260°

Bethesda’s Review Policy Sets a Terrible Precedent

HPP: Don’t start sending the industry down a dark road, Bethesda. You should be able take your time to fix bugs, add features, polish things up and craft something you can feel justifiably proud of. Let us do the same.

Read Full Story >>
heypoorplayer.com
derkasan2749d ago

If they didn't play favorites, I wouldn't think this was so bad.

cleft52748d ago (Edited 2748d ago )

Ultimately game journalist only have themselves to blame for these new policies. Publishers have always wanted to pull this, hell if publishers could get away with it, they wouldnt send review copies out at all. In the past this was unthinkable because game journalist/game reviewers had the ear and hearts of the consumers aka the gamers.

Yet recent trends have shown the core consumers moving away from listening to reviewers and more toward listening to video content producer, be it Youtubers or live streamers, like those on Twitch.

On top of that, the credibility of game journalist has come under much scrutiny in recent memory. This is largely due to game journalist effectively attacking their audience. Releasing articles that have been extremely anti-gamer/anti-consumer. When you bite the hand that feeds you or in this case give you staying power, what do you expect will happen? Publishers like Bethesda have been waiting for a chance to cut out game journalist and control the message. By having game journalist turn on their consumers in favor of pushing agendas they gave Publisher like Bethesda the chance to cut them out of the loop. Surprise, surprise Bethesda took them up on that opportunity.

MatrixxGT2748d ago

This whole situation is joe blo going deep sea fishing in a kiddie pool.

Back in the day you had a few publications that would have reviews but now anybody can create a blog and call themselves a game critic.

Then they get free games early and write a review with a flashy headline to generate clicks on an ad ridden website laid out by a 3 year old coloring outside the lines.

Bethesda isn't ruining anything, the consumers are. It only takes one look at the comment section on any article here to prove that.

ninsigma2748d ago

Very well put. Whenever I see an article complaining about this, I see it as the publications scrambling to get out ahead of this as if it's not their own fault for being shady, agenda driven unprofessionals.

ZaWarudo2749d ago

These journalist are salty that they can't rush out their clickbait reviews early. That's really why so many sites are crying foul.
If you want feedback and impressions, don't buy it day one. Simple. Just wait.

Stevonidas2749d ago

You mean, HAVE DISCIPLINE? The fuck is that?

ZaWarudo2749d ago

I'll show you! *Takes out belt*

MasterCornholio2748d ago (Edited 2748d ago )

As Jim Sterling said now developers will rush their reviews because of this.

Before critics received their games early and had an embargo date.

This allows two things to happen.

1. Gives reviewers more time to write their reviews.
2. Eliminates the worry about the other sites releasing their reviews first.

By not sending out reviews early critics will just rush their reviews just so that they have their reviews out earlier than the competition. This will affect the quality of reviews because critics won't analyze the game as much.

Fortunately not all reviewers worry about this type of thing. Total Biscuit says that he has a loyal fanbase that are willing to wait for his reviews so he doesn't have a problem with that. However the critics that don't have that will be in trouble.

@S45

Didn't critics received the console version of the game?

The game is fine in consoles but on PC it was broken. The reason why that happened was because Rocksteady gave the responsibility of the PC version to very poor porting studio. I agree that they should have done a much better job with the PC version of Arkham Knight.

xPhearR3dx2748d ago

"This will affect the quality of reviews"

Lol the quality of reviews have been complete garbage for years. The majority of reviewers only use a fraction of the numerical scale, that being 7, 8 or 9. And anytime a game someone is looking forward to doesn't receive a score they expected (despite not even playing the game yet) they comment with "Don't care, buying it anyway" .

The only people suffering from this policy are journalist who don't get to play before everyone else. No review is going to stop someone from purchasing a game day 1 they're excited about and have been wanting to play for MONTHS if not YEARS. Except if every review comes out saying the game is completely broken. Think Arkham Knight PC.

s45gr322748d ago

Maybe is because gamers have become better reviewers than videogame journalists. It was the steam community that after reviewing Batman Arkham Knight. They informed everybody that the game was broken. In contrast gaming journalists were giving glowing reviews og say game.

ninsigma2748d ago

If the quality of reviews goes down, I can see less and less people relying on them. I consider that to be a good thing.

robtion2748d ago

It's not really that simple. The industry hypes day 1 buys and aggressively pushes this agenda by making all kind of pre-order bonuses, play the game a day/week early etc

They don't want you to wait to buy.

Andofaus2748d ago

Yep or their review and final score of a game is not a reflection of the quality of the product but by what will get more clicks, the gaming media at this point is irrelevant and only real opinions by gamers, tubers, steamers and the like are what matters. As others have said in the comments the media outlets only have their selves to blame for policies like this.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2748d ago
_-EDMIX-_2748d ago

I don't know if I honestly care , the reality is if somebody truly wants a game but is worried about the quality they could simply wait for the review embargo to be lifted, I always see this as a first-world problem because exactly who is forcing anyone to purchase this on the very first day of release?

I don't remember the last time a review has ever influenced me to ever purchase a game or not purchase a game

Vegamyster2748d ago

No reviewer is perfect and you'll always see inconsistencies but this doesn't benefit the consumer in anyway and i don't see why it should be changed, obviously you can just wait until after the game launches but knowing about a games potential problems like technical issues or bugs before launch is better than after.

ninsigma2748d ago (Edited 2748d ago )

A problem with that is if it's reviewed before launch it's technically not the same experience as what the consumers will have.

Edit: fixed spelling

GrimmyReaper2748d ago (Edited 2748d ago )

Yea because no company has ever done THAT before, right? Hiding bugs and glitches and poor optimization?

Remember Watch Dogs? Remember Battlefield 4? Remember Assassin's Creed Unity? Look up most of the embargo's on triple A games these days. These companies don't tell you so people like you don't notice. And then people bitch about it and then comes the next game and all is forgotten. This absolutely doesn't affect consumers. How?

Those that already don't buy games day one won't be affected.
Those that buy games day one will buy it regardless of reviews and numbers prove this.

Barely a few hours after Unity launched, people posted bugs and frame rate issues and what not and people STILL bought it.
Watch Dogs downgrades were noticeable weeks before launch and people STILL bought it.
Same with the division.

And any review that dares break their bubble of hype is simply ignored and labeled as "Clickbait review by hater" because again. People are gonna buy those triple A games regardless.

Either have some patience and self control or face the consequences of trusting a company of all things. And no, releasing buggy and unfinished games shouldn't be acceptable, but seeing how people buy these games day one, companies make their money regardless. If Bethesda's new policy has pushed you to wait before buying a game, they have done you a bigger favor than you even realize.

Vegamyster2748d ago

@GrimmyReaper

People like me? I don't buy games based on reviews, trailers and very rarely at launch so don't generalize me with millions of other consumers, my argument is that these reviews while not all perfect are simple tools and they're being taken away for no good reason, the less hoops the consumer has to jump through to know if a product is good or not the better.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2748d ago
DragonKnight2748d ago

You ignore 2 important problems.

First is supply. We've all seen stories of, and even experienced ourselves, games we can't buy due to supply demands. Sometimes said supply issues make wait times ridiculously long. This is especially bad with Amazon's pre-order setup.

Second is online purchases. People tend to think in bubbles and in very self-centered ways. The idea that you don't have to worry about supply if you buy digital ignores things like network availability, bandwidth caps, etc.. Separately these issues mean very little, together they are a problem. Some people don't feel like waiting an extra few weeks to get a game they paid full price for in order to have day one, and don't have the network ability to get digital.

But even disregarding all of this, no one should be defending anti-consumer tactics such as trying to maximize sales via ignorance.

_-EDMIX-_2748d ago

I over all agree with the majority of what you're saying but I still stand by that no consumer necessarily needs to purchase any game the first day of its release.

If it takes some time for reviewer or consumers to address some issues then so be it, I believe that within a week's time or so they're going to be able to publicize any serious issues.

I completely understand why a company is basically saying we're not going to be giving out copies of our games weeks ahead of time.

These guys very much know that people are going to be purchasing their game around the launch with very little information and basically gambling if it has issues or not and I don't even disagree with you slightly on your last sentence that they're trying to "maximize sales via ignorance"

But this is one of those situations where you as a consumer just need to make up your own mind in regards to how you purchase, because I feel like those who are ignorant enough to purchase before reading a review were likely not going to wait for one anyway.

This is definitely a difficult situation and it's only going to get more difficult with new intellectual properties in which lots of the features and Concepts will be questionable until release.

I think the only new intellectual property I pre-ordered this generation was actually until dawn and I was pleasantly surprised but let's be honest things could have went the other way and it could have been a terrible game the only other and new intellectual property I'm actually pre-ordering is Horizon zero Dawn because I trust the team and thus far I like what I saw but I don't think I'm like most gamers I'm actually more laxed on my game purchases and many times if the game delivers on a couple of components I'm pretty fun but I don't think everyone is going to be that way regarding games.

Lol I mean nowadays if I got a good seven-hour campaign with a decent story I seem to be ok. A game would have to be just absolutely royally jacked up for me to question purchasing it upon release I was even fine with Fallout 4 and Witcher 3 issues when they both released.

But I still completely understand what you're saying not all consumers will feel this way.

opinionated2748d ago (Edited 2748d ago )

I like the precedent, I hope more developers follow suit. I hope that voice actors union collapses under their own stupidity as well. These idiots think they are a valuable part of the industry, enough to make demands and threaten publishers. In reality they are becoming more useless by the day. We don't need these middlemen anymore. Certainly in no position to lecture or make demands.

Sciurus_vulgaris2748d ago

Voice actors are becoming useless, and aren't a valuable part of the industry?

opinionated2748d ago

Not voice actors, the union.

s45gr322748d ago

Well videogame journalists are a joke. So I agree with you on that; however, I disagree in regards to SAG-AFTRA union. It is the unions that speak in behalf of workers and defend workers rights. These unions are not perfect in regards to featherbedding, union fees, or seniority preference. Still, I wish there were game developer unions to protect game developers. Too many game developers lose their ip (Hideo Kojima lost the rights to make Metal Gear games 😭 even though he was the creator), work long hours, lose their jobs, or get underpaid. With a workers union game developers will be better off. If you want great games, we need happy game developers.

opinionated2748d ago

Unions are not needed anymore. They are a radical egalitarian joke. The publishers just released a statement and said they are a joke and if they don't get their shit together they are going to avoid working with that union in the future. I hope it happens.

ninsigma2748d ago

A lot of unions are fairly agenda driven these days and a lot of these strikes etc often happen even if the workers didn't want it. The union are making them to fit their agenda. Kojima didn't lose the rights to make metal gear. Konami always owned the IP. The game is surely better off in the hands of Kojima but he technically didn't own it even though he created it.

Lamboomington2748d ago

that makes no sense at all.

Gaming reviews are ultimately for the consumer. Giving journalists less time to do their reviews just means more rushed reviews, more people buying the game before reviews. ie Consumers don't have access to good information about the game before they purchase.

opinionated2748d ago

In theory you're right. In reality you give these people too much credit. Especially with the bigger publications, you act like these people are professionals giving expert analysis. They arent.

If consumers rush to buy games they don't know anything about or base their opinions on clowns who "rush their reviews to make a buck" then they are shitty consumers and need to take some responsibility. Own up to their dumb choices.

ninsigma2748d ago

"Giving journalists less time to do their reviews"

I'd have thought not being tied to a day before release would mean they have even more time....

admiralvic2747d ago

I agree.

I find it amazing how some people are acting like a couple of bad journalists have ruined it for everyone and the YouTubers and the like are righteous.

Part of the problem is that people don't want fair reviews, but reviews based off morales and values. A great example of this is Street Fighter V. The Metacritic average for SFV is 77 for critics and 3.4 for user reviews.

The issue people have is simple. Street Fighter V did not ship as a complete product and the modes/content included was underwhelming. What people want is journalists to punish the game for releasing early. These would be scores in the 3 out of 10 range. However, despite Street Fighter V lacking arcade, trials and more, it plays pretty well. The core mechanics are solid and features no bugs.

This is where the issues come into play. Do you make a stand and give it a really low score because it isn't as full as you think it should be or do you give it an okay score because it's a good game, it just isn't complete. It seems most journalists went for the latter, where as YouTubers and other sources went for the former, so the community seems to view the former as more trustworthy.

Tctczach2748d ago

I don't buy games based on reviews. I feel people should go in blind and experience and form their own opinions. I get some people like to read and get the general consensus on how it plays. If I do this I usually end up fixating on a problem that stood out to them and I don't enjoy it that much.

solidboss2748d ago (Edited 2748d ago )

The whole point here is knowing that you aren't getting a broken/buggy product or in the case of no man's sky be completely lied to. It's not like how it was in the 90's where you can maybe read a review of a game but even then who's to say it wasn't sponsored or paid off? Even then everything was mostly word of mouth so there was no way of knowing if a game was worth it or not unless a friend that you trust gives you impressions or you borrow it from them. Now we have easy access to such information all it takes is a little patience to see if your $60 is being well spent. It bothers me that things like this happen and its okay for the video game industry but why not any other industry? At times it can seem like the video game industry almost takes its audience as idiots with the things they are able to pull off

Show all comments (39)
170°

Xbox, do you even have a plan anymore?

TSA asks what is the future for Xbox.

Read Full Story >>
thesixthaxis.com
Chocoburger6h ago

They clearly never did, hence why they spent so many BILLIONS on other publishers as a last resort.

anast5h ago

They have a plan. It's to move everything toward streaming and mobile. This is just the next step.

Cacabunga4h ago(Edited 4h ago)

With half of the money they spent, they could have been on the very top and the gaming industry would be way bigger than it is.. encourage developers, indies, make them grow trust them and they will deliver.

Tody_za3h ago(Edited 3h ago)

What are you talking about Cacabunga? The Xbox faithful insisted that Microsoft has infinite money, and after Activision they should buy Square Enix and Capcom before Sony does. There was no chance ever that Microsoft would do this. They would use their infinite millions and Bitcoins to invest in 50 new IP and beat everyone.

Tody_za1h ago

Did I really need to add a /s to my comment...

andy854h ago

To ruin great studios it's looking like

Skuletor4h ago

Sure, a plan to be a more hated game company than EA. Ubisoft were recently giving them a run for their money but I think Xbox have really knocked it out the park with their latest stunt.

neutralgamer19924h ago

Absolutely not, their whole plan is at odd with what MS wants

Phil wants GP to become big
MS wants to sell games and make billions

GP can’t be sustained with AAA games which take 3-5 years and 7 figure budgets. Only go put those games on GP day one. Why do you think games are coming out on other platforms?

People want a change and want Phil gone without realizing if someone new comes along they may want to change everything again so we just keep going in circles. Phil has to realize that and give clear message on the direction of Xbox

Show all comments (21)
340°

Brad Hilderbrand explains the reason behind the recent Xbox studio closures

There are two reasons why all those Bethesda studios closed, and neither of them have anything to do with Bethesda (directly)...

Game Pass and Activision.

Read Full Story >>
linkedin.com
Christopher9h ago(Edited 9h ago)

The guy confirming what we've all (well, most of us) been saying since the latest purchase.

crazyCoconuts6h ago

Remember the relatively common counter that went something like "I'm sure you arm-chair CEOs know better how to run a company than the biggest company in the world"?

I mean - there's a lot to running a company for sure, but on this topic it's hard to understand how Phil and team didn't see this coming.

Tody_za6h ago(Edited 6h ago)

Phil and team knew it was coming and planned for it. It's not even a conspiracy, it's simply the business of cutting costs and superfluous studios after a major acquisition. They don't give a damn about Tango Gameworks or other small creative studios that won't recoup their losses. They don't care about investing in this industry. They have no interest in risky and expensive new IP. They are only interested in profiting off ownership of Bethesda IP, Call of Duty and Candy Crush.

I guarantee you that not one single game under their banner will improve or become bigger and better.

Welcome to the Xbox family, what a pathetic joke.

Anyone who continues to support this, enjoy your future, because this is it. Ninja Theory is next, and Perfect Dark after that.

Christopher5h ago

Especially not with the evidence of tons of existing movie streaming subs out there and how they fail to make a profit with over 100m users each quarter.

Lightning773h ago

Apparently they're debating if they wanna put the new Cod on Gamepass or not.

Either grow GP with Cod or don't put it on GP and grow the revenue the traditional way while GP will suffer.

The mess that MS puts themselves in.

XiNatsuDragnel9h ago

I'm not surprised Microsoft guys are crock nuff said

isarai8h ago(Edited 8h ago)

Honestly i think Bethesda needs to buy themselves out of zenimax/MSs hands and do their own thing, i honestly think that would fix a lot of issues and save them from a potential closure.

Zeref8h ago

There's a reason they sold in the first place. And Bethesda is not closing anytime soon lol. As much as I hate the studio closures. They were all small studios 2 of them were mobile studios.

I think these are growing pains and Xbox will get back on track. But they're not getting any more passes.

jwillj2k47h ago(Edited 7h ago)

I’d like to see your reaction to being growing pained out of your job after the launch of a successful product.

Mr_cheese5h ago

Excuses, Excuses, excuses.

If growing pains have been happening for the best part of a decade, they're not growth.

XiNatsuDragnel4h ago

Zeref nii San
I'm sorry but xbox has been rightfully bashed due to constant incompetence

romulus234h ago

Yet you literally just gave them a pass, being "small studios" or "mobile studios" is irrelevant. There's no excsue for closing Tango, none. They praise the game, they PR talk about it's the kind of game the company needs and yet they shutter the developer, that's foul on every level.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4h ago
Tacoboto4h ago

Bethesda greenlit Redfall, launched Fallout 76 in the condition it was in (and the fiasco with the bonus bag), and spent all that time on Starfield finishing it as it was with that same engine. Wolfenstein Youngblood exists because of them too, not Microsoft.

Are you *sure* leaving them alone would actually result in a better outcome, not just a different one?

isarai3h ago(Edited 3h ago)

A lot of this excessive monetization, and GAAS crap started when Zenimax decided to start looking for a buyer. Not a coincidence that there was a sudden shift in prioritizing profits above quality or even coherence at the same time. They wanted big numbers to attract buyers, now that they've been bought, MS wants exactly what they were baited with.

However even under Zenimax they made enough to self publish sometimes, so i would imagine it's not too far fetched that they could pay their way into independence if they REALLY wanted to.

Also even people at Bethesda and Arkane were hoping MS would cancel the game as again, they were forced to make something they didn't want to make.

Einhander19728h ago

Ah, we can see how the Microsoft media machine works.

Every article I read now is some kind of attempt to shift the blame off Microsoft and paint them as the victims or convince people that Microsoft mistakes were just some kind unforeseeable unfortunate twist of fate.

The shills are out in full force today.

Christopher8h ago

This is not at all what this article is saying. It's saying that honest and useful studios are getting closed because of big money deals elsewhere and the faults with game pass as a model.

Einhander19728h ago

I understand what the article is about.

It's a deflection, it's a putting the cart before the horse article.

Let me tell you how this problem wouldn't have existed in the first place.

Microsoft not creating a service funded by subsidization and having the foresight to see that it would disrupt consumer spending habit to begin with. Then not buying Bethesda and undertaking costs for a service that was already failing to pay for itself because their own expectations of Game Pass having "billions" of subscribers was unobtainable from the very start.

And if you don't think that was the case go back to the article on the day Game Pass launched and read the comments from people from day one who foresaw that this would be an unsustainable model and would cause people to stop spending in the same way.

Christopher7h ago

***Microsoft not creating a service funded by subsidization and having the foresight to see that it would disrupt consumer spending habit to begin with.***

This article literally supports this opinion. He's not praising Game Pass or the ABK purchase.

Einhander19727h ago(Edited 7h ago)

This is an explanation of why it failed, there is zero blame put onto Microsoft itself.

Yes, it talks about what went wrong, but it doesn't say Microsoft shouldn't have done it. It doesn't say Phil should have foreseen this outcome and stopped before it got to this point.

"convince people that Microsoft mistakes were just some kind unforeseeable unfortunate twist of fate"

Christopher7h ago(Edited 7h ago)

***but you're seeing the impact; all those smaller studios making really interesting games are going to fall away, simply because as good as games like Hi-Fi Rush are, they're never going to make enough money to make up that $70B hole that Xbox now has to dig itself out of.***

If you see that as support or you explicitly just want people to end their argument with "and, in conclusion, Microsoft bad" then that's on you. This article does not support Microsoft's choices and highlights the faults. Nothing it says is good about these choices, even saying that putting CoD on Game Pass would be money losing for them because they've set themselves up for failure (and not putting it on there will drop subscriber numbers like crazy, meaning their Game Pass plans were shit to begin with).

No matter how you look at it, they're saying Microsoft made decisions that hurt the bottom line, force closures, and leave Game Pass in a situation where they lose no matter what they do. It's all negative.

Einhander19727h ago

Christopher, if Microsoft hadn't made Game Pass and bought a bunch of publishers would this article even need to exist?

Christopher6h ago

***Christopher, if Microsoft hadn't made Game Pass and bought a bunch of publishers would this article even need to exist? ***

How is this an argument to anything being discussed? This is just as valuable of an argument as "if fish had stayed in deeper waters, they wouldn't have evolved to tetrapods, adapted to shallow water and then to land, and we wouldn't even exist and have to worry about game pass at all."

You're bringing nothing to this argument and then complaining that other people are highlighting the issues with Game Pass and spending tens of billions on studios because what we should be discussing is what it would be like if Microsoft hadn't done any of that.

Well, they did do it. Now pull up your big boy pants and join in on the discussion of what that has meant for the industry since then and, especially right now, how that is affecting the industry and game studios under Microsoft. None of us are able to go back in time and change what was done.

Einhander19726h ago(Edited 6h ago)

Christopher, this isn't me not understanding what the article is about, it's you not understanding what I am saying.

If you want me to make excuses for Microsoft's bad decisions you're not going to get that or just agree with people who are doing that, it's not going to happen, nor are you going to convert me into thinking xbox "needs to exist".

Ya know what, maybe "Microsoft bad".... maybe their decisions ARE having a negative effect on the industry, and instead of deflecting from their actual actions and making excuses for them we stand up and say "no" "Microsoft is hurting the industry"

And maybe, just maybe, it was so obvious that this was going to be the outcome that even nobodies in comment sections on websites were able to easily predict this outcome, yet Microsoft did it anyway then kept doing and even when it became undeniable that it was having a negative impact on their business and and the industry itself, then they knowingly made even bigger purchases and caused more problems.

And the one thing you're right about is that I can't go back in time, but I CAN speak up and try to keep it from happening again...

Maybe if the people who were speaking up 7 years ago were listened too we wouldn't be having this discussion and Tango and Arkane would still be in business along with all the other people who have lost their jobs due to Microsoft's actions.

Do you like analogies?

What you're saying is like an alcoholic crashing their car then trying to explain it by saying it was caused by everything except the fact that they were dunk because they are an alcoholic and don't want to stop drinking.

TiredGamer6h ago

The article is essentially focusing the blame on MS. GamePass was a hail mary play to change the gaming paradigm and carve out a special niche for themselves, emulating the Netflix model, that might have led to MS becoming the leader in the long-term. Unfortunately, the subscriber growth isn't really there, and the model isn't really built to weather that lack of revenue. MS is now in a restructure mindset to figure out how they balance out their model in a way that can still make them money.

've always believed that GamePass was a high risk shot that had a very low chance of long-term success. But the problem with it, whether it succeeded or not, is that it accelerated the proverbial "race to zero" consumer expectation that ran its course in the mobile gaming industry in the late 2000s. When consumers start thinking that games should be "cheap" (as in through a $10/month all-you-can-eat subscription model), it turns the narrative against games being priced at realistic levels. So with the GamePass failure, they've not only sabotaged their market share, but they've impacted the entire industry and devalued the cost of game development to the average consumer. So now it's harder to develop mega-big budget games and to earn the revenue needed to pay for them.

XiNatsuDragnel4h ago

Again terrible excuses in the 1st place

Christopher5h ago

***If you want me to make excuses for Microsoft's bad decisions you're not going to get that or just agree with people who are doing that, it's not going to happen, nor are you going to convert me into thinking xbox "needs to exist". ***

No one is asking you to make excuses for Microsoft's bad decisions nor is anyone asking you to convert to anything.

***Ya know what, maybe "Microsoft bad".... maybe their decisions ARE having a negative effect on the industry, and instead of deflecting from their actual actions and making excuses for them we stand up and say "no" "Microsoft is hurting the industry" ***

Literally no one here is doing this. They're literally discussing how Microsoft's decisions have hurt the industry. Except you. You're rambling about why people aren't complaining about Microsoft when people are in fact complaining about Microsoft.

*** And the one thing you're right about is that I can't go back in time, but I CAN speak up and try to keep it from happening again... ***

Then perhaps actually add something to the conversation other than calling people shills when people are complaining about the decisions and repercussions of Microsoft's actions.

Tacoboto4h ago

Christopher, you're fighting a block wall here - Ein will continue twisting and contorting any remark to fit his self-created narrative.

Einhander19724h ago(Edited 4h ago)

"Then perhaps actually add something to the conversation other than calling people shills when people are complaining about the decisions and repercussions of Microsoft's actions."

Cristopher, in no way is the author of this article complaining, they are explaining what happened it's literally the title. They never once say that Microsoft shouldn't have bought Zenimax or Activision or that Game Pass was a bad idea to begin with. They think the problem with Game Pass is that it didn't grow fast enough, not that it was a bad idea from the get go.

BTW this is his job title.

"Public Relations and Communications Leader"

What do you think a Public Relations and Communications Leader does to make money?

Edit: I have read a dozen of these articles that just started coming out in the last 24 hours that are trying to shift the conversation away from blaming Microsoft, the shift here and in several other articles is trying to say it just didn't gain subscribers fast enough, not that it was a bad idea to begin with that was doomed to fail or placing the blame on anyone.

It was all just an unforeseeable outcome, no one should be held responsible it was just a billion dollar oopsie that's costing thousands of people their jobs and has caused a downturn in the entire industries sustainability.

Oopsie!

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 4h ago
MrDead7h ago

It's greed. MS has the IP's it wants now it's dumping the studios that it's raided, MS will still make money from Tango's games unlike the people that made them. If anyone follows MS outside of gaming you'll see this is what they do, buy companies take what they want consolidate some of the workforce and shut them down. I don't know why people are acting so surprised when this is Microsoft being Microsoft.

MS is a three trillion dollar company, if it enters a market it has no need to compete, they take what they want and with the financial influence it can bypass laws that are meant to protect the consumer and the workforce. Just look at how they are cornering the AI market right now with buyups and investments.

Show all comments (36)
60°

Capcom Had Record Sales in 2024 Fiscal Year

Capcom Co., Ltd. today announced that in its consolidated earnings for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2024, net sales were 152,410 million yen (up 21.0% year-over-year), operating income was 57,081 million yen (up 12.3% year-over-year), ordinary income was 59,422 million yen (up 15.7 % year-over-year), and net income attributable to owners of the parent was 43,374 million yen (up 18.1 % year-over-year).

Read Full Story >>
capcom.co.jp
PRIMORDUS2h ago

Hey Capcom I want a remake of Viewtiful Joe 1 and 2 on Switch or, maybe Switch 2. I loved both of those games on GameCube.

MeteorPanda16m ago

Good. capcom and square enix were my two favourite developers and now it's just CapCom! Square enix keeps missing the mark, their sparks gone.