90°

If you can’t write an honest review, quit

GamerNode's Eddie Inzauto writes:
"I respect video games and the work that goes into creating, marketing, and critiquing them. I respect the people who do these things – the developers, those who work in PR, and my peers in the gaming press. And I respect the gamers who will read my website’s reviews before (or after) playing a game.

So when I read an "honest" article about how a reviewer can’t write an honest review out of compassion for the people – his friends – on the creative rather than the critical side of the industry, I can’t help but feel a trespass upon something that I, and many others, hold so dear and work so hard to support and protect."

Read Full Story >>
gamernode.com
Baka-akaB4308d ago (Edited 4308d ago )

True but then again we'd be left with 96% less sites , and among he survivor , maybe only one big site (my pick would be eurogamer , the least cringeworthy and "sellout-ish" of the bunch ) , and that's a big IF :p .

joeorc4308d ago

That a review is just an Opinion? just because someone writes a review does not mean that somehow he or she is trying to pull the wool over some's eyes.

when reading a review, you have to take the review at it's face value and that it's just an opinion, nothing more nothing less.

saying that the people reviewing these games need to stick to Integrity as being "is the biggest part of this line of work."

that's just like anything your word is your bond.

saying a person did not give a honest review is based on the opinion of some one else that may have an opinion that may not jive with the person who wrote their own experience with the content.

Calling them out to say they need to be honest in their review is pretty moot, in of itself due to the fact they may not agree with your take on the content, but calling into question if they themselves are not being honest in of itself kinda like saying to someone else your lieing about your review or somehow it's not as trusting. Which is like i stated an Opinion about someone other's Opinion.

that's why Everyone has one, and that's why i play the game for my self to make that choice for myself, if i like a game or not.

Patriots_Pride4308d ago

LOL beat me to the post...well said.

ddurand14308d ago

beat me too it also.

but the children and fanboys that fell down the rabbit hole will never understand.

digitaleraser4308d ago

In complete agreement as well.

The correct way to use reviews is to find a reviewer whose tastes are similar to your own, by looking at their past reviews and seeing how in line they are with your own opinion.

Anyone who thinks they should be able to pull up any random review and expects that each review should be in agreement as to how good or bad a game is, as if its a scientifically measurable thing, is doing it wrong.

morganfell4308d ago

No, a review shouldn't be just an opinion. This is why before any review begins, before a pen is put to paper, before a single key is pressed, a set of quantifiable standards must be in place. Standards detailed and available to the public. Stating, "This is a game that most people would like" is not a standard. Stating "The game pushes graphics" is not a standard.

In addition, publications and sites need a strong willed objective editor in chief. They need someone to temper personal opinion and send these kids back to redo the review when it comes off as a "This is what I like" piece. That isn't a review, it's an opinion. It's an infomercial on "Get to know an ignorant writer".

It's called, "I'm more important than the game and I am more important than the demographic for which this is supposed to be written". I review isn't supposed to be a facebook profile about what some dumb kid likes. Pffft.

Honestly 96% is a nice number because 96% of these so called reviewers need the air let out of their over-inflated ego and they need to learn their place when it comes to the game, the gaming public, and those that write about but are not in the game industry.

As I have often said on this very site so called game journalism is the greatest injustice currently afflicting our hobby. It's easier to quote myself:

"People, many just inbred adolescents with an insight and temperament to match, screaming constantly waving around their standardless magic score gun threatening an industry IN WHICH THEY DO NOT WORK.

They need to be taken out to the woodshed and given the ass beating they deserve. This group of malcontents have driven the "8.9 and below is not a great game" stake into the heart of our hobby. Their undue influence and narrow minded perceptions on gaming have completely destroyed a large part of the creative process as game development has turned into scared developers attempting to dodge the IGN, Destructoid, Kotaku and every small crap blog minefield.

No standards, none at all written down and enforced because apparently they are free to flit about on what does and does not matter with the mental focus of Dory looking at the latest shade of blue.

What do gamers do when these pinheads write these crap pieces? Well if it supports their hardware of choice they applaud the shoddy journalism even though it is unbelievably detrimental to gaming overall. They justify it and reward it with word of mouth, reposts, and hit insurance galore. There are several people on this board and elsewhere responsible for the issue. You can always find them approving and contributing these trash pieces of writing because it satisfies their infantile ego.

I can't stand behind criticism because it is criticism without experience. It is criticism without a guideline as these writers praise one feature in a game and then attack the same implementation in another. Lack of discipline in any field separates the amateur from the professional. A real Editor in Chief makes a person beneath them a great writer. But these people feel they are the only ones that should have free reign."

This rampant destruction of gaming needs to end now.

Rupee4308d ago

You state that reviews need a "set of quantifiable standards must be in place. Standards detailed and available to the public"

Okay, that sounds great but what kind of standards? How is that possible? People have different tastes, y'know? I like peppeoni pizza but you like cheese pizza. Who can say which is better? (pepperoni, obviously) I don't see any way of producing a review without the authors own bias coming into play.

Personally, I think it's just important to understand that it's the authors opinion/experience. If you're stupid enough to let someone else decide what game you'll buy... well that's your own shortcoming. Experience it yourself and then make an informed decision.

Do away with the riciulous numbering system (i.e. 10/10, 3.5/5). I'd much rather have a well-written article describing the highlights and low-points of the game.

(I understand you're out of bubbles but if you could edit your original post, I'm genuinely curious to know what you suggest. Thanks)

4308d ago
Ducky4308d ago (Edited 4308d ago )

^ But you can't really score graphics like that because standards keep changing.

What was visually impressive in 2007 may just be mediocre in 2011... and the same holds true for most other elements of a game.
So you can't use any static reference when the standards change every year, or rather, every few months.

... and there is the other problem of deciding what standard to pick. A lot of the big sites have multiple reviewers, and each might have a different opinion of what standard should be used.
Should Infamous' graphics be measured against Uncharted's, or should it be measured against an open-world game's graphics?

Screen tearing/stuttering is something technical and is pretty much a fact that doesn't require any direct comparison.

Rupee4307d ago

@fatoldman exactly. Should a game like minecraft have "uncharted" graphics and should it's score be penalized if it doesn't? You can't put all games on the same standard...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4307d ago
Baka-akaB4308d ago (Edited 4308d ago )

"when reading a review, you have to take the review at it's face value and that it's just an opinion, nothing more nothing less."

"Calling them out to say they need to be honest in their review is pretty moot, in of itself due to the fact they may not agree with your take on the content, but calling into question if they themselves are not being honest in of itself kinda like saying to someone else your lieing about your review or somehow it's not as trusting."

Except it's not a matter of just having different opinions .

The problem isnt falling upon negative opinions and/or different than yours .
Too many of those are actually and precisely filled with lies , wrongly researched data and intel .
a few of those spend more time discussing general and vague feelings of the author over actually discussing and dissecting the game at hand .

Hell there is a fine example of an IGN 2 paragraphs Dynasty warriors Gundam review , where the author spent all of it disclaiming how he dislike the genre and dynasty warriors titles . A vague discussion , with vague arguments instead of reviewing the game concerned , even if negatively .

people dont care or notice because of the game reviewed but this is plainly wrong .

In cases like this , this is more than difference or clash of opinions , they just arent doing their work at all or properly

360ICE4308d ago

...and all that BS.
The article was a response to another writer's article, in which he argued how hard it was to write honest reviews, when you've got friends in the industry.

The response said, in essence, that users trust reviewers to write honest reviews, and not sugarcoat them even if they are friends with the ones who made them. It's a call for integrity and honesty, rather than sensibility and misplaced sympathy. It's not about any opinion in particular.

Now, I suggest you read the article and take it for what it is instead of spewing out some horrendous feel good speech, or whatever that was supposed to be.

Xperia_ion4308d ago

Seriously why doesn't this guy have four bubbles already ? Too real?

Tommykrem4308d ago

Yeah...
Or he didn't get what the article was all about.
I'd rather ask why 360ICE doesn't have 3, or why Baka-akaB doesn't have 10?

DanCrabtree4308d ago

Here's the real thing, which Eddie touches on in this, is that good writing wouldn't offend a developer because it's so convincing and rock solid. If the review is full of "I FELT LIKE THIS SUCKED OR WAS GOOD. HERE ARE MY FAVES," as are too many of the reviews we read (and sometimes write), then of course it can get under someone's skin. If the writer instead chooses to engage with the design elements and make reasonable judgments based on those, it's hard to argue.

Here's what I read WAYYY to often. "Super Mario Galaxy 2 has a weak story component, but it doesn't need that because of its strong, nostalgic gameplay." I've been guilty of these kinds of over-generalizations before, for sure. And if I were a PR person for that game, yeah, I might take that kind of sentence personally, because not only did the writer make a poor, sweeping judgment of the game, but they didn't base it in any objectivity, so the criticism sounds like it's coming from a place of pre-determined preference for or against the game/game developer.

In contrast, saying "Super Mario Galaxy 2 threads together evolved 3D platforming, a cheerful aesthetic, and the classic 'damsel in distress' bit that this plumber's career can't escape," is much harder to take offense to as a PR person or dev, because you'd be like, "Well, that's how that game is."

In my opinion, that's the real danger, and probably why this other writer is now so afraid to write reviews. It's not that the institution of writing reviews about products that your friends work on is broken, it's that you're (collective) a bad writer and that can get you into some hot water.

yeahokchief4308d ago

Yeah but if your opinion doesn't reflect what 99% of your readers are saying about the game then something is not right unless you are somehow "special". And that's fine if you disagree with your readers, but you better be able to back your shit up.

Really it only hurts your own credibility because if I catch someone feeding me bullshit then i'm just not going to listen to them anymore or return to their site. I will go to where I can get reliable information on games.

I don't really care what games get reviewed anymore. I make my decision about games watching youtube videos of the gameplay or if it's made by a developer that i trust.

You look at horrible games like Resident Evil Raccoon City which got TERRIBLE reviews and it still sold like mad.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 4307d ago
Patriots_Pride4308d ago (Edited 4308d ago )

What is an honest review?

TBH there is no such thing as one because we all have different taste and opinion on games.

I really into RPG's but not much into FPS but I have to review Black Ops 2...my review will be some what bias becuase I am a RPG fan.

Thats why when one person frog Ign ot Games Trailer reviews a game people should take it with a grain of salt because thats his opinion on the game and your could be different.

Baka-akaB4308d ago (Edited 4308d ago )

of course there is . As long as you actually review a game to begin with , instead of projecting your issue with a genre/dev/publisher .

Or as long as your review isnt chokeful of innacurate infos , errors or worse lies about a game .

Or as long as you aint omitting obvious issues with a game for dubious reasons (Like IGN giving 9s with flying to PES 2008 when it had impossible to miss technical issues on PS3 and 360 , just because they were official sponsors of the game )

Difference of taste and opinion can't be settled , but the rest from above got little to do with reviewing

360ICE4308d ago

WTH is up with people degrading the term opinion? Opinion and honesty have no place together? Honesty is describing something as you see it. If what you say is wrong, or not in accordance with the opinions of others that doesn't make you dishonest.

matgrowcott4308d ago (Edited 4308d ago )

It doesn't matter whether you like FPS or RPG - your personal opinion doesn't come into it. Your professional opinion, the one where you have knowledge and depth of experience in each genre, is much more important.

When Hannah Montana The Movie came out, I reviewed the game. Would I choose to play it in my spare time? Of course not, but letting that cloud my judgement would make me a sucky writer. It wasn't made for me, so why would I complain about the fact that it wasn't to my tastes?

That's what a lot of people are missing here, I think. If I was posting on Twitter, I might say that I disliked a game. If I'm writing a professional review, I can't say that same game is bad when it's technically decent and going to result in countless entertainment hours for the people who buy it.

Which, ladies and gentlemen, is why Call of Duty receives 10/10s from major sites every years.

Incipio4308d ago (Edited 4308d ago )

I would only read Gerstmann's reviews over at Giantbomb then. His honesty got him fired from Gamespot.

JBSleek4308d ago

Very interesting read.

My only question or thought is what is honest as reviews are subjective and critiquing a game is hard.

There are no universal truths of reviews. The best review would be for games to come uut with competent demos so gamers can try them themselves after that reviews are incomplete tools used to judge games.

Show all comments (27)
290°

Why Xbox believes it must cut costs and close studios

Companies, particularly public companies like Microsoft, need to grow.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
gold_drake1d 16h ago

i mean its pretty simple, they spent close to 30 billion in acquiring activision, they thought they'd make it bk no problem, and that didnt happen.

its just shit that because of MS's miscalculation alot of people lost their jobs.

Jingsing1d 13h ago

This is exactly what many people said would happen including the CMA and FTC. Lies lies and more lies and they allowed a $69 billion buy out to happen.

gold_drake1d 13h ago

oh yeh it was 70 billion. that was my bad haha even worse.

JackBNimble15h ago

MS has educated financial advisers, they knew there was little chance to recoup the 70billion just to break even on the Activision deal let alone whatever other nonsense is going on in MS.
This whole thing was to corner the market for leverage.

thesoftware7301d 13h ago (Edited 1d 13h ago )

gold,

You can't be serious, right?

Do you think that MS thought they would make 80bill in a year & Half? They haven't even released titles under MS yet, lol.

But in fact, that A/B revenue is already paying off, look at the last earnings call. That $80 billion is long-term money, my guy, no sane person/company would think they would make that back in any short-term situation, it's a long-term investment.

Let's play silly then. If MS's reason for laying off staff and closing studios was due(which it really was not) to the A/B deal, tell me what Sony's reason was for past studio closures, the recent 900-person layoffs, closing Sony London, shutting down Dreams, and closing Japan Studio? Zipper? Psygnosis? cuts at all their internal studios.

Keep in mind, you are claiming MS's reason is because of the A/B deal; please explain Sony's reason.

Hofstaderman1d 12h ago

You actually still defending them? Sheesh.....

gold_drake1d 12h ago

this is not a sony vs MS debate. dont make it something it isnt.

and of course not, but im pretty sure they thought they'd make more money after the deal. they didnt, and closed off some studios.

its pretty insane to think there is any other reason for the closure of studios in this case.

romulus231d 12h ago (Edited 1d 12h ago )

(It really was) due to the Activision Blizzard deal and the loss of physical sales due to gamepass. You keep bringing up Sony in all your posts about this, stop deflecting and trying to change the topic, this is about MS and what they are doing.

BehindTheRows1d 12h ago

Has nothing to do with Sony. Stay on topic.

notachance1d 12h ago

once in a while you see someone too invested in their make-believe console war that everything happened has to be connected to said war…

a bit of banter between fans is normal, this crusade you’re doing now isn’t.

Chevalier1d 11h ago

Wow idiotic. You bring up very old closures not that there haven't been recent ones from Playstations, but, seriously stop deflecting. This has NOTHING to do with Playstation.

Does Playstation got $3 trillion behind them and daddies wallet? No they don't so stop making a fool of yourself.

Xbox has never been profitable really and they just keep losing money so between their worst hardware sales, terrible 3rd party sales and now terrible 1st party sales.

Gamepass numbers that are no longer being announced shows their numbers after 3 years of missed targets has flatlined. Plus their recent gains up to 34 million were ONLY because they folded Gold members in too. Absolutely take your idiotic rhetoric out of here. Keep on topic without deflecting.

S2Killinit1d 11h ago

Ayayayay with these xbox/MS excuses.

Reaper22_1d 6h ago

How dare you mention Sony! Everyone here knows when Sony closes a studio and lay off workers it was the right thing to do. Even when they bought Gaikai and fired almost everyone it was the right thing to do.

Gamers can be such hypocrites sometimes.

andy851d 5h ago

Is it? That's revenue not profit. Completely different.

fr0sty20h ago

The earnings call only showcased how dire the situation is... Even with ABK and Bethesda, they still couldn't make enough to keep investors happy, gamepass subs are stagnant, and hardware sales are tanking.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 20h ago
thesoftware7301d 10h ago (Edited 1d 10h ago )

Drake,

"this is not a sony vs MS debate. dont make it something it isnt."

You are correct that it's not an MS Vs Sony Topic, but when exaggeration and imagination mix from a one-sided social group, similar examples are needed to ground radical thoughts; in this instance, the example was that shutting down 3,4,5, even 6 studios during a restructure/ buyout/acquisition is not some anomaly(it can suck) that has to be dissected or spell doom and gloom.

"But I'm pretty sure they thought they'd make more money after the deal. They didn't, and they closed off some studios."

But they did make more money, a lot, actually; the last earnings call showed a huge growth in profit, almost all due to A/B revenue.

"its pretty insane to think there is any other reason for the closure of studios in this case."

The fact that they did make money, kinda throws this out the window, and besides, you don't wake up and say, hey let's close a studio, you look at the output, you look at the dev as a whole, the long term and short term, you weigh it against all other studios and goals, you keep key members, ect..then you close if they are the weakest links...which by MS analysis they were.

Again, I will make a small Sony comparison, just so some of you can understand and see past the bias; Insomniac, ND, and Bungie have made some of the best games ever created, yet Sony saw fit to cut jobs in every of these studios, even tho Insomniac & ND are the biggest producers of PS games, leagues ahead better than Tango and Arkane, yet, they saw cuts, mind you, while being the TOP produces of PS first party. They were told to cut costs, and more jobs may be on the line, and Bungie is being threatened by a hostile Sony takeover. Put that in perspective, as I know that layoffs and dev closures are different, but if the best of the best is getting cut off, it is less than surprising, that lesser studios are closing.

@Cheva,
My response fits well with your comments as well. You even went on to prove that the dev closures are not just due to A/B acquisition. Then you point out Sony has less money than MS, inferring that MS should keep devs open that they see as lesser earners, while Sony having less money makes it okay to close them. lol...it doesn't work that way.

gold_drake1d 10h ago

im not reading all of that. u have ur opinion, i have mine.

thats rly it.

but this aint sony vs ms.

ApocalypseShadow1d 9h ago

You're trying to compare a 100 billion company to a company that has 3 TRILLION worth. SIE has to live or die on their own. And in turn, PlayStation has helped the main company again and again. Sony has to balance out what is working and not working in the company.

While Xbox has Daddy Warbucks footing the bill to keep the platform afloat. They have been bleeding money from Nvidia hardware in the OG Xbox, the RROD fiasco, the attempted 2013 DRM nonsense and the lies about being the most powerful console in the world and the losses of paying out millions to prop up a service hoping it catches on with enough subscribers to justify its existence.

They're not comparable if Xbox isn't allowed to live or die by its actions. It's subsidized. Revenue isn't profit. And if they were profiting on their own, they wouldn't be closing developers. If they were profiting, they wouldn't need Daddy Warbucks spending 80 to 100 billion buying up 3rd party publishers to sustain a loss leading platform.

They stopped announcing game sales, stopped announcing hardware sales, stopped announcing game pass subscribers, they are putting games on their competitors platforms but you're telling us that they are doing great even after killing jobs and closing developers at Xbox.

Stop drinking the Kool aid. You're drunk.

Chevalier1d ago

Again at which point did Playstation have a $3 trillion company shift the market with a giant purchase?

"But they did make more money, a lot, actually; the last earnings call showed a huge growth in profit, almost all due to A/B revenue."

Lol. No they didn't. Increased revenue was ONLY due to adding Activision Blizzard revenue in. Growth was only 1 percent. It's idiots like you that have no idea what they're talking about is why Xbox isn't better than it is. You guys just make excuses continually.

If Xbox got so much profit then why did they stop announcing hardware numbers? Why did they stop announcing Gamepass numbers? Oh right because they're NOT profitable. Their sales in every category has dropped off the face of the planet. It's why Spencer will be closing more studios and canceling upcoming projects too.

The Wood17h ago

How can they be profitable when they're not selling enough hardware, software or subs. You need take a seat on this one my friend unless you can prove you angles

jwillj2k415h ago

Sony didnt shut down the studios you mentioned after they made last of us or ratchet and clank or destiny. Cutting jobs is not equal to closing studios. Sony cuts are a candle in the sun of Microsoft’s closures.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 15h ago
WelkinCole1d 5h ago

I am pretty sure MS knew this would happen and this was part of their plan. I mean if anyone with half a brain can see this happening I am pretty sure a multi billion company like MS knew this would happen

The whole strategy in buying Beth and Acti/Blizzard is for

1. Buy established games they can have under xbox because they have done a horrible job in building their portfolio internally for the past 15 years

2. Following from 1, try and boost xbox competitivenss against a dominat PS which MS after 3 tries still can't crack

3. Follolwing from 2, try and weaken Playstation dominance by taking out these massive multiplats from the PS

4. Following from 3, try and profit off from the PS domiance with selected games they will still have on the PS to make money like COD

5. Obviously get the IP's by buying them instead of creating them which again as I mentioned in number 1 they have been woeful in doing

None of these had anyting to do with keeping all the devs they accuried. MS has always been very shitty to Devs under them. Look at what happned to Bungie for example.

I believe MS in court truely mean it when they said they had to do something because PS was just too dominant. This was their last roll of the dice.

And from the looks of things. It has not panned out as MS had hoped. PS5 is still as dominant as ever and xbox is still behind. Worse still their MP's they got is not irreplaceable as they thought. Starfield? lol!. There have not been any major shift in momentum in this console war in their favor so now its time to start cutting their loses and it starts with the most expensive cost for any company. People.

Michiel19891d 3h ago

for a comparison, sony laid of a bigger % of it's staff this year than ms, it's what companies sadly do nowadays. If you think with GP and Bethesda + acti aquisition they were looking for quick cash, you couldn't be more wrong. It hasn't even been a year, "they thought they'd make it bk no problem, and that didnt happen." shows you have 0 understanding of how a business operates.

thesoftware73014h ago

@ Michiel1989

Exactly this!

I'm reading these comments, and it's mesmerizing how off-base most of them are.

I posted a few comments above, and their rebuttals have nothing to do with the points that I presented; when they start doing that, I just ignore them because, at that point, they're debating all over the place.

Profchaos20h ago

30 more like 70 to 80 plus 7 for Bethesda

Tzuno15h ago

meanwhile everything turned woke an inevitably went downward, i'd say it serves them well if they promote such kind of approach, mwuahahahahahhh!

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 14h ago
anast1d 13h ago

They are going to use AI for a large portion of the game development process. Upper management need bonuses and the shareholders need more money. So, people will lose their jobs.

Skuletor1d 13h ago

Maybe they were already using AI to make business decisions, which would explain why they closed Hi-Fi Rush's studio, then said they need more games like Hi-Fi Rush not long after that announcement.

Crows901d 12h ago (Edited 1d 12h ago )

They shouldn't have bought any studios. Some is okay...but they went on a shopping spree...stupid

Einhander19721d 12h ago

The better question is why did Microsoft buy publishers for a service they were subsidizing they knew couldn't support.

And why are so many websites trying to make people feel sorry for Microsoft instead of truly criticizing the fact they are closing studios and killing jobs that would have been fine if Microsoft themselves hadn't gotten involved.

Quit feeling sorry for Microsoft and start feeling sorry for the industry and the all the gamers who are actually losing out.

THIS IS MICROSOFTS FAULT.

RNTody1d 12h ago

The first thing that happens after any major acquisition or merger is a consolidation of the whole new portfolio, which includes cutting any excess, bloat or portfolios that don't fit the larger MO of the big boy. So far, it's been par for the course with Microsoft and that's why gamers have been so against this acquisition. Tango Gameworks is the beginning. You think Microsoft wants to pay to keep small timers like Ninja Theory in business?

There is absolutely zero evidence to suggest that Microsoft will improve any of these studios, but plenty to suggest that they will get rid of what they don't need and hold onto the IP. The real agenda of the acquisition was always to acquire The Elder Scrolls, Diablo, Fallout, Call of Duty, Candy Crush etc. that will create millions in passive revenue stream for Microsoft regardless of where the games release. Microsoft simply wants their cut.

Because of Games Pass Microsoft has no interest in investing in new IP which is risky and requires creative talent they can neither nurture nor manage. Game Pass has also not grown in the way Microsoft expected it to, even post acquisitions. Therefore the logical thing to do, without serious money makers to release, is to cut as much cost as possible.

Show all comments (47)
100°

Former Dragon Age lead writer David Gaider pours scorn on EA's AI dreams.

"They want you to believe the devs under them are super stoked to work generative AI into their processes," continued Gaider, "but I assure you what they took as excitement was really a veiled wail of despair not unlike the time that team was informed of their new 'really cool' live service mandate.".

LordoftheCritics4d ago

Publishers see gaming as another stock market.

isarai4d ago

I think anyone with some common sense knew this, im glad i don't support their games anymore, what a sh!t company.

Psychonaut853d ago

Friends don’t let friends buy EA or Ubisoft.

Chocoburger3d ago

I said this yesterday. AI isn't what we want when it comes to crafting artistry. Alas, these soulless corporate morons don't care about their work, only about cutting corners as much as possible.

120°

Phil Spencer and the Battle for Xbox’s Soul

Has the rapid growth of Xbox made the ship too heavy? Following the closures of Tango Gameworks, Arkane Austin, and Roundhouse, we explore what the future of Xbox could look like.

LG_Fox_Brazil4d ago

This ship was never meant to sail, this ship was made from the get go to sink as fast as possible. It almost feels that they want to lower the standards of quality in the industry so that they can fit in

rlow13d ago

I disagree, Xbox from the get go innovated and changed the industry. They did a lot of firsts and standardized a lot of others. It wasn’t till the beginning of the Xbox1 era that things started to go south.

Stevonidas3d ago

Yep, although I’d argue it started going to shit when they tried to hock Kinect on their audience instead of continuing to invest in their studios and IPs. 2001-2010 Xbox was peak gaming, though.

rlow13d ago

@Stevonidas
I agree they never should have focused on it after the 360 era. But you do have to remember they were faked out by the huge volumes of Kinects sold. To quote info on Wikipedia, “Project Natal, It was first released on November 4, 2010, and would go on to sell eight million units in its first 60 days of availability.” So if your Xbox and see these huge sales on a peripheral where are you going to put some money? Criticism in hindsight is worthless…..if only we could all see our future. In other wards they had no way of knowing. Plus they had engagement numbers and a lot of signs pointed to people wanting it.

Their biggest mistake wasn’t the Kinect, but unlike Sony after the PS3 debacle. They didn’t double on down on exclusive good games. The other huge mistake was letting Call of Duty go to Sony.

Hedstrom3d ago

Phil wants Xbox to be as soulless as him!

Tacoboto3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Xbox has no soul and Phil has no confidence, and it's impossible to say either do when they killed Tango and Arkane Austin.

Everything they've said since has only made them look worse to a point that they're actually less competent than Embracer.

Markdn3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Whe you release something like the series S and expect it not to hurt your business model, and developers have to have parity with games. Then you know Microsoft don't care. Series s is the final nail that broke developers,

Show all comments (12)