• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Xbox passed on deal to make Marvel games to focus on their own IP - Head of Marvel Games

Tripolygon

Member
I mean I think people need to look at this from everyone's perspective.

First, we don't know the financials involved with licensing Spider-Man from Marvel.

Second, 110 million is a lot of money to put into a game that ultimately you aren't going to own rights to the franchise for. So you can see why Microsoft would be hesitant. That 110 million probably makes more sense being put towards first party games that you can own the license to and if successful cross market.
Microsoft spent 100 million on rise of the tomb raider 1-year time exclusivity. They do not own the IP nor have any rights to the franchise.
 
I guess focusing on their ip really meant buying up a bunch of them. Job done.
Microsoft tried to develop their own IP but it largely hasn't worked out to the degree in which the industry relatively compares them to their competitor Sony.

Microsoft came onto the scene later than Sony, but their problem was their early success with Halo which hampered development of other titles.

Sony's early success with Crash Bandicoot and Spyro was short-lived because they didn't own the IP. Naughty Dog and Insomniac had to reinvent themselves.

How many major franchises from PS1 does Sony still support? Gran Turismo...

PS2? God of War (rebooted) Ratchet and Clank (kind of rebooted)
PS3? Uncharted (will they continue it?), last of us, maybe Demon's Souls?

The key for Sony is that they internally grew and invested in their studios, which is something Microsoft hasn't really done. The result of which is they needed to play catchup. Similar to DC/Warner Bros trying to catch up to Marvel, and similarly finding out they're too behind to do it the same way. Look at DCs biggest successes. They've been stand alone. Man of Steel and Wonder Woman (before they got wrapped up into DCEU), Dark Knight Trilogy, The Batman, and Joker. Doing their own thing they can have just as much success.

I think Microsoft buying Activision and Bethesda was an overreach, but we'll see how these play out.
 
Microsoft spent 100 million on rise of the tomb raider 1-year time exclusivity. They do not own the IP nor have any rights to the franchise.

100 million and let's look at why they did it.

2013 Tomb Raider (6th best selling game of 2013) had been a pretty big success and Microsoft had failed to deliver anything for 2015 and Uncharted 4 was coming out.

Microsoft needed something and in a hurry. You also have a franchise largely tied with PlayStation, so the idea is to get that userbase over.

In hindsight Rise wasn't as good as the original reboot, the fanbase didn't jump over, and so it looks like a bad move.

100 million for a game they didn't develop vs 110 million for a game that you have to make yourself.... You have to look at the opportunity cost there as well.
 

BeardGawd

Gold Member
Wolverine will sell gang busters if they keep it mature themed.

Majority of Marvel games have been trash. Out sounds like ms made the right call

No they just have to be SMART and have an eye for compelling games.

Avengers focusing on Kamala Kahn was a huge mistake. GOTG while good was a game noone asked for. It's a good popcorm flick but noone cared about these characters. Plus these games with multiple characters are really tough to do. Should have just focused on one central character.

MS could have picked Wolverine, Blade, Dr Strange, etc... basically any character that could make a great action game.

MS sorely needs good action adventure games that don't involve shooting.

This was a huge missed opportunity.
 

mansoor1980

Gold Member
David Jaffe was right
 
Even Sony doesn’t have multiple studios making Marvel games it’s only just one. Plus they still are able to release other games as well.
In fairness they had Camouflaj make Marvels' Iron Man VR. It just wasn't very successful.

I could certainly see Sony looking to fuel the growth of their studios with some more marvel games depending on the success of Wolverine.
 

Tripolygon

Member
100 million and let's look at why they did it.

2013 Tomb Raider (6th best selling game of 2013) had been a pretty big success and Microsoft had failed to deliver anything for 2015 and Uncharted 4 was coming out.

Microsoft needed something and in a hurry. You also have a franchise largely tied with PlayStation, so the idea is to get that userbase over.

In hindsight Rise wasn't as good as the original reboot, the fanbase didn't jump over, and so it looks like a bad move.

100 million for a game they didn't develop vs 110 million for a game that you have to make yourself.... You have to look at the opportunity cost there as well.
You said 110 million is a lot to put into something you aren't going to own the franchise. I showed you that is not true. They have been spending lots of money on timed exclusives that they don't own.

Rise was a bad move, passing on a marvel game was also a bad move in hindsight, not all decisions you make is right in business.
 
Wolverine will sell gang busters if they keep it mature themed.



No they just have to be SMART and have an eye for compelling games.

Avengers focusing on Kamala Kahn was a huge mistake. GOTG while good was a game noone asked for. It's a good popcorm flick but noone cared about these characters. Plus these games with multiple characters are really tough to do. Should have just focused on one central character.

MS could have picked Wolverine, Blade, Dr Strange, etc... basically any character that could make a great action game.

MS sorely needs good action adventure games that don't involve shooting.

This was a huge missed opportunity.

I think you're right in a lot of ways here, but think you're wrong about some stuff as well.

I think focusing on making a Wolverine game is a prelude to an X-Men game. X-Men is Marvels second largest IP historically. If Sony can make Wolverine work, they can probably expand that to X-Men afterward.

That being said making Wolverine work is going to be difficult. Wolverine doesn't make sense for open world. So the game will or at least should probably be much smaller in scale and more linear.

Blade and Doctor Strange are equally as difficult to make if not more so.

Microsoft has their own IP they need to flesh out well. Fable can fit the bill here.
 
You said 110 million is a lot to put into something you aren't going to own the franchise. I showed you that is not true. They have been spending lots of money on timed exclusives that they don't own.

Rise was a bad move, passing on a marvel game was also a bad move in hindsight, not all decisions you make is right in business.

The context matters, they had a finished product that they thought would be well received. Going into a Spider-Man game and dumping a ton of money into it, not knowing how it will turn out is a bigger risk.

Lots of scenarios to consider there.

A) The game sells well, but not monolithically well and the ROI isn't there.
B) The game sells poorly because you weren't able to pull it off and the ROI certainly isn't there.
C) And no matter what you still don't own the IP.

With Tomb Raider they thought they were betting on a sure thing. Turns out they weren't. They wouldn't own the IP, but it makes sense to take a shot at Sony close to their heart, which I think they enjoyed doing by owning Crash and Spyro. And I think was also a factor in Sony buying Bungie.
 

Isn't MS developing a Disney IP?

I think Microsoft has seen the success of Sony with IP. They've also seen the success of Uncharted and I think they are looking to marry the two with Indiana Jones, but historically these games haven't sold well. Bethesda isn't the studio I'd go to to make an Indiana Jones game either, but maybe this will be an evolution for them. They'd love to have a game that rivals Uncharted and takes some of that userbase away. Indiana Jones has more pedigree than Uncharted, but that has to translate into the game.
 

01011001

Member
This is what you posted tho:




So, is this the part where I just bow out of this conversation?

You are literally contradiction yourself......with your own posts....

I am not, maybe you lack the brain capacity to understand what I am saying... game rating systems are only using 6-10 and the rest is not really used, hence why I said an 8/10 is way below below a 9/10... because that's how shitty rating systems work today.

if you don't understand that I am very sorry for you
 

Hugare

Member
The truth is, MS wouldnt have a first party studio not busy already with Forza/Gears/Halo (at the time) to make Marvel games

"Oh but Sony doesnt own thr IP".

Do you think anyone cares? It works like any other first party exclusive, it sells tons of copies and consoles, and thats what matters
 

Rea

Member
Microsoft spent $100 million to keep rise of the tomb raider off PlayStation for 1 year. How much do you figure Spiderman cost to make?

Sony did not use their internal studio to make the game, their internal studios were busy working on their own games.

They all take risks when they want to.

Insomniac just made Sunset for Microsoft during that time period so they had a close relationship with them too.

Someone made a bad call in hindsight but I'm sure they weighed the options at that time and were ok living with it. It happens all the time. Sony refused to publish Demon's Souls in the west because they did not believe the IP would be successful even though they owned the IP. These things happen.
Ultimately, Microsoft didn't think Spider-Man game will be successful. It was their bad call.
It seems Sony is willing to take more risk in game development than Microsoft, you can look at the games like Death Stranding.
 

01011001

Member
That should be obvious but that poster sad ps4’s SM is a success because it’s SM… which is not true at all.

I did not say it was a success because its Spider-Man, I said SpiderMan will be more successful than Wolverine...

and I said SpiderMan was successful due to a combination of being a first party game and being developed by a trusted developer.
even if it was only marginally better than Amazing SpiderMan 2, it would have sold nore copies than it
 

BeardGawd

Gold Member
I think you're right in a lot of ways here, but think you're wrong about some stuff as well.

I think focusing on making a Wolverine game is a prelude to an X-Men game. X-Men is Marvels second largest IP historically. If Sony can make Wolverine work, they can probably expand that to X-Men afterward.

That being said making Wolverine work is going to be difficult. Wolverine doesn't make sense for open world. So the game will or at least should probably be much smaller in scale and more linear.

Blade and Doctor Strange are equally as difficult to make if not more so.

Microsoft has their own IP they need to flesh out well. Fable can fit the bill here.
For Wolverine they just need to copy the template Activision made with their 2009 Wolverine. Which was pretty awesome actually. It owed a lot of it's combat design to ninja gaiden. Gives us that with the graphics of Spiderman and its a hit.

MS can easily rectify this. Give Blade to Ninja Theory who already made a competent DMC and loves dark themes and subject matter.
 
Last edited:

01011001

Member
Why were the activision SM games failures then?
exactly due to the reasons I told you. every Marvel game that released at the time was pure shit, absolutely garbage.

these 2 Amazing SpiderMan games were the better ones actually and were still sub par.

the market was flodded with shitty Marvel movie tie-ins, so of course the market reacted negatively to that
 
For Wolverine they just need to copy the template Activision made with their 2009 Wolverine. Which was pretty awesome actually. It owed a lot of it's combat design to ninja gaiden. Gives us that with the graphics of Spiderman and its a hit.

MS can easily rectify this. Give Blade to Ninja Theory who already made a competent DMC and loves dark themes and subject matter.

I don't remember that Wolverine game selling a ton. The problem is as popular as the character is, the depth of gameplay and style of gameplay isn't going to reach as large an audience as a Spider-Man or Batman game. It's easily their riskiest game to date if it has anywhere close to the budget Spider-Man did.

If Wolverine hits, it'll take Insomniac to a whole new level, but if the game doesn't perform well, it'll probably stop this momentum in its tracks. I think an X-Men game happens either way though.

Ninja Theory isn't the caliber of studio you put on a game like this and with Hellblade 2, they probably don't put out another game for another 4-5 years... And honestly you have to do a lot ot ensure the game doesn't become boring.

That is where I think Sony has a headstart on any marvel competitors. Spider-Man 2 leads to Wolverine, Wolverine leads to X-Men. You are basically building an X-Men game with the assets and engine you already have. You could even let Sucker Punch use the engine and assets to do X-Men. Their pedigree around Infamous would probably be well suited.
 

jaysius

Member
Spider-Man was lightning in a bottle, before we call anything a mistake let’s see another good Marvel game. Infamous as previously stated are mostly shit games, they tried too hard to make traversal more fun, but really insomniac didn’t understand how to code driving cars and make an interesting open world. The combat in Infamous was meh, the sequel was very weak, the characters weren’t very interesting.

People are staring to get Marvel fatigue, even the review padded scores for the most whored reviewers(ign etc) couldn’t give the new Dr. Strange a high score. Not even Benedict Cumberbuns could draw people in.Disney Marvel shit is getting stale, even the brainless masses that love this garbage are starting to turn away.
 
Last edited:

odhiex

Member
Yeah...too bad. They could have at least tried making a good Marvel Superhero game. Instead, they went to their own tired IPs to sell.

Maybe someday tho.
 
Last edited:
Spider-Man was lightning in a bottle, before we call anything a mistake let’s see another good Marvel game. Infamous as previously stated are mostly shit games, they tried too hard to make traversal more fun, but really insomniac didn’t understand how to code driving cars and make an interesting open world. The combat in Infamous was meh, the sequel was very weak, the characters weren’t very interesting.

Your point is accurate, but Infamous was Sucker Punch, not Insomniac.

I actually think Sucker Punch has a better model for gameplay in a Wolverine game a mix of stealth and action, but honestly, stealth doesn't REALLY make sense for Wolverine, it makes more sense for Batman. Think you have to be careful with gameplay mechanics.

Batman was a template for Spider-Man so Insomniac had an easier job. Not sure that template works for every superhero.
 

iHaunter

Member
Phil "The Flunky" Spencer. One bad decision after another. It never ceases to end.

Glad he made the decision though. Insomniac is doing an amazing job. Xbox doesn't have the talent to pull it off anyway at the moment.
 
Last edited:

tmlDan

Member
Sounds like you're salty because not everybody likes Marvel.
The first Spiderman gameplay trailer has 75 million views on the marvel channel.


Name me another game with a trailer with that many? I know you feel cool hating something popular but even without the marvel/spiderman branding the games fantastic and fun to play.

OT: MS made a huge mistake, then again they didn't really have a studio that could make a good Spiderman game back then
 
Last edited:
Spider-Man was lightning in a bottle, before we call anything a mistake let’s see another good Marvel game. Infamous as previously stated are mostly shit games, they tried too hard to make traversal more fun, but really insomniac didn’t understand how to code driving cars and make an interesting open world. The combat in Infamous was meh, the sequel was very weak, the characters weren’t very interesting.
ants GIF

People are staring to get Marvel fatigue, even the review padded scores for the most whored reviewers(ign etc) couldn’t give the new Dr. Strange a high score. Not even Benedict Cumberbuns could draw people in.Disney Marvel shit is getting stale, even the brainless masses that love this garbage are starting to turn away.
Latest Spider-Man flopped at the box-office?
clown GIF by Team Coco
 

Bridges

Member
Obviously hindsight is 20/20 but I get why they chose to focus on their IP. Microsoft put themselves in a bad spot by not keeping the IP to a lot of notable "Xbox games" over the years.
360 was full of high profile exclusives that turned multiplat like Mass Effect & Bioshock, and the XB1 years consisted of a lot of exclusives they didn't retain the rights to like Sunset Overdrive & Titanfall.

When those studios move on you're back to just Halo/Gears/Forza and the occasional Crackdown/Fable. It makes sense why you would want to pivot to develop more projects you could turn into franchises without worrying about studios getting bought or wanting to go multiplat down the line.

Sony was smart to grab Spiderman, but who knows if Microsoft even could've made a game as good or successful as Spiderman, it very well could've been an expensive flop like Avengers if they chose the wrong team for it.
 

jaysius

Member
The first Spiderman gameplay trailer has 75 million views on the marvel channel.


Name me another game with a trailer with that many? I know you feel cool hating something popular but even without the marvel/spiderman branding the games fantastic and fun to play.

OT: MS made a huge mistake, then again they didn't really have a studio that could make a good Spiderman game back then
Sweet fuck, find a weaker metric than YOUTUBE VIEWS lol.
 
Obviously hindsight is 20/20 but I get why they chose to focus on their IP. Microsoft put themselves in a bad spot by not keeping the IP to a lot of notable "Xbox games" over the years.
360 was full of high profile exclusives that turned multiplat like Mass Effect & Bioshock, and the XB1 years consisted of a lot of exclusives they didn't retain the rights to like Sunset Overdrive & Titanfall.

When those studios move on you're back to just Halo/Gears/Forza and the occasional Crackdown/Fable. It makes sense why you would want to pivot to develop more projects you could turn into franchises without worrying about studios getting bought or wanting to go multiplat down the line.

Sony was smart to grab Spiderman, but who knows if Microsoft even could've made a game as good or successful as Spiderman, it very well could've been an expensive flop like Avengers if they chose the wrong team for it.

Don't forget that Gears was Epic and they've moved on from the franchise.

If I'm Microsoft, I'd put a lot into Fable, but they've tried that and they are trying it again.
 
Activision had a big part in the success of the 360 and it is no surprise that Microsoft wanted to buy them as a result.

Sony hasn't really taken that approach.

Tomb Raider was big for PlayStation, but Sony had Naughty Dog make their own Tomb Raider.
Assassin's Creed was really big for PlayStation, but Sony had Sucker Punch make their own Assassin's Creed.

Doesn't always work though, Sony tried to make their own Zelda with Dark Cloud and their own GTA with the getaway, but it comes down to having quality studios, which they have now. They didn't really have this in the early 2000s.

That being said, I could easily see Sony buy CDPR or Take2, which offers them a lot of what they don't have right now.
 

jaysius

Member
So you're just going to ignore the 800 million it grossed?
Of the many baseless stances posted every minute on Neogaf, I think “fuck Disney-Marvel” is a great one no matter what.

Also fuck Disney-Star Wars because they announced that now EVERY FUCKING THING needs to be painfully forcefully connected together into one huge cinema-centipede bore shitfest like all the Marvel movies.

Wolverine has had some really bad games, and some worse movies, who knows how this upcoming game will pan out really. By the time that game finally comes out, we might all hate Wolverine from shitty casting(like that child they cast for Spiderman)or from a run of more bad movies.

The previous Marvel games like that Avengers thing was pure trash, leaving us with one Great Spider-Man game and another half hearted half step semi sequel semi rip off(Miles Spider-Man).
 
Last edited:
Of the many baseless stances posted every minute on Neogaf, I think “fuck Disney-Marvel” is a great one no matter what.

Also fuck Disney-Star Wars because they announced that now EVERY FUCKING THING needs to be painfully forcefully connected together into one huge cinema-centipede bore shitfest like all the Marvel movies.

Wolverine has had some really bad games, and some worse movies, who knows how this upcoming game will pan out really.
Dance Dancing GIF by AFV Pets
 

Rockman33

Member
Your nitpicking over 1.5 million units and 2 months. At the end of the day, there like a million or so apart. Pretty much the same. And I read somewhere saying in May they reached 13million.

After how many billions and billions spent + advertising and championing Phil and Gamepass, plus a cheaper Series S and only 1.5 million units more than Xbox One…. well done lol

TBH it was a dumb statement from Aaron Greenberg as usual.

Truth is Xbox One DID outsell 360 compared to 360’s first 16 months. And it meant nothing. Just like it means nothing now selling 14.5 million. Xbox aint gonna sell close to the 360 again
I’m not nitpicking when I’m just correcting your facts. 14.5 compared to 12 million is over 20% more. That’s a big deal.

Also consider you could easily buy a Xbox one 6 months after launch and you still can’t get a series X whenever you want. (Not saying it’s impossible to find) but the demand is still outpacing supply.
 
What studios would make marvel games anyway?
This was unfavorable deal to them, considering they aren't out of halo,Gears, forza.

This was the best outcome for both parties.

Sony with big marvel characters, and 3rd parties for other marvel games.
Meanwhile, Xbox would diversify their IPs outside of gears, forza and halo.

Because we all know they damn well needed to.

Despite having a fucking treasure trove of classic IP, MGS's continued reliance on Halo, Gears and Forza is pretty starling.

Good decision by Phil as always. Xbox fans got the better superhero game, Crackdown 3.

drive off 50 cent GIF
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom