Microsoft Redfall (Xbox Series/PC) - Open World Co-Op Shooter from Arkane, update: Doritos/Mountain Dew/Rockstar Energy Drink cosmetic DLC now available!

[Dexterryu]

How exactly is he taking responsibility? Just saying something doesn't mean anything. Is he refunding everyone their $$? Giving the game away free? Fixing it?

[stepee]

14 minutes ago, Brian said:

A man who knows his time is up.  

 

I think at this point if I was Satya I would feel like even if Phil was a net positive and helped guide Xbox back into a better position with gamepass and all, that whatever it was he could bring to the table is completed and it’s time to find someone for the next phase of building strong first party game studios.

 

It just does not seem to be his strong point and I’d be very concerned that the Activision acquisition would be pissed away with some disaster COD game that takes six years to make.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

6 minutes ago, Dexterryu said:

How exactly is he taking responsibility? Just saying something doesn't mean anything. Is he refunding everyone their $$? Giving the game away free? Fixing it?

 

In the corporate world, just saying "Dude, my bad!" is taking responsibility!  You don't have to do anything at all - just say it!

[Bacon]

Next time an MS property makes an FPS perhaps just give it to the DOOM Eternal team instead

[ShreddieMercury]

Very strange to me that there was supposedly so much pinned to the success of a game that, before release, didn't seem to impress all that much.  To me this just looked like another generic co-op looter shooter.  Is it disappointing coming from Arkane given their past output?  Definitely.  Was it expected to review extremely well and represent the dawn of a new Xbox golden age?  It was?  What the fuck?

 

The disconnect between how this game has been received and what it actually is and was advertised to be, doesn't make sense to me.  It certainly seems like it wasn't ready, but neither was Jedi Survivor, or a number of 2023 games.  But in those games the rays were traced I guess?

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

25 minutes ago, ShreddieMercury said:

Very strange to me that there was supposedly so much pinned to the success of a game that, before release, didn't seem to impress all that much.  To me this just looked like another generic co-op looter shooter.  Is it disappointing coming from Arkane given their past output?  Definitely.  Was it expected to review extremely well and represent the dawn of a new Xbox golden age?  It was?  What the fuck?

The disconnect between how this game has been received and what it actually is and was advertised to be, doesn't make sense to me.

 

I think from the Microsoft perspective, their expectations for this title genuinely were nothing greater than that it would be "good enough" to give a bit of a boost to Game Pass subscriptions for the first half of the year prior to the release of the (theoretically) Starfield behemoth in September.  Really - that's it, nothing more than that. 

 

The fact that it's not even close to meeting that relatively modest "good enough" expectation, has seemingly caused some observers to call into question exactly what the hell is going on in the Xbox ecosystem in terms of development, and potentially more significantly, debating the entire value proposition of the Game Pass experiment is what has contributed to what on the surface level appears to be a "disproportionate" reaction to an otherwise middling title.

[crispy4000]

41 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

I think from the Microsoft perspective, their expectations for this title genuinely were nothing greater than that it would be "good enough" to give a bit of a boost to Game Pass subscriptions for the first half of the year prior to the release of the (theoretically) Starfield behemoth in September.  Really - that's it, nothing more than that. 

I wouldn’t debate that Starfield was always considered bigger.  But this absolutely was NOT intended to be a “good enough” game to bide the time until the next release.

 

How can I say that?  Go back to how the game was announced.  Watch it again.

 

 

A 5 minute CG trailer and ‘E3’ showcase closer meant to sell us on the world and characters.  This was not supposed to be a State of Decay tier franchise.  It was meant to be marquee.  At least at some point in its development.

 

Priorities must have shifted along the way, but from what it was initially pitched to the public as.  Microsoft has themselves to blame for hyping it as a system seller prematurely.

 

It would have been better to spend none of the resources on producing that trailer, and instead pump those funds into making the game closer to the vision.

[Keyser_Soze]

I agree with @ShreddieMercury in a way. As I mentioned in the other post the game was revealed and no one was into it, so I don't think there was really any hype around this and if it didn't meet anyone's expectations then it is what it is. Perhaps the marketing budget was actually too strong for a game that wasn't meant to be a "AAA game."

 

There are some games that benefit from not being shown and some that benefit from do being shown and maybe they should have had a bigger reveal for the game, showing exactly what it is that way people could properly check out sooner if they so chose to.

 

To me, as Crispy sort of mentioned, there's really nothing that will "fix" this game. It was always going to be a looter shooter. You can fix the AI and bugs but the core game is going to be the same and if you're just not into it like the reviews show then those scores wouldn't have improved even if it was a flawless game.

 

As a side note, I do think it was kind of rotten that they allowed trolls who were never going to buy the game shape the development of the game. If the theory that the always online broke the AI is true then they should have come out and said it has to be always online because of the AI. If someone really wanted the game, they wouldn't cry about always online. Same with the 30 fps thing. It's slightly disappointing it doesn't run at 60 but if you were looking forward to the game that is something you can get past, not latch on to. If you were crying about 60fps you were never going to play the game. Similarly, it's strange how it's a game breaker for this game but a game like Pokemon that is filled with more bugs, looks worse and runs at 15 fps gets higher review scores. I guess Microsoft forgot to cut the check for this game.

[Xbob42]

1 hour ago, Keyser_Soze said:

If you were crying about 60fps you were never going to play the game.

Hi, have we met? 

[Xbob42]

9 hours ago, Brian said:

A man who knows his time is up.  

Mm, maybe? While it's easy to lay the blame at Phil, because of course the buck does stop with him... I can't imagine he's somehow out there making all these studios make bad games when by all accounts I've heard the devs seem pretty happy to be working under him.

That said, I could see him being replaced, and I could see the next head of Xbox not doing any better or indeed doing much worse like Phil's predecessor. At which point I would honestly be worried about the continued existence of Xbox at all, and that wouldn't be good for anyone because that just fuckin' leaves Sony in this space and Nintendo doodling in a corner.

[Dodger]

RedFall was already in development when they took over Bethesda. Phil has said multiple times they care about other metrics other than sales, and several of their games are crushing it in that regard. Forza Horizon 5 recently announced 30 million players. Grounded has been a huge success. Sea of Thieves became a success. I won’t panic until Starfield misses. If that fails then we know there is a real problem brewing. 

[Keyser_Soze]

That interview was interesting. He must have been reading @Commissar SFLUFAN's posts. He said it would be fair if he got fired because he gets paid too much for what he does.

[Dodger]

Xbox just had one of its best quarters ever despite all of their struggles. Dude can go ahead and order the yellow Ferrari he’s got nothing to worry about.

[nublood]

4 hours ago, Dodger said:

Xbox just had one of its best quarters ever despite all of their struggles. Dude can go ahead and order the yellow Ferrari he’s got nothing to worry about.

Maybe that's why the Series S/X STILL doesn't have that AAA marquee exclusive. Because they really don't care. lol

[Brian]

 

[crispy4000]

9 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

I agree with @ShreddieMercury in a way. As I mentioned in the other post the game was revealed and no one was into it, so I don't think there was really any hype around this and if it didn't meet anyone's expectations then it is what it is. Perhaps the marketing budget was actually too strong for a game that wasn't meant to be a "AAA game."

 

There are some games that benefit from not being shown and some that benefit from do being shown and maybe they should have had a bigger reveal for the game, showing exactly what it is that way people could properly check out sooner if they so chose to.

 

It’s really hard to get hyped about a game whose reveal doubles down on world building, but shows pretty much nothing of the game itself.  You need an extremely fresh idea, huge established IP, or a pedigree like Kojima’s for that to work.  Arkane Austin does have some clout, just not enough to stave off the feeling that this game was chasing trends on some level.

 

What that CG reveal trailer did do was set a tone that Redfall would be a significant part of Microsoft’s this-gen Xbox plans.  It would be one of their big current-gen only titles we were waiting to see materialize.  On top of that, it was given a release window.

 

Where I don’t see eye to eye with you and @Commissar SFLUFAN is this idea that it was never meant to be that.  It sounds an awful lot like revisionist history, considering the way it was initially presented to the public.  It’s much easier to believe that the game never came together as intended, as an AAA title with the expectations they built.  Phil said so much himself, the vision wasn’t realized.

[AbsolutSurgen]

I only listened to the first half of the Phil Spencer podcast discussion, but...  Wow.

 

He doesn't get it.  If you want to build a successful platform you need to create "gotta have" content, not mediocre/bad games to justify the monthly fee.  IMHO, he is responsible for some of the biggest strategic blunders in the gaming world.

[crispy4000]

20 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

I only listened to the first half of the Phil Spencer podcast discussion, but...  Wow.

 

He doesn't get it.  If you want to build a successful platform you need to create "gotta have" content, not mediocre/bad games to justify the monthly fee.  IMHO, he is responsible for some of the biggest strategic blunders in the gaming world.

I don’t totally agree.  I think Microsoft’s proved they can still hang, just not ‘win’ as Kyle says, with a focus on services and hardware.  The hype cycle around new consoles these days (60fps last-gen games wheee!) illustrates that perfectly.

 

The Wii U meanwhile had times when its games were delivering when other consoles weren’t, but captured none of the market.  So there is some truth to his statement in that respect too.  Nintendo fans are well familiar.

 

I wish the takeaway here could be not to launch a new console without games to show for it.  You have to wonder if that could have improved Microsoft’s standing this gen.

[JPDunks4]

I dont think Phil is in any trouble yet. 

 

Managing an acquisition is probably not easy, especially during a pandemic when you aren't even really allowed to visit studios in person.   You always risk Xbox coming in, being too  hands on and then possibly upsetting existing teams.  Xbox stayed hands off of Bethesda and pretty much all the studios they bought according to most.  Probably too hands off.

 

Every game released under the Xbox Game Studios banner since 2020 has basically been well received at launch.  Even Metacritic, as flawed as their scoring systems are, gave Xbox Game Studios Publisher of the year in 2021.  So this notion that Xbox just releases bad games is made in somewhat bad faith. 

 

They have failed in the AAA space to have consistency, but AAA games take time to make and just about every one of Xbox's 1st party studios have released games in recent years.  Turn 10, Ninja Theory, Compulsion and Undead Labs are the 4 teams that haven't released anything for the longest amount of time,  Rare has at least continued to update SoT which has been pretty successful. 

 

All those teams were also very small indie type studios (other than Turn 10) that were asked to grow their teams, most moved and built new studio space, are making bigger more ambitious projects, in the middle of a pandemic.  It seems quite a bit different than an already established big studios moving on from one project to another, especially if its a sequel.

 

Most all their other studios have released games in the last 2-3 years, they just haven't been Xbox exclusives.

 

So I can't imagine Redfalls fail is going to threaten Phils job alone, unless the Activision Blizzard merger was something he spearheaded and pushed for, and if it ultimately falls apart, his head goes with it.

 

 

[JPDunks4]

And as for the interview itself, I've seen a lot say his tone and some statements were made specifically for Regulators.  Highlighting they are in 3rd and can't compete with Nintendo or Sony. 

[Dexterryu]

What Phil said about Redfall is god awful, but overall he's been good for Xbox and gaming in general. He corrected the Xbox One as a media center and has evangelized cross play console / PC play. As a CEO, he probably didn't have direct hands on to the launch of this game and just looked at the data his teams were giving him.

[AbsolutSurgen]

He is not the CEO of a company.  He is the business unit leader of a division.

If he is not directly aware of the quality of each of the products that company is releasing, he's not doing his job.

Xbox Studios hasn't released a big successful game on Xbox in almost a year and a half.

[Dexterryu]

6 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

He is not the CEO of a company.  He is the business unit leader of a division.

If he is not directly aware of the quality of each of the products that company is releasing, he's not doing his job.

Xbox Studios hasn't released a big successful game on Xbox in almost a year and a half.

 

His official title is CEO of Xbox Game Studios. This is not the way a leader of leaders work in a company as large as MS. He more than likely has subordinates that are responsible for various areas that he trusts to inform him. Obviously someone within that chain of command screwed up badly in this case and is likely going to pay the price.

It's ultimately on him that this happened and on him to see that it's both fixed and doesn't happen again... but to think he's directly playing, reviewing, etc every game (even big ones) is just not how things work. What he was likely shown was the good stuff by his team because they want to look good to their CEO. He probably saw the sugar coated highlights. That's realistically all CEOs have the time for.

[crispy4000]

1 hour ago, Dexterryu said:

What Phil said about Redfall is god awful, but overall he's been good for Xbox and gaming in general. He corrected the Xbox One as a media center and has evangelized cross play console / PC play. As a CEO, he probably didn't have direct hands on to the launch of this game and just looked at the data his teams were giving him.

 

Great overall for gaming, and he's playing the hand he's been dealt the best he can, especially recovering from the Xbox One.  Well, maybe it's frustrating now that those Activision funds are so tied up.  But that was also an opportunity he'd be crazy to pass up.

 

Phil's general philosophies about how to run the business have limited their standing in the console market.  He's supposed to be selling Xbox's, but also wants to say that your friends can play against Xbox owners from any device, that cloud gaming is an affordable alternative to access their games, and that PC gamers are welcome to ignore both their consoles and storefronts because of simultaneous releases.

 

It puts pressure on Xbox hardware to be sold at a crazy value.  When they're not a clear value victor, it's bad news.  Microsoft probably thought the Series S was going to do more for them.  I don't think they anticipated a $400 all digital PS5.

[AbsolutSurgen]

1 minute ago, Dexterryu said:

 

His official title is CEO of Xbox Game Studios. This is not the way a leader of leaders work in a company as large as MS. He more than likely has subordinates that are responsible for various areas that he trusts to inform him. Obviously someone within that chain of command screwed up badly in this case and is likely going to pay the price.

It's ultimately on him that this happened and on him to see that it's both fixed and doesn't happen again... but to think he's directly playing, reviewing, etc every game (even big ones) is just not how things work. What he was likely shown was the good stuff by his team because they want to look good to their CEO. He probably saw the sugar coated highlights. That's realistically all CEOs have the time for.

Leaders at big companies are very involved in the products they release.  I know this from personal experience.  If he is not, that is a problem.

[Brian]

I eagerly await Jason’s piece on this debacle. 

[Dexterryu]

53 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

Leaders at big companies are very involved in the products they release.  I know this from personal experience.  If he is not, that is a problem.

 

Agree to disagree. I'm not going to play "who's dick is bigger" with you. CEOs at companies just can't get involved with smallish individual products. Flagship products like the Xbox itself, sure... but a release from a subsidiary of a subsidiary, no. It doesn't scale. The lone exception is Elon.

[stepee]

I thought Phil’s whole thing was he was supposed to be a gaming bro? I’d think he would want hands on early access as a gamer. 

 

If Phil as CEO of MS Studios isn’t aware of the quality of their first party output in development, I think that’s probably part of the problem, maybe nobody is. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

8 minutes ago, Dexterryu said:

 

Agree to disagree. I'm not going to play "who's dick is bigger" with you. CEOs at companies just can't get involved with smallish individual products. Flagship products like the Xbox itself, sure... but a release from a subsidiary of a subsidiary, no. It doesn't scale. The lone exception is Elon.

He is not a CEO of a big company -- he is the "CEO" of a business unit, which has very different responsibilities.  He doesn't have a board, doesn't have IR, corporate policy, etc.  Satya Nadella would not have any idea of what games are coming out.  That's Phil's job.  Not to manage them on a daily basis, but he is responsible for them.

For his business unit, what other "flagship products" beyond the 4-5 games he is releasing this year is he paying attention to right now?

[best3444]

I currently have this downloading for the lol's. I'm just so shocked this turned out to be poop. 

[Dodger]

3 hours ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

I only listened to the first half of the Phil Spencer podcast discussion, but...  Wow.

 

He doesn't get it.  If you want to build a successful platform you need to create "gotta have" content, not mediocre/bad games to justify the monthly fee.  IMHO, he is responsible for some of the biggest strategic blunders in the gaming world.

 

They are working on the "gotta have" content with Starfield, Fable, Avowed, Hellblade 2 if it looks anywhere near that good when it launches, plus trying to get COD into GamesPass every year. 

 

Also I work for a huge company, the CEO doesn't even know I exist and before covid the only time I met a low level VP is the once a year one came to the office for one day and had a townhall meeting for an hour. So no one with any real power in the company I work at has ever met me or said a word to me, and definitely has no idea who I am. Phil dropping by a studio once a year is probably normal. How often is Jim Ran visiting every studio at Sony?

[stepee]

17 minutes ago, Dodger said:

 

They are working on the "gotta have" content with Starfield, Fable, Avowed, Hellblade 2 if it looks anywhere near that good when it launches, plus trying to get COD into GamesPass every year. 

 

Also I work for a huge company, the CEO doesn't even know I exist and before covid the only time I met a low level VP is the once a year one came to the office for one day and had a townhall meeting for an hour. So no one with any real power in the company I work at has ever met me or said a word to me, and definitely has no idea who I am. Phil dropping by a studio once a year is probably normal. How often is Jim Ran visiting every studio at Sony?

 

I feel like Jim Ryan probably does visit the studios often, I don’t think it’s blind luck their studios put out such highly regarded content.

[AbsolutSurgen]

16 minutes ago, stepee said:

 

I feel like Jim Ryan probably does visit the studios often, I don’t think it’s blind luck their studios put out such highly regarded content.

He doesn't need to necessarily need to visit the studios.  The great thing about video game content, is that you can get digital copies brought to you remotely!

[stepee]

9 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

He doesn't need to necessarily need to visit the studios.  The great thing about video game content, is that you can get digital copies brought to you remotely!

 

lol yeah I thought about that afterwards, but the general point stands, I feel that Jim is probably pretty damn aware, Sony has a tight quality control from like mid ps3 up to now. 
 

I think Phil pays attention too, I don’t think he actively avoids the products he’s in charge of, I think he’s just whiffing a bit.

[ShreddieMercury]

Jim Ryan is almost certainly not playing many video games or driving their quality in any individual way.  Phil Spencer seems to enjoy playing games but is also very unlikely to be involved with every release to the extent that many here are suggesting.  There seems to be a misunderstanding of how organizations this large function at a basic level here.