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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - The Sorry State of Microsoft's First Party

Tagged games:

ice on 01 October 2015
pokoko said:
Yeah, it's kind of funny to look back at all that speculation about all those new AAA studios Microsoft was building for the Xbox One and how they were supposedly going to rival Sony's World Wide Studios in terms of content.

Don't get me wrong, Rome wasn't built in a day and they've certainly improved over the 360, but so many of those mystery studios did not really translate to a markedly superior Xbox first-party selection. So far, Press Play has been the biggest surprise star.

The biggest disappointment, I think, was Black Tusk being turned into a Gears studio. Now, I am biased, as I don't like Gears, but that whole deal literally translated to the loss of an AAA game for Microsoft. If Epic had kept making Gears, who knows what Black Tusk would have produced. Of course, I don't blame them for acquiring Gears and milking it for more but it's still kind of disappointing to see a new IP vanish. Though, I will also say that I really liked the Gears video that was shown at E3.

It might seem strange that I'm singling Black Tusk out and not 343i but I believe that's a different situation, as 343 was MADE to be a Halo development group and people were hired knowing that.

Totally agree, was bummed when Black Tusk turned into a Gears studio. If I was a massive Gears fan I'd probably feel different though. 343i was made to make Halo, that's true. I'd still like to see them branch out, in at least different genres in side games. I think that could be really cool. I still pray for a Halo RPG



Around the Network
D-Joe on 01 October 2015
iceland said:
D-Joe said:
Yeah it's so sad that Microsoft have many good games they own the IP that in development and release soon.
Why i should care they own the studio or not as long as they own the IP which is fixed their most weak part of MS at 360era.

The only atrocious part is some of people in here is asking MS to do everything, if not, then it's bad.

Honestly I had low expectations yet they still disappoint. Does it matter if the game is made by MS or not? Nope, doesn't mean I still can't be critical of their piss poor First Party Studios. 

Phil Spencer already said they want more owned first part franchises, not studios.



http://zh-tw.justin.tv/johndoe1899

ice on 01 October 2015
TheSting said:
I was off topic Iceland and just wanted to know. Sorry
Their 1st party has been shit. I don't mind at all that 343 and Coalition stick with one series.
Do we honestly know if that demo which was not really showing much even a game from Black Tusk? AAA at that?

I think Phil said it wasn't even a game... just some teaser thingy made. Either way I wanted a new IP, if I was a Gears fan I wouldn't mind as much. Also don't worry about it, feel free to talk about IPs, it's pretty related to the subject.



ice on 01 October 2015
D-Joe said:
iceland said:

Honestly I had low expectations yet they still disappoint. Does it matter if the game is made by MS or not? Nope, doesn't mean I still can't be critical of their piss poor First Party Studios. 

Phil Spencer already said they want more owned first part franchises, not studios.

Okay, I still think they need a decent First Party or at the very least manage their studios better.

IPs are important, I'm not downplaying that but so is First Party Studios.



AlfredoTurkey on 01 October 2015

While not a MS IP, I think Titanfall not doing well took MS by surprise. That game was suppose to be the new Halo for them, and it sort of flopped. I really don't think they intended to have to find another game like that.



Around the Network
D-Joe on 01 October 2015
AlfredoTurkey said:
While not a MS IP, I think Titanfall not doing well took MS by surprise. That game was suppose to be the new Halo for them, and it sort of flopped. I really don't think they intended to have to find another game like that.

Create another Halo then it goes multi platform(not matter how it sells it will be multi platform when sequel announced)?

Don't think MS will expect this.



http://zh-tw.justin.tv/johndoe1899

dyremose on 01 October 2015

Why create something yourself when you got that dough to buyout 3rd parties and make them promise not release their game on that other system everyone's talking about.? Surely everyone wins this way and our inability to understand videogames will never be discovered. This is a better scam than kickstarter.



AlfredoTurkey on 01 October 2015
D-Joe said:
AlfredoTurkey said:
While not a MS IP, I think Titanfall not doing well took MS by surprise. That game was suppose to be the new Halo for them, and it sort of flopped. I really don't think they intended to have to find another game like that.

Create another Halo then it goes multi platform(not matter how it sells it will be multi platform when sequel announced)?

Don't think MS will expect this.


I am 100% sure that had Titanall sold like it was suppose to, that MS would have bought the rights. I mean, they paid billions for Minecraft for crying out loud. They aren't afradi to blow money.



UltimateGamer1982 on 01 October 2015

I was hearing a lot of great things too leading up to the Xbox one launch regarding Microsoft building up their first party with lots of studios and ips.

But so far, it's just more halo, Forza, gears, and fable. Shame. Guess Microsoft would rather stick with what sells rather than try something new.



ice on 01 October 2015
dyremose said:
Why create something yourself when you got that dough to buyout 3rd parties and make them promise not release their game on that other system everyone's talking about.? Surely everyone wins this way and our inability to understand videogames will never be discovered. This is a better scam than kickstarter.

Considering MS isn't the only one that does that and they actually haven't done it that much, I don't find this a valid excuse.