VideoGame_Discussion

Get the Xbox Elite controller if you can. I love mine, and I have two of them, one for each of my consoles. I like the weight of the controller, there’s a ton of customization options, and the obvious high quality of the controller. I did have the left bumper issue on one of my controllers, but that was 3 years after I bought it, and a local retro game store fixed me right up for $40. Still recommend the controller.

BucketofJustice wrote:

Thanks. I did end up ordering a red Elite 2 core controller, didn't want to miss out on the $96 sake price. I'll order a third party paddle pack from Amazon.

Hell yeah. Let me know how you like it once you get it.

The Robocop game is super on sale, but only on Xbox and only as part of a the Microsoft "Countdown" promotion. Previous games from these Countdown sales made it to Gamepass days or weeks after the sale.
Is it safe to presume that Robocop will end up on Gamepass or should i jump on this deal?

Same thing with Modern Warfare III, it's the cheapest i've ever seen a new release COD game so close to its original release date. I know there's a higher probably of COD coming to Gamepass due to the Activision/Blizzard deal going into effect Jan 1st. Would Microsoft bring COD to Gamepass as a giant F YOU to Sony?

Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.

Also, if you took advantage of having PC Game Pass ( i did, there's a couple games on there that i don't have to buy on Steam now)...you can Gift 5 of your friends a 14 day trial with a $5 Microsoft gift card.
That's a nice gesture from Microsoft

M$ did say that CoD and Activision games in general would not come to GP right away. We all know they'll come eventually, but when and how (all at once, over time, rolling, will any show up in the base package, etc) is yet unknown.
Activision was well known for keeping the price of new games higher and avoiding good sales for a months after release, so MW3 being on sale so soon likely is more a sign of M$ ownership and possibly a reaction to the poor reception of the very short campaign, vs a sign is coming to GP... But that's purely a speculative guess on my part.

I'm with you though on really disliking buying a game that goes on GP or is a freebie from some service before I play it.

BucketofJustice wrote:

I love it. Why oh why did I wait so long?? Prime delivery is sucking right now so I got a set of the Scuf paddles, since that's all I could get within the 2 days (actually got them next day), and I'm trying to get used to not hitting the paddles on accident. The Scuf's are smaller and shaped different from the OEM paddles so they can be flipped and used in slots other than designed for. I'll probably use just 2 paddles for a while to adjust. So glad I got the Elite Series 2 though.

I’m glad you like it. It’s probably my favorite controller of the generation, and maybe all time. There’s a couple nit picks, but really that’s all it is and they feel great to hold and use. I keep the paddles on the back but I don’t have a profile on most of the time, so it doesn’t really matter.

https://www.ign.com/articles/microsoft-can-now-be-...

Xbox ceo says Microsoft can now be a multiplat publisher. Not quite saying the inevitable corollary.

Feeb wrote:

People who buy Xbox hardware from this point forward are suckers?

Or there won't be Xbox hardware from this point forward?

benstylus wrote:

Yes.

I love it, been saying this for YEARS!! But I was brushed off as some looney toon. Though I mentioned this before GP was even a thing, it just makes more sense now that it is. GP to be sustainable needs to be on everything it can... You you need to branch out and fine other sources of revenue to make up for the limited reach GP would have. The GP model right now is NOT sustainable. I think MS is better positioned as a 3rd party then 1st.

I’m not up on the details of the CoD stipulations. But I’m pretty sure there are some roadblocks to just saying “everyone pays for GP for CoD?” This is kinda the reason it met resistance. No one wants to do that.

Hmm was hoping/expecting more of an uncharted style gameplay with Indiana Jones. Definitely didn’t sell me on the game at all, but I’m not a big Indiana jones fan. Combat looked meh

Finn wrote:

Realistically, they could keep gamepass proprietary to Xbox / PC and make people buy the games on other platforms if they wanted to. MS can afford to play the very long game.

If they did that, then the future of Xbox is 100% digital starting with the next generation or possibly a mid-gen digital-only refresh. Next gen or the one after that I imagine they would be pushing hard for cloud everything too.

Gamepass on PS4 or Switch seems like it would be DOA. Right now, neither Sony or Nintendo want MS to compete against their subscription service on their own platform, so if it is ever allowed, Sony and Nintendo would be getting a significant cut of that $.

the definition of parasitism.

This new Indy game looks awesome! Developed by Wolfenstein devs too. Troy Baker as Indy also.

https://youtu.be/htGnW6YNPjs?si=aNL8W74CR3E9ZkRF

benstylus wrote:

I don't know if MS is all that keen on playing that long game though. They have lots of money sure, but how long do you want to bleed or prop up a model that is un-sustainable? I think for sure having some games come to other platforms will help open up other revenue streams... GP is great for the consumer but ultimately I don't trust it.

I think GP on other platforms would work but not like it currently is. I think for it to work on other platforms it has to offer just MS games and not other games, I think what can push Sony and MS away is if non MS first party games show up on GP then you are basically cannibalizing sales. If you just put MS games on a service and offer it at a competitive price it's a win win. Sony and Nintendo make some cash and MS has more subscribers, basically opens up another revenue stream for MS and Nintendo and Sony make money of something that otherwise would not be there.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

And Todd Howard is exec producing it, the director of Wolfenstein New Order and Youngblood is behind it. I'm digging the gameplay, combat looks great.
It looks like it's 3rd person during exploration and 1st during combat, which i absolutely love, i wish more games would do this.
Its set between Raiders and Last Crusade, seeing Marcus in the trailer actually brought tears to my eyes. I love him in the series and the actor was a great man.

Shane12m wrote:

It is.
Exploration, puzzles, and interactions etc (like rope swings ) are in 3rd person like Uncharted and combat is in First Person.

"Players control Indy as they navigate through a mix of linear, story-sensitive areas and wider, exploratory landscapes. Combat can either be directly engaged with or circumvented entirely through the use of stealth mechanics, and the character's signature whip can be used as both a weapon, or as a means for traversing across obstacles, and solving various puzzles to uncover alternate paths and obscured collectibles."

Indiana Jones and the Great Circle looks very promising! But Senua's Saga: Hellblade II has my full attention at the moment. The first game was great, and I think this sequel is poised to be better with all of the additional funding that Microsoft has. Disappointed that there will be no physical release, but I am not surprised. Avowed also looks solid!

2024 should be a good year for Xbox studios!

Just realized the new Indy game will be Xbox and PC exclusives. Sony is probably eating their hat right about now. Until that Wolverine game by Insomniac comes out that is.

Ehh. They’ll probably just drop another uncharted remake.

Finn wrote:

They've been propping up Xbox since the early 2000s despite never getting any kind of foothold for the Xbox ecosystem in the Asian markets. That's a huge market not to be competing in.


It's great for a certain kind of consumer right now, but I think bad for consumers in general in the long run.

Look at what has happened with video streaming. Dozens of services out there and to watch everything you want, you have to subscribe to multiple, or binge on one service then switch to another, etc. So either you are paying as much as you would have to just buy the stuff, or you have a part time job managing your subscriptions to make sure you are using, pausing, etc. each service at optimal times or you are just throwing away money.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

Another M rated Wolverine game would be fantastic.
That Wolverine Origins game was great. 100 times better than the movie.

Heck yeah. I replayed the Wolverine Origins game so many damn times in the early 2010’s. And I think they said they got approval from Marvel to make the new Wolverine game M.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

Oh my gosh, that's awesome. It was wishfull thinking but it looks like you're on the money.
https://gamerant.com/marvels-wolverine-m-rating-co...

Ya and from what I watched of the gameplay of the leak it’s gonna be brutal. I hope they have him regenerate on the fly too. That was so rad in the Origins game.

benstylus wrote:

True, but that does not mean it’s going to last forever, they have also said that if GP can’t make the subscriber threshold they have set out that they could pull out of the market. That tells me that there is definitely a time limit.

Finn wrote:

They just paid 68.7 billion dollars to buy Activision, buy far the highest dollar acquisition of a video game company ever.

For context, the second biggest acquisition was Take Two buying Zynga for 12.7 billion. The MS/Activision deal was nearly five and a half times that.

They ain't pullin' out anytime soon.

benstylus wrote:

Just repeating what was said. They have a number they want to hit and they want growth. The GP model has to have growth in active accounts or it fails. It's even bigger now because of the acquisition. I believe MS said that if this move does not bring in the numbers they wanted they would indeed pull out out... I think think they would rethink things. I would bet they would leave hardware and focus on selling software personally.

I maybe wrong, but I did say for awhile that MS should go multi plat, said it more when GP came out... it makes more sense, to be successful it means MS has to shift from 1st to 3rd party. They are starting to do it now. It's only a matter of time before it fully happens IMO. It feels as though MS could see the writing on the wall.

Microsoft lays off 1,900 workers, nearly 9% of gaming division, after Activision Blizzard acquisition

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/microsoft-lay...

To be fair, layoffs are expected after a big merger, as there would probably be quite a bit of duplication of staff to be integratred.

The Riot Games layoffs are the bigger story IMO.

https://www.riotgames.com/en/news/2024-rioter-upda...

League of Legends alone brings in nearly 2 billion dollars a year. Even with that Riot isn't immune

This however is a little concerning....

https://www.thegamer.com/xbox-digitial-only-micros...

Finn wrote:

This is definitely something I expected but not quite this soon. I thought they would wait for their mid-gen Pro Xbox Series console which would be all digital and then kill off their physical releases at that time.

The upcoming XSX refresh isn't going to be a Pro model, and it loses the disc drive. I don't know why they'd even bother with doing that. We throw in old BC discs more than anything in ours.

They’re probably also doing this if true to keep costs down. I usually balk at $70 AAA disc based games now and wait for a price drop. And as much as I don’t care for digital mostly I’ll concede to paying $10 or so less digital than for the disc if push comes to shove.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

They aren't going to lower digital game prices because they want you to gamepass

I’m not sure why MS is hellbent on dying on this gamepass hill. Maybe because they’re buying up the entire non first party catalogue? At this point they’re just shoving it down our throats.

Yeah but once game pass becomes like a $30-40 dollar a month premium who’s really going to use it as much? Even at the rate it’s at now I only subscribe for like 3 months out of the year and gorge myself on all the games available I want to play at the time then say peace out for another 8-10 months.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

Once all games are streaming only you won't have a choice

Blah. The future of gaming access kinda sucks. Think I’ll just go back and replay all the disc games I’ve been saving for those depressing rainy future days.

Just like everything else- once the young are convinced this is the way it always was we will look like the loons for saying this isn’t the way.

Damn those kids and their music.

Feeb wrote:

Money. A consistent revenue stream and making like $200M+ each month off it is nothing to sneeze at. It takes away the pressure of having a AAA title flop. Over 2 billion dollars a year is one hell of an incentive to carry on down this path.

I think GP is a great value, especially compared to PS+. PS+ mostly just gets things that GP already had a year prior.

This is true. At least GP gives you new releases right away sometimes. PS+ is always on a delay with new games.

Sony made a mistake trying to provide a GP alternative. If you have your hedgehog don’t be baited into a pissing contest.

I’m not sure on numbers for these things. Is this data even public? Especially on the MS side they are historically very stingy with numbers. I know a couple of years back Sony made almost a billion more than ms in subs. It’s a user base game basically- and ms has been forced to leave its own base to keep up.

Not trying to bang on Sony for their approach with PS+ but I feel like I read the head of Sony just recently said that he didn't think GP made any sense because people only play one game at a time.
Maybe I didn't catch that correctly, but if so, I have no clue where they got that from. Maybe before GP I was more like that, but in the past 2 weeks or so I've played at least 7 different games on my XSX alone, plus likely 4 more on my PC.

For me with GP, I did the $1 upgrade initially and had right around 2.5 years when I did, then I got a full 37 months and did it again, only for the full 1 month price of $15 then. When that runs out in about 13 months I don't think I'll renew. I've accumulated so many games on that system and others that don't get as much attention, so I'm good with letting the sub lapse and maybe I'd go back to the old Live which is of course now GP-core or whatever - but maybe not, I had Live to play with my college buddy who lives far away, but he's a dad and doesn't play much period and even less so co-op.

I also know other people who didn't game a lot on their X1 but opted to try GP for the $1 price and then didn't pay attention and kept getting charged the $15/month and played virtually zero games via it before I believe eventually waking up to the fact and canceling. I'm sure like with most subs, M$ hopes folks do that and pay for it whilst hardly playing games. I presume that most GP contracts have an 'acquire' component to get games and then a 'use based' fee - meaning that if Ubisoft opts to put AC Syndicate on there, M$ pays them a flat fee and then tracks how much Syndicate gets played and then pays Ubi for time usage and/or number of players whom actually played more than like 30 mins. Clearly that's my assumption, but that model would mean that 1000s of active subs paying $15+/month and playing almost nothing period or think of those CoD only type of players, results in a good bit on income vs. pay outs. Not that GP doesn't seek to promote it's breadth of games, it does, but I'd bet they love folks who really only play 1 or a few games a bunch, vs. folks who play lots and lots of different games.

I tend to play a single game to exhaustion before I move on. It makes more sense to just own them if I’m putting 100 hrs in over a few weeks. It also keeps me a bit more honest- I’ll actually play what I invest in instead of just moving on and forgetting it. Good and bad. I only play things I know I like and don’t branch out too much. This is fine by me- I don’t have all the time to try it all and I know I’ll enjoy the time I do have.

There's zero wrong with that @Feeb and I was more like that before getting GP. I dumped days worth of time into The Division and its sequel and have lots of hours spent in the Forza Horizon series. I also see the value of playing only 1 at a time for at least a single genre, like I can't generally be playing 2+ FPSes at once b/c of controls or things that might be different. But I also have played a lot of smaller titles in the past few years, so playing multiple works for me. Plus of the several I've played on my XSX recently, some were more of a try it out type vs. diving in deep. I do like to explore in games as well, to get more from them and collecting things, so I hear you on that front too.

See, this just annoys me.

Wanted to grab Lego Star Wars for my kid on Xbox, digitally. $60! Yet, it's $15 physically, insane.

Yep. With physical, the market decides what the price will be because used games exist and also because stores eventually want to clear out stuff that isn't selling to replace it with stuff that will. With digital, if the publisher never wants it sold for a penny less then full MSRP then that's where it stays.

Your only hope at that point is to try to get the currency to buy it at a discount, and most of those deals are 10% or occasionally 15%.

(On the other hand, I'm also opposed to paying a ridiculous sum of money for a physical copy as opposed to a cheap download)

MrBean wrote:

standard $18 and deluxe $21 on eshop

So with all these rumors and announcement of MS going third party... We now possibly have Starfield being brought over and Gears of War being talked about. You have to ask yourself was buying Activision Blizzard a good thing? If you love the Xbox and how things traditionally were, you are probably thinking no. MS I think has finally realized that GP is not sustainable and that it's not going to give them the ROI they needed. I think this also finally pours cold water on the "MS has deep pockets and can play a long game"

I think it's kind of weird that Starfield could be headed over and the reason MS bought Zenimax was to keep it off. I mean. At least they will make more money of this.


If they release the first Halo on PS5 I will buy it just to have it on my shelf.

The way MS has handled its house over the last 3-4 years I’d definitely be concerned about the quality and frequency of releases moving forward. Maybe we’ll be surprised and this expedites blizzard’s ridiculously long dev times.

The rumors over the last few days are all sorts of weird and unnerving to me. I finally got back to Xbox after loving the original, the 360, moving completely to Sony because of the Xbox One mess, but the Series X bringing me back. Now all the third party talk...I don't know. Maybe they dug too big a hole with Game Pass and the Xbox One.

Spencer said they'll talk about it next week, but from a purely Xbox standpoint, that seems like an eternity. Maybe someone leaked these rumors to dissuade Xbox from doing them. I guess we'll see.

When 75% of your product name is box you really need a console. It really speaks to the idea that Xbox is a culture and not necessarily a machine that plays games. This is good and bad in that it promotes an unhealthy brand loyalty and emotional ties to inanimate products. This idea is not exclusive to MS stuff of course. Some extreme behavior on all fronts. It’s also an intended consequence of the loyalty they push. Sega don’t do what nintendont anymore - but that’s an example of the tribalism these guys try to create. You reap what you sow- the backlash will be emotional as well- which is usually not rational. Don’t think for a second that MS wanted to abandon these strong console based ties. Spin it as “obvious way to make more money” but realize the bombardment of how “pro consumer” Xbox was touted to be only to now espouse the idea of them only being in it to maximize profits. Not mutually exclusive but definitely a feel of hypocrisy- for me personally.

I don't regret buying my Series X but if I was hit by financial woes and decided to sell a console, it would likely be a top contender.

Probably would sell the PS4 first though since I have a PS5 and that makes it a bit redundant

Yeah nothing is sacred anymore when they’re all chasing after the same thing. Money. I member when the console wars were in full bloom and having an Xbox meant you can only play Halo and Gears on an Xbox and having a PlayStation meant I could only play games like Final Fantasy VII and Crash Bandicoot on PlayStation. Man times have changed when corpos want not just some of the money, but all of the money. It indeed does beg the question as to why MS spent almost 70 billion dollars on Activision if their goal is to go multi-platform though. Do they feel their selection of games and revenue will make for a large return on investment in say 10 years or less? That’s the only thing I can think of is analysts told MS to do this now and come out ahead and then some in the years to come.

Because when they own the biggest brands I'm gaming, they can sort of dictate the direction of the industry.

They are pushing hard for the all digital, zero consumer ownership future where every gamer is a continuous revenue stream. Being far and away the largest player in the industry allows them to dramatically increase the pace towards that goal.

For every one of us old guard who says we won't take part of that there are plenty of younger gamers who will.

I’m surprised - and not- by the number of Xbox guys cheering the idea of no more Xbox but making more money and having a bigger share than Nintendo and catching Sony. When did we become cheerleaders for billionaires?

Feeb wrote:

Everyone loves an underdog story.

No Xbox? No games? Winning.🤔

They may own the biggest brands but I am worried with MS's track record after the purchases. They are still having issues pushing out quality games. We have had Hi-Fi Rush. Starfield has been anything but a solid release.

It would have been great for MS if they could make games loo Ike Sony or Nintendo but this has sadly not been the case and has led to this.

Phil Spencer tweeted this today due to all the rumors:

"We're listening and we hear you," Spencer said in a tweet. "We've been planning a business update event for next week, where we look forward to sharing more details with you about our vision for the future of Xbox. Stay tuned."

It'll be interesting to see how that goes. To see how much of these rumors are true.

His comments give the rumors legitimacy. I mean if they were not true you would and should stop them instead of ignoring them and waiting as they could do more damage to your brand.

benstylus wrote:

Makes sense. I’m an old core gamer myself and prefer disc vs digital and I can already see them dissolving all future games by disc and pivoting to the all digital future. They’re already starting with Hellblade II this year being all digital I believe. I guess limited run games is going to be the place to go for the old disc folks like myself’s future. Blah.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

Or just play the old games til they don't play no more.

Superb idea.

I wonder if they will do a limited gamepass of sorts for certain platforms where it will be cheaper but less stuff. Maybe only certain exclusives and what not.

If they have trouble releasing Games, how are they going to do only releasing games? What will Sony Fan Boys do when there is no Xbox, will they talk about the good ole days of hat'in? Will they buy and play MS games or will they still hate on them?

Dusk wrote:

I think that is the only way Sony or Nintendo OK it. 1st party MS games and nothing that could cut take away from there bottom line. I mean if game "A" comes out on GP on a PlayStation or Nintendo then they loose out on a potential sale. This could be a good thing for MS as it would allow them to cut back on some overhead ie. money tossed at putting 3rd party on GP. At very least 3rd party games need at least a year before they are eligible for GP so not to cut into sales on other consoles. This is honestly why I think Sony's approach is far more sustainable. With all the IP and studios that MS has at there finger tips it should not be a problem pumping out games on a decent schedule right? That's why they did this... that's what they told us.

I don't see Gamepass coming to PlayStation as long as Sony has its own competing subscription product.

Unless MS heavily subsidizes Sony to allow it as an add-on tier to PlayStation Plus or something.

It's more plausible for Switch but even then it seems unlikely. Nintendo is doing it's own thing and it's working well for them so why change?

Again, I can only see it working if it's stripped of 3rd party. Only way it makes any sense for Sony to do it. GP as it stands would be a horrible business move in there part.

benstylus wrote:

So as more info comes out about the Xbox layoffs, it's clear that it's a whole lot more than just redundant positions being eliminated after eating Activision.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/tech/article/tech-layo...

RIP Toys for Bob

Yeah that is not good. I was looking forward to Toys For Bob releasing a new Crash and/or Spyro game.

Nadella is protecting the bottom line. He will cut fat even if it means games gets hit pretty hard to keep the holders happy. His 10 year resume looks really good overall- I doubt he’s as patient going forward.

Big layoffs, but, fortunately, it looks like Toys for Bob isn't dead. They're moving to working remotely: https://www.theloadout.com/xbox/toys-for-bob-layof.... I wish they had more Skylanders games. I just finished Superchargers recently, and it was a lot of fun. Trap Team and Swap Force were great too.

Apparently there is a bunch of unrest among dev's. They are not liking the new compensation rules since MS is moving away from physical sales and never post sales it's not sitting well with a lot. I can see MS bleeding a lot of the talent they acquired as things shake out.

What gets me though is MS apparently is pushing forward with there next gen console. What is the point? Honestly, I see absolutely no point in owning an Xbox when they go multiplatform. Not only that, look at 3rd party support... Will they want to support a platform with so many question marks around it? The optics are pretty bad when you have MS choosing not to full it's full weight behind a console they made. They have been so wishy washy about there hardware lately.

It also looks like they are renaming Xbox Game Pass to Microsoft Game Pass.

https://media.gamestop.com/i/gamestop/MSFTXBDemoDa...

The Xbox branding is there, but it's interesting they name chosen. Instead of Xbox Gamepass it's Microsoft Gamepass.

The Xbox name is unfortunately tied to the toxic club culture they built it on. They’re probably hoping Microsoft is a bit less polarizing- and they may be moving towards no box, so no Xbox.

Sounds silly but lots of gamers want nothing to do with Xbox.

Food for thought but MS just became the first company to hit 3 trillion market cap and passed long time rival Apple for the first time in over a decade. They got there largely thanks to their AI focus, plus shaving costs by reducing staff generally boosts the bottom line. Thus gaming likely isn't as important right now to the bean counters, especially when Sony still flatly outsells them and has better exclusives.

It's sort of funny to me that so many folks were all upset that MS was buying ABK because they feared that would mean CoD (and more) would go Xbox exclusive, only to now moan that MS could go basically non-exclusive for all games. It's like, wait didn't you just want them to do this? I do suspect that the groups that complained in these two cases don't have a lot of crossover, but it's still amusing to me.

Talk about pushing Gears, Halo and even Starfield and Hi-Fi Rush over to the PS5 doesn't bother me, since the first 2 are many years old now, and the latter 2 can only fetch so much revenue from GP. Going timed exclusive, especially with GP titles makes sense to me, but none of us know the financial details of any of these games, decisions, nor how GP funds factor in.

As someone who finally got an Xbox Series X in December... and have been catching up on many Xbox exclusives I missed since 2019 or so, I am concerned about all of the recent multiplatform rumors. I hope only Bethesda and Activation games are on other platforms and not exclusives such as Halo and Gears.

Question: I have Starfield downloaded but am hesitant to start due to the upcoming city maps patch. Is it worth waiting for? Also, does anyone think the XSX version will ever get 60FPS while the XSS stays at 30? Is that unlikely? I may wait if an FPS patch seems likely...

Side note: Redfall, which I am currently playing, is not a great game, but it is not a horrible one either. They patched it to decency and I have having fun with the fast gunplay.

I don't know if the people complaining about MS getting COD are the ones complaining about them going multi platform. I have not herd that. What I have herd is the legion of Xbox die hards lashing out and selling Xbox's. The Xbox influencers are all pretty damn pissed right now.

It would be cheaper for me to get a used box and the games I want than to consider long term subs. The digital push will end this idea going forward or at least force an MS account. Consumers tend to spend for convenience- not value.

I typically favored my 360 over PS3 back in the day but now I think I would I like Xbox but more as a service like Game Pass. I would have 0 issues if Microsoft announced in the years to come they would be halting producing and new consoles and focused solely on software, similar to what Sega did back in the Dreamcast days of olde. And look how good they’re doing now. Imagine what MS could do without focusing on making hardware and hitting hardware sales numbers and focused only on making good quality games now that they have bought a good chunk of the industry?

TalonJedi87 wrote:

How good are they doing now? They never separate out their gaming division from other divisions in their annual reports, so only Microsoft knows whether the gaming division is really turning much (if any) profit.

MS faces so many hurdles. Sega at least was able to make a clean break. MS can't do this. It's to bad they did not exit before people were super invested in there ecosystem and built up large digital libraries. It's going to be interesting to see how MS handles this.

My plan going forward:
- Set a long term roadmap on how existing software will be supported.

- GP on other platforms. IF you want GP on other platforms look into ways you can deliver the service without harming the platform your putting it on. 1st party games , fine but if you make 3rd party deals maybe add games that have already been available for 12 months so your not stealing sales.

- look into ways maybe in incorporating Xbox user accounts into PSN so users achievements can be taken with them. Let's face it some people have never owned a PS and only ever played an Xbox, it be worth looking the possibility of being able to transfer most if not all. It basically be with games that are available on both systems. Your not get all of it, but maybe it does not have to be such a gut punch.


- look into the possibility of scrapping the next console. What's the point in dragging out the transition? How many units could you possibly sell when many people feel like they are going to be abandoned... Why would they buy another console from you? Why would 3rd party support you?

Finn wrote:

Any gamepass on competing platforms is going to have to not just "not harm" Sony or Nintendo, but strongly benefit them.

Sony and Nintendo have 100% final say over anything that is licensed for their hardware, so if it is perceived as anything but a positive, they can simply choose not to allow it on the system.


If MS really pushes hard into the sub-only and eventually stream-only business they can still get a good number of console sales out of it. Or maybe they will lease those too like a modern cell phone plan.


The strategy seems to have been buy them all up and they aren't third parties anymore

MS faces so many hurdles. Sega at least was able to make a clean break. MS can't do this. It's to bad they did not exit before people were super invested in there ecosystem and built up large digital libraries. It's going to be interesting to see how MS handles this.

My plan going forward:
- Set a long term roadmap on how existing software will be supported.

- GP on other platforms. IF you want GP on other platforms look into ways you can deliver the service without harming the platform your putting it on. 1st party games , fine but if you make 3rd party deals maybe add games that have already been available for 12 months so your not stealing sales.

- look into ways maybe in incorporating Xbox user accounts into PSN so users achievements can be taken with them. Let's face it some people have never owned a PS and only ever played an Xbox, it be worth looking the possibility of being able to transfer most if not all. It basically be with games that are available on both systems. Your not get all of it, but maybe it does not have to be such a gut punch.


- look into the possibility of scrapping the next console. What's the point in dragging out the transition? How many units could you possibly sell when many people feel like they are going to be abandoned... Why would they buy another console from you? Why would 3rd party support you?


What happens next is going to be really interesting.

I've been an Xbox first gamer since the 360 and thanks to programs like GwG and MS rewards points I have a very large digital library on the ecosystem. But this still just rumored shift away from exclusives doesn't bother me like it's doing to some. Sure it may change my approach for the next gen but I'm not sure I'll even go into the next gen too hard anyhow.
Clearly others are in different positions on gaming overall, but this is why I don't get diehards or fanboys. The 360 was a leader of sorts and they got me into that ecosystem from there but I didn't shun Sony and have a PS3 and PS4 and want a 5 eventually, but with the Sony exclusives coming to PC I'm actually thinking of going for those versions instead.

I’m now wondering if they will create some type of game pass service, where it doesn’t include their first party libraries from like Xbox game studios like the Halos, Forzas and Gears of War games of the worlds and then launch that service on Nintendo and Sony platforms. This way it retains some exclusivity to their Xbox consoles and gets some more folks to buy Xboxes. Perhaps call it Game Pass Lite or something.

There is no way Nintendo or Sony allows that unless it's heavily subsidized. A service like that would only poach sales. I think a service that is the reverse of that would make sense. But again if all this goes through and there are alot of signs suggesting it is I ask what is the point of releasing next gen hardware? Why invest the money when your releasing your games on everything... You can make more money by simply not spending it.

I honestly love this, yes this all digital thing blows and I wish it would just disappear but MS going third party is music to my ears.

Same. I’d love a MS going third party only and I think after the next console generation maybe by 2030, it may just be an all digital future sadly. That I’m not really a fan of but it’s looking like the grim future becoming a reality.

Finn wrote:

Let your gamepass sub lapse and it does

When I had gamepass I’m pretty sure I paid 9.99 for the Witcher 2 and then let it lapse. The game that lured me -deaths door- wasn’t even on GP then.

Maybe I'm not fully understanding all of this but....

Layoffs aside, who cares? This was already heading to digital only regardless, it's just happening sooner than expected. I doubt the gaming division is going away entirely. I'm a GP subscriber and also have physical games. Everything continues to work as it should. They don't need to call it Xbox GamePass if it ends up working on any platform. It's literally just running as a resource in the cloud on any device with an internet connection. If you have an actual Xbox Series X, maybe it runs better. If you don't, it runs a little slower since there's no dedicated proprietary hardware powering it. Why wouldn't Sony do the same thing with their hardware?

This is essentially digital media being consumed on any platform. If you absolutely must stick to physical games due to principle or preference, you should probably stick to retro consoles or anything Nintendo.

I think the thing most people are shocked about is that it's happening this soon after the Activision deal.

They are thinking MS spent all this money to buy the company (plus millions more on litigation to get it approved) so they could finally have some compelling exclusives on their system, and now it seems like not only are they not going to be exclusives but they may not even be planning to continue on with the Xbox brand at all?

Then what was the point?

And apparently the point has been the push to the subscription model all along. The more studios they own, the better chance they have to be the dominant player in that market.

No one expected Netflix was going to one day to destroy the video rental industry (and severely cripple the home video physical industry) with streaming. Yet internet speeds and technology caught up.

Look at the music market: it went from all physical sales to mostly digital sales to no one is buying anything just subscribing to Spotify.

Now here we all are in the video game world seeing the push to digital more and more. MS is thinking beyond digital sales and trying to position itself appropriately for the next two phases after that: subscription and streaming.

You could say it's a bold move but it's the only move that makes sense for them. PS4 sold double the number of Xbox One systems. PS5's ratio over the Xbox Series console is even higher, with about a 2.5 to 1 lead overall since launch, with Sony growing that lead (2023 sales were 3 to 1 in favor of PS5).

If any of this is true, my guess is that Game Pass will drop all third-party and indie games... and stack it with all Activision, Bethesda, first-party studio games... and offer it on rival platforms... but that is the only way to play CoD and other formerly third party games on the rival platform. With better subscription pricing for those on Xbox Series X|S, as well as third-party and indie games on Xbox Series X|S.

SMY36738 wrote:

Not enough benefit there for Sony/Nintendo. If MS conditions availability of COD on allowing gamepass, Sony could revive Killzone or Socom or something. If there's no more Xbox to play it on, and it's not on Playstation, people in the Sony verse will move to other similar games. Heck maybe this is EA's chance to bring back Medal of Honor or make Battlefield relevant again. Or Ubi could create its 40th Tom Clancy spinoff series.

Nintendo has proven they can get along just fine without COD so they wouldn't take any subscription services that would eat into their own sales.

I kinda secretly wish MS would make COD a Game Pass exclusive, although unlikely since they did say several months ago that their goal was to have COD still on PlayStation, solely for that fact you just mentioned. Give us back the other war games of olde. Socom. Medal of Honor. Brothers in Arms. My body is ready. Enough with the obligatory COD nonsense. Variety is the spice of life!

Folks preach innovation and complain about remasters etc yet annually they buy more madden and CoD than anything.

Those “gamers” really grind my gears.

Feeb wrote:


They buy Pokemon too

And Assassin's Creed

Feeb wrote:

There's a large subsection of people that buy their annually COD and/or sports game, and that's it for the year. Those are not the same people that are looking for more/different.

DCGX wrote:

This is repeated pretty regularly, but is it true or is it just one of those things that people believe because it's been said for so long?

https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/28/23777298/sony-f...

I guess it is true.

In 2021, over [14?] million users (by device) spent 30 percent or more of their time playing Call of Duty, over 6 million users spent more than 70% of their time on Call of Duty, and about 1 million users spent 100% of their gaming time on Call of Duty. In 2021, Call of Duty players spent an average of [116?] hours per year playing Call of Duty. Call of Duty players spending more than 70 percent of their time on Call of Duty spent an average of 296 hours on the franchise.

It's a small percentage of the overall userbase (less than 1%), but it's also not just a handful of people doing it for a youtube stunt or something.

FIFA is super popular now as well. Imagine what a truly capable (console) handheld- one that emulates an in front of the TV experience (better and faster load than switch) version of fifa, madden , CoD etc. maybe this is exactly why that market would fail- a 1 game attach rate would require selling it at a profit very quickly. They gotta buy more than 1-3 games.

benstylus wrote:

It's definitely a small percentage compared to all gamers, but a small percentage buying one or two games adds up quick versus the rest of gamers buying everything else that's out there.

If I only bought one or two games a year, and had a franchise I only played, I'd buy it every year too, no question regardless of quality.

https://www.ign.com/articles/xbox-game-pass-now-ha...

Apparently MS now has 34 million gamepass subscribers, up from 25 million when they last disclosed numbers in early 2022.

Seems like a nice boost, but they also converted Xbox Live Gold subscriptions to Game Pass Core late last year, and those ARE included in the total according to that ign article.

The problem I see is that according to this article from Forbes:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2023/07/17/...

Xbox Live Gold had 46 million subs back in May 2020. I'm sure many of them had already converted to Gamepass before the official rebrand of Xbox Live last year, but 46 million in 2020 to 34 million in 2023 is still a net loss of 12 million users, unless I'm missing something?

Read that article last night too. That’s still like a half a billion dollars a year they’re taking in even with losses. And this is why they’re a 3 trillion dollar company. The Xbox division is like a hobby for them and they keep buying up companies collecting them like Pokemon cards. Even if they’re losing they’re still making some kind of money.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

Assuming every one of those 34 million is on the "cheap" $60/yr plan, that's still $2 billion a year, or 5 Bobby Kotick severance packages.

But how much are they paying in dev costs for first party titles and licensing costs for third parties?

Now they are claiming the biggest hardware leap of any generation for the next console. Which is like 4 years away. Between the quote posted from Spencer in the PS5 topic last night, and now this. I'm starting to buy into them having lost their minds over there. How can they claim something about the hardware that doesn't exist yet. There is no way they have a dev model this early. Like they may have mock ups. But there is no way they have a working dev unit of a the next hardware that is 4x times as powerful as the existing hardware. Unless it is a $2K PC I can't see how that is even possible right now.

EDIT: the thing I read miss quoted, because of course it did. They didn't say 4x as powerful. They said "largest technical leap". Which could mean a lot of different things.

benstylus wrote:

Licensing is a big Expenditure I’m seeing now. I found an article online saying they spend like hundreds of millions of dollars per month to keep some games on their service.

MS doesn’t do themselves any favors by continuing to be obscurantist regarding the numbers. There’s often a spin in play. Often words or phrases that play on semantics etc. It feels patronizing at times.

I mean yeah...here's an article I found with some absurd gauging licensing fees for GP games (present or future). Some are monthly fees, others are 1 time fees. And for the record I wouldn't pay 50 cents to have Gotham Knights on my anything... that game was just a barrel of disappointment.

"Here’s the full breakdown of estimated costs for including games on Xbox Game Pass (whether at launch, or years after launch in the case of GTA V and Red Dead Redemption 2):

Star Wars Jedi: Survivor – US $300 million
Mortal Kombat 1 – US $250 million
Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League – US $250 million
Assassin’s Creed Mirage – US $100 million
Gotham Knights – US $50 million
Dying Light 2 – US $50 million
Lego Star Wars – US $35 million
Grand Theft Auto V – US $12-15 million per month
Red Dead Redemption 2 – US $5 million per month
Dragon Ball: The Breakers – US $20 million
Wreckfest 2 – US $10-14 million
Return to Monkey Island – US $5 million
Just Dance – US $5 million
Net Crisis Glitch Busters – US $5 million
Blood Runner – US $5 million
Baldur’s Gate 3 – US $5 million"

https://www.gameshub.com/news/news/xbox-game-pass-...

Off topic, but I wish Xbox customer support was the same support that handled the Microsoft365 business division. Support is complete ass over there. At least the gaming division is only half assed.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

Yeah, more amazing journalism at work I see. Those numbers are not what they paid, or were willing to pay. Those numbers are what they thought the partner, a.k.a. the developer/publisher, would ask for their game to be on the service. That is all that is. And it has notes about the game and their thoughts on it being on the service. None of it is concrete or shows any of the actual money involved in any deals. They've never actually said themselves how it works or what they pay. We have just gotten little bits and pieces from smaller devs, and mostly all they have to say is it really helped them out due to the deal they made for it.

Here is link to images of the actual emails with the info: https://imgur.com/a/pHi74Dq

Its getting pretty bad with all these lame ass gaming new sites. None of them have legit info anymore. Just like all media these days really. They all just change the info to fit their own narrative with little regard for the actual truth.

ryanflucas wrote:

The office 365/outlook.com/hotmail support is the worst I have ever seen. Its a complete joke. I deal with that stuff regularly, consult and do support for hosting companies and business. And when people use their service ask for my help it really annoys me. Because getting anything resolved from their end takes weeks. Its pretty bad when you can make yahoo look responsive.

I think it’s just a reflection of the current state of American society- overblown sensationalism and fake news. It’s all over MS a bit more so than the Japanese companies. They do a better job of not participating in the rigmarole of journalism.

All publicity is definitely not good publicity.

Archer wrote:

Thanks for clarifying. I love some of the notes. Very entertaining. “EA-Jedi Survivor: Crown Jewel. They won’t do.”

its funny because the BG3 Dev's said they did not want to put it on GP.

I would imagine that MS seeks to have a contract along the lines of an initial flat fee to bring the game to the service for at least a year. Most games tend to last that long, often longer. Then I would expect that the publishers would want some sort of usage based compensation for both unique gamers playing the title and for certain time thresholds, possibly per gamer as well but maybe cumulative for all players. I also imagine options are discussed to allow for extending the time on the service, potentially incentive based.

Was Gotham Knights really that horrible? It's installing on my console now, I'm not expecting amazing things but wanted to give it a shot.

Gotham Knights is an insult to the Arkham games. It’s just tedious and repetitive gameplay with no lock on that gets frustrating. And to add salt to the wound caps out at 30fps on consoles. Meh.

Now that Cyberpunk is fixed and not a steaming pile of crap, it's actually a good game.

So Pentiment and Grounded are going to Switch. And Hi-Fi Rush is going to PS5. Officially announced. The fourth and final game has not been confirmed yet.

I’d probably fire up sea of thieves again.

Yeah looks like Sea of Thieves is the fourth game, and for PS5. Prior to the link below being published, it was just info from the Nintendo direct and an early leaked trailer on youtube.


https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2024/02/21/new-platfor...

I had an XSX around launch, but then got a PS5 a year or two ago and have only been playing that (my son has the XSX in another room). I want to revisit my decent Xbox library and the Forza games in particular so I'm looking to get another Series console.

I had an XSS at one point but I have lots of BC stuff on discs + the lower res bothered me.

I see the XSX is on sale for $350 on Amazon and a few places right now. That seems like my best option as used prices appear to be in that range? I know the hardware refresh is coming out soon but since it doesn't have a disc drive I don't want it. Anyone selling an XSX? Or is $350 likely my best bet?

Probably is. And the revision is just speculation right now anyway, after the info dump last year. Even then, that info was a couple of years old.

Anxiouz wrote:

I've seen them as low as $249 new. I know i should've waited.
Go to slickdeals and make a saved search for "xbox series x" and it'll email you when one pops up.

Was the SX on sale the 18th only for $350? Not seeing it, post a link if possible. My Nephew wants one.

@Groo It's on the Xbox store on Amazon and I still see it for $350:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&lo...

Anxiouz wrote:

Awesome! Thank you!

edit: The Black fooled me, that is the 1TB S.

Oh man, I'm so sorry. Yesterday this had a toggle for XSX vs XSS but now it's just XSS and a lot of redirects take me to this now. Something did change.

Got Diablo 4 in today, pop in the disc says needs an update: 16gb from Disc 69 GB from Network. Was at about 121 speed. I have 1000mbps Fiber. I checked on the Xbox said DL was at 954. Why was it so slow? And why so little from the disc? Said it was going to take over an hour. I dont remember- this from Diablo 3. I hope I get to enjoy this game, I dont have Gold etc.

Groo wrote:

This has been an issue with xbox since the X1. Installs from a disc that also require a download take ages.

And you can play online (the only way to play game as its online only) without gold/gpu. But you can not do any of the network stuff. You wont see other players like you normally would. You can't do world events. You can't access a certain vendor (pvp vendor) because you can't earn pvp currency. And it will bug you to purchase it every time you log into the game as well. But you can still enjoy the main story and wonder around the world doing side quests/dungeons.

Archer wrote:

Happy bday Archster!

Thanks @Feeb

Series x 299.99 refurb @ woot.

This is cheapest I’ve seen them retail from CAG this year.

https://electronics.woot.com/offers/xbox-series-x-...

3 year GPC to GPU trick still works, surprising.

https://gamingbolt.com/third-party-game-developers...

This is not good for Xbox. This is even before MS decided to support other consoles. So now IMO it's compounded, why would a 3rd party want to support a console that is floundering in Europe and now MS is now even putting it's full muscle behind? Why on earth would the consumer support a console that is bringing there games to other platforms? Why not just support Sony and Nintendo and get there games also? Phil right now is doing an excellent job in Killing Xbox the way we know it. The crazy thing is even some of the Xbox games are running somewhat better on PS5? How the hell? This is according to Digital Foundry. MS needs to clear this up and stop stringing things along, going forward things are an absolute mess, and they are not done bringing games over to other platforms.

I feel like MS is mid-pivot but not communicating to existing (or new) customers where they're heading. It feels like we're in a lull and they kinda expect the hardware refreshes coming up to stir excitement..which they most definitely will not.

But for multi-platform stuff...Xbox still has 30M or whatever consoles out there so I think it's still worth dev effort to support that pool of potential customers.

But why I ask? How many of those have moved to PC or PS5? Why would you continue to support a console that is dying? While the others are doing great. MS complaints about the industry are exactly what they can't do while Sony and Nintendo are. MS never understood it's about solid first party and that's something the Big Two can do and do well. MS for too long has leaned on Halo and Forza. They have not released a solid big new franchise in what feels like back in the 360 days. Sony has led the way with new Franchises since and Nintendo does a great job branching existing IP into other games.


People may not like what I say, but there is a reason why MS is in the predicament they are. "Where is the games" and by that exclusive 1st party? They have bought enough and have little to show.

Meh. I don't think Xbox is going anywhere. Even if it is selling half the units of the PS5, that's plenty and no big devs will stop supporting it. Sure you may have smaller devs who just do the PS5/PC thing, but MS has money to throw at select smaller games that they think will generate buzz and keep Gamepass peeps happy. Unless porting games to the Xbox is cost prohibitive (which I don't believe it is), I don't see any way the games that actually move the needle skip the Xbox.

On Phil Spencer...I'm not a fan of his, but then again I'm not a fan of any suit. No matter how much they try to make belive they are one of us. But let's not act like he's to blame for all this. The dude inherited a dumpster fire and has done his best to pivot and carve out a space for Xbox in the gaming segment. They have a lot of developers now and have a service in Gamepass that seems to be doing well. No clue how sustainable it is long term, but I think the Xbox peeps are pretty happy. And MS has plenty of money and with the money they have invested, they have a huge stake in gaming. They aren't going anywhere.

At least that's my read on things.

I saw recently that indie devs have been disappointed in Microsoft's money offerings in putting their games on GamePass these days. Apparently they aren't offering publishers anything close to what they used to (the same was said for Epic Games too in the same article).

Xbox is absolutely not going anywhere so long as Mr. Multi-Billion-Trillion Dollar Baby Daddy Microsoft keeps backing them and footing the bill for their ridiculous expenditures.

Microsoft doesn't have a great track record in hardware, but Xbox is indeed not going anywhere, anytime soon.

... Now if the stock would just split already!

TalonJedi87 wrote:


If only they went into Zune with that level of dedication and money.
I still use mine to this day.

PizzaTheHutt wrote:

I haven't heard of anyone using a dedicated mp3 player anymore until you just posted. Most people I think just use their phones now

benstylus wrote:

I still use a very old sandisk tinny mp3 player. I use it when I go for walks/runs or go to the gym. I hate using my phone for that. Phones are too big now days. And if you accidentally drop it the glass will break.

MrBean wrote:

I don't think anyone said Xbox is going anywhere.... But there will be a shift from hardware to just software, it makes the most sense. There is a reason why no hardware manufacturer is also a 3rd party dev. They could just drop the Xbox name (doubt it)... Or rename it Xbox Studios ... I think that's great because you still carry the Xbox brand recognition. I think its better then calling it Microsoft Game Studios sor whatever. It is however end of days for MS hardware, that writing is on the wall you just look at it. I would love it if MS would just focus on software. But again could you imagine if that 69 billion was invested on expanding internal studios and reviving dormant IP? MS has never quite learned that you cant spend yourself to a market leading position. It has not helped sales and are stuck in a 3rd place spot. Yes they have greatly improved revenue but again that's on the backs of others. With how many studios they have you would think we would have seen some new AAA stuff... Or just stuff rather then the trickle.

I use an Astell&Kern high fidelity one for when I want to really immerse myself in some music. I have some high end headphones, and I have all of my CDs ripped to FLAC on an SD card. It has made me appreciate the nuances of songs I listened to for years and experience them in a new way. That being said, though, I do use my phone for everyday stuff off of Spotify.

benstylus wrote:

I have an iPod shuffle. It’s the way.

Feeb wrote:

... there is no iPod, only Zune!

MrBean wrote:

Are you the gatekeeper or the key master?

Finn wrote:

With no hardware, there's really no Xbox. If the hardware goes away, they would almost certainly pivot to a new name or revert back to Microsoft.

They kind of already have started gping that direction with Game Pass Ultimate. A very system-agnostic name.

Awful decision. Hooray for PC players tho. Bleh.

Hellblade 2 Confirmed to Run at 30 FPS on Xbox, No Performance Mode Available
https://ign.com/articles/hellblade-2-confirmed-to-...

Maybe they should drop forced support of the Xbox Series S.

The Series X has been in the $300-$350 range New many times making the Series S key value $300 not a value. Instead MS doubled down and released a Series S 1TB for $350. Worthless from day 1.

Groo wrote:

Yeah, they are killing the XS because of the SS support. Its pathetic. I know the S is cheaper and more people bought it because of that. But it makes owning an X pointless. All games run way worse on the X than a PS5. Even their own games they just released on PS5 run better on PS5 than the damn X.

Microsoft should’ve just done what Sony did. Come out with a baseline, digital only SX and make it a little bit cheaper. But no they wanted to make an all digital console a whole lot cheaper than Sony‘s digital PS5 and now look where it got them. For shame.

It got them a butt-ton of gamepass subscribers. That's literally all anyone I know who has one does with it.

And that’s probably all MS cares about at the end of the day. Those lucrative subs.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

With the recent discussion that the game pass deals for developers have gotten a lot skimpier, I can't imagine they were actually making much money on it.

They just wanted the explosive growth and kept throwing money as the subs kept coming in, but now that things have hit a bit of a plateau, they have no idea what to do next. (Because apparently "make amazing games" is off the table)

I mean they ate up all these studios years ago and are only just starting to trickle out games this year. I read an article the other day that said that a lot of those studios development teams that Microsoft purchased are on standby shrugging not knowing what to do next or where it’s going to go. I guess Microsoft doesn’t know either. They were so worried about chasing the cars and when they finally caught the shiny cars they now kinda sorta don’t know what to do with them. I mean, don’t get me wrong. I’m sure Hellblade II will do well (even at that locked 30fps nonsense) And that Indiana Jones game looks pretty sweet. But I feel like there’s so much more they could be doing with all these studios by now instead of letting them all hang back and hang around like a turd floating around in the toilet, waiting for them to flush and get on with it.

I don't know why anyone is surprised that they don't know what to do with these developers they bought.

You can just look at the last 20 years of games developed by Rare.

They started off on a weird foot with Grabbed by the Ghoulies, but then the Conker remake at least was pretty well received. On 360 they started pretty strong with Kameo and Perfect Dark Zero, and then got weird again with Viva Pinata.

People thought they had finally got their old mojo back when a new Banjo Kazooie was announced, and then it wasn't really a sequel but a vehicle building game?

Then Microsoft decided Rare's talent would best be realized by making Kinect Sports in 2020. And then again in 2011. And again in 2014.

But wait, Killer Instinct was released in 2013! A reboot of Rare's beloved fighting game series would surely be a project Rare could sink their teeth into. NO. WE WILL GIVE THIS TO ANOTHER DEVELOPER, DOUBLE HELIX, WHOSE MOST RECENT PRIOR RELEASE WAS BATTLESHIP BASED ON THE MOVIE BASED ON THE TABLETOP GAME. RARE MAY ONLY SUPERVISE. FROM A DISTANCE. AFTER THEIR KINECT GAME WORK FOR THE DAY.

At least we got Rare Replay in 2015, a collection chock full of nostalgia and reminders that Rare's best days were behind them as long as Kinect was a thing Microsoft incorrectly believed people wanted.

Finally in 2018 there was Sea of Thieves, a games-as-a-service success story thanks to being different and engaging (and also being free on gamepass)

But what about the Battletoads reboot? Once again Rare would be providing only a support role on an IP they created. The game would be developed by Dlala Studios instead because fudge Rare.

(Back to 2005, It's Mr. Pants! for GBA was kinda fun too)

I am not surprised as much as I am disappointed. I loved Xbox growing up and wanted them to do right and succeed, but they’re just repeating the same mistakes of the past it seems.

I'm not too disappointed. Games still look good on my X.

I am playing Hogwarts Legacy and Diablo 4 on mine. SX still Got the Green on the inside.

YES. About time they came back to this. Please finish adding all the OG xbox and xbox 360 games that haven't been added yet. One of the main reasons I continue to own an xbox is because I can play so many BC games from older generations. The way PlayStation handles this is joke.

Yeah, I’ve always said that Xbox actually cares about the past generations that allows gamers to play the majority of their games from the first generation of Xbox to now on modern consoles whereas Sony is just like yeah F U pay me more to stream the old stuff whereas MS is like hey if you got a disc from 2001 fire it up! (Mostly). I’m actually happy to hear that they’re getting a team together too bring forth even more old-school Xbox games from older generations to be able to play on modern consoles. There’s still a handful in my collection that are missing from BC and I’m hoping that they’re going to once and for all just announce that every single game will be playable from Xbox and Xbox 360 on modern Xbox consoles.

TalonJedi87 wrote:


I don't know if this means they're adding more games though. Back in 2021 they specifically said "we have reached the limit of our ability to bring new games to the catalog from the past due to licensing, legal and technical constraints." (technical being the games that require peripherals).
https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2021/11/15/70-new-back...

Ya I recall that too so that article they posted recently is a bit perplexing then.

It reads to me as though they are reaffirming their commitment to hardware.

If you click through to the story instead of just reading the twitter post, they also specifically mention preserving your digital library, so I don't think more OG Xbox BC is what they are announcing.

Finally! Been waiting for Jedi Survivor to make it to Gamepass. Letting people here know in case they were considering buying it. Supposedly coming out on Thursday.

https://www.xboxachievements.com/news/star-wars-je...

Play it! it's buggy and has some glitches but I had fun with it for sure. Can't wait for the next one.

Downloading it now. Fallen Order wasn’t perfect either but definitely was a lot of fun. I’m hearing good things about Survivor. I was playing RDR2 but going to pause that and play this because I only have a few months left on my GPU sub and not sure if I want to renew.

Jedi Survivor was great minus some glitches. I’m still salty I can’t platinum it cause of a stupid glitch where 2 priorite shards won’t spawn.

Oh that sucks to be so damn close.

Super frustrating dude. And I tried all the YouTube tricks around it and still nope. Hopefully they patch it but I’m not holding my breath as it’s been a year now and they still haven’t addressed it.

Staraang wrote:

Is it less challenging/easier than the 1st game? I had to rage quit the 1st one because i got stuck on some of the more harder Souls-like sequences. I'd like get back into it with the sequel.

Simon_Belmont wrote:

Didn’t try it yet, hope to be able to play this weekend. You should give the first one another whirl. I’m not even that great of a gamer but managed to muddle through it. You’re almost certainly a more hardcore gamer than me and can likely beat it if I can.

I would get frustrated too and had to try some sequences particularly boss battles repeatedly. I found the key is to build up your skills. Initially I tried over and over to beat some enemies when I first encountered them. Nearly ragequit myself until I realized some of them are nearly impossible until you’ve leveled up especially by acquiring some of the really powerful attacks.

I’ll try the 2nd game out and report back.

Alright, got to play Survivor some. Got past the first boss and it's overall quite similar in gameplay to the first game. Overall mechanics and controls are the same and just as good as ever. Some of the camera angle issues are still there but I know this was a bigger deal to others than me. The stances and new skills are cool. There haven't really been any significant puzzles yet. So far I wouldn't call the game especially difficult but a big part of that is I'm already familiar with the controls and some of the fighting tactics.

The thing that struck me most especially when I started the game is how the graphical detail of the environments has been improved. Coruscant looks amazing. So far I'm enjoying the story but it's really just getting started so we'll see how it goes.

Microsoft has shutdown four Bethesda studios, Arkane Austin, Tango Gameworks, Alpha Dog Games, and Roundhouse Studios. The closure of Arkane Austin, means the people who paid for the premium edition of Redfall will now not get the DLC they paid for (which is already over a year behind schedule). And Alpha Dog is the team who made all the modern Doom games. And Tango Gameworks is the team that made Hi-Fi rush, which was a massive hit. And Roundhouse is just being merged into Zenimax Online to work on ESO.

Wow I’m A little shocked to hear about Tango. I loved hi-fi rush. I guess this is just Microsoft realizing that gee maybe we shouldn’t have spent $68 billion on a single studio. And billions before that on smaller studios when it doesn’t look too sexy on our annual financial report card.

The entire industry has a HUGE cost problem. Games are too big and too expensive. Things really need to change. Even Media Molecule was on the chopping block for Sony when they had their wave of cuts recently. It just sucks and makes me worry for devs like Ninja Theory and Obsidian if their games don't hit. If Tango can make Xbox's most critically acclaimed game in a decade and still get shut down, then anything is possible. And I feel for Arkane Austin. I didn't play Redfall and I know it wasn't a hit, but Prey was very good.

Hope those folks all land on their feet.

Heavyd814life wrote:

It seems to be pretty much entirely western studios getting axed.

Even when Japanese companies like Sony are cutting, you don't see news about anyone at Polyphony Digital for example facing job cuts. Instead you hear about Naughty Dog (American), Insomniac (American), Guerilla Games (Dutch), and London Studio (British).

Maybe it's not the entire industry that has the cost problem.

(Insert smug looking Nintendo picture here.)

Gamers are creating an environment where nothing but new AAA is acceptable. Severely criticizing remakes, games inspired by others, sequels etc. [ironically they buy the same crap repeatedly, guard it from criticism and sink thousands of hours into it annually] Companies have naively started going down that road- big money big new game. @benstylus may be onto something in a sense because it does seem that more eastern influence on a company equates to more willingness to stick with what works and subtly build on it - as opposed to overly ambitious earth shattering reinventions of gaming that the western climate (gamers) is seemingly calling for.

Even an industry layman can tell you that the money is in the annual rehashes and recurring franchises. This sucks for gaming in general but it’s the obvious path of least resistance. I was hopeful that things like big mergers would equate to taking on the easy money from the annual cash cows and mobile; and then reinvesting it in more creative experiences- but unfortunately it looks like raking in that easy money is the only true desire.

I mean, I guess it’s the same application for the movie And film industry. Instead of creating new original ideas, they just are now relying on existing IP’s and rehashing and creating requels and reboots galore because it’s the safer route and they are simply banking on peoples nostalgia. And let’s get real folks, Nostalgia, like sex, sells and is one hell of a drug.

Archer wrote:

Alpha Dog only did the 'Mighty Doom' mobile game, not the reboot and 'Eternal.' I played about 10 minutes of 'Mighty Doom' before I couldn't take it anymore. Arkane Austin is a shock, but I think Tango Gameworks was heading this way already. Most everyone behind their major releases had already left, including the founder. Maybe there just wasn't enough creativity there anymore. I'm speculating of course.

I do agree there's a inflated budget problem, but I don't think it's just games. We've seen this in film for a couple of decades already.

I also don't think it's on the consumer either. The industry was a glut, especially the PS4/Xbox One era, with remasters and half-baked re-releases that no one asked for that big publishers were trying to make a quick buck on, and we're still seeing that a little. But new IPs just take time, AAA or not. That does lead to over-inflated budgets. That fact is, and this is more obvious in games than movies, tech is expensive. Games aren't hour long 2D hops from the 80s and 90s anymore that 10 or less people could make. To make a cinematic game takes a lot of tech and a lot of money. Though some indies are finding a better balance.

People complain about it, but I think SEGA has it right with the 'Like a Dragon' series. Sure there was some low moments and padding within certain entries, but for the most part, that whole series is at the top of cinematic story telling, with, for my money, some of the best narratives in gaming, but they reuse assets like there's no tomorrow. I'm guessing one of those games is a fraction of the cost to make than any of Sony's narrative games, yet their stories stand right next to them.

I'm not entirely sure it's all nostalgia. Some of it is just familiarity.

Take for example people who go to McDonalds when they travel. They aren't necessarily going because they have such fond memories of past McDonalds trips, they are going because it's more or less a known quantity.

Sure they could check Google for a highly rated local hole in the wall, but what if they don't like it? Better to just stick to what you know.

And in a world where rentals stores are all but dead and games typically cost $60-$70, sticking with what you know is seen by most consumers as the safer option. Maybe you won't get wowed as often, but you also aren't likely to get burned as often.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

Entertainment is the opium of the people. It is the blue pill of a soulless world.

This is unfortunate for those involved, but I don't see how it's much different vs. what's been happening to EA, Embracer, Square-Enix and others, i.e. I don't think explicitly blaming M$ nor the merger with Bethesda made this worse necessarily. Seems likely that Bethesda and ActBlizKing were going to shrink anyhow. Not absolving crummy execs either, plenty of blame to go 'round. The pandemic caused studio's to grow and demand for games went up when the world was in lockdown, that ended, economy hasn't recovered, games are absurdly expensive to make, especially when trash like SBI and Blackrock DEI crap gets crammed into the mix. Plus overall gaming is likely shrinking a bit for a number of different reasons. Not trying to open the DEI/SBI can here, but it's a growing factor in the industry and right or wrong, lots of gamers are rejecting it and that's having effects on sales.

Specifically for these 3 studios:
Arkane Austin - Redfall was a huge screwup for a very hyped game that surely M$ and Bethesda wanted/expected more out of. Prey and Dishonored earned them a rep that they completely tarnished with Redfall.
Tango Gameworks - Hi-Fi Rush was solid and their previous The Evil Within games were good too, but Hi-Fi should've gone to PS5 sooner and like someone else said, the founder left and surely many other key talents followed him.
Alpha Dog Games - Mighty Doom was alright, it was a phone game so what does one expect. I played it a good while ago but I simply don't spend real $$ on mobile games.

Slickriven wrote:

Mobile is such a weird space. Either you hit it huge and rake in billions or you stay small. There really aren't any halfway success stories in thst space that I'm aware of.

Redfall was not that bad. It was worse than Dishonored 2, and the expectations were too high for Redfall to meet them, but it was fun. It’s even less of a big deal given that it was on Game Pass day one. Arkane Austin deserved better.

I just read that Alan Wake 2 still hasn't recoop'd it's dev costs. I feel that it being digital-only significantly impacted sales, but general consensus seems rather positive for the game and it sold well enough. But this would have sunk other studios. That's a pretty scary business to be in.

Hi-Fi Rush is great, and I can't imagine that studio is all that big? But if profits weren't strong enough MS just doesn't want the risk and with hardware tanking, and all that spent acquisition money, they need to build a bit of a war chest.

Anxiouz wrote:

I loved the first 'Alan Wake,' but I still primarily purchase physical and I know a vocal minority spoke out against the choice of digital only. That said, I fully expect a physical release once all the DLC is out. What really hurt AW2 was being an Epic Store exclusive. Not being on Steam is was really hindered its sales. I wonder if they count the money they got from Epic as part of re-couping devs costs or not. I'm guessing not.


I played this on Game Pass, like most. I'm guessing, over the past year, Microsoft is finding that putting these games on Game Pass is severely affecting sales and the breakdown of subs is not making up the cost difference. It's another game that I would've bought physically in a heart beat, and was excited for the announcement from Limited Run Games that they will be doing the physical, even if it is LRG. Hopefully that still happens. I understand the thought process of having smaller games being perfect for a subscription service, I agree with that to an extent, but it doesn't seem to be worth the cost even with smaller budgets. Who knows at this point. I think Microsoft has worked themselves into a corner with Game Pass. That I could've told them from early on.

Gamepass is the new PS farm system. Get that word of mouth out there and then get the sales.

I don't know. Most of the games on Game Pass are also available on PlayStation's premium service or their monthly freebies anyway. There are exceptions, but it's a pretty big overlap. Unless people are itching to get something on PS before it hits those options.

I haven't tried Redfall yet but want to, it actually landed in my randomly selected set of games to try next. I didn't mean to imply that it was horrible, but it certainly wasn't good at launch and like say Watch Dogs or Cyberpunk2077 it was overhyped and missed those expectations.
Alan Wake 2 is interesting as to why it didn't do great - Epic and no Steam, digital only, not playing fully as Alan, race swapping Saga and having her be very shallow... just lots of missteps.

I heard some info about GP not long ago about how early on M$ was throwing some big $$$ at devs to get them to put games on the service, especially for day 1 launches, but that has dried up a LOT. Personally I have little issue/almost prefer that a game doesn't go on there day 1. Let the dev/pub get more sales to the folks that just have to buy it/are willing to pay to play it right away. Then 3, 6, heck even 12 months later get it on GP. Jedi Survivor just finally landed on EAplay and thus GPU almost exactly 1 year after launch. I liked Fallen Order a good bit but wasn't compelled to buy Survivor and waited it out, will be playing that soon as well since it's now available to me.

I also have noticed that lots of games, especially smaller ones, tend to hit some of the same free or cheap options around the same time. Like M$ will add it to GP, then Epic and/or Amazon Games will give it away for free and maybe it'll land on PS+ as well.

Oh yeah MS Game Pass is a great value but almost too great of a value and some people, myself included, don’t just keep an active rolling 12 month subscription but rather look for those cheap 3 month codes and sub in for a limited time and play the few new shiny games then bounce not to be seen again until the next wave of new games comes out on the service. By folks like me who do that it probably really hinders their overall sales growth.

DCGX wrote:

True. To clarify- MS first party games would greatly benefit from a strategy like that.

According to a new report from IGN, the announcement caught Arkane developers by surprise as they were still actively working on the first-person shooter, including its now-cancelled Hero Pass DLC. It's said that Arkane Austin was also working on an update for Redfall, due out this month, which would have added an offline mode to the shooter.

So now its another game lost to history once the servers go offline. Which will probably be soon.

I feel bad for the Arkane Austin people. These people have taken a lot of abuse over the game. But they've been working on it apparently non stop to make it what players wanted, and what they wanted it to be. They were forced to release it way too early due to the Bethesda acquisition by Microsoft. I guess they wanted another full year to work on it, they were told no. Microsoft wanted something for game pass in early 2023, so the game was rushed. Pretty messed up.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

This is probably going to be my strategy when my sub expires in August. I want to complete Jedi Survivor before then which shouldn’t be an issue. I would’ve liked to complete Sea of Stars too but that’s going to be ambitious with my summer schedule. I’ll probably just start working through my backlog once I lose GP.

Slickriven wrote:

Your point about Tango is why I'm so worried about Ninja Theory. Their founder left last month and I have no idea who heads up the studio now. It's always my worry when a megacorp buys a studio. Key people end up leaving oftentimes to start smaller, more agile studios and all that's left is the original studio name and IP.

Archer wrote:

I remember reading something last year that they didn't even want to make Redfall. And then it was rushed out to fill the Gamepass quota during that period of transition where there doesn't seem to have been much oversight from Microsoft. Hurts to lose a dev this talented and makes me worry for all devs.

Someone mentioned Alan Wake a few posts ago and apparently Remedy's next game is a live service game. Feels like it could be Rocksteady all over again. We live in a world now where blockbusters are too expensive and anything unique is too risky. So live service games and remakes is all anyone wants to greenlight. If you can't monetize a game or find a way to play on nostalgia, you're kinda screwed.

Arcane Austin closing does not shock me. Red Fall was an absolute turd of a game. I feel bad for anyone that spent actual money on it. The only positive thing I can say about it is simply that I did not invest ANY money in the game for the time I spent with it. This game has no redeeming qualities one of the worst games I have played in awhile and I put it right up there with turds like Circus Maximus (Xbox) R.A.D (PS2). The blame IMO should be put on the suits that green lit this turd instead of flushing it and that decision killed this studio. It sucks people will never get what they paid for, but at least MS is going to try and make that right... I am sure they will.

Tango, I am shocked. I must admit at first I had no interest in the game and really had no interest in the genre... but I watched a review on it about a week ago when I noticed it was on a flash deal on PSN and I kinda want to give it a go. I don't think I will buy it this sale I just have too much to play, but the next time I see it on flash I will jump on it. Just sad it's not seeing a physical release officially and it's being farmed out to Limited Run.

Alpha Dog studios - Mobile games... yuck. Never herd of any of there properties. Sad to see people loose there jobs... not sad to see less mobile games crap.

Roundhouse Studios... same as AD, not really sure what they have done.

It may not be recent and most of the current shutdowns have been western studios but lets not forget Japan Studios.


With Tago again, I am not sure Hi-Fi Rush was a MASSIVE success. Maybe in comparison to recent MS 1st party releases... but I do recall hearing the game did not do as well as hopped saying the game had not earned the money it hopped it would make. I believe this game was hurt because of GP. The game would have generated more cash IMO had it not been on GP. I don't believe the game prompted a massive influx of subscribers. Sure GP probably allowed people to play the game that otherwise would never have.. .but those people are typically already going to have GP.. MS already has that money. Again I doubt a game like Hi-Fi Rush brought in enough GP subs to off set potential sales and this hurt the studio in the end.

Finn wrote:

My understanding is although the studio was technically closed, it was mostly reorganized into other studios like Team Asobi

benstylus wrote:

That's right, forgot about that one. But I still think Sony Lost some talent over that.

I fear for Ninja Theory and them being on the chopping block next then if Hellblade II doesn’t sell like a bajillion copies out the gate.

Again, games like the ones Ninja Theory make has to make you think what there metric for success is? If the game is 1st party there is no way in hell it can be copies sold.. not with GP cannibalizing's potential sales and games of this nature typically don't draw one into a subscription service. You would think it would be a combination of the two. I am genuinely curious to see how they do it.

This is probably why if I was a smaller studio under MS's umbrella I would be a little scared of being shut. MS might do better if they sold of the studios they plan on shutting down and IP they will undoubtedly let go and crap on a shelf and gather dust.

Seems that the direction the industry is heading in is you need to be a AAA and/or AAAA game developer or GTFO nowadays apparently. What a world.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

I don’t see that at all. In fact I think it’s gonna go the opposite. There are a lot of indie games with small teams or one person that make a lot of money and become huge successes

Shane12m wrote:

You might think indies have a better chance but how many indie titles in a given year make any kind of splash?

Then compare that to the total number of games released every year.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/552623/number-...

Last year there were over 12,000 games released on Steam. Lets assume at least 11,000 of those were indies (probably much higher... I doubt the big publishers are collectively releasing 3 games a day every day all year to get to 1000+).

Start naming all your favorite indie darlings of 2023... For each one you can name there are probably 500 more that went nowhere saleswise.

benstylus wrote:

11K of those weren't indie games though. 1K of those were indies. And 10k of those were shovelware, or trashware. Whatever term you prefer. Steam, PS and Nintendo are overrun with garbage releases. 80-85% of all games released on all three platforms fall into that shovelware category now. Its pathetic.

And just for arguments sake, so there is clarification. An indie is a game made by someone with actual development knowledge or skills. Someone using actual tools that aren't free to the public, or hold your hand WYSIWYG tools. Like RPG Maker for example. Or someone who owns an actual business that makes profitable games. Shovel/trashware are games that anyone of us could just slap together with basic tools and minimal knowledge/skills and get it listed for sale. I'm sure I don't need to provide examples, we all see them. All those under $5 games. Or all the anime porn bullcrap on steam.

Well apparently MS is doing this because they have basically said they can’t operate all they have bought. There is more too it but there is talk COD may not make it to GP the new releases anyway. I hate to say I saw this coming but I did, it was painfully obvious that was the way it was going to go. GP is also going to see a price increase. I am not here to argue the value of GP but it will go down as MS’s biggest blunder. It’s just not sustainable and with games getting more expensive to make… writing is on the wall, you just need to read it.

https://metro.co.uk/2024/05/09/xbox-plans-job-cuts...

Yeah and if COD hits GP then it’ll get another price hike. Soon the value is going to be outweighed by the monthly fee me thinks because once it creeps up and approaches a wifi or cell phone bill monthly price that’s when folks might start questioning its real value.

Archer wrote:

I would guess the anime porn games are more profitable than most games that you would define as indies.

But that's part of the problem. With the flood of crap being so ubiquitous, it's often difficult to find the "good" indie titles. If they don't get noticed within the first few days of coming out, they usually get buried under the pile.

Even if the number of quality indies is closer to 1,000 a year, still maybe 2 to 3 percent of those make it big. Not great odds.

TalonJedi87 wrote:


Honestly I think you are going to see a price hike without the addition of new COD's. By putting the game day one on GP lets say 1 million people don't buy the new COD and instead get it on GP and lets say 70% are digital sales and 30% are physical. You are looking at roughly 63.7 million dollars that the people getting the game on GP have to spend in COD cosmetics and currency just to break even and hope for more spending to make some more money. That's a tall ask IMO. I don't buy in game cosmetics at all and getting the game on GP would not change that.. The only game that manages to get me to spend was WoW back in the day and now Fall Guys, I don't spend a lot but it offers the most temptation lol... well that and Pokemon GO when I played it more but I have not spent any money on that since my kid was born so....

Raising the price of GPU or GP for that matter may drive up sales a tad if people opt to just buy the game and forget about GP, but that would hurt the GP model and the fact that even MS has acknowledged the slow growth in new subs. Something gonna have to break at some point.

Oh yeah I mean, you just have to ask the question at the end of the day, which is how high is MS Willing to push the envelope And raise the bar on the monthly premium Before people start to wake up and go “I only want GP for one or two games right now I’ll just buy them on a sale or used etc. for about the same price as a monthly GP sub” If GP breaches like say $25-30+ a month I can def see peeps buying games directly again than just renting or leasing them on a live service subscription.

Part of the miscalculation here is M$ looking at a game coming to GP Day 1 and thinking, this needs to drive X# of new subs. Epic store has/had similar thoughts with offering free games each week.

To ding Hi-Fi Rush for low sales makes no sense when nobody knew it was coming and it went to GP. So the active subs like me opted to try it out, maybe right away, maybe a few weeks/months later, but I just don't think it was going to entice hundreds, let alone thousands of new or returning GP subs. The genre isn't that big of a driver, sure the pedigree of Tango likely drove some interest, but clearly that wasn't enough.
Similar with Epic, them offering a certain game for free this week might get some new customers, but the vast majority of customers are likely already present, while some will almost never come onboard bc they hate the company or head guy.

I really think to save GP day 1 releases should get heavily limited. It likely made sense initially to drive interest but now the vast majority of potential subs have tried out the service and decided if they'll stay subbed or join periodically or never bother.

I mean while it certainly is nice to have a $70 game as a day 1 release, I guess if it keeps costs and monthly premiums down to release new titles a few months post launch I would be a fan of that. Plus, there's no way with my, and I'm sure other folks, limited time schedules, to play most new game releases day or even week 1 anyway nowadays. I have a pretty decently sized backlog as well to sift thru before I get to any new releases and by the time I am ever caught up, those new releases become months old and are even discounted by then.

I agree with the time allotment take you're making @TalonJedi87 but that's coming from gamers in their 30's and 40's and maybe older. It certainly seems like teens and some useless folks in their 20's have plenty of free time to game or protest or whatever. Joking aside, I do wonder on the breakdowns for gaming time of GP in general but also along age groups and such. I don't have kids and gaming is my number 1 hobby and time suck, but I know plenty of other adults that were into gaming more in the past but don't have the luxury to make time for gaming anymore.

The time sink factor is also maybe an argument on not bringing CoD to GP Day 1. Seems like many players of that franchise really only play that game or maybe a few other similar titles, so GP doesn't really make sense for that crowd... Or maybe it does?

TalonJedi87 wrote:


Exactly. People crapped on PS+ Extra and PS+ Premium when they were introduced a couple years ago for not getting AAA games on day one like GamePass, but I don't care, there's more than enough to play that I don't need everything day one. If a game is good on day one, it'll still be good a year later. In fact it'll probably be better a year later with all the updates and extra content that were added over time. I have games like Dead Island 2, Dead Space Remake and others that I'm forgetting right now, all 2023 releases that I've still never gotten around to playing yet. No rush. Today I'm going to download Animal Well on PS+ and I'll play and hope to enjoy it probably more than any other AAA title that released day one on GamePass so far in 2024.

Part of the reason why I think Sony has a better strategy. Not saying it's perfect... but at least it allows the games to make it's money. The people that would never buy it still won't and will wait the time it takes to show on the service rather than have people that otherwise would buy it playing it on Plus rather than buying it.

Tango got a raw deal and I hope that talent lands somewhere where they can be properly utilized.

@Slickriven you are right. My brother for example rarely plays anything else. His PlayStation is more a COD machine then anything same with the group he plays with and they are not alone, I don't want to say vast majority but I bet you it's a sizeable number of people that only play COD and nothing else... maybe Madden of FIFA if your in Europe.

They really need to put smarter people in charge over there.

Just a day after Microsoft closed Hi-Fi Rush studio Tango Gameworks, Xbox Game Studios head Matt Booty has reportedly told staff, “We need smaller games that give us prestige and awards." Tango Gameworks' Hi-Fi Rush was a hit when it shadow-dropped into Xbox Game Pass, reaching more than two million players just over a month after its release and raking in a host of accolades, including a Game Award and a BAFTA. Compared to many of Xbox's first-party games, Hi-Fi Rush fits the bill as a "smaller game," and certainly earned the prestige and awards Matt Booty is asking for. In fact, Xbox itself referred to the game as a "break out hit" in "all key measurements and expectations," according to vice president of Xbox games marketing Aaron Greenberg last year. Bloomberg reports that Tango Gameworks was in the process of pitching a Hi-Fi Rush sequel when Microsoft closed the studio, which makes the closure even more confusing.

Cognitive Dissonance may actually exist.

MS to me always needs smarter business folks leading the helm because they essentially have some great ideas, but for every great idea, there’s like 2 or 3 really bad ones that cause them to back peddle and wind up doing something foolish that doesn’t really benefit anyone, developer or consumer alike and causes more harm than help.

Finally, something all the Xbox gamers have been clamoring for. A mobile store!

Reminds me of the dude at ABK that asked the people booing him after announcing a Diablo mobile game, "Don't you people have cell phones?".

So this is how it ends huh MS? With a mobile store? I think I just might kill you tonight. Excuse me while I go find something to strike you with.

Hellblade 2 is due on the 21st may. I’m not hearing much about it. What’s going on?

Feeb wrote:

Everyone is concerned about it since Ninja Theory was bought by Microsoft. And there is mounting concern if this game doesn't set record numbers they could get shut down as well. Also rumors now that it was rushed to meet quarterly targets. I have no idea if there is any truth to that, or any of the concerns. Its all just speculation and rumors at this point. Its also an xbox exclusive (also pc I think) for the time being. So it doesn't have the big hype as it would if it was on all systems. The first game sold the most copies on PS4, and now its not on PS5. People are are really down on xbox and anything exclusive to them seems to be cancer at this point. So I think a lot of the hype died outside the people that loved the first game.

Archer wrote:

I don’t do twitter anymore but months ago HB2 was already a hot topic. Take that with a grain of salt since most discussions on Twitter are probably paid mouth pieces etc. but there was a palpable hype.

Yeah, all the hype is from fans. There does not seem to be any marketing being done on their end. Which is also probably what is fueling peoples concerns. Video games are in a weird place right now.

Personally thought it was a strange game to hype as a big mainstream system seller at Xbox series launch. The first one is not much more than a tech demo- cool but pretty minimalist.

I’m sure Hellblade 2 will score well. I loved the first game and played through it multiple times. It was short and sweet romp that was great to play with a pair of headphones to pick up all the little sounds, but yeah agreed if the sequel doesn’t sell well enough for MS’ wacky standards, Ninja Theory may have a target on their backs for the next round of MS’ chopping block.

The first one looked great and had some cool concepts and audio, but was an extremely simple game. By the end I was pretty bored. The bar for the sequel (to me) is pretty low. As a GP title I'm excited about it and think it'll get a lot of play from folks, but I don't know about sales. It looks like the focus again was on mo-cap and graphics, and without marketing $ being spent I can't imagine it's going to veer too far from the original.

It’s also kind of ironic when you think about how MS expects an exponential and exuberant amount of growth for these first party titles when they’re releasing day 1 on GP too the more I think about it. How can one quantify units sold when half the folks are just playing and renting/leasing these titles day and week 1 on GP? Are they tracking sales via new subs I wonder during the launch period of titles such as the upcoming Hellblade II or what? Like what method of tallying up said game sales is MS using and is it really that accurate I wonder with these titles releasing on GP day one? How do they trace hybrid sales?

Feeb wrote:

Couldn't agree more. The first game was made on a shoestring budget. It was always supposed to be a niche, arthouse type of game. But I figured with the way they pushed it at the start of the generation, it was going to have a bigger size and scope, but that doesn't seem to be the case at all. It's also a digital only game so you're limiting your audience even more and I feel like the vast majority of people will just play it on Gamepass and won't actually buy it.

Hopefully there'll be more hype once reviews come in and it'll generate enough buzz to sell well on Steam. Plus I think Ninja Theory's core audience is actually on PlayStation so maybe they'll port it over and it'll do well?

But it just speaks to the broader issue with the industry. The game has been in development for 6 years and we're worried it needs more time in the oven. We're just two generations removed from a time where we'd get whole trilogies in 6-7 years (Uncharted, Dead Space. Mass Effect, BioShock etc). Now we're lucky if we get 1 game from a series in a generation.

TalonJedi87 wrote:

That's the thing - we really don't know what MS expects. On the one hand they say a game has been a success by all measures, then on the other hand they just up and close the studio.

The fewer studios they have, the less content they can require be on day 1 GP, and with every surprise studio closure, resentment builds. I can guarantee you that the talented individuals now looking for work aren't going to be super keen to work on a gamepass game. And with the high dollar deals for that having dried up too, even fewer 3rd party studios are going to want to go that route.

Well I mean then eventually something has to give then right? Meaning MS can’t just expect constant exponential growth with GP subs. Look at video streaming apps like Max, Disney and Hulu. They’ve capped out and are now losing so many subs due to constant price hikes that they’re all pooling together I read to create some sort of triple play bundle deal between all 3 streaming services at one flat rate. It’s only a matter of time I think before that catches up with the game industry and their game streaming/sub services.

Covid sales were a red herring. They hid a trend by way of a freak occurrence. Also- across the board businesses, and particularly executives, are having a hard time realizing that those inflated numbers are not sustainable. In typical fashion- they moved the goalposts the wrong way- and they’re refusing to cede any revenue to reset the industry. Instead- they’re burning it down to keep paying the guys at the top. Times like these you realize it’s not about us or good games- it’s about Mr CEO getting paid and reporting good things to shareholders- because the next guy in line will do it if you don’t. If I had a dollar for every time someone in a leadership course preached “lead from your heart” and “live your mission statement” as well as .50c every time a leader didn’t do this- I’d be a happy dude.

Yeah some ppl sure miss those Covid numbers. I know my job does and I’m in manufacturing of disposable containers and during the pandemic our sales went up like 300% and now that they’re back to pre-COVID numbers the CEO is like what happened??? Uh the world regulated itself dude. That’s kinda what happens after a pandemic subsides.

Pretty much. Business dudes only seem to understand numbers. And it takes like a dozen of them to even do that.

Immortals of Aveum joins GPU today via EAplay. Anyone play it? It worth trying out?

Personally I'm just getting started in Evil West and looking forward to jumping into SW: Jedi Survivor next/soon. If IoA is worth playing, then it could get my attention after SW:JS.

I checked out the trial on PS+ a while back. It was pretty average. Not terrible, but not fun either. It boils down to a match the color magic combat game. While also being on rails. And the acting/story was pretty bad too.

Today Microsoft/Activision announced they have launched a new studio. After shutting a bunch down. Make it make sense. Lay off 1,900 people. Then hire new people for a new studio.

https://blog.activision.com/activision/2024/activi...

Or hire the same people back for less money.

MS has fully turned to the dark side. Their profile pic on Facebook is even red now. Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

I’m sure the decision to form a new studio predates the layoffs. Heck it may even predate the Activision/Xbox merger. But announcing it so soon after all the layoffs just goes to show that MS can’t read the room. I don’t know if it’s a lack of competent leadership or a PR department that’s just really, really bad at its job or both, but it feels like anyone with half a brain would know not to make this sort of announcement now. You have a showcase in a month. Announce it then and spin it as your renewed dedication to the industry or some bs like that.

From the leadership and PR angle, that Sarah Bond interview was really, REALLY bad. I won't throw all the blame at her feet, but it was just terrible. Btwn them and Ubisoft and Sony and GG2... nearly the whole industry seems like it's a hot mess.

Slickriven wrote:

I played about 3/4 through it. It's just ok. The core shooting gameplay isn't very satisfying so adding more and harder enemies as you go doesn't make it more fun. I mostly gave it a try to see an Unreal engine 5, and honestly it's not a super impressive example.

Sounds like that final redfall offline patch is going to come out afterall. I might check it out again after it does. They've released a lot of patches for it. And I guess it doesn't play as horribly as it did at launch.