Not by Rare but Too Human is also like that. Started as a GameCube game, it was a part of GCN's pre-release lineup. They released the unfinished game on 360, yet I wouldn't say no to a Switch port. It wasn't THAT bad.Kameo, Grabbed by the Ghoulies and PD Zero being brought over to Switch/Switch 2 would make for a funny avant garde story considering those titles started off as GCN games before the buyout.
Yeah Spencer still seemed pretty keen to keep the hardware side of Xbox going and was potentially looking to play the long game and come back strong next gen, but I wonder if those higher up don't have that same kind of patience.Wonder if Spencer is gonna step down over this. If it's as radical a shift as these leaks seem to suggest they really need someone new to right the ship that Spencer failed to keep from sinking.
I sure don't find it funny for the people that invested in the Xbox ecosystem that may end up losing their digital library and game saves in the future due to MS pulling a Zune or a Windows Phone. But laugh away I guess.I haven't read everything about what's been going on here, but multiplat seems like the best strategy for Xbox with all its many studios whose revenue comes from multiplat games. Those companies would be slowly killed by Xbox exclusivity.
Totally agree with people saying a lack of competition for PS is really bad for players.
But am I allowed to laugh at huge money failing (in the console business)?
That isn't what I was laughing at and I don't see any quickening of that situation. It is an inevitable situation for all digital libraries you know.I sure don't find it funny for the people that invested in the Xbox ecosystem that may end up losing their digital library and game saves in the future due to MS pulling a Zune or a Windows Phone. But laugh away I guess.
It's very catastrophist to think that the Xbox digital library will just vanish because of this. At this point, there's no solid reason to think that. If anything, Microsoft going digital-only and wanting to leverage their ecosystem over exclusive games signals the opposite.I sure don't find it funny for the people that invested in the Xbox ecosystem that may end up losing their digital library and game saves in the future due to MS pulling a Zune or a Windows Phone. But laugh away I guess.
Rare Replay switch(2)?
Don’t know if that’ll be the case. But i did wonder about his role. This change seems to be too far soon compared to what he talked about and those leak emails.Wonder if Spencer is gonna step down over this. If it's as radical a shift as these leaks seem to suggest they really need someone new to right the ship that Spencer failed to keep from sinking.
All I really want is Rare Replay and Hi Fi Rush. To be honest the rest of the XBOX catalogue just bores me to tears.
Spencer: “We finally acquired Activision-Blizzard!!”
Nadella:
Yeah, Jason’s tweet is unrelated
Spencer: “We finally acquired Activision-Blizzard!!”
Nadella:
Seeing as Spencer was the one to make Bethesda games exclusive in the first place, I very much doubt that he was on board with this. Like, he might accept it if it's a condition for him to keep his job but I don't think they're doing this voluntarily.Don’t know if that’ll be the case. But i did wonder about his role. This change seems to be too far soon compared to what he talked about and those leak emails.
The exclusive CoD deals have been very important for PlayStation, and these will probably not continue.Remember when people were afraid that they might take COD away from Playstation
Starting to feel like the merger imight be helping Sony more than Microsoft lmao
I agree with a lot that you say in this post. It's definitely a new decision, not something they've been planning long term.I also feel this must be a recent decision. If this had been Microsoft's long term plan dating back the past few years, then they would have surely been blaring it from the rooftops during the ABK acquisition. It would have made it far less of an ordeal to get the deal past regulators if they'd made it clear this was going to be their plan going forward.
The more I think about it, the more it seems clear that the Microsoft Top Brass aren't happy with Xbox sales and are now looking to recoup costs from the ABK merger as fast as possible. Possible they now view dedicated hardware as an unnecessary expense in this day and age.
The few people who care about such things, and care about what Rare was and did decades ago, probably know it anyway. It is not a helpful marketing gag.Tell you what, they'll miss a marketing trick if they announce Sea of Thieves on Switch without exclaiming the words 'RARE ARE BACK' at every opportunity.
Yeah Spencer still seemed pretty keen to keep the hardware side of Xbox going and was potentially looking to play the long game and come back strong next gen, but I wonder if those higher up don't have that same kind of patience.
I agree with a lot that you say in this post. It's definitely a new decision, not something they've been planning long term.
I think one of the reasons we're seeing this is that tech companies like Microsoft were throwing money around when interest rates were cheap and debt was essentially free, but now that interest rates have skyrocketed, the financial departments are now going to be taking an axe to anything that doesn't generate revenue and profit.
The sad thing is, even with the above, I still think this is foolish short term thinking. Console hardware always has the potential to generate revenue long term. The best thing MS could have done would be putting in the effort to make Xbox hardware desirable again: doing that means getting billions in revenue from game sales on your hardware, which is a huge source of income. De-emphasizing hardware just means giving up on that revenue stream, which is absolutely the wrong decision. Not when they had the entire ABK library to start selling the hardware with.
I'm in agreement that it seems short sighted, and I believed until recently their strategy was to emulate what Nintendo achieved with the Wii U to Switch turnaround - ride out the next 2-3 years, giving all their new studios time to cook, then come out the gate with a new console and a killer lineup for the following two years. I think it's a strategy that could have worked if Phil had been given time. But I guess you could argue that Phil has been given six years and Xbox sales are worse than ever.I agree with a lot that you say in this post. It's definitely a new decision, not something they've been planning long term.
I think one of the reasons we're seeing this is that tech companies like Microsoft were throwing money around when interest rates were cheap and debt was essentially free, but now that interest rates have skyrocketed, the financial departments are now going to be taking an axe to anything that doesn't generate revenue and profit.
The sad thing is, even with the above, I still think this is foolish short term thinking. Console hardware always has the potential to generate revenue long term. The best thing MS could have done would be putting in the effort to make Xbox hardware desirable again: doing that means getting billions in revenue from game sales on your hardware, which is a huge source of income. De-emphasizing hardware just means giving up on that revenue stream, which is absolutely the wrong decision. Not when they had the entire ABK library to start selling the hardware with.
There's a rumored remakster of Oblivion by Virtuos. Virtuos is a well experienced Switch port studio, so Oblivion for Switch and/or successor makes a lot of sense.The IP I was most worried about was Elder Scrolls, so I'm glad to learn that there's a chance I might be able to play the next one on my playstation or switch. I was ready to buy an Xbox only for that, but I rather not to.
I just hope they come out and share what their immediate and mid-term plans are for the XBOX platform because I currently see no point in sticking with them rather than cut my "losses" and jump back to PS.
I mean, they'd probably be very happy with Xbox One sales right now...I know this seems like an over-generalization, but it's pretty astounding that the Xbox brand still continues to struggle to recover from the Xbox One.
Gonna need ESPN to do a 30 for 30 on the Xbox platform post 2012.I mean, they'd probably be very happy with Xbox One sales right now...
No one's successfully broken into the traditional console space since Xbox did it over 20 years ago despite Xbox being a weak brand for half of that time, if not longer. If your goal is to just make a traditional PlayStation competitor, the only real play is to buy exclusivity deals until your first party output can rival Sony's.You think something will come up to replace Xbox in the same way they replaced Sega once their consoles went under?
Consoles have and always will be a risk. You can go a whole generation of hardware with incredible games made obscure because they happen to be stuck on an unpopular machine. You can have you brand nigh irreverisbly damaged by such failure.The sad thing is, even with the above, I still think this is foolish short term thinking. Console hardware always has the potential to generate revenue long term. The best thing MS could have done would be putting in the effort to make Xbox hardware desirable again: doing that means getting billions in revenue from game sales on your hardware, which is a huge source of income. De-emphasizing hardware just means giving up on that revenue stream, which is absolutely the wrong decision. Not when they had the entire ABK library to start selling the hardware with.
This is the most important question, and I think Series S might be the answer. They can offer different options that don't really compete with PS, like a much cheaper console that runs most games, handheld gaming devices, super powerful Xbox/Surface gaming PC, etc."why continue making dedicated hardware?"
The thing is, Starfield was never going to turn things around by itself. No one game ever turns around hardware by itself. It's about showcasing that you've got an upcoming library of strong software.Replying mostly to the bolded part here: I think it made sense for them to at least wait and see if a massive exclusive like Starfield would turn into a system seller. I think it's safe to say that it did not and that, going even a step further, Microsoft so far does not have a single system seller exclusive to them.
Now I get that "system seller" may be a poorly defined term. What I mean is literally any piece of software that significantly shifts hardware numbers (making an impact on market share as well) and I don't think we can say that we have seen any of that so far.
In light of that I think it would make a lot of sense for Microsoft to make their content available to a broader audience, ultimately earning them more money.
But that of course both begs the question "why continue making dedicated hardware?" and also wether or not GamePass is really the way to go for them to make the most money from their IPs.
I thought most of the original Rare devs who worked on Banjo left to create Playtonic?Banjo Threeie in name is great. But please remember Rare made those games. Their humor is so hard to match. That’s a vital part of the Banjo Kazooie series. If Rare doesn’t make Banjo Threeie (which they won’t), then I’ll have some skepticism
I was super hyped for Too Human. Then it came out and got middling reviews and I never picked it up. I think I might have played a demo, though.Not by Rare but Too Human is also like that. Started as a GameCube game, it was a part of GCN's pre-release lineup. They released the unfinished game on 360, yet I wouldn't say no to a Switch port. It wasn't THAT bad.
that shit is in legal superhell, you will never see a switch port of it because they can't sell itNot by Rare but Too Human is also like that. Started as a GameCube game, it was a part of GCN's pre-release lineup. They released the unfinished game on 360, yet I wouldn't say no to a Switch port. It wasn't THAT bad.