@charizard1605: It has ea to do that for them
What Microsoft needs (and lacks) is a prestige franchise/studio
@tormentos said:
@FastRobby said:
Halo 5 at 5 million was 3 months after release. Uncharted 4 8.7 million was after 7.5 months (the whole of 2016). If you then take into account the marketshare of both consoles, than Halo is still the bigger franchise, and always will be. I'll keep it short now, and write a bigger response once I've properly read your OP for what I deem to be mistakes. But TLOU, and Uncharted are really not as big as Halo when it comes to franchising (generating buzz, and $$$).
Yeah the 5 million they shipped on day one and claim as sold..lol
Halo 5 Reaches $400 Million in Sales to Become Biggest Halo Launch Ever.
Microsoft has announced that Halo 5: Guardians generated more than $400 million in global sales during its first week, meaning the Xbox One game is now the "biggest Halo launch" of all time. The figure includes sales of games and hardware, and drives Halo franchise lifetime revenue to over $5 billion.
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/halo-5-reaches-400-million-in-sales-to-become-bigg/1100-6431980/
We know that was total bullshit as NPD came out and Halo 5 sold 900+k in 5 days vs Halo 3 which sold 2.4 million units in 24 hours,it wasn't even close,worse Halo 5 was 2 months on NPD,Halo 3 was 4 months on NPD 2 of them on spot 1 and it would have being 5 months but loss the 10 spot to Mario and Sonic at the Olympics by 10k.
Halo 5 charted 2 months and vanish from NPD there is no fu**ing way in hell that Halo 5 sold 5 million in 3 months when it didn't chart on NPD like Halo 3 did,If halo 5 would have sold 5 million in 3 months it would have outsold Halo 3 as it took Halo 3 more than 3 months to sell 5 million.
And don't even dare hiding in digital sales even if Halo 5 sales were 50/50 (which are not) still that would put Halo 5 losing to Halo 3 as well on launch,on UK it was the same Halo 5 sold way less than Halo 3 did.
5 million copies X $60 = $300 millions add the extra cash earn on special edition version,add Halo bundles sold in November and you get the rest of the $400 millions they claim Halo generated on launch..
You people are really dumb if MS claimed 400 million in sales on 5 days get a damn calculator and do the math and see how much they most have sold to achieve $400 millions in sales..
Is pretty easy 5 million copies of Halo by $60 dollars is $300 millions so you can see how MS played with numbers and how their whole halo numbers were skewed,just look at gamestop report ""Halo 5 reaches $400 millions in sales to become the biggest launch halo launch ever,reality is other when you compare NPD numbers.
- Halo 3 - Xbox 360 (Microsoft) - 3.3 million
http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/NPD_September_2007
In case you want to argue it Halo 3 sold 3.3 million copies in like 6 or 7 days of sales.
In comparison Halo 5 sold 900+K in like 5 or 6 days as well.
Is not even close MS lied about those numbers which is why when they reported the $400 millions never stated how many copies were sold..hahahaha
Halo 3 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Halo 5 oh did i mention the xbox 360 userbase was a little smaller than the xbox one user base on time frame to make the humiliation even worse.
$400 million in sales includes Halo 5 hardware related sales.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_5:_Guardians
A commercial success, Halo 5: Guardians and its game-related hardware grossed over US$400 million in its first twenty-four hours and US$500 million in its first week.
For example, http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/accessories/controllers/halo-5-wireless-controller
MS claims 55 million "active Xbox Live" users, which XBO and X360 combined install base can support.
@jg4xchamp said:
C: what about the part where Sony's first party sucks? because it still does. Like kudos for the effort, but egad the playing it part of their games.
Bu, but the sum of their...
@ConanTheStoner said:
@jg4xchamp said:
C: what about the part where Sony's first party sucks? because it still does. Like kudos for the effort, but egad the playing it part of their games.
Bu, but the sum of their...
still trash. In fact they are worse when you start judging them on how each part comes together for a greater whole.
Mooooaaar SmearCampaign....
I'd like to say it never gets old but I'd be lying.
@charizard1605 said:
Microsoft’s first party lineup is a problem. This is not news to anyone at this point- while Microsoft has some guaranteed sellers in Halo, Gears of War, and Forza (the decline in sales for them notwithstanding), it lacks any larger diversity within its portfolio, unlike Sony and especially Nintendo, who both manage to hit a broader range of demographics and aesthetics with their titles. But even that isn’t the larger problem here- the larger problem is that Microsoft flat out lacks any prestige franchise or studio in its lineup, to drive outside interest in Xbox.
What is a prestige project? A prestige project is essentially something that is your critical showpiece- it is guaranteed a high amount of critical success, and general respect from the industry. It may or may not sell well, but it ends up attracting wider interest to your platform simply by its very existence, even from those people who otherwise may not have been interested in the platform initially.
NINTENDO
Nintendo, naturally, has a prestige franchise- The Legend of Zelda series. Zelda is often called gaming’s prestige franchise in general, and is the highest rated franchise in history, with each new major release in the series being a landmark title. Zelda is one of the few games that can attract attention to Nintendo platforms even from those who otherwise don’t care for Nintendo, their games, their aesthetics, their hardware, or their IP. It’s a big budget showcase of Nintendo’s game making prowess, its critical reception in the industry is quite literally second to none (the highest rated game of all time is a Zelda game, and no mainline console Zelda game ever had a lower than 93 composite score), wins an astonishing amount of awards with every entry, and generates interest in Nintendo platforms, when Nintendo’s usual fare fails. Zelda is not necessarily Nintendo’s highest selling franchise – in 30 years, the series as a whole has sold 75 million units worldwide, and on average, each game sells 4-6 million – but it is almost second to none in driving interest in Nintendo’s platforms by a larger audience, and buying Nintendo mindshare.
PLAYSTATION
Sony does not have a prestige franchise– instead, PlayStation has a prestige studio. That studio, of course, is Naughty Dog, who have really come into their own in the last decade or so. Their games are guaranteed incredibly high critical reception, and Uncharted 2 and The Last of Us each set a record for the overall number of Game of the Year awards they won in their respective years of release. A Naughty Dog release is a momentous occasion- even Xbox fans usually tend to acknowledge Naughty Dog’s games, and express interest in them. People who are otherwise disinterested in PlayStation get interested with a new Naughty Dog project. When a new Last of Us is announced, or a new Uncharted releases, the entire industry sits up and takes notice. Naughty Dog games, even now, are not Sony’s highest selling titles- that crown is still held by Gran Turismo. But Naughty Dog games are the prestige games, the games that can generate interest from a larger audience that otherwise would simply be disinterested in Sony’s larger offerings.
XBOX
The release of a prestige game, then, is an event. The release of a new Zelda is an event. The release of a new Naughty Dog game is an event. And yet, Microsoft has nothing like that. The interesting thing is, they used to- until the end of the Xbox 360 era, one could have said Halo is a prestige franchise- which it was. Halo was setting paradigms for the entire industry, selling Xbox consoles all on its own, receiving extremely high composite review scores, winning Game of the Year awards with every new entry. The release of a new Halo game was an event, one that the entire industry took notice of. That it was Microsoft’s highest seller was irrelevant- Halo was their prestige brand.
But that’s not true anymore. Whether fans like to admit it or not, Halo‘s standing is not what it once was. The overall sales of the games have gone down, the critical reception has definitely fallen, and the release of a new Halo title is commonplace, routine, banal, expected. Of course there will be a new Halo game this year- why wouldn’t there be one?
Halo has settled down into a larger identity. It knows what it is, and it tries to do that, and do that well- there is nothing wrong with that! It means Halo is consistent more than anything. But it also means that if the average PlayStation or Nintendo gamer was not interested in Halo 1-5, Halo 6 will not change their mind.
This is one area where Zelda has a major advantage over Halo (and indeed, most other franchises in the industry)- each game is a dramatically new take on the franchise, with its own distinct spin on the mechanics, series’ lore and characters, distinct visual identities, and they indeed, play out differently too. Ocarina of Time, Majora’s Mask, Wind Waker, and Skyward Sword are all vastly different games from one another, with Twilight Princess really being the only retread in the series. The upcoming Breath of the Wild again looks to be a thorough departure from all Zelda conventions. With a new Zelda game, you never quite know what to expect- even something as basic as how the game might look is up in the air. With Halo, you know exactly what you are getting with a new entry. Which, again, is great for fans- but is not good for driving larger interest, and, thanks to diminishing returns, also not good for sustaining critical reception.
This predictability – predictability in knowing just what Halo will be, and when it will come out – when coupled together with Halo‘s general decline in quality compared to the Bungie days, has made it lose its standing as a prestige franchise. And now, Microsoft finds itself in the unenviable position of having no brands and no studios with which to drive larger interest in its platforms. Halo is in fact the perfect encapsulation of Microsoft’s first party situation- safe, predictable, generally good, but nothing mind blowing, and nothing that will convince anyone not already convinced.
---
So where to from here? What can Microsoft do to resolve the situation? It cannot rely on its existing franchises to drive larger interest via prestige- there is an air of predictability around these franchises, and the lack of overall variety leading to frequency in the release of their staples is one of the problems that has contributed to this problem in the first place.
What Microsoft needs to do is invest in a new IP and/or a new studio.A new IP/new studio that doesn't exist to drive the highest number of software sales and/or revenue possible- but just to produce games that are creative showpieces, high quality pieces of work that the larger industry can appreciate and respect. Microsoft needs a series or studio that can drive a halo effect- one must have studio or franchise, where every new release can be an event, and is generally celebrated by the industry, regardless of platform allegiances.
This studio or franchise needs, obviously, full creative freedom- it must be allowed to put out the game that it wants to put out, without being made to adhere to some larger company strategy, or to some template that Microsoft thinks might drive up revenues (in the past, Microsoft's push for its various pet projects, such as Kinect, has stifled creativity at its studios). The studio must be allowed to make whatever games it wants. This also means that Microsoft cannot start forcing a 'games as service' mantra on this studio or franchise- the very idea of a prestige franchise is not to drive up revenues directly, but larger outside interest in your platform.
It also means that Microsoft cannot simply can the studio or franchise because there was one underperforming game- it took Naughty Dog years before they reached the status that they ultimately did. Zelda has had several underperforming games over the years, but Nintendo has stuck by it. Microsoft can't drop a studio or franchise because of one underperforming game. In fact, there is a high likelihood that your prestige products always underperform relative to expectations- but again, direct revenues from prestige products are almost never the point.
---
What do you all think? Does Microsoft need a prestige studio/franchise? Or do you think it can continue the way it has been going? Why/why not?
---
TL;DR: No, f*ck off. Read the goddamn thread and then comment. I put pretty pictures in there to keep your attention, too, and I also bolded the important shit so you know what to pay attention to.
I mean they have 4 "billion dollar franchises" (minecraft, halo, gears, forza)
They've taken chances on new IPs like State of decay, Ryse, Sunset overdrive, quantum break, sea of theives, recore, titanfall,
They are rebooting older IPs like the rare replay, Phantom Dust, crackdown
They still own some IPs they could do work with like blinx, mech assualt, brute force, fable, scalebound.
and they release 3-4 big AAA games a year pretty much always. Sony does better in the indie department and the japanese games but outside of that MS has provided better in everything else. for racing, 1st person shooter, 3rd person shooter, sandbox MS has the best games in those genres and sony doesn't. Sony has the better JRPGs and that's about it. as far as western RPGs all the best ones are 3rd party. Sony and MS don't' have any good true western RPGs
Log in to comment