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

Is it too late for MS to moneyhat the next gen version of Cyberpunk and Dying Light 2? lol

I don't like the idea of a moneyhat war at all, but I can't deny it'd be amusing to see Cyberpunk struggle on PS4 Pro, be optimised for Xbox One X because of the bundle, marketing deals and just extra power, then also have next-gen console exclusive to Xbox (with smart delivery). This would all be taking place around launch too, with possibly the biggest title of the year.

Overall though, I'm hoping Microsoft will try to take the high ground this next generation, and that the studios they've invested in will have enough year one exclusives ready, that it'll make whatever deals Sony is trying to make irrelevant. 'Cause we know Sony likely have nothing noteworthy in the pipeline themselves, possibly for the first two years. I'd have to be very optimistic to believe Ratchet & Clank would be ready by 2021.

Of course if they want to keep playing dirty, Microsoft buying out WB's studios may not be so bad after all...



Around the Network

I can't believe that the PS5 is bigger than the Series X and not just by a small amount either it looks to be quite a margin bigger. It was unthinkable a few days ago that any console could be bigger than the Series X.



MS needs to fund exclusives as well if Sony throws money on so many devs. But they can invest in the development of games instead of just buying games away from other platforms. That might be even more expensive per game but better 5 real exclusives which only happen because of you as 10 games which you just buy away for a year.

But doing nothing and playing the nice guy won't help MS. Most consumers won't care about what Sony does. They will only care about the games they can get on every console. 

If Sony will buy away even big games (do we even know if a game like RE8 won't be timed exclusive?) then MS just looks bad even if they are the "good ones"



crissindahouse said:

MS needs to fund exclusives as well if Sony throws money on so many devs. But they can invest in the development of games instead of just buying games away from other platforms. That might be even more expensive per game but better 5 real exclusives which only happen because of you as 10 games which you just buy away for a year.

But doing nothing and playing the nice guy won't help MS. Most consumers won't care about what Sony does. They will only care about the games they can get on every console. 

If Sony will buy away even big games (do we even know if a game like RE8 won't be timed exclusive?) then MS just looks bad even if they are the "good ones"

Surely they would've announced if it was during the reveal. It's already confirmed for other systems, so pulling it away for a year now would be pretty unthinkable, especially as it's slated for 2021.



Ryuu96 said:
crissindahouse said:

MS needs to fund exclusives as well if Sony throws money on so many devs. But they can invest in the development of games instead of just buying games away from other platforms. That might be even more expensive per game but better 5 real exclusives which only happen because of you as 10 games which you just buy away for a year.

But doing nothing and playing the nice guy won't help MS. Most consumers won't care about what Sony does. They will only care about the games they can get on every console. 

If Sony will buy away even big games (do we even know if a game like RE8 won't be timed exclusive?) then MS just looks bad even if they are the "good ones"

Res 8 is multiplat.

There's been talk that FF16 might get money-hatted and it was meant to be at the Sony event according to insiders but moved last minute.

I'd actually love to see MS moneyhat FF7 Demake part 2 for a 2025 release followed by Nintendo buying the 3rd part exclusive in 2029 so everyone can finally come to an agreement by the end of this decade that timed exclusive deals are crap.



Around the Network

I'd say you would need to secure a minimum of 10 year licence deals to justify the price tag so each of the IP could get at least 2-3 games out and by that time if some of them dry up you would have a studio geared and ready to start up on a new IP.



Yeah Red Dead Redemption was at that amount and most Assassins's Creed games hit 1000 across all the studios doing their own segments.

Actually studios getting contract work for small periods seems to be a standard in AAA development.

Edit: I actually think Gears had like 600 developing it with Splash Damage and other various contractor work along with 200-300 Coalition devs.



trunkswd said:
Ryuu96 said:

Ubisoft, I think almost every AC has roughly 1,000 employees.

Definitely not typical for Microsoft though.

WoodenPints said:

Yeah Red Dead Redemption was at that amount and most Assassins's Creed games hit 1000 across all the studios doing their own segments.

Actually studios getting contract work for small periods seems to be a standard in AAA development.

Edit: I actually think Gears had like 600 developing it with Splash Damage and other various contractor work along with 200-300 Coalition devs.

I stand corrected. I guess I am a couple generations behind. I guess Assassin's Creed having such large teams makes sense. They have so much content and are developed in 3(?) years nowadays. To do EVERYTHING in Origins or Odyssey has to take over 100 hours. RDR2 I am guessing is hundreds of hours to do everything. 

Assassin's Creed basically has 3 Main development teams so it's kind of like a games on a 3 year development cycle with each of this Main teams taking on the main game with other Ubisoft studio's doing other things like Singapore Studio does all the way areas and Boat sections another does all the tombs/underground stuff etc

Here's is a little image of sections done by the non main team on AC Origins alongside the core game been developed by Ubisoft Montreal.



Damn 1200 people. Also good to hear that MS are redesigning the dashboard. Kinda expected that since they have a new mobile app coming.



trunkswd said:
WoodenPints said:

Assassin's Creed basically has 3 Main development teams so it's kind of like a games on a 3 year development cycle with each of this Main teams taking on the main game with other Ubisoft studio's doing other things like Singapore Studio does all the way areas and Boat sections another does all the tombs/underground stuff etc

Here's is a little image of sections done by the non main team on AC Origins alongside the core game been developed by Ubisoft Montreal.

That is a lot of work. I amazed how coherent these games are. I have high hopes for AC Valhalla. Vikings are something we don't see a ton of in gaming. I mean "realistic" games. So not God of War. I loved AC Origins, but didn't care for Odyssey and its setting. The world was just way TOO big and too much naval stuff in it.

I actually quite liked the naval stuff in Origins and Blackflag but I still haven't done Odyssey yet although I bought the Gold Edition on it's most recent sale so I really should get around to it to avoid plaything straight through Odyssey and Into Valhalla later on this year and potentially burn myself out.