‘Redfall’ Proves Xbox Needs to Make a Major Strategy Change

Redfall's failure might have been avoided if Xbox took a more hands-on approach to the development.

darkrider120d ago

Stop buying publishers, change leadership, improve the studios they got

Sonic1881119d ago

The acquired Bethesda when they was going down hill. Microsoft helped Bethesda before the ship was sinking

Flakegriffin118d ago

What has Microsoft done for Bethesda besides purchasing them?

giovonni119d ago

Has nothing to do with why this failed. The game was already in limbo when it was being created back in 2018. With high turn over and lack of clear direction with Arkain way before MS brought the studio. “The game reportedly suffered because its development team was continually understaffed, with Arkane’s Austin office employing fewer than 100 people, and insufficient outsourcing support offered by Bethesda.” They were hoping the game would be cancelled, but it wasn’t. Now, I know what you’re going to say “ well just cancel it then.” Like that would have mattered.


isarai119d ago

MS had a lot to do with it, they could've cancelled it, overhauled it, delayed it, repurposed it, etc all 100% at the go ahead of MS. Either they seen the game was garbage and knowingly sent it out anyways, or didn't spend the time or effort to even know what state their games are in before they ship them.

giovonni119d ago

@isarai yeah right, and it would of been the same talk that we are having right now. “ oh, MS doesn’t know how to make AAA games” once again the game was in development since 2018. Ms brought them 2021 it’s already deep in its development…. However people bias of MS is gonna believe what they feel is right or should have been done right and just skip over the truth.

shinoff2183119d ago

Ms still in the end gave the go to release it. Doesn't change anything. Ms said yes let's roll

LabRat119d ago (Edited 119d ago )

@giovonni just because it was in limbo before MS, doesn't give MS a pass. Their name is now on this game. They could have done 1 simple play through of it and seen it was a train wreck. They have the money to stop, delay, and cancel games (see Scalebound, Fable Legends).

You should not be making excuses for them, they owned the company for years before release. It's not like they bought them and 6 months later this launched.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 119d ago
z2g119d ago

no it doesn't. it proves they rushed a game to market to fill a hole from delayed games.... the strategy hasn't even had a chance to really play out yet considering it takes years to make a single game.

Godmars290119d ago

Putting something out, patching it later, is a strategy they've been doing since before Sea of Thieves. What they've been doing with Windows and other office software.

GhostScholar119d ago

That game was well underway before the purchase. Had they canceled the game you people would be blasting them for that as well.

giovonni119d ago

Right, they want to act like the noble thing to do was cancel it in the first place like that would have made a difference with their bias views.

Lightning77119d ago

The same people saying cancel it are the same ppl that'll yell "MS are killing its games! All in the same breath don't ever trust the flip floppers.

Rimeskeem119d ago

Not our fault they went with a lose/lose scenario. Bad business decision.

giovonni119d ago

So buying Bethesda was a bad business decision now? When you buy a company, any company things are inherited. This isn’t new, the fact that Arkane isn’t getting any of the blame is simply crazy to me. Even with the evidence thats present that shows arkane had developed, and lost direction way before MS purchased it. It’s still MS fault, yet if they would have cancelled it it still would have been MS fault. Damn if they do damned if they don’t.

shinoff2183119d ago

I think rimeskeem, meant ms releasing the game. Gio your pretty defensive

giovonni119d ago

@shinoff not at all you’re reading it that way.

Rimeskeem119d ago


yes, that's called a lose/lose scenario. Thank you for explaining it as I am sure people didn't understand lol

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 119d ago
GhostScholar119d ago

They have failed at first party exclusives that’s just a fact but I disagree that they suck. I have a series x, ps5, and a switch and I only pick up the ps5 and switch for exclusives. I think game pass is a million times better than ps plus. I prefer the Xbox controller. I play all third party games on Xbox. I don’t think either of the three systems suck, but if I was a Sony fanboy I’d be worried after that showcase Sony bombed. I think we’re seeing that the Jim Ryan era is not about single player first party games. He admittedly is focused on games as a service. Sugar coat that all you want but it’s not good for the future of the games that have made Sony so great the past generation and a half.

franwex119d ago

I agree with you that the series x is arguably the superior system. By maybe a hair.

But what good is having hardware if the software sucks? Nintendo with the weakest hardware is dominating due to their software. I’m not personally into Nintendo games-but cannot deny that their games sell.

Microsoft needs to also drop the requirement of also supporting the series s. It should be optional-at least for third parties.

Godmars290119d ago

There is no strategy at this point.

By any real count at this point they cannot make anything in house. Have to buy 3rd party publishers who already have projects going. They've outright given up on consoles, focused wholly on streaming in hopes to create/replace the market where they failed to dominate with consoles.

GhostScholar119d ago

You do know Sonys best dev is insomniac right? You know a third party dev they bought?

Profchaos119d ago

Insomniac is great but the best is debatable for my money ive never been disappointed by sucker punch

badz149119d ago

And Insomniac's best games before the acquisition were...?

Godmars290119d ago

You know they were generally exclusive to Sony for a good while, right? Rarely made multiplatform titles or had popular 3rd party titles, right? Have done their best work under Sony, versus Halo sans Bungie or Gears getting poorer quality sequels, right?

You remember when Rare under MS was referred to a corpse in a gimp suit every time they were dragged out at E3, right?

shinoff2183119d ago

Always wanna bring this type of stuff up. Lol. I think I looked up insomniac games and naughty dog games from this same arguing. I found it interesting that their best stuff was made with sony. They also were studios not publishers that thrived on the competitors console.

Shadowsteal119d ago

Sony could've not bought them and they would've continued to pump out Playstation exclusive games like they have since PS1.

What's your point?

GhostScholar119d ago

I was asked what the best game was before Sony bought them and the answer is sunset overdrive. It was incredible and all
Their games sense then have borrowed from the traversal in that game. That game made insomniac who they are today. I’m sure you wouldn’t lower your Sony sunglasses to actually play it, but it’s legit amazing.