I Have No Problem With the Xbox and Xbox 360, the Xbox One is Kind of a Joke Though

http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-one/killer-instinct-season-3

Killer Instinct Season 3 has 86 Metascore.

https://www.videogamer.com/news/killer-instinct-reached-record-6-million-unique-users-in-march

The Killer Instinct franchise reached record engagement with 6 million unique users in March, Microsoft has said in a statement relating to NDP Group sales data in March

It's useful to include a point with a post.

No I'm not missing your point. Alot of PC gamers want more support from M$. And consoles are have mostly redundant libraries out side of a handful of games. Most people don't want to invest in a mostly redundant system. Your attitude is what M$ is responding to, you don't want to buy their box, so they just decided to port more games so you can still buy the software. Software sales are the vast majority of profit any way...

Or is it you being a fanboy, because you're taking what I'm saying so personally, I never said it was bad, just redundant. And I don't see consoles as platic boxes, you're trying way too hard to steer this argument with your assumptions. I see consoles as hardware, an ecosystem and a conduit for business. As a former owner of an Xbox One who wasted a lot of money there, I'm well within my rights to criticise MSs flawed direction with your precious Xbox One.

I'm not taking anything personally. What your saying is utter nonsense. As if a family of devices is bad for M$... through twisted logic against xbox. Because it makes the xbox a lot more redundant with PC but your fail to see that if you want to buy and play M$ exclusives you still need to buy one of those devices in the family and that's M$'s vision. Not to mention play anywhere can make upgrading/replacing devices easier because there are more options.

So on one hand you claim, you don't need to buy an Xbox, which is my point, then you make a sale for Play Anywhere from being an option, then a direction for the company, it is clearly a function highly suited to buying both devices. You need to clarify your position with Play Anywhere. An option, a direction for the company. I never mention Play Anywhere, I usually mention MS making games multiplat killing the in-between market of those wanting both a PC and a console. You almost seem to contradict yourself. When I say 'sure but Play Anywhere works on the idea you have and want both devices which is redundant thing to do' you cop out and fall back on the 'it's just an option'.

What do you think options are supposed to be? Restrictions? Options for the customer are a direction. M$ is pushing for that. BC? Another option to play your 360 games on XOne. Play Anwhere? Another option to play your XOne games on PC. After ballmer left they started treating their devices as a family of devices.

I get additional value out of play anywhere because I have both devices. Not to mention your clearly ignoring other benefits mean when upgrading you have MORE options for your game library if its on play anywhere. It also allows you to get a cheaper second device and still allow people in your household to play it without bothering you.

The idea of a windows platform means yes you don't need to buy multiple devices anymore and the more games they port to it the more true it is but you get additional benefit by making devices more interchangeable giving a player more options where they play their game library.

Seriously, stop with the personal attacks, it looks weak and stop being (or at least trying to be) condescending to make yourself seem more intelligent. My defence doesn't work on those notions, they're just your assumptions on what I think. It's weak, seriously, you wanna talk, lets do this, but cut the BS.

And? I have to because of how ridiculous your position is. This is only bad in a fanboys eyes because it gives you more reasons to avoid an xbox. Your making xbox out to be more than anything it is, a plastic box that can play games. 'I see consoles as hardware, an ecosystem and a conduit for business.'. It's a plastic box that plays games and it's an option if you want a console, a pc, or multiple devices now. I have more Play Anwhere games than I do ps4 games... (blood borne nioh vs astroneer everspace re7). Do I see ps4 as a solid purchase... no its completely redundant with my PC outside literally a couple of exclusives. My xbox has become an extension of my PC and its why I've made it a priority to buy games through play anywhere first before looking at steam/gog.

So please tell me why this scenario is bad. I want multiple devices and have the option to do so. Why is this bad for you if you can save $300 bucks on an xbox one and just buy the games for PC? Neither system is having anything taken away, they are just sharing more.

You can criticize M$'s software being mediocre, personal tastes in such give that allowance. For instance I've never liked anything naughty dog put out post Jak era apart from the jack and daxter collection... but criticizing M$ for making it so you don't need multiple devices as much and literally saving you money and bringing more options as to where to play those games means you don't have to invest in an expensive box. You have options to buy those games anyway. Trying to twist this as poor decision making and focusing on Xbox while ignoring the greater landscape they are making is a complete fanboy argument. If you don't make arguments that clearly are biased towards a piece of plastic you won't be called a fanboy.

And please tell me what you think of sony's psnow supporting ps4 games soon... it makes a ps4 completely unnecessary. Do you consider this a bad thing?

@kvallyNot sure if serious:

We know Xbones recently released lineup,some of its past lineup and all future games are also on the PC.

Not even in the same ball park,that's why most own a PC and PS4 combo.

It's from Rare.

Your taste is horrible imo.

That's what this thread is, right? Your opinion sharing with us. Telling us the same thing that everybody knows?

Lol, first, you are taking this personally which is why you're twisting my use of the words redundant to mean bad, then you make assumptions, move to insults and then bring the PS4 into this. Second, you shouldn't be condescending because you're not good enough to be. I've put barely any effort into this discourse against your failure of an argument, that just goes round and round in circles.

No one's buying it.

LOL

This IS fanboy logic btw. Completely backpedaling when there is no reasonable defense to why M$ providing more options for consumers is a bad thing for either M$ or consumers. I didn't mean it in a bad way... clearly you did. Even when talking about how M$ handles feed back your painting it with heavily imply negativety. M$ is reacting to poor sales, which is very explicit to mean they aren't thinking about what they are doing.

RARE seems to have had VERY little input in Killer Instinct 2013. Can't find much on their involvement. Right now it's a MS Studio game predominantly made my Double Helix (in the past) and now Iron Galaxy headed by Ken Lobb with some unknown input from RARE.

If you can find me some info on what RARE did. So far I've found Phil Spencer saying "we’ve got Rare people looking at it" and "We had the internal team with Rare creative people – there were certain people that I wanted to make sure were close to this experience to make sure it’s tried and true. People ask me about Rare and I always go back to, like, Battletoads, but there aren’t many people from those games that are still around.".

Is it billed as a RARE game? On start up I don't remember it saying RARE.

Keep reaching, keep failing. Your arguments are desperate.

They aren't as bad or as desperate as your. How am I desperate when I clearly pointed out you backpedaled on your own arguments. Normally I like to clean the quotes up but I'll leave them in there for posterity's sake :).

And if you will please show me why my argument of options are never bad is desperate?

Good post dude.

But it still comes down to what you and I have discussed ad nauseam already. Subjectiveness. Shew says we are accepting mediocrity. Well who is it that gets to decide what is mediocre for me? Shew? Cows? Gamespot? Metacritic? Allah? I like the Xbox better, period. Controller, online community, support, Halo, Gears, and just making social gaming a thing. As I have stated repeatedly, Sea of Thieves will release and get a 5 or 6/10 from Gamespot. I bet my life on it. But I've been in the alpha since January and it is something I look forward to every Wed because it already has a very friendly yet competitive community. The most fun I've had on PSN online is playing Alienation with getyeryayasout. We invite the people from SW but they all wuss out. I can and will much rather play Destiny 2, RDR2, Battlefront 2 on Live.

If we're going to talk mediocrity, lets mention my least favorite thing on earth: JRPG weaboo waifu baby shit turn based combat. So many of these games that are listed in list wars are lost on me. Yakuza, TLG, Grav Rush 2, P5, Nier, MLB, etc I have no, nein, zero, zilch, nada desire to play many of these heralded PS4 games. So what? Its all subjective.

Yes, a lot of what is on Xbox one is on PC, you're right. Can you build a decent PC for $300 to play the games well? The bottom line is, whether so many of you guys like it or not, Microsoft is very much PC. How many of you are playing on your 4k ready rigs with Linux? So yeah they are going to support both their products. And millions of consumers are not going to give a rat's testicles that FH3 is on PC because this forum know it all about gaming mindset isn't the norm. We are the weirdos, the minority in the market place.

Desperate because you make assumptions, twist words etc.

Also I didn't back-pedal. I checked before I posted that. I never said Play Anywhere was bad, only that it was redundant and a gimmick.

For example, to help you with the meanings and differences of the words. Kinect on the Xbox 360 is a gimmick, because it's not needed but there are games and some things you can do with it. Kinect 2 on the Xbox One is redundant, because there isn't much use in having it. WWE All Stars is bad because... Well where to begin.

But is you have a PC, what's the point in getting an Xbox One? Play anywhere is good if you're already in the situation of having an Xbox One and Windows PC. Otherwise it's nothing to shout about. Play anywhere isn't going to become something big. Because MS made everything multiplat with the PC, the group of gamers that were PC gamers and Xbox gamers is going to be a struggling market, because those PC gamers know there's no point to buying an Xbox. For the most part, PC gamers want a console that plays different games to their PC. PC gamers are more likely to get a PS4 or Switch at this point. You'll probably get some strays who started out with an Xbox One and moved to the PC. On the one hand MS want to merge the markets of console and PC with their ecosystem, the problem is, they're asking PC gamers to spend a load on a console that will play the same games. If MS want to merge their markets, they need to do their own cheap Steam link for PC gamers, a £30 - £40 Xbox Link or something. That would make sense instead of asking someone to drop £200 to £300 on more hardware to play the same games, that makes no sense.

The entire basis of your argument is negative, saying something is useless and having no point is implying heavily a negative. Mentioning that your criticizing M$'s flaws again... your solidifying your position that this is a negative.

Sea of theives is going to suck. Dude nearly EVERYONE who made RARE great, jumped ship. At best it'll be above average. The only reason Killer Instinct is any good is because of Ken Lobb. And even that game isn't under the RARE name anymore. No one was getting Kinect forced, it had more options, and anyone who didn't want it didn't have to. It's not like being a second rate PS4 is going great for them.

Nothing your saying is even postive at all. When rare is making real games your stance on kinect being useless and somehow this still is not a good thing? FANBOY LOGIC.

No flexibility ISN'T always a good thing, that's a cop out. I used to always have a PC and always a console, because up until THIS gen, 75% of consoles games were only on consoles. Most games last gen for the first three quarters of the gen were mostly Xbox 360 and PS4, that was perfect. PC for PC stuff consoles for console stuff. YOU CAN NOT have it both ways, you can't kill the reason to own BOTH a PC and console and then claim this 'Play Anywhere' is anything other than bs.

Explicitly stating that it isn't a good thing ^.

I guess mac support on steam is complete BS because it allows you to change platforms and play the games you want on any supported hardware you have? How on earth is this even a reasonable assessment if you weren't a fanboy of some sort?

There's a difference between responding to feed back and not having the balls to hold out your vision because the competition has better sales. And how is this responding to feed back? No one asked them to do this. They're struggling against PS4, so like Nintendo (did), MS are searching for other ways to compete. But they do it at the expense of the consumer. Unwritten rule, don't make major changes to a console post release, because someone's getting fucked over, turns out not them. You find a vision, stick to it and build upon it. MS are struggling to build the Xbox One, because they can't make up their minds what it's about. Just because it wasn't selling as well as the PS4, you don't throw nearly everything it's about out of the window and start again, you make a few minor to medium changes and make it a damn good product for its fans. Sony didn't throw anything out with what the PS3 was about, they held strong while in a weak position, continued to improve it and it caught up and became as good as the competition.

Some how the options here are being stated as an expense to the consumer. Somehow by making certain purchases more flexible or releasing the games on more platforms is somehow hurting the consumer? WTF?

Nobody is losing value in their products, everyone is gaining more value and more options, will that make some devices redundant sure, but that isn't a bad thing. That means your not tied to playing strictlly on an xbox one, or games strictly on PC, and your not forced to only upgrade 1 way, and you have the option now for a dedicated console to some extent.

I wish they went all in and made all purchases play anwhere if dlc/games are supported on either platform. There's no way that sort of flexibility is ever bad. It means xbox players can upgrade to a PC or if you want to switch over to a dedicated console at some point play anywhere games can come with you.

...

Your underlying logic has been completely flawed because you don't seem to understand M$ giving players options is just that.. OPTIONS. And having purchase flexibility means you can purchase things and not worried about it being tied to a single product going forward. The options I enjoy don't hurt you and you don't have to engage in them. Thats what it means to be OPTIONAL. If you a PC gamer then your covered for M$'s offering so you don't HAVE to buy a console and thats the reason this is a good thing. Its an option if you want to but your not penalized for not investing in every plastic box with different labels on it.

Your view is completely fanboy based. Your attacking the XBOX value as a product against consumer friendly policies allow you to replace it with a PC and then literally stating that it isn't a good thing that Play Anywhere exists. You may not have explicitly stated 'play any where is bad', but thats exactly what you said in the context of your argument.

The gamer is who decides, and the fact that a Gen 8 console is barely tracking better than its Gen 6 predecessor proves FLATLY that not only are gamers currently not on board with the console but also developers and publishers considering. . .

I'm going to be blunt here. . .

Xbox One does not pay the bills. Development budgets are to the moon compared to Gen 6 and up to this point, the industry is clearly non-committal to exclusives for the platform as a result. Hardly subjective. Money talks and if you look at XBone's lineup, the silence speaks volumes.

@tekphan: false

And the gamer has decided. Are "gamers" only the people like You? So the almost 30 million that own an X1 aren't gamers? It is tracking better. So let me get this right, you MUST BE FIRST? Then why didn't you like the Wii More than PS3?

X1 doesn't pay the bills. LOL What 3rd party devs besides Japanes ones are making exclusive PS4 games? You act like this is a massive thing in the industry. If I am a dev, live and work in Japan. I will NEVER not have PS or Nintendo as an available platform for my games because of audience. But 16 years in this industry for Xbox, what else is new? They cannot control Japanese devs. They can attempt to court them like last gen, and take a look at the sales. It didn't move the needle much in Japan. They are a loyal people to their own. I wish Americans were more like that. Instead they are loyal to the dollar.

I get it, really I do. You fit in with the majority, I do not. My mom raised me to be my own man and not care if I do not. I have backbone; am not a follower. From August to Febuary there were games released every month not on PS. Yes they are on PC. The really real world, as in not SW, equates Windows with PC. Like I asked: How many of you are playing your High end rigs with only Linux? LMAO get in touch with reality. That exclusivity shit is dead. If you buy/build a gaming PC, Windows OS is a part of the cost. The vast majority of gamers are running it on PC. So they got paid regardless. Nier gets paraded but its on PC, isn't it? You guys all still want to pretend the console war is like Super NES vs Genesis days. But the corporations do not give a flying fvck about that shit. So go ahead and hate Xbox, pat your fanny and say to yourself "I'm right because I'm like the majority". At the end of the day it doesn't mean you're right. It means you're right FOR YOU.

But Play Anywhere is something you care about, not me. I hardly ever talk about that. I originally wrote about MS making everything multiplatform. Yeah, I'm negative about that direction. Makes owning both a PC and an Xbox redundant. You can go round in circles all you like.

Dude, **** sake. When a developer hasn't made a stand out game really since the N64, excuse me if I'm less than excited about what they're developing. I used to say give 343 a chance with Halo. Team Ninja haven't performed particularly well since key members of their team left. Polyphony digital have struggled to push the GT series for some time. Are you REALLY calling me a fanboy for wanting to wait for the final build before I hear judgements on the game.

As I said, all Xbox games on the PC isn't a good thing for anyone wanting to buy a console as well. Yes I'm a fanboy because I WANT to own more than one gaming device, give me break dude. Mac support is BS because apple don't often put the most competent of GPUs in their products unless you're spending a ton on an expensive Mac and most developers don't support the Mac as it is. Also Mac is still a PC and not a separate device according to mods on SWs.

I didn't say options hurt the consumer. Just that the demographic of PC/Xbox console gamers non existent. Dude you can do what you want with your money, I don't care. I only stated an opinion, and it still holds. Unless you pretty much solely game on an Xbox, it's kind of redundant. There are better options.

Yes, I'm negative about the Xbox, I don't like the direction they went in. But there's much about this gen I'm not fond of, and it's not exclusive to Xbox. I don't like the idea of frequently released consoles, I believe in one hardware per gen. I don't like how hard DLC is pushed these days, one expensive game plus expensive season passes is a piss take. And MS push DLC WAY too hard on their Forza games. If you're a completest, you are in for some hurt, the full game of FM 6 with all the content easily passes the £100 mark and I bet it's the same for FH 3. I'm not a fan of exclusives being on the PC, I like a reason to own a console. I spent £429 on an Xbox One Day One Edition, it lost Kinect, value and exclusives. Excuse me if I'm not thrilled about the money I wasted, and MS essentially leaving me with one of the most over powered netflix players there is, because that's pretty much all it was used for. I care also that they went in this direction after release. They told us kinect was important and the console would have exclusives. You don't care about that, fine. There are things I could have used that money on. If I had known, if they had let me in on their plan, I would have chosen a PS4. You just don't make huge changes like that post release, that does hurt the consumer.

Not sure who is sadder, Xbone fanboys or OP. Dude, nobody is going to read any of that.

Options are good. How is me benefiting from additional options hurting you? It's not.

Dude, **** sake. When a developer hasn't made a stand out game really since the N64, excuse me if I'm less than excited about what they're developing. I used to say give 343 a chance with Halo. Team Ninja haven't performed particularly well since key members of their team left. Polyphony digital have struggled to push the GT series for some time. Are you REALLY calling me a fanboy for wanting to wait for the final build before I hear judgements on the game.

Except they have, viva pinata and Banjo N&B were both well received.

Second the logic here is bad. 343 has nothing to do with rare so applying that logic is dumb. Same with team ninja... did you miss nioh or something? Just because other developers do bad has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not will do well. They are independent, but that is besides the point. I'm not saying you have to like Sea of Thieves. I'm critisiing your logic for attacking my PoV that its good that rare isn't relegated to kinect software which you have regarded as useless... is anything but good. It has nothing to do with the software they will produce, but what the software they no longer are producing. Regardless of how well Sea of Thieves does the entire gaming community is going to be better off for it's potential and the lack of more kinect garbage.

So again your point of view that it's somehow not good that a developer has the opportunity to make what they want and are not forced to make garbage for a bit of tech deemed worthless is absolutely a fanboy point of view. Your hiding behind the quality of a game that isn't out trying to defend that view point which has nothing to do with rare having the freedom to fail with dignity or potentially even better bring great games to market.

There's a difference between responding to feed back and not having the balls to hold out your vision because the competition has better sales. And how is this responding to feed back? No one asked them to do this. They're struggling against PS4, so like Nintendo (did), MS are searching for other ways to compete. But they do it at the expense of the consumer. Unwritten rule, don't make major changes to a console post release, because someone's getting fucked over, turns out not them. You find a vision, stick to it and build upon it. MS are struggling to build the Xbox One, because they can't make up their minds what it's about. Just because it wasn't selling as well as the PS4, you don't throw nearly everything it's about out of the window and start again, you make a few minor to medium changes and make it a damn good product for its fans. Sony didn't throw anything out with what the PS3 was about, they held strong while in a weak position, continued to improve it and it caught up and became as good as the competition.

...

I didn't say options hurt the consumer. Just that the demographic of PC/Xbox console gamers non existent. Dude you can do what you want with your money, I don't care. I only stated an opinion, and it still holds. Unless you pretty much solely game on an Xbox, it's kind of redundant. There are better options.

Actually you basically did say it hurts the consumer, go back and read your arguments. You very clearly in the context of all your arguments said that. Not to mention you did state it explicitly.

Not to mention your completely missing the point of Play Anywhere and exclusives only being on WINDOWs devices. Xbox doesn't exist by itself with M$ and with spencer running the show its been very clear what vision they are heading in.

As I said, all Xbox games on the PC isn't a good thing for anyone wanting to buy a console as well. Yes I'm a fanboy because I WANT to own more than one gaming device, give me break dude. Mac support is BS because apple don't often put the most competent of GPUs in their products unless you're spending a ton on an expensive Mac and most developers don't support the Mac as it is. Also Mac is still a PC and not a separate device according to mods on SWs.

This is fanboy logic in the bold. Your basically stating you want imposed restrictions to make additional purchases perceived as more valuable. Your making a distinction between consoles and PC's that just don't have to exist... that brings absolutely no value to the table what so ever. If M$ ever stops mulling over mouse/keyboard support then you could potentially play games like total war on a console. The only thing that makes them any different are arbitrary restrictions on consoles that only benefit the platform holder.

For instance what happens if there were no exclusives? You buy as many devices as you want and play games any where you want.... how is that not a good thing for everyone. Developers will have access to the widest range of consumers all the time and consumers will have access to all the games all the time. Exclusives are by there very nature restrictions that create more expenses for consumers. You want a console to play in the living room? Now you have the option of a small form facter PC or potentially getting console. Or if someone makes a streaming device just use that...

options are ALWAYS a good thing. The more options an end user has the more he can by hardware to suite his needs. Play Anywhere is indeed a step in the right direction.

Mac is an exclusive subset of PC's you can't license/use the MAC os software without apple hardware. PC is a much bigger and all encompassing market. So while all mac's are PC's, not all PC's are mac. I feel like this is a fairly trivial concept.

Yes, I'm negative about the Xbox, I don't like the direction they went in. But there's much about this gen I'm not fond of, and it's not exclusive to Xbox. I don't like the idea of frequently released consoles, I believe in one hardware per gen. I don't like how hard DLC is pushed these days, one expensive game plus expensive season passes is a piss take. And MS push DLC WAY too hard on their Forza games. If you're a completest, you are in for some hurt, the full game of FM 6 with all the content easily passes the £100 mark and I bet it's the same for FH 3. I'm not a fan of exclusives being on the PC, I like a reason to own a console. I spent £429 on an Xbox One Day One Edition, it lost Kinect, value and exclusives. Excuse me if I'm not thrilled about the money I wasted, and MS essentially leaving me with one of the most over powered netflix players there is, because that's pretty much all it was used for. I care also that they went in this direction after release. They told us kinect was important and the console would have exclusives. You don't care about that, fine. There are things I could have used that money on. If I had known, if they had let me in on their plan, I would have chosen a PS4. You just don't make huge changes like that post release, that does hurt the consumer.

Ok DLC has nothing to do with options. And again the lack of exclusives is only a problem if your a fanboy. I'll see if I can get M$ to apologies for allowing you to buy their games on their other platform...

Its not hurting you that their games are on another platform. Now you have choices and if you want to play a gaming in the living room you have the option to do so, but if you don't, you have other options... the changes they are making are more consumer friendly. You know you could sell the xbox and get a ps4? Have you ever thought of that?

Secondly going with the sunken cost fallacy isn't going to make an xbox a better product. Sticking with kinect when it's a pretty rubbish product isn't going to make xbox better.. Would you have bought a kinect adventure's 5? Even ps4 isn't worth owning over a PC to any great deal, they only have a handful more games that are actually worth looking into. And some of them are sony/pc exclusives as well.. PC has practically ALL the worthwhile games and maybe getting a console day 1 before there is anything worth buying on it is YOUR FAULT. Especially considering your view on kinect as redundant... when most of M$'s first party were force to product kinect rubbish outside of halo/gears/forza... Sony has nearly ALWAYS been a better choice for a secondary system or nintendo because both of them have a single platform to focus on and the value is by adding restrictions to software for those platforms.

Not to mention you mentioned previously 'PC for PC stuff consoles for console stuff'... So what's stopping you from buying the console stuff on the console and PC stuff on the PC. There is a clear distinction in most cases with controller requirements and other factors like online capability. Some games work fine for consoles, like yooka laylee I don't see as something that would play significantly better on PC. I just bought the surge because it seemed like a game that is much better for couch potato time. I knew sinking $450 likely was going to be wasted when PC covers 90% of all the games the consoles will ever receive and has vastly more games on the side... I bought it specifically knowing there would be games I'd rather play in the living room over the PC and play anywhere gives me the option of both scenarios as viable with a game.

@kvallyVery true:

"the lack of exclusives is only a problem if you're a fanboy"

Lol what? Are you saying if someone mentions that one console is superior to another console, they are a fanboy even if one console has experiences that can't be played elsewhere?

No, this is called being a good consumer, stop trying to justify microsoft dropping the ball, also it's more than "A handful more games"

We aren't talking about which console is better and if we were the PC has nothing to do with it... Context matters which your disregarding all of what I said and picking out a single sentence... and injecting a lot more meaning.

And I made a distinction somewhere between as these are now just M$ exclusives since they are on M$ platforms only.

PC isn't MS platform, people can just go to windows 10 and be like "lol I'll buy this one game then play the rest on gog and steam"

Not to mention eventually they come to steam, quantum break is on steam for example.

*goes round in circles.

Viva Pinata and Nuts and Bolts was a LONG time ago. Yes it's a fanboy point of view that a developer with a shit track record not be given a HUGE financial budget to waste... Said no one ever.

*goes round in circles

Nope, I said when they make major decisions, someone gets fucked over which they do. When you buy a console, you buy into the vision of what the company sells you. If you spend loads expecting one thing and it turns out that's not what they're going to provide, you're getting your time and money wasted. You will not convince anyone differently. If I buy a Nintendo or Sony console, I know what I'm getting the whole gen. So if I don't like it, it's on me.

Take this as a statement. If MS did this from the beginning, fine. Because everyone who is getting it, knows what they're getting into. How am I getting hurt when they drop Kinect, the value and exclusives as a day one buyer? Are you serious?

Nope, it isn't fanboy logic to want your gaming devices to differentiate from each other. "That brings no value to the table" :S.

If there were no exclusives, why would you buy more than one device. See I happen to be a fan of traditional consoles. Don't mind having them.

*goes round in circles.

Kinect 2.0 is rubbish? Prove it. It was actually pretty high tech. It was capable of more than body motion. Kinect didn't need to force you to play Kinect games, if everyone had it and developers knew it, it could have been used to enhances single player games. It wasn't like the Xbox 360s Kinect, but I can see the one sided narrow fanboy position you're taking on it. Belittling it to reinforce your point.

Ahh "YOUR FAULT" the proof YOU are the fanboy. Yes let's blame the fan, lol. Blaming me for having the AUDACITY to be a fan of Xbox consoles. Don't worry certainly felt like it was my fault. Funny, never felt that with a Sony or Nintendo product. Don't worry, I'll NEVER early adopt again

So basically this was a round about way of defending MS no matter what. Also, Playstation 'always better for a secondary system', the evidence builds up.

Because IT IS POINTLESS N... **** it. *goes round in circles.

circles? Your factually wrong saying the last good games Rare put are are from n64 days. Not much of a circle. Seems like a straight line that ended abruptly calling out your misinformation.

Nope, I said when they make major decisions, someone gets fucked over which they do. When you buy a console, you buy into the vision of what the company sells you. If you spend loads expecting one thing and it turns out that's not what they're going to provide, you're getting your time and money wasted. You will not convince anyone differently. If I buy a Nintendo or Sony console, I know what I'm getting the whole gen. So if I don't like it, it's on me.

Take this as a statement. If MS did this from the beginning, fine. Because everyone who is getting it, knows what they're getting into. How am I getting hurt when they drop Kinect, the value and exclusives as a day one buyer? Are you serious?

Their vision largely doesn't utilize kinect 2 as much or more importantly FORCEFULLY. The majority of people don't want kinect or it's software. Secondly they aren't all digital... so should they have stuck with it?

Games are still made for kinect occasionally. https://www.theverge.com/2016/7/13/12173190/fru-game-review-xbox-one-kinect. The problem is kinect is extremely limited to standing in front of the tv and doing motions. Not that its bad but its not really something I think a lot of developers want to deal with.

Not to mention your the one that called kinect 2 redundant. So again FANBOY logic your using it to serve your argument when you don't believe it to be a worth while product. Is this still some twisted defense against Rare or something. Or did you really want a sequel to kinectamals?

Nope, it isn't fanboy logic to want your gaming devices to differentiate from each other. "That brings no value to the table" :S.

It actually is if you really understand the implications you want. You want to be forced to buy different plastic boxes because a handful of IP's are intrinsically tied one of the plastic box.

If there were no exclusives, why would you buy more than one device. See I happen to be a fan of traditional consoles. Don't mind having them.

If you wanted more than one device for because you actually need more than one device for some reason... then you buy an additional device. How is this a hard concept? Exclusives create a more costly landscape for consumers because they have to buy multiple plastic boxes to play all the games they want.

What exactly is wrong with the option to play the games you want anywhere you want? M$ has moved to allow many of its games to be PC or Xbox both of which are their platforms.

Kinect 2.0 is rubbish? Prove it. It was actually pretty high tech. It was capable of more than body motion. Kinect didn't need to force you to play Kinect games, if everyone had it and developers knew it, it could have been used to enhances single player games. It wasn't like the Xbox 360s Kinect, but I can see the one sided narrow fanboy position you're taking on it. Belittling it to reinforce your point.

The tech was fine but the games were rubbish and the vast majority of developers weren't supporting it... It didn't matter if the developers new you as a consumer had it if they didn't plan on supporting it... That wasn't the barrier to entry for the kinect.

Ahh "YOUR FAULT" the proof YOU are the fanboy. Yes let's blame the fan, lol. Blaming me for having the AUDACITY to be a fan of Xbox consoles. Don't worry certainly felt like it was my fault. Funny, never felt that with a Sony or Nintendo product. Don't worry, I'll NEVER early adopt again

So basically this was a round about way of defending MS no matter what. Also, Playstation 'always better for a secondary system', the evidence builds up.

I'm sorry you don't want to take personal responsibility for making an expensive purchase before you had any real use for it.

Not to mention 5 seconds of research could have told you that M$ has issues supporting both platforms exclusively and not a large first party base. Any one with a shred of dignity and intelligence on this forum could have told you sony/nintendo were better if you felt the need to buy a second system to PC. That was largely the view of 360 towards the end of it's lifespan, outside of a few games of games there wasn't any real reason to invest in it as a secondary system.

As a PC gamer, 360 and XOne fan, even I can admit that. If I buy console multiplats its on xbox one. I literally spent $400 on a ps4 for bloodborne and accepted it was largely a waste of money because I didn't want to wait for the prices to come down for ps4 and am not of fan of the majority of first party studios that sony has.

So basically this was a round about way of defending MS no matter what. Also, Playstation 'always better for a secondary system', the evidence builds up.

Or you know my point of view has changed, options where I buy and play games are good and M$ supporting PC is good.

PC is basically a M$ platform. When something like 97% of desktops are windows based and practically every game made for PC supports PC first and mac/linux has partial support at best... it's M$'s platform. And quantum break is only on windows, so it's not supporting the secondary PC platforms (mac/linux).

Nope, RARE hasn't made a "GREAT" game since the N64. They made a few good ones on the Xbox 360. If you think their Xbox 360 games are 'factually' as good as their legendary SNES and N64 games, ya know the era people consider the "Golden Age of RARE", when all the best people were still there, then that says more about your standards.

Poor Kinect 2 research. Proof: "extremely limited to standing in front of the tv and doing motions".

Was Kinect forceful or did MS decide to chase a specific audience. Comes back to the question: 'Do we need all devices to play the same games and have the same experiences?'.

Yes all responsibility is on me and NONE on MS. Such a fanboy.

Again with assumptions lol. That was assuming I was primarily a PC gamer. I was a big Xbox fan, Xbox was great, STILL love the Xbox 360 and wanted more Xbox. Aren't I the asshole in this story :S. GOOOOOO MS.

Whether or not you liked the games is subjective, but as far as quality goes every game they made on 360 prior to kinect games were well received and mechanically sound games. This would be like me saying Naughty dog hasn't made any great games since Jak. Even if I don't like them now I can still recognize the quality of their work. Rare through out 360 era made great quality games.

And that doesn't matter all that much, the point is your arguing against them making real games is a good thing. You'd have to be a fanboy to hold this point of view. And if you really want more xbox then you should really want them to continue making real games.

Poor Kinect 2 research. Proof: "extremely limited to standing in front of the tv and doing motions".

Ughh... have you seen a kinect? That's explicitly what it was designed for. Monitoring a users motions and interpreting them. It is limited to about a room. So expressing running around in large areas is extremely difficult. Its a similar issue with VR where you walk around physically space to navigate an area, you have to teleport to a new square to continue navigating all over the place.

Don't get me wrong there are potentially good games, like imagine black and white, that was a gesture based game using the mouse it would have translated perfectly. But the amount of games is going to be limited compared to a controller which happens to be an extremely simple and elegant solution to navigating complex worlds.

Again with assumptions lol. That was assuming I was primarily a PC gamer. I was a big Xbox fan, Xbox was great, loved the Xbox 360 and wanted more Xbox. Aren't I the asshole in this story :S. GOOOOOO MS.

Your using the PC saying its somehow devaluing your purchase which is a similar situation as last gen 360. Its not an assumption if your choosing to buy all the games on your PC primarily instead of an xbox... You basically stated as much... If you want more value in your xbox to play "console" games. Just buy more "console" games on your xbox instead of the PC. It's a pretty simple solution. No one is forcing you to buy all PC games if you have a PC.

There are plenty of games on xone you can't get on ps4. M$'s first party isn't as strong + they don't get as much 3rd party support from japan... but that was true prior to going into this gen. This is nothing new.

Yes all responsibility is on me and NONE on MS. Such a fanboy.

It's your money. How is M$ supporting ALL their platforms bad?

Again your using backwards logic that there needs to be more restrictions to make their platforms more valuable. Platforms are more valuable with the more support they get. Yes we are living in an age where more and more platforms are being supported and the vast majority of games are supported on all the platforms, and there is a small minority of exclusive support. Because of the wider support its a lot easier for people to invest in a single device and get the vast majority of games they want to play. This is a great time to be a gamer because every platform is fairly equal with game support.

Was Kinect forceful or did MS decide to chase a specific audience. Comes back to the question: 'Do we need all device to play the same games and have the same experiences?'

Yes kinect was forceful because in chasing the a specific audience you as a consumer had no choice in investing in a device you didn't want if you wanted an xbox. They FORCED you to buy a kinect before it was worth buying if you wanted an xbox and your upset that it's worth never increased? Which is why they eventually removed it because people didn't want to buy and and developers weren't producing compelling software for it. And your saying removing a product that turned out to have very little value for consumers and developers they removed and that its "reactionary". Again see the logic in your arguments. You got screwed with kinect so you think everyone else should and M$ to continue trying to force it on developers/consumers? What fucking hell do you live in? Again Sunken Cost fallacy... M$ could continue to burn consumers with hardware that has little value or they could make it cheaper and overall better value per dollar. If your an early adopter of a PLATFORM your always run the risk of over paying or never getting value for that platform.

Yay a function game is made, lets throw all our money at the dev. It was still a long time ago and it still doesn't change the fact I'll wait for the final build like a reasonable person.

Wasn't limited to motion. Look harder.

Are you serious blaming me? You are a MS fanboy. They changed the product AFTER release. How am I going to research that. Let me google 'when is the most likely time MS might shit their pants?'. If you're a traditional early adopter, you pay more and have less games, that is USUALLY the limits of the risk. The only times that come to mind when people actually got fucked over, was with the Xbox One and the Playstation Vita when Sony stopped supporting it properly. After the Xbox and Xbox 360, why the **** would I expect MS to do that. What you call options, fine, but there is a time and a place to having major CONCEPTUAL changes to console and it isn't after the gen has started. You do it first so EVERYONE knows what they're getting into. What about that don't you get?

No, it wasn't fucking forced if it WAS the focus of the console as its original concept. Why do Nintendo ever bother with innovation? They should have made all their consoles like Xbox and Playstation, is essentially what you're saying. If people didn't want Kinect, they didn't have to buy the Xbox One. And it wasn't Kinect people had a problem with, it was the price of the console compared to the PS4. They had a reason for packing in Kinect, developers need to know everyone has a peripheral otherwise a split market makes development too big of a financial risk. The same reason VR won't go anywhere past tech demos, the same reason the 32x didn't sell. Don't white knight the removal with BS reasons, they simply dumped it to reduce the price. Developers never really had a chance, it was never just about the individual motion games, it was about how it could enhance games as well. Look up a game called Nevermind. Yes Kinect 2.0 could have done that, it would have been adequate for that biofeedback.

MS did this not for options, but because they are desperate to catch Sony and regain the market and **** anyone in their way.

You call this sunk cost fallacy, but it's an important part of the console business. Now along with chasing sales, they've lost fans, consumer trust etc. You DO NOT change the concept after release. It's just something you don't do in consoles, you can make all the justifications you like, but the consoles cost way too much, so they have to be considerate to what their core fans want, even if it means failing for a gen, everyone else has had the balls to do that, it's the nature of the business. MS had to work hard for people to trust them before, and people still found it hard. Gamers now think Xbox are the people that will make knee jerk reactions and make major changes at the drop of a hat. And we aren't even sure it was a sunk cost fallacy, because MS didn't even try tbh, they dumped Kinect way too fast. It took Sony YEARS of hard work and financial loss to make the PS3 as good as it is and they probably broke even by the end of the gen, BUT they have the fans loyalty and their trust for that. How did the fans show that, they bought the PS4 in droves for unknown reasons at launch with no regrets. I'd personally never trust MS again with consoles. I'd wait a good couple of years after they launch a console before even considering it.

Lots of mad Sony fans here. It's a bummer that the PS doesn't have any exclusives, but just play the games and don't worry about the semantics.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-06-11-microsoft-explains-killer-instinct-reboots-free-to-download-pay-for-more-characters-business-model

Rare involved. Ken Lobb "intimately involved".

Meanwhile, Rettig said Rare, original creator of Killer Instinct, is involved in the reboot, but the principal creator is Silent Hill: Homecoming studio Double Helix. Builds are sent to Rare periodically, and the UK developer offers its feedback. "At Rare there are not many people who worked on the original game who are there any more," Rettig explained, "but there are some people who worked on it. We send builds to them. We get their feedback, and we factor that in to how we approach the game."

However, Ken Lobb, the veteran Microsoft games executive who worked on the original game as well as Rare classic GoldenEye 007, is "intimately involved".

The grunt work is done by the out source teams and supervise by ex-Rare employee who worked on original Killer Instinct with Microsoft games executive rank.

I'm not saying you should buy the game. But your arguing against rare making real games as if that isn't a good thing. Again how is more real games not a good thing. You said you want more xbox... this is more xbox. Rare's early games on the platform added to what made it a great platform.

Are you serious blaming me? You are a MS fanboy. They changed the product AFTER release. How am I going to research that. Let me google 'when is the most likely time MS might shit their pants?'. If you're a traditional early adopter, you pay more and have less games, that is USUALLY the limits of the risk. The only times that come to mind when people actually got fucked over, was with the Xbox One and the Playstation Vita when Sony stopped supporting it properly. After the Xbox and Xbox 360, why the **** would I expect MS to do that. What you call options, fine, but there is a time and a place to having major CONCEPTUAL changes to console and it isn't after the gen has started. You do it first so EVERYONE knows what they're getting into. What about that don't you get?

They only changed bundling kinect after it failed miserably, the product was the same. And there are still plentry of games for xbox... I'm not sure what your point is any more because apart from kinect no longer being important xbxo is still xbox and is still getting first party support from M$. Your factually wrong on the fundamental changes to XBOX apart from kinect.

No, it wasn't fucking forced if it WAS the focus of the console as its original concept. Why do Nintendo ever bother with innovation? They should have made all their consoles like Xbox and Playstation, is essentially what you're saying. If people didn't want Kinect, they didn't have to buy the Xbox One. And it wasn't Kinect people had a problem with, it was the price of the console compared to the PS4. They had a reason for packing in Kinect, developers need to know everyone has a peripheral otherwise a split market makes development too big of a financial risk. The same reason VR won't go anywhere past tech demos, the same reason the 32x didn't sell. Don't white knight the removal with BS reasons, they simply dumped it to reduce the price. Developers never really had a chance, it was never just about the individual motion games, it was about how it could enhance games as well. Look up a game called Nevermind. Yes Kinect 2.0 could have done that, it would have been adequate for that biofeedback.

Actually thats not at all what I'm saying. Considering that M$ did make their console like every other product on the market kinect was always an addon that was forced onto consumers regardless of whether or not it had any value. It wasn't an integral part of the experience and many of the traditional gaming experiences shipped without support for it. Same thing happened with wii u. Some of the best games on the platform didn't bother with the tablet... and many people complained about it, and many games supported the pro controller. It turns out you can't force developers to make wonderful experiences with a technology.

It was FORCED. Thats the point of making it a central focus is so no one can opt out. Even with everyone owning it developers barely utilized it making it a useless bit of tech bundled with an expensive package. They had plenty of time experimenting with the 360's kinect and they still didn't bother having anything ready for xbox one or planning anything interesting really. A year and a half of being a waste of packaging M$ dropped it.

The fact is the market was already split, between PC/Xbox/PS4 so anything being added would be gimmicks at best (red card for swearing in fifa 15 on 360...). VR will do better because there is interest in it, and there are developers that want to create experiences for it. It's already succeeding far more than kinect ever has from a software perspective. A lot of the coolest kinect applications have been for non gaming.

And nevermind didn't end up supporting kinect for various reasons, but in the end they didn't have access to the data they needed to support heart rate monitoring through the xbox one, it had nothing to do with M$ removing it from the bundle.

MS did this not for options, but because they are desperate to catch Sony and regain the market and **** anyone in their way.

Your argument about xbox's value is that its less if M$ supports PC as well as xbox.. And yet your contradicting yourself here saying that M$ is reacting poorly to sony's better sales against xbox by undermining xbox sales by creating options for consumers where PC users can now enjoy M$ first party on windows too.. yup FANBOY LOGIC.

The perceived value loss is a perception of a fanboy. Somehow xbox as a product is some how inferior with first party support being spread to the PC platforms? It would be like critisizing sony for having many of their exclusives shared with ps3, games like persona 5. Oh ps4 isn't as valuable because they released a game I want on another system I have!

You call this sunk cost fallacy, but it's an important part of the console business. Now along with chasing sales, they've lost fans, consumer trust etc. You DO NOT change the concept after release. It's just something you don't do in consoles, you can make all the justifications you like, but the consoles cost way too much, so they have to be considerate to what their core fans want, even if it means failing for a get, everyone else has had the balls to do that. MS had to work hard for people to trust them before, and people still found it hard. They now think Xbox are the people that will make knee jerk reactions and make major changes at the drop of a hat. And we aren't even sure it was a sunk cost fallacy, because MS didn't even try tbh.

Your clearly a fanboy again because your using kinect to serve an argument against M$. When reality would show they did not react to the market and ditch kinect, they were whittled down until kinect was beaten out of them. Everyone criticized M$ for holding onto the kinect dream well after it overstayed its welcome on xbox. To call this a knee jerk reaction with kinect is utter nonsense and revisionist history. Not to mention you clearly stated kinect was redundant on xbox. So trying to say M$ did something terrible by removing something redundant is aslo some serious fanboy logic.

It took Sony YEARS of hard work and loss to make the PS3 as good as it is, and they have the fans loyalty and their trust for that. How did the fans show that, they bought the PS4 in droves for unknown reasons at launch with no regrets. I'd never trust MS again with consoles. I'd wait a good couple of years after they launch a product before even considering it.

Sony actually burned bridges with ps3, they disregarded developers and basically told them working harder was worth it. They took away linux support and were sued over it. It took them an incredible amount of effort to start releasing decent games because of their own arrogance when designing the hardware and cost them millions in r&d which was basically thrown out with ps4. What ever happened to sixaxis support? 4d? Telling fans they should work harder to afford $600 price tag? Ps3 was nothing short of humbling for sony.. only M$ dropped the ball and we got ps4 and a half "pro", psn paywall to play online...

So spinning this as positive hard work and not recovering from shooting themselves in the foot is amazing... its even more amazing your criticizing Microsoft from recovering after shooting themselves in the foot as a knee jerk reaction and can't be trusted. And there it is, after a long discussion of absurd reasoning you have finally shown your colors and there is a big sony symbol on it.

And I'm going to continue ringing this bell. OPTIONS are always good. Not having to buy an xbox and still getting Microsoft first party on windows is good. Being able to buy an xbox and the prospect of sharing all purchases with the PC is GOOD. If your a console only gamer than no value is being removed by any of these choices by M$. These are all objectively good things and only a fanboy would believe otherwise.

Wow, this whole thread has turned into a massively boring wall of text.

Yes but this doesn't seem to be done under RARE. Ken Lobb is working seperate of them. Doesn't sound like RAREs doing much development work there. IDK, don't remember the game even being under the RARE name.

We're done. We're going round in circles.

Out source team has to follow the leadership team's vision.

LOL the thread title keeps making me chuckle. Who gives a crap if you have a problem with the X1? And why would it be a problem if its a joke? I love jokes and laughing. The Vita is a joke. I still own it, laugh, enjoy life and play mostly PSP games on it.

Yes call it circles when your trying to defend dumb fanboy ideas, and I've shot down all your arguments.

A lot of games are developed this way. If you have enough studios like sony you can outsource work between internal studios which they regularly do. This is such a pointless attack against rare.

@waahahah: You failed in all your arguments. You never came close to shooting down anything.

How was that an attack on Rare. You are SUCH an Xbox fanboy. You don't get credit for making a game because you occasionally check builds. Ken Lobb and Double Helix did most of the work separately. This then comes under MS Studios. The Rare logo doesn't even come up when you launch the game.

Your entire augment has been against rare the entire time. What do you think dismissing rare and their value or their work is? It's an attack, or criticism. But its not coming from a place of sense so its more of an attack. And you've been trying to defend the position that its not a good thing that rare is allowed to make real games... because dumb reasons. Your don't like their games, they aren't a good studio... WTF does it matter than? It doesn't you just need to shoot down positively of any of M$'s decisions. That's what the entire conversation on rare came from. You were factually wrong about the quality of the games they produce post n64 era as well.

@waahahah: No it hasn't. Is there something wrong with you?

I said I'll wait until the games finished before judging, like a normal person. I'd do that with any developer, but specially one the a sketchy record.

I love Ace Combat, but I'll wait until Ace Combat 7 is finished before getting excited after the awful Assault Horizon.

If Rare deliver, great. But I stopped holding my breath with them a while ago.

Doesn't mean I don't give MS Studios a chance. 343 I have a chance. Love Turn 10. Not sure about Black Tusk, maybe they had a rough rookie go with their first game, maybe they'll do better next time. But Rare, I've been waiting too long.

Thing is, PS4 is absolutely killing it this gen and 2 of the most highly sought games overt he last few years have been exclusive to the console. It realy is the best place to play games, period.

Rare being able to make real games is a net benefit. It has nothing to do with judging what they produce because what they produce is going to be better than kinectimals 2. And it's proven to be quality games on 360, and sea of theives is proving to be a quality game, whether or not its fun is subjective. Regardless of whether or not you like it in the end it will likely find a fanbase and expand M$'s portfolio in a positive way. The wait and see if you like it is not a defense here. Especially since sea of thieves isn't a game in normal development right now. The dev's have regular live streams, and there is an insider program where many people are already playing the game. Like I said, I don't like naughty dog but the quality is there and its easy to see. Sure I'll let you not like the game but trying to outright dismiss it as a positive for M$ is outright fanboyish. And claiming it has a sketchy record is again fanoyish.. because there is nothing sketchy about them or their record. They've produced great games prior to kinect development. They may not have the same mass appeal as Uncharted but they are quality games.

That's low standards and not good enough for even MS. If they invest in developers they need something that sells too. Claiming their record isn't sketchy is fanboyish. Yeah, they did produce great games, an age ago, since then, everyone left, the Stamper brothers, everyone.

I'm not giving them a pass because they have RARE as a developer name. It's the people who run it, not the name on the door. The only developer I usually give a pass to, is probably Turn 10, because they are that damn good and they deliver just about every time. And most of the times they don't it's likely pressure from the MS suits, such as the FM 5 rush job for the Xbox One launch. Also FM 4 could have used more time for more ideas, because it's quite close to FM 3, but it was forced for the 2 year cycle. But I can forgive that given the nature of sports games. And don't defend MS with my 'MS suits' comment, we know they do this, they forced Bungie to release ODST as a full game instead of an expansion, they go nuts with Forza DLC as well.

But your stance is, 'as long as a developer is working on proper games'. There are so many developers doing that, but are they stand out? Is 'above average' good enough for the astronomical budgets of games these days? If standards didn't matter Scalebound would still be coming out. And that was a stunning looking game from a developer that nearly always delivers amazing games.

Even if you go back to their Xbox 360 games, Banjo was 2008, ages ago. It has a 79 on metacritic and didn't sell great. MS was right to put them on Kinect. See you have a double standard, when it comes to the Xbox One, you said MS has to do what's right for business. YOU CAN NOT give a developer a buget to make a game like Banjo Nuts and Bolts on the Xbox 360 or the Xbox One and not have it score well across the board and sell well. It's not viable. If RARE was making games for the N64 or Xbox, it would be different, games had smaller budgets then, but they cost A LOT more now. If you want to make games as fan service, that's fine, but you need to keep that to smaller Indie like budgets. It's fine having above average games like that. A lot of developers are at a point where one or two shit games and they close their doors for good. Why do you think there are so many games from mainstream genres, because they can't afford to not have games that perform.

What? Please describe one "sketchy" thing Rare has done. Because sketchy has nothing to do with sales performance.

I'm not giving them a pass because they have RARE as a developer name. It's the people who run it, not the name on the door. The only developer I usually give a pass to, is probably Turn 10, because they are that damn good and they deliver just about every time.

Again you fail to understand my argument. RARE being allowed to make games that are not kinect focused is good for microsoft. I'm not giving rare a pass either, if they're game doesn't interest me, then I won't buy it. But the logic here is failing on your end. Freeing rare to do what they want has nothing to do with who's left in charge, or how good they're game will be. Again as I said earlier now RARE is free to fail with their dignity.

And most of the times they don't it's likely pressure from the MS suits, such as the FM 5 rush job for the Xbox One launch. Also FM 4 could have used more time for more ideas, because it's quite close to FM 3, but it was forced for the 2 year cycle. But I can forgive that given the nature of sports games. And don't defend MS with my 'MS suits' comment, we know they do this, they forced Bungie to release ODST as a full game instead of an expansion, they go nuts with Forza DLC as well.

None of this has anything to do with the discussion about whether or not its a good thing rare is free to do what they want now. All we know about RARE's next upcoming title based on live streams and impressions is it is reasonable to assume the quality of the craft hasn't changed, whether or not the game is fun is debatable.

But your stance is, 'as long as a developer is working on proper games'. There are so many developers doing that, but are they stand out? Is 'above average' good enough for the astronomical budgets of games these days? If standards didn't matter Scalebound would still be coming out. And that was a stunning looking game from a developer that nearly always delivers amazing games.

My stance is they are not FORCED to work on kinect games. Not that that they are making proper games, but they are making games they want to make which happen to be ditching kinect.

Even if you go back to their Xbox 360 games, Banjo was 2008, ages ago. It has a 79 on metacritic and didn't sell great.

79 is still basically considered a great game.

MS was right to put them on Kinect. See you have a double standard, when it comes to the Xbox One, you said MS has to do what's right for business. YOU CAN NOT give a developer a buget to make a game like Banjo Nuts and Bolts on the Xbox 360 or the Xbox One and not have it score well across the board and sell well. It's not viable. If RARE was making games for the N64 or Xbox, it would be different, games had smaller budgets then, but they cost A LOT more now. If you want to make games as fan service, that's fine, but you need to keep that to smaller Indie like budgets. It's fine having above average games like that. A lot of developers are at a point where one or two shit games and they close their doors for good. Why do you think there are so many games from mainstream genres, because they can't afford to not have games that perform.

This has nothing to do with allowing rare to make games they want to make. Your just trying to direct the conversation to fanboy rhetoric. Rare should be punished because they didn't sell enough? You realize sony's first party is as good as it is... because they don't act stupidly like that? They have faith in their first party and try to cultivate a good environment so they'll hit their stride, build a fanbase, and continue to make good games. Not to mention if rare is only rare in name why would they do that to basically a new dev team after rebuilding rare? You can't say rare isn't the same any more, while also saying they should be shoved into a corner because of their predecessors.

You can't complain about M$ having a knee jerk reaction then say the best thing to do for M$ is to have a knee jerk reaction and shit all over their developers. Not to mention its a far better time for rare like games to be made since 360/ps3 were the dude bro era and there has been a resurgence of interest in more diverse games.

Except if you love MP and social gaming. Overwatch, COD, Battlefront, Battlefield are all on Xbox (with a safer network) and PC. Add to that Gears 4, Halo 5 and if you like racing competitively (I don't care for it) Forza whatever. Fighting, with SF5 PS has but that is on my Windows PC. I love Nioh and Horizon. One is first party, the other is a Japanese dev. They will not forego support of a Japanese platform unless they are specifically hired to do so. That's just the way it is.

I would rather defend Donald Trump's lies for a year than play Persona 5, Disgaea, Danganronpa, Yakuza, Grav Rush 2, TLG, MLB among others.

See the problem is, people swear by the popular opinion until it comes to say, music. Or food, or film. I dont need to like what others like because others aren't paying for my entertainment. I have that burden so the BEST place to play is all subjective.

One sketchy thing... Everything between Star Fox Adventures, up to now including all their portable games, apart form Kameo, Viva and Banjo. That's a pretty sketchy record over a period of 15 years. And MS have been giving them time and money for 14 years.

Yeah, but Sony make sure there's talent in their studios as well. You can't just give any studio untold time and money and suddenly they'll produce something awesome. It doesn't work like that. But you can give talent time and a budget, and eventually they will do some great things.

RARE has only made a few good (above average) games since MS bought them. Probably Kameo, Viva and Banjo. And yeah, my argument has pretty much everything to do with them. ****, the average development budget for a game is $50 million with a marketing budget that can range from half that, to double or triple that. And you think developers should just be given time, space and a huge budget indefinitely WITHOUT proven talent, until they produce something. Are you mad? MS has been giving them time and money since the first Xbox, for 14 years. It's anything but knee jerk.

And some how THIS is fanboy rhetoric?

And you are the one that changed the discussion. Originally, I never said they shouldn't make games, that's my own opinion based on their track record. The discussion was, should we be excited about RAREs game, and my answer was **** no, I'm not getting excited about a RARE game, I'll wait to see what reviews say. I'm happy to be proved wrong.

Tbh it is shocking to hear you talk about what is good for MSs business and then you so easily think a developer should be given tens of millions of dollars until they come through.

I don't get why RARE couldn't even do anything interesting with kinect. Nintendo did stunning things with a Wiimote, like Mario Galaxy for example. That's talent.

I don't think you know what sketchy means, none of those things are sketchy.

Yeah, but Sony make sure there's talent in their studios as well. You can't just give any studio untold time and money and suddenly they'll produce something awesome. It doesn't work like that. But you can give talent time and a budget, and eventually they will do some great things.

I guess you don't know how talent comes into being for companies like sony/MS or how a company can prove it has talent. Also no one said give them untold time and money.

And especially if you believe no one from the old rare is left, fundamentally it can't be a bad thing to allow this new rare the chance to prove its talent.

RARE has only made a few good (above average) games since MS bought them. Probably Kameo, Viva and Banjo. And yeah, my argument has pretty much everything to do with them. ****, the average development budget for a game is $50 million with a marketing budget that can range from half that, to double or triple that. And you think developers should just be given time, space and a huge budget indefinitely WITHOUT proven talent, until they produce something. Are you mad? MS has been giving them time and money since the first Xbox, for 14 years. It's anything but knee jerk.

All of their games were basically considered above average since MS bought them, they were all close just shy of great on metacritic. Your basing your opinions on a reality that just doesn't exist. Again fanboy. They did poorly in sales which is a totally different problem which could be down to marketing or other issues. RARE has shown it has talent, If you can point out some mechanically unsound games... you might have a point but everything they have done has a base of really good quality. The problem is the games didn't find a good audience. For instance Banjo N&B is far more likely to find a larger player base today, its similar to games like KSP or Besiege where the core concept is essentially engineering to solve problems.

You also continue to make massive assumptions. Giving RARE an opportunity to freely make what they want does not mean giving them unlimited resources to do it.

And some how THIS is fanboy rhetoric?

Yes see your assumptions and backwards logic. New rare shouldn't be able to create what they want because old rare games didn't sell that well.

And you are the one that changed the discussion. Originally, I never said they shouldn't make games, that's my own opinion based on their track record. The discussion was, should we be excited about RAREs game, and my answer was **** no, I'm not getting excited about a RARE game, I'll wait to see what reviews say. I'm happy to be proved wrong.

The discussion had nothing to do with excitement over what rare is doing. Just that its a net positive for M$ to free rare of the kinect hell they were placed into. As far as they shouldn't make games you basically did say that in the context of your arguments, that there was no value in rare making new games because they made games you didn't like and all the good people left. You were factually wrong about the quality of their titles and the critical reception is better than what you give it credit for.

Tbh it is shocking to hear you talk about what is good for MSs business and then you so easily think a developer should be given tens of millions of dollars until they come through.

It's shocking because you clearly don't know basic english. To say its good that rare isn't FORCED to make kinect games doesn't translate in any way to given them tens of millions of dollars.

Again your LOOKING for arguments to attack to somehow paint this as a negative.

I don't get why RARE couldn't even do anything interesting with kinect. Nintendo did stunning things with a Wiimote, like Mario Galaxy for example. That's talent.

Have you played Mario Galaxy? Very little of that game relies on the wii mote on a fundamental level. Your still just mario running and jumping through most of it. Mario Galaxy still has the nunchuck, and the wii mote has buttons, They took a traditional experience and added the the wii mote to aspects of the game. The wii's control scheme is far more accommodating to complex games though.

M$ never came out with any real decent split controller design so the input was limited to mostly the motion detection. I think I've seen 1 game with controller + kinect. And also nobody did anything truly worthwhile with the kinect. They all had the same premise and that was stand around in front of the TV and act a bit stupid. I think there are far more limitations to the way the tech was implemented on xbox so blaming developers isn't going to work in this case.

http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/innovative-uses-kinect/ <- the best of kinect ended up having nothing to do with gaming so I think developers loved it, just not game developers. I think that speaks for itself that maybe it wasn't suited to gaming as well as the wiimote+nunchuck. Trying to blame rare for kinects design failures is again, fanboy argument trying to tie an industry wide issue to a developer. Even the wii has line of competent games utilize the tech well that went beyond tech demos. Kinect did not.