And many of the complaints were that it was too similar to the classic Rare games, instead of trying to adjust to modern mechanics.

Hopefully. XOne is pretty dull compared to Switch/ PS4, at least for me.

You know MS gave Rare the freedom to make Sea of thieves right?

Go on, name me the brands under MS that are forced to make single IPs that aren't built from the ground up under MS to do so in the first place?

Yeah, I think Don if off base here. If anything, Microsoft gives its studios too much freedom.

They gave the freedom for then to make the IP as they had the freedom to do Kinect games?

Can we talk about studios that had to take on Halo and Gears and drop their previous games? Would rather wait you name a single studio that made a very big IP on MS and were allowed to make anything else... Bungie left MS to stop doing Halo, MS bought Gears because the creator didn't want to keep doing it, Shut down the studio for Fables because the IP died...

There are much more examples of MS demanding studios to keep churning sequels than allowing then to create new IPs.

Too much freedom? What freedom they have on doing sequels in and out?

You know its because MS gave Rare too much freedom in the past with games like Perfect Dark Zero, Grabbed by the Ghoulies and Banjo Nuts n Bolts is why MS moved Rare to Kinect games and guess what.. they made successful Kinect games for a short period of time. It seemed to work for them. Now they have freedom back and are making Sea of Thieves. 

MS is not out to kill your favourite brands because they love to. You need to move on from your anti MS thinking.

Also you failed to name me MS brands that are forced to make IPs that aren't built from the ground up. Bungie wanted to let a multi-million dollar franchise die which is stupid to any major business model and shareholders would have hated it.

Halo - 343i < Built to make Halo games

Forza - Turn10 < Built to make Forza games

Gears - Coalition < Built to make Gears games and open to more once the trilogy is finished.

Fable - Lionhead < Fable series died and Lionhead were no good at anything else and were shut down.

Sony and Nintendo all have there fair share of IPs dying and studios closing down. In fact even if Nintendo took Rare back, they are well known for cancelling projects if they don't meet Nintendo's standards. So Rare going to Nintendo and magically letting Rare release games isn't that easy as you think. Plus MS wont let those IPs go, if anything they will sell Rare but keep the assets.

1) 343 was created to continue making Halo games. That's its sole purpose. Look at the company name.

2) Black Tusk I'll give you. It was founded in 2012 to create a new IP, "to build the next Halo." Now it's working on Gears.

3) Rare has been given an obscene amount of freedom to create its own games, yes, including Kinect: https://www.destructoid.com/microsoft-didn-t-push-for-kinect-development-rare-chose-it-327384.phtml

4) According to reports, Playground is working on an RPG: http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/11/23/forza-horizon-devs-secret-new-game-is-an-open-world-action-rpg

Playground is an Independent Studio tho. They are not owned by MS.

Does Nintendo and Sony has any studio built to make a single franchise?

The only one i can think of is Polyphony Digital.

Well these are two different topics right? Couldn't we assume that these studios want to work on the same IP again and again? Creating a bunch of games from the same property over a short amount of time isn't proof positive that publisher meddling was the cause. Otherwise we should extend the same scrutiny to Polyphony, as you wrote, or Naughty Dog, which turned out five Uncharted games in a decade.

For the record I think Microsoft is a poor manager of its properties. But not because of micromanagement. 

giving to much freedom made they decide what the company have to do? What logic is on it? Or is it documented that MS done it this way instead of assumption? Because from what we have they were releasing different games because none stuck. So when the question is if the game stuck will they be able to deliver new IPs or keep on the same game.

Bungie were obligated until they opted out. Simple as that. You say it's stupid, stupid is milking your franchise to death. There are plenty of developers that do very successful franchises and then wrap it up and move to a new IP. But you first ask to name, but you'll excuse any that happens to had it.

Coalition had other game in development and were forced to make Gears and drop that game because MS bought Gears IP and made they dev it.

And you assume that the company wasn't good for anything besides Fable because? I know why, because that would destroy your narrative that MS give total freedom to their devs... You will also say that the lack of 1st party titles and new IPs made by MS are totally false right?

I don't want Nintendo to buy Rare back, I'm just pointing out that if SoT is massive success the odds of Rare keep doing it is bigger than they moving on (not saying it's impossible). And sure Sony have IPs and studios closing and dying, but from the 3 companies is the one more likely to give devs freedom to choose what they will do.

Also I'm not even saying MS saying what their devs is bad, although I think it can go to the area of creativity impairing and IP milking, but if it works for them I don't worry, more games MS fans like. I like how Sony do and that is why I buy their console, you prefer how MS do and buy their games.

1) ok. And that is why I put Bungie leaving because they were mandated to make Halo, not that 343 wasn't made to do it. Still you know that Media Molecule was bought because they were making LBP and still were freed to develop more games.

3) Do you know that obscene would be a bad thing right? And as I put, the point is that they had freedom to try because nothing really struck gold, so from MS ways it being tied down is more likely. But if the dev keep their freedom after that I'll gladly eat the crow.

4) Will wait for it to release, but still it was first mandated to do Forza games.

Do you really doesn't seem MS more on the side of deciding and mandating the games its devs do?