Approvals 10/3 ▼
hammersuit (2) - 2110d ago Cancel
koga88 (4) - 2110d ago Cancel
ZeekQuattro (2) - 2110d ago Cancel
cheshirepurr (2) - 2110d ago Cancel
130°

Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto just did an about-face on F2P, so now what?

Perhaps Nintendo's IP doesn't work well with F2P, but from a business perspective, F2P "seems the only way to go right now," says Dr. Serkan Toto.

Read Full Story >>
gamedaily.biz
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (2)- Updates (2)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community2110d ago
Changed: content
donniebaseball2110d ago
masterfox2110d ago

"F2P "seems the only way to go right now," says Dr. Serkan Toto." , ""The only really successful monetization angle for single-player games has, historically, been DLC and you can't make enough money on DLC spenders to make up a box cost"

^^^ Complete BS!!, historically really ? , oh ok let me see what DLC I downloaded when boughts FF VII, or DMC for the PS2, or MGS for the PS1 , or RE series from PS1 , Grant Turismo bought lots of cars in the PS1 right?, Marvel Vs Capcom 2 I bought lots of characters from DLC right ?, Uncharted 1 of the PS3 bought lots of things right?,...... BS!!!! , none of them had DLC cr@#p in it and were a total success, the issue here is that some developers want's to cash in quickly by releasing a mindless MP game just like Fortnite, or PUBG , instead of creating an immersive Single player experiences , one of the main issues here also is that developers are lacking imagination and vision to create Single player experiences like in the past so instead they choose the easy way and go for a MP only instead or F2P brainless games.

jimbost792110d ago

Agree with you totally mate. Why is there a need to make more money of a game other than sales? Its just pure greed.

gangsta_red2110d ago

"Why is there a need to make more money of a game other than sales?"

Is this really a question? There's all different factors on why a game needs to make more money after an intial sale. One reason comes to mind of a games retail cost is much lower than development and there's no guarantee that sales of that game will re-coup the cost.

DLC, MTs and other GaaS type services also help a lot of devs fund the next project.

gangsta_red2110d ago

"... what DLC I downloaded when boughts FF VII, or DMC for the PS2, or MGS for the PS1 , or RE series from PS1 , Grant Turismo bought lots of cars in the PS1 right?, Marvel Vs Capcom 2"

You're naming a lot of past games that didn't have nearly the cost of development that these current titles have and are in a much more agressive gaming market.

"...mindless MP game just like Fortnite, or PUBG , instead of creating an immersive Single player experiences ,"

PUBG and Fortnite are mindless? Why does every discussion like these seem to always devolve into some debate about MP vs SP? Especially when it could be argued that there are also mindless SP games as well as excellent MP games?

We have already seen a number of developers unable to keep up with today without trying their hand at MP, Housemarque and Bethesda automatically come to mind.

We have also seen a lot more developers rely strictly on well known IPs instead of bringing out new games (like in the past) because of brand recognition selling more.

jimbost792109d ago (Edited 2109d ago )

Yes it really is a question. I remember playing games on all my early consoles. Take nintendo for example. On my nes, snes, n64 none of their games had any dlc or MTs. Yet nintendo managed to make a profit, survive and have enough money to develop further games. Without making more money after the initial sale. So how did they they do this without any dlc or MTs?
I can tell you how. They made great games that people wanted to buy. Full games, with no bullshit.
I get that devs like housmarqee who I also think make great games struggled to make a decent profit. But that's just the nature of business. Not every company can survive.
You're saying that company's knowingly make games that they know won't recoup the cost of development so add mts and dlc to help them make more money? Maybe some do, but those are primarily mp games and it doesnt work out for alot of them.
As far as sp games go. Imo there is 0 reason other than greed to charge the player more money for anything. Remember when alt costumes etc were just unlockable in game? When you didnt have to pay for it. Now some companies have seen this as a way to squeeze an extra few quid out of the player and thats bullshit.
Look at god of war. Full game no bullshit. Profit made. Could they add dlc and mts? Yes they could. Would it sell? Yes almost certainty. What would be the reason? To squeeze an extra few quid out of the player. Also known as greed.

So what are all these other factors that mean a dev has to make more money after the initial sale?
Like i said not all devs/games can be successful and some will go out of business even tho they made great games. But once again that's just the nature of any business.

XiNatsuDragnel2110d ago (Edited 2110d ago )

Build quality games with no gimmicks with all included content for the game even free DLC expansions. Nuff said!

porkChop2110d ago

I don't mind paying for proper expansions if they're done right.

Servbot412110d ago

The same Nintendo charging $279 for items in Animal Crossing Pocket Camp...

100°

Every PlayStation Studios game available now on Windows PC

Windows Central writes: "Many PlayStation Studios games that are ported to PC get dedicated PS5 DualSense support, which allows users to experience haptic feedback and adaptive trigger support without actually having to own a PS5.

According to Hermen Hulst, head of PlayStation Studios, it's still the company's intent to launch the bigger single-player games on PS5 first, before later bringing the games to PC. This might not be the case for multiplayer games however, which are considered okay to launch simultaneously on console and PC."

Read Full Story >>
windowscentral.com
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community2d ago
ocelot072d ago

My guess is after god of war. Probably last of us 2 that's a almost 4 year old game now and by the time it's released on pc it will be more than 4 years old or close to 5.

Elda2d ago

Every old Playstation game that is now on PC.

shinoff21832d ago

Right. I definitely see what a headlined from a website named windows central was trying to do though. It's cute little wordplay to help out the green box

Flewid6382d ago

Are PlayStation games no longer good or worth playing once they are old?

Elda2d ago

I'm guessing my comment went over your head.

XiNatsuDragnel2d ago

Good at least they can sell hardware

220°

Former Activision studio Toys for Bob partners with Xbox to publish its first game as an indie

Former Activision studio Toys for Bob partners with Xbox to publish its first game as an indie. This is something of a homecoming, as Microsoft owns Activision.

Read Full Story >>
engadget.com
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community3d ago
Obscure_Observer3d ago

Very very early in development. Still, fantastic news!

Let´s GO!!!

Lightning773d ago

I guess.

How come they didnt either let them go or sell Tango and others to another publisher? Not saying Ubisoft, EA would be any better. (Capcome would of treated them right )

At least it wouldn't be MS of all ppl destroying them.

MS really should let go Tango go like they did TFB here.

darthv723d ago (Edited 3d ago )

one was under Bethesda (Tango) the other under Activision (TFB). Clearly each one handled the separations of their subordinates differently.

Obscure_Observer3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

"How come they didnt either let them go or sell Tango and others to another publisher? Not saying Ubisoft, EA would be any better. (Capcome would of treated them right )"

Perhaps because Zenimax and ABK handles such matters differently based on their own internal policies as "independent" publishers.

Whoever, chances are it´s simply because MS didn´t wanted Tango or Austin to be acquired by competitors and develop new bangers for them, giving MS a bad rep in a possible future. Which could also be the reason why they ensured an exclusive partnership with TFB and its new game, before anyone else.

Sad and disgusting. But it is what it is.

Lightning773d ago (Edited 3d ago )

"Whoever, chances are it´s simply because MS didn´t wanted Tango or Austin to be acquired by competitors and develop new bangers for them, giving MS a bad rep in a possible future."

MS has a bad rep now because those studios are no more. I rather them sell the studio continue to make multiplatform releases, while MS continues to focus on whatever they're doing. If they didn't want Tango around they should separated from them or sell them to, like they did TFB.

It's inexcusable, they have options on how to handle studios they don't want anymore with killing jobs. Not just MS but the rest of the industry also.

Sad and disgusting sure how many will get shut down next year or this year even?

I don't trust MS decisions and motivations at this point. You have to admit they make one dumb move after another.

Obscure_Observer2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

"MS has a bad rep now because those studios are no more. I rather them sell the studio continue to make multiplatform releases, while MS continues to focus on whatever they're doing. If they didn't want Tango around they should separated from them or sell them to, like they did TFB."

Imo, MS separated from TFB because they didn´t had a game associated with Xbox yet, unlike Tango.

"I don't trust MS decisions and motivations at this point. You have to admit they make one dumb move after another."

Fair enough. It was indeed an epic dumb move from them to close Tango.

Still, all to be forgotten, like always have. This is not the first time a big publisher shuts down a beloved and/or successful studio out of nowhere and certainly won´t be the last. Do you remember Lionhead? Do you remember Evolution Studios? Yeah... both were beloved studios and yet, those companies kill those studios in q blink of an eye and got away with it.

anast2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

The studio boss made some money from this transaction. Once the game releases, the studio will get chopped up.

-Foxtrot3d ago

Manages to buy their freedom especially after all the shit Microsoft has been doing with its studios lately

...

Goes right back to them as partners.

Okaaaaaay...

darthv723d ago

Id venture a guess that TFB working directly with MS was a better outcome than working through Activision to get to MS.

VersusDMC3d ago

From the article...

"Toys for Bob spun out as an indie back in February after Microsoft instituted sweeping layoffs that impacted 86 employees, which was more than half of the staff"

I doubt those 86 employees enjoyed the Microsoft experience over Activisions.

Inverno3d ago

MS shuts down studios because of lack of resources and then helps these guys by giving em resources. Also MS is what forced them to buy their freedom in the first place? What kind of logic 😂

Chevalier3d ago

The best thing is that the company that is worth $3 trillion and owns the company instead of Xbox lacks resources. How the hell does a company worth $3 trillion making a measly $70 billion purchase they 'can't' support. Lol

BlindMango2d ago

The reason they would need to "partner with Microsoft" is simply to make a game that's part of a franchise that Microsoft owns. Meaning they're probably going to make a new Spyro game - they're still an independent studio, but are making a game in a franchise that Microsoft owns. It's kind of like Remedy partnering with Rockstar to be able to make the Max Payne remakes.

shinoff21832d ago

It was probably the deal to get released from Ms

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2d ago
Sciurus_vulgaris3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Xbox’s gaming division seems to still function as 3 semi-autonomous sub-divisions, Xbox Studios, Bethesda and ABK. The three main sub-divisions can seemingly shut down or build studios and set up partnerships independently. This would explain why Bethesda can recently shutdown studios, while ABK spins off one studio, while building a new one. Plus, Toys for Bob could be spun off by ABK, only to immediately re-partner with Microsoft.

Chevalier3d ago

That's absolutely 💯 BS. Any sane 'autonomous' company would NOT put their games on Gamepass day 1 like COD will lose probably billions.

Also they're all under Xbox game studios so any autonomy is an illusion.

PhillyDonJawn2d ago

No, I'm sure MS can and does step in when they want something done specifically but I'm also sure they let them also work independently

shinoff21832d ago

I highly highly doubt this. Ms controls all. The guys aren't gonna be allowed to just shut something down like that without approval. No way

Elda3d ago

Either a kiddie game or something uninteresting.

Obscure_Observer2d ago

Don´t worry. You won´t be playing it anyway since their next game will possible be a next gen Xbox console game.

Elda2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Don't worry about my comments.

PhillyDonJawn2d ago

Right probably something like astrobot

romulus232d ago

Nah he said "uninteresting", lots of people are interested in Astro Bot.

Elda2d ago

Never Astro Bot. Astro Bot looks better than any exclusive released on XB this entire generation & believe there hasn't been much.

Asplundh2d ago

Crash 4 was good, so I'm hopeful.

PhillyDonJawn2d ago

Hey you said that about SOT and looks like many ppl on PS is playing it. You also found bugsnax interesting ffs your opinion hold no weight lol.

Elda2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

Bugsnax is BS, tried it & quickly deleted it. It's a game that fits right on Gamepass. PS5 owners that are probably playing the boring SOT you could count on one hand. LMAO!!...don't try to come for me.

PhillyDonJawn2d ago

So you admit bugsnax interested you enough to try? 😂 someone gotta call you out on the foolishness.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2d ago
Show all comments (35)
130°

What Happens to Your Steam Account When You Die?

The Outerhaven writes: While Steam has come out recently, stating that Steam accounts can't be transferred, we need to think about it since we all will eventually kick the bucket. But if Valve is denying transferring accounts, what can be done? Plenty, actually.

Read Full Story >>
theouterhaven.net
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community3d ago
thorstein4d ago

It goes to my kids because I gave them the passwords.

To Steam: Missio has a song that conveys my feelings about you stealing my purchase after I die. It's called "Middle Fingers"

shinoff21833d ago

Pretty much. My son knows my info.

Abear213d ago

Yeah worrying about digital ownership when you’re on the other side of the grass seems a little strange, but also on brand for these millennial journalists to worry about.

qalpha2d ago

I'm sure Keith will be happy to hear he's a millennial journalist.

Goodguy013d ago

I suppose if I have kids, I'd just give em my account details by retirement age. If I die young then...idk lol.

CrimsonWing693d ago

Yea, I mean just give someone the password to your account. Is that difficult to do or something? Like, I’m legit asking because I don’t know.

anast3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

It's not difficult but It's against the policy. If they find out, they will lock the account permanently.

CrimsonWing693d ago

Ah ok, I had a feeling there was something like that. It seems kind of weird that you can’t just hand your account over to a family member or friend and let them take over the account.

Show all comments (16)