DarkMage619
$MSFT
Yes it is a division. A division with full support from the CEO and CFO of MS. Similar to how the PlayStation has support from Sony.
-
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.
Do you Microsoft to invest into buying more studios or do you want them to use their resources and make new studios?
- Thread starter Derktron
- Start date
MistBreeze
Member
to build studio is to add to the medium and gaming in general
to buy a dev is to subtract from it
to buy a publisher is actually harming to the industry
this is how I look at it as a gamer not an investor
yes even sony buying insomniac is harmfull...
to buy a dev is to subtract from it
to buy a publisher is actually harming to the industry
this is how I look at it as a gamer not an investor
yes even sony buying insomniac is harmfull...
Last edited:
Genx3
Member
How about saving a publisher that's already up for sale from the clutches of Amazon, Google, Activision, EA, Tencent, Sony so that those games can be far more accessible??
HaveButOneLife
Banned
Then I'm surprised they aren't doing more, must be some sort of business related thing.
Not at all, those sort of deals help the console ecosystem.
Last edited:
MistBreeze
Member
I don't know how microsoft will manage them but I can say that microsoft taking them is better than amazon or google or tencent
sony will make them only ps5 so I can see that
MistBreeze
Member
don't mind me it is just what I think for the time being
but I feel that the industry adapt to anyting
new publishers rise and many go out of business the market will grow room for new publishers and developers and many will go out of business
it is the way it is
remember midway games ???
yes it was one of the top publishers with many great games
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
Stagnation and complacency are just as relevant issues to a publisher managing game development studios as any other expanding body of organisation.
These are universal principles. If you struggle to grasp that then the issue is with you.
Leyasu
Banned
We haven't really seen anything from any of the new studios yet as they have been honoring existing contracts or not yet fully integrated. besides, you were talking about Microsoft has a whole, now it is a publisher. When you look at game development length, what you are talking about, would not come to fruition for well over a decade... Maybe a couple.
We should revisit this in 10 yrs....
Derktron
Banned
Make it 3 to 4 years would be the logical way of thinking. 10 years is too much. Let’s see what Microsoft does with studios like Bethesda.
DarkMage619
$MSFT
Do more what? Buy more studios? It will happen.
Krisprolls
Banned
They never went all in like they just did with Bethesda, the situation changed. 7.5 billion dollars is a lot of money. It either succeeds or they give up on gaming, keeping all those studios wouldn't make sense for MS business.
They had 2 options before this gen : give up on gaming or going all in with a subscription model. They chose the latter but it's well documented they were extremely close to choose the former (so people were right to say that actually).
MS is a big margin trillion dollar corp, they need big margins in every of their businesses, otherwise their investors aren't happy (basically, the smaller businesses would decrease the gains per share for the investors). Strategically, it's all about Azure cloud business and Office 365, gaming doesn't fit outside of Game Pass and cloud gaming.
Last edited:
Krisprolls
Banned
Both MS and Sony already closed studios in the past.
But one is highly successful with the bulk of the market share, and the other one is trying a new strategy from scratch, so it's easy to guess where the chances of studio closures are higher.
Hezekiah
Banned
Cloud and mobile gaming, neither of which will be going anywhere fast for proper gaming.
The answer is to just get a PC, and enjoy the flexibility it gives you. It's going to be a while before anything eye-catching comes out by MS anyway so supply of PC components should ease.
They will do with Bethesda what they are doing for all the other new studios freedom and financial support. If Bethesda sinks or swims is up to the team Booty will give them the room to make the games they want and resources to make them. Every new studio will sink or swim on thier creative vision and putting it into a game. This is great and what we all asked for unlike old management who forced games on studios with predictable shit results. Will some fail yep will some come up with great games yep. It won't be the bean counters dictating the studios success but the staff which I is all every developer would dream of.
Genx3
Member
phil_t98
#SonyToo
Just like Sony did
Umbral
Member
What they should do is field a bunch of pitches from visionaries and bankroll whatever it is they want to make.
What they will do is buy a popular studio, eat its soul, and ruin whatever it is they were working on with their corporate culture.
I want Microsoft to win, but they won’t get out of their own way.
What they will do is buy a popular studio, eat its soul, and ruin whatever it is they were working on with their corporate culture.
I want Microsoft to win, but they won’t get out of their own way.
Krisprolls
Banned
You look triggered for some reason, but that's the truth.
My second passion outside of gaming is finance and stock markets. That's the way it works. Investors wait for returns on their capital, I know I do. And corporations have strategies. Whether you like it or not.
bxrz
Member
Where do you guys get this stuff from lol
Genx3
Member
LOL
I'm not triggered at all.
Just wondering if you actually believed what you typed but I thinks its obvious you don't.
Have a good day.
Umbral
Member
Paying attention to history. Paying attention in general.
Edit: You completely ignored the final sentence, which is curious to me.
Last edited:
That was true under old management but under matt Booty things are completely different. Studios have creative freedom Microsoft is only there for financial support.
Psychonauts 2 Had Cut All Its Boss Fights for Cost Reasons Before Microsoft Bought Double Fine
Double Fine got support from Xbox after the acquisition.
Xbox Game Studios boss Matt Booty prefers a method of acquisition called “Limited integration” or “unplugged studios” where developers can remain as they are while Xbox provides “financial firepower and support of the larger business.”
InXile boss Brian Fargo, for example, shared a story about pitching the studio’s next game to Booty and how despite it being a new idea, it was a relatively simple process. “I prepared the whole [presentation], I sat with Matt [Booty] and said here is what we want to do, and he said ‘if that’s what you want to do, then great’. It was over in like 60 seconds.”
From the past when others ran the xbox division. Things have changed to what we all wanted but some can't let the past go.
Leyasu
Banned
How long do games take to make?
Besides, it is not fair to judge studios after one game
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
Did MS have zero first party studios prior to their more recent spending spree?
Honestly, you Xbox fans baffle me with your stubborn insistence on defending a gaming company that has unilaterally underdelivered for the better part of a decade, all the while claiming people should wait and be patient for another decade.
It’s hilariously self-defeating.
DarkMage619
$MSFT
It always baffles me that if you don't like Xbox why spend time and energy criticising and attacking it? You'd figure with all the amazing experiences Sony offers you wouldn't even care about what MS is doing. Yet you are worried about what an Xbox fan likes? Maybe people like different things. No one is forcing you to buy any MS products.
Last edited:
Leyasu
Banned
Could you please put up the quote where I defended their paltry effort since a long arse time? Because I don't recall writing that. Thanks.
By the middle of next year they will have more than tripled their studios. That is obviously a signal of intent. Now instead waiting for those mythical E3 announcements that never came, there is a wait, but at least they have the studios to fulfil the expectations.
My decade comment was in response to your nonsense "empires falling" analogy. Because after all those investments, I'm sure that Microsoft are going to shutter those studios after one game if it is not a mega hit. It will be more like what Netflix do, or what the other sub service providers do. If an I.P doesn't become a big hit, it will be shelved and a new one worked or a different one resurrected.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
Nobody is attacking anything.
This is a dicussion forum. I am discussing MS and their first party development. Your childish twisted faux-logic makes you assume that the only people qualified to discuss MS are those who have an active interest in products and services. That simply isn’t how the real world (where adults live) works.
No well rounded adult individual should be so triggered or upset by the mere sight of another expressing negative sentiment about a company or platform you like. If you are, you really should take a step back from these forums and review your priorities.
NeoGaf isn’t an echo chamber for fan of any particular gaming platform. And neither are NeoGaf threads on topics focused on any specific platform holder exclusively reserved for fans of said platform. If you carry this view, you’ve completely missed the point of what this discussion forum is supposed to be about.
DarkMage619
$MSFT
Seems to me that the 'triggered' ones are the people who have to jump in to every MS thread to repeat the same complaints over and over again. The same people with the same complaints and since they don't own the platform they know the least about what they are talking about.
It's one thing to ask questions to get informed but that isn't what happens. But you're right this is a forum and you are free to express all the negativity you'd like. I'm you'll express an original sentiment. Any moment now...
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
Well the issue as I see it is your poor reading comprehension, because my comment about fallen world empires was not an analogy, nor was your response to it even of any meaningful relevance to my entire post.
The point I was making was a very simple one. I.e. A focus on relentless expansion without the appropriate care and attention put into properly managing existing domains (i.e. studios) will led to ultimate failure. I drew a parallel with old world empires. It was a very simple point and premise. Not at all rocket science.
Not sure why you seem so triggered by it.
The simple principle is universal and relevant to any type of organisation, i.e. don’t just expand, expand, expand while not being careful to get your existing house in order.
Up till now you’ve provided no meaningful counter-argument. Only gone on some irrelevant, tangential rant about something entirely unrelated to the initial discussion. I’m not really sure what to say to you at this point.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
There’s absolutely no prerequisite to expressing a sentiment that is original or that stands at odds with the expressed sentiments of the majority. Neither is there any inherent virtue in doing so. Just parroting a sentiment contrary to the mainstream for the sole purpose of being a contrarian is neither beneficial to anyone, nor does it make you big and clever. That’s rather a juvenile mindset.
Again, posters like you are trying to force artifical constraints on the discourse of the thread, simply because you dislike what’s being expressed.
It’s transparent and endears you to noone.
Last edited:
Flutta
Banned
The less studios they acquire, the better it is for the gaming industry. Almost every AAA game they've made under Mr Phil has either bombed or got piss poor reviews(Forza Horizon aside), with that said I don't trust MS with AAA games due to every AAA project now needs to evolve around GamePass.
With smaller titles they're doing fine tho.
With smaller titles they're doing fine tho.
Last edited:
DarkMage619
$MSFT
Oh like I said man you are free to express the very thoughtful, original, and constructive ideas about a platform that you don't own. It's pretty insightful.
Leyasu
Banned
Why would your opinion trigger anyone?
You do indeed have a point about relentless expansion and are right when you say that my original reply was not relevant.
I admit to not reading all of your posts and In all honesty if I had, I would not have replied.
DaGwaphics
Member
Good point. The subscription model changes a lot of things. Bottom-line sales are no longer the biggest indicator of success, replaced instead by engagement. If X game doesn't do well commercially but is popular with a particular subset of subscribers, thus keeping them subscribed, the software would likely still be looked at as a success. Having a diverse lineup that keeps the broadest user base subscribed becomes the primary goal. That's a big win IMO.
Last edited:
Shelookdlvl18
Banned
I don't think any of that works how you think it does.
Unless you were being sarcastic, and I just missed it. Please tell me that's the case.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
There you go trying to attach artificial constraints to the discussion as if you have to own a console to be able to talk about it.
Ironically, the discussion topic at hand isn't even about a console. It's about a company and the management of its game development studios. Of which no one in this entire thread owns. So I guess we should close the thread then?--by your own obtuse and bizarre logic.
Look, if you don't have anything meaningful to reply with, you might as well move along. I certainly will be.
Nah, you're misinformed.
It actually does work exactly how he thinks he does.
What about his post did you think was sarcastic? I'm genuinely curious.
Papacheeks
Banned
You are not wrong my friend. I just got back from playing some Horde from Gears 5 since it was on sale on steam. I played it on gamepass last year, and without a game like The outer worlds on the horizon of release that fall I would have cancelled my sub then. Now supposedly they changed a bunch of stuff that was basically broken/terrible for horde. It still is a god damn mess, and makes little sense in how the menu system is laid out.
Gears became another grind fest, and like a lot of MS's titles that have online components they like many others in the multiplayer sector, are trying to make them grindy for the sake of it. Where the fuck has gaming gone? I remember when titles by MS were just fun online games that you made your own fun with what was given. Now its " how long can we keep them in our game".
And they wonder why so many flock to Sony and Nintendo. Because the games are the games, no bs. And maybe that is a negative to multiplayer focused players, who would rather play something with seasons or whatever. But there are games like call of duty, battlefield that do that. I really hope Microsoft has learned how to manage studios, and understand that the industry has been pushing back in this shallow way of developing games. Look at all the hero/battle roayal games that were released, and look at all the games now that have "seasons". Really hope a majority of the slate MS has coming is single player focused stuff thats quality.
Because if we get more campaign games with a heavier long term emphasis on multiplayer, Im seriously done with them as a brand. Gears was the last straw. I really love gears more than halo, and I like halo a lot. I recently replayed all of the campaigns and played some firefight with friends had a blast. But gears, co-op and horde from 3, and horde from 4 I spend tons of time on. And honestly I dont even recognize gears anymore.
MS needs to literally start looking at what they already have and understand that it just wasn't the number of studios they had that was the issue. They don't know how to manage them, and that has been going on for almost 2 gens. I really think after the honeymoon phase is done for gamepass, they are going to see what people are actually playing on the service. And it wont be microsoft games.
Last edited:
Shelookdlvl18
Banned
Well well well. Look what we have here. I'm your huckleberry, and that's just my game.
I'd first like to start with why exactly it is that Xbox fans baffle you? Where is this "stubborn insistence to defending a gaming company that has unilaterally undelivered for the better part of a decade" that you speak of? You state it as fact when it's anything but. I could put forth examples to defend my opinion I'm sure, but being the gentleman I am... I'd be obliged if you'd do so first.
I'd also like to address your round and round we go arguments. In one post, you find it ludicrous to suggest that anything such as an "echo chamber" could exist, and deny it outright. Yet in a following post, you argue that there's no virtue in expressing sentiments that stand at odds with the majority. I'd posit that "parroting" a sentiment that goes along with the mainstream, while simultaneously criticizing those whose opinion happens to run counter, is a rather juvenile mindset. To so easily wave away the thought of an echo chamber, only to then turn around and set up the prerequisites for one yourself doesn't make you big, and it certainly doesn't suggest you're clever.
You're free to express your opinions and thoughts on the matter, just as anyone else is. I just find the matter in which you go about defending your opinions to be severely lacking in logic to say the least.
Shelookdlvl18
Banned
I'm afraid you both apparently suffer from being misinformed.
I was hoping his entire premise was. Seeing as your opinion is "exactly" as his is on the matter, I'll put it to you.
It's stated as if it were a fact that if the Bethesda purchase isn't successful on some level that MS is simply "out of gaming", when that may very well not be the case. The Bethesda purchase could fail miserably, and MS could continue to have a presence in gaming.
His following assertion that "MS had 2 options" One being to give up on gaming, and the other to go all out on a subscription model. Was MS really relegated to just those two? According to whom? Seeing as it's so "well documented"... Could either of you please point me to this documentation that shows they were "extremely close" to calling it quits in regards to gaming?
His third paragraph is the real ringer though. Supposedly because MS is a big trillion dollar company. That requires to all of its divisions to have equally big margins. MS is all about Office and Azure, and gaming doesn't fit supposedly outside Gamepass and cloud.
MS is one of the most successful companies on planet worth trillions, because of it's diversity. MS is one of 2 companies left that currently enjoys a AAA credit rating, and is the only tech company to do so. Not because its all about Azure and Office, but rather because it's so well diversified.
It's obvious neither him or you have any clue as to what you're talking about. To then tell me that I'm misinformed? Really? Considering how things actually are. That's akin to a roach trying to tell a human how to tie shoelaces... Immediately before being stepped on by his supposed pupil.
Bernkastel
Ask me about my fanboy energy!
Talents are not made in a incubation center. New studios take time, like Initiative, but they can't magically create 10 like them.
Papacheeks
Banned
I dont think reasonable people are thinking this, Everyone knows it took Sony years to get to where they are, it think the issue is they have had years with 343, coalition and only made countless sequels. And honestly not anything that amounts to much entry wise. Issue is they mismanaged many studios and cancelled a lot of projects. So what a lot of us fear is that since their metric now is more based on engagement numbers instead of sales, what will happen to budgets and the types of games they are allowed to make?
If these first projects dont knock peoples socks off then what? You look at Microsoft as the bethesda brand? The only place to play Fallout, doom, elder scrolls and starfield? Which to me I know this is fanboyish but they didn't earn any of that. All they did was buy them. It's not like Microsoft has a long standing history of funding Bethesda game development for projects. Which is what both Nintendo and Sony do.
They use to be like this with Bioware and the likes.
Outside of doom eternal, and the evil within I dont play a lot of bethesda titles which I understand millions do. But honestly even though zenimax will run the same in terms of what they are making, microsoft still has to manage some form of their financials. And to me they need to manage their own internal developed studios first before they do anything.
All them buying Zenimax showed me was you dont have enough content to power your service that gave you the influx in investment through the bigger part of the company.
I need to see all the projects from those studios first.
Shelookdlvl18
Banned
Is that concern trolling I detect? Just kidding.
The recently released Hivebusters DLC that was released seems to be getting pretty good reviews. Nothing to suggest that either a grindfest or a mess really at least not that I've heard of. Of course opinions differ I suppose.
After your 2 paragraph rant on MS's multiplayer woes, you start your third paragraph with "And they wonder why so many flock to Sony and Nintendo". In what universe are Nintendo's, and especially Sony's multiplayer offerings worth flocking to? Do tell, because I'd like to know.
While you're at it. Would you mind explaining exactly how the industry has been pushing back in that supposed shallow way of making games. Because regardless of what either of us like... The fact is that those "shallow" made games like COD, Fortnite, Apex, etc... Are dominating gaming these days. I fail to see the pushback.
I'm sure MS can see what people play on Gamepass and what they don't. Even if there was a honeymoon period, why would they need to wait around until that's over to start playing other games. As if that point alone weren't enough... At the rate MS is acquiring developers, I'd bet that as time goes on. They'll find plenty of people playing their games.
RoboEight
Member
I think this is the smart move, Sony do a good job of building strong first party studios as well as having these studios share a lot of tech/information it's a strong network of companies. MS sit on a ton of potential buying up studios is part of the game but they should also focus on the studios they have now and like you said focus on funding multiple teams within and supporting them with what they need. Sony releases a game like Ratchet and Clank and it's like why isn't MS there with something like Banjo Kazooie it seems like a no brainer and a big IP, if the core team at Rare doesn't want to make it then fund a new team to make it. MS has almost no support from Japan and as much as Phil has talked about talks in Japan very little ever comes of it.
Remember the 360 and the great exclusives they had, Lost Odyssey, Blue Dragon, Infinite Undiscovery, a ton of Cave and other shmups, Magna Carta, Ninety Nine Nights and so on there was a lot there and they need more of that. Phil could always drive a truck of money to SE/tri-ace and make a new Valkyrie Profile
pls . I would like to see them approach Sega more and maybe get an exclusive from them, I'd like to see a new Jet Set Future game or a new Phantasy Star something along those lines, maybe offer to fund a team to get it made. Fact is there is a lot of potential they just need to spend the right money and I at least hope they can diversify their portfolio a little more. Gamepass is a great service and I would personally like to see them fund even smaller game experiences because I honestly miss a lot of those off titles we use to get in the early days.I'm sure MS does have stuff upcoming we haven't heard about and it's only a matter of time before we do or at least I hope they do.
Last edited:
Bernkastel
Ask me about my fanboy energy!
Coalition has been not around for countless years, they only became a proper AAA studio this gen. I don't understand the issue with a dedicated Halo studio, they make them because fans want the Halo universe to be explored more and the devs are not fatigued by Halo contrary to what many people believe. Similarly I don't know what is the point of forcing Turn 10 into working on something else will be. Playground Games is now working on a Fable game even though Forza Horizon was one of the highest selling first party exclusives last gen(they even skipped the release cycle) so its not like they are forcing these studios to work on one IP.
There was a team when MS hardly bought any studio unlike their competition. So they lost Bioware, feelplus, Kingdom Under Fire devs, Bizarre Creations, Respawn etc.
So far they have only bought studio that they have worked with previously or the ones that are in financial trouble. And that includes Zenimax, because they were looking to be bought for a while(there were rumours about EA trying to buy them a while back). Unless we are Nintendo or Sega(when they made hardware), both the current home console manufacturers came to market through buying studios and making a few of their own.
Papacheeks
Banned
I was not talking about multiplayer games when I was talking about the "brands" of sony and Nintendo, What is their bread and butter? Single player games. if you read my response correctly i'm specifically talking about single player to campaigns of games. i was talking about the multiplayer portions in MS games that now have become a focus of the game's design in itself. When im talking about Playstatoin and Nintendo didn't know I had to spell it out for you since everyone here who follows the industry knows where their heritage in games is. And thats primarily single player games.
My point is why people are flocking to spiderman, ghost, animal crossing, botw is the games are just that, games. Without needing to wade through a bullshit menu system that literally tracks everything. Which is what we come to expect from games like rainbow six, call of duty ect. But was not the case for halo, gears years ago.
DarkMage619
$MSFT
Who is attaching any constraints? I said numerous times you are free to talk about something you know nothing about. What was your meaningful contribution? The statement about "Xbox fans baffle me with your stubborn insistence on defending a gaming company that has unilaterally underdelivered for the better part of a decade". There are SEVERAL areas where the Xbox platform delivers more than the competition. Perhaps that support of the Xbox platform comes from people who know, use, and like the product they produce and it is a little irritating hearing from detractors who don't know what they are talking about. It is not bizarre or obtuse to call out a ridiculous statement but as I've said you are free to make it.
Krisprolls
Banned
[/QUOTE]
Lol unfortunately it definitely works the way I told you. Corporations have strategies and average return on capital decrease when you add less profitable activities. Corporations regularly cut non core and non profitable businesses.
Gaming isn't a core part of Microsoft strategy, especially outside of Game Pass and cloud gaming. Cloud gaming at least makes sense because it leverages Azure (cloud services), their core business.
Which part don't you understand ?
Lol unfortunately it definitely works the way I told you. Corporations have strategies and average return on capital decrease when you add less profitable activities. Corporations regularly cut non core and non profitable businesses.
Gaming isn't a core part of Microsoft strategy, especially outside of Game Pass and cloud gaming. Cloud gaming at least makes sense because it leverages Azure (cloud services), their core business.
Which part don't you understand ?
Last edited:
Krisprolls
Banned
Yes they do know that, but having to make the games available on major platforms like Xbox CFO hinted at, including probably PS5, reduces the need to subscribe to Game Pass, making buying studios less efficient as a strategy. The success for Game Pass is far from certain. Success as in having enough subscribers at a high enough price to make it profitable enough overall.
Last edited: