Xbox CEO just gives up

[ARobinGaming]

Didn't expect to see this today. I'm probably being cynical but do we think he's just still trying to make Xbox seem small and ineffective so the EU won't block the deal of getting Activision as i know they were trying to convey originally  it would help them not be in third place or whatever..

 

I don't have too much else to add but I'd rather interested to know what companies Xbox is talking about In regards to Exclusive Deals as for example Hoyoverses Games haven't come to the Xbox as far as I know and I'm not aware if this is due to sony having a deal with them or just the lack of presence they have in Asia.

Edited May 5, 2023 by ARobinGaming

[MidnightDragon]

Phil is being a big crybaby and tries to claim it’s not about good games. What is he smoking?

[DecadentSlacker]

Mediocre to bad games, excessive spending, reliance on business models that can't turn a profit...it's all disheartening to people who enjoy/used to enjoy Xbox consoles. I hope Xbox turns things around, but it might be time for new blood and a different strategy. The Redfall debacle and the Activision merger getting denied aren't the only things holding the company back. I truly believe that they feel quality doesn't matter. Especially after the things said in this interview about great games not making a difference. Who cares if a game is good when it's just being thrown up on Gamepass? Apparently, a lot of people do care. 

 

They've had years to produce some exclusive games to boost interest in their brand. There have been a lot of duds. I've always enjoyed owning multiple consoles, but saw no reason to get an Xbox Series S/X. It doesn't look like that will change anytime soon. 

 

They own some studios that have produced great games in the past, but things have just been managed poorly. I worry for the future of some studios under the Xbox umbrella. Look what happened to Rare. It'd be nice to see the third brand in the console market improve, but I don't have a lot of faith. 

[DrBloodmoney]

9 minutes ago, MidnightDragon said:

Phil is being a big crybaby and tries to claim it’s not about good games. What is he smoking?

 

 

I don't give a toss about console wars - I firmly believe a healthy industry needs multiple strong players in the game... 

 

...but that argument he is making does ring false.

 

 It rather has that feeling of hearing a great big fat person very cogently and meticulously making the point-by-point argument that it's not about healthy diet... it's a thyroid thing, or a metabolism thing, or a societal thing or a mental thing...

....while surrounded by empty Big Mac wrappers.

 

 

Sure... those things might have an influence... but they won't really know until they actually try the healthy diet...

 

...and Microsoft won't really know whether their anaemic console sales are based on a lack of good games, until they try...

... y'know...

having some 

Edited May 5, 2023 by DrBloodmoney

[Vault-TecPhantom]

13 hours ago, automechtech1 said:

Hard to envy being in Phil Spencer's shoes after Don Mattrick nearly buried the Xbox brand. The fact that he took a company that was *this* close to being shuttered and had it reclaim the market share it has now is a testament that he was doing something right, even if there were better routes that could have been taken. He knew they wouldn't be able to fight PlayStation on the same playing field, which is why Xbox focused on features like Game Pass, shared games on PC, cloud gaming, backward compatibility, etc.

 

The truth is Xbox does need a strong library of exclusives. They don't need a lot, but they do need them to be very good and very appealing. Turning Xbox into more of a service and less of a plastic box helped growth in the short term, but even as a gaming service you need reasons (i.e. exclusives/good games) to draw people in.

 

Finally. A nuanced take after all the console war silliness! 

[Eirulan]

I also find the thread title very clickbaity.

 

...Phil looks tired in the interview, you can see he must have been under a lot of pressure the last few days, probably mainly because of the CMA decision. That's why I think it's all the more remarkable and admirable that he faced the interview.

After the Redfall disaster, I honestly wouldn't want to be in the shoes of the Starfield developers, the pressure that the public is now putting on the one game alone is very great.

[StarWolf3000]

4 hours ago, ARobinGaming said:

I don't have too much else to add but I'd rather interested to know what companies Xbox is talking about In regards to Exclusive Deals as for example Hoyoverses Games haven't come to the Xbox as far as I know and I'm not aware if this is due to sony having a deal with them or just the lack of presence they have in Asia.

 

From what I know is, that Microsoft and Mihoyo were talking about partnership before Mihoyo got in touch with Sony and Nintendo, about their upcoming title Genshin Impact (I think Honkai Impact 3rd was never an option for a console release).

 

Since the exact terms were never made public, there are speculations on why this never fruited in the end:

One point is the major absence of Xbox in the asian market, where the main audience for Mihoyo's games is.

Another one is speculated about the cross-platform play and progress, where Xbox likely wanted exclusive servers instead of shared servers between platforms (first negotiations with Square Enix about FF XIV say hello).

 

After the success with the game on it's multiple platforms (PC, mobile, PS4 and PS5), they regretted to being unable to secure a deal. For their current game, Honkai: Star Rail, Xbox might have approached Mihoyo, who likely were not interested, even maybe for the same reasons as for Genshin.

[Alayaes]

17 hours ago, Rozalia1 said:

 

21:32. He seems to abort stating it directly as he is just about to say it, but it was how I understood that sentence from him.

I'm always very iffy on paraphrased bullet points. You might say you don't add your opinion, but by paraphrasing and personally interpreting you definitely can add a bias, even a subconscious one. The thread title shows me that you have a clear bias and that your bullet points will exist to support that narrative.

 

The problem is that people will just read the bullet points and take it for the gospel. This is how misinformation spreads; people are going to quote your personal interpretation as opposed to Phil's own spoken words. He never stated that he realizes he'll get fired if he gets more knocks against him. He was casually saying "if I keep messing up they might just get someone else in here, haha". This is just banter, that's it. Not the same as "I admit that I'll get fired". One is more truthful. The other is sensational. You know, like the media.

 

Not to mention, a lot of people on this website are probably pretty gleeful about Xbox's misfortunes, even if they won't admit it. It all adds a confirmation bias that's not healthy for the discussion.

 

Also, running a department this size is probably infinitely more complicated than people realize it is. If he says that just having great games will not make a console generation successful then he's probably right. We're armchair quarterbacks and have no clue what it's like in that business at that level. Like in industrial construction, I hear all the time that "you just have to get good craftsmen" or "you just need good drawings/engineering". It's not that simple.

[Dreakon13]

54 minutes ago, Alayaes said:

If he says that just having great games will not make a console generation successful then he's probably right.

 

I said in this thread a few times about the idea of peoples digital libraries tying them to a certain platform, and making it harder to get people to switch, and for the consoles that are falling behind to catch up than it used to be.  A random person on Twitter pointed out that "if Xbox had good games, people would just buy it and keep their PS5's and Switch's and own all of them so the digital library thing isn't an issue"... but it is.  Even if we disregard that scenario being less likely given the poor college student demographic that gaming tends to fall into and people being brand loyal more out of necessity than anything... that'd be a +1 for Microsoft, but it wouldn't be a -1 for Sony or Nintendo.

 

And I think that's what Phil is saying.  The absolute best case scenario, everything goes perfectly... they're still probably playing catch up forever.  They aren't taking market share from the other guys, they're just filling up their own slice of the pie a little thicker.  He's not talking about success or profitability, I dunno if they are but you can be successful to some degree without being Sony or Nintendo... he's talking about how unrealistic it is at this point that Xbox overtakes them even if they bang out a few gems.

Edited May 5, 2023 by Dreakon13

[cy1999aek_maik]

49 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

I said in this thread a few times about the idea of peoples digital libraries tying them to a certain platform, and making it harder to get people to switch, and for the consoles that are falling behind to catch up than it used to be.  A random person on Twitter pointed out that "if Xbox had good games, people would just buy it and keep their PS5's and Switch's and own all of them so the digital library thing isn't an issue"... but it is.  Even if we disregard that scenario being less likely given the poor college student demographic that gaming tends to fall into and people being brand loyal more out of necessity than anything... that'd be a +1 for Microsoft, but it wouldn't be a -1 for Sony or Nintendo.

 

And I think that's what Phil is saying.  The absolute best case scenario, everything goes perfectly... they're still probably playing catch up forever.  They aren't taking market share from the other guys, they're just filling up their own slice of the pie a little thicker.  He's not talking about success or profitability, I dunno if they are but you can be successful to some degree without being Sony or Nintendo... he's talking about how unrealistic it is at this point that Xbox overtakes them even if they bang out a few gems.

I understand the point about having a digital library and not wanting to convert, however I think most consumers are most excited about new releases, not playing old ones. This is purely anecdotal, but most local ads I've seen for the ps5 are advertising god of war, or horizon or some other PS5 game. I've never seen an ad IRL for the ability to play ps4 games on ps5. So while the digital library is a factor, I think most consumers go where the most impressive looking games are. Even if redfall was a banger, there were no flashy trailers for it, or any attractive marketing material for it. Most people I spoke to about the game knew it for the mediocre IGN gameplay preview. 

 

So yeah in a way he is right. Even if starfield is an 11/10 game, it won't do shit, especially if they don't market that one either(I haven't been following that game too closely but nothing popped up that actually made the game seem interesting)

[starcrunch061]

6 hours ago, ARobinGaming said:

Didn't expect to see this today. I'm probably being cynical but do we think he's just still trying to make Xbox seem small and ineffective so the EU won't block the deal of getting Activision as i know they were trying to convey originally  it would help them not be in third place or whatever..

 

As far as I know, the EU is fine with the deal (though with Britain blocking it, he might be fearful that the EU will follow suit).

 

You know, I pull for MS. I have lots of issues with Sony, and some competition would do some good. But increasingly, I don't think XBox will provide that competition, even if this deal goes through. My problem at this point is that rather than improving a product and a service, MS keeps trying to pull an end-around, and this mushmouth "woe is me" bullshit is taxing.

 

1 hour ago, Dreakon13 said:

I said in this thread a few times about the idea of peoples digital libraries tying them to a certain platform, and making it harder to get people to switch, and for the consoles that are falling behind to catch up than it used to be.  A random person on Twitter pointed out that "if Xbox had good games, people would just buy it and keep their PS5's and Switch's and own all of them so the digital library thing isn't an issue"... but it is.  Even if we disregard that scenario being less likely given the poor college student demographic that gaming tends to fall into and people being brand loyal more out of necessity than anything... that'd be a +1 for Microsoft, but it wouldn't be a -1 for Sony or Nintendo.

 

Of course it is, and it's not even a matter of being "poor" or any other nonsense that the idiots on gamefaq and reddit bring up. 

 

The fact is, I bought the PS2 because I could play my PS1 games. I bought the PS3 because I could play my PS1 and PS2 games. I waited a LONG time before getting a PS4, because I couldn't play my PS1, PS2 and PS3 games.  I bought a PS5 as early as I (reasonably) could because I could play my PS4 games.

 

Do I have money for three consoles? The question is idiotic. But do I want three consoles ruining my quarter-sawn oak TV cabinet that was purchased precisely to hide these consoles (and was significantly more expensive than anything it currently houses)? No.

 

The fact is, owning three consoles is just dumb to me. I don't mind other people wanting to do so, but lots of us don't.

Edited May 5, 2023 by starcrunch061

[Rozalia1]

4 hours ago, Eirulan said:

I also find the thread title very clickbaity.

...Phil looks tired in the interview, you can see he must have been under a lot of pressure the last few days, probably mainly because of the CMA decision. That's why I think it's all the more remarkable and admirable that he faced the interview.

I don't agree. He went out there and said that he can't beat the competition and that it wouldn't matter if Xbox had good games as it wouldn't make a difference. It might be hard to remember for people at this point considering how much Xbox has stated they don't care about console sales (because they're getting beat, they were all too happy to mention those few months they beat the PS5 due to extreme shortages for the PS5), but once upon a time Spencer actually talked about taking the fight to Sony and selling more than they do. Now? It's hopeless, Sony and Nintendo their competitors are just too powerful for Microsoft. Note that what was it now... a year ago? Two? Spencer was saying that PlayStation and Nintendo were "out of position" (due to the cloud they're now telling regulators is irrelevant) and so not even competition to Xbox anymore, with their actual competition being Google/Amazon.

 

To me that goes beyond being the words of a tired man, it is the words of a broken one. The Xbox Series X is a failure because its role was supposed to be their power console that easily and heavily overpowered the PS5, something they believed they had in the bag because the story goes they managed to get their hands on (outdated) PS5 specs, but then not only was the PS5 stronger but because Sony/Mark Cerny actually tries innovating instead of gluing PC parts together and largely calling it a day it is generally outperforming the Xbox Series X. The Series S is a failure as it has failed to disrupt the market and to capture casuals. Gamepass has failed as it isn't taking over gaming (thankfully). All their bought studios are barely outputting anything and they've been halted in their big buy out which will itself prevent further big buy outs they arrogantly proclaimed they were going to do after getting this one. All their astroturfing with literal Xbots, small time shills on forums/twitter, big time shills with platforms, and at this point corrupt government officials have changed all of 0 for their business. Even the PR that all their astroturfing and in gaming their front man Spencer managed to gain for them is collapsing as the long patience seemingly finally runs out on all their failures, likely not helped by the temper tantrums that off his head Brad Smith has been pulling.

 

Spencer seems to be all out of ideas and can't see a way to win even with Microsoft's unlimited funding behind him. He rubbishes good games turning it around because he knows, like I do, that being an honest competitor in gaming that has some success is not what Microsoft itself wants. Microsoft wants domination, their monopoly in gaming, and anything short of that is a failure. As the saying goes, they don't want to make some of the money, they want to make all of the money.

 

3 hours ago, Alayaes said:

I'm always very iffy on paraphrased bullet points. You might say you don't add your opinion, but by paraphrasing and personally interpreting you definitely can add a bias, even a subconscious one. The thread title shows me that you have a clear bias and that your bullet points will exist to support that narrative.

 

The problem is that people will just read the bullet points and take it for the gospel. This is how misinformation spreads; people are going to quote your personal interpretation as opposed to Phil's own spoken words. He never stated that he realizes he'll get fired if he gets more knocks against him. He was casually saying "if I keep messing up they might just get someone else in here, haha". This is just banter, that's it. Not the same as "I admit that I'll get fired". One is more truthful. The other is sensational. You know, like the media.

 

Not to mention, a lot of people on this website are probably pretty gleeful about Xbox's misfortunes, even if they won't admit it. It all adds a confirmation bias that's not healthy for the discussion.

 

Also, running a department this size is probably infinitely more complicated than people realize it is. If he says that just having great games will not make a console generation successful then he's probably right. We're armchair quarterbacks and have no clue what it's like in that business at that level. Like in industrial construction, I hear all the time that "you just have to get good craftsmen" or "you just need good drawings/engineering". It's not that simple.

 

Outside transcribing what he said word for word, and that would be very long indeed, everyone adds things when they sum things up. Even if they try not to, if what is being said is ridiculous than by trying to not make them look bad in the summation you're in essence defending them. As for not adding my opinion I meant I didn't have my own thoughts right next to the summation stating why what Phil said was wrong/foolish.

 

I started that point with "seems" because I found it odd and it was how I understood it. As for banter, Spencer himself in the interview basically told people he wasn't in the mood for banter. 

 

And why wouldn't they be? No one console wars harder than Xbox, from management to their fans real or otherwise. People enjoy seeing such people get what they deserve.

 

Ah yes. The expert knows best. Some news for you, all the experts have been saying that Microsoft was easily going to clear the Activision deal first in America, which was wrong, then in the UK which was wrong, and now they're saying well they will surely be correct when it comes to the EU (they might I'll give them that). Experts can be wrong and blind to all manner of things that would be obvious to a random guy off the street (such as good games are what sell consoles for one when it comes to Spencer). Then if we talk on the specific issue of "good games won't turn things around" that is also wrong. A big reason the PS3 turned things around (which aided the PS4) was by producing good games. Oh but that was before the digital lock in, okay, Nintendo with the Switch then, and yet they have done tremendous. You put in the work and you'll get rewarded for it, might not come instantly like with the PS3, but you keep at it and people will notice.

19 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

Nintendo has too long of a history and too fiercely loyal of a userbase to honestly draw a comparison.  They're almost in their own category as far as gaming goes and not really direct competition to Xbox, Playstation or PC.

 

If the answer is "just be Nintendo" then you're underestimating the totally unrealistic mountain that would be to climb.

 

Well of course, you don't become like the greatest video game company ever overnight. You have to put in the work over a long period of time which is what Sony has been doing and they have been rewarded heavily for it. Xbox could very much do the same but the problem is all of that takes a lot of time and effort, time and effort that Microsoft clearly does not wish to expend as they believe in shortcutting their way to dominance.

[Dreakon13]

36 minutes ago, Rozalia1 said:

Well of course, you don't become like the greatest video game company ever overnight. You have to put in the work over a long period of time which is what Sony has been doing and they have been rewarded heavily for it. Xbox could very much do the same but the problem is all of that takes a lot of time and effort, time and effort that Microsoft clearly does not wish to expend as they believe in shortcutting their way to dominance.

 

The problem is they're doing it from a distant third place at the worst time to try and do it.

 

Back in their beginnings, Nintendo took the scattered mish-mash of unremarkable consoles and revolutionized gaming at home.  Sony had stiffer competition in the mid-90's but for lack of a better way of describing it, revolutionized 3D gaming.  Not to discredit the effort and risk it took, but they played their cards right and entered the industry at the perfect times.  Without that opportunity, both of them probably would've meandered and fizzled out as quick or quicker than Xbox is.  Xbox never really had that spot to pick, and has always kinda been second fiddle to somebody else because of it.

 

With the industry as large as it is now, and set in its ways, there's very little left to revolutionize and the cost is higher and the risk far greater than it ever has been.  The closest I think anyone really can change things... is not changing what we play, but how we play it, and to Microsoft's credit they nailed it with Xbox Live back in the day changing the console multiplayer landscape, and more recently with Game Pass.  These opportunities they did take are probably the only reason they're still around honestly, but it's not enough.  I guess it is fair to say they maybe squandered these foot in the door moments they've taken.

Edited May 5, 2023 by Dreakon13

[Ashande]

5 hours ago, Eirulan said:

I also find the thread title very clickbaity.

 

...Phil looks tired in the interview, you can see he must have been under a lot of pressure the last few days, probably mainly because of the CMA decision. That's why I think it's all the more remarkable and admirable that he faced the interview.

After the Redfall disaster, I honestly wouldn't want to be in the shoes of the Starfield developers, the pressure that the public is now putting on the one game alone is very great.

 

The public would be far less likely to lay that pressure on Starfield if it wasn’t the only game coming up to hang their hat on and Microsoft hadn’t been hyping it to hell and back for years. I’m not a fan of the way Xbox fanboys will crow about some single thing they think is their big edge in the console war, but at the same time they aren’t being given anything else concrete to hope for.

 

Xbox owners such as myself are three years in and have been given a sub-par Halo, a decent Forza Horizon (both playable on Xbox One and PC, which for some reason “doesn’t count” even as they roast Sony owners for games being available on PS4 or PC), The Medium (which jumped ship pretty quickly), Hi-Fi Rush (which is great but also kind of niche, and wasn’t helped any by being surprise launched and buried under Microsoft’s hyping of Redfall) and Redfall, which has gone over like a bucket of lead bricks despite being the “big thing.” But we’re continually told “just wait, Xbox’s time is coming, here, gnaw on this single nugget of a game that will actually release instead of being vaporware like Indiana Jones, Everwild, a new Gears or Fable game or anything else we’ve promised and have yet to deliver or even prove exists outside of a concept.”

 

If Phil looks tired, or is stressed, or is having a bad time of things… good. He should be. A lot of these issues go up the chain to his desk, and if he’s too busy chasing the ABK acquisition to worry about how the brand and the first party studios are doing and is either unwilling or unable to delegate to someone who will say “Hey, we might want to put some of those studios we already bought to work, and you probably should have a chat with or expend some resources over at Arkane, because, Redfall, ugh, yeah, bad times.” then it is - or at least should be - his ass in the fire.

[Rozalia1]

28 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

The problem is they're doing it from a distant third place at the worst time to try and do it.

 

Back in their beginnings, Nintendo took the scattered mish-mash of unremarkable consoles and revolutionized gaming at home.  Sony had stiffer competition in the mid-90's but for lack of a better way of describing it, revolutionized 3D gaming.  Not to discredit the effort and risk it took, but they played their cards right and entered the industry at the perfect times.  Without that opportunity, both of them probably would've meandered and fizzled out as quick or quicker than Xbox is.  Xbox never really had that spot to pick, and has always kinda been second fiddle to somebody else because of it.

 

With the industry as large as it is now, and set in its ways, there's very little left to revolutionize and the cost is higher and the risk far greater than it ever has been.  The closest I think anyone really can change things... is not changing what we play, but how we play it, and to Microsoft's credit they nailed it with Xbox Live back in the day changing the console multiplayer landscape, and more recently with Game Pass.  It's not enough though.

 

Is it the worse time? When Nintendo first gained their domination it was true that their competitors, the strongest of which being Atari, had just blown their own brains out yes. However, there was a real chance that the console market was dead and trying to get it going again wouldn't work, but Nintendo overcame that and we're here today. One of the ways they did that was with great games which restored people's faith in consoles being quality products. 

 

When Sony got screwed over by Nintendo (though in Nintendo's view Sony was trying to pull a fast one on them) they entered a market that had for a long time been almost completely dominated by Nintendo outside the short period where Sega fiercely contested them. They didn't just overcome Nintendo due to the technology differences, but also benefited from Nintendo having acted like a tyrant towards third parties for many years. So when they got humbled in the PS3 era as third parties greatly abandoned exclusivity with them they realised that their success was built on a house of cards and so they put in the work and developed their own great games which paid off in what we see today.

 

Common thread with those two is the great games. Xbox as I said could certainly put in the work and given enough time their market share I'm sure would start to get closer to Sony's. The problem is Microsoft, who is above Xbox, doesn't want the numbers to be Xbox 100 million, Sony 100 million. That isn't success to them. Xbox numbers being at the 1 billion mark, which would be total domination like never seen before, is success to Microsoft. With the Xbox One they expected 400 million to 1 billion sales which obviously they came nowhere close to and management at the time lost faith on it being possible hence why they were ready to scrap the platform. That was when Gamepass came along and promised them that while yes they could never sell that many Xbox consoles, if they get their service on all the other devices out there then they could reach billions of people.

 

As you've said, their effort with Gamepass appear to have failed and I'm happy for it. Microsoft simply has no ambition to put out great games, they want to destroy their competition with their loss leader subscription service and then give people no choice but to accept their slop. Xbox itself might perhaps have some people who do want to produce great games of course, but as long as Microsoft calls the shots above them it doesn't matter. They either do the shortcuts Microsoft wants or they'll get replaced.

 

5 minutes ago, Ashande said:

If Phil looks tired, or is stressed, or is having a bad time of things… good. He should be. A lot of these issues go up the chain to his desk, and if he’s too busy chasing the ABK acquisition to worry about how the brand and the first party studios are doing and is either unwilling or unable to delegate to someone who will say “Hey, we might want to put some of those studios we already bought to work, and you probably should have a chat with or expend some resources over at Arkane, because, Redfall, ugh, yeah, bad times.” then it is - or at least should be - his ass in the fire.

 

Spencer and seemingly by extension his management team seem like they have the problem that they think that they need to be friends with and as such nice to those below them. Which sounds great but is going to be one of the reasons we've seen such mismanagement at Xbox. Shu Yoshida at Sony by all accounts is a great guy and a joy to be around for people, but when he checks a game out he'll tell you if he thinks the game is crap/has problems/whatever. He doesn't shout at people and tell them they're worthless or whatever, he just tells them the honest truth. Of course he has made mistakes as he has admitted, most famously Demon's Souls which he just "didn't get" at the time. You can't however be afraid of doing a misstep.

 

Their mock reviews also seem to have the same issues. Apparently Redfall was fine in mock reviews according to Spencer hence the surprise, and yet the leaked mock reviews we saw from Xbox for the Last of Us Part II said stuff like the gameplay wasn't great and downplayed the game somewhat from what I recall. That tells me that Xbox's mock reviewers are happy to put down the competition's games but unwilling to put down Xbox's, in essence console warring, and as such are worthless.

[Sanetsuken]

I have so much i want to rant against this but I'll stick to the biggest thorn

 

Quote

Admits that Xbox knew that Redfall was going to run at 30 frames on console when they were doing 60 frames videos. Says it is a lesson learned.

 

WHAT LESSON? YOU CAN'T WILL OPTIMISING INTO EXISTENCE?

For someone who is so high up at microsoft you sure as fuck should not be saying anything even remotely close to this because it is a damning implication that you just don't give a fuck about how it runs because people are sheep and won't complain aside from the usual suspect.

 

How in the everloving fuck anyone thought this was a good approach is beyond me and I hope the fear of <insert favourite deity here> has made them finally understand not to try and outright lie and bullshit the customer to the highest degree

[automechtech1]

9 hours ago, Vault-TecPhantom said:

 

Finally. A nuanced take after all the console war silliness! 

I appreciate that. I find tribalism to be very 10,000 BCE so it's disappointing when people still want to fall into "us vs them" mentalities. Sony/PS is no more my friend than MS/Xbox or Nintendo.

 

After having listened to the entire interview I find OP's title and bullet points to be constructed in a disingenuous manner. Even the point about "good games not selling consoles" is taken extremely out of context - which in fairness it seems that people even on Xbox forums are misunderstanding Phil Spencer's point. He's very well aware that games are necessary to success, and he even talks about the importance of taking risks for new IPs (he specifically mentions games like Sea of Thieves and Grounded) to come to fruition multiple times earlier in the interview, so it's baffling that people are running with this one snippet out of context. Or maybe it's just a testament that comprehension is at an all time low.

[RedDevil757]

17 hours ago, TrophyChief said:

But it's true. The decisions they are making, the products they are releasing, and the lack of communication around their other titles and go forward plans proves this. This is not to say that they will suck indefinitely. If enough positive change happens then they can garner goodwill again and become better. Let's hope they do for the sake of their players, fans, and the industry.

I'm more happy with my Xbox than my PlayStation. Sony have been making more and more bad decisions thanks to Jim Ryan. A future of live service games and exclusive first party games that all have the same feel. Or a company that seems happy to shine light on the little guy. Yes they lack exclusives apart from Forza that is good but tbh apart from Ratchet and Clank, the last Sony exclusive that I loved was last of us on PS3 so they aren't doing much better for me.

12 hours ago, Vault-TecPhantom said:

 

Finally. A nuanced take after all the console war silliness! 

It's toxic and so childish isn't it. All 3 have pros and cons. I have them all. Lucky forward to Zelda

[mcnichoj]

Daily reminder the people that go on the internet and proclaim that consoles need exclusives are a minority. The majority of people buying consoles just pick the one that has their favorite button pictures, mostly play multiplats and don't go on the internet to talk about video games.

 

On 5/4/2023 at 3:36 PM, ExHaseo said:

3DS - Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance

You waited till about the time they dropped the New 3DS to get the console? You missed out on a lot of great games.

[Kessarath]

Hello and welcome.

 

Has everyone forgotten about the upcoming Hellbalde 2? It will almost certainly succeed and I will miss this game on PlayStation. Of course, that won't help "the windows company" much. Well, but Hellblade 2 will be rather a hit. I will add from myself that I am a huge opponent of subscription games. This (as we see) lowers the quality of the games. I wonder how Starfield will end? If, like Redfall, then maybe people will finally wake up.... and what is Kojima cooking for MS. Hopefully not a completely exclusive title.

[Rozalia1]

18 hours ago, automechtech1 said:

I appreciate that. I find tribalism to be very 10,000 BCE so it's disappointing when people still want to fall into "us vs them" mentalities. Sony/PS is no more my friend than MS/Xbox or Nintendo.

 

After having listened to the entire interview I find OP's title and bullet points to be constructed in a disingenuous manner. Even the point about "good games not selling consoles" is taken extremely out of context - which in fairness it seems that people even on Xbox forums are misunderstanding Phil Spencer's point. He's very well aware that games are necessary to success, and he even talks about the importance of taking risks for new IPs (he specifically mentions games like Sea of Thieves and Grounded) to come to fruition multiple times earlier in the interview, so it's baffling that people are running with this one snippet out of context. Or maybe it's just a testament that comprehension is at an all time low.

 

What exactly is "console wars" about the OP? We can't bring up what Xbox's boss said now? As I stated, Xbox from its fans real or otherwise to its very management engages in the console wars like no one else. As such please spare the rest of us with this "don't pick on Microsoft" stuff.

 

Taking risks and having diversity is a point he makes that goes towards expanding Gamepass across many devices, the idea that if you have diverse offerings then you can reach the maximum amount of people. What he said about good games not changing market share related to the Xbox console itself.

 

Though as you want to talk further context. It wasn't in the OP because again, didn't want to colour it with my own comments, but the exact language he used involving bringing up these good games not making people sell their PS5s. Why indeed would Xbox putting out good games make people sell their PS5s exactly? Freudian slip as they say. The strategy Microsoft has had of attempting to buy out large amounts of the third party market is being followed not to add value to Xbox, that is secondary and will be largely thrown away the moment they no longer need it as most of their games simply aren't profitable (largely due to Gamepass), it is being done to take away value from PlayStation.

 

21 hours ago, Sanetsuken said:

I have so much i want to rant against this but I'll stick to the biggest thorn

 

 

WHAT LESSON? YOU CAN'T WILL OPTIMISING INTO EXISTENCE?

For someone who is so high up at microsoft you sure as fuck should not be saying anything even remotely close to this because it is a damning implication that you just don't give a fuck about how it runs because people are sheep and won't complain aside from the usual suspect.

 

How in the everloving fuck anyone thought this was a good approach is beyond me and I hope the fear of <insert favourite deity here> has made them finally understand not to try and outright lie and bullshit the customer to the highest degree

 

I watched a number of people to see what they thought of the interview and one of them, David Jaffe, was shocked at Spencer coming out with the "lesson learned" business. Said that such things you learn on the way to the top job, not when you're actually in the top job. Another in Maximillian believes that Spencer has no idea what goes on at Xbox as everyone below him seems to be a yes men who tell him that everything is always fine.

 

Which all reminds me of a comment Spencer made in the past which was that the former management team all left/got fired over the Xbox One debacle so he in essence became the head of Xbox by default due to being the highest ranking guy left at Xbox. Certainly explains a lot and going by Spencer's comment that he "overpaid anyway" it seems the man himself knows he ain't fit for the job. He is like a Captain who suddenly became the head of the military because all the generals, colonels, so forth got arrested/killed/whatever.

 

7 hours ago, mcnichoj said:

Daily reminder the people that go on the internet and proclaim that consoles need exclusives are a minority. The majority of people buying consoles just pick the one that has their favorite button pictures, mostly play multiplats and don't go on the internet to talk about video games.

 

I get that you arrived at that conclusion due to so many people playing CoD, Fortnite, and the like but you're incorrect. People do like having the better product and having great exclusives with good word of mouth helps sell the console even if the people don't ever actually go on to play many of those games. Both Nintendo and Sony have the reputations for putting out great high quality games. Microsoft does not. That matters a lot. If multiplats were the be-all and end-all then Microsoft would certainly have had more success with their Gamepass market destruction strategy.

 

16 hours ago, RedDevil757 said:

I'm more happy with my Xbox than my PlayStation. Sony have been making more and more bad decisions thanks to Jim Ryan. A future of live service games and exclusive first party games that all have the same feel. Or a company that seems happy to shine light on the little guy. Yes they lack exclusives apart from Forza that is good but tbh apart from Ratchet and Clank, the last Sony exclusive that I loved was last of us on PS3 so they aren't doing much better for me.

It's toxic and so childish isn't it. All 3 have pros and cons. I have them all. Lucky forward to Zelda

 

You don't like Jim Ryan because he ain't a PR man like Spencer is. Cool. Who is actually doing the better job? Unquestionably Jim Ryan. PlayStation gamers don't need Jim Ryan to be their "friend", they just need him to do a good job.

 

I'm not a fan of the live service stuff myself though many of these are being done by studios Sony has recently picked up and the offerings apparently are across many different genres. Ultimately though you can't attack Sony for being samey and then say that them branching out is bad, come on now.

 

I find your comment about "all have the same feel" being a negative strange when you then praise Last of Us which is a game of that feel.

 

6 hours ago, Kessarath said:

Hello and welcome.

 

Has everyone forgotten about the upcoming Hellbalde 2? It will almost certainly succeed and I will miss this game on PlayStation. Of course, that won't help "the windows company" much. Well, but Hellblade 2 will be rather a hit. I will add from myself that I am a huge opponent of subscription games. This (as we see) lowers the quality of the games. I wonder how Starfield will end? If, like Redfall, then maybe people will finally wake up.... and what is Kojima cooking for MS. Hopefully not a completely exclusive title.

 

Logically they must be showing it at the coming showcase. I also think the aim is to make it a high quality third person narrative heavy game like the Last of Us and the like which would be wise as Microsoft lacks those and it has clearly hurt them. It has however seemingly been in development hell, like much of Xbox's output, so we'll see how it turns out.

 

I agree with you on subscription games. Hopefully with Gamepass stalling and the Xbox brand on fire we can see off Microsoft's latest attack on gaming.

[SelectiveGamer]

Best video I've probably seen about this. IMO. Because I have to add that to everything apparently anymore

 

 

[mcnichoj]

8 hours ago, Rozalia1 said:

Nintendo have the reputations for putting out great high quality games.

In the past I would put "(except for Nintendo)" when saying exclusives don't matter but it was literally right as I was typing that post that it occurred to me, it doesn't matter there either or at the very least in the context of what we're talking. If exclusives were all that mattered, Nintendo wouldn't have been struggling every other generation for its entire existence post the 16-bit era.

N64 got stomped by the PSX and lost third party support.

The GameCube severely underperformed and is considered a failure by Nintendo internally.

We all know Wii hardware did insanely well but that wasn't because of gamers. Quality software sales suffered. The system sold despite the exclusives, not because of them.

3DS bombed at release.

Then we finally get to the Wii U. It did so bad Iwata (rip) said they couldn't survive in the console market if their next console also failed. IIRC the Wii U was pumping out good titles pretty regular and yet no one was buying the console. Those same games have since been ported to the Switch and other systems and in some cases have made ten times the sales compared to the original WU release. If all the people with a Switch love Nintendo and these games so much, how come they didn't show up for the WU? No multiplats. Even though performance in these titles on Switch are shit, a lot of people still bought Doom 4 on it. Multiplat indies are making a killing on the Switch.

 

15 hours ago, Rozalia1 said:

I get that you arrived at that conclusion due to so many people playing CoD, Fortnite, and the like but you're incorrect. People do like having the better product and having great exclusives with good word of mouth helps sell the console even if the people don't ever actually go on to play many of those games.

If this really was the case then the PS4 wouldn't have been beating the Xbox One 2:1 out the gate. PS4 launched with basically nothing and COD/Battlefield were the top sellers which were games that had just came out right before the gens launch. I'd feel safe betting that most of the people buying it on the new console had just bought it on the old one. Meanwhile Xbox One launched with titles like Dead Rising 3 and Killer Instinct but people still opted not to buy it.

Fast forward to the next gen and the Xbox Series X sells out consistently during launch period with zero exclusives. PS5 could have launched without DS and MM and would still have sold at the same rate. The video game industry is now in the Apple phase where consumers just NEED to have the new thing regardless if they actually need it or if it's even any better than the old thing.

I personally know a few people that didn't need to go to the current gen. This one dude I met camping out for a Series X just wanted the new console to get a boost in game performance for Warzone, two other dudes in the line were buying it primarily for basketball. No one on the line really talked about Halo or Gears. Had two different people that live near me hound me constantly for info on where they could buy the PS5 after it launched.

Neither of them owned a PS4 and neither of them play video games at all. The one I know eventually got a PS5 had told me weeks after they got it that they hadn't even set it up. I'd be surprised if he has since even put ten dedicated hours into a single game. I've never heard him mention the console after that. I assume the two of them solely wanted the console for the clout that they'd get from posting photos of it on their social media.

They're an extreme case though and I think we can all agree most people are probably like the other three. Yet still three people sat outside for twelve hours waiting for a machine with no exclusives just to play games they were already playing. Two of them just wanted the new thing and stay within the Xbox ecosystem. The other guy actually wanted a PS5 but the pre-orders were completely sold out. Right there you can see how finnicky some peoples brand allegiance can be. First chance he got though he probably bought a PS5 and re-bought the same 2K/COD or whatever the newest releases were by the time he got one. Even though it really doesn't matter where you play these games and he's not the type of person to care about Demons Souls or Returnal or Final Fantasy 16. So those games being on the PS5 would mean nothing to him.

If someone for some weird reason said they liked the PS5 because it has Spider-Man games on it even though they don't play them would kind of be like someone saying they really like Stanley Kubrick's films because he also did 2001: Space Odyssey despite the person never having seen the movie or having any intention to ever do so. It's just a silly notion.

[Rozalia1]

4 hours ago, mcnichoj said:

In the past I would put "(except for Nintendo)" when saying exclusives don't matter but it was literally right as I was typing that post that it occurred to me, it doesn't matter there either or at the very least in the context of what we're talking. If exclusives were all that mattered, Nintendo wouldn't have been struggling every other generation for its entire existence post the 16-bit era.

N64 got stomped by the PSX and lost third party support.

The GameCube severely underperformed and is considered a failure by Nintendo internally.

We all know Wii hardware did insanely well but that wasn't because of gamers. Quality software sales suffered. The system sold despite the exclusives, not because of them.

3DS bombed at release.

Then we finally get to the Wii U. It did so bad Iwata (rip) said they couldn't survive in the console market if their next console also failed. IIRC the Wii U was pumping out good titles pretty regular and yet no one was buying the console. Those same games have since been ported to the Switch and other systems and in some cases have made ten times the sales compared to the original WU release. If all the people with a Switch love Nintendo and these games so much, how come they didn't show up for the WU? No multiplats. Even though performance in these titles on Switch are shit, a lot of people still bought Doom 4 on it. Multiplat indies are making a killing on the Switch.

 

N64 lost third party support due to Nintendo having previously been a tyrant and continuing with technology that third parties didn't want to continue with. Granted, considering the capability of cartridges these days they weren't wrong in the end but at the time everyone wanted the switch to discs. This loss of third parties led to the PlayStation getting a mammoth amount of exclusives.

 

GameCube swapped to discs, though they were minidiscs. The PS2 still had massive amounts of third party exclusives and on top of all that was a cheap DVD player.

 

WiiU had branding issues and its ideas weren't fully developed (they were with the Switch).

 

You're seriously trying to attribute the Switches massive success to multiplat indies? They certainly do very well there (due to the Nintendo base having more gamers open to them in it), but no. Mario Kart 8 sold 60+ million. Animal Crossing sold 40+ million. The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild sold 30+ million. Super Smash Bros. Ultimate sold 30+ million. Super Mario Odyssey sold 25+ million. Pokémon Sword / Shield sold 25+ million. New Super Mario Bros. U sold 23+ million. By comparison Sony's top game was God of War (2018) at 23+ million, which means that Sony's best could only reach the bottom of Nintendo's elite sellers. Microsoft aren't even worth speaking about (they did buy and so own Minecraft, but that is a multiplat).

 

4 hours ago, mcnichoj said:

If this really was the case then the PS4 wouldn't have been beating the Xbox One 2:1 out the gate. PS4 launched with basically nothing and COD/Battlefield were the top sellers which were games that had just came out right before the gens launch. I'd feel safe betting that most of the people buying it on the new console had just bought it on the old one. Meanwhile Xbox One launched with titles like Dead Rising 3 and Killer Instinct but people still opted not to buy it.

Fast forward to the next gen and the Xbox Series X sells out consistently during launch period with zero exclusives. PS5 could have launched without DS and MM and would still have sold at the same rate. The video game industry is now in the Apple phase where consumers just NEED to have the new thing regardless if they actually need it or if it's even any better than the old thing.

I personally know a few people that didn't need to go to the current gen. This one dude I met camping out for a Series X just wanted the new console to get a boost in game performance for Warzone, two other dudes in the line were buying it primarily for basketball. No one on the line really talked about Halo or Gears. Had two different people that live near me hound me constantly for info on where they could buy the PS5 after it launched.

Neither of them owned a PS4 and neither of them play video games at all. The one I know eventually got a PS5 had told me weeks after they got it that they hadn't even set it up. I'd be surprised if he has since even put ten dedicated hours into a single game. I've never heard him mention the console after that. I assume the two of them solely wanted the console for the clout that they'd get from posting photos of it on their social media.

They're an extreme case though and I think we can all agree most people are probably like the other three. Yet still three people sat outside for twelve hours waiting for a machine with no exclusives just to play games they were already playing. Two of them just wanted the new thing and stay within the Xbox ecosystem. The other guy actually wanted a PS5 but the pre-orders were completely sold out. Right there you can see how finnicky some peoples brand allegiance can be. First chance he got though he probably bought a PS5 and re-bought the same 2K/COD or whatever the newest releases were by the time he got one. Even though it really doesn't matter where you play these games and he's not the type of person to care about Demons Souls or Returnal or Final Fantasy 16. So those games being on the PS5 would mean nothing to him.

If someone for some weird reason said they liked the PS5 because it has Spider-Man games on it even though they don't play them would kind of be like someone saying they really like Stanley Kubrick's films because he also did 2001: Space Odyssey despite the person never having seen the movie or having any intention to ever do so. It's just a silly notion.

 

What you're relaying is what is referred to as an anecdote. Just because this may have happened with these people doesn't mean anything. You could one day meet 3 people who'll tell you that the Jumping Hotdog, Stroke the Dog, and so forth are why they're buying a PS5. That wouldn't then mean that massive amounts of people are buying the PS5 for those games.

 

I'm very surprised to be seeing this talk regarding the Xbox One/PS4 as the story regarding that is so famous. The Xbox One publicly hanged itself and became unsalvageable, to the point that Spencer in his interview basically stated that Xbox has been doomed ever since in the console market. Perhaps you weren't paying attention at the time, but the reputation damage the Xbox brand took at that time was immense. As for exclusives, some mediocre exclusives weren't ever going to save that mess, but many people had also already had lost trust in Microsoft in that area. In the second half of the 360 was where it began where Xbox exclusives became very thin. Then with the Xbox One they launched with them sure, but quickly dried up again. Xbox Series launched with zero exclusives and has been poor on the issue ever since even though they bought what? 20 studios? Then when they do launch they aren't seen as premium products like Sony/Nintendo anyway.

 

Like I said, even if most gamers aren't specifically going to play every exclusive they do matter a lot. People will ask people they know who are bigger gamers than they are, they'll go online and see what people's chatter says. If they do they'll find people talking up Nintendo and Sony's games while Microsoft they'll see at best promises (though they'll likely also see talk that Microsoft always promises and never delivers) and at worse people saying that their games are poor. If this sort of thing didn't matter then Microsoft wouldn't spend their time and money at the start of every generation spreading FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) about PlayStation with their massive astroturfing apparatus.

[yowzagabowza]

On 5/6/2023 at 5:41 AM, Kessarath said:

Hello and welcome.

 

Has everyone forgotten about the upcoming Hellbalde 2? It will almost certainly succeed and I will miss this game on PlayStation. Of course, that won't help "the windows company" much. Well, but Hellblade 2 will be rather a hit. I will add from myself that I am a huge opponent of subscription games. This (as we see) lowers the quality of the games. I wonder how Starfield will end? If, like Redfall, then maybe people will finally wake up.... and what is Kojima cooking for MS. Hopefully not a completely exclusive title.

Hellblade 2 is the only game that I'm disappointed PlayStation won't be getting. 

There is almost no chance that the original would have been made, let alone found success, if it was an Xbox exclusive.