Bungie: We Carried Xbox 360

Bitter? Noooo.

Posted by Staff
Bungie: We Carried Xbox 360
Halo creator, Bungie, has a community lead called Brian Jarrard. Brian has been giving a little insight into how the company feels now it's grown less close to Microsoft. One thing that stands out is the notion within Bungie that without Halo - and its creators - the Xbox and the 360 would not be the mighty beast it is today.

"In recent times, Bungie has not known anything other than big; anything other than carrying the weight of an entire console on our backs.

"However, since becoming independent last year, the future of the studio definitely includes a desire to not only create the ?next big thing? but to also foster and explore creative concepts of varying scales. We currently have multiple projects under way, each with a different scope and timeline."

Does Brian really mean this? Or has Australian Gameplayer writer Clint McCredie taken some contextual liberties? Apparently Brian means it, telling McCredie that Bungie "...had no idea it would... single-handedly make or break Microsoft?s entry into the game console market."

So, what of the future? Says Brian, "As the franchise grows, though, and as Bungie?s relationship with Microsoft continues to evolve and change, it?s probably safe to say that we will have less and less involvement down the road."

The full interview is available here.

Companies:
Games:

Comments

Showing the 20 most recent comments. Read all 21.
OptimusP 6 Nov 2008 17:32
2/21
haritori wrote:


But isnt this the situation for all consoles? Good games equal good console sales?



Explain the PSP sales then? Which aren't really bad, actually quite good, just not compared to the DS, but no one buys games on it that aren't called Monster Hunter...and it sold already quite good before Monster Huner came on it.
Sam 6 Nov 2008 18:01
3/21
First of all nowhere in the interview did he say "We Carried Xbox 360" that's just a nice controversial headline you chose to get plenty of fanboy traffic, "...had no idea it would... single-handedly make or break Microsoft?s entry into the game console market." refers to the original Xbox which certainly got a boost from Halo 1+2.
As for Halo 3, you could just as easy say that Bungie needed the 360 as it would never have made a profit off of the user base that the PS3 had at that time, good games require a console with a good market share to make money and consoles need good games to get their market share, the 360 had a strong user base before Halo 3 launched, yes it moved more consoles but they couldn't of made the kind of money they did without the 360.
To be honest all Bungie have done is a bit of self-promoting which you would expect a company to do, it's you who have changed the emphasis of their word to get youself some of that fanboy flame war traffic.
more comments below our sponsor's message
deleted 6 Nov 2008 18:02
4/21
OptimusP wrote:
haritori wrote:


But isnt this the situation for all consoles? Good games equal good console sales?



Explain the PSP sales then? Which aren't really bad, actually quite good, just not compared to the DS, but no one buys games on it that aren't called Monster Hunter...and it sold already quite good before Monster Huner came on it.



Piracy as with the DS and any other handheld console previous that was dominated by nintendo. at least thats my opinion, the fatc the PSP costs nothing to hack and the DS requires a one time buy of a Cart that costs less than half the price of a DS game.

where as compare that to the 360 and PS3 and Wii

you first have the complication of soldering a chip to a board, special Readers and Writers to Rip and Burn respectively and not to mention Media for 360 and PS3 doesnt come cheap, its why its not so popular as it is in the Handheld market.

as for Monster Hunter well thats those Crazy Japanese for you, personally i thought Monster Hunter was pants, Lego Batman is my fav PSP game at present and Lumines being my all time fav, as Soon as Sqeenix Annouce a PSP FF7 Remake then that will be im sure.
deleted 6 Nov 2008 18:12
5/21
Sam wrote:
First of all nowhere in the interview did he say "We Carried Xbox 360" that's just a nice controversial headline you chose to get plenty of fanboy traffic, "...had no idea it would... single-handedly make or break Microsoft’s entry into the game console market." refers to the original Xbox which certainly got a boost from Halo 1+2.
As for Halo 3, you could just as easy say that Bungie needed the 360 as it would never have made a profit off of the user base that the PS3 had at that time, good games require a console with a good market share to make money and consoles need good games to get their market share, the 360 had a strong user base before Halo 3 launched, yes it moved more consoles but they couldn't of made the kind of money they did without the 360.
To be honest all Bungie have done is a bit of self-promoting which you would expect a company to do, it's you who have changed the emphasis of their word to get youself some of that fanboy flame war traffic.


but htere hasnt been any fanboy flame war traffic? and if the title is trying to attract fanboys what kind of fanboys that love halo 3 or the MS would come to slag off Bungie or the 360? even PS3 fanboys would have nothing to add other than maybe "yeah the 360 would fail with out Halo" to which a 360 fanboy could reply "yeah the PS3 has no games" and so on...

I also read the interview, and i got that they implied to carried MS into the Games market which includes XBOX and XBOX360.
Tim Smith 6 Nov 2008 18:18
6/21
Sam wrote:
First of all nowhere in the interview did he say "We Carried Xbox 360"...it's you who have changed the emphasis of their word to get youself some of that fanboy flame war traffic.


Hi Sam,

I can sort of see where you're coming from here. However, the line in the interview: "In recent times, Bungie has not known anything other than big; anything other than carrying the weight of an entire console on our backs...." more than indicates to me that indeed the 360 was meant (my emphasis).

This is why I did a double-take - well, it's one of the reasons.

As for creating fodder for fanboy wars, one of the things we constantly try to avoid (sometimes to the detriment of hits) is exactly that. Actually, which fanboys would be drawn to this one? Are there Bungie vs Microsoft fanboy wars now?

I'm sorry if that other sites have lowered your trust levels and I hope you take the time to respond to this.

Cheers for the visit.

Tim
OptimusP 6 Nov 2008 18:40
7/21
Tim Smith wrote:
Are there Bungie vs Microsoft fanboy wars now?

*checks memo's*

No...no Bungie vs. MS wars...yet...

Let's go live to the Pentagon pressconference for more feedback on this potential growing threat
Tim Smith 6 Nov 2008 18:46
8/21
OptimusP wrote:
No...no Bungie vs. MS wars...yet...


Oh s**t, does this mean that this thread has inadvertently started one?

Nightmare.

Tim
headcasephil 6 Nov 2008 19:57
9/21
haritori wrote:
I think its safe to say that Halo did make the XBOX a cult gaming choice at the time, it had a reason to be on the market, but the 360 would not of failed without Halo 3, in effect the 360 was initally successful on the carried weight of the XBOX and Halo 1 & 2 fans, so it helped the 360 certainly, but Bungie wont be helping the next XBOX, although the HALO IP might.

But isnt this the situation for all consoles? Good games equal good console sales?

XBOX has Halo just like the PS1 had Final Fantasy to thank.

this is a very good ponit just look at nintendo and rare ok the n64 did not do as well as it could but i think with out one of rares best tiles 007 goldeneye the n64 would have done even worse a bit like the gamecube as i feal that if rare were with nintendo in the gc era and had made perfect dark and kemio which were both games that were ment to come out on the console the sales would have been a little better

halo made the xbox it was the beast game for the console for pritty much 2 years halo2 was the beast online game for xbox and for the start of the 360s life and still to day many people play it at this time there are 1,023 Players Online in Halo 2 and 11,695 Halo 2 Players (Last 24 Hours) which for a game that came out 9/11/2004 on a last gen console is a hell of a lot
Sam 7 Nov 2008 03:03
10/21
Well yes my trust levels have been put to the test and this site has had it's part in that but i've not read a thread on Sprong for some time so i'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you've either grown up as a site, employ better writers or i visited here on a couple of particularly bad days, as i'm somewhat amazed that your comments section hasn't errupted into a an all out console war, every other site i have visited lately has gone off after even less fanboy sensative threads than this.
We can at least agree to differ on the context, "In recent times, Bungie has not known anything other than big; anything other than carrying the weight of an entire console on our backs...." to me that kind of emphasizes the pressure to live up to the expectations of 360 owners, Halo 1+2 were hugely popular on the Xbox and the hype for Halo 3 on a new generation console must have surely been a huge weight on their backs, i don't think any game developer, however egotistical would lay claim to be the sole reason for a consoles success, fanboys definitely but the Community Lead at Bungie or any other software company? i just can't see it.
Anyway if i misjudged your motives i apologize, i've just had a very difficult time on forums as ever thread seems to end up as flame bait, judging by your lack of fanatics on this thread you seem to be some kind of exception, you must tell me what your secret is.


Tim Smith 7 Nov 2008 08:33
11/21
Sam wrote:
Anyway if i misjudged your motives i apologize, i've just had a very difficult time on forums as ever thread seems to end up as flame bait, judging by your lack of fanatics on this thread you seem to be some kind of exception, you must tell me what your secret is.


Not a problem. One thing I do try to respond to is criticism that does leave me thinking, "Were we right to report it like that?" I also appreciate people taking the time to post (as long as it's not 'First post' or 'you iz all noobz' etc).

The secret to not having (too many) fanatics? I wish I knew. We just try to keep the reporting across all levels of gaming. It's up to the SPOnG readers to tell you why we don't have too many flame wars.

Cheers for coming your post - it's also refreshing from this end to see that kind of input.

Tim
king skins 7 Nov 2008 13:28
12/21
Tim Smith wrote:
It's up to the SPOnG readers to tell you why we don't have too many flame wars.



Probably cos most of the threads end up going massively off topic and you have to prove your point on these forums as most people end up posting reasoned replies rather then the normal my console is better than yours s**t you get on other sites
deleted 7 Nov 2008 15:50
13/21
king skins wrote:
Tim Smith wrote:
It's up to the SPOnG readers to tell you why we don't have too many flame wars.



Probably cos most of the threads end up going massively off topic and you have to prove your point on these forums as most people end up posting reasoned replies rather then the normal my console is better than yours s**t you get on other sites


Id agree with that, although my console is better :))
Roblc 7 Nov 2008 17:53
14/21
haritori wrote:

I think its safe to say that Halo did make the XBOX a cult gaming choice at the time, it had a reason to be on the market, but the 360 would not of failed without Halo 3, in effect the 360 was initally successful on the carried weight of the XBOX and Halo 1 & 2 fans, so it helped the 360 certainly, but Bungie wont be helping the next XBOX, although the HALO IP might.

But isnt this the situation for all consoles? Good games equal good console sales?


Nope. Even with the huge sucess of Metal Gear 4, Devil May Cry, and Little Big Planet, the PS3 is still playing 'catch up' to the 360/Wii sales. Just look at current sales figures, and you'll see my valid point.

haritori wrote:

XBOX has Halo just like the PS1 had Final Fantasy to thank.



actually thats sort of wrong. The PS1 had more than just Final Fantasy to sell it. Every exclusive title that the PS1 had, Metal Gear, Final Fantasy 7-9, Tekken 1-3, Vagrant Story, Twisted Metal 1-3 ,Resident Evil 2-3, Crash Bandicoot, etc. was a reason to buy it then because you couldnt find that title on any other console. And it continued with the Ps2 , like "The Shadow of the Colossus", as most of those companies still did huge exclusives(I dont need to name all of those..just look at your PS2 game library) on the Ps2 giving it a reason to have it unlike the 'other' systems. I doubt that the Ps2 would have sold as good if MGS3, Shadow of the Collosus, Okami, Final Fantasy X & X-2, released on the original Xbox simoulatenously. But despite the orignal Xbox almost flopping in Japan, the Halo/Bungie combo didnt seem to help much there.



haritori wrote:
Its a little big headed of the Dev to think they Made MS gaming choice easier! the fact the game was good Dev should get thanks for, thats about it, but it will be interesting to see where Bungie ends up, i suspect without Halo they will struggle to be noticed as much.


yes it is...but its also very arguable whether Bungie was reason that people bought an Xbox for. I bet if the Xbox was a pain in the arse to develop for (like all of the Playstation systems are) this gen would be significantly different. But I do see Bungie having a hard time creating any FPS with or without a Halo's IP. They need to switch genres, like a RPG for instance, like a Halo MMO.

OptimusP 8 Nov 2008 14:03
15/21
Roblc wrote:

Nope. Even with the huge sucess of Metal Gear 4, Devil May Cry, and Little Big Planet, the PS3 is still playing 'catch up' to the 360/Wii sales. Just look at current sales figures, and you'll see my valid point.

Well, actually, the PS3 has this year so far gained the Xbox360 by a million and a bit more. A more realistic picture is that the Xbox360 and PS3 are fighting over the pseudo-hardcore scraps Nintendo is literally leaving them, untill Nintendo moves up-market and pushes both out. It's called a disruption strategy, a economic theory developed by a Harvard prof.

Roblc wrote:
Okami

Really, Okami? Sure, fantastic game, but it sold anything but buttocks and is one of the big capcom mistakes they have been making since 2004. Should have been made on the GC and it would have sold better (like all the quirky games released last-gen like Killer 7, Beyond Good & Evil, Viewtifull Joe and it's sequel ect. all sold better on the GC then on the PS2)



Roblc 8 Nov 2008 20:27
16/21
Optimus Wrote:

Really, Okami? Sure, fantastic game, but it sold anything but buttocks and is one of the big capcom mistakes they have been making since 2004. Should have been made on the GC and it would have sold better (like all the quirky games released last-gen like Killer 7, Beyond Good & Evil, Viewtifull Joe and it's sequel ect. all sold better on the GC then on the PS2)


yep, just another victim to those huge exclusive titles on the PS2, or was it because of Halo ?

Optimus wrote

Well, actually, the PS3 has this year so far gained the Xbox360 by a million and a bit more. A more realistic picture is that the Xbox360 and PS3 are fighting over the pseudo-hardcore scraps Nintendo is literally leaving them, untill Nintendo moves up-market and pushes both out. It's called a disruption strategy, a economic theory developed by a Harvard prof.


okay, if you say so. I seriously didnt know anyone had up to date sales figures on the console wars. But oh well. cant be right all the time.
OptimusP 8 Nov 2008 23:50
17/21
Roblc wrote:

okay, if you say so. I seriously didnt know anyone had up to date sales figures on the console wars. But oh well. cant be right all the time.

I didn't knew either, but the nice chaps at NeoGaf seem to compile a lot of data on a yearly basis now and then and looking at it from a yearly basis (with montly sub-divisions) really puts a very different perspective on everything.

One remark on the NeoGaf compilathons, for Europe, they only have numbers for the biggest markets like Britain, Germany France and Spain.
PreciousRoi 9 Nov 2008 00:17
18/21
Oh leave off the "pseudo-hardcore" bullshite, willya? FFS, anyone who buys a next gen Hi Def capable console is "pseudo-hardcore scraps"? As an aside, as near as I can tell, "hardcore gamer" was invented by marketing folks to describe what they used to just call "gamers", but who now had to be differentiated from the newly minted "casual gamers", a group whose own definition is fuzzy at best, fluid at worst. But now back to this "pseudo-hardcore" garbage you seem determined to spew.
...from my POV it looks like:
" "Real (hardcore) gamers" (A group of which I obviously consider myself a member) are playing the PC and Wii console, those 360 and PS3 owners are total poseurs (who I could totally pwn)"

I'm not even sure if "hardcore gamer" is something you aspire to be, or something you have to reluctantly admit to and blame on addictive personalities running on both sides of you family...

I think our first mistake is caring about the definition of a marketing term...no good comes from that.
deleted 9 Nov 2008 02:37
19/21
PreciousRoi wrote:
Oh leave off the "pseudo-hardcore" bullshite, willya? FFS, anyone who buys a next gen Hi Def capable console is "pseudo-hardcore scraps"? As an aside, as near as I can tell, "hardcore gamer" was invented by marketing folks to describe what they used to just call "gamers", but who now had to be differentiated from the newly minted "casual gamers", a group whose own definition is fuzzy at best, fluid at worst. But now back to this "pseudo-hardcore" garbage you seem determined to spew.
...from my POV it looks like:
" "Real (hardcore) gamers" (A group of which I obviously consider myself a member) are playing the PC and Wii console, those 360 and PS3 owners are total poseurs (who I could totally pwn)"

I'm not even sure if "hardcore gamer" is something you aspire to be, or something you have to reluctantly admit to and blame on addictive personalities running on both sides of you family...

I think our first mistake is caring about the definition of a marketing term...no good comes from that.



I would say

Gamers (Hardcore) are Casual Gamers, Casual in the definition that they play games on a casual basis, its part of their casual lifestyle, an assumption is made that Hardcore gamer means you are the geek gamer the gamer who spends no less than every waking and non working hour playing games,

Marketing based Casual Gamers are couldnt give a s**t gamers, basically your Mum and Sister those who buy Horse riding games, those who look at a Wii and laugh because a pyshical motion directed to a graphical response causes them to giggle a bit and would only play the damn system because they had 2 glasses of Red with xmas dinner and a glass of sherry, the kind that has been recently pointed out to buy the most expensive board game, and its a current Fad a trend something that will die down and those "Casual Gamers" will become either non gamers again or actually become "Hardcore Gamers"

in 5 years time Nintendo will struggle, Those Casual Gamers still wont give a s**t about the Wii 2`s graphics in HD and moving a device at the screen will be wearing thin and your grans last glass of sherry will result in her playing DDR on the xbox 720 for the required annual giggle, she will still be baffled by iPods and the gift of a camera phone you give her will end up in the drawer within a couple of weeks, in fact i suspect more and more will move on to passing Netbooks around next xmas than Wii`s or DS`s.

The casual market holds no lure for us the GAMER and most of us already bore of the predictable now nintendo offerings of cyber dogs and virtual sports, we are craving our fix of 100 hour RPGS and ultra realistic driving simulations, we crave Mario and Zelda all the same but unitl Nintendo is going to offer it in a way we want to play it we wont be falling for their new consoles or revolutionary games and controllers, and i somehow think Nintendo have learnt a lesson and we will see a Wii 2 with a more hardcore offering with an optional Casual market offering and unfortunatly for us we will see MS and Sony fall into the trap of the `Casual` buyer by that time far far far too late.

a humble Casual Hardcore Gamers opinion.
PreciousRoi 9 Nov 2008 05:01
20/21
Me, I'd want to have a somewhat inclusionary definition of "hardcore gamer" for everyone's delicate ego's sake, but one that would be dependant upon a definition of "casual gamer". Where a "hardcore gamer" would be any "gamer" who excludes himself from the "casual gamer" set for whatever reason, thereby including everyone who thinks they're hardcore...I don't think this will be a popular definition, because I think some are demonstrably more interested in an exclusionary definition of "hardcore gamer". So it wouldn't matter if you keep up with industry news, have every console, play tactical FPSes every waking hour, or RPGs for two hours every other day (more on the weekend). If you have a good reason not to be casual, you're 'core. full stop.

I'd also count the failure to include a component cable as an epic fail.
OptimusP 9 Nov 2008 12:57
21/21
PreciousRoi wrote:
Oh leave off the "pseudo-hardcore" bullshite, willya? FFS, anyone who buys a next gen Hi Def capable console is "pseudo-hardcore scraps"? As an aside, as near as I can tell, "hardcore gamer" was invented by marketing folks to describe what they used to just call "gamers", but who now had to be differentiated from the newly minted "casual gamers", a group whose own definition is fuzzy at best, fluid at worst. But now back to this "pseudo-hardcore" garbage you seem determined to spew.
...from my POV it looks like:
" "Real (hardcore) gamers" (A group of which I obviously consider myself a member) are playing the PC and Wii console, those 360 and PS3 owners are total poseurs (who I could totally pwn)"

I'm not even sure if "hardcore gamer" is something you aspire to be, or something you have to reluctantly admit to and blame on addictive personalities running on both sides of you family...

I think our first mistake is caring about the definition of a marketing term...no good comes from that.


Naah, hard-core gamer is a rather old term, probably invented by gamers, picked up by the gaming press and then picked up by marketing, marketing is always behind, they can only observe what is allready happening minus a few strokes of geniuses. The recent "meaning" of hard-core however is crafted by a self-defense ivory tower reflex of (mostly american) gaming journalism.

Also, PreciousRoi is funny when he's mad, starts inventing all kinds of narrow-minded stuff people seem to be saying. Offcourse, more interesting is the question why...besides, half of what i say is complete bullshit anyways, the other half is the attempt of constructing a cultural scientific context with proper right wording and definitions since my master thesis for history is about videogames. But since no one ever bothered to even try to define anything game-related (well, except games then) you're going to have these kind of bumpy definition "talks".

A more possible all-inclusion way of looking at it is the entertainment pyramid. You have people who see games as popcorn, people who see games as a hobby, but only one of many, you have people who have games as their primary or only hobby and you have people who have games as a complete lifestyle (or major part of). The interesting bit about this pyramid is that even the lower level can perfectly be playing gears of war, but in a casual way.

The problem untill the beginning of this decade is that the gaming pyramid was quite narrow, now the lowest level is extremely broad thanks to major part of the DS and Wii. Part of Nintendo's strategy is to get those people to start broaden out the upper levels and pushing out the other competitors who are more and more relying on the upper levels of the pyramid. This does not exclude that those efforts can not reach the lower levels with the right marketing and perception-creation.

Another thing the pyramid implies is that this lowest level never dissapears, the mums and girls now buying ds's and stuff...sure you can call it a fad, but for the same money, it is there to stay if you market it well.

Also, i implied all over the forums that:
1) hard-core gamer is something you can only objectively define in time trough time spent doing gaming and meta-gaming activities. I just added to that that hardcore gamers are people who like games, all kinds of games, not afraid to try any kind of new game (unless, after expercience built up in a genre and they found out they do not like the genre, they can decline trying a game in the genre they don't like playing).
2) pseudo-hardcore gamer was a term i invented to piss of people...and this is the sneaky trick...who actually are pseudo-hardcore gamers. Only they will have troubles with that term and the meaning behind it. It's good to know where you actually stand PreciousRoi...really! Now the question is, why do you do it?

God, i would be a bad interviewer, explaining the real meaning behind elaborate questions and terms.
Posting of new comments is now locked for this page.