Edit: It turns out I am not perfect and have holes in my knowledge. Games that are wrongly categorized are shifted over to the other list, but with a strikethrough to indicate a change, to preserve my original thoughts.
Games, brands and series associated with XBOX, compared to other console brands. The lists doesn’t mean exclusives or best games. It’s more of, what you think of games, when you think of XBOX.
Core brands created by XBOX
- Halo
- Gears of War
- Fable
- Forza
Secondary brands created by XBOX
Age of Empires- Sea of Thieves
- Starfield
- Hellblade
- State of Decay
Purchased by XBOX
- Age of Empires
- Minecraft
- Call of Duty
- WoW
- Overwatch
- Diablo
- Fallout
- DOOM
- Killer Instinct
Console exclusives with XBOX
- Lost Odyssey
Associated with XBOX, but no longer exclusive
- Ninja Gaiden
- Titanfall
- Star Wars Knights of the Republic (KOTOR)
- Ori and the Blind Forest
I was thinking about XBOX and its future, and somehow I got tangled in history and what the brand recognition is. This is the end result of my thoughts.


They always felt kind of weirdly similar to me, even the games that they just ended up buying. Hard to describe, but the games always felt rather ‘functional’, rather ‘game-y’. Kind of like what I think of as solid AA games, just scaled to AAA.
Like, I don’t know, Hellblade is about mental illness and kind of made up to be this cinematic experience, so it should be a massive exception to this, but then it’s wrapped in this hack’n’slash gameplay and has the name “Hellblade”, as if they were afraid it might flop, if it doesn’t promise your usual dose of generic/violent gameplay.
Hell, Minecraft feels like it got microsoftified, in that they just keep adding more and more stuff to it, with no clear direction. It’s just, oh, the community wants XYZ, let’s add XYZ.
I guess, maybe that’s part of it? They have a lot of money, so game studios just add all kinds of features rather than making hard decisions on what kind of game they want to be.
That’s obviously also very positive in many ways, but yeah, might ultimately lead to the sameyness…
Well, I wouldn’t say this is a bad thing. Unless you mean by they try to appeal to everyone, which results into appealing to no one. But the game is quiet popular, so I think in that front Microsoft did actually good job, seemingly. Online games like these with community building content lives and dies with their community engagement. And its also quiet modifiable, so I don’t have any problem with that. But I"m also not playing the game, so maybe my view doesn’t count much here.
Had to think about it for a moment, but I would say the fundamental problem with adding more content to Minecraft is this classic game design quote:
Source
In early days of Minecraft, you would cut down a tree, then slap down 6 blocks of wood and that was your table. It looked fine, because everything was just blocks and the few available blocks all could be combined without it looking terrible.
Now you’ve got a magnitude more blocks and the player looking to ruin their fun will spend far too much time:
There are folks that find it relaxing to mine for hours and to spend hours getting every detail perfect about their build. But even those folks presumably wouldn’t call it fun.
But of course, your community will still ask for ever more hyperspecific blocks to be added, so they can optimize the fun out even more. Because your community are not game designers.
I can’t talk about the specifics, as I have no experience. But wanted mention that the community changes over time too, gets older, old players leave, new come in, even the game developers change over time. I think in a game like Minecraft adding stuff is not the worst thing that can happen, because people can mod the games and host their own worlds and game rules. So its more like giving more tools in the hand.