Support NeoGAF

[Alebrije]

Phil was playing the crying game so they can get Activision.

 

[March Climber]

I just listened to this video too. Max does a great job of explaining how businesses essentially work and why what Phil is saying makes sense.

He also had the same take as me from earlier, which is that there is a giant chain of command... and for some reason that chain of command gets poisoned somewhere up the line to where he is essentially hearing 'yes men' report to him that everything is going well and fine(and they're showing him the very best vertical slices of gameplay), when that's not what he's looking to hear or see. So he got blindsided by Bethesda and Arkane's choices and now he has no choice but to take all of the heat for it.

Not saying Phil is free of responsibility though, but like Max said, he is in way tooo high of a position and his hands have been tied with way bigger ordeals(like the ABK acquisition) to look all the way downwards to see who's making a mess of things. This means he might have to waste his time to shift his focus to things he doesn't want to, like keeping an eye on a completely different publishing company such as Bethesda, just to make sure they are doing their job. And for Phil who is a boss of a boss of a boss of a boss, that sounds really damn annoying.

 

[H-I-M]

I think what a lot of people miss is that first party exclusives and console sales profit just isn't enough for MS. They want netflix of gaming. They want consistent online engagement, not one and done high budget affairs. They want MTX live service money at a large scale. They want constant growth. And they want to own most studios that put out games so they can make use them to make more online live service games, with COD at the forefront.

We don't miss anything.

Microsoft wants a lot of things, but it seems like they won't get any of it, that's what you don't understand.

Their consoles are not selling.
Their gamepass is not selling.
Their massive Activision takeover got blocked.
Their own leader Phil Spencer is looking defeated and even said that we might not see him for long.

 

[Chiggs]

Phil was playing the crying game so they can get Activision.

I keep seeing this response, and I'm not denying that it could be one of their strategies...but if they ACTUALLY think that will work...wow, just wow.

 

[Chiggs]

Jaffe ripped Phil a new one. He said so much that I couldn't type it all up if I tried.

- Jaffe was shocked that when MS bought Bethesda\Zenimax that they didn't take control of the development right then and there. Phil said they let Arkane just continue doing what they were doing.
- He said Phil makes why too much money to have "JUST" learned the lessons that he's learning now.
- He talked about Sony's process to greenlighting games and the execs play testing them throughout the whole process.
- Said Phil isn't the right guy for the job. Said that Phil is perfect for marketing overall ideas and a vision. But needs help with the execution side of things.
- He said that he's worried about Phil's mental health.
- And he talked about how scary Shu is when he comes to your office to see your game. I'll time-stamp that here.


Jaffe's explanation of what it's like when Shu walked into your office
Youtube Link

I've been saying this for a couple of years now...and I know I'm hardly the only one.

I feel like going back in time to see where my first Dump Phil post was...but it's honestly just too depressing.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Man, Max is so great. Awesome video.

 

[ToadMan]

This is from the Xcast interview.

Does this mean that Starfield was behind Redfall in terms of production milestones? But it's releasing only 4 months after Redfall.

Am I reading this correctly, as in this is a big slip/deal and can indicate that Starfield is also likely coming hot? Or am I totally misreading it and this bears no importance?

Yeah this is something I've heard several times over and I think he tried to chose his words carefully but didn't do it very well.

I think what has actually happened is that when they bought zeni, xbox just focused on the Starfield project because that looked like the big hope. As a result they took their eye off of Arkane (apart from telling them to scrap the PS5 work) and left them to get on with Redfall with little support. But Phil didn't want to say that - it would make xbox seem both negligent and disinterested in the quality of first party output. So he instead tried to find a plausible rationale relating to development progress but that doesn't add up given the timescales to release of Redfall vs Starfield.

I think Phil was scrabbling to find a reason why Starfield won't suffer the same fate as Redfall to placate fears, and pulled out this "midway through development" excuse when in truth the development phase with Starfield is identical if not further along.

 

[ToadMan]

So the million dollar question for Xbox....whose the equivalent of Shu there?

That would be Phil.

After all, Phil cancelled the PS5 version of Redfall. And Shu would have done the same if he'd been the first party manager of note...

 

[rolandss]

He also had the same take as me from earlier, which is that there is a giant chain of command... and for some reason that chain of command gets poisoned somewhere up the line to where he is essentially hearing 'yes men' report to him that everything is going well and fine(and they're showing him the very best vertical slices of gameplay), when that's not what he's looking to hear or see. So he got blindsided by Bethesda and Arkane's choices and now he has no choice but to take all of the heat for it.

As someone who works for a massive company that routinely reports up to its parent company I totally see why this happens. Layers of teams and people are in between you and the board. People report up and say there’s a problem or a road block, other people become afraid of reporting failure or delay, because they become more accountable, don’t want to look incompetent or suddenly you have a whole lot of extra teams or people crawling over you to to “help” which usually means slowing you down or making your job harder, because help usually doesn’t mean much except more pointless meetings and reporting but no extra resources. The guys at the top don’t get an accurate picture a lot of the time.

This isn’t always the case. There’s good execs who know how to cut through crap and go to the right people. But the helicopter ones, and there’s a lot, who spend most of their time in meetings about strategies and plans and not actually getting into and understanding how teams operate, they’re the ones that cycle around often with a very different picture of the business to the people actually working in it.

 

[Shadowstar39]

Sounds like the creation of a sob story to appeal to the hearts of regulators....

What I was thinking too. Hopefully regulators aren't buying it.

 

[graywolf323]

What I was thinking too. Hopefully regulators aren't buying it.

I don’t really see why they would, it’s basically Xbox saying “Look we suck at managing the studios we already have, that’s why you should let us nearly double in size!”

 

[Humdinger]

So the million dollar question for Xbox....whose the equivalent of Shu there?

Back about 10 or 15 years ago, MS got a lot of shit for over-managing their developers into oblivion (e.g., Lionhead, Rare). There were lots of stories about how Sony enabled freedom for their devs, whereas MS was a bunch of intrusive suits. MS had seen how badly their management failed. They were chastened and intent not to repeat the same mistake, so when MS acquired the new studios (Bethesda, etc.), they took a "hands off" approach. Which isn't working out too well for them.

Sony wants you to buy their hardware and first-party games, Microsoft just wants you to subscribe to gamepass.

Only fanboys think there are "places" especially if you think hardware sales determine each company's place.

I agree with "Microsoft just wants you to subscribe to gamepass." I don't think they care that much about console sales. They realize they lost that race.

I disagree with the second statement. Console sales are traditionally how success has been measured. You don't have to be a fanboy to consider them as a metric of success.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Back about 10 or 15 years ago, MS got a lot of shit for over-managing their developers into oblivion (e.g., Lionhead, Rare). There were lots of stories about how Sony enabled freedom for their devs, whereas MS was a bunch of intrusive suits. And MS saw how poorly their strategy worked. So, when MS acquired the new studios, they retreated from that, felt chastened, and decided to take a more "hands off" approach. Which isn't working out too well for them, either...

I don't think Sony has been truly hands off. I believe they allow their devs a lot of freedom however they still keep an eye on things and won't let anything get approved. I believe a completely hands off approach is just a bad idea for anyone to apply.

In Microsoft's case they need to find a good balance. Just like Sony has over the years.

 

[Humdinger]

I don't think Sony has been truly hands off. I believe they allow their devs a lot of freedom however they still keep an eye on things and won't let anything get approved. I believe a completely hands off approach is just a bad idea for anyone to apply.

In Microsoft's case they need to find a good balance. Just like Sony has over the years.

I agree. Sony was not "hands off."

I have lost hope that MS will get their shit together. I'm hoping Starfield delivers, and Avowed. If then, I might pick up an Xbox. But it's hard to have much confidence in the brand at this point.

 

[MasterCornholio]

I agree. Sony was not "hands off."

Definitely. Jaffe talked about how scary some Sony execs can be when they visit their studios. I'm not saying Microsoft should go to the extreme but just enough to let them know that they just won't accept anything. And that there are consequences for a bad product.

 

[Humdinger]

Agreed.

 

[Alebrije]

I just listened to this video too. Max does a great job of explaining how businesses essentially work and why what Phil is saying makes sense.

He also had the same take as me from earlier, which is that there is a giant chain of command... and for some reason that chain of command gets poisoned somewhere up the line to where he is essentially hearing 'yes men' report to him that everything is going well and fine(and they're showing him the very best vertical slices of gameplay), when that's not what he's looking to hear or see. So he got blindsided by Bethesda and Arkane's choices and now he has no choice but to take all of the heat for it.

Not saying Phil is free of responsibility though, but like Max said, he is in way tooo high of a position and his hands have been tied with way bigger ordeals(like the ABK acquisition) to look all the way downwards to see who's making a mess of things. This means he might have to waste his time to shift his focus to things he doesn't want to, like keeping an eye on a completely different publishing company such as Bethesda, just to make sure they are doing their job. And for Phil who is a boss of a boss of a boss of a boss, that sounds really damn annoying.

If this is how it works, this is an advice for Phil Spencer :

 

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

Anyone notice how he sidestepped two big questions? The first was about Starfield 30 vs 60 and the second was
"what do you say to the people that feel like Microsoft is focusing too much on PC and not enough on Series x?"

This tells us Starfield is 30 fps. If it had a 60 fps mode then there was no better time to say it then yesterday.

His answer to question number two was reiterating their plan of "catering to a wide variety of platforms" which doesn't surprise me but is disappointing none the less. Series X was supposed to be all about power and speed. Vwe havnt even gotten games that use rdna2 features touted by Mr. Snake Oil. Only rdna2 feature used is variable rate shading. We havnt had a single game that shows off the Series X hardware yet! Well, we have Flight Sim I guess.

It's clear tho that with Series S and PC focus that Series X is not super important. Thats where I feel I've been hoodwinked by MS (that and BC program being shut down).

 

[Lord Panda]

While on one hand, I appreciate the candour, but I find his attitude really bemusing and baffling.

 

[PSYGN]

We might be seeing less Phil in interviews lol

 

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

hes not stupid, hes saying what needs to be said while the activision takeover is still trying to go ahead, hes ticking those PR boxes to sway the regulators.

That's a good point. That comment he made about being 3rd place "losing the war" was made for the regulators. Now it makes sense.p

 

[Die Namek Ability]

He’s not “admitting defeat”. What is people’s issue here? He’s saying Xbox is never going to overtake PlayStation. You’re not going to convert die hard PlayStation console players to switch over to the Xbox ecosystem. He’s succinctly pointing out what we all already know.

Xbox’s plan is not to somehow magically supplant PlayStation as the dominant hardcore AAA high-end console platform.

Like Nintendo, Xbox needs to do their own thing and find success in that.

What is so complicated about what Phil’s saying, and why so much hyperbole from people?

Huh?

 

[ToadMan]

Only fanboys think there are "places" especially if you think hardware sales determine each company's place. You don't seem to understand how businesses actually operate. Xbox is just one division within Microsoft, and its only goal is to make money for its parent company.

If you listened clearly to how Phil spoke on this, you’ll note he referred to “places” and xbox not being first, and “winning” or not.

He also said that even an 11/10 Starfield wouldn’t lead to a shift of console ownership and people “selling their PS5s”.

This latter point is to me exactly the problem with MS and Xbox. Xbox set the conditions for a win - console dominance - and have failed on their own terms.

There is no need for anyone to sell anything - any company interested in making money from gaming just has to get the content out there, and MS has more ways of doing that today than they’ve ever had.

Yet Phil referred to people selling their PS5s. That was his reference to “winning”. Not people buying an xbox or even just buying an MGS game - he specifically said selling their PS5.

If MS had set up xbox as a division interested in peaceful coexistence with the rest of the gaming marketplace, they’d be in a uniquely powerful position today - they’d be set to host all the major game content on their cloud service going forward. They could and should be making deals with Sony, Nintendo and the major 3P publishers to host all that content and take a slice of their action.

Instead, they’re trying to put other first parties out of business while coercing customers to their services through acquisition. That’s what winning means for xbox - dominance. And that’s why their most vocal cheerleaders are obsessed with console warring.

 

[Rentahamster]

Even if he actually thinks that, he probably shouldn't admit that publicly. Bad marketing.

 

[ToadMan]

That's a good point. That comment he made about being 3rd place "losing the war" was made for the regulators. Now it makes sense.p

Nah. The CMA and EU are focusing on cloud - console is irrelevant.

 

[Badlucktroll]

I have a series x, but i am starting to get worried that microsoft is up to its old antics of trying to monopolize and destabilize. this time its our precious game console industry.

 

[Astray]

If you listened clearly to how Phil spoke on this, you’ll note he referred to “places” and xbox not being first, and “winning” or not.

He also said that even an 11/10 Starfield wouldn’t lead to a shift of console ownership and people “selling their PS5s”.

This latter point is to me exactly the problem with MS and Xbox. Xbox set the conditions for a win - console dominance - and have failed on their own terms.

There is no need for anyone to sell anything - any company interested in making money from gaming just has to get the content out there, and MS has more ways of doing that today than they’ve ever had.

Yet Phil referred to people selling their PS5s. That was his reference to “winning”. Not people buying an xbox or even just buying an MGS game - he specifically said selling their PS5.

If MS had set up xbox as a division interested in peaceful coexistence with the rest of the gaming marketplace, they’d be in a uniquely powerful position today - they’d be set to host all the major game content on their cloud service going forward. They could and should be making deals with Sony, Nintendo and the major 3P publishers to host all that content and take a slice of their action.

Instead, they’re trying to put other first parties out of business while coercing customers to their services through acquisition. That’s what winning means for xbox - dominance. And that’s why their most vocal cheerleaders are obsessed with console warring.

Worse than that, he and Microsoft are addicted to winning big and quick.

The idea that Sony and Nintendo both built up their audiences slowly, accumulating small wins over time is completely lost on him, it's consistency that wins the race, you don't need all 10/10s to win, but you need to maintain a regular cadence of games that are 7.5 at a minimum. 360 was the closest they'd come, and even then they didn't learn. Releasing a 9/10 game, then waiting for ages to release a 5/10 game doesn't build your brand!

 

[Eotheod]

Anyone notice how he sidestepped two big questions? The first was about Starfield 30 vs 60 and the second was
"what do you say to the people that feel like Microsoft is focusing too much on PC and not enough on Series x?"

This tells us Starfield is 30 fps. If it had a 60 fps mode then there was no better time to say it then yesterday.

His answer to question number two was reiterating their plan of "catering to a wide variety of platforms" which doesn't surprise me but is disappointing none the less. Series X was supposed to be all about power and speed. Vwe havnt even gotten games that use rdna2 features touted by Mr. Snake Oil. Only rdna2 feature used is variable rate shading. We havnt had a single game that shows off the Series X hardware yet! Well, we have Flight Sim I guess.

It's clear tho that with Series S and PC focus that Series X is not super important. Thats where I feel I've been hoodwinked by MS (that and BC program being shut down).

Seriously, can people shut up about PC detracting development efforts or console experiences? It is unsurprisingly not the case at all when it comes to game development, and usually there is quite heavy PC development inherently to the development of the console version, because surprise surprise you can't actually "develop" on a console.

PC is doing nothing to the console industry, it is quite literally an easy moneygrab with no effort but competent technical support from the developers. To think it is causing reduced development or distractions to consoles is very myopic in view, as is evidence of all platforms selling well despite supporting PC (except Nintendo). It is ridiculous to think Xbox is suffering because of PC, as it is very much a side piece that plays well into the development cycles and naturally works with Microsoft/Windows.

It's why Game Pass is a fucking good idea, and should not be reduced to scraps of titles released months after their main release window. It's a digital library service to convince people that they can safely switch platforms (and retain the old platform so choosing) without losing too many games. That's the entire reason behind Game Pass, it's a digital carrot on a stick to reduce the impact of switching to a new platform that you may not have titles on.

It's why I agree and disagree with Phil in his mentioning of losing the initial digital console era. While yes they did lose the PS4/Xbone era technically, Game Pass is that solution to providing a digital wallet of games at a snap of the fingers. Doesn't matter where you play, you are in their ecosystem. It's why I won't go back to PlayStation anytime soon, because I don't have the laundry list of titles like I do on Xbox with Game Pass.

 

[Sgt.Asher]

Microsoft had it going good in the 360 era, then they fucked it by chasing wii casual dollars(late stage 360 sucked). Then fucked it even more with the xbox one launch.
They just had to keep steady but wanted it all, then lost everything.

 

[Kaleinc]

 

[MacReady13]

Just comforted to know Phil mention that he knows Microsoft can't compete with Sony/Nintendo in the console space, hence his introduction of that sub service bullshit. Bring the games without the lies and people will come. You have lied to us all from day 1 and now it's all starting to unravel... And it's sad cause as I've mentioned on here many times, the 360 was one of, if not my fav console of all time. Xbox was awesome then! Today there shift in focus has completely lost me and seemingly millions of others.

 

[tusharngf]

I think they should go back to the xbox360 days now. Cancel gamepass and put games first on xbox consoles and after 1 or 2 years on PC. Once they start making good games everyone will buy Xbox. Exclusive content sells the hardware. It will take some years but with good games they can get the sales.

 

[Bernardougf]

I think they should go back to the xbox360 days now. Cancel gamepass and put games first on xbox consoles and after 1 or 2 years on PC. Once they start making good games everyone will buy Xbox. Exclusive content sells the hardware. It will take some years but with good games they can get the sales.

They should eliminate just launch games form gamepass, charge more for the service, and PC 1 year after .. starting with starfield .. they will never do that ... but they should.. as sony should stsy the fuck away from pc (1 year after is ok) / subscription services

 

[GigaBowser]

Phil looked like he was in a cold sweat

I thinks maybe they might have told him in the back that Xbox will LEAVE without Activision like they were gonna do in after Xbox One

This breaks my heart as a gamer I'm sorry my friends

I looked up to Master Chief when I was young

 

[Danjin44]

This breaks my heart as a gamer I'm sorry my friends

 

[TheGodfather07]

I feel sorry for Phil spencer. Theres only so much he can do. Its obvious that it's the upper Microsoft management that is the real issue. It was never just a single person like Don mattrick or Phil spencer. I think its likely that Microsoft will replace him just so they can recycle the same garbage with a new face. Don't fall for it when it happens. Or maybe, Microsoft are done and will pack it up this time. We'll have to wait and see.

 

[Luigi Mario]

I just now realized that the person on the right is supposed to be Greenberg and not Timdog himself, but Greenberg does look a little thin, doesn't he?

 

[cartman414]

Microsoft had it going good in the 360 era, then they fucked it by chasing wii casual dollars(late stage 360 sucked). Then fucked it even more with the xbox one launch.
They just had to keep steady but wanted it all, then lost everything.

The only reason they had that opening was because Sony screwed the pooch. But of course Sony also began to correct course.

 

[bobbyphunk]

Melt after melt in this thread

 

[Sinfulgore]

All three of the big three want to sell the most consoles per generation, it is totally disengenious to believe it does not matter to these companies. Nobody wants to be in third place of a generation.

I wouldn't want to be part of any company who doesn't believe they could be #1 in their field.

Explain, why doesn't any company want to be in third place? What does being in third place even mean?

That's great for you but most companies don't care about being #1 in their field because it's a meaningless metric and in most cases it's unachievable.

 

[AGRacing]

.

Well you're pointing to recent strategy. There were no subs,vr headsets or lower spec launch consoles in 2001.

No you don't understand my point. When Microsoft isn't doing well , Sony is more likely to do things that take advantage of their consumer "loyalty". The effort Sony makes to make customers happy is far stronger when there is healthy competition in their wheelhouse.

I'm not advocating for Sony to become Microsoft. They sure aren't perfect. I want a very healthy Microsoft (and I'll support them) to keep a Sony I don't get continually frustrated with.

 

[Arachnid]

"We spent 7 billion dollars on Bethesda for shit nothing. Enjoy Hi-Fi Rush, I guess."

Thanks, Phil. :/

 

[twilo99]

We don't miss anything.

Microsoft wants a lot of things, but it seems like they won't get any of it, that's what you don't understand.

Their consoles are not selling.
Their gamepass is not selling.
Their massive Activision takeover got blocked.
Their own leader Phil Spencer is looking defeated and even said that we might not see him for long.

I think it’s over for Xbox

 

[Doom85]

Explain, why doesn't any company want to be in third place? What does being in third place even mean?

That's great for you but most companies don't care about being #1 in their field because it's a meaningless metric and in most cases it's unachievable.

Most, if not virtually all, major companies care about being #1 or at the very least making as many sales as they possibly can.

And for the rare few that don’t for some bizarre reason, you can be rest assured the shareholders do.

Regardless, it’s a stupid thing for a major representative of a company to say out loud. I never heard of the CEO of Dairy Queen admitting they‘ll never reach the sales of McDonald’s or Burger King. Bad PR is, well, BAD.

 

[theclaw135]

What did Microsoft expect? Hiring the clowns responsible for how buggy Bethesda's games were, could only end in fiasco.

 

[ArcaneNLSC]

This is from the Xcast interview.

Does this mean that Starfield was behind Redfall in terms of production milestones? But it's releasing only 4 months after Redfall.

Am I reading this correctly, as in this is a big slip/deal and can indicate that Starfield is also likely coming hot? Or am I totally misreading it and this bears no importance?

Yeah I picked up on that quote and was surprised thinking Starfield had been in development for a few more years before Redfall but if this is the case where Redfall has been in development longer I don't have much hope for the quality and polish let alone the game being complete when launched. Starfield might have a bigger dev team but given its a bigger project I'd still be concerned.

 

[Arsic]

I took more time to digest this:

I get they have a different strategy for success that isn’t just banger exclusives. This eco system thing is their play to be profitable and welcome more users from various avenues.

However, gaming at its core has always been about experiencing unique experiences you can’t get anywhere else to justify the purchase of the hardware. In their case if they just want to sell gamepass then you still need really good games only on pass.

His comment that starfield being an 11/10 wouldn’t make someone sell their PS5 to then go Xbox is totally missing the bigger picture. Maybe this person WOULD buy a Xbox to add to their ps5, or perhaps they don’t own a console yet and this one game will make that decision to buy.

Games sell consoles and more. I got a PS3 for MGS4. I got a 360 for Halo 3. I got a Xbox One for Chief Collection. I got a PC for DOTA2. I got a PS5 for demons souls remake. Did other games come along to help justify those purchases ? Yes.

If he thinks if Xbox didn’t have the next Fortnite craze they wouldn’t sell millions of consoles overnight then he’s a delusional moron. He SHOULD be chasing these kinds of games that get recognition both in SP and MP. No starfield won’t sell 50 million Xboxes , but 4 more games of high quality will absolutely sell Xboxes or PC gamepass subs.

He needs to step down. You’re no longer out to win the core fight : great games you can’t get anywhere else.

 

[Kokoloko85]

Lol admits defeat so he can try to get the deal through. He’s a sly slimy one like his boss:

https://gameluster.com/microsoft-ceo-tells-sony-let-us-have-competition/

MS DNA is full of crap and manipulation just like Daddy Bill Gates

 

[GloveSlap]

I don't think Sony has been truly hands off. I believe they allow their devs a lot of freedom however they still keep an eye on things and won't let anything get approved. I believe a completely hands off approach is just a bad idea for anyone to apply.

In Microsoft's case they need to find a good balance. Just like Sony has over the years.

Microsoft needs a James Cameron type to oversee their first party output. Someone that can be a hard ass, not because they are a penny pinching suit, but because they demand the best and take their art form seriously.

 

[gothmog]

I don't think Sony has been truly hands off. I believe they allow their devs a lot of freedom however they still keep an eye on things and won't let anything get approved. I believe a completely hands off approach is just a bad idea for anyone to apply.

In Microsoft's case they need to find a good balance. Just like Sony has over the years.

I don't think Xbox leadership understands how to a) do any of that and b) probably most importantly ask for help. I was hopeful that they would try and find some people from Zenimax since they were a publisher that seemed to get games out the door. That was just wishful thinking.