Microsoft’s Xbox chief discussed the state of the Xbox business.
Embracer CEO demonstrates a masterclass in mental gymnastics in latest interview.
"I'm sure I deserve a lot of criticism, but I don't think my team or companies deserve all the criticism. I could take a lot of that blame myself. But ultimately I need to believe in the mission," he said.
OK give us Kingdoms of Amalur 2 with AAA budget and we will accept your excuse
CGM Writes: While we were over at PAX East, we were able to sit down with Goichi Suda (Suda51) and talk about the upcoming remaster of Shadows of the Damned
We explore the Sega classics that are ripe for revival! From Panzer Dragoon Saga to Virtua Fighter, discover why these legendary games deserve a comeback on next-gen consoles. Dive into a nostalgic journey and see which Sega titles are set to captivate a new generation of gamers in 2024.
Turned based Phantasy Star and Shinning Force remain at the top of my list of Sega IPs that need to return. At the very least I'd take a Shining Force collection that has 1,2,3, CD and the Game Gear entries.
I was hesitant to put these two on. I've personally played more PSO than the RPG version. And shame on me, I don't remember much about Shining Force to talk about it properly.
That said, so many Sega licences deserve their place in this list.
A new Phantasy Star in the numbered series would be amazing. Shining Force too. But I’d settle on some collections as that’s probably the best we will get
I don't trust Sega to do a proper comeback. The games will be just remastered and/or monetized to death.
I think the meat and potatoes of this whole thing are whether you agree with him on this or not. Do you think his talks about Starfield being the first in their big plans to grow their platform (GamePass) which is console-specific and requires hardware for the mass majority of people that utilize it, or is it solely a long-term plan for subscription models and streaming, which then CMA would be absolutely right about in how they saw it.
***
FTC: If Microsoft is going to grow, particularly in a business like console, it can grow by taking share from its competitors
Spencer: There’s no console growth in our [Activision] deal model.
FTC: Do you have any intention of this deal helping you climb out of the number three spot?
Spencer: In console, we do not.
FTC: So that’s just a write off?
Spencer: I don’t understand how that’s a write off?
***
----
FTC: Can you swear under oath that without looking at any future terms that need to be hashed out, you’ll ship all the versions of Call of Duty that may exist on all the versions of PlayStation that make exist in the next 10 years?
Spencer: That’s my goal, yes.
...
Spencer: That’s my goal, yes. If what you’re trying to propose is that Sony might change the terms of how we ship games on our platform then that would prohibit us from shipping on their platforms.
---
The skeptic in me sees this as 'If PlayStation doesn't align with our GamePass plans, then it would prohibit us from shipping on their platforms.' I can't see any other way that PlayStation would change the terms of how they ship games otherwise. It's a pretty-established concept and hasn't seen any change.
If we are talking about numbers, it had a pretty decent start with the original Xbox, a honorable defeat in the 360 days, a horrible death in the Xbox One days and is walking a path that will probably lead to a less terrifying loss with the Series X and S, but one that maybe won't be as bad as last gen. If we are talking about games, then I would say that it did a great job in the first half of the 360 life and that was it, it was average at best in every single other generation that it took part of
They lost by their own hands because of a lack of effort. They have the money, they have the resources, they are a software giant. Yet put out less content than their competitors every time. Why would that be deserving of a generation win? And in later years, almost purposely tried to lead the market into digital territory and online which is where they are strong in. Even lobbied against physical media like Blu-ray as a dead end until they needed it to store games on. They lobby now about cloud over consoles and reaching billions of casuals who are fine with their games on cellphones.
Jim probably saw that it would be against Microsoft interest to pull COD because of the money it generates on PlayStation. But seeing the final offer of hosting the game but getting zero revenue was the straw that broke the camel's back. Buying publishers knowing it would systematically strip Sony of revenue each time they bought a publisher. Even said they weren't done making acquisitions. Who else would be next and large enough for Microsoft to take more money out of Sony's pockets?
They keep saying they were scared of not getting games like Star Field which we know would have been timed just like Ghost Wire and Death Loop. But have money hatted many times to keep games away from PlayStation. Timed or exclusive. They also made it seem that they needed to protect gamers from Apple, Amazon and Google by buying these publishers. How was that supposed to protect us? Just more lies and misleading statements they make.
Stadia failed because Google didn't put in the effort like many of their creations. Dismantled their development teams and made no games. Of course it was going to fail. Offering games to buy that you don't actually own. Physically or digitally.
No matter what Microsoft says, it doesn't stop Microsoft from creating games and studios to compete. It doesn't stop them from entering the mobile market. They can do these things at any time. Activision could have offered their own cloud service using Microsoft servers. They don't need Microsoft owning them to do it. This is all a ploy to choke Sony of revenue and force gamers to a platform they don't want to use or they would be using Xbox worldwide at the same level as Nintendo and Sony right now. It's bad enough with all these mega corporations owning everything no matter what you buy or use. To allow a mega corporation like Microsoft to buy up the industry and dictate terms is so bad for the industry, that it makes their DRM 2013 attempt seem tame in comparison.
He’s so full of it
Who would’ve ever guessed in the 51 years of videogame console industry that a company would legally say they lost ‘the console war?’
Whereas former titans like Atari and Sega bowed out because they couldn’t financially compete anymore, Microsoft who has all the funds they can manage still act like they’re the underdog here.
Yet we’ve seen would happen if they did ‘win’ with the always online DRM and locking so many console features behind a paywall. Hard to root for a company that’s so willing to screw over its own consumers. Never forget that Xbox Live price hike they had to go back on because of backlash