gamecube, then the Xbox, and then the Xbox 360. You know how hard it is to keep changing platforms? Nope.



Bet with Xander XT: 

I can beat more games on his 3DS than he can on my PSVita in a month. Loser has to buy the winner a game on his/her handheld Guess who won? http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=193531

Me!

The_Sony_Girl1 said:


You're kidding me. Publishers don't ruin the games? How do you explain that Destiny pulled content? The beta was basically the same as the game, except it actually impressed people. And who ruined that? Activision did. 

Excatly my point. It was originaly for the Gamecube, then the Xbox, and then the Xbox 360. You know how hard it is to keep changing platforms? Nope.

The only one who's kidding who is you kidding yourself ... The beta doesn't matter, what matters most is the final game and notice how no one is blaming Activision for Destiny disappointing them but rather it's Bungie! 

Which nullifies your point that Perfect Dark Zero would've delivered more if it had not been a launch title. Perfect Dark Zero had many chances to materialize into a good game and newer hardware is generally easier to work with since you can brute force the game instead yet Rare failed to deliver within the given deadline.

Was it EA's fault that Maxis failed to deliver on SimCity ? 

Was it Sony's fault that Japan Studio's games were recent flops ? 

Was it Sega's fault that Gearbox Software made a mess of Aliens: Colonial Marines ? 

Was it Square Enix's fault that Eidos failed to bring posiitive reception for Thief ? 

Is it Microsoft's fault that Crytek's Ryse: Sony of Rome crashed ? 

Anybody that says it's a publisher's responsibility to ensure a quality game are lying to themselves ...



-The Mac would've been considered an adequate gaming PC because of Halo and ushered people towards Mac brand PC gaming. If MS didn't exist in the industry they wouldn't have purchased Bungie away from Apple. Microsoft had nothing exclusive of worth to sell the Xbox and they bought it as  the centerpiece of the Xbox after Apple revealed the game.

- Rare most likely would've have gone full third party and the Stamper bros would probably still be owners of Rare.

-Gears of War would've been a PC game and probably would've been down ported to the PS3.

- Lionhead would still be making PC games.

- There would 've been no Kinect because Sony wouldn't still said no because they make their own tech and there would be MS to take their seconds.

-Sony have had no need to make Killzone or Uncharted, but would've supplmented that with Fantasy action adventure and JRPG's.

- Bioware most likely would not have released their more powerful games on a console until the PS3 era (KOTOR, Jade Empire, Mass Effect). 

- Ninja Gaiden would've been on the PS2 and N64

-Nintendo probably would have less issues with third party and Sega probably would've lasted longer with the Dreamcast.

- Online most likely would've been free but not as in depth as it is today.

- Competitive FPS wouldn't be as important as it is today on consoles.



fatslob-:O said:
The_Sony_Girl1 said:


You're kidding me. Publishers don't ruin the games? How do you explain that Destiny pulled content? The beta was basically the same as the game, except it actually impressed people. And who ruined that? Activision did. 

Excatly my point. It was originaly for the Gamecube, then the Xbox, and then the Xbox 360. You know how hard it is to keep changing platforms? Nope.

The only one who's kidding who is you kidding yourself ... The beta doesn't matter, what matters most is the final game and notice how no one is blaming Activision for Destiny disappointing them but rather it's Bungie! 

Which nullifies your point that Perfect Dark Zero would've delivered more if it had not been a launch title. Perfect Dark Zero had many chances to materialize into a good game and newer hardware is generally easier to work with since you can brute force the game instead yet Rare failed to deliver within the given deadline.

Was it EA's fault that Maxis failed to deliver on SimCity ? 

Was it Sony's fault that Japan Studio's games were recent flops ? 

Was it Sega's fault that Gearbox Software made a mess of Aliens: Colonial Marines ? 

Was it Square Enix's fault that Eidos failed to bring positive reception for Thief ? 

Is it Microsoft's fault that Crytek's Ryse: Sony of Rome crashed ? 

Anybody that says it's a publisher's responsibility to ensure a quality game are lying to themselves ...

It's their fault when the publisher owns the developer or had an exclusive deal with them. When it's not, then it's not the fault of the publisher.



Bet with Xander XT: 

I can beat more games on his 3DS than he can on my PSVita in a month. Loser has to buy the winner a game on his/her handheld Guess who won? http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=193531

Me!

Around the Network
Ka-pi96 said:

Yep, they were. Microsoft bought them in 2002, but all their best employees left in 1999 to form Free Radical (I miss Free Radical ).

I must admit that the industry will indeed miss Free Radical but before being bought out by Crytek they didn't exactly finish so strong with Haze ...



The (gaming) world would be a better one.



Hunting Season is done...

The_Sony_Girl1 said:

It's their fault when the publisher owns the developer or had an exclusive deal with them. When it's not, then it's not the fault of the publisher.

It makes absolutely no difference whether or not the publisher owns the developer or not ...

It's not the publisher's damn job to make the game! That's the studio's responsibility ... 

Why is Turn 10 and 343 Industries able to push great games despite Microsoft owning them ? 

If you truly believe that then wouldn't you agree that it's Sony doing more damage to their own studios than Microsoft currently is by releasing less than stellar games such as Killzone Shadow Fall and Driveclub ? 



fatslob-:O said:
The_Sony_Girl1 said:

It's their fault when the publisher owns the developer or had an exclusive deal with them. When it's not, then it's not the fault of the publisher.

It makes absolutely no difference whether or not the publisher owns the developer or not ...

It's not the publisher's damn job to make the game! That's the studio's responsibility ... 

Why is Turn 10 and 343 Industries able to push great games despite Microsoft owning them ? 

If you truly believe that then wouldn't you agree that it's Sony doing more damage to their own studios than Microsoft currently is by releasing less than stellar games such as Killzone Shadow Fall and Driveclub ? 

Microsoft is the only console manufacturer who nine times out of ten seems to share that way of thinking.



S.T.A.G.E. said:

Microsoft is the only console manufacturer who nine times out of ten seems to share that way of thinking.

I'm pretty sure that both Sony and Nintendo will agree with me on that too ...