Playstation is upset about Microsoft and CoD

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
18,285
2,710
118
A new Killzone could try and change things up. GG would have to not the make the game completely straight. It could still be linear, but have open ended level design, multiple paths, or secondary objectives. As for Resistance, mainly R2 suffered the most from being too much like COD. R3 brought back the weapon wheels (with upgradeable weapons) and health meters. The main problem with R1 is the game is too hard and has sparing checkpoints.
Don't know how particularly en vogue those settings are anymore though; the military. Resistance 3 went into a bit of a Half-life direction, moving away from its original military setting. But Killzone probably can't as much. Sony has also never had studios that could really make good shooters, and they still don't. Except maybe for Housemarque, with Returnal seemingly having made a positive impression on people, and it being a succesful shift from indie sidescrolling shmup to AAA third-person shooter.
 

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
18,131
7,237
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
Sony has also never had studios that could really make good shooters
Insomniac with Resistance 3. While not perfect, GG has good shooting with the KZ sequels.

Don't know how particularly en vogue those settings are anymore though; the military
Doesn't matter. There's lots of stuff that are not "en vogue". Does not mean money cannot be made, nor does it mean there isn't an audience for it. Games like Fight n' Rage, The Takeover, and SOR4 came out when brawlers weren't "en vogue" (there was a slow build up though).

In case you have forgotten, there's going to be a new Crysis coming out. If and when it does well, you bet your ass there are going to be a whole bunch of military shooters to follow again. Anything is possible.
 
Last edited:

Old_Hunter_77

Elite Member
Dec 29, 2021
558
550
98
Country
United States
Halo Infinite is basically done from community feedback off latest moving forward plans
This right here is the most baffling thing to me. Ok, I don't play Halo and those types of games or Call of Duty, but I understand people love them and they are popular and you can play with friends etc. Plus there is the nostalgia thing so when Halo Infinite came out I thought for sure it would be the biggest deal in the gaming world- easy money, guaranteed smash!

And then.. it kinda sucks, I guess? People don't like it no more, the players got bored, no new interest content or whatever? Especially from what Nick C and others says is the core gameplay is actually solid so it's not quite a cluserf*** like Battlefield 2042.

So what kind of absolute managerial, budgetary, or bureaucratic screwupathon happened over there to result in this absolute flacid reception of what seemed like a big fat golden goose?!

All this to say- I love seeing Microsoft and Sony argue over CoD because my fantasy is that people fall away from it eventually because nothing lasts forever, trends change, and if they can screw up Halo they can screw up CoD, and then it wouldn't matter in the end with the only result as usual being a bunch of richer lawyers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
18,131
7,237
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
So what kind of absolute managerial, budgetary, or bureaucratic screwupathon happened over there to result in this absolute flacid reception of what seemed like a big fat golden goose?!

All this to say- I love seeing Microsoft and Sony argue over CoD because my fantasy is that people fall away from it eventually because nothing lasts forever, trends change, and if they can screw up Halo they can screw up CoD, and then it wouldn't matter in the end with the only result as usual being a bunch of richer lawyers.
Activision already screwed up COD several times. Just not enough to piss everyone off.
 

Bedinsis

Elite Member
Legacy
Escapist +
May 29, 2014
862
329
68
Country
Sverige
I suppose Sony will have make do with Battlefield, PUBG, Fortnite, and whatever Bungie will bring to the table. Aside from the myriad of other multiplats that I assume come out (I am not up to date about FPSs but it is a popular genre so I assume there will be plenty).

To be perfectly frank, I suspect Call of Duty going Microsoft-exclusive will hurt Call of Duty more than it will aid Microsoft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

laggyteabag

Scrolling through forums, instead of playing games
Legacy
Oct 25, 2009
3,147
744
118
UK
Gender
He/Him
So what kind of absolute managerial, budgetary, or bureaucratic screwupathon happened over there to result in this absolute flacid reception of what seemed like a big fat golden goose?!
The foundation of Halo Infinite appeared to be solid, which is why it received very positive reviews over the launch period. The problem is that they completely failed to build on that success with much needed bug fixes and content. Fast-forward to now, and it has almost been a year since launch, and very little meaningful content has been added, the the biggest bugs are still present. Hence the outrage.

We may never know for sure what went on behind the scenes, but my best guess is a combination of engine troubles, a lack of clear direction for the franchise, and poor management/leadership which just exasperated both problems.

Halo Infinite uses a new proprietary engine, that was developed in-house by 343. The problem though is that Microsoft heavily relies on contractors with 18-month limited contracts, and they rarely hire those contractors into permanent staff. What I guess this meant for the engine development, is that there were relatively few experienced engineers, supported by an army of contractors on an 18-month long revolving door. My guess is that this led to a significant amount of technical debt, which 343 is currently battling, to get new content out.

The other big issue was just 343 wasting time. Halo Infinite had the longest development period of any Halo game, yet it launched with comparatively little content - so what happened? Well, 343 has been determined to put their own mark on the franchise since they took over, which is why Halo 4 and 5 look the way they do. For Halo Infinite, there is evidence of 343 trying to turn the game into a Hero Shooter, like Overwatch, or a class-based shooter, like Battlefield, before finally realising that people who like Halo, wanted to play Halo, I guess. My other personal belief is that 343 wasted a significant amount of time on a "Halo 6" that was supposed to be released at some point in between Halo 5 and Halo Infinite, but it was scrapped after the poor reception towards Halo 5, and the more positive direction that Halo Wars 2 had taken.

Basically, everything that could go wrong, did go wrong - and they are now 3-for-3 (343, heh) on poorly received Halo games under their stewardship.

Something has got to give.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Samtemdo8

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 25, 2020
1,375
520
118
Country
Private
This is old news. There was a similar story a few months back. Oh, boo hoo Sony! You got all these other ips, and you got Killzone. How about putting the ones you don't use to good use?
Because no one gives a shit about Killzone
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)

Get the point
Legacy
Aug 1, 2011
2,878
422
88
Cretaceous
Country
USA
Gender
Dinosaur
Microsoft has killed everything it's had and I'm worried that they keep buy more shit to kill. Some of that shit is already nearly dead already (looks at BLizzard)
The thing is about Microsoft is I don't think they get how to be a game Studio. They know how to be a great tech service but actually making a games is another matter. They buy and invest into games make them their own (This has happen as far back the the original Halo) but actually allowing the studio's to grow is another matter. They just fizzle out and die or just jump ship like Bunige or Epic. So they buy more studios and Ips to repeat the process.
 

CriticalGaming

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2017
8,560
3,465
118
The thing is about Microsoft is I don't think they get how to be a game Studio. They know how to be a great tech service but actually making a games is another matter. They buy and invest into games make them their own (This has happen as far back the the original Halo) but actually allowing the studio's to grow is another matter. They just fizzle out and die or just jump ship like Bunige or Epic. So they buy more studios and Ips to repeat the process.
That would explain why they tried to make the Xbox One a all-in-one media station instead of strictly a games console. And also explains why they feed off the nostalgia of when they were successful with Gamepass having a library of all their old shit on it. Becuase outside of Forza games and Flight Sim, they've got nothing.

Not to mention they've bought all these studios and since buying them none of them have released a single fucking thing iirc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Gordon_4

The Big Engine
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
4,306
3,477
118
Australia
That would explain why they tried to make the Xbox One a all-in-one media station
While there's much criticism that can be lobbed Microsoft's way for the post Xbox 360 decision making, I kind of feel this one is kind of piss weak. The PS2 started the multifunction trend since it made a big deal of being a DVD player as well as a console. Then the PS3 did the same with BluRay - a move which contributed greatly to it winning the format competition against HD-DVD - and there was much rejoicing. In fact a major criticism I have of the PS4/XBone era is that neither of them went the next logical step and supported 4K blu ray playback. And since from PS3 onwards the devices were essentially small form PCs adding support for applications like Netflix was a pretty good idea since it took a long while for the Smart TV as we know it with its app support to come into being.

Now Microsoft really over-estimated how much gamers gave a shit about these as core functions and erroneously emphasised them in the lead up the Bone's launch, but if they'd not included them there'd have been hell to pay. I mean the PS4 has 90% the same functionality but Sony didn't make a big fuss about them; they let us know they were there but otherwise laser focused on the games.
 

CriticalGaming

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2017
8,560
3,465
118
While there's much criticism that can be lobbed Microsoft's way for the post Xbox 360 decision making, I kind of feel this one is kind of piss weak. The PS2 started the multifunction trend since it made a big deal of being a DVD player as well as a console. Then the PS3 did the same with BluRay - a move which contributed greatly to it winning the format competition against HD-DVD - and there was much rejoicing. In fact a major criticism I have of the PS4/XBone era is that neither of them went the next logical step and supported 4K blu ray playback. And since from PS3 onwards the devices were essentially small form PCs adding support for applications like Netflix was a pretty good idea since it took a long while for the Smart TV as we know it with its app support to come into being.

Now Microsoft really over-estimated how much gamers gave a shit about these as core functions and erroneously emphasised them in the lead up the Bone's launch, but if they'd not included them there'd have been hell to pay. I mean the PS4 has 90% the same functionality but Sony didn't make a big fuss about them; they let us know they were there but otherwise laser focused on the games.
The thing about your examples is thus:

The PS2 put it's games on DVD discs and as a result being about to watch DVD's was a by product of that. The same goes for the PS3 and Blu-ray. Both of these systems had games as a primary focus and the other entertainment was just a side effect of the tech they put into the gaming side.

The 360 however had no such capability and in fact required you to buy a separate Hd/DVD device to watch a special type of dvd that wasn't even as good as the blu-rays moving forward.

While the PC angle does make sense into consoles and both companies did put that effort into their systems. Sony never left the focus on the games, while MS announced their system with hardly a game to show and poor always online ideas to boot. So you are very much right there. Regardless of both systems trying to offer media extras. Sony kept the focus on what people wanted while MS didn't think their cunning plan quite through lol. A problem they still have today.
 

Gordon_4

The Big Engine
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
4,306
3,477
118
Australia
The thing about your examples is thus:

The PS2 put it's games on DVD discs and as a result being about to watch DVD's was a by product of that. The same goes for the PS3 and Blu-ray. Both of these systems had games as a primary focus and the other entertainment was just a side effect of the tech they put into the gaming side.

The 360 however had no such capability and in fact required you to buy a separate Hd/DVD device to watch a special type of dvd that wasn't even as good as the blu-rays moving forward.

While the PC angle does make sense into consoles and both companies did put that effort into their systems. Sony never left the focus on the games, while MS announced their system with hardly a game to show and poor always online ideas to boot. So you are very much right there. Regardless of both systems trying to offer media extras. Sony kept the focus on what people wanted while MS didn't think their cunning plan quite through lol. A problem they still have today.
Minor point of order: the 360 could play regular DVDs just fine on its own, it only needed that addon drive to play HD-DVDs.

Also, PS2 games did indeed come on DVDs, but playback was not just something that occurred as a by-product of using the format since discs containing data and discs containing a commercial film product are authored differently when they're burnt. The playback feature was deliberately added since movie DVDs all have a sort of encryption on them (DSS I think it was called) which you need a licence key/chip to authenticate and authorise playback. Its also why pre-built Windows PCs up until Win10 (or 8, its unclear) that had DVD drives also had some shitful software like PowerDVD installed on it: for that same security check.

So to drag this steer back on point, I think we can both agree that by this point its expected that the PS and Xbox be fully fledged multimedia devices because A) why wouldn't you since they have the grunt to make it seamless and B) they tend to end up in living rooms where movie watching is done so being able to do all the other stuff makes them an attractive 'one and done' device for people. BUT, Microsoft need to rein in bragging about those functions because they're baseline now: its like GM or Ford making a big deal that their latest sedans have climate control or power steering.
 

hanselthecaretaker

My flask is half full
Legacy
Nov 18, 2010
7,640
4,776
118
Microsoft has killed everything it's had and I'm worried that they keep buy more shit to kill. Some of that shit is already nearly dead already (looks at BLizzard)
Just have to make sure they only buy up shitty IPs, I guess.


That would explain why they tried to make the Xbox One a all-in-one media station instead of strictly a games console. And also explains why they feed off the nostalgia of when they were successful with Gamepass having a library of all their old shit on it. Becuase outside of Forza games and Flight Sim, they've got nothing.

Not to mention they've bought all these studios and since buying them none of them have released a single fucking thing iirc.
Gate’s mantra with the Xbox was originally to have a PC in every living room. Obviously functionality would be limited to a more entertainment focus, but I don’t think they anticipated how difficult “entertainment” could be in contrast to “office” machines.