Xbox passed on deal to make Marvel games to focus on their own IP - Head of Marvel Games

Lognor

Banned
That was a matter of timing though. If GotG had released first then it could have been a major hit. As it was, it had the Avengers stink on it. But if you are going to point to past performance then you should include Spider-man selling 20 million followed by Miles Morales selling 6.5 million.



I think you gotta go for it when given the opportunity, but peter42O peter42O makes a good point that there could have been other circumstances that prevented it from happening at the time.
Not necessarily. Remember, Sony doesn't OWN spiderman. Look at what happened with mlb. Mlb games were trash. Sony buys the license and starts making great games that sell very well. Mlb tells them to release it everywhere. Sony has no control over the ip anymore. Same could happen with spiderman when the contract runs up. Which would be a great thing for Xbox and pc owners!
I'd like to play those spiderman games!

If ms games they chose to develop over a Marvel game do gangbusters then ms made the right decision.

Owning the ip is usually the better option. Ms agreed!
 

Dick Jones

Gold Member
That was a matter of timing though. If GotG had released first then it could have been a major hit. As it was, it had the Avengers stink on it. But if you are going to point to past performance then you should include Spider-man selling 20 million followed by Miles Morales selling 6.5 million.
I agree with this. I still haven't touched GotG because of the Avengers game. That was so meh.
 

Lognor

Banned
So why would Xbox have produced a bad Marvel game?
Well not necessarily trash. Gotg was very good. It sold like trash though. Ms could make a great Marvel game but they can make great games with the countless ip they own and make more money.

These big ips that cost a lot to use usually don't work out for the dev. Gotg, avengers, star wars, etc
 
Well not necessarily trash. Gotg was very good. It sold like trash though. Ms could make a great Marvel game but they can make great games with the countless ip they own and make more money.

These big ips that cost a lot to use usually don't work out for the dev. Gotg, avengers, star wars, etc

Well with Microsoft funding the project I doubt there would be an issue. Plus having more Marvel games included with gamepass wouldn’t be a bad idea. If Sony did it I’m sure Microsoft could as well.
 
Final Fantasy had always been a console exclusive up until XIII, with the exception of FFXI coming to 360 a year or two after launch.

Sony helped fund SFV. Capcom was im a very different place financially at that time.
Bottom line multiple Final Fantasies and Street Fighter games were on other platforms. Insomniac Spider-Man games have always been on PlayStation. It had nothing to do with a money hat with regards to Marvel.
In fairness to Microsoft, I would have done the same in 2014. Look at their internal studios at that time. Who would have been able to make Marvel games because I don't see anyone capable of doing them, especially Spider Man.

Should Microsoft go after Marvel/Disney/Lucas IP's now? Absolutely. But back in 2014 and their 6 studios? Nah.
Perfectly said. MS in 2014 didn't have a 2nd party studio ready to take this task on. It is revisionist history to believe this could have gone any other way with MS at the time. You can make an argument about MS missing out on GTA3 but this is quite different. MS also has the tendency to make multi-player titles that certainly isn't true of Spider-Man games.

To the current situation MS has already worked with Disney on that Sea of Thieves/ Pirates collaboration so it's not like MS is refusing to work with Disney it's just about finding the right opportunity.
 

Leyasu

Banned
Sometimes you just need to take a risk. I don’t believe Insomniac has ever worked on a Marvel IP before so there was some risk in letting them make Spider-Man. Unless you take the same risk with someone else you’ll never know if they are capable of making something good or not.
I didn't mean it as not having confidence in said studio, I meant that we don't really know what said studio's obligations were.
 

Lognor

Banned
Well with Microsoft funding the project I doubt there would be an issue. Plus having more Marvel games included with gamepass wouldn’t be a bad idea. If Sony did it I’m sure Microsoft could as well.
But like I said, if they chose developing a Marvel ip over, for example, avowed, they would have to give a big chunk of that money to Marvel. Now avowed might do millions in sales, maybe similar sales to what a Marvel title would do. So doesn't it make sense for ms to focus on their own ip since they get to keep all the money?
 

Lognor

Banned
Spiderman made a lot of sense for insomniac since they didn't bring any ip other than that one game that bombed (fuse?) And maybe sunset overdrive. Sony doesn't own a ton of ip so that was a perfect match.
 
But like I said, if they chose developing a Marvel ip over, for example, avowed, they would have to give a big chunk of that money to Marvel. Now avowed might do millions in sales, maybe similar sales to what a Marvel title would do. So doesn't it make sense for ms to focus on their own ip since they get to keep all the money?

I don’t think money is an issue for Microsoft. Regardless it would definitely help gamepass quite a bit to have popular IPs release on it,
 

Swift_Star

Banned
But like I said, if they chose developing a Marvel ip over, for example, avowed, they would have to give a big chunk of that money to Marvel. Now avowed might do millions in sales, maybe similar sales to what a Marvel title would do. So doesn't it make sense for ms to focus on their own ip since they get to keep all the money?
You really think avowed will do anything closer to Spider-Man numbers, specially being on gamepass? 😅
 

Lognor

Banned
I don’t think money is an issue for Microsoft. Regardless it would definitely help gamepass quite a bit to have popular IPs release on it,
But they are already accomplishing the same thing you're asking. Gotg is on game pass. Avengers might be but that's trash so who cares? Just because they're not developing these titles doesn't mean they are not getting popular Marvel ip on game pass.
 

peter42O

Member
I think you gotta go for it when given the opportunity, but peter42O peter42O peter42O peter42O makes a good point that there could have been other circumstances that prevented it from happening at the time.
I also believe that it was bad timing. Mojang and Turn 10 are literally Minecraft/Forza Motorsport studios so eliminate them. In 2014, The Coalition was doing the Gears Ultimate Edition and Gears of War 4 and are basically a Gears studio so eliminate them. 343 is strictly a Halo studio so eliminate them. Rare? Nah. No chance. Only Lionhead was left who was doing the eventually cancelled Fable Legends. Internally, there was no studio that could do it and even if they did, would they be able to pull it off as good as Insomniac did in 2018? My answer is no. Externally, deals already didn't work out like Crackdown/Ryse/Quantum Break/Recore so why take the chance?

Most of all, when you consider the fact that Microsoft was going to shutdown Xbox completely in late 2017, a Spider Man game that probably would have been closer to those Activision games than Insomniac games wouldn't have done much if anything.
 

Rockman33

Member
Im just saying what I read before:
“The Xbox One reached the milestone for the week ending June 27. The console sold 94,057 units to bring its worldwide lifetime sales to 13,054,203”

People shit on vgcahrts but they have been accurate loads since 2010
Right. So if it took Xbox one till the end of June to get to 13 million. And at the end of April Xbox series is already at 14.5 than they ARENT selling the same. Series is outpacing the one by 20%.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Not necessarily. Remember, Sony doesn't OWN spiderman. Look at what happened with mlb. Mlb games were trash. Sony buys the license and starts making great games that sell very well. Mlb tells them to release it everywhere. Sony has no control over the ip anymore. Same could happen with spiderman when the contract runs up. Which would be a great thing for Xbox and pc owners!
I'd like to play those spiderman games!

If ms games they chose to develop over a Marvel game do gangbusters then ms made the right decision.

Owning the ip is usually the better option. Ms agreed!

We don't know what Sony "owns" as far as Spider-man (game) is concerned. Just as we don't know who owns the rights for Indiana Jones, but MS doesn't have a problem making that.
 

Warnen

Can he swing from a thread? Take a look overhead / Hey, there, there goes the Spider-Man
MS holding out for that Spawn license.
 

peter42O

Member
Perfectly said. MS in 2014 didn't have a 2nd party studio ready to take this task on. It is revisionist history to believe this could have gone any other way with MS at the time. You can make an argument about MS missing out on GTA3 but this is quite different. MS also has the tendency to make multi-player titles that certainly isn't true of Spider-Man games.

To the current situation MS has already worked with Disney on that Sea of Thieves/ Pirates collaboration so it's not like MS is refusing to work with Disney it's just about finding the right opportunity.
Agree completely. Way too many issues all around at that time for Microsoft regarding Xbox and adding Spider Man wouldn't have done much. Maybe a little buzz/hype when announced but would anyone really have confidence in it? I wouldn't have had any confidence in it.

At least in 2016 with Insomniac, I was like, awesome. They release great games on a consistent basis. Are very productive. Great quality. And they already had the traversal mechanics somewhat set based on Sunset Overdrive.

Just not the right time for Microsoft back then.
 
But they are already accomplishing the same thing you're asking. Gotg is on game pass. Avengers might be but that's trash so who cares? Just because they're not developing these titles doesn't mean they are not getting popular Marvel ip on game pass.

No because they are not day one releases exclusive to the Xbox platform. If Microsoft owned Insomniac and Spider-Man it would be a huge boon to gamepass. Hopefully that makes more sense.
 

Lognor

Banned
We don't know what Sony "owns" as far as Spider-man (game) is concerned. Just as we don't know who owns the rights for Indiana Jones, but MS doesn't have a problem making that.
Wasn't that Bethesda that made that decision prior to the ms acquisition? Not sure that would be happening today.

Well we can assume that Sony does not own the gaming rights to spiderman in perpetuity. An ip owner would NEVER agree to that.
 

Lognor

Banned
No because they are not day one releases exclusive to the Xbox platform. If Microsoft owned Insomniac and Spider-Man it would be a huge boon to gamepass. Hopefully that makes more sense.
Why does that matter if they are exclusive? They're still available for free on game pass. And no, gotg was not a huge boon. The game failed pretty spectacularly on the sales front. Do you think it would have sold materially more if ms developed it and it released day one on game pass?
 

CamHostage

Member
Final Fantasy had always been a console exclusive up until XIII, with the exception of FFXI coming to 360 a year or two after launch.

Sony helped fund SFV. Capcom was im a very different place financially at that time.

And I think this idea that games got "moneyhatted" because the publisher chose one platform exclusively for a title misses the valuation of platforms that still exists. PlayStation has been able to foster a community that self-identities, and a Final Fantasy made exclusively for that community has potential for better sell trends if it's only to them than if it's just a mass-market release product, because that community is extra-motivated to be part of the shared experience. (Every platform has this, to a certain extent, and you still see "exclusives" from different ranges of developers, sometimes timed-exclusive and sometimes exclusives which last, but I feel like it's easier to point to a few clear interests to zero in on for PS sales, especially for that audience still loyal from the PS1/PS2 highpoints, whereas it tends to be more nebulous elsewhere.) Sony may have assisted in marketing or what have you elsewhere, there was likely finance incentive involved for Square at some point, but the plan to commit to one single platform doesn't just come down to, "How much will you pay me to not talk to the other guy?"
 
Last edited:

Kokoloko85

Member
Right. So if it took Xbox one till the end of June to get to 13 million. And at the end of April Xbox series is already at 14.5 than they ARENT selling the same. Series is outpacing the one by 20%.

Your nitpicking over 1.5 million units and 2 months. At the end of the day, there like a million or so apart. Pretty much the same. And I read somewhere saying in May they reached 13million.

After how many billions and billions spent + advertising and championing Phil and Gamepass, plus a cheaper Series S and only 1.5 million units more than Xbox One…. well done lol

TBH it was a dumb statement from Aaron Greenberg as usual.

Truth is Xbox One DID outsell 360 compared to 360’s first 16 months. And it meant nothing. Just like it means nothing now selling 14.5 million. Xbox aint gonna sell close to the 360 again
 
Last edited:
Why does that matter if they are exclusive? They're still available for free on game pass. And no, gotg was not a huge boon. The game failed pretty spectacularly on the sales front. Do you think it would have sold materially more if ms developed it and it released day one on game pass?

Exclusive content is very important for gamepass if you didn’t notice. It’s why Microsoft is buying all those studios to help fuel it even further. Producing day one Marvel IPs would certainly add even more value to the service. More is always better you know.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Wasn't that Bethesda that made that decision prior to the ms acquisition? Not sure that would be happening today.

Well we can assume that Sony does not own the gaming rights to spiderman in perpetuity. An ip owner would NEVER agree to that.

No we cannot assume anything considering there was serious negotiations between Marvel and Sony when it came to Spider-man's inclusion in the MCU.

Microsoft also funded Insomniac making Sunset Overdrive and Microsoft never owned that IP. So MS was fine doing that for SSO, but not cool with Spider-man? No way.
 

GHG

Member
This thread has not disappointed. The mental gymnastics on display is incredible.

Thierry Henry Smile GIF by hamlet
 

Lognor

Banned
Exclusive content is very important for gamepass if you didn’t notice. It’s why Microsoft is buying all those studios to help fuel it even further. Producing day one Marvel IPs would certainly add even more value to the service. More is always better you know.
Source on that? And how do you explain cod of it remains multiplatform? You said exclusive content is very important and yet it looks like cod might not be exclusive. So ms seems to disagree with you! Outriders wasn't exclusive but it being on game pass was a huge boon for the dev. The game sold better because of game pass. But it wasn't exclusive. Countless other examples of this. Exclusivity is not the end all be all.
No we cannot assume anything considering there was serious negotiations between Marvel and Sony when it came to Spider-man's inclusion in the MCU.

Microsoft also funded Insomniac making Sunset Overdrive and Microsoft never owned that IP. So MS was fine doing that for SSO, but not cool with Spider-man? No way.
Serious negotiations, sure. But again NO ip owner would license their ip in perpetuity. It could be long term or be continually renewed but Sony doesn't own it.

You read the op right? Ms said no. They had the chance. They said no. That's the story. No
 
Not surprised at all

Just look at KOTOR, they knew a lot of Xbox fans wanted to see a remaster/remake. It’s now a PlayStation console exclusive for what ever time frame.

The potential was there and Sony/Insomniac took that risk.

They could of took on the X-Men franchise, you know, a big third person action game or a RPG with a Witcher /Mass Effect dialogue system and choices, something like that but no.

I remember they passed on GTA 3 too
 
Only XIII and XV came out on Xbox. That's 2 out of 16. The others all were exclusive to either Nintendo or PlayStation. But, I guess two does count as multiple. Not sure what your point is though.
My point is an exclusive game made from the bottom up on PlayStation is not the same as paying to prevent an established franchise from coming out on another platform. The Spider-Man game was never an example of a money hat. Sony absolutely moneyhatted Street Fighter and Final Fantasy. Spider-Man is a completely different story.
 

Stuart360

Member
So, it's marvel's fault. for coming to Microsoft, and ask if not attempt to strike a deal. for any potential marvel property to be exclusive to Xbox? and Microsoft turned them down. but it's their fault?



Question Mark What GIF by MOODMAN
Its no ones fault. Just because Insomniac made a good Spiderman game it doesnt mean MS fucked up.
Fact is the superhero games we have had in recent years have been hit and miss, and the ridiculous success of the superhero movies hasnt been the same with the superhero games, outside of SPIDERMAN.

Like i already said, being a PC gamer i'm very happy MS didnt take this deal and have their studios making superhero games (that i couldnt care less about) over other games.
 

SenjutsuSage

Halo TV Series Promoter - Live from: Reach
For people trying to blame this on Phil Spencer, know that Phil Spencer when he took over at Xbox in 2014, he was still heavily handcuffed in many regards and was answering to a Terry Myerson, who it has been suggested literally wanted to get rid of the Xbox division.

https://www.polygon.com/2014/3/31/5566186/phil-spencer-head-microsoft-xbox-division

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella announced Spencer's promotion in a companywide email today. Spencer will report to Terry Myerson, executive vice president of the company's Operating Systems Group, which covers Windows, Windows Phone and the Xbox One operating system. According to Nadella, Spencer will continue to work with Yusuf Mehdi, chief marketing and strategy officer for Xbox; George Peckham, head of Xbox third-party relations; and Mike Angiulo, corporate vice president of hardware development for Xbox.

Myerson did not actually leave Microsoft until 2018 during a Microsoft reorganization, at which point Phil Spencer was elevated to Microsoft's leadership group.

These were discussions that were taking place back in 2014 according to the Head of Marvel Games. Phil didn't truly have power at Microsoft until 2018.

https://www.windowscentral.com/xbox-can-play-long-game-its-exclusive-line-time-running-out

This was March 2018 below.

Recently, Microsoft re-organized itself, cutting out former Windows & Devices chief Terry Myerson, while elevating Phil Spencer and the gaming operation to the senior leadership table. Windows itself has now been cannibalized by other divisions, splitting it under a new "Experiences & Devices" unit under Executive Vice President Rajesh Jha and the "Cloud and AI" group under Scott Guthrie. Surface creator Panos Panay is now the company's chief product officer, and since last year, Phil Spencer truly leads the charge for gaming, for the first time.

And since Phil and the gaming operation finally got to the leadership table at Microsoft what transpired since?

In June 2018 Microsoft announced the acquisition of Ninja Theory. Playground, Undead Labs, Compulsion Games, and announced the creation of The Initiative. And then later on that same year in November, Microsoft announces the acquisition of Obsidian. Starting to see a trend since Phil was now in leadership and Myerson was gone? And what took place June 2019? They acquired Double Fine. Then what about September 2020? They bought Bethesda. And finally, what happened Jan of this year? They announced they were buying Activision Blizzard. Had Phil REALLY been in charge back then they almost certainly cut a deal. And who is to say they haven't secretly cut a deal since? We don't know. I would wait and see, but Microsoft isn't exactly wrong for focusing on the IP they have. They have some monsters. And with the Activision deal, they will have even more talented studios capable of making all sorts of games.

But Xbox has been an entirely different story since Phil truly took control.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Serious negotiations, sure. But again NO ip owner would license their ip in perpetuity. It could be long term or be continually renewed but Sony doesn't own it.

Not true. Sony owns the Spider-man movie license in perpetuity which is why there were negotiations going on in the first place.

You read the op right? Ms said no. They had the chance. They said no. That's the story. No

Sure......but obviously it wasn't because Microsoft would never back a project without owning the IP, as you claimed.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
What studios would make marvel games anyway?
This was unfavorable deal to them, considering they aren't out of halo,Gears, forza.

This was the best outcome for both parties.

Sony with big marvel characters, and 3rd parties for other marvel games.
Meanwhile, Xbox would diversify their IPs outside of gears, forza and halo.

True. In 2014 MS didn't have many studios that would look like a good fit for a Marvel game. Who knows what they would have picked anyway, it's not like they turned down Spiderman as a finished product. Loved Spiderman, looking forward to playing Miles when the PS+ thing hits.

Xbox does seem to have a habit of passing on some big opportunities with third-parties, you've got to chuckle at that. When they turn something down it's basically guaranteed to print gold for whoever picks it up. :messenger_beaming:
 
Last edited:

Captiosus

Member
The Xdudes are so predictably funny. Now watch that dramatic flip flop, when MS annouces a deal to develop a superhero game with either Marvel/DC.
Was barely a week and a half ago when Xbox twitter was in full damage control, talking about how Microsoft "needs" to sign third party, triple-A day-and-date games for Game Pass to mitigate the loss of Redfall and Starfield.

What game was repeatedly on their lists, usually at the top of them?
Gotham Knights.

But now it's all "I don't care about superhero games". :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 

Stuart360

Member
I dont really watch any Marvel anymore. Im not sure why its so hard to believe that not everyone wants licensed Marvel games from first party studios.
Yeah thanks. Warriors are annoyingly tyring to turn this into console war crap. I'd be pretty annoyed if 3 or 4 of MS studios were having to make superhero games over other games.
Outside of Batman, who i dont even really consider a 'superhero', i couldnt care less, especially with Marvel which imo is a lot more kiddy l.ike compared to DC.
 

Topher

Gold Member
This thread has not disappointed. The mental gymnastics on display is incredible.

Thierry Henry Smile GIF by hamlet


gymnastics fail GIF


Gotta say.....it is amusing.

Yeah thanks. Warriors are annoyingly tyring to turn this into console war crap. I'd be pretty annoyed if 3 or 4 of MS studios were having to make superhero games over other games.
Outside of Batman, who i dont even really consider a 'superhero', i couldnt care less, especially with Marvel which imo is a lot more kiddy l.ike compared to DC.

How did this become about 3 or 4 MS studios?
 
Last edited:

Three

Member
Lognor and Hendricks shitting on Marvel games as trash and garbage yet in the thread "Guardians of the Galaxy finding their audience on Gamepass"




What happened all of a sudden that you're glad? Were you pissed off that you were getting garbage and trash so you were trying to create a dumpster fire with those emojis?
 

Klayzer

Member
I dont really watch any Marvel anymore. Im not sure why its so hard to believe that not everyone wants licensed Marvel games from first party studios.
Not hard to figure out, why many more want high quality first party Marvel/DC games. Characters they know well, stories and powers translated to the video games medium, a typical aaa budget, etc.
 

Stuart360

Member
gymnastics fail GIF


Gotta say.....it is amusing.



How did this become about 3 or 4 MS studios?
Well assuming it was multiple games. Plus other studios often help studios with first party games.
I know its hard to believe with the annoyingly successful superhero movies, but not everyone cares about playing superhero games, as The Avengers and GOTG showed perfectly. So yeah some of you stop trying to turn this into console war shite please.
 

kyoji

Member
Yeah thanks. Warriors are annoyingly tyring to turn this into console war crap. I'd be pretty annoyed if 3 or 4 of MS studios were having to make superhero games over other games.
Outside of Batman, who i dont even really consider a 'superhero', i couldnt care less, especially with Marvel which imo is a lot more kiddy l.ike compared to DC.
I dont think its console war'n as much as it is killing YET ANOTHER dumbass take like this one, trying to push this agenda



but hey what do i know 🤷‍♂️
 
I dont really watch any Marvel anymore. Im not sure why its so hard to believe that not everyone wants licensed Marvel games from first party studios.

That should not mean they shouldn’t be made for people that would like them. They have proved to be successful on PlayStation so far.
 

Tripolygon

Member
For people trying to blame this on Phil Spencer, know that Phil Spencer when he took over at Xbox in 2014, he was still heavily handcuffed in many regards and was answering to a Terry Myerson, who it has been suggested literally wanted to get rid of the Xbox division.

And since Phil and the gaming operation finally got to the leadership table at Microsoft what transpired since?
But Xbox has been an entirely different story since Phil truly took control.
This narrative needs to go. Phil Spencer has been in leadership roles since the beginning of Xbox. He has been the general manager of Xbox studios US then worldwide, corporate vice president, and the lead of Xbox in 2014. He has been in positions to greenlight games, create new studios and close some. These are all leadership roles.
 
Top Bottom