Support NeoGAF

[GymWolf]

With all the studios they have they can release big games every 2-3 months basically, if everything go smootly.

 

[kingfey]

'We want to make video games, but right now we're not,' states video game company.

This is brought to you by the matrix, where you can make all your bullshit come true.

 

[RoboFu]

I mean .. doesn’t everyone?

 

[kingfey]

With all the studios they have they can release big games every 2-3 months basically if everything go smootly.

Once 2022 is gone, that is when they will have steady projects.

MS were supposed to get Deathloop and ghost wire tokyo. But Sony made those timed exclusives.

 

[kyussman]

Given the amount they have spent on studios I should fucking well think so.Let's hope they are quality when they start arriving.

 

[Leyasu]

Increasing the development can bring out games like psychonauts 2. It could add more content in to the game, because they have other studios, which can cover for them.

Yeah I don’t think that is what he means though.

Think about what big game release means and 'dragging out development cost' means. Think of some of their inhouse developers. Rare and 343i are good examples. How do you think they have been maintaining an income with such big gaps between a game release?
GaaS exists. You pay a subscription regardless of their output, people buy microtransactions in your game regardless, you don't need a big game release. This is where it's different if your focus is single player games. You need a game release to maintain your income.

That word salad still doesn’t fit or explain your reasoning. Yeah it is obvious that Microsoft are using gamepass money and mtxs to subsidise game development, but it is not going to make them drag their heels when the goal is to have games available to buy and for their service, and said studio is then free to pursue other projects or expansions.

P.S a subscription service doesn’t equall GAAS. And every genre has a place on a subscription service, it is not the type of content , it is the amount of content that counts.

 

[Three]

That word salad still doesn’t fit or explain your reasoning. Yeah it is obvious that Microsoft are using gamepass money and mtxs to subsidise game development, but it is not going to make them drag their heels when the goal is to have games available to buy and for their service, and said studio is then free to pursue other projects or expansions.

You asked

So what you think that it makes more sense to drag out development and increase costs than finishing and releasing them?

The reasoning is that them not releasing a big AAA game every month isn't going to increase costs like you think it does because the subscription and MTX is most of their income and comes without them having to release a big game every month.

Releasing a big AAA game every month where you are subscribed and paying the same monthly fee regardless is actually what will increase costs for them. They will not do that just to entertain you if you're subscribed regardless.

 

[adamsapple]

Think about what big game release means and 'dragging out development cost' means. Think of some of their inhouse developers. Rare and 343i are good examples. How do you think they have been maintaining an income with such big gaps between a game release?
GaaS exists. You pay a subscription regardless of their output, people buy microtransactions in your game regardless, you don't need a big game release. This is where it's different if your focus is single player games. You need a game release to maintain your income.

I see we're still spreading the fallacy of subscription service = GaaS.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Over a decade of basically the same messaging, but I guess for those who waited that long they can keep waiting.

 

[Leyasu]

You asked



The reasoning is that them not releasing a big AAA game every month isn't going to increase costs like you think it does because the subscription and MTX is most of their income and comes without them having to release a big game every month.

Releasing a big AAA game every month where you are subscribed and paying the same monthly fee regardless is actually what will increase costs for them. They will not do that just to entertain you if you're subscribed regardless.

I never said that they would release a big game every month. You have not read my posts correctly or I have worded them wrong.


But I will respond to this post.

If they had enough studios that were well coordinated, releasing a game a month. It would not cost them more than running an equal amount of studios but releasing less games lol

Once the game is finished and for sale the team can then shift to their next project. MTXs from games that have them and a community don’t stop because people are still playing them and subscribers are still paying. The only way your reasoning makes sense is if Microsoft have a limited amount of studios. But even then they would still need to pay for 3rd party content to fill out gaps or they are releasing clones month in month out.

 

[kingfey]

The reasoning is that them not releasing a big AAA game every month isn't going to increase costs like you think it does because the subscription and MTX is most of their income and comes without them having to release a big game every month.

People dont spend money on your games, if it doesnt have content. Ask halo infinite MP, early Sea of thieves. You just spouting nonsense.
Plus releasing more games will generate them more money. Incase you dont get it, having more mtx games released, will generate them more money, compared to them holding out those games.

Releasing a big AAA game every month where you are subscribed and paying the same monthly fee regardless is actually what will increase costs for them. They will not do that just to entertain you if you're subscribed regardless.

That is complete false. Releasing AAA content every month would not increase their cost.
You have gamepass subs (around 40m-50m is $320m-$400m at average of $8 a month), Non gamepass xbox users, Steam users. That is enough to recoup the cost of their games.

To break it down
Gamepass: $320m generates 5.3m copies for that month alone, while $400m 6.6m copies. That is $8 gamepass average price (Because global money isnt USD).
Non xbox gamepass users: 1-2m copies.
Steam: 1m-3m copies.

That is 7m-11m copies, which can generate $420m to $660m for that month. You also have to account the long term sales.

They arent losing money. They are gaining more than what the game cost on that month.

Gamepass is making those who dont want to buy the game at first, pay for the game. Games usually sell lower, because people are not willing to buy it at $60, unless the game is huge popular. So having gamepass subs, subsidizing those people can cover the lower sales. Steam+xbox would need to sell 2m-4m copies, while gamepass can generate 4m-7m from the subs.

 

[kingfey]

Over a decade of basically the same messaging, but I guess for those who waited that long they can keep waiting.

Arent you guys tired of repeating this useless and pointless argument? Does your brain rot so badly, that the last 4-5 months become nonexistent?

 

[Three]

I never said that they would release a big game every month. You have not read my posts correctly or I have worded them wrong.


But I will respond to this post.

If they had enough studios that were well coordinated, releasing a game a month. It would not cost them more than running an equal amount of studios but releasing less games lol

Once the game is finished and for sale the team can then shift to their next project. MTXs from games that have them and a community don’t stop because people are still playing them and subscribers are still paying. The only way your reasoning makes sense is if Microsoft have a limited amount of studios. But even then they would still need to pay for 3rd party content to fill out gaps or they are releasing clones month in month out.

Can you please explain what your point is then? Because you replied to a person discussing the economic feasibility of releasing a big game every month by suggesting it somehow increases cost by not doing it. The truth of the matter is though that these games being released rely mainly on the subscription and MTXs therefore these studios and MS not needing a constant flow of big releases.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Arent you guys tired of repeating this useless and pointless argument? Does your brain rot so badly, that the last 4-5 months become nonexistent?

IKR, they've spent billions getting games for GP. LOL

It'll take a minute to get the scheduling worked out in an ideal way.

 

[Three]

People dont spend money on your games, if it doesnt have content. Ask halo infinite MP, early Sea of thieves. You just spouting nonsense.
Plus releasing more games will generate them more money. Incase you dont get it, having more mtx games released, will generate them more money, compared to them holding out those games.


That is complete false. Releasing AAA content every month would not increase their cost.
You have gamepass subs (around 40m-50m is $320m-$400m at average of $8 a month), Non gamepass xbox users, Steam users. That is enough to recoup the cost of their games.

To break it down
Gamepass: $320m generates 5.3m copies for that month alone, while $400m 6.6m copies. That is $8 gamepass average price (Because global money isnt USD).
Non xbox gamepass users: 1-2m copies.
Steam: 1m-3m copies.

That is 7m-11m copies, which can generate $420m to $660m for that month. You also have to account the long term sales.

They arent losing money. They are gaining more than what the game cost on that month.

Gamepass is making those who dont want to buy the game at first, pay for the game. Games usually sell lower, because people are not willing to buy it at $60, unless the game is huge popular. So having gamepass subs, subsidizing those people can cover the lower sales. Steam+xbox would need to sell 2m-4m copies, while gamepass can generate 4m-7m from the subs.

Nobody is arguing whether those games would survive or not without content. Halo and Sea of thieves may very well get content but this isn't classified as "big game releases every month" is it?

How exactly wouldn't a big AAA release every month not increase costs when your subscription amount remains the same and people aren't unsubscribing if you don't release it?

 

[Leyasu]

Can you please explain what your point is then? Because you replied to a person discussing the economic feasibility of releasing a big game every month by suggesting it somehow increases cost by not doing it. The truth of the matter is though that these games being released rely mainly on the subscription and MTXs therefore these studios and MS not needing to a constant flow of big releases.

My point was that artificially drawing out dev times increases the costs of the project. The quicker the turnaround, the cheaper the project with the potential of realising more projects.

 

[Riky]

Over a decade of basically the same messaging, but I guess for those who waited that long they can keep waiting.

They just won publisher of the year, keep up.

 

[DaGwaphics]

My point was that artificially drawing out dev times increases the costs of the project. The quicker the turnaround, the cheaper the project with the potential of realising more projects.

Very true. The developers are all making the same salaries regardless, the more time taken, the more expensive the project.

 

[Leyasu]

Very true. The developers are all making the same salaries regardless, the more time taken, the more expensive the project.

Perhaps I should have worded my posts better to start with.

 

[kingfey]

Nobody is arguing that those games would survive or not without content. Halo and Sea of thieves may very well get content but this isn't classified as "big game releases every month" is it?

Delaying games, while these games arent getting enough content will not generate enough money for them. They have to mask the lack of updates for some of their big titles, which generates alot of money for them. Delaying it, will make people leave the game, and might not come back for more.

How exactly wouldn't a big AAA release every month not increase costs when your subscription amount remains the same and people aren't unsubscribing if you don't release it?

Because it increases the sub, while making the sub more valuable.
Biggest fear of subscription model, is losing subscribers. You have to have steady income of contents to make them busy, while also attracting new subscribers.
But the most important, is keeping the momentum alive. Gamepass isnt the only place where they sell games. They can also get revenue from steam, and their xbox store. This type of action becomes more useful, when they have sales. People will generally buy it, when its cheap.

So they get game sales from xbox and steam. And they also get monthly fees from gamepass. That is enough to make more money for them.

Also, not every game will cost $200m to make.

 

[Three]

My point was that artificially drawing out dev times increases the costs of the project. The quicker the turnaround, the cheaper the project with the potential of realising more projects.

Yes that's obvious for game sales but this isn't the model under a subscription. Prolonging release doesn't affect the studios backing/cash flow from MS because they have people paying monthly regardless and ramping up releases actually increases risk and cost.

 

[AJUMP23]

Steady flow of great games is a good plan.

 

[Fitzchiv]

You hear that rumbling in the distance? That's the £100bn+ Activision/Zenimax floodgates creaking open.

Sure, things are dry right now, but when this shit hits you better all be building Arks and shoving your moms and wives onto them two-by-two.

 

[Leyasu]

Yes that's obvious for game sales but this isn't the model under a subscription. Prolonging release doesn't affect the studios backing/cash flow from MS and ramping up releases actually increases risk and cost.

Lol so everything becomes cheaper because of a subscription service? Salaries, studio running costs, voice actors etc?

I didn’t know that

 

[DaGwaphics]

Yes that's obvious for game sales but this isn't the model under a subscription. Prolonging release doesn't affect the studios backing/cash flow from MS and ramping up releases actually increases risk and cost.

With a subscription, content is everything. To maintain subscriptions they need content, your subscription revenue isn't forever guaranteed in that scenario.

 

[STARSBarry]

Good, now they just need to deliver on it. As an Xbox series X owner I am still waiting for the results of their recent acquisitions.

So far we have not had a title release under the Microsoft banner since the purchases and honestly we will need to see what they can come up with.

Forza Horizon was great, Halo was OK, Sea of Thieves took awhile but has turned it around, less said about Gears of Bore the better. Microsoft are a mixed bag really and they are trailing their poor rep from the One days with them.

God I hope Starfield is good... God I hope there releases get to be consistantly good like the 360 days.

 

[kingfey]

IKR, they've spent billions getting games for GP. LOL

It'll take a minute to get the scheduling worked out in an ideal way.

Gamers need to realize that things dont happen fast. If Sony didnt have contractual agreement with bethesda, we would have seen ghost wire tokyo for xbox this month. MS has to respect these contracts. Also, their studios release games in 2018-2019. They cant churn out games super fast.

 

[Three]

Because it increases the sub, while making the sub more valuable.
Biggest fear of subscription model, is losing subscribers. You have to have steady income of contents to make them busy, while also attracting new subscribers.
But the most important, is keeping the momentum alive. Gamepass isnt the only place where they sell games. They can also get revenue from steam, and their xbox store. This type of action becomes more useful, when they have sales. People will generally buy it, when its cheap.

So they get game sales from xbox and steam. And they also get monthly fees from gamepass. That is enough to make more money for them.

Also, not every game will cost $200m to make.

This is what I'm saying. Did you unsubscribe when they released no games this quarter? I bet most people didn't so why would MS switch to 1 big AAA game a month? Just to increase their risk and cost? They aren't going to do that to entertain your wishful thinking.

The new subscribers they plan to attract but not by changing the gaming industry norm of a few big games near Christmas but by buying IPs and moving fanbases to the subscription where they might see value instead of buying it. Not by pumping out AAA games per month. Look at the reality and stop living with only hope and excuses as to why it hasn't happened already.

 

[kingfey]

This is what I'm saying. Did you unsubscribe when they released no games this quarter? I bet most people didn't so why would MS switch to 1 big AAA game a month? Just to increase their risk and cost? They aren't going to do that to entertain your wishful thinking.

It keeps those users subscribed. People will not be subscribed to your service, if they arent getting what they want. Not all those monthly games would be what they want.
For me, age of empire, forza horizon 5, and halo infinite didnt justify my gamepass subscription. But it was those 3rd party games, which kept me to the service. As long as people like me subscribed to the service, MS would need to pump out contents constantly (2 games every 2-3 month).

The new subscribers they plan to attract but not by changing the gaming industry norm of a few big games near Christmas but by buying IPs and moving fanbases to the subscription where they might see value instead of buying it. Not by pumping out AAA games per month. Look at the reality and stop living with only hope and excuses as to why it hasn't happened already.

What reality are you referring? MS has tons of IPs, which they arent utilizing it at all. Buying new IPs wont change that fact. Starfield is new IP. Deathloop was new, redfall too. Avowed. As long as MS keep making those IPs, people will subscribe to their service.

Look at Disney, and how they are treating disney+. They made tons of contents, because of that service, which they couldnt before.

 

[NeonGhost]

Why do I feel like I’ve been hearing this since 2014

 

[Heisenberg007]

God of War ascension was released in 2013. God of War in 2018. So 5 years to make.

In an interview, Sucker Punch stated that they’d worked on Ghost of Tsushima for six years. Sony also announced it was it early development as at 2015.

You’re really vocal about some of these things that you’re wrong about.

Because at the end of the day, Sucker Punch released a game after 6 years, but the game itself (Ghost of Tsushima) didn't take 6 years to make.

https://www.usgamer.net/articles/ghost-of-tsushima-devs-canceled-project-allegedly-surfaces-online. They were working on Prophecy and didn't really start Ghost of Tsushima in full production, likely until 2016.

God of War ran into a similar problem. They were working on Internal-7 before they had to cancel it and shift to God of War. Internal-7 was in production for nearly 36 months, and that was after Ascension. 36 months after 2013, and you can do the math. This also goes in line with what Cory said that by E3 2016, they only had the level they showed. Nearly everything else was developed between 2016 to 2018.

 

[Three]

With a subscription, content is everything. To maintain subscriptions they need content, your subscription revenue isn't forever guaranteed in that scenario.

it is but tell me why would content ramp up to a AAA release a month instead of the norm we have now? I'll ask again, did you unsubscribe from gamepass this quarter without the big game release a month/quarter, did subscriber numbers go down?

Does netflix make a huge netflix original movie every month?

So why do it?

It keeps those users subscribed. People will not be subscribed to your service, if they arent getting what they want.

The point is that they remain subscribed regardless and you increase profits by NOT having a big AAA release every month. So you answered the question yourself, you stayed subscribed regardless this whole quarter without a AAA release.

My point about the IP thing is that they need to attract people to the subscription but it's easier to do this with established games coming to the sub than ramping up game releases.

 

[DaGwaphics]

it is but tell me why would content ramp up to a AAA release a month instead of the nor


m we have now? I'll ask again, did you unsubscribe from gamepass this quarter without the big game release a month/quarter, did subscriber numbers go down?

Does netflix make a huge netflix original movie every month?


The point is that they remain subscribed regardless and you increase profits by NOT having a big AAA release every month. So you answered the question yourself you stayed subscribed regardless this whole quarter without a AAA release.

I never said anything about a AAA release every month. LOL

I don't think they have enough teams available to support that, tbh. I could see a scenario where maybe they have 4 AAA games a year and maybe 8 AA. Even that would probably be tight, but it would certainly be easier to grow some of the smaller AA studios they have into multi-team operations as opposed to needing all those AAA games. I can see where it would be advantages to have a first-party release every month, but that isn't something they are talking about now.

 

[kingfey]

The point is that they remain subscribed regardless and you increase profits by NOT having a big AAA release every month. So you answered the question yourself you stayed subscribed regardless this whole quarter without a AAA release.

Then people will leave your subscription. You are thinking that everyone has the same taste. They arent. People will leave your subscription service, if they dont get what they want. People have limits.

 

[Three]

I never said anything about a AAA release every month. LOL

I don't think they have enough teams available to support that, tbh. I could see a scenario where maybe they have 4 AAA games a year and maybe 8 AA. Even that would probably be tight, but it would certainly be easier to grow some of the smaller AA studios they have into multi-team operations as opposed to needing all those AAA games. I can see where it would be advantages to have a first-party release every month, but that isn't something they are talking about now.

But that's what everyone here is talking about AAA. so why are you arguing the point that it wouldn't increase cost for little benefit? You said every quarter others were saying every month.

The original posts:

I assume the goal is to have a big AAA title every quarter, things that will really get GP members excited. Seems like they have the studios now to do that if you figure a 5yr dev time, they'd need like 20 AAA teams, not impossible. With room for their AA studios to do their thing as well.

So we're down to every quarter from last times every month. You all are insane if you think you're getting a AAA game every month/quarter. You've all been saying this same line since the xbox one telling people to wait for Xbox Next to see the output.

Ask yourself this, have you unsubscribed from gamepass because there isn't a steady flow of AAA games currently? So why would MS increase expenditure like that needlessly?

They will buy big IPs for marketshare growth but big AAA releases every month will not be something that's needed unless there is no growth.

Now we are arguing the point whether people will unsubscribe without a AAA release every quarter/month and the answer seems to be no.

 

[Three]

Then people will leave your subscription. You are thinking that everyone has the same taste. They arent. People will leave your subscription service, if they dont get what they want. People have limits.

As Iamvin22 said it's nice to want things. They won't necessarily leave and you and the others here who remain subscribed are anecdotal proof of that.

in the same way that Gamepass/PS+/GWG doesn't have stellar games releasing every quarter or month for it a large majority are happy to remain subscribed. Does netflix get a big blockbuster movie every month/quarter?

Do I want stellar AAA games releasing every month? Who wouldn't. Would you/I/majority leave if they don't? of course not as is evident by subscriptions not dropping this quarter and you and the others still subscribed regardless. Would MS spending the least amount of money on releasing/making games while keeping people subscribed make sense? Yes. That's the reality.

 

[Evil Calvin]

It's not quite there yet, according to Phil

There are a lot of talented developers working under the Xbox banner now, and according to Microsoft's gaming CEO, Phil Spencer, the aim for the tech giant from here on out is to provide an ongoing stream of "great" video game content.

Phil touched on this during the same Xbox Era podcast - noting how Microsoft hasn't quite reached that point yet, as there's no "big game" for this quarter. Here's exactly what he had to say:

Xbox Wants To Provide A 'Steady Flow Of Great Games' Moving Forward

It's not quite there yet, according to Phil

www.purexbox.com

How many years have they wanted a steady flow? Take out Horizon, Gears, Forza MS and Halo.....there hasn't been much of anything in the last 10 years

 

[Trogdor1123]

has a company ever not said this? They should be fired if they don’t say it

 

[Ozriel]

Because at the end of the day, Sucker Punch released a game after 6 years, but the game itself (Ghost of Tsushima) didn't take 6 years to make.

https://www.usgamer.net/articles/ghost-of-tsushima-devs-canceled-project-allegedly-surfaces-online. They were working on Prophecy and didn't really start Ghost of Tsushima in full production, likely until 2016.

God of War ran into a similar problem. They were working on Internal-7 before they had to cancel it and shift to God of War. Internal-7 was in production for nearly 36 months, and that was after Ascension. 36 months after 2013, and you can do the math. This also goes in line with what Cory said that by E3 2016, they only had the level they showed. Nearly everything else was developed between 2016 to 2018.

So, knowing this, why are you still using ‘Current Year - Year of last game release = development time’ for xbox studios?

I’d have thought your research would have taught you that things aren’t as simplistic as that?

How many years have they wanted a steady flow? Take out Horizon, Gears, Forza MS and Halo.....there hasn't been much of anything in the last 10 years

How does it make any sense to you to cite the past 10 years, a large chunk of which they had only a handful of studios and no Gamepass?

Last year alone, their studios released Flight Sim, Psychonauts 2 and Deathloop, if you exclude the evergreen titles.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Does netflix get a big blockbuster movie every month/quarter?

They are delivering a new movie every single week. Most of those aren't blockbusters of course, but Netflix understands that original content is king.

 

[Kerotan]

nah, its just that the engine wasnt designed for warzone and they didnt think it would blow the fuck up like it did. this is where warzone 2 comes in. totally new engine and will have less maintenance and headaches.

Hopefully. Badly needs it.

 

[Umbasaborne]

It's nice to want things

Yep, they made a bunch of big purchases that have yet to bare fruit, but games take time to make, so i get it to an extent, im sure they dont want another unfinished game launch, like halo infinite

 

[Ozriel]

Over a decade of basically the same messaging, but I guess for those who waited that long they can keep waiting.

Going from ‘xbox is trying to monopolize gaming!’ in January to ‘xbox won’t have lots of games’ in March is quite the turnaround

‘Over a decade’? Really?

 

[Evil Calvin]

I mean they bought Compulsion Games 4 years ago and still haven't released a game yet. It's been a long drought with the usual few games over the last 10 years sprinkled in.

 

[lachesis]

Their service does need to provide steady flow, otherwise it would be a burst.
I reckon they would be shooting for something like at least one day-1 gamepass releases every month, whether it's a 1st party release or 3rd party release.

 

[bushwookie]

Because at the end of the day, Sucker Punch released a game after 6 years, but the game itself (Ghost of Tsushima) didn't take 6 years to make.

https://www.usgamer.net/articles/ghost-of-tsushima-devs-canceled-project-allegedly-surfaces-online. They were working on Prophecy and didn't really start Ghost of Tsushima in full production, likely until 2016.

God of War ran into a similar problem. They were working on Internal-7 before they had to cancel it and shift to God of War. Internal-7 was in production for nearly 36 months, and that was after Ascension. 36 months after 2013, and you can do the math. This also goes in line with what Cory said that by E3 2016, they only had the level they showed. Nearly everything else was developed between 2016 to 2018.

Dude, just stop already.

You're talking in circles, and moving goalposts with every post you make. In one, you doubt MS will be able to release decent games at a steady clip, and point to how they've run their studios previously. In another, you laughably claim that Sony releases a big game almost every month (39 days) which means you expect MS to be releasing one a month. When called out by one person, you immediately go full defense mode, by claiming that when it comes to Sony, it doesn't necessarily have to be a first party game in order to count. 3rd party exclusives count as Sony releasing games too.... And while we're at it, let's just throw in timed exclusives as well. And finally we've come to this. Where someone called you out, and now your script has flipped yet again, as now it's really not about how long it took to release the games... It's really about how long that dev specifically worked on that game. Of course this only applies to Sony.

Good god man, get off of it already. Why are you even in an Xbox thread to start with? You've got a long storied history of loving everything Sony, and concerned with everything Xbox. You don't play it, and you obviously don't care for it... So why even bother entering an Xbox thread to begin with? Much less mucking it up with all your fake concern posting.

 

[Heisenberg007]

So, knowing this, why are you still using ‘Current Year - Year of last game release = development time’ for xbox studios?

I’d have thought your research would have taught you that things aren’t as simplistic as that?

If a studio rebooted a game, I'd take it into account. But neither Undead Labs nor Ninja Theory were working on another IP that they had to cancel before resuming production on SoD3 and HB2. If you know about this, share receipts.

Also, first you accused me of being wrong, and when I presented receipts, you completely changed the topic.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Dude, just stop already.

You're talking in circles, and moving goalposts with every post you make. In one, you doubt MS will be able to release decent games at a steady clip, and point to how they've run their studios previously. In another, you laughably claim that Sony releases a big game almost every month (39 days) which means you expect MS to be releasing one a month. When called out by one person, you immediately go full defense mode, by claiming that when it comes to Sony, it doesn't necessarily have to be a first party game in order to count. 3rd party exclusives count as Sony releasing games too.... And while we're at it, let's just throw in timed exclusives as well. And finally we've come to this. Where someone called you out, and now your script has flipped yet again, as now it's really not about how long it took to release the games... It's really about how long that dev specifically worked on that game. Of course this only applies to Sony.

Good god man, get off of it already. Why are you even in an Xbox thread to start with? You've got a long storied history of loving everything Sony, and concerned with everything Xbox. You don't play it, and you obviously don't care for it... So why even bother entering an Xbox thread to begin with? Much less mucking it up with all your fake concern posting.

Read my posts again.

Never once I said that "I doubt MS will be able to release decent games at a steady clip." On the contrary, I said that MS will likely be able to release one exclusive game per month (first-party + second-party + and third-party exclusive), considering Sony has been releasing 1 big game every 50-80 days, and they have half the number of teams.

How's that "mucking it up" or "concern posting" when I'm literally saying that Xbox will likely be able to release more games than PlayStation? Jeez, some of you guys, I swear.

 

[TheShocker]

If their definition of quality is anything relatable to what 343i is doing with Halo, you can count me out. MS is more focused on “woke” culture and pandering than they are putting out quality games.

 

[Three]

They are delivering a new movie every single week. Most of those aren't blockbusters of course, but Netflix understands that original content is king.

I have netflix too and I'd love to hear what you're talking about. What new orginal movie releases were there this past month let alone week? As you said they are not AAA blockbusters anyhow but I'm interested to know what movies you're seeing that I ain't.