Microsoft want generic shooters, not creative titles (proof)

  • 49 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by uninspiredcup (7641 posts) -

The title "rime" a title currently for the Playstation 4 was apparently pitched to Microsoft first. Sadly, it wasn't a first person shooter designed for tellytubby gangsters on xboxlive talking about your mother while shooting ethnic people in the face, so they turned it down.

Is this factually based proof Microsoft has 0 interest in creative interesting titles?

Eurogamer, like gamespot but good

#2 Posted by lostrib (33376 posts) -

Was promised proof, found no proof

#3 Edited by Shewgenja (8345 posts) -

Considering the XBone doesn't even work well with a 50hz signal properly, and hell, Kinect on the 360 had a hard time detecting black people..

In Microsoft-Land, XBox is for white middle class Americans. The cream of the crop in the videogame industry demographics. Nothing else matters to them. It is and seems to always have been WalMartBox 'MuricaFuckYeah.

Just like they did with 360, they will pay only lip service to anything that doesn't fit that model. There's just not as much of a carrot to troll Sony fans with cross-plat JRPG announcements anymore. There's no more 'BOOM' to doing it.

#4 Posted by misterpmedia (3363 posts) -

MS gotta love dem shootbangs

#5 Edited by Wasdie (49556 posts) -

Project Spark's very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Microsoft does have a thing against single player only games though. They want everything to be connected and other mulitplayer buzzwords. It's a toxic mentality that limits the games that are going to be on their system.

#6 Edited by uninspiredcup (7641 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Project Sparks very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Not a game.

#7 Posted by Wasdie (49556 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Project Sparks very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Not a game.

How is it not a game?

#8 Posted by Shewgenja (8345 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Project Spark's very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Microsoft does have a thing against single player only games though. They want everything to be connected and other mulitplayer buzzwords. It's a toxic mentality that limits the games that are going to be on their system.

Hmmm. That's rather up in the air. A "me-too" title for LBP was certainly a generation in the making lol

#9 Posted by bobbetybob (19126 posts) -

Unlike the PS4 and it's top quality creative titles, such as Killzone Shooty Gun, Olde Fashioned London Shooter, Infamous Pretend These Super Powers Aren't Basically Just Guns and of course, upcoming Naughty Dog megaton, Uncharted And The Quest for Shooting Motherfuckers

#10 Edited by uninspiredcup (7641 posts) -

@Shewgenja said:

@Wasdie said:

Project Spark's very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Microsoft does have a thing against single player only games though. They want everything to be connected and other mulitplayer buzzwords. It's a toxic mentality that limits the games that are going to be on their system.

Hmmm. That's rather up in the air. A "me-too" title for LBP was certainly a generation in the making lol

It's like Mario, without the content. Or good. Also not a game.
These apps should be sold on googleplay.

#11 Edited by hoyalawya (340 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Project Spark's very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Microsoft does have a thing against single player only games though. They want everything to be connected and other mulitplayer buzzwords. It's a toxic mentality that limits the games that are going to be on their system.

To be fair, Microsoft has an edge over their competitors in online infrastructure especially now with the push to get Azure integrated into Xbox. I see it as one of the strategies to distinguish their platform.

#12 Edited by Wasdie (49556 posts) -

@Shewgenja said:

@Wasdie said:

Project Spark's very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Microsoft does have a thing against single player only games though. They want everything to be connected and other mulitplayer buzzwords. It's a toxic mentality that limits the games that are going to be on their system.

Hmmm. That's rather up in the air. A "me-too" title for LBP was certainly a generation in the making lol

It's like Mario, without the content. Or good. Also not a game.

These apps should be sold on googleplay.

That doesn't make it not a game. You opinion here isn't fact.

#13 Posted by Wasdie (49556 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Project Spark's very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Microsoft does have a thing against single player only games though. They want everything to be connected and other mulitplayer buzzwords. It's a toxic mentality that limits the games that are going to be on their system.

To be fair, Microsoft has an edge over their competitors in online infrastructure especially now with the push to get Azure integrated into Xbox. I see it as one of the strategies to distinguish their platform.

I understand why they are doing it I just disagree it's the right direction and it will cost them more of the market than they believe it will.

Look at how well Skryim has done on all platforms. There is a healthy market for single-player only games. Microsoft is foolish to be focusing just on network connectivity.

#14 Edited by BeardMaster (1580 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Project Spark's very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Microsoft does have a thing against single player only games though. They want everything to be connected and other mulitplayer buzzwords. It's a toxic mentality that limits the games that are going to be on their system.

Single player games generally arent system sellers. Nobody is gonna rush out and buy expensive hardware for some game they will beat in a week. However they will do it for a game that they expect to give them months of entertainment.

Hell even most my PC builds/upgrades coincide with some MMO i want to play. And i rarely ever pay full price for single players games, usually wait for them to hit the bargain bin... with the exception of RPGs since those usually offer a ton of content for the money.

Frankly i think MS is just concentrating on giving gamers what they want.... and maybe my buying habits are toxic to the industry, but the value proposition is fantastic for my wallet.

#15 Posted by Wasdie (49556 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Project Spark's very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Microsoft does have a thing against single player only games though. They want everything to be connected and other mulitplayer buzzwords. It's a toxic mentality that limits the games that are going to be on their system.

Single player games generally arent system sellers. Nobody is gonna rush out and buy expensive hardware for some game they will beat in a week. However they will do it for a game that they expect to give them months of entertainment.

Hell even most my PC builds/upgrades coincide with some MMO i want to play. And i rarely ever pay full price for single players games, usually wait for them to hit the bargain bin... with the exception of RPGs since i know those usually offer tons of gameplay per dollar.

Frankly i think MS is just concentrating on giving gamers what they want.... and maybe my buying habits are toxic to the industry, but the value proposition is fantastic for my wallet.

Since when did single player games not become system sellers? If a game is good people will buy it and the platform its on. Simple as that.

Microsoft isn't giving gamers what they want, its giving gamers what they believe gamers want. That doesn't benefit the gamer. They could support all types of games but they are choosing not to.

#16 Posted by SummerParadise (160 posts) -

And Sony turned down Titanfall because Titanfall wanted to be on PS4 or Xbox One but Sony did not want to give PS4 to them. So i say Sony is not creative.

Project Spark is proof that it is creative. So, OP is lying. No proof, lock this thread.

#17 Edited by uninspiredcup (7641 posts) -
#18 Posted by shawn30 (4364 posts) -

The title "rime" a title currently for the Playstation 4 was apparently pitched to Microsoft first. Sadly, it wasn't a first person shooter designed for tellytubby gangsters on xboxlive talking about your mother while shooting ethnic people in the face, so they turned it down.

Is this factually based proof Microsoft has 0 interest in creative interesting titles?

Eurogamer, like gamespot but good

Rime looks great and I hate the One lost it, but when you look at new IPs like Quantum Break (gameplay directly affects an entire season of a television show included with the game, time altering elements, from a great dev) and Sunset Overdrive (open world third person shooter) and then Fable Legends (RPG 4 player co-op) and then Project Spark (game creation) Killer Instinct (Fighting game) Kinect Sports (motion control, family oriented) and then you add Halo 5, Titanfall, Gears of War 3 and Forza Horizon (racing) thats a pretty damn diverse lineup IMHO.

#19 Posted by lawlessx (46444 posts) -

Project Spark is an app.

it's a game..get over it

#20 Posted by MrXboxOne (742 posts) -

No one cares about an indie game called Rine

#21 Edited by uninspiredcup (7641 posts) -

@lawlessx said:

it's a game..get over it

My friend, is notepad a game? Come now.

#22 Posted by speedfreak48t5p (6625 posts) -

@lawlessx said:

@uninspiredcup said:

Project Spark is an app.

it's a game..get over it

I don't thing he's going to get over it.

#23 Posted by YearoftheSnake5 (7090 posts) -

@lostrib said:

Was promised proof, found no proof

#24 Edited by Murderstyle75 (4165 posts) -

They did similar shit with Heavy Rain. Only that time the reason was the game content and story was too subjective for Microsoft and their family friendly image.

#26 Posted by always_explicit (2661 posts) -

The title "rime" a title currently for the Playstation 4 was apparently pitched to Microsoft first. Sadly, it wasn't a first person shooter designed for tellytubby gangsters on xboxlive talking about your mother while shooting ethnic people in the face, so they turned it down.

Is this factually based proof Microsoft has 0 interest in creative interesting titles?

As supposed to fictionally based proof? The word proof implies fact by default or else it would not be proven.

P.S your thread sucks.

#27 Posted by lostrib (33376 posts) -

They did similar shit with Heavy Rain. Only that time the reason was the game content and story was too subjective for Microsoft and their family friendly image.

too subjective?

#28 Edited by IMAHAPYHIPPO (2560 posts) -

@lawlessx said:

it's a game..get over it

My friend, is notepad a game? Come now.

Anything's a game if you play with it.

#29 Edited by lostrib (33376 posts) -
#30 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38208 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Project Spark's very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Microsoft does have a thing against single player only games though. They want everything to be connected and other mulitplayer buzzwords. It's a toxic mentality that limits the games that are going to be on their system.

It does coincide with their previous "always online" policy everyone hated

#31 Edited by StormyJoe (4759 posts) -

@uninspiredcup: Dumb conclusion, and there is already a thread on this.

#32 Edited by misterpmedia (3363 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

Project Spark's very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Microsoft does have a thing against single player only games though. They want everything to be connected and other mulitplayer buzzwords. It's a toxic mentality that limits the games that are going to be on their system.

Couldn't agree with that more. Neglecting offline play denies 'sure thing' sales because everyone can play the product and not just people with stable internet connections or people that are in the right location for fibre BB

#33 Posted by lawlessx (46444 posts) -
#34 Posted by MonsieurX (29234 posts) -

Came in thread expecting proof,I am disappoint.

#35 Posted by BeardMaster (1580 posts) -

@Wasdie said:

@BeardMaster said:

@Wasdie said:

Project Spark's very existence kind of disproves that entire theory.

Microsoft does have a thing against single player only games though. They want everything to be connected and other mulitplayer buzzwords. It's a toxic mentality that limits the games that are going to be on their system.

Single player games generally arent system sellers. Nobody is gonna rush out and buy expensive hardware for some game they will beat in a week. However they will do it for a game that they expect to give them months of entertainment.

Hell even most my PC builds/upgrades coincide with some MMO i want to play. And i rarely ever pay full price for single players games, usually wait for them to hit the bargain bin... with the exception of RPGs since i know those usually offer tons of gameplay per dollar.

Frankly i think MS is just concentrating on giving gamers what they want.... and maybe my buying habits are toxic to the industry, but the value proposition is fantastic for my wallet.

Since when did single player games not become system sellers? If a game is good people will buy it and the platform its on. Simple as that.

Microsoft isn't giving gamers what they want, its giving gamers what they believe gamers want. That doesn't benefit the gamer. They could support all types of games but they are choosing not to.

I think gamers prioritizing multiplayer over single player is a trend thats been happening for quite some time.

#36 Posted by Heil68 (43258 posts) -

SONY is a sanctuary for developers.

#37 Edited by treedoor (7478 posts) -

This proof explains games like Killer Instinct, Project Spark, Below, Dead Rising 3, Forza 5, D4, and a whole bunch of other titles coming for Xbox One that are totally generic shooters


Sony, on the other hand, only develops creative non-shooter games such as Killzone, Uncharted, and The Order.

#38 Posted by edidili (3446 posts) -
#39 Posted by uninspiredcup (7641 posts) -

So many Microsoft fanboys.

#40 Posted by lostrib (33376 posts) -
#41 Posted by edidili (3446 posts) -
#42 Posted by lawlessx (46444 posts) -

So many Microsoft fanboys.


So now anyone that doesn't agree with your warped mindset is a fanboy?

#43 Posted by bobbetybob (19126 posts) -

@bobbetybob said:

Unlike the PS4 and it's top quality creative titles, such as Killzone Shooty Gun, Olde Fashioned London Shooter, Infamous Pretend These Super Powers Aren't Basically Just Guns and of course, upcoming Naughty Dog megaton, Uncharted And The Quest for Shooting Motherfuckers

Killzone SF, The Order and Uncharted 4. Then take a look at the rest of Sony's first party library. Only a small fraction are shooters breh. You can bet your arse the PS4 will have a diverse set of exclusives as the years go by. Just like EVERY Sony console/handheld.

What's retarded about that? I was obviously exaggerating to an extent but a lot of the electricity powers made the games feel like bad third person shooters at times.

I'm sure the PS4 will have unique exclusives as the years go by, but they sure aren't starting out with many.

#44 Posted by uninspiredcup (7641 posts) -

My friends, this is "conceptual" proof. A principle in action. Instead of looking at it objectively, what we have are xbox favored users trying to pimp off apps as games and listing other action games like killer instinces as if they too are groundbreaking indie titles. Utterly ludicrous.

#45 Posted by lostrib (33376 posts) -

My friends, this is "conceptual" proof. A principle in action. Instead of looking at it objectively, what we have are xbox favored users trying to pimp off apps as games and listing other action games like killer instinces as if they too are groundbreaking indie titles. Utterly ludicrous.

Project spark is a game

#46 Edited by edidili (3446 posts) -

My friends, this is "conceptual" proof. A principle in action. Instead of looking at it objectively, what we have are xbox favored users trying to pimp off apps as games and listing other action games like killer instinces as if they too are groundbreaking indie titles. Utterly ludicrous.

No idea why you're trying so hard to downplay project spark. Is it because it can run on tablets too? Is it because it is getting distributed from a store?

The game you originally posted doesn't look like a monster either. Looks like it can run on my phone. Chill out with these double standards.

#47 Posted by Bigboi500 (29139 posts) -

No interest in Xbox One games because, you know, I'm totally not a telletubby gangsta.

#48 Posted by Bigboi500 (29139 posts) -

No interest in Xbox One games because, you know, I'm totally not a telletubby gangsta.

#49 Edited by lundy86_4 (42875 posts) -

Already had a thread on this.

#50 Edited by mynamesdenvrmax (2194 posts) -

I'll play my shooters on my Xbox and I'll play games like this on my iPhone. Keep it, PS4.