Thursday, May 4th 2023

Xbox's Phil Spencer Addresses Redfall's Substandard Launch State

Phil Spencer, CEO of Xbox Game Studios, appeared on the popular (Xbox-themed) Kinda Funny Games podcast earlier this week for a video interview (Xcast Episode 137). The almost 45-minute long conversation touched upon several topics relating to gaming matters at Microsoft, with the hosts managing to corner Spencer about the recent (not so good) launch of Bethesda and Arkane's horror FPS Redfall. Gaming community feedback has not exactly been encouraging in the wake of the game's release two days ago, and Spencer admits that he shares similar sentiments: "I'll just say all up, there's nothing that's more difficult for me than disappointing the Xbox community. I've been a part of it for a long time. I obviously work on Xbox, head of the business, have a lot of friends, get a lot of feedback. And just to watch the community lose confidence, be disappointed, I'm disappointed. I'm upset with myself. I revisit our process - I think back to the announcement of 60 FPS and then we weren't shipping 60 FPS, that was our punch in the chin, rightfully, a couple of weeks ago. And then seeing the game come out and the critical response was not what we wanted, and it's disappointing."

He continues his thought about reacting to feedback this early on in the process: "What can we learn? What can we get better? One thing I'll fight is what went wrong. There's clearly quality and execution things we can do, but one thing I won't do is push against creative aspirations of our teams. Then a lot of people will say, hey, you've got teams, teams know how to do one kind of game, just force them to go do the one kind of game they have a proven track record for. I'm just not a believer in that. Maybe that means I'll under deliver for some of our fans out there. But when a team like Rare wants to do Sea of Thieves, when a team like Obsidian wants to do Grounded, when Tango wants to go do Hi-Fi (Rush) when everybody probably thought they were doing The Evil Within 3, I want to give the teams the creative platform to go and push their ability, push their aspirations."
Spencer is sorry about the situation and is open to taking part of the responsibility: "But I also need to have a great selection of games that continue to come that surprise and delight our fans. We under-delivered on that and for that I apologize. It's not what I expect, not what I want. But it's ours to deliver." His primary concern lies with Redfall's technical problems, rather than the game's critical reception (in terms of press coverage): "I don't look at the review scores on Redfall - there are quality issues and we're working on those - but I think there's a fundamental piece of feedback that we get that the game isn't realizing the creative vision it had for its players. That doesn't feel like a hey, just delay it. That feels like the game had a goal to do one thing and when players are actually playing they're not feeling that thing, they're not feeling the creative execution of the team."


Spencer discusses his company's internal project postponement strategies: "When a game needs to be delayed, we did with Halo, we did with Starfield, we did with Redfall, because the production timeline is saying, we have this vision, and our production timelines don't get us to the completion of that vision, we do delay games. We do that..." He states that he's a fan of Arkane's past work and legacy, but a good track record is not always indicative of things to come: "Learning about the quality - and there are clearly, I've seen them, I know there are bugs in Redfall - but when I look at the crash rates on the game, because we get all the telemetry of everything that's happened, it's not out of proportion for a game that has just launched. It's in the pocket of what we would expect. That's not to deny any of the animation, streaming of texture bugs, the AI bugs we've seen. We will go work on those. But when I look at the review scores of this game, did we have enough of a creative differentiation in our core idea? And did we realize that creative ambition? I'm a huge supporter of Arkane Austin. Their track record is awesome. I love a lot of the great games they've built. This is one where the team didn't hit their own internal goals when it launched."

Spencer delivers a slightly confusing sentence about getting a product out of the door, even in a less than satisfactory state: "I think it's maybe a little simplistic to just say, hey, if you would have just delayed it three months the core creative of the game would have delivered on something that was different than what it was. So I look at them in different camps. If there's a production timeline issue, we've been open to delaying. If we just have more bugs than we should have at the end of a game, we're open to delaying. At some point we have to have a creative vision and put the game out, and reviewers and players will tell us what they think." The AAA game development industry has become far too reliant on post-launch patches and updates in order to fix various issues - press and fans alike have remained critical of this approach for over a decade. Microsoft and Bethesda have produced yet another repeat of that situation - the Austin, Texas-based branch of Arkane Studios has already promised (weeks before Redfall's launch date) an adjustment to the single-player element's functionality, as well as higher frame rates on Xbox Series consoles.

Sources: Kinda Funny Xcast Ep. 137, The Verge
Add your own comment

36 Comments on Xbox's Phil Spencer Addresses Redfall's Substandard Launch State

#2
TheinsanegamerN
Translation: "you vegetables keep buying this garbage unfinished, so SQUEEEL LITTLE PIGGIES! Also remember to pre order the next game we're making, no we wont tell you what it is."
Posted on Reply
#3
ZoneDymo
TheinsanegamerNTranslation: "you vegetables keep buying this garbage unfinished, so SQUEEEL LITTLE PIGGIES! Also remember to pre order the next game we're making, no we wont tell you what it is."
You are insinuating that it matters to these vegetables, as long as the media covers it as the next triple A game, and Geoff Keely wipes his ass with 100 dollar bills because he drooled all over it, they will pre-order and defend it.
Posted on Reply
#4
dir_d
Phil Spencer is definitely saying the right things, he knows for over a decade, the release a shitty game and patch it after the launch strategy has degraded consumer confidence in AAA Studios.

What he hasn't said, which means the most, is how he is going to stop this from happening. He said he's not afraid to delay a game... Ok but what about hiring extra QA teams or going into some detail to build confidence back up.
Posted on Reply
#5
Tom Yum
Frankly, I call BS on the idea the senior exec didn't know the state this game was in when published. Redfall was a flagship game for Xbox this year (one of only two, with Starfield being the other). Phil can make all the right noises, but he must have known it was in this state, and it was launched anyway. How people take what he says at face value baffles me.
Posted on Reply
#6
swaaye
Yeah you know they were fully aware that it probably should have been delayed. Though I don't know if it's as bad as the knee jerk social group think reviews make it out to be because review bombing is a thing and there are positive reviews mixed in that make it sound alright.
Posted on Reply
#7
64K
A quote from the article by Phil Spencer:

"I'll just say all up, there's nothing that's more difficult for me than disappointing the Xbox community. I've been a part of it for a long time. I obviously work on Xbox, head of the business, have a lot of friends, get a lot of feedback. And just to watch the community lose confidence, be disappointed, I'm disappointed. I'm upset with myself. I revisit our process - I think back to the announcement of 60 FPS and then we weren't shipping 60 FPS, that was our punch in the chin, rightfully, a couple of weeks ago. And then seeing the game come out and the critical response was not what we wanted, and it's disappointing."

Then why did the game get released in the lousy shape it is and why doesn't he even mention the PC gaming community in his apology? Supposedly he has been reaching out to PC gamers with porting previously Xbox exclusives and future MS games. Is the hundreds of millions of dollars MS is making from PC gamers not worthy of at least a mention in the apology for Redfall?
Posted on Reply
#8
Verpal
I can excuse a game like Jedi survivor launch in subpar performance state, at least they mostly fixed it quickly, and the game foundation is good.

But Redfall's issue is way more fundamental, the fundamental game mechanic and environment is the problem, not just some lame performance and texture loading issue.

They know full well what they are doing, they just didn't care enough, gotta fill that monthly game release on game pass right?
Posted on Reply
#9
Darmok N Jalad
Must have been too busy pulling the PS5 support out of the game to get it right for launch.
Posted on Reply
#10
ZoneDymo
VerpalI can excuse a game like Jedi survivor launch in subpar performance state, at least they mostly fixed it quickly, and the game foundation is good.

But Redfall's issue is way more fundamental, the fundamental game mechanic and environment is the problem, not just some lame performance and texture loading issue.

They know full well what they are doing, they just didn't care enough, gotta fill that monthly game release on game pass right?
You should not forgive that appalling release just because another game is even worse, both are inexcusable and lets not forget they are asking 70 dollars for a single player game with pretty much zero replayability.....
Posted on Reply
#11
evernessince
swaayeYeah you know they were fully aware that it probably should have been delayed. Though I don't know if it's as bad as the knee jerk social group think reviews make it out to be because review bombing is a thing and there are positive reviews mixed in that make it sound alright.
No amount of delaying the game would have made it better. It plays like a bad Xbox 360 era game. Terrible animations, low effort content, low quality assets, a ton of loading screens, boss fights that are super dated, bad gunplay, and overall just bad design decisions at nearly every turn. This is one of those cases where the game is just bad and deserves the criticism it's getting.

They released the game because delaying would have just wasted money. The time to make changes was years ago, when they were building the game's base and assets.
64KA quote from the article by Phil Spencer:

"I'll just say all up, there's nothing that's more difficult for me than disappointing the Xbox community. I've been a part of it for a long time. I obviously work on Xbox, head of the business, have a lot of friends, get a lot of feedback. And just to watch the community lose confidence, be disappointed, I'm disappointed. I'm upset with myself. I revisit our process - I think back to the announcement of 60 FPS and then we weren't shipping 60 FPS, that was our punch in the chin, rightfully, a couple of weeks ago. And then seeing the game come out and the critical response was not what we wanted, and it's disappointing."

Then why did the game get released in the lousy shape it is and why doesn't he even mention the PC gaming community in his apology? Supposedly he has been reaching out to PC gamers with porting previously Xbox exclusives and future MS games. Is the hundreds of millions of dollars MS is making from PC gamers not worthy of at least a mention in the apology for Redfall?
His job is damage control and he's trying to do that here. They 100% knew before hand the state of the game and it was certainly their decision to release the game in a bad state to cut looses. He doesn't want to admit it but anyone who's played the game can see no amount of delaying would have fixed the game. He admitted here that the game missed quality metrics but doesn't address the fact that they are still charging $70 for it. The honest thing to do would be to charge $25 - $30 for the game, as the game is right now it 100% is not a AAA game deserving a AAA price tag.
Posted on Reply
#12
64K
If Spencer was even remotely sorry for the crappy Redfall launch he would see to it that the game is reduced from $70 to at most $40 until/if it's patched and polished but he won't. As the old saying goes:

"Actions speak louder than words."

I wouldn't pay more than $15 even if it does get patched and polished.
Posted on Reply
#13
ymdhis
That's all baloney.

The game launching like crap isn't as important as delivering it late, because there are sometimes cross-marketing deals which CANNOT be pushed back. There may be launch days set up in advance, marketing scheduled for a given date, cross-company tie-in licenses like toys of Happy Meals, and so on and on. Delivering it late also means recalculating quarterly/yearly revenues, loss of goodwill by investors, etc.

They weigh which will lose them more: the game shipping late VS the game launching in a crap state. Almost always it's cheaper to just launch it like crap and then patch it later.
Posted on Reply
#14
Imouto
At this point I wonder why MS is so adamant about staying in the videogame business. Must be unadulterated spite because they are losing billions upon billionsand are going nowhere.

They cut up losses with Nokia/mobile far before. If the ACTV deal falls off the table I bet they might have the disbanding meeting once again.
Posted on Reply
#15
Minus Infinity
Wow, another day another fluster cluck in the gaming industry. Maybe Nivida were on to something, it doesn't matter if the gpu is expensive, no one will be buying new games anyway. Anyway a weasel word interview straight out of a politician's playbook.
Posted on Reply
#16
Icon Charlie
Nothing new from the talking head. Things just never change. the same type of BS that happened 15 years ago is still the same today... or even worse.
Posted on Reply
#17
sepheronx
ImoutoAt this point I wonder why MS is so adamant about staying in the videogame business. Must be unadulterated spite because they are losing billions upon billionsand are going nowhere.

They cut up losses with Nokia/mobile far before. If the ACTV deal falls off the table I bet they might have the disbanding meeting once again.
Are they losing money though?

Anyway, I don't want a monopoly in the gaming industry.

While I would like to see someone else join the market like Sega again or NEC, I think console makers and developers need to step back a bit.

First, having two variants may not have been right idea. Just have the series X and move on. Then, maybe incentive developers to make on the system, maybe lower royalty fees? Maybe release an optimized engine that will work well on the system and allow indie developers access to said engine to take advantage of the consoles specs?

I'm starting to see a rise in indie games gaining more traction. Games like Subnautica as example, some indie horror titles like Them and US, and other titles, are gaining popularity. If these games can become easily available and working on Xbox series X, and promoted, I can see it doing well.

First parties are important as well. Maybe dial things back a bit, look at existing IP work keeping and go back to some roots. A Halo game that isn't open world but similar to that of Halo 1 and 2.

Maybe instead of having gamepass as something for big expensive titles, have it more for indies as an easy affordable way to publish their gamed.
Posted on Reply
#18
evernessince
sepheronxMaybe instead of having gamepass as something for big expensive titles, have it more for indies as an easy affordable way to publish their gamed.
That would be really cool and it'd help indie devs out. Some of my favorite games for the last few years have been from small developers. The problem for Microsoft is that would require them to be able to tell what a good game looks like, which they are clearly incapable.
sepheronxAre they losing money though?
They probably are. I think if they had released the game at $30 - $40 they would have gotten a lot less bad press and made more money in the end. $70 is outside the impulse buy range and really causes people to scrutinize.
Posted on Reply
#19
Vayra86
dir_dPhil Spencer is definitely saying the right things, he knows for over a decade, the release a shitty game and patch it after the launch strategy has degraded consumer confidence in AAA Studios.

What he hasn't said, which means the most, is how he is going to stop this from happening. He said he's not afraid to delay a game... Ok but what about hiring extra QA teams or going into some detail to build confidence back up.
This is the Phil Spencer rulebook we get here.

The guy gets it, clearly, the company doesn't. He's the good cop, basically. But still part of the corps.

They call this PR, marketing, or in other words, horse manure. Acts speak louder than words Phil, have a nice day.
Icon CharlieNothing new from the talking head. Things just never change. the same type of BS that happened 15 years ago is still the same today... or even worse.
Lens Flare Dubstep lmao
Posted on Reply
#20
TriCyclops
It's an embarrassment and not even fun to play. How much money did it cost tom develop this meh-burger?
Posted on Reply
#21
Unregistered
ImoutoAt this point I wonder why MS is so adamant about staying in the videogame business. Must be unadulterated spite because they are losing billions upon billionsand are going nowhere.

They cut up losses with Nokia/mobile far before. If the ACTV deal falls off the table I bet they might have the disbanding meeting once again.
I have no idea what they are doing, Halo Infinite is a joke, no Forza game for ages now, no Gears of war, lots of dead franchises like Fable, Kameo... Etc

To be fair Sony isn't doing better either at least in quality, but at least they have quantity.
#22
Bomby569
What can you learn? do better?

what a joke, like no one played that garbage at Arkane, Bethesda, MS and still decided to cash in on the dumpster fire.
Posted on Reply
#23
Vayra86
64KIf Spencer was even remotely sorry for the crappy Redfall launch he would see to it that the game is reduced from $70 to at most $40 until/if it's patched and polished but he won't. As the old saying goes:

"Actions speak louder than words."

I wouldn't pay more than $15 even if it does get patched and polished.
The fact we would pay even $1 for this POS to begin with after the way it has been treated and forked over to us is already five steps too far in my book.

Just boycot the title. No you won't play it from the budget bin either. Just straight up say FU, indefinitely. If you absolutely must have confirmation it truly is crap, pirate that shit.

We're far too lenient as consumers, and the main reason is we are too kind for ourselves, we can't say no, for whatever reason, but primarily because we lack discipline.
Posted on Reply
#24
64K
Vayra86The fact we would pay even $1 for this POS to begin with after the way it has been treated and forked over to us is already five steps too far in my book.

Just boycot the title. No you won't play it from the budget bin either. Just straight up say FU, indefinitely. If you absolutely must have confirmation it truly is crap, pirate that shit.

We're far too lenient as consumers, and the main reason is we are too kind for ourselves, we can't say no, for whatever reason, but primarily because we lack discipline.
Agreed. I will never buy it for any price but there are quite a few gamers that will buy it anyway and $70 is way too much. $40 dollars right now or 15$ next year for them. Problem with MMOs is that it's best to get in the game early before the player base erodes which it definitely will with this turd.

Best just to avoid it period imo.
Posted on Reply
#25
JimmyDoogs
This was a project started by Bethesda. Just like they had the idea to turn Wolfenstein into the same type of MP co-op mission based game. MS didn't come to Bethesda and ask them for this. IMO they should of just cancelled it because at this point you guys look at a bad game and say the companies dead now. Phil Spencer has largely saved Xbox games. Don't you guys remember 2013? Don Mattrick almost killed Xbox trying to turn it into TV and always online crap. We just got Hi-Fi rush and Wo Long just recently on game pass. IMO Phil Spencer is one of the most important people in the games industry. I get the criticism of a bad game but to say Phil Spencer should be fired is so wrong. He's gotten Xbox from being horrible to being pretty good. PC game pass is a very positive thing for PC gamers so the overall hate for Xbox is strange. A good game will come out and people will ignore it but then a bad game will come out and EVERYONE makes fun of it. Like I played Anthem and it wasn't THAT bad, it's just a game to me. Don't you guys remember all the shovelware from NES-PS2? One bad game is enough to make gamers rage even though there could be a great game right before it.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 18th, 2024 23:41 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts