210°

How Microsoft threw away their Xbox dominance opportunity

In the early part of the previous generation Microsoft had Sony on the ropes and we all expected that knock out blow that simply never came.

Read Full Story >>
lazygamer.net
BALLBAGS3790d ago (Edited 3790d ago )

Microsoft did really well with the 360,actually took a massive market share from Sony..

then arrogance kicked in (what is it with third console arrogance?) and they messed up the image of the Xbox One with PR calamity after another, plus weaker hardware at a higher price.

and what really pisses me off is how they have allowed Sony to overtake them in the online space, I would always tout live over PSN, yet it seems Microsoft are now playing catch up, PSN offers everything live does plus you get soo much more bang for your buck,whether it be games, discounts or services not behind a pay wall. Microsoft need to seriously get back on the ball

Microsoft have to be kicking themselves

Mikelarry3790d ago

its weird the "third console arrogance" seems to affect all three. you would think one of them would have learned "hey wait our competition became arrogant that is why they lost their consumers to us lets not make that same mistake"

BALLBAGS3790d ago

@mikelarry,it's just unbelievable

I did buy the Xbox One, owning the console has showed me Microsoft built this machine for America

most of the functionality regarding the TV services is not for outside of the states, what the hell were Microsoft thinking?

I connected my sky box through the HDMI and not only was there constant flickering, there was strange lag in TV programmes so all this media entertainment box Microsoft claim is all good and well as long as you live in the states.

it's just one big balls up

Eonjay3790d ago

I think their two biggest mistakes are pushing Kinect (why, just why?) and focusing on the dying media of TV. I bet you that Sony will overtake them in that department as well with TVoIP. No cable box required.

Death3790d ago

@Eonjay,

Microsoft released an app on the 360 that allows TimeWarner subscribers to use their console as a cablebox. I haven't checked to see if it's available on the XboxOne yet, but it was announced over the summer it would be. Granted this is just one provider now, but it is a possible peek into the future. I like this idea more than another paid subscription service which is the direction Sony is headed.

cleft53790d ago

I was really hyped for the Xbox One after experiencing the 360. I remember there being rumblings of how well prepared Sony was going to be but I didn't pay to much attention to it because the 360 was amazing.

Then everything happened and afterwards it lead to me canceling my Xbox Live account, stop buying any games for the 360 even to the point of not renting 360 games, buying a PS4 and PSVita, and putting my 360 in the closet to make space for my PS4 next to my PS3.

The ball was in Microsoft court and not only did they drop it, they cut a large hole in it and threw it in the nearest garbage can.

ProjectVulcan3790d ago (Edited 3790d ago )

The 'strange lag' Ballbags is Xbox One having to duplicate frames because it only outputs in 60hz, whereas PAL TV for most of Europe is 50hz.

This means any PAL TV signal run through Xbox One will never look right or natural. That's a pretty critical factor considering the whole machine was basically designed around the TV premise.

Not the greatest decision I ever saw...

Mikelarry3790d ago (Edited 3790d ago )

@ vulcan

i cant believe someone disagreed with your comment as its fact not rumour.

GrizzliS19873790d ago

im still in awe as to why people do not understand why Kinect was being pushed so much...

you think they cared about you playing games without a controller? LOL

It was about a camera inside your house that can read everything, and microsoft selling off this information and data to other companies for TRILLIONS of dollars.

its not a conspiracy theory, its a fact, and the only one that makes sense.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3790d ago
GarrusVakarian3790d ago (Edited 3790d ago )

Gotta agree with you on the whole live vs PS plus thing, i paid for live for years and didn't really like doing it, i didn't get much for my money apart from the odd demo and the ability to talk to my friends via party chat and play online. Then i bought PS plus earlier this year for the first time and i was blown away by the amount of "free" games i could download right away, it was alien to me that i could get so much stuff right away from my subscription....the discounts you get are also very good. So as someone who has used both, i can safely say that PS plus blows live out of the water.

Another thing i never really get is when people always tout that live offers the better multiplayer experience......ive played literally hundreds of online games on my 360 over the years, never really had any problems.....but i also had an equally great experience with the games ive played over PSN (although i haven't played a fraction of the amount of PS3 games online compared to 360 games). Both services are exactly the same when it comes to playing online.....boot up game,choose MP....enjoy, exactly the same.

Death3790d ago

Exactly the same basic service. If you used the additional features Live had over PSN it would be a different story. Having the ability to start a party chat to round up my friends regardless of what they were doing on their 360 was a huge advantage PSN never had. Being able to launch the game while maintaining that same party chat was also nice when you didn't want to hear the whiny kids on the other team. If you didn't play with many friends it didn't matter. It is all on how you used it.

princejb1343790d ago

"Another thing i never really get is when people always tout that live offers the better multiplayer experience"

People only say live is better to make themselves feel better for having to pay lol
The multiplayer experience is the same in both consoles with minimum amount of lag depending on the game

Death3789d ago

The basic multiplayer is the same on both.

I don't mind paying for Live since I am under the impression my time is valuable. If I can spend less time getting my friends together and more time gaming, it is worth the $50 a year. If you have no friends or don't mind picking up the phone and making calls then it has less value.

hazardman3790d ago

In the, take first 4 and last letters of your name.

Baka-akaB3790d ago

Imo the famed arrogance didnt just start with the XB1 early pre release days . It already did on 360 in the last 2 years between kinect and their lack of commitment to pumping more of their own games for a public they won over so well

D-riders3789d ago

why does it piss you off that Sony took over MS in the online space. MS isnt a game company like sony is, why wouldnt Sony over take MS in the game field .

gamer20133789d ago (Edited 3789d ago )

Sony hasn't taken anything over. Sony does other things just like MS so they're not anymore of a gaming company than MS is. Sony has been in the business longer than MS but Nintendo has been in it much longer than Sony - if you're going to go there.

It was MS that seen the potential with online console gaming not Sony! It was MS that pushed and shaped online console gaming to what it is today it wasn't Sony.

What Microsoft did for online console gaming:

- Friends lists

- Matchmaking

- Gamertags

- Achievements

- Firmware updates

- Community; before XBl gaming was mostly a solitary experience

XBL popularized squad-based tactics, co-operative play, clubs and clans. Micro is also continuing to lead with the introduction of Azure and further improvements to their (already superior) matchmaking system.

All that said, one could comfortably argue that MS is more of a gaming company than Sony!

gamer20133789d ago (Edited 3789d ago )

Oh come on! Sony did not overtake MS in the online space that's pure hyperbole. XBL has always stood for performance, quality and reliability vs PSN. XBL currently is in need of some tweeks to bring it up to speed - that's all. Saying that PSN is better than XBL is like saying; MS makes better hardware than Sony! One of the dumbest things that I've read here in a while.

XBL may not offer the same amount of old games for free as PSN but what it does offer is yours to keep and XBL offers just as many; if not more, discounts and services. Do you even use XBL??? I'm not trying to go all out fanboy on you but, I've never payed full price for an XBL subscription and there's always deals on games and a lot of other stuff - always!

Yeah, I wish that the skype features weren't behind a pay-wall; don't know what MS was thinking there but, come on buddy!

BALLBAGS3789d ago

@gamer,i have a Xbox One of course I use live.. I am a gamer and in no way shape or form a fanboy, I just speak truth about my experiences

PSN is now better than live, I have both services, browsing the Internet using Netflix etc is not behind a paywall unlike live, and as for value for money I can tell you haven't got a psn+ account or you would not state Sony give old games, have a look at the catalogue of games Sony are giving away with psn+ and you will be shocked at how recent many of the games are.

fact of the matter is I was an avid live gamer and psn+ has overtaken live with its features and the reality is all of the playstation Apps are not behind a pay wall.

as for the TV services in the UK regarding my Xbox One the less said about that the better. unlike many people I'm hoping Microsoft turn this around

quenomamen3789d ago

Lol @ the disagrees cuz everything you say is 100% true. This gen was theirs to lose and even though the X1 will not be a total failure by any means they handed this gen's launch to Sony with a bow on it. " Pride comes before the fall "

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3789d ago
ThatCanadianGuy5143790d ago

Looks like they will come in last for the 3rd gen in a row.Well, actually they'll come in 2nd since Wii U is bombing so badly.

Still pretty sad tho.OG xbox was awesome.I played it way more then PS2 back in the day.It's just so sad to see the steady decline of the brand.All the great guys who made the original xbox, with all their passion for gaming and wanting to bring console gaming to the next level all called it quits and left.

All that's left is this ugly, bulky, media device wannabe that has more hardware problems then it does games.
Xbox is on it's last leg now.

TheFallenAngel3790d ago (Edited 3790d ago )

By the time xbone comes out in other markets, it will be late for them. What really pushed them was that it was cheaper than ps3. But then again they completely abandoned the console with exclusives, while Sony still releasing exclusives on ps3.

Death3790d ago (Edited 3790d ago )

I disagree. I've never seen conclusive data that the Xbox 360 was cheaper throughout its' lifetime. They offered a console SKU that was less expensive, but also a more expensive SKU at the same time. The assumption PS3 fans always made was the base console was the bulk of sales. Microsoft sold a $399 and $299 console at launch. 8 years later and they still have a $299 SKU.

scott1823789d ago (Edited 3789d ago )

Conclusive data? Seriously? Where did you get your info of it being $399 and $299 at launch? On the same site you can probable see that the ps3 was $499 and $599 at launch, and that was a year later. Yes the prices are more comparable now with the 360 having $199 and $299 consoles and the ps3 having $249 and $319.95 available.

The ps3 was always more expensive, with the launch consoles being up to $200 more. Still outselling the 360 every month worldwide since launch with that huge price difference is a huge achievement.

Also, this gen, the PS4 is selling more consoles plus software worldwide because it is easier to develop for and multiplat games are in higher res on the ps4. Sony should win on both fronts now.

Death3789d ago

scott, I understand what you are saying, but the bulk of Sony's sales did not occur when they were priced $100-$200 more. They started selling consoles when they offered systems at the same price as the 360. Sony has reduced the price of their consoles by 50% in order to get the sales they have. Microsoft has reduced by 25-33% since launch which occured a year prior to Sony launching the PS3. Without knowing the percentages of sales between core consoles and the premium SKU's, we can't say they were "cheaper".

As for the PS4, it is $100 cheaper than the Xbox One. Easy to figure since each company only has 1 SKU. As for software and hardware sales, we need something besides VGC to determine attach rates and sales data. Easier to develop for and higher res are things that will change over time. The Xbox One with it's eSram is making it more difficult for developers to achieve the same resolution natively. As new tools become available that will change. Surely you seen the difference between the launch PS3 games vs games over time. Why would that not apply to the Xbox One?

LeCreuset3789d ago (Edited 3789d ago )

Stop it, bro. That's pathetic. The PS3 was cheaper than the 360. End of story. And while you're sitting there trying to figure out which system dropped more percentage wise since launch, remember to factor in the affects of the RROD.

scott1823789d ago (Edited 3789d ago )

@Death

I know they started selling more when they dropped the price for the ps3, but it always outsold the 360 monthly since launch, check any data you wish to find that. I assume NPD still has the figures. It was always more expensive and always outsold the 360, any data on any site will show you that. It's not a secret.

The esram is a very tiny amount used for small things, like some AI and texture and such, when it is programed correctly. It was put in to make up for the overall ram speed but it doesn't make much of a difference. It is much different in next gen machines it's very straight forward compared to the ps3 last gen. The ps3 was very complex with it's SPU architecture, that is why it took so long to figure out for devs.

D-riders3789d ago

what are you talking about. It was a well known fact that to get the same output from your xbox 360 you spent more moeny than you would for a ps3. thats not even an arguement. betwwen charge and play kits and xbox live your alomst even right their

scott1823789d ago

^

Yeah that made up for a $200 launch price difference for sure :/

Why o why3789d ago (Edited 3789d ago )

You forgot the wireless adapters. The 360 cost more for me and many others in the long run even if you factored out the games.

That year head start or lack of is really kicking ms in their a**es. It was an 18 month head start in some regions at the beginning of last gen. They'll be zero such advantages this gen. The hard numbers are there for all to see. Both selling, just one selling better and I can't see any advantage ms has to reverse that. More people are going back to the play station brand than are moving from it to a competitor. All you have to do is look at how many n4g users have voiced why they've moved camps to get a micro sample. Cost is also garnering more undecided customers. Just like last gen, some buyers see that price difference more than anything else.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3789d ago
InTheLab3790d ago

Yeah except MS never had Sony on the ropes. They were outsold every year aside from one and without the 1 year headstart they would have trailed behind all of last gen.

MS did well last gen but too many give them more credit than earned.

Hicken3790d ago

There was a perception of dominance, to be sure. With all the ads, and promoting big name games as if they were exclusives, anybody who wasn't paying close enough attention would think Microsoft was selling more systems worldwide than the Wii or PS3. That impression, though, probably didn't extend outside of the US.

But the truth is that they sold the slowest of all three consoles, and only dominated in one region... if you can call it that, since they weren't actually in first place there, either. They got off to a good start, but you can't have somebody on the ropes before the fight even begins: as soon as Sony entered the ring, there was no more "on the ropes," as they won each round.

Yeah, overall, Microsoft did well last gen, but I don't think they're happy with how it ended. And, frankly, I don't think they'll be happy with the way this one ends, either.

Death3790d ago (Edited 3790d ago )

They tripled their marketshare. I'm guessing they were much happier than the company that lost the most. I'm not sure where you place the "win" line, but I fail to see what Sony "won" in any round. For the fans such as yourself, they sold a few more consoles. Congrats.

LeCreuset3789d ago

@Death

They tripled their market share because they had a lot of room to go nowhere but up after the low sells of the original Xbox. PS2 was the best selling system of all time so Sony had plenty of room to go down and less to go up. When you talk about market share you have to look at things in their totality. MS didn't just hit the scene with the 360 and gain that market share. That also meant losing quite a lot of money on the original Xbox. They can triple their market share, and I'm sure that hurts Sony, but at the end of the day the console with more market share is still happier than the console with less.

rainslacker3789d ago (Edited 3789d ago )

People claiming market share should look up what market share consists of.

The console market almost tripled in the PS3/360/Wii era, mostly thanks to the Wii, so from a market share perspective, MS maintained it's market at about 30% of the market. Sony dipped from about 60% to around 30%, and Nintendo cleaned up with the largest gain, about 20% to 40%. Rough numbers, but I don't care to do the math right now.

What MS increased was their adoption(sell-through) rate. That's a good thing, but the market share arguments I keep seeing are seriously flawed. The only way MS would have increased it's market share given the numbers, is if the actual market had stayed relatively even from the prior gen, and if their competitors took major losses on their adoption rate, which they didn't. Sony's sell through rate was down less than 10% over the same time frame.

LeCreuset3789d ago (Edited 3789d ago )

Well Said.

This article tries too hard to construct a narrative, when really all that is needed is to take a step back and analyze the situation in its totality. Last gen was an outlier. The Wii was cheap enough, innovative enough, and lucky enough to catch casuals at the right moment. With the Wii U Nintendo is back to struggling with sells. The 360 had a year head start and was cheaper, and had to rely on that head start for years to give the impression that it sold better than PS3. Now it's looking like Sony will be the hot console even in NA again. This wasn't some big rise and fall story for MS. There were simply factors that allowed MS and Nintendo to gain market share last gen, but it looks like things are correcting back to normal.

DanielGearSolid3790d ago

Ms did well but they didn't "dominate"
The internet made it seem that way with all the ps3 doom articles
But the numbers said otherwise, Ps3 has been outselling 360 since launch... And now has sold more even with the year headstart.
The US isnt the world

Show all comments (60)
350°

Microsoft's quest for short-term $$$ is doing long-term damage to Windows, Surface, Xbox, and beyond

Microsoft is pushing for no "red line" for what games could come to PlayStation, and it all revolves around Satya Nadella and CFO Amy Hood's plans to increase every department's margins.

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
Brazz19h ago

"The plan to move Xbox games to other platforms is codenamed "Latitude" internally, and I know there's debate and unease at Microsoft about whether or not this is a good idea. More upcoming Microsoft-owned games slated for PlayStation are already being developed. At least for now, they're potentially obvious games you'd most likely expect. And yes, while it's true Microsoft is a prolific publisher on PlayStation already, it has typically revolved around specific franchises like Minecraft. From what I've heard, Microsoft is pushing for no "red line" for what games could come to PlayStation, and it all revolves around Satya Nadella and CFO Amy Hood's mandate to increase every department's margins. "

Yeah, they are going to kill Xbox hardware.

Xeofate17h ago

"Yeah, they are going to kill Xbox hardware."

It's for the best.

Quit stringing along xbox fans and screwing over PlayStation owners.

crazyCoconuts12h ago

Take good care of those Xboxes if you have 'em ...

outsider162412h ago

An Xbox game on a Playstation. Never in my years of gaming did i ever thought this was gonna happen.

jznrpg7h ago

It is dying anyway so doesn’t make much of a difference

VersusDMC7h ago

No way can they get rid of the hardware as probably 90% of game pass subscribers are hardware users.

Highly doubtful those users will move to PC or Cloud to subscribe there and the competition (Sony and Nin) will never have gamepass on their system.

If they want to keep the current subscribers, they need to keep releasing new hardware.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 7h ago
gold_drake18h ago

i think it will kill off the xbox brand. windows will be fine.

but there is and would be a chance that xbox might be killed off in the future. if they fail to make the money they put in. imo.

S2Killinit15h ago

They wont kill it, but they will go fully PC while keeping xbox as a brand, and go multiplatform for the most part. They will also work tirelessly to diminish console gaming’s importance.

PRIMORDUS12h ago

It would be best if Xbox goes the way of Sega, just make and publish games. I know I myself will not support them at all with buying games from them, you all can. 🙃

ChasterMies11h ago

The Xbox brand will live for the games. I don’t expect Microsoft to entirely drop out of gaming hardware. They make Surface tablets and laptops. They’ll make Xbox branded hardware for those that want it.

shadowT17h ago

"Microsoft is pushing for no "red line" for what games could come to PlayStation"

Forza and Starfield next?

Skuletor16h ago

Starfield would be no surprise and there's the rumor that it will come to Playstation after the Shattered Space DLC, Forza (along with Halo and Gears of War) I find less likely but I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually end up on PlayStation too, especially if Xbox give up on hardware and go the Sega route.

shinoff218316h ago

Not to worried about forza. I'd rather see others like what inxile and obsidian are working on. Starfield sounds like it needs more time in the oven so let it cook first imo. If starfield and it's a small if does release on ps it'll be in the fall around the time for dlc or right at the dlc and come packaged with it.

-Foxtrot17h ago

In the words of Phil Spencer when he was talking about Nintendo last year

“It's just taking a long time for Microsoft to see that their future exists off of their own hardware"

S2Killinit15h ago

Yup. MS are a cancer to console gaming.

Aloymetal15h ago

100%!!
I wonder what happened to that dude that was always here posting those court articles with cartoons about MS spending all those billions in studios. He suddenly disappeared, I guess he doesn't like bad news when the green brand is in trouble. No new articles from him as of late...

PRIMORDUS12h ago

Yup, and it's only going to keep spreading.

Outside_ofthe_Box12h ago

Phil Spencer's words always comes back to bite him lol

16h agoReplies(7)
Show all comments (63)
130°

Microsoft's Absurd Antics Have Me Scared For Dishonored And Arkane Lyon's Future

With Arkane Austin no more and Lyon living for who knows how long, the superb Dishonored is in serious danger; Microsoft cannot be trusted.

Relientk772d ago

I love the Dishonored series so much and really want Dishonored 3. Microsoft better not screw this up.

JEECE2d ago

I mean, I think the fans will probably kill Arkane Lyon by cooking up reasons to hate whatever they do next without playing it. I've never seen a game so artificially disliked as Deathloop.

thesoftware7302d ago

Lol, why don't we just say, we are worried about all studios owned by MS now. They will keep closing studios until they have none left ...🙄

Skuletor2d ago

Just merge them all into a single studio, have it churn out a single Call of Duty every year and call it a day, lol.

Barlos2d ago

Don't be scared, you'll be fine.

Skuletor2d ago

It's exputer, fine is one word I would not associate with them.

Profchaos2d ago

I think it's becoming clear based on matt bootys comments there's no future for any IP that can't sell above 10 million within the launch window. But is also a small game that gives them prestige

/S it's beyond a joke right now

Show all comments (10)
290°

More Job Losses At Xbox, “There’s More To Come”: Paul Thurrott

Paul Thurrott in a recent episode commented on the on-going Microsoft fiasco hinting at more job losses and that "there's more to come".

Read Full Story >>
spieltimes.com
Sonic18814d ago (Edited 4d ago )

There won't be no more acquiring game publishers from Microsoft in the future . Xbox has to pay Microsoft back. It might take two decades to do that.

sagapo4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

I don’t understand what you’re saying. Xbox IS microsoft so there’s no “paying back “.
And MS gross profit in 2023 was over 140 billion dollars so forget your 2 decades.

Unless you mean the money MS invested in Xbox (acquisitions included) and the time it will take for xbox as a brand to gain that money back on it’s own, then yeah, that could take a while.

romulus234d ago

The better term to use might be return on investment, xbox is simply a division of Microsoft one that MS can easily do away with if profit margins are not met. So in that regard he's right, if xbox isn't showing the expected return on investment the higher ups are expecting than it's unlikely Microsoft will acquire any other studios any time soon, especially if they are spending billions buying developers just to shut them down in the end.

MrBaskerville3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Xbox is a division that they discussed shutting down but doubled down on after Gamepass was pitched.

It needs to make money at some point. Big money.

rokos3d ago

According to Statista the net income of Microsoft is about $72.4 billion dollars which is a bit lower than last year profit. That is almost as much as Activision's acquisition but I assume that would be a one off since it costs so much plus I see how their focus has been shifted to AI, thus any major future investments will probably be in that area.

Markusb333d ago

i think you are really missing the point

VariantAEC3d ago

@romulus23
That is not why MS buys studios. They might continue to buy because it's about taking that sweet sweet IP out of the corporate husks of their acquisitions.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3d ago
SonyStyled4d ago

“There won't be no more acquiring game publishers from Microsoft in the future”

No bro, there do be is for Microsoft not acquiring for what is now if not what it be is 😂

4d ago Replies(2)
ChasterMies3d ago

Xbox isn’t a separate company from Microsoft. It’s all Microsoft.

Abear213d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Let’s be real, this is the media spinning all the acquisitions and liquidations of said developers and spinning it to make M$ the villain.

This was bound to happen, a bigger slice of pie and cut costs, when the games come they stand to make more and that’s their agenda—it was the writing on the wall when the sales went through and legally all those who approved the sale and mergers knew this would happen.

Snowflakes need to realize business is ugly and you can cry all you want but this is how capitalism works. And it works.

That said, M$ needs to steer the narrative and grab hold of all this, make their plans known, hype the hell out of all those dead IP’s they plan to revive, and be honest about the timeline. This is likely to involve mobile and IP on other consoles, and most people realize that.

The problem is this company is incapable of being transparent and seems to often want to dissuade and confuse is customer base. The lack of E3 has hurt Microsoft and I don’t think they know how to properly or effectively market their brand anymore.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3d ago
jwillj2k44d ago

There really needs to be a class action lawsuit here. You buy these companies just to put people out of jobs. And it’s not like something happened to derail their plans this WAS the plan. Microsoft has no business in this space at all.

franwex4d ago (Edited 4d ago )

Microsoft has been doing this for years. They simply want the IPs. Look at Nokia. Look at Skype. This time it simply expanded to games. Gaming is not as important to Microsoft’s executives as it was to the founders too. Bill Gates was willing to sell the og Xbox at a loss. Steve Balmer approved the red ring of death fiasco. This CEO isn’t really a gamer.

-Foxtrot4d ago

Maybe it's time though to put a stop to it and use a big giant like Microsoft as a huge example to the rest of these big companies.

There has to be a line drawn somewhere.

People like the FTC and the like went against Microsoft yet their Actvision deal was still allowed to go through yet look what's happened...it's not even Acitivisions studios aswell, it's Bethesdas.

VariantAEC3d ago

Years?

Try several decades, and in the gaming space 2.3 decades.

Jon615863d ago

You do realize this happens in ALL industries? Or are you just saying this because it is Microsoft? In any case I feel for those that are being let go but the trch industry is suffering right now.

jwillj2k43d ago (Edited 3d ago )

This absolutely does NOT happen all the time. Let me know the last time 1 company with a terrible product track record spent 100 billion onto acquire MULTIPLE successful companies in under a year only to shut them down and stop making their products regardless of how successful they were. Not merge them, completely shut them down.

And you can’t use Microsoft in your example.

Notellin3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Class action lawsuit? The law is on their side and protects them at all costs. There are no rules to protect the people at the bottom.

jwillj2k43d ago

Not true when it comes to mass layoff do your research.

RNTody4d ago

Ninja Theory, Perfect Dark, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, Wolfenstein 3, Dishonored, Prey, Doom, Quake... something tells me that bad things are going to happen to these entities under Microsoft.

MrDead3d ago

ID software, the makers of Doom and Wolfenstein that have been with us since 1991 could be gone and MS will keep the IPs.

I hope some of these studios can buy their freedom from MS otherwise this is going to be even more devastating for the industry and gamers.

Yui_Suzumiya3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

That's exactly what I'm worried about. I've been a fan of id since Wolfenstein 3D and I'm honestly afraid.

lodossrage3d ago

Toys for Bob saw the writing on the wall and bought themselves out.

Wouldn't be the first time a company did that under MS either. Bungie and Twisted Pixel did the same. Considering what just happened, I can see some other devs trying to buy themselves out too.

anast4d ago

Good thing the bosses of all those small studios made their money.

glenn19794d ago

they cant do it right now they will get burned

XiNatsuDragnel3d ago

Phil and his team need to be gone

lodossrage3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Won't make a difference.

The whole structure needs to be overhauled. Anyone that replaces Phil will be no different than him, Mattrick, or anyone else.

Until the company changes how they go about business, nothing will change

glenn19793d ago

I just don't have any idea what they would do , they have done sooo much damage on their xbox brand, they have a show at July or June I think, but will it even matter even they show amazing games, idkn

lodossrage3d ago

True,

But they may as well get it over with. Whether it happens now or later, the burning is going to hit the same.

Reality is the ONE move that can alleviate a lot of this is the one move they can't make. Remove day 1 from gamepass.

Show all comments (68)