Forums - Microsoft Discussion - With Series X, Microsoft has no more excuses for first party software droughts

This generation could be the best first party support for an Xbox console ever.

Last edited by PotentHerbs - 5 days ago

Around the Network
vivster said:

Sorry, but I've heard just too many times the beautiful phrase of "We are pumping so many resources in acquiring 1st party games, but please be patient because making games takes years". Well, many years have passed and nothing happened, so excuse me if I don't have much confidence in anyone claiming the exact thing right now.

As for the sudden shift, I don't see it. If anything the X360 showed how much weaker their brand is compared to Playstation. If I get a 90m head start in a 100m dash against Usain Bolt and finish a millisecond behind him, that doesn't mean I'm suddenly close to equal with him. No, it highlights even more how great Bolt is by still being able to win with such a handicap. Not only had the 360 a massive head start, every sale after it was basically compound interest due to a more competitive base and so many more people already jumping on it because there was no alternative. XSX doesn't have a massive head start this time and it looks like prices of both are gonna be competitive. PS5 is even in a way better position that the PS4 was since it is able to leverage a substantial fanbase and reconfirmed trust by consumers.

X1 once again confirmed that even coming from the strongest position they ever had, they couldn't capitalize on it. Why? Because they did not have any competitive 1st party offerings. They couldn't even be arsed to do it when they most needed it, so why would anyone believe that right now that suddenly is going to change? The hope for XSX to turn things around is about as feeble as my hope for a failed Switch.

I wish nothing more than Xbox completely crushing Playstation into oblivion, but I just can't see it.

The 360's headstart over the PS3 amounted to a meager 5.5m and Sony had to buy market share by sacrificing billions of dollars in order to sell more units. So using your analogy correctly, you got a headstart of 7m in a 100m dash and Bolt could only beat you because he was doped.

Your history of the events is so way off that it's hard to believe that you've been on this site for several years. The Xbox One's poor performance isn't owed to lackluster first party offerings, it comes down to Microsoft making it clear from the get-go that multiplatform games will be inferior on their console, in combination with braindead anti-consumer policies. Microsoft positioning the XSX as superior to the PS5 is much, much more important than a bolstered first party lineup.

Your analysis of the prospects of the XSX is about as poor as your assumptions for why Switch could fail. You've learned nothing.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

vivster said:

Microsoft had 3 generations of showing a strong 1st party lineup, they never delivered. There is absolutely no reason to believe it's gonna be different this time around.

We've been hearing about MS beefing up their 1st party for 15 years now.

There was a window of a few years on the Xbox 360 where MS was nailing the first and second party mix.

But broadly I agree with the thread. MS has bought up game studios en masse. The first year of Series X can be expected to be a little dry given the timing of the purchases, but after that I'd expect to see multiple high quality exclusives with decent diversity each year.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

vivster said:

Sorry, but I've heard just too many times the beautiful phrase of "We are pumping so many resources in acquiring 1st party games, but please be patient because making games takes years". Well, many years have passed and nothing happened, so excuse me if I don't have much confidence in anyone claiming the exact thing right now.

Fair enough, but I would say that, seeing as they have 10 games already announced for the near future (with supposedly more to be announced on July) they appear to be keeping their promise on the quantity front.



DonFerrari said:
Dulfite said:

When has Nintendo ever had 7 months with no first party game? If we are counting both handhelds and home consoles I don't think ever?

And to not count both is something I don't agree with because more than Sony and way more than Microsoft, Nintendo has had to split it's software divisions in half to satisfy gamers on both platforms. Now, with the Switch and going forward with a unified platform, that has even less of a chance of happening.

I know this is mostly off topic, but I don't get the shot taken at Nintendo in the op. Can you give me some years in which there were 7 month droughts of no first party games from them? Maybe I'm wrong.

I guess he is talking about WiiU only because it was really abandoned.

They still came out with 3ds games during that time.



Around the Network
Dulfite said:
DonFerrari said:

I guess he is talking about WiiU only because it was really abandoned.

They still came out with 3ds games during that time.

I know, but for a costumer of WiiU the releases on 3DS doesn't really matter.

It is like saying that because MS was releasing Windows and Office products during that time alleviate they not releasing games.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

I just don't want to hear MS say yet again for the 15th year in a row "Greatest lineup in Xbox history" . Heard that promise forever and a day. I kinda wish they would revive Rare lesser-known stuff like Wizards and Warriors. Maybe Captain Skyhawk?



Bite my shiny metal Cockpit!

vivster said:
RolStoppable said:

I'll focus on the bolded to keep this thread on topic. Your paragraph doesn't require many changes to match the thought processes that preceded 360 vs. PS3. What history has taught us is that the generational reset in the console business can change the fortunes of console manufacturers very fast. PS2 vs. Xbox was a clear win for Sony, PS3 vs. 360 was absolutely not a win for Sony, PS4 vs. XB1 was a clear win for Sony again. If you want it as simple as predicting a sudden shift based on historic sales data, then PS5 vs. XSX should be a significant loss in market share for Sony because so far a big shift has occured every generation between PS and Xbox. (That's not how proper analysis works, but you seem to prefer to simplify things beyond the point of rationality.)

For Microsoft's first party specifically, the sudden shift has already occured, but game development takes years, so it logically follows that the fruits of Microsoft's decisions won't be visible until years after the sudden shift had happened. Up till 2017, Microsoft's first party direction put an emphasis on the games as a service model and first party studios that failed to deliver got closed without any replacements for them. Beginning in 2018, Microsoft made moves to bolster their first party studios with several acquisitions. I don't need to explain that more studios mean that more games can be developed concurrently. Then again, this sequence of events has been lost on you, judging by your posts in this thread.

Sorry, but I've heard just too many times the beautiful phrase of "We are pumping so many resources in acquiring 1st party games, but please be patient because making games takes years". Well, many years have passed and nothing happened, so excuse me if I don't have much confidence in anyone claiming the exact thing right now.

As for the sudden shift, I don't see it. If anything the X360 showed how much weaker their brand is compared to Playstation. If I get a 90m head start in a 100m dash against Usain Bolt and finish a millisecond behind him, that doesn't mean I'm suddenly close to equal with him. No, it highlights even more how great Bolt is by still being able to win with such a handicap. Not only had the 360 a massive head start, every sale after it was basically compound interest due to a more competitive base and so many more people already jumping on it because there was no alternative. 

I don't agree with your analogy. The generation went on for 8 years before the successors hit the market. M$ was only out one year longer than PS3 and only sold about 5.5m during that first year. They wanted to sell 10 million before the PS3 released but that didn't happen *. There was a "Dreamcast effect" where people just wanted to see what Sony offered before buying. In every reveal, the PS3 looked to be a better system in every way, showing demos that looked better than anything the Xbox 360 was showing. AND it had fancy Wii like motion controls. You remember Sony saying "Next gen doesn't start until we say so".

And even then, Sony didn't surpass Xbox until after the PS4 and Xbox One were released *. And even that came at a huge financial cost.

There's a quote I read in a magazine that I can't find anywhere but it stayed in my mind. It was something like: Sony: "Their lead doesn't matter. We've been in this position before. Dreamcast first, PS2 later. PS1 first, N64 later. It doesn't matter what they sell. We'll quickly overtake them and it will be business as usual." And they had every right to feel that way. It was historically accurate. No matter what the competition did, Sony crushed them. They outsold the competition by five times during the 6th gen.

If you were running the 100m against Usain Bolt and he gave you a 15m head start and you barely lost by seconds even after blowing your hamstring early in the race (subtle RRoD analogy, there), that's actually something to be proud of. I'd say a better analogy would be Rocky vs Apollo Creed. Despite having nobody believing in him, Rocky went toe to toe with the champ. He didn't even belong in the same ring. He fought an amazing fight, almost won, and stole our hearts.

Then later, Mr. T easily beat the hell out of him and killed his manager.

*Sales figures are from memory. May not be 100% accurate.

Last edited by d21lewis - 4 days ago

mZuzek loves AA batteries

This year alone is pretty stacked. Going forward I feel there will be minimum 2 AAA games per year with numerous A-AA to pad out the non holiday period. I don’t see them slowing down, especially if they aren’t done acquiring.



 

 

Leynos said:
I just don't want to hear MS say yet again for the 15th year in a row "Greatest lineup in Xbox history" . Heard that promise forever and a day. I kinda wish they would revive Rare lesser-known stuff like Wizards and Warriors. Maybe Captain Skyhawk?

But guys here will say Phill Spencer haven't said that nor did promise to improve the first party for several years.

d21lewis said:
vivster said:

Sorry, but I've heard just too many times the beautiful phrase of "We are pumping so many resources in acquiring 1st party games, but please be patient because making games takes years". Well, many years have passed and nothing happened, so excuse me if I don't have much confidence in anyone claiming the exact thing right now.

As for the sudden shift, I don't see it. If anything the X360 showed how much weaker their brand is compared to Playstation. If I get a 90m head start in a 100m dash against Usain Bolt and finish a millisecond behind him, that doesn't mean I'm suddenly close to equal with him. No, it highlights even more how great Bolt is by still being able to win with such a handicap. Not only had the 360 a massive head start, every sale after it was basically compound interest due to a more competitive base and so many more people already jumping on it because there was no alternative. 

I don't agree with your analogy. The generation went on for 8 years before the successors hit the market. M$ was only out one year longer than PS3 and only sold about 5.5m during that first year. They wanted to sell 10 million before the PS3 released but that didn't happen *. There was a "Dreamcast effect" where people just wanted to see what Sony offered before buying. In every reveal, the PS3 looked to be a better system in every way, showing demos that looked better than anything the Xbox 360 was showing. AND it had fancy Wii like motion controls. You remember Sony saying "Next gen doesn't start until we say so".

And even then, Sony didn't surpass Xbox until after the PS4 and Xbox One were released *. And even that came at a huge financial cost.

There's a quote I read in a magazine that I can't find anywhere but it stayed in my mind. It was something like: Sony: "Their lead doesn't matter. We've been in this position before. Dreamcast first, PS2 later. PS1 first, N64 later. It doesn't matter what they sell. We'll quickly overtake them and it will be business as usual." And they had every right to feel that way. It was historically accurate. No matter what the competition did, Sony crushed them. They outsold the competition by five times during the 6th gen.

If you were running the 100m against Usain Bolt and he gave you a 15m head start and you barely lost by seconds even after blowing your hamstring early in the race (subtle RRoD analogy, there), that's actually something to be proud of. I'd say a better analogy would be Rocky vs Apollo Creed. Despite having nobody believing in him, Rocky went toe to toe with the champ. He didn't even belong in the same ring. He fought an amazing fight, almost won, and stole our hearts.

Then later, Mr. T easily beat the hell out of him and killed his manager.

*Sales figures are from memory. May not be 100% accurate.

Rocky managed to be champion on second movie, third and fourth, and even after retired he almost won again.

Don't see MS doing the champion on X1....



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994