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

Forums - Microsoft - Confirmed: Scalebound Cancelled

Cloudman on 10 January 2017
twintail said:
Cloudman said:
Man, that is just a real bummer. They should have at least finished the game. Now all that work done on it just seems like a waste...

The whole point is that it was becoming a waste of money , especially if it wasn't actually at a decent development milestone. And Platinum don't even seem that invested in it anymore.

Throwing more money at it ain't going to change anything except waste the devs time and cost MS even more money.

It seems more of a waste to just drop the project. It looked like it was getting close to completion. Better to get something out of it than nothing at all, I say.



 

              

Dance my pretties!

The Official Art Thread      -      The Official Manga Thread      -      The Official Starbound Thread

Around the Network
thismeintiel on 10 January 2017
Bandorr said:
I much rather them invest money into a "new" game than just bringing me a game I could already play with no new content.

I much rather them invest money into fixing a new game than just bringing me a game I could already play with no new content.

Basically I prefer them do anything with a new game - than just porting an old game with no new content.

The only way "they stopped spending on it" benefits the gamer - is if xbox has limited funds. If their funds are so limited that they have to choose between working on scalebound - or making a new game. And if their funds are THAT limited - they have serious problems.

Well, it's pretty obvious they are scaling back on spending.   Back when that became evident that it was true that MS wasn't going to buy advertising deals and 3rd paty exclusives, I believe they said something along the same lines.  Better for gamers.  Quite a few gamers said they didn't mind it as long is it brought quite a few new games.  Well, they announced a few, but it looks like they are running out of funding for those.  Wonder if they may scale back to where they are focusing on just Halo, Forza, and Gears, with maybe an occasional Rare game. 

LudicrousSpeed said:
thismeintiel said:

I'd say it's more like they are shifting to Windows gaming, leveraging their Xbox fans to do, rather than pumping Xbox in a larger thing. You don't spend less and less money on something you're growing larger.

Funny, I only remember him specifically speaking of Xbox. They must have more things less successful and less known than the Xbox brand. Wonder why he picked that one? Hmm.

And nothing says shifting off of console gaming like releasing two new consoles. Also, you have no idea how much money they are spending, for all we know the Scorpio alone will have a higher cost than all the marketing deals they made last gen or this gen. You're speaking factually about assumptions you're making to fit your agenda :)

Gates, the founder and former CEO of Microsoft, said he’s been helping new CEO Satya Nadella transition into his new leadership role and that he would support Nadella if the new CEO proposed a spinoff of one of Microsoft’s units.

But Gates said he didn’t foresee either Bing, the company’s search engine division, or Xbox, its gaming division, as potential stand-alone companies because they are part of Microsoft’s long-term strategy.

"We're taking PC gaming and Xbox gaming and bringing those a lot closer together," he said. "The power of the graphics chips means you can do great games there.

"So I'm sure Satya and the team will look at that. It's up to them. We're going to have an overall gaming strategy so it's not as obvious as you might think."

Like I said, it was nothing more than an endorsement for his new CEO. And he talked about Xbox because he was asked a question by someone in the audience about Xbox, and Bing. No offense, but maybe try looking into stuff you see on the Internets instead of just taking headlines you see at face value. A lot of gaming sites spun this the same way you are, for hits of course. But ignorance is no excuse.

Not even you can ignore that they are spending less and less on gaming.  You don't just say no to exclusive advertising, timed exclusivity to DLC, and 3rd party exclusives (full or timed) when it's what you did all last gen and for the first year of this gen.  And they were obviously sour about not being to do it anymore, hence the workarounds to the ad deals.  Well, until told to stop by Activision and EA.  Now, if this led to double the 1st/2nd party exclusive content, that would be one thing.  But, nope, it's actually led to less.

I will concede that Gates said it was part of their long-term plan, along with Bing, back in 2014.  He also said if it was ultimately decided to spin it off, he'd be fine with it.  There's been a lot that's changed since 2014, as I have pointed out above.  Spending less and less on something, while pushing another product just as much, if not more, at the big E3 event for the former product doesn't lend itself to the idea that it is still part of your long-term plan.



 

Zoombael on 10 January 2017
LudicrousSpeed said:
Ruler said:

Then just buy a 360

Why? I said BC 360 game, I have an Xbone :)

Yeah. Old games are better anyway. New games suck. Retro rulez.



Hunting Season is done...

j.thomaz on 10 January 2017

Apparently the Scorpio was too weak to handle the game, PG has decided to switch over another platform....



poklane on 10 January 2017

Shinobi did some digging on Crackdown 3, that game is fine http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=228006243&postcount=7443



Around the Network
Normchacho on 10 January 2017
LudicrousSpeed said:
Ruler said:

less games is better for gamers, you heard it from uncle phill 

If the game was garbage, then it is good for gamers that Microsoft took it out back and put it down rather than pumping more money into it. That money can be used elsewhere to create something that isn't laughably bad looking.

No it isn't. It's good for Microsoft, but bad for gamers. You made a similar post when another game got cancelled for the Xbox One and this is even more ridiculous.

As I said in that thread "At best, a game not coming to a platform is a zero sum...the suggestion that a platform isn't getting a certain game is good, regardless of the game, is silly."

And you can't even make the argument that Scalebound getting cancelled is a non-factor. It was one of the most highly anticipated titles coming to the system this year.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=224161&page=1

12 of the 29 unique users who posted in that thread before we knew about it being cancelled said that Scalebound was one of their most anticipated titles for 2017. Compared to 8 for Crackdown 3, 5 for Sea of Thieves, and 4 for State of Decay 2.

Those were all people who saw the same trailers and gameplay that you and I did, and they were excited for the game.

But sure, continue to pretend that bad news is good news.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Normchacho on 10 January 2017
poklane said:
Shinobi did some digging on Crackdown 3, that game is fine http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=228006243&postcount=7443

This is good news.

 

Sorry LudicrousSpeed; I know it would have been even better news for gamers if it had been cancelled.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Normchacho on 10 January 2017
CGI-Quality said:
Normchacho said:

No it isn't. It's good for Microsoft, but bad for gamers. You made a similar post when another game got cancelled for the Xbox One and this is even more ridiculous.

As I said in that thread "At best, a game not coming to a platform is a zero sum...the suggestion that a platform isn't getting a certain game is good, regardless of the game, is silly."

And you can't even make the argument that Scalebound getting cancelled is a non-factor. It was one of the most highly anticipated titles coming to the system this year.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=224161&page=1

12 of the 29 unique users who posted in that thread before we knew about it being cancelled said that Scalebound was one of their most anticipated titles for 2017. Compared to 8 for Crackdown 3, 5 for Sea of Thieves, and 4 for State of Decay 2.

Those were all people who saw the same trailers and gameplay that you and I did, and they were excited for the game.

But sure, continue to pretend that bad news is good news.

I hear what you're saying, but Ludicrous makes a point here. As gamers, we want more and more games, yes, but I can't imagine that releasing a crappy one is any better (and this comes from my moderate experience with working with my own projects). I'd rather a team kill it with fire than launch a turd and "patch" it along the way.

Sure, it's not good if a game come out and isn't well recieved, but that doesn't make cancelling the game good for gamers. What would be good for gamers would be to give the developers the time, money, and freedom to make it right. It may not be the best business decision, and it may not always be reasonable, but I think it's undeniably bad news for gamers that Scalebound got cancelled.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Torillian on 10 January 2017
CGI-Quality said:
Normchacho said:

No it isn't. It's good for Microsoft, but bad for gamers. You made a similar post when another game got cancelled for the Xbox One and this is even more ridiculous.

As I said in that thread "At best, a game not coming to a platform is a zero sum...the suggestion that a platform isn't getting a certain game is good, regardless of the game, is silly."

And you can't even make the argument that Scalebound getting cancelled is a non-factor. It was one of the most highly anticipated titles coming to the system this year.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=224161&page=1

12 of the 29 unique users who posted in that thread before we knew about it being cancelled said that Scalebound was one of their most anticipated titles for 2017. Compared to 8 for Crackdown 3, 5 for Sea of Thieves, and 4 for State of Decay 2.

Those were all people who saw the same trailers and gameplay that you and I did, and they were excited for the game.

But sure, continue to pretend that bad news is good news.

I hear what you're saying, but Ludicrous makes a point here. As gamers, we want more and more games, yes, but I can't imagine that releasing a crappy one is any better (and this comes from my moderate experience with working with my own projects). I'd rather a team kill it with fire than launch a turd and "patch" it along the way.

I guess one point that I've been considering is whether or not a bad game releasing is a bad thing for gamers overall or a non-factor.  If a game you never thought was interesting because of bad initial previews gets cancelled I'd argue that's a non-factor for you because you weren't going to get it and it wasn't going to affect your life one way or the other (though one could argue that if it released it could have ended up actually good and have a positive effect on your life).  On the other hand, some people will see those same previews and think the game looks interesting or fun, and for them the cancellation is a bad thing.  

Under your concept, should Recore or The Order exist?  These have low reviewer scores and are generally considered by many to be "turds" but my point is that not everyone thinks so.  So in my view I would agree with Normchacho: a cancelled game can be bad if you were looking forward to it, neutral if you weren't, but it's tough to envision it being good as a consumer unless you are assuming that whatever funds would be used for that will be put into something better, but that remains to be seen.  



...

Torillian on 10 January 2017
CGI-Quality said:
Torillian said:

I guess one point that I've been considering is whether or not a bad game releasing is a bad thing for gamers overall or a non-factor.  If a game you never thought was interesting because of bad initial previews gets cancelled I'd argue that's a non-factor for you because you weren't going to get it and it wasn't going to affect your life one way or the other (though one could argue that if it released it could have ended up actually good and have a positive effect on your life).  On the other hand, some people will see those same previews and think the game looks interesting or fun, and for them the cancellation is a bad thing.  

Under your concept, should Recore or The Order exist?  These have low reviewer scores and are generally considered by many to be "turds" but my point is that not everyone thinks so.  So in my view I would agree with Normchacho: a cancelled game can be bad if you were looking forward to it, neutral if you weren't, but it's tough to envision it being good as a consumer unless you are assuming that whatever funds would be used for that will be put into something better, but that remains to be seen.  

The Order and ReCore weren't turds, though. I meant a truly bad game (doesn't work, lots of bugs, etc, etc...) 

hmmm.....guess I didn't think Scalebound looked that broken.  Wasn't something on my radar because it looked dull, but I didn't think it looked like an unplayable mess.



...