At least on the X1 store, there is a bunch of games being put in a 20th category. And at least half of them aren't on sale.
Just a reminder that a bunch of these were/are popular!
Those are my favourite sales!
They aren't calling it a 20th anniversary sale, so I don't see why that's an issue.
I'd hate for you to miss out on the joke, so I'll explain it:
Every week, retailers release advertisements in an attempt to induce potential customers. But, not everything listed in the advertisement is discounted. You see, the ad exists to show people items available for purchase.
Doesn't stop some people from complaining about it as if an advertisement is only to show things that are discounted. Thus:
Microsoft is dumb for advertising things not on sale! Which is probably unironically making the rounds somewhere.
Ironically, since I have Ultimate, basically everything in there was either free or discounted. Didn't even know it wasn't a special. (Though figured it was just a collection of "classics" anyway.)
If that Hyperkin Duke had been wireless, I'd be really tempted to pick one up now.
Think I'll start Halo with my son today. How many players will MCC Halo 1 allow for couch coop?
Looks like 1 is only 2 player co-op although I swear I've played the campaign splitscreen with 3 friends back on the Oxbox
Halo:CE campaign coop was only ever 2 player splitscreen. Multiplayer you could do 4 person splitscreen, with up to 16 in a match if you had 4 Xboxes hooked together with system link.
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
If that Hyperkin Duke had been wireless, I'd be really tempted to pick one up now.
Think I'll start Halo with my son today. How many players will MCC Halo 1 allow for couch coop?
Looks like 1 is only 2 player co-op although I swear I've played the campaign splitscreen with 3 friends back on the Oxbox
Halo:CE campaign coop was only ever 2 player splitscreen. Multiplayer you could do 4 person splitscreen, with up to 16 in a match if you had 4 Xboxes hooked together with system link.
No idea what my memory is of because it's not Halo 3.
Did go to a 4 TV Halo mp party though and that was a blast.
Its nice that microsoft seems to be making those inroads for japanese games. I know its miniscule in japan, but I like the options over here.
Eh. My guess this is a Bandai Namco joint, and they have a pretty healthy marketing relationship (DBFZ, Kakarot, Jump Force, Code Vein, Tekken etc etc). They've been doing this for a while with Xbox
I'd definitely love to see more outreach to smaller Japanese publishers though rather than just the mass-marketable conglomerates
0
BlackDragon480Bluster KerfuffleMaster of Windy ImportRegistered Userregular
BRIAN BLESSEDMaybe you aren't SPEAKING LOUDLY ENOUGHHHRegistered Userregular
I recently blasted through Halo 1 with a buddy a few weeks back. It's a remarkable achievement in shooter design that holds up at its very core, but the amount of recycling and padding in the level design is egregious by modern standards. It's all perfectly functional and serves the story but it absolutely drags at many spots and the amount of backtracking through reskinned or completely untouched, reused environments has this real undercurrent of the developer really running the clock on player's time. When it works, it works beautifully (ie. Silent Cartographer), but when it doesn't it starts feeling like a real fucking chore.
Of course, Halo 2 ironed out a lot of those issues (bar some early levels, ughhhhh) or at least didn't make it so obvious, which while retaining just about everything else excellent about the previous one makes it a knock out of the park. Barring the occasional absolute enemy bullshit at higher difficulties of course.
I recently blasted through Halo 1 with a buddy a few weeks back. It's a remarkable achievement in shooter design that holds up at its very core, but the amount of recycling and padding in the level design is egregious by modern standards. It's all perfectly functional and serves the story but it absolutely drags at many spots and the amount of backtracking through reskinned or completely untouched, reused environments has this real undercurrent of the developer really running the clock on player's time. When it works, it works beautifully (ie. Silent Cartographer), but when it doesn't it starts feeling like a real fucking chore.
Of course, Halo 2 ironed out a lot of those issues (bar some early levels, ughhhhh) or at least didn't make it so obvious, which while retaining just about everything else excellent about the previous one makes it a knock out of the park. Barring the occasional absolute enemy bullshit at higher difficulties of course.
oh don't worry, it was egregious at launch as well
I recently blasted through Halo 1 with a buddy a few weeks back. It's a remarkable achievement in shooter design that holds up at its very core, but the amount of recycling and padding in the level design is egregious by modern standards. It's all perfectly functional and serves the story but it absolutely drags at many spots and the amount of backtracking through reskinned or completely untouched, reused environments has this real undercurrent of the developer really running the clock on player's time. When it works, it works beautifully (ie. Silent Cartographer), but when it doesn't it starts feeling like a real fucking chore.
It was an extremely common complaint, amplified by the (at the time) rather unique architectural design (that would inspire a bunch of imitators on Xbox and Playstation 2)--that made no self-evident logical sense and was extremely easy to get lost in. Like Doom, except you didn't go into it expecting the maze from hell.
All subsequent Halo titles at least tried to avoid this mistake (like how Reach, 4, and 5 have overly diverse but linear architectural design).
Using monthly award players kinda feels like having those old MtG champion deck cards scattered throughout your deck. Like, fine for friendly tabletop, but come on, get an actual deck.
It's not surprising that they're making that decision, console exclusives are still dumb
I'm not sure they are dumb, since everyone loves first party content put out by Nintendo and most of what Sony makes. Xbox has needed more titles in the stable for years now. The differences between Sony and MS' machines are small enough that the games are the defining factor for most people buying them. It may not make sense as a customer but for them? Sink or swim
Exclusives are explicitly anti consumer, I couldn't care less if they make sense from a business perspective.
I'm not sure that's true. Would the world have been better off without The Last of Us? Does anyone really complain they can't play Mario games on their Xbox? If you wanna say buying up a giant company for their IPs is anticonsumer I can probably get down with that, but lots of these works only exist in the first place because of first party development. Again some consumers can buy all the consoles, and therefore don't care about some titles not being on everything. It's probably easier to say it's anti- poor consumers.
Exclusives are explicitly anti consumer, I couldn't care less if they make sense from a business perspective.
Now if you can just convince Nintendo, we could save ourselves a lot of trouble.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say this doesn't bode well for the "Game Pass on Switch!" choir--for that matter, Game Pass on anything that's not an Xbox Console or a Windows PC. Game Pass Streaming on Android is a juggernaut compared to iPhone, but it's still missing large chunks of the library.
0
AxenMy avatar is Excalibur.Yes, the sword.Registered Userregular
I do feel bad for all those person who owns a PS5. This stuff is never fun.
That said I wonder if it is actually "exclusive exclusive" or "exclusive (for 6 months)". Could really go either way I think.
A Capellan's favorite sheath for any blade is your back.
I do feel bad for all those person who owns a PS5. This stuff is never fun.
That said I wonder if it is actually "exclusive exclusive" or "exclusive (for 6 months)". Could really go either way I think.
I don't know if Microsoft would drop 7 billion dollars to just get timed exclusives.
They'd still make money from the sales.
And, I mean, it's not like this game is going to move consoles. Under normal circumstances probably, but right now? May as well shotgun it across everything.
A Capellan's favorite sheath for any blade is your back.
I do feel bad for all those person who owns a PS5. This stuff is never fun.
That said I wonder if it is actually "exclusive exclusive" or "exclusive (for 6 months)". Could really go either way I think.
I don't know if Microsoft would drop 7 billion dollars to just get timed exclusives.
They'd still make money from the sales.
And, I mean, it's not like this game is going to move consoles. Under normal circumstances probably, but right now? May as well shotgun it across everything.
Yeah, but I wager they make more selling their own boxes and services to people than a few sales on a rival platform. Microsoft is looking to future proof the brand. Before the purchase most people would have gotten a PS5 with very little hesitation based on the first party content, but with a heavyhitter like Elder Scrolls or Fallout off the table it makes a much tougher choice for some people, and that's always been the endgame.
I do feel bad for all those person who owns a PS5. This stuff is never fun.
That said I wonder if it is actually "exclusive exclusive" or "exclusive (for 6 months)". Could really go either way I think.
The ol' "Sony White Text" scenario, yes.
It's a valid concern. Trying to apply logic and a view of recent (let's say 10 to 15 years) history, I would say "Probably not." Gears of War was not "invented" by Microsoft either--it was the brainchild of a studio within Epic (which is why we have that half-complete and very poor-performing in-house demo of GOW1 on PS3). The franchise--and even its spinoffs, like Tactics--are pretty firmly controlled by Microsoft and exclusive to Microsoft's platforms ("Xbox on PC" being a definable, if extremely broad, category).
Starfield--in fact, the whole Bethesda acquisition--feels a lot more like Gears of War than Minecraft, a multiplatform success story built with Microsoft's cooperation years before they acquired Mojang, where Microsoft has a clear motivation to honor the multiplatform ecosystem. Minecraft was literally the test case for multiple (and more than two) cross-platform gameplay ecosystems. Starfield and its ilk barely exist yet, months after Bethesda was acquired.
Of course, my first mistake could be trying to apply logic. On top of that, after a certain point, exclusivity does not matter in almost any meaningful way. Devil May Cry 2 was a console-selling Playstation exclusive, except then decade later it came to Xbox 360 port of the PS3 re-release. And that was a bad game. No Man's Sky was basically a completely different game when it finally came to Xbox. If Horizon: Zero Dawn comes to Xbox the same year the sequel launches on Playstation 5, for useful purposes it was an exclusive for Sony.
I do feel bad for all those person who owns a PS5. This stuff is never fun.
That said I wonder if it is actually "exclusive exclusive" or "exclusive (for 6 months)". Could really go either way I think.
I don't know if Microsoft would drop 7 billion dollars to just get timed exclusives.
They'd still make money from the sales.
And, I mean, it's not like this game is going to move consoles. Under normal circumstances probably, but right now? May as well shotgun it across everything.
Under this same logic, Sony might as well bring Demon Souls and other similar titles to Xbox One, where they could sell it to an audience that is less likely to have had the opportunity to buy the original title PS3 title, on an install base that's more than five times that of the Playstation 5. By itself, it's already moved as many consoles as it's going to by this point.
Might as well go for the shotgun spread. But they probably won't, because they're looking towards the future, and not immediate results.
But it'd be better for us, the audience, if they did.
Minecraft is kinda more like another service that MS offers, it's prevalence across many platforms has only made it more culturally relevant. Which does make a case for no console exclusives in a way, but I kinda consider it an outlier because Minecraft is so popular across all age groups and accessible to anyone.
Now if they ever make a Minecraft 2? That might not make it to PS5 lmao
Minecraft is kinda more like another service that MS offers, it's prevalence across many platforms has only made it more culturally relevant. Which does make a case for no console exclusives in a way, but I kinda consider it an outlier because Minecraft is so popular across all age groups and accessible to anyone.
Now if they ever make a Minecraft 2? That might not make it to PS5 lmao
A better comparison--which isn't easy, because Minecraft is literally the only game of its kind in the world, and its audience demonstrates that--might be Final Fantasy XI. Sony had a obvious interest in keeping FFXI exclusive to Playstation 2, and probably could've (considering their clout and their M.O. at the time), but probably judged that bringing it to the Xbox 360--a smaller customer base than the PS2, very obviously--helped a franchise they had a vested interest in, if did not own. So they didn't pursue that avenue, the way they had with the franchise before and after that title.
Posts
Ironically, since I have Ultimate, basically everything in there was either free or discounted. Didn't even know it wasn't a special. (Though figured it was just a collection of "classics" anyway.)
Looks like 1 is only 2 player co-op although I swear I've played the campaign splitscreen with 3 friends back on the Oxbox
Well that should do. The younger kids can stick to fortnite and castle crashers.
Steam ID: Good Life
Steam ID: Good Life
The url says it all lol, D&D Dark Alliance comes to Game Pass on console, PC, and cloud at launch June 22nd, also features console/PC crossplay
Halo:CE campaign coop was only ever 2 player splitscreen. Multiplayer you could do 4 person splitscreen, with up to 16 in a match if you had 4 Xboxes hooked together with system link.
Xbox players get to be anime before other platforms
pleasepaypreacher.net
No idea what my memory is of because it's not Halo 3.
Did go to a 4 TV Halo mp party though and that was a blast.
Eh. My guess this is a Bandai Namco joint, and they have a pretty healthy marketing relationship (DBFZ, Kakarot, Jump Force, Code Vein, Tekken etc etc). They've been doing this for a while with Xbox
I'd definitely love to see more outreach to smaller Japanese publishers though rather than just the mass-marketable conglomerates
Well, that saves me $40.
~ Buckaroo Banzai
This is actually the first time I've played the campaign for Halo.
I played Halo 2 coop campaign with a buddy, but that's about it... Aside from a little Halo 2 and 3 multi with friends over the years.
Steam ID: Good Life
Of course, Halo 2 ironed out a lot of those issues (bar some early levels, ughhhhh) or at least didn't make it so obvious, which while retaining just about everything else excellent about the previous one makes it a knock out of the park. Barring the occasional absolute enemy bullshit at higher difficulties of course.
Lots and lots of wallpapers, for your desktop, tablet, phone, and it even your Xbox itself!
Only problem is, there are 325 themes, and five versions of each... meaning that unless I'm mistaken, there are 1,625 different files to download.
That... could take a while. Wish there was a way to download them all at once.
Like Mega Man Legends? Then check out my story, Legends of the Halcyon Era - An Adventure in the World of Mega Man Legends on TMMN and AO3!
Or you could pick out a few you really like and just download those.
oh don't worry, it was egregious at launch as well
It was an extremely common complaint, amplified by the (at the time) rather unique architectural design (that would inspire a bunch of imitators on Xbox and Playstation 2)--that made no self-evident logical sense and was extremely easy to get lost in. Like Doom, except you didn't go into it expecting the maze from hell.
All subsequent Halo titles at least tried to avoid this mistake (like how Reach, 4, and 5 have overly diverse but linear architectural design).
Yeah, I was thinking about Plan B, too.
Like Mega Man Legends? Then check out my story, Legends of the Halcyon Era - An Adventure in the World of Mega Man Legends on TMMN and AO3!
Kinda rude, Xbox
XBL - Foreverender | 3DS FC - 1418 6696 1012 | Steam ID | LoL
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2021/05/15/report-bethesdas-starfield-is-xbox-exclusive-if-that-was-still-a-question/?sh=67f4c0a866f6
'Jeff Grubb @JeffGrubb Starfield is exclusive to Xbox and PC. Period. This is me confirming that.'
Here's the Tweet. And like everyone else, I still don't know what the heck Starfield will be.
The freak-out over this is accordingly amusing.
PS - Local_H_Jay
Sub me on Youtube
And Twitch
I'm not sure they are dumb, since everyone loves first party content put out by Nintendo and most of what Sony makes. Xbox has needed more titles in the stable for years now. The differences between Sony and MS' machines are small enough that the games are the defining factor for most people buying them. It may not make sense as a customer but for them? Sink or swim
PS - Local_H_Jay
Sub me on Youtube
And Twitch
I'm not sure that's true. Would the world have been better off without The Last of Us? Does anyone really complain they can't play Mario games on their Xbox? If you wanna say buying up a giant company for their IPs is anticonsumer I can probably get down with that, but lots of these works only exist in the first place because of first party development. Again some consumers can buy all the consoles, and therefore don't care about some titles not being on everything. It's probably easier to say it's anti- poor consumers.
PS - Local_H_Jay
Sub me on Youtube
And Twitch
Now if you can just convince Nintendo, we could save ourselves a lot of trouble.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say this doesn't bode well for the "Game Pass on Switch!" choir--for that matter, Game Pass on anything that's not an Xbox Console or a Windows PC. Game Pass Streaming on Android is a juggernaut compared to iPhone, but it's still missing large chunks of the library.
That said I wonder if it is actually "exclusive exclusive" or "exclusive (for 6 months)". Could really go either way I think.
I don't know if Microsoft would drop 7 billion dollars to just get timed exclusives.
PS - Local_H_Jay
Sub me on Youtube
And Twitch
They'd still make money from the sales.
And, I mean, it's not like this game is going to move consoles. Under normal circumstances probably, but right now? May as well shotgun it across everything.
Yeah, but I wager they make more selling their own boxes and services to people than a few sales on a rival platform. Microsoft is looking to future proof the brand. Before the purchase most people would have gotten a PS5 with very little hesitation based on the first party content, but with a heavyhitter like Elder Scrolls or Fallout off the table it makes a much tougher choice for some people, and that's always been the endgame.
PS - Local_H_Jay
Sub me on Youtube
And Twitch
The ol' "Sony White Text" scenario, yes.
It's a valid concern. Trying to apply logic and a view of recent (let's say 10 to 15 years) history, I would say "Probably not." Gears of War was not "invented" by Microsoft either--it was the brainchild of a studio within Epic (which is why we have that half-complete and very poor-performing in-house demo of GOW1 on PS3). The franchise--and even its spinoffs, like Tactics--are pretty firmly controlled by Microsoft and exclusive to Microsoft's platforms ("Xbox on PC" being a definable, if extremely broad, category).
Starfield--in fact, the whole Bethesda acquisition--feels a lot more like Gears of War than Minecraft, a multiplatform success story built with Microsoft's cooperation years before they acquired Mojang, where Microsoft has a clear motivation to honor the multiplatform ecosystem. Minecraft was literally the test case for multiple (and more than two) cross-platform gameplay ecosystems. Starfield and its ilk barely exist yet, months after Bethesda was acquired.
Of course, my first mistake could be trying to apply logic. On top of that, after a certain point, exclusivity does not matter in almost any meaningful way. Devil May Cry 2 was a console-selling Playstation exclusive, except then decade later it came to Xbox 360 port of the PS3 re-release. And that was a bad game. No Man's Sky was basically a completely different game when it finally came to Xbox. If Horizon: Zero Dawn comes to Xbox the same year the sequel launches on Playstation 5, for useful purposes it was an exclusive for Sony.
Under this same logic, Sony might as well bring Demon Souls and other similar titles to Xbox One, where they could sell it to an audience that is less likely to have had the opportunity to buy the original title PS3 title, on an install base that's more than five times that of the Playstation 5. By itself, it's already moved as many consoles as it's going to by this point.
Might as well go for the shotgun spread. But they probably won't, because they're looking towards the future, and not immediate results.
But it'd be better for us, the audience, if they did.
Now if they ever make a Minecraft 2? That might not make it to PS5 lmao
PS - Local_H_Jay
Sub me on Youtube
And Twitch
A better comparison--which isn't easy, because Minecraft is literally the only game of its kind in the world, and its audience demonstrates that--might be Final Fantasy XI. Sony had a obvious interest in keeping FFXI exclusive to Playstation 2, and probably could've (considering their clout and their M.O. at the time), but probably judged that bringing it to the Xbox 360--a smaller customer base than the PS2, very obviously--helped a franchise they had a vested interest in, if did not own. So they didn't pursue that avenue, the way they had with the franchise before and after that title.