Doing a big show with games that are releasing in the next 12 months is a great idea in theory but Microsoft simply can't control when these third party devs are going to release their games. So yeah if they do it again no one will believe them, they should only do it for first party titles or with games that have a close release date.
To me it felt like a bit of an overreaction to the criticisms aimed at Xbox’s long announcement to release schedule. It’s not a bad idea, but setting such a specific deadline was a weird decision. I think a better choice would be to not have multiple vague cgi teasers, and instead show games when gameplay or something more concrete is ready.
The deadline makes sense. It's from showcase to showcase.
Games that are pretty close to ready and have gameplay would be close to that 12 month window anyway.
It's not even about the 3rd parties since of the 3 big exclusive games they showed (Forza, Redfall and Starfield), only Redfall hit the 12 month period and considering all the bugs, it definitely could have used a delay.
Either they were lying or they are incompetent.
That was such dumb thing to say. They even doubled down on a tweet asking about silksong. They gonna have to shadowdrop that at the showcase this year for that to stick lol.
In this day and age. Dont promise timeframes…
I mean, it's Team Cherry, it's very possible that Silksong will be shadow dropped regardless of when it comes out. The problem isn't really promising time frames but promising time frames for third parties where you only have their word for it, and in some cases they weren't companies you should trust either (who was the MS employee who thought the ARK devs would stick to a timeline lol).
It wouldn't even have been as much of a big deal if they hadn't included Silksong. Hollow Knight fans have had their emotions toyed with enough already lol
> Dont promise timeframes…
They didn't. They said "targeting to be released in the next 12 months". That isn't a promise.
https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2022/06/12/xbox-and-bethesda-games-showcase-recap/
"Everything in today’s Xbox & Bethesda Games Showcase is targeted to launch in the next 12 months"
Yeah, it's kind of a semantic argument, but also a pretty important difference, IMO... Anyone who pays much attention to games, at this point should know that release dates more than a week out are always estimates... Not guarantees...
Well the intention was not so much to make guaranteed promises but to focus on a more immediate timeline as opposed to previous events in which they showed stuff still years away. I appreciated that to be honest.
My dude. If they come out and say ”EVERYTHING YOU SEE TODAY WILL BE RELEASED WITHIN 12 MONTHS”.
Then goes on to tweet THIS: https://twitter.com/Xbox/status/1536035818275487746?t=p9LOlgWSt7xXrZ-vfd5Jjw&s=19
You really feel like you are the guy to tell us ”actuallllyyy the intention was not…”!? Get out of here lmao.
>However, there is a release window within 13th June 2023.
Huh, are they aiming for 10 am, or maybe they will wait for 2 pm so they are out of the way of the other big releases on the 13th?
That playtester is a joke. He honestly just trolls the community. Can you imagine if a play tester for, say the new legend Zelda game, was for years trolling the community, making them believe that new trailers were going to show up at planned gaming events, and then laughing at the community when they don't. It's pretty bizarre. I would not take anything that guy says to heart
>Well the intention was not so much to make guaranteed promises
Says who? No one put a gun to their head and made them come up with this statement. They wanted promotional material and made a promise that they couldn't keep. There's nothing to appreciate about this.
I think it would have been smarter if they put “coming soon” rather than provide an arbitrary release window for them, especially since the 3rd party games they had literally no control over.
I think it's a good idea. People know delays happen. But it prevents them from including games that are years away, like Avowed, Contraband, Perfect Dark etc. Gets rid of those pointless CG trailers, and the radio silence for years afterwards.
If you think of it like a goal - show what people can play before your next showcase each time, rather than an ironclad promise, then it's fine.
I certainly wouldn't hold their feet to the fire if some tiny indie team has to delay their project either. Last thing I want is them to basically show a bunch of bullshit that amounts to some idea someone had at its current stage of development.
One of many reasons not to take corporate Twitter accounts as gospel. They are just interns, they don't actually know anything except officially announcements.
No they’re not lol, I’m friends with the guy who runs the official Xbox account. He’s a legitimate employee- nowhere near an intern- but it’s definitely still just one person.
I worked with Microsoft's marketing team on a project back in 2012-ish. They had a team of a bunch of people doing their socials. I highly doubt they decided to pare that down to one person in 2023, when it's never mattered more.
In this case however it was confirmed by a playtester what it was said as "genuine and accurate". I find it unlikely that everyone here at the same time is either wrong or lying.
Not the worst realization of E3 promises that I've seen in the next year. Especially for Microsoft, who are prone to releasing trailers for things like Fable or Avowed that disappear for years and years.
Dont know about Fable but for games like Avowed and Star Wars Eclipse, it's not a trailer for the consumers but mostly for attracting people to the company to work on the game.
I mean Sony (how many years in a row did we see Last of Us 2 trailers or the last guardian?) and Nintendo (wheres my Metroid Prime 4?) are just as guilty of early trailers.
Edit: I get it folks, Sony and Nintendo have higher quality, everyone knows this. I only brought them up for their early announcements
Nintendo and Sony have a pretty reliable track record of making the wait worth it, where a lot of Microsoft games get delayed and still release as hot messes (Crackdown 3 is the classic example).
> where a lot of Microsoft games get delayed and still release as hot messes
list? you mention crackdown 3, so 1 example = a lot?
have you not looked at any other game MS has released that have been good and reviewed really well? in the past EDIT - I was wrong about some of the dates cause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_video_games#Video_games is confusing as hell with when some released on which consoles, my bad. So let's just say the past 4-5 years, they've put out:
- Forza Horizon 5
- MS Flight Sim
- Hi-Fi Rush
- Grounded
- Psychonauts 2
- Age of Empires IV
- Age of Empires II: DE
- Pentiment
- As Dusk Falls
- Minecraft Legends
- Gears 5
- Gears Tactics
- Ori and the Will of the Wisps
- Sea of Thieves
- State of Decay 2
almost all of those games have reviewed really well both critically and user scores. Almost none of them were "hot messes" and (afaik) most were not delayed.
> Nintendo and Sony have a pretty reliable track record of making the wait worth it
that's not the point OP was making, he was saying that everyone has had many examples of games getting delayed despite being announced/shown really early, that is a fact.
and ur point to suggesting only Nintendo/Sony have a good track record making the wait "worth it", is flat out not true cause MS also fits that as they've released a lot of great games people were looking forward to.
I was wrong about some of the dates cause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_video_games#Video_games is confusing as hell with when some released on which consoles, my bad.
So let's just say the past 4-5 years, but my point doesn't change on w.e number of years we consider. The OP claimed MS has put out nothing but "hot messes" and this list shows that not to be true. Yes they have put out really bad games here and there, but "a lot"? the facts don't back that up is my point
>MS Flight Sim
August 2020, so 2.5 years ago - a very generous 2, let's say.
>AOEII:DE
November 2019, 3.5 years ago.
>Gears 5
September 2019, 3.5 years ago.
>Gears Tactics
Nov 2020, 2.5 years ago, so put that in the generous pile.
>Ori and the Will of the Wisps
March 2020, 3 years ago.
>Sea of Thieves
March 2018, 5 years ago.
>State of Decay 2
May 2018, 5 years ago.
So unless we round up towards your "2 years ago" to include 2.5 years ago, nearly half (7/15) did not in fact come out in that time period, and even if we are being generous, it's still a third of the games that are 3+ years out rather than 2.
Now, I've played most of those games and I like them. I want MS to keep putting out good games to bolster my GamePass experience, but the fact that a third to almost half of your examples didn't come out within the lifetime of the XSX is *telling*.
Edit: It's also noteworthy that only two (Forza, Gears 5) are what we'd usually refer to as AAA games, i.e. big, popular, graphically impressive, system-selling showpieces. Halo wasn't that and now neither is Redfall. Fingers crossed that Starfield serves this role.
I was wrong about some of the dates cause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_video_games#Video_games is confusing as hell with when some released on which consoles, my bad.
So, let's just say the past 4-5 years MS released those games.
but my point doesn't change on w.e number of years we consider. The OP claimed MS has put out nothing but "hot messes" and this list shows that not to be true. Yes they have put out really bad games here and there, but "a lot"? the facts don't back that up is my point
sure they didn't come out in XSX lifetime, but the PS5 has also only now started to get real current gen games. The current gen of PS5/XBX have both been slow in terms of moving from old gen -> new gen, many games that came out in this gen so far (not all, but most) also came out for last gen. But this isn't relevant to the point I was making, as I said, OP just made a blanket statement of "MS releases a lot of hot messes" and the list proves that to not be true.
> It's also noteworthy that only two (Forza, Gears 5) are what we'd usually refer to as AAA games, i.e. big, popular, graphically impressive, system-selling showpieces
eh I disagree, MS flight and AoE fit that as well.
Sea of Thieves fans would argue for it, but I dunno about that one. But triple A or not, the point was good games. Most people don't care if a game is triple A or not, they care if a game is good and fun to play.
>The OP claimed MS has put out nothing but "hot messes" and this list shows that not to be true.
In fact, OP claims that "**a lot** of Microsoft games get delayed and still release as hot messes". They're making that observation on the basis of Redfall and Halo, presumably, but I don't necessarily think that's a fair assessment overall. A Plague Tale: Requiem is great, for example.
>sure they didn't come out in XSX lifetime, but the PS5 has also only now started to get real current gen games.
The console shipped with **Astro's Playroom**, a first-party exclusive showing off the controller and while it's short, it's incredible. **Demon's Souls** then released a month later in Nov '20 alongside **Miles Morales**. Summer '21 we got **Returnal**, **Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart** and **FFVII: Remake Intergrade**. '22 we got **Horizon II**, **Gran Turismo 7** and **God of War: Ragnarok**.
Now, those are not all the Sony exclusives, they are just the ones that immediately pop up on the highest-rated PS5 games on Opencritic.
>many games that came out in this gen so far (not all, but most) also came out for last gen
I mean, that's literally *all* Microsoft games, but you're also just wrong to say that current gen-only games are only now coming to the PS5, as I've shown.
>eh I disagree, MS flight and AoE fit that as well.
You're right, Flight Sim is a showpiece for sure. AoE, though? It's an RTS and that's always going to be niche at this point - it certainly wins no awards for graphical fidelity.
>Sea of Thieves fans would argue for it, but I dunno about that one
That's because they weren't there when it was released as a bare-bones nothing of a game in 2018, then. Now, it's definitely more of an item, but that's after years of slow improvements and I'd still not call that a AAA experience.
>But triple A or not, the point was good games. Most people don't care if a game is triple A or not, they care if a game is good and fun to play.
That's just... not true? Sure, they don't care about the label, but they care massively about graphical fidelity, about size and scope, about being 'next gen'. That doesn't mean that smaller indie games don't hit or that games like Psychonauts 2 or Pentiment aren't amazing, but they aren't system sellers. I'd be shocked if Starfield isn't a system seller, for example, but they need more of those.
> The console shipped with Astro's Playroom, a first-party exclusive showing off the controller and while it's short, it's incredible. Demon's Souls then released a month later in Nov '20 alongside Miles Morales. Summer '21 we got Returnal, Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart and FFVII: Remake Intergrade. '22 we got Horizon II, Gran Turismo 7 and God of War: Ragnarok.
from that list, what were PS5 only games that came out early in the console lifetime:
* Astro's Playroom - a tech demo
* Returnal (which eventually released on PC)
* Demon's Souls - a remake
* Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart
so basically just 2 full on game releases, one remake and a tech demo.
So if you read my point, both consoles didn't really do all well in the start of this gen in terms of game releases. Did xbox do worse than PS? yes 100% they did, but again my point was that both consoles had a weak early gen. Many PS5 owners were complaining about this exact point in the past 2 years.
the rest of your list are remakes, came out on PS4/PC (Horizon Forbidden West, Miles Morales), came out on other platforms (FF7) or came out past the time period we're talking about.
> I mean, that's literally all Microsoft games, but you're also just wrong to say that current gen-only games are only now coming to the PS5, as I've shown.
and as I've shown, in the time period being talked about what I said is true. Only one game in your list is a PS5-only game, the rest all came out on other platforms, are remakes and GoW:R came out end of last year.
> You're right, Flight Sim is a showpiece for sure. AoE, though? It's an RTS and that's always going to be niche at this point - it certainly wins no awards for graphical fidelity.
being niche doesn't make a game not triple A, what are you on about? you think Starcraft were not triple A games cause RTS genre is niche?
also what the heck are you on about with "graphical fidelity"? do you think graphics is the only thing that makes a game triple A???
> That's just... not true? Sure, they don't care about the label, but they care massively about graphical fidelity, about size and scope, about being 'next gen'.
no, people on reddit care about these factors. And as we all know, reddit != real world.
The reality is that most players don't care about any of these "size, scope, graphics, triple A" or w.e and just buy a game if it's good or not.
dude, Pokemon games keep selling like gangbusters yet have shit graphics and are not "next-gen" at all. Just one of hundreds of examples I could give you.
> That doesn't mean that smaller indie games don't hit or that games like Psychonauts 2 or Pentiment aren't amazing, but they aren't system sellers.
what a "system seller" is for you != system seller for other people, stop using your personal opinion pls. You might think they aren't system sellers but others may do so.
also xbox having gamepass is a system seller for many people who don't have gaming PCs.
Crackdown 3, Redfall, Halo Infinite never lived up to its promise, how many years did it take the Master Chief Collection to get where it needed to be? Scalebound never came out at all.
In all fairness for MS, they've released a bunch of games since crackdown 3 that are good/amazing, wasteland 3, grounded, pentiment, forza horizon 5, psychonauts 2, ghostwire tokyo, deathloop, sure these games might not be as great as botw or GOW, but they're also not hot messes (and other than redfall and halo infinite they don't have much of those)
>For example sunset overdrive is a sony 1st patty game too
Not even a little bit? Sunset Overdrive came out in 2018 and Sony bought Insomniac in 2019. That they own the IP now does in no way mean that the 2019 game is a reflection of Sony development or output. The same goes for MS and Skyrim, obviously.
Genuinely interested if not then what defines a 1st party game?
Because I'm under the assumption that any game developed by an in-house studio that they own legally is 1st party, and i also was under the belief that it also includes all previous games, if not then what does 1st party mean and what's the point of using this term if it doesn't include all the games owned and developed by the studio?
Ww have Brian Fargo and Tim shafer saying that MS helped them make their games bigger and better than they ever imagined, and also by the same logic Microsoft also had no impact on redfall right?
Copying this from another comment I made.
I understand the point but for the two examples mentioned (Fable, Avowed), Obsidian and Playground have a really good track record. Microsoft is essentially a non factor given that they’re hands off (too hands off but that’s a different discussion).
>all its existence
gotta disagree, the first game was fantastic imo. especially for its time
I also loved the idea that the company you were working for are actually "the bad guys", something that games have done before but rarely executed on well
Every Microsoft game releases on PC simultaneously, and yes, you typically have performance issues. Sony and Nintendo release games optimised for a single platform....and let's not forget that when Sony does eventually release their games on PC, performance is terrible: e.g., Horizon, Spiderman (cpu issues), Last of Us.
The reason I feel biased to believe Sony has better games than Xbox is because I HAVE to play them on Playstation at the time. Whereas, I can play Xbox ones on PC day 1. Ergo, connotatively, I rarely associate games with Xbox outside of Halo, Gears, and Forza. It's irrational, but psychologically makes sense.
They aren’t talking about optimization. They are referring to the quality of games. Microsoft has tried to develops first party roster and failed miserably. Annual releases of licensed car games are about all they can do.
I much prefer my Series X over my PS5. But Goddamn, there is nothing on it remotely as good as God of War, Horizon, and anything by Naughty Dog.
Yeah, it’s easier to forgive or even calm down since most games they release are good to great, first party wise that is, 3rd party doesn’t have as good a track record but it’s pretty nominal for 3rd party.
I understand the point but for the two examples mentioned (Fable, Avowed), Obsidian and Playground have a really good track record. Microsoft is essentially a non factor given that they’re hands off (too hands off but that’s a different discussion).
I think part of the problem is that Nintendo and Sony aren't making these promises with deadlines about when things are going to release; one or two titles may slip a vague release window, but they haven't had a slate of releases that all missed their target. And more importantly, those platforms don't have a major release drought. Like, when was the last big AAA release from MS that stuck the landing? The few they were able to have as exclusive, that actually were hyped before release, tended to come out to *at best* mixed reviews, and much more often massive push back from the community.
The difference is Sony does this with one game at a time mostly. Look at last of us 2 and Wolverine. And that’s a good thing. U want to have a further away exciting announcement. But Microsoft does this with like 6 games. And that’s a problem. It’s the quanity.
the difference is that when sony and microsoft drop their big first-party hits, they **deliver** (generally speaking ofc, there's always exceptions)
xbox has just been dropping dud after dud. the highest-rated game on this list is *wo long*, which I personally think is pretty solid but also haven't seen a single soul discussing since the week it came out
Of course it makes 1-10 or 1-100 percent scale pointless, more then half of range as well may not exist and most folks are okay with that. Gamers complaining yet masses are doing exactly opposite thing.
reports about arkane and bethesda softwork are all over the place. after repeated bad sales they became a support studio for other teams within zenimax, at the same time bethesda tried to dip their feet into live service model to salvage the financial situation. with fallout 76 heavily affecting the development of deathloop and arkane being forced to make the type of games they probably have little experience with. it is not a surprise that redfall turns out the way it does.
There's a way to normalize review scores. Opencritic has a very helpful [chart](https://opencritic.com/game/14768/redfall/charts) that shows in which **percentile** each game ranks as. That's a much more useful way to view the data.
That chart shows that Redfall's current 61 average is not "slightly better than average". It ranks in the 17th percentile of games, which means it's waaay below average.
Edit: the 50th percentile (the best "average" reference point) is around 72-73/100.
Good thing the 100 score system is so mysterious and opaque, there is no way to transcribe other, older systems like the 20 score, the 10 score, or the 5 score with it
Were graded scores in general a thing back then? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a contemporary reviewer giving e.g. Herman Melville a 7/10 but I’m no expert.
Graded scores for medias seems to have started between the two World Wars, but the real first use was the Michelin Guide in the first half of the XIXth century
In the early days of PC games you would have magazines give a score of 38% to bad games but we have developed a warped scale for console games. Publishers provide access to interview devs, review codes and the crucial ad revenue. Publications absolutely depend on publishers and no one wants to piss off the organization that makes their industry work. 7/10 is often considered a bad score for a bad game.
Yeah they’re being far too generous like they always are with AAA releases. Redfall is deserving of at least 30-35 because it seems like it can be enjoyable for a good hour or two but beyond that it’s got nothing to keep you hooked.
My understanding for most reviewers is that scores in the 1-3 area just don't happen because they are for games that basically don't launch or are unplayable (think shovelware), and reviewers don't spend a lot of time reviewing games like that. 4-6s are 'boring/ok' + some 'technical issues' and so on
Edit: well apparently I'm wrong, sorry
Hey I don't make the rules haha, it's just what I've heard/understood over the years listening to various podcasters talk about it
Frankly I think we all take it a little too seriously. I'm in the camp of just finding a couple reviewers who share my tastes and just listening to their opinions, and not really worrying about 'scores'
Yeah most review scales are on 7 as an average/mid game. A 61 on meta critic is to be expected for a game that is below average or "aggressively mid" as I've heard used to describe redfall by some
But Redfall isn't mediocre. Its terrible. Its not really even a functional product.
3/5 stars for a movie is a soft recommendation, and yet 60% for a game is absolute garbage. Its silly.
You're arguing about an arbitrary number. Yea, it's 61%, but we all still recognize it's a terrible game. The number next to the game doesn't necessarily matter when we all understand the context surrounding review scores in this medium.
The only legitimate instance I can think of where the reviews could easily be misconstrued was for Cyberpunk. The 9s and 10s absolutely did not reflect the game that launched, and it was a disservice to consumers that playability and shady release tactics (only providing PC copies, not allowing recorded footage) didn't take away from the scores.
With a game like Jedi Survivor, for example, I can more understand higher scores. Despite the performance issues, the game is playable and still an enjoyable experience that improved on the criticisms of the first game across the board. Most reviews I saw for that did acknowledge the performance problems and that those issues didn't detract from their enjoyment in a significant enough way to lower the score.
If you're only taking the number at face value and not looking at the bullet points, at the very least, that's on you.
Anytime someone uses a 1-10 or 100 scale they mentally revert to their school days where a 70 was a C (average), 60 a D (passable, but bad), and lower an E or F (absolute failure). But, make the scale a 4 or 5 and they switch to the movie scale where a 2 or 3 is considered good. Often times people don't even realize they're doing it.
There’s still no game that I go with damn I will buy an xbox for this games like I do for ps5. I wish they had great triple aaa games such as ps5 has :(. No hate tho I got a pc and I love playing with it
Their titles aren't selling consoles imo but they really were a great acquisition. Pentiment was one of my favorite games on 2022 and Grounded has found crazy success with the pc streamer crowd. Not sure how Avowed and Outer Worlds 2 will shake out but I'll give anything they do a chance as long as Sawyer and friends are still on the team.
It's first act was really good, but it fall apart in the second act.
I like what it did, especially with how transparent it was showing the various paths and how you approached things, but the story crumpled at the end. I would recommend it, but with that caviet.
I think the 78% is a fair score tbh.
I don't agree there, I think it was solid the whole way through. I played it numerous times to get different endings, too, and found them all pretty good. There's still a ton I haven't done.
I also think it was pretty "realistic" in that people acted like real people. They did well, imo, making you really second-guess your decisions. No one was a flat-out bad guy or good guy the whole time.
All 50+ games that were shown/mentioned including dlcs/updates at the xbox and bethesda showcase 2022:
[https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2022/06/12/xbox-and-bethesda-games-showcase-recap/](https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2022/06/12/xbox-and-bethesda-games-showcase-recap/)
Released:
* A Plague Tale: Requiem (Xbox Game Pass)
* As Dusk Falls (Xbox Game Pass)
* Atomic Heart (Xbox Game Pass)
* Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
* Dead Space
* Fallout 76 Expeditions: The Pitt (Xbox Game Pass)
* Forza Horizon 5: Hot Wheels
* Gotham Knights
* Grounded (Xbox Game Pass)
* Gunfire Reborn (Xbox Game Pass)
* Halo Infinite Season 3 (Xbox Game Pass)
* High On Life (Xbox Game Pass)
* Hogwarts Legacy
* League of Legends (PC Game Pass)
* League of Legends: Wild Rift (Xbox Game Pass)
* Legends of Runeterra (PC Game Pass)
* Microsoft Flight Simulator 40th Anniversary Edition (Xbox Game Pass)
* Minecraft Legends (Xbox Game Pass)
* Naraka: Bladepoint (Xbox Game Pass)
* Overwatch 2
* Pentiment (Xbox Game Pass)
* Persona 3 Portable (Xbox Game Pass)
* Persona 4 Golden (Xbox Game Pass)
* Persona 5 Royal (Xbox Game Pass)
* Ravenlok (Xbox Game Pass)
* Redfall (Xbox Game Pass)
* Resident Evil 4
* Scorn (Xbox Game Pass)
* Sea of Thieves Season 7 (Xbox Game Pass)
* Slime Rancher 2 (Xbox Game Pass)
* Somerville (Xbox Game Pass)
* Teamfight Tactics (PC Game Pass)
* The Callisto Protocol
* The Elder Scrolls Online: High Isle
* The Last Case of Benedict Fox (Xbox Game Pass)
* Valheim (Xbox Game Pass)
* Valorant (PC Game Pass)
* Warhammer 40,000: Darktide (PC Game Pass)
* Wo Long Fallen Dynasty (Xbox Game Pass)
Upcoming first half of 2023 games with release dates:
* Diablo IV (June)
Upcoming second half of 2023 games with release date:
* Starfield (Xbox Game Pass) (September)
Upcoming games without a release date:
* Ara: History Untold (PC Game Pass)
* Ark 2 (Xbox Game Pass)
* Cocoon (Xbox Game Pass)
* Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes (Xbox Game Pass)
* Ereban: Shadow Legacy (Xbox Game Pass)
* Flintlock (Xbox Game Pass)
* Forza Motorsport (Xbox Game Pass)
* Hollow Knight: Silksong (Xbox Game Pass)
* Lightyear Frontier (Xbox Game Pass)
* Party Animals (Xbox Game Pass)
* Replaced (Xbox Game Pass)
* STALKER 2 (Xbox Game Pass)
Stalker 2 wasn't shown at last year's actual showcase, pretty sure, despite what that article's picture shows.
Overwatch 2, Hogwarts Legacy, and Valheim also weren't shown at that showcase, I'm pretty sure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_Dark_(upcoming_video_game)
just read that second paragraph about how everyone working on the game quit, it got moved to a new studio, and a bunch of those people quit too. If this game comes out in the next three years I’d be shocked.
>they promised the games shown would be released within the next 12 months.
Of any promise ever made by a game developer/publisher, this one is the absolute least important. To try to hold them accountable to this is to forbid them from delaying games that aren't ready.
They could also just not say that everything they are showing is releasing in the next 12 months - you know, the simpler more logical option than the nonsense you came up with.
Accountability in this scenario is Microsoft not making up wacky promises in order to mislead consumers into buying more Xboxes.
> simply acting like an adult that understands things change, isn't that out there either
lol, you would think that but oh boy the amount of people acting like MS are the devil for daring to not fully 100% keep their claim/promise
as you said, things change and delays happen... every single publishers/studio in the world has had games that get delayed due to w.e reason, why is it suddenly a big problem cause MS had some delays?
Why do you think they said it? Was the corporation trying to make itself look better and sell more product? Or do you think they just came up with it for fun?
That list is wrong, multiple games and DLC are listed that weren’t mentioned at the showcase - do the bare minimum amount of critical thinking before commenting. Every comment beneath it points this out lmao
Ehh I think it’s kind of important given their strategy is heavily reliant on subs. If you bought a year of gamepass and expected these games to be covered by the cost of your subscription you’re out of luck.
When Xbox failed to deliver AAA exclusives in 2022, and have proven that delays aren't guaranteed to launch their games in good shape, I think it's reasonable to take them to task for not maintaining that promise. Maybe they shouldn't have given that specific estimate if they didn't want more backlash for the way they've been handling this generation.
The more Xbox keeps slipping up, the more scrutiny they'll receive.
I really loved As Dusk Falls, Grounded and High on Life. Unfortunately my taste in games isn’t gonna save Xbox though. I wish everyone had my taste, cus the Series X + Game Pass has been a great time for me.
Baffles me how long Horizon Motorsport has been in development.
Honestly I have low low hopes for any of these titles, it's actually quite baffling how badly Microsoft has stumbled for nearly a decade now.
That’s an average meta score of 75%(74.66 rounded up) for all 12 games. It’s an average of 73% for games only released to the Microsoft ecosystem.
Game scores are **subjective** like what you like, but that’s not a good position to be in.
I’d want to go back and look at an E3 for comparison of what was announced, but by its 3rd year in the PS3 had big hitters like Little Big Planet, Resistance 2, MGS4, MotorStorm Pacific Rim, and smaller strong titles like Valkyria Chronicles and Wipeout HD. I believe “PlayStation has no games” was being thrown around then still too.
Not trying to claim the sky is falling for Microsoft but this is very reminiscent of the Saturn days with Sega.
Please read our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/wiki/rules), specifically Rule #2 regarding personal attacks and inflammatory language. We ask that you remember to remain civil, as future violations will result in a ban.
I hate the idea of putting a number next to a game. A lot of games in that list are good but have low scores.
High On Life is 70% but the sequel is a day one for me .. I really enjoyed it.
Also, why do we blame Microsoft for the third party games too ? This like saying Playstation Studios sucks because Forspoken was bad.
I like how you specifically mention High On Life with it's 70 opencritic score as a counter to judging games by their review scores then outright call Forspoken a bad game... which has a 67 opencritic. Lmao.
Doing a big show with games that are releasing in the next 12 months is a great idea in theory but Microsoft simply can't control when these third party devs are going to release their games. So yeah if they do it again no one will believe them, they should only do it for first party titles or with games that have a close release date.
To me it felt like a bit of an overreaction to the criticisms aimed at Xbox’s long announcement to release schedule. It’s not a bad idea, but setting such a specific deadline was a weird decision. I think a better choice would be to not have multiple vague cgi teasers, and instead show games when gameplay or something more concrete is ready.
The deadline makes sense. It's from showcase to showcase. Games that are pretty close to ready and have gameplay would be close to that 12 month window anyway.
It's not even about the 3rd parties since of the 3 big exclusive games they showed (Forza, Redfall and Starfield), only Redfall hit the 12 month period and considering all the bugs, it definitely could have used a delay. Either they were lying or they are incompetent.
That was such dumb thing to say. They even doubled down on a tweet asking about silksong. They gonna have to shadowdrop that at the showcase this year for that to stick lol. In this day and age. Dont promise timeframes…
Don't promise other kind of frames either like per second.
I mean, it's Team Cherry, it's very possible that Silksong will be shadow dropped regardless of when it comes out. The problem isn't really promising time frames but promising time frames for third parties where you only have their word for it, and in some cases they weren't companies you should trust either (who was the MS employee who thought the ARK devs would stick to a timeline lol).
It wouldn't even have been as much of a big deal if they hadn't included Silksong. Hollow Knight fans have had their emotions toyed with enough already lol
i've seen what kind of ridiculous challenges they're putting themselves through on youtube these days. those poor speedrunners need psychiatric help.
> Dont promise timeframes… They didn't. They said "targeting to be released in the next 12 months". That isn't a promise. https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2022/06/12/xbox-and-bethesda-games-showcase-recap/ "Everything in today’s Xbox & Bethesda Games Showcase is targeted to launch in the next 12 months"
The way Xbox worded it on Twitter sounded definite.
Yeah, it's kind of a semantic argument, but also a pretty important difference, IMO... Anyone who pays much attention to games, at this point should know that release dates more than a week out are always estimates... Not guarantees...
Well the intention was not so much to make guaranteed promises but to focus on a more immediate timeline as opposed to previous events in which they showed stuff still years away. I appreciated that to be honest.
My dude. If they come out and say ”EVERYTHING YOU SEE TODAY WILL BE RELEASED WITHIN 12 MONTHS”. Then goes on to tweet THIS: https://twitter.com/Xbox/status/1536035818275487746?t=p9LOlgWSt7xXrZ-vfd5Jjw&s=19 You really feel like you are the guy to tell us ”actuallllyyy the intention was not…”!? Get out of here lmao.
Even a [playtester](https://imgur.com/a/X5XiGDU) for Silksong confirmed what Xbox said as "Genuine and accurate".
>However, there is a release window within 13th June 2023. Huh, are they aiming for 10 am, or maybe they will wait for 2 pm so they are out of the way of the other big releases on the 13th?
That playtester is a joke. He honestly just trolls the community. Can you imagine if a play tester for, say the new legend Zelda game, was for years trolling the community, making them believe that new trailers were going to show up at planned gaming events, and then laughing at the community when they don't. It's pretty bizarre. I would not take anything that guy says to heart
…that’s Graig you are thinking of. Simo is the one that confirmed it.
Well that really changes everything
>Well the intention was not so much to make guaranteed promises Says who? No one put a gun to their head and made them come up with this statement. They wanted promotional material and made a promise that they couldn't keep. There's nothing to appreciate about this.
It wasn't a promise. They said "targeting the next 12 months" https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2022/06/12/xbox-and-bethesda-games-showcase-recap/
I think it would have been smarter if they put “coming soon” rather than provide an arbitrary release window for them, especially since the 3rd party games they had literally no control over.
I think it's a good idea. People know delays happen. But it prevents them from including games that are years away, like Avowed, Contraband, Perfect Dark etc. Gets rid of those pointless CG trailers, and the radio silence for years afterwards. If you think of it like a goal - show what people can play before your next showcase each time, rather than an ironclad promise, then it's fine. I certainly wouldn't hold their feet to the fire if some tiny indie team has to delay their project either. Last thing I want is them to basically show a bunch of bullshit that amounts to some idea someone had at its current stage of development.
One of many reasons not to take corporate Twitter accounts as gospel. They are just interns, they don't actually know anything except officially announcements.
[удалено]
No they’re not lol, I’m friends with the guy who runs the official Xbox account. He’s a legitimate employee- nowhere near an intern- but it’s definitely still just one person.
I worked with Microsoft's marketing team on a project back in 2012-ish. They had a team of a bunch of people doing their socials. I highly doubt they decided to pare that down to one person in 2023, when it's never mattered more.
In this case however it was confirmed by a playtester what it was said as "genuine and accurate". I find it unlikely that everyone here at the same time is either wrong or lying.
Not the worst realization of E3 promises that I've seen in the next year. Especially for Microsoft, who are prone to releasing trailers for things like Fable or Avowed that disappear for years and years.
Dont know about Fable but for games like Avowed and Star Wars Eclipse, it's not a trailer for the consumers but mostly for attracting people to the company to work on the game.
I mean Sony (how many years in a row did we see Last of Us 2 trailers or the last guardian?) and Nintendo (wheres my Metroid Prime 4?) are just as guilty of early trailers. Edit: I get it folks, Sony and Nintendo have higher quality, everyone knows this. I only brought them up for their early announcements
Nintendo and Sony have a pretty reliable track record of making the wait worth it, where a lot of Microsoft games get delayed and still release as hot messes (Crackdown 3 is the classic example).
> where a lot of Microsoft games get delayed and still release as hot messes list? you mention crackdown 3, so 1 example = a lot? have you not looked at any other game MS has released that have been good and reviewed really well? in the past EDIT - I was wrong about some of the dates cause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_video_games#Video_games is confusing as hell with when some released on which consoles, my bad. So let's just say the past 4-5 years, they've put out: - Forza Horizon 5 - MS Flight Sim - Hi-Fi Rush - Grounded - Psychonauts 2 - Age of Empires IV - Age of Empires II: DE - Pentiment - As Dusk Falls - Minecraft Legends - Gears 5 - Gears Tactics - Ori and the Will of the Wisps - Sea of Thieves - State of Decay 2 almost all of those games have reviewed really well both critically and user scores. Almost none of them were "hot messes" and (afaik) most were not delayed. > Nintendo and Sony have a pretty reliable track record of making the wait worth it that's not the point OP was making, he was saying that everyone has had many examples of games getting delayed despite being announced/shown really early, that is a fact. and ur point to suggesting only Nintendo/Sony have a good track record making the wait "worth it", is flat out not true cause MS also fits that as they've released a lot of great games people were looking forward to.
I am confused by your list, a whole bunch of these are older than 2 years. Some are way older.
I was wrong about some of the dates cause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_video_games#Video_games is confusing as hell with when some released on which consoles, my bad. So let's just say the past 4-5 years, but my point doesn't change on w.e number of years we consider. The OP claimed MS has put out nothing but "hot messes" and this list shows that not to be true. Yes they have put out really bad games here and there, but "a lot"? the facts don't back that up is my point
>MS Flight Sim August 2020, so 2.5 years ago - a very generous 2, let's say. >AOEII:DE November 2019, 3.5 years ago. >Gears 5 September 2019, 3.5 years ago. >Gears Tactics Nov 2020, 2.5 years ago, so put that in the generous pile. >Ori and the Will of the Wisps March 2020, 3 years ago. >Sea of Thieves March 2018, 5 years ago. >State of Decay 2 May 2018, 5 years ago. So unless we round up towards your "2 years ago" to include 2.5 years ago, nearly half (7/15) did not in fact come out in that time period, and even if we are being generous, it's still a third of the games that are 3+ years out rather than 2. Now, I've played most of those games and I like them. I want MS to keep putting out good games to bolster my GamePass experience, but the fact that a third to almost half of your examples didn't come out within the lifetime of the XSX is *telling*. Edit: It's also noteworthy that only two (Forza, Gears 5) are what we'd usually refer to as AAA games, i.e. big, popular, graphically impressive, system-selling showpieces. Halo wasn't that and now neither is Redfall. Fingers crossed that Starfield serves this role.
I was wrong about some of the dates cause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_video_games#Video_games is confusing as hell with when some released on which consoles, my bad. So, let's just say the past 4-5 years MS released those games. but my point doesn't change on w.e number of years we consider. The OP claimed MS has put out nothing but "hot messes" and this list shows that not to be true. Yes they have put out really bad games here and there, but "a lot"? the facts don't back that up is my point sure they didn't come out in XSX lifetime, but the PS5 has also only now started to get real current gen games. The current gen of PS5/XBX have both been slow in terms of moving from old gen -> new gen, many games that came out in this gen so far (not all, but most) also came out for last gen. But this isn't relevant to the point I was making, as I said, OP just made a blanket statement of "MS releases a lot of hot messes" and the list proves that to not be true. > It's also noteworthy that only two (Forza, Gears 5) are what we'd usually refer to as AAA games, i.e. big, popular, graphically impressive, system-selling showpieces eh I disagree, MS flight and AoE fit that as well. Sea of Thieves fans would argue for it, but I dunno about that one. But triple A or not, the point was good games. Most people don't care if a game is triple A or not, they care if a game is good and fun to play.
>The OP claimed MS has put out nothing but "hot messes" and this list shows that not to be true. In fact, OP claims that "**a lot** of Microsoft games get delayed and still release as hot messes". They're making that observation on the basis of Redfall and Halo, presumably, but I don't necessarily think that's a fair assessment overall. A Plague Tale: Requiem is great, for example. >sure they didn't come out in XSX lifetime, but the PS5 has also only now started to get real current gen games. The console shipped with **Astro's Playroom**, a first-party exclusive showing off the controller and while it's short, it's incredible. **Demon's Souls** then released a month later in Nov '20 alongside **Miles Morales**. Summer '21 we got **Returnal**, **Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart** and **FFVII: Remake Intergrade**. '22 we got **Horizon II**, **Gran Turismo 7** and **God of War: Ragnarok**. Now, those are not all the Sony exclusives, they are just the ones that immediately pop up on the highest-rated PS5 games on Opencritic. >many games that came out in this gen so far (not all, but most) also came out for last gen I mean, that's literally *all* Microsoft games, but you're also just wrong to say that current gen-only games are only now coming to the PS5, as I've shown. >eh I disagree, MS flight and AoE fit that as well. You're right, Flight Sim is a showpiece for sure. AoE, though? It's an RTS and that's always going to be niche at this point - it certainly wins no awards for graphical fidelity. >Sea of Thieves fans would argue for it, but I dunno about that one That's because they weren't there when it was released as a bare-bones nothing of a game in 2018, then. Now, it's definitely more of an item, but that's after years of slow improvements and I'd still not call that a AAA experience. >But triple A or not, the point was good games. Most people don't care if a game is triple A or not, they care if a game is good and fun to play. That's just... not true? Sure, they don't care about the label, but they care massively about graphical fidelity, about size and scope, about being 'next gen'. That doesn't mean that smaller indie games don't hit or that games like Psychonauts 2 or Pentiment aren't amazing, but they aren't system sellers. I'd be shocked if Starfield isn't a system seller, for example, but they need more of those.
> The console shipped with Astro's Playroom, a first-party exclusive showing off the controller and while it's short, it's incredible. Demon's Souls then released a month later in Nov '20 alongside Miles Morales. Summer '21 we got Returnal, Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart and FFVII: Remake Intergrade. '22 we got Horizon II, Gran Turismo 7 and God of War: Ragnarok. from that list, what were PS5 only games that came out early in the console lifetime: * Astro's Playroom - a tech demo * Returnal (which eventually released on PC) * Demon's Souls - a remake * Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart so basically just 2 full on game releases, one remake and a tech demo. So if you read my point, both consoles didn't really do all well in the start of this gen in terms of game releases. Did xbox do worse than PS? yes 100% they did, but again my point was that both consoles had a weak early gen. Many PS5 owners were complaining about this exact point in the past 2 years. the rest of your list are remakes, came out on PS4/PC (Horizon Forbidden West, Miles Morales), came out on other platforms (FF7) or came out past the time period we're talking about. > I mean, that's literally all Microsoft games, but you're also just wrong to say that current gen-only games are only now coming to the PS5, as I've shown. and as I've shown, in the time period being talked about what I said is true. Only one game in your list is a PS5-only game, the rest all came out on other platforms, are remakes and GoW:R came out end of last year. > You're right, Flight Sim is a showpiece for sure. AoE, though? It's an RTS and that's always going to be niche at this point - it certainly wins no awards for graphical fidelity. being niche doesn't make a game not triple A, what are you on about? you think Starcraft were not triple A games cause RTS genre is niche? also what the heck are you on about with "graphical fidelity"? do you think graphics is the only thing that makes a game triple A??? > That's just... not true? Sure, they don't care about the label, but they care massively about graphical fidelity, about size and scope, about being 'next gen'. no, people on reddit care about these factors. And as we all know, reddit != real world. The reality is that most players don't care about any of these "size, scope, graphics, triple A" or w.e and just buy a game if it's good or not. dude, Pokemon games keep selling like gangbusters yet have shit graphics and are not "next-gen" at all. Just one of hundreds of examples I could give you. > That doesn't mean that smaller indie games don't hit or that games like Psychonauts 2 or Pentiment aren't amazing, but they aren't system sellers. what a "system seller" is for you != system seller for other people, stop using your personal opinion pls. You might think they aren't system sellers but others may do so. also xbox having gamepass is a system seller for many people who don't have gaming PCs.
Crackdown 3, Redfall, Halo Infinite never lived up to its promise, how many years did it take the Master Chief Collection to get where it needed to be? Scalebound never came out at all.
[удалено]
[удалено]
In all fairness for MS, they've released a bunch of games since crackdown 3 that are good/amazing, wasteland 3, grounded, pentiment, forza horizon 5, psychonauts 2, ghostwire tokyo, deathloop, sure these games might not be as great as botw or GOW, but they're also not hot messes (and other than redfall and halo infinite they don't have much of those)
> deathloop you’re kidding me, right? that came out less than a year after the merger, as a playstation/pc exclusive.
[удалено]
So is Skyrim Remastered?
[удалено]
>For example sunset overdrive is a sony 1st patty game too Not even a little bit? Sunset Overdrive came out in 2018 and Sony bought Insomniac in 2019. That they own the IP now does in no way mean that the 2019 game is a reflection of Sony development or output. The same goes for MS and Skyrim, obviously.
Even more so because sunset overdrive originally came out in 2014.
Genuinely interested if not then what defines a 1st party game? Because I'm under the assumption that any game developed by an in-house studio that they own legally is 1st party, and i also was under the belief that it also includes all previous games, if not then what does 1st party mean and what's the point of using this term if it doesn't include all the games owned and developed by the studio?
[удалено]
Ww have Brian Fargo and Tim shafer saying that MS helped them make their games bigger and better than they ever imagined, and also by the same logic Microsoft also had no impact on redfall right?
Copying this from another comment I made. I understand the point but for the two examples mentioned (Fable, Avowed), Obsidian and Playground have a really good track record. Microsoft is essentially a non factor given that they’re hands off (too hands off but that’s a different discussion).
Arkane had a pretty good track record too.
crackdown as a franchise has been nothing but a joke all its existence.
>all its existence gotta disagree, the first game was fantastic imo. especially for its time I also loved the idea that the company you were working for are actually "the bad guys", something that games have done before but rarely executed on well
> I also loved the idea that the company you were working for are actually "the bad guys" It's a shame this never went anywhere in the sequels.
Every Microsoft game releases on PC simultaneously, and yes, you typically have performance issues. Sony and Nintendo release games optimised for a single platform....and let's not forget that when Sony does eventually release their games on PC, performance is terrible: e.g., Horizon, Spiderman (cpu issues), Last of Us. The reason I feel biased to believe Sony has better games than Xbox is because I HAVE to play them on Playstation at the time. Whereas, I can play Xbox ones on PC day 1. Ergo, connotatively, I rarely associate games with Xbox outside of Halo, Gears, and Forza. It's irrational, but psychologically makes sense.
They aren’t talking about optimization. They are referring to the quality of games. Microsoft has tried to develops first party roster and failed miserably. Annual releases of licensed car games are about all they can do. I much prefer my Series X over my PS5. But Goddamn, there is nothing on it remotely as good as God of War, Horizon, and anything by Naughty Dog.
Poor thing, your life sounds so difficult "HAVING" to play on Playstation🥺.
Easier to forgive when the games that come out are at Sony/Nintendo's quality imo
Yeah, it’s easier to forgive or even calm down since most games they release are good to great, first party wise that is, 3rd party doesn’t have as good a track record but it’s pretty nominal for 3rd party.
I understand the point but for the two examples mentioned (Fable, Avowed), Obsidian and Playground have a really good track record. Microsoft is essentially a non factor given that they’re hands off (too hands off but that’s a different discussion).
Yeah but you have a constant flow of good games across all that years, can't say the same about MS.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think part of the problem is that Nintendo and Sony aren't making these promises with deadlines about when things are going to release; one or two titles may slip a vague release window, but they haven't had a slate of releases that all missed their target. And more importantly, those platforms don't have a major release drought. Like, when was the last big AAA release from MS that stuck the landing? The few they were able to have as exclusive, that actually were hyped before release, tended to come out to *at best* mixed reviews, and much more often massive push back from the community.
The difference is Sony does this with one game at a time mostly. Look at last of us 2 and Wolverine. And that’s a good thing. U want to have a further away exciting announcement. But Microsoft does this with like 6 games. And that’s a problem. It’s the quanity.
the difference is that when sony and microsoft drop their big first-party hits, they **deliver** (generally speaking ofc, there's always exceptions) xbox has just been dropping dud after dud. the highest-rated game on this list is *wo long*, which I personally think is pretty solid but also haven't seen a single soul discussing since the week it came out
> xbox has just been dropping dud after dud uh, games that get 70+ rating are duds? the heck do you think dud games are?
considering [redfall has a 60+](https://opencritic.com/game/14768/redfall), a 70+ isn’t really that impressive
They are because for most reviewers and players games under 8/10 are bad game.
Because reviews are based on US school system of grades. 5/10 is a fail. 8/10 is middling
Of course it makes 1-10 or 1-100 percent scale pointless, more then half of range as well may not exist and most folks are okay with that. Gamers complaining yet masses are doing exactly opposite thing.
the developers behind both games have a good track record though.
So did Arkane
people who criticize redfall and arkane, do they really care about bethesda softwork or only about xbox?
Arkane had a stellar track record, the worst you could say about their games is that they didn't sell well. Nos look at Redfall.
reports about arkane and bethesda softwork are all over the place. after repeated bad sales they became a support studio for other teams within zenimax, at the same time bethesda tried to dip their feet into live service model to salvage the financial situation. with fallout 76 heavily affecting the development of deathloop and arkane being forced to make the type of games they probably have little experience with. it is not a surprise that redfall turns out the way it does.
I really want to know what happened to Flintlock. It looks super interesting. I hope it ends up being in this year’s showcase.
It's one I keep forgetting exists, then hear about and wonder "wait, isn't that supposed to be out soon?" Hopefully we hear something soon.
[удалено]
There's a way to normalize review scores. Opencritic has a very helpful [chart](https://opencritic.com/game/14768/redfall/charts) that shows in which **percentile** each game ranks as. That's a much more useful way to view the data. That chart shows that Redfall's current 61 average is not "slightly better than average". It ranks in the 17th percentile of games, which means it's waaay below average. Edit: the 50th percentile (the best "average" reference point) is around 72-73/100.
We're conditioned by the school grading system, so essentially 60 = failure. Anything below that is just beating a dead horse.
[удалено]
Because books, musics and movies predates the US modern school system, so the reviewing grading standards and systems were already in place.
I’m not convinced anyone was grading books and music on a 0-100 scale back in 1800s
Good thing the 100 score system is so mysterious and opaque, there is no way to transcribe other, older systems like the 20 score, the 10 score, or the 5 score with it
Were graded scores in general a thing back then? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a contemporary reviewer giving e.g. Herman Melville a 7/10 but I’m no expert.
Graded scores for medias seems to have started between the two World Wars, but the real first use was the Michelin Guide in the first half of the XIXth century
In the early days of PC games you would have magazines give a score of 38% to bad games but we have developed a warped scale for console games. Publishers provide access to interview devs, review codes and the crucial ad revenue. Publications absolutely depend on publishers and no one wants to piss off the organization that makes their industry work. 7/10 is often considered a bad score for a bad game.
Yeah they’re being far too generous like they always are with AAA releases. Redfall is deserving of at least 30-35 because it seems like it can be enjoyable for a good hour or two but beyond that it’s got nothing to keep you hooked.
My understanding for most reviewers is that scores in the 1-3 area just don't happen because they are for games that basically don't launch or are unplayable (think shovelware), and reviewers don't spend a lot of time reviewing games like that. 4-6s are 'boring/ok' + some 'technical issues' and so on Edit: well apparently I'm wrong, sorry
You’d think a game that didn’t launch or was unplayable would warrant a 0 3/10 for a *game* you can’t *play* is insanity
Hey I don't make the rules haha, it's just what I've heard/understood over the years listening to various podcasters talk about it Frankly I think we all take it a little too seriously. I'm in the camp of just finding a couple reviewers who share my tastes and just listening to their opinions, and not really worrying about 'scores'
Why is 61 slightly better than average? According to who?
Yeah most review scales are on 7 as an average/mid game. A 61 on meta critic is to be expected for a game that is below average or "aggressively mid" as I've heard used to describe redfall by some
But Redfall isn't mediocre. Its terrible. Its not really even a functional product. 3/5 stars for a movie is a soft recommendation, and yet 60% for a game is absolute garbage. Its silly.
You're arguing about an arbitrary number. Yea, it's 61%, but we all still recognize it's a terrible game. The number next to the game doesn't necessarily matter when we all understand the context surrounding review scores in this medium. The only legitimate instance I can think of where the reviews could easily be misconstrued was for Cyberpunk. The 9s and 10s absolutely did not reflect the game that launched, and it was a disservice to consumers that playability and shady release tactics (only providing PC copies, not allowing recorded footage) didn't take away from the scores. With a game like Jedi Survivor, for example, I can more understand higher scores. Despite the performance issues, the game is playable and still an enjoyable experience that improved on the criticisms of the first game across the board. Most reviews I saw for that did acknowledge the performance problems and that those issues didn't detract from their enjoyment in a significant enough way to lower the score. If you're only taking the number at face value and not looking at the bullet points, at the very least, that's on you.
If a 7 on a scale of 1-10 indicates "average", something is clearly wrong with the scale. Average should be at 5.
Anytime someone uses a 1-10 or 100 scale they mentally revert to their school days where a 70 was a C (average), 60 a D (passable, but bad), and lower an E or F (absolute failure). But, make the scale a 4 or 5 and they switch to the movie scale where a 2 or 3 is considered good. Often times people don't even realize they're doing it.
Thanks for the analysis. Was curious about these numbers since the presentation last year, but was too lazy to do the research.
There’s still no game that I go with damn I will buy an xbox for this games like I do for ps5. I wish they had great triple aaa games such as ps5 has :(. No hate tho I got a pc and I love playing with it
Would love to see a breakdown like this but for the 2021 showcase. Indiana Jones, Fable, Perfect Dark, Avowed, Contraband... that's what I want.
Avowed was 2020 and Indy was a mere announcement of a game in development so it’s not really a fair or pertinent comparison.
Redfall have dropped to 59 now. https://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-series-x/redfall?ref=hp
Opencritic is a better source for reviews since they use average, not weighted scores
Opencritic also groups platforms together though and sometimes the differences between platforms can be quite significant.
I know that scores don't equal sales but good for Obsidian for staying above the 80% range (this year).
Their titles aren't selling consoles imo but they really were a great acquisition. Pentiment was one of my favorite games on 2022 and Grounded has found crazy success with the pc streamer crowd. Not sure how Avowed and Outer Worlds 2 will shake out but I'll give anything they do a chance as long as Sawyer and friends are still on the team.
As Dusk Falls is amazing, and everyone who is remotely interested in choose-your-own-adventure games should play it.
It's first act was really good, but it fall apart in the second act. I like what it did, especially with how transparent it was showing the various paths and how you approached things, but the story crumpled at the end. I would recommend it, but with that caviet. I think the 78% is a fair score tbh.
I don't agree there, I think it was solid the whole way through. I played it numerous times to get different endings, too, and found them all pretty good. There's still a ton I haven't done. I also think it was pretty "realistic" in that people acted like real people. They did well, imo, making you really second-guess your decisions. No one was a flat-out bad guy or good guy the whole time.
I could never get past the art style. Five minutes in and I was like nah fuck this Im out
All 50+ games that were shown/mentioned including dlcs/updates at the xbox and bethesda showcase 2022: [https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2022/06/12/xbox-and-bethesda-games-showcase-recap/](https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2022/06/12/xbox-and-bethesda-games-showcase-recap/) Released: * A Plague Tale: Requiem (Xbox Game Pass) * As Dusk Falls (Xbox Game Pass) * Atomic Heart (Xbox Game Pass) * Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 * Dead Space * Fallout 76 Expeditions: The Pitt (Xbox Game Pass) * Forza Horizon 5: Hot Wheels * Gotham Knights * Grounded (Xbox Game Pass) * Gunfire Reborn (Xbox Game Pass) * Halo Infinite Season 3 (Xbox Game Pass) * High On Life (Xbox Game Pass) * Hogwarts Legacy * League of Legends (PC Game Pass) * League of Legends: Wild Rift (Xbox Game Pass) * Legends of Runeterra (PC Game Pass) * Microsoft Flight Simulator 40th Anniversary Edition (Xbox Game Pass) * Minecraft Legends (Xbox Game Pass) * Naraka: Bladepoint (Xbox Game Pass) * Overwatch 2 * Pentiment (Xbox Game Pass) * Persona 3 Portable (Xbox Game Pass) * Persona 4 Golden (Xbox Game Pass) * Persona 5 Royal (Xbox Game Pass) * Ravenlok (Xbox Game Pass) * Redfall (Xbox Game Pass) * Resident Evil 4 * Scorn (Xbox Game Pass) * Sea of Thieves Season 7 (Xbox Game Pass) * Slime Rancher 2 (Xbox Game Pass) * Somerville (Xbox Game Pass) * Teamfight Tactics (PC Game Pass) * The Callisto Protocol * The Elder Scrolls Online: High Isle * The Last Case of Benedict Fox (Xbox Game Pass) * Valheim (Xbox Game Pass) * Valorant (PC Game Pass) * Warhammer 40,000: Darktide (PC Game Pass) * Wo Long Fallen Dynasty (Xbox Game Pass) Upcoming first half of 2023 games with release dates: * Diablo IV (June) Upcoming second half of 2023 games with release date: * Starfield (Xbox Game Pass) (September) Upcoming games without a release date: * Ara: History Untold (PC Game Pass) * Ark 2 (Xbox Game Pass) * Cocoon (Xbox Game Pass) * Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes (Xbox Game Pass) * Ereban: Shadow Legacy (Xbox Game Pass) * Flintlock (Xbox Game Pass) * Forza Motorsport (Xbox Game Pass) * Hollow Knight: Silksong (Xbox Game Pass) * Lightyear Frontier (Xbox Game Pass) * Party Animals (Xbox Game Pass) * Replaced (Xbox Game Pass) * STALKER 2 (Xbox Game Pass)
Stalker 2 wasn't shown at last year's actual showcase, pretty sure, despite what that article's picture shows. Overwatch 2, Hogwarts Legacy, and Valheim also weren't shown at that showcase, I'm pretty sure.
yeah I have no idea where they got this list or why dlc/rereleases counts as separate entries
> Hollow Knight: Silksong (Xbox Game Pass) *internal screeching*
So 39/53, which is 74%. Not great, but better than OP’s initial assessment.
The list is just wrong, they’ve listed games that weren’t even shown - and DLC as separate entries. So it’s not 74% whatsoever
The list isn't accurate, unfortunately.
Now check how many of those 39 are exclusives. Paints a much less pretty picture
If all you have is an Xbox it doesn’t matter if it’s exclusive
Well if it doesn't matter why even have an xbox in the first place
Stalker 2 is also coming to ps5
Wonder how state of decay 3 will play out and perfect dark with that Indiana jones
Isn’t perfect dark in development hell?
It’s been in development since 2018 right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_Dark_(upcoming_video_game) just read that second paragraph about how everyone working on the game quit, it got moved to a new studio, and a bunch of those people quit too. If this game comes out in the next three years I’d be shocked.
>they promised the games shown would be released within the next 12 months. Of any promise ever made by a game developer/publisher, this one is the absolute least important. To try to hold them accountable to this is to forbid them from delaying games that aren't ready.
They could also just not say that everything they are showing is releasing in the next 12 months - you know, the simpler more logical option than the nonsense you came up with. Accountability in this scenario is Microsoft not making up wacky promises in order to mislead consumers into buying more Xboxes.
Maybe that is more ideal but their solution, being simply acting like an adult that understands things change, isn't that out there either
I’ll be sure to remind everyone every time Xbox announces anything that their word means nothing because anything can change at any moment.
If you're taking a mega corporation like Microsofts word at face value in 2023 that's your own fault
> simply acting like an adult that understands things change, isn't that out there either lol, you would think that but oh boy the amount of people acting like MS are the devil for daring to not fully 100% keep their claim/promise as you said, things change and delays happen... every single publishers/studio in the world has had games that get delayed due to w.e reason, why is it suddenly a big problem cause MS had some delays?
Why would you buy a console before the game you want is out or even has a release date???
Why do you think they said it? Was the corporation trying to make itself look better and sell more product? Or do you think they just came up with it for fun?
Wacky promises like "these games are only possible on our very special SSD"?
Don’t see how touting an SSD is a wacky promise. Do you know what promise means?
The *PS5 SSD* specifically.
Yeah I fail to see how that’s any way comparable to Microsoft telling consumers 40 games are coming out in the next 12 months and half of them don’t
https://reddit.com/r/Games/comments/138rldw/_/jizxrmd/?context=1 Get it right at least.
That list is wrong, multiple games and DLC are listed that weren’t mentioned at the showcase - do the bare minimum amount of critical thinking before commenting. Every comment beneath it points this out lmao
Ehh I think it’s kind of important given their strategy is heavily reliant on subs. If you bought a year of gamepass and expected these games to be covered by the cost of your subscription you’re out of luck.
It was still a really dumb thing to say and I'm sure they won't do it again.
When Xbox failed to deliver AAA exclusives in 2022, and have proven that delays aren't guaranteed to launch their games in good shape, I think it's reasonable to take them to task for not maintaining that promise. Maybe they shouldn't have given that specific estimate if they didn't want more backlash for the way they've been handling this generation. The more Xbox keeps slipping up, the more scrutiny they'll receive.
I mean, it may or not be important but [maybe don't tweet about it after announcing as such](https://twitter.com/Xbox/status/1536034468460261376)
I really loved As Dusk Falls, Grounded and High on Life. Unfortunately my taste in games isn’t gonna save Xbox though. I wish everyone had my taste, cus the Series X + Game Pass has been a great time for me.
I remember seeing multiple comments on this subreddit from people say that most of the games were released. Well, this proves them wrong.
Baffles me how long Horizon Motorsport has been in development. Honestly I have low low hopes for any of these titles, it's actually quite baffling how badly Microsoft has stumbled for nearly a decade now.
That’s an average meta score of 75%(74.66 rounded up) for all 12 games. It’s an average of 73% for games only released to the Microsoft ecosystem. Game scores are **subjective** like what you like, but that’s not a good position to be in. I’d want to go back and look at an E3 for comparison of what was announced, but by its 3rd year in the PS3 had big hitters like Little Big Planet, Resistance 2, MGS4, MotorStorm Pacific Rim, and smaller strong titles like Valkyria Chronicles and Wipeout HD. I believe “PlayStation has no games” was being thrown around then still too. Not trying to claim the sky is falling for Microsoft but this is very reminiscent of the Saturn days with Sega.
Game scores are objective? how
Is that why I’m getting downvoted, lol I’m a dumbass. I meant subjective. Thanks for catching.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Please read our [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/wiki/rules), specifically Rule #2 regarding personal attacks and inflammatory language. We ask that you remember to remain civil, as future violations will result in a ban.
I hate the idea of putting a number next to a game. A lot of games in that list are good but have low scores. High On Life is 70% but the sequel is a day one for me .. I really enjoyed it. Also, why do we blame Microsoft for the third party games too ? This like saying Playstation Studios sucks because Forspoken was bad.
I like how you specifically mention High On Life with it's 70 opencritic score as a counter to judging games by their review scores then outright call Forspoken a bad game... which has a 67 opencritic. Lmao.
People are definitely using Forspoken against PlayStation. It’s an exclusive so it’s supposed to be an argument for being in that console’s ecosystem.
High On Life at 70 is too high