140°

Eurogamer: ' Transition to next-gen in 2-3 years' say Ubisoft

Ubisoft reckons we'll see Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo "transition" from the current generation of consoles to the next in two to three years.

"There's absolutely some amazing product coming. The new hardware, if it's not new platforms coming, the things like Move, Kinect, 3DS, these will all reinvigorate the market, and I do see in the next 12 month if not growth then stabilisation before what I assume to be a new transition into new consoles probably in the next two to three years."

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
Forbidden_Darkness5054d ago

I'm still loving my PS3 exclusives, so need to rush for Next Next Gen ;)

xztence5054d ago

Maybe MS and Nintendo will but we wont see next gen from Sony for atleast another 4 years.

TheLeprachaun5054d ago

Microsoft - Mid 2012/Late 2012
Nintendo - Late 2012/Early 2013
Sony - Late 2013/Early 2014

My opinion.

November 9 20045054d ago

no sony ill release a console too,you rally think hey want to fall behind? whoever triggers the next gen everyone is going to retaliate too. in 2-3 years is fine,i think by then we will be ready for a new console.

5054d ago
seij5555054d ago

Geez Walther, did you make a bad investment or something?

5054d ago
randomwiz5054d ago

2014 seems like too late of a release date although i wouldn't rule early 2014 out. In my opinion, Microsoft will be the first to release a console, but they won't make the same mistake as they did with the 360 and rush it out. I believe their pricing will be a last minute thing, because I'm sure they'll base their pricing on what Sony's going to price their console at, but Microsoft won't be able to do this because Sony will release at a later date, and will also be waiting to see what the 720's pricing will be.

I think Nintendo will have a release just in time for the holidays at an overpriced price point(by overpriced, i mean $0-100 more than what their console costs to build). Then they can easily drop the price when demand decreases. I think they banged their heads on the wall after the wii was consistently sold out for many months and went on ebay for upwards of a $1000 because had they known it would be so popular, they would sold it at a higher price.

MS - early 2012
Nintendo - holiday 2012
Sony - holiday 2012 or mid/holiday 2013

Conloles5054d ago

Walther of course there'll be another one, the Xbox takes home the cream for the E+D division

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 5054d ago
ChickeyCantor5054d ago

Lots of people still love their DVD's....
No F it, not even gonna go there.

Spydiggity5054d ago (Edited 5054d ago )

i agree with you. there are still a lot of really good games that continue to come out. but come on. i'm getting really tired of gamers, especially the ps3 crowd, saying stuff like this.

yes we know...you are elitist and you think you've got the best device in the world and therefore don't need anything else. well i, and most rational thinking people, disagree. better is better...and i'll take better as soon as i can get it. i don't care who does it; sony, ms, nintendo, w/e...just do it. i've been looking at graphics better than console can do since 2007 on pc...this generation was last gen by the time it hit its stride. yes, UC2 looks good compared to other console games, and yeah gow 3 was chaotic and nuts to watch, but why wouldn't you want better?

if you know companies are intentionally witholding progress for the sake of milking creativity and tech, that should piss you off. you shouldn't be showering blind support on a company...let em know...you want more. we should expect more as gamers. companies should be challenging the tech, not be happy as hell to cater to it.

I STILL see games coming out that do nothing to challenge current tech. games that just copy other games, use the same dated looking engines, and are happy to walk away with 500,000 sales. We should demand more. It doesn't matter how long generations have been in the past, the issue is progress. and as far as i can see, we're behind the times. If crysis could achieve what it did in 2007, we should be expecting a lot more 3 years later! Look at the leaps graphics went through from PS1 to PS2...it was pretty massive. But look at the next Leap. PS3 and 360 games are mostly just upscaled versions of the top games last generation. the HD version of stuff we saw on PC for years.

I don't mean to sound like a graphics barron, i realize there's more to it than that. but when you play a game now...tell me you don't already know just about exactly what's going to happen. it's because it's the same stuff we've been seeing for 10 years almost. the same havok physics engine, the same enemy ai, the same set pieces, the same everything. it's time for a change.

I should have written this as an article....

snp5054d ago

You don't think it'd be smarter to hold off as long as possible, though, Spydiggity and make sure the gap between this and next gen is as distinct as it can be?

I worry if they go too soon, yes there's going to be improvement, but monumental 'easy and obvious to sell' improvement? I'm not so sure.

I think a night and day difference will still need another couple of doublings of graphics tech. Maybe double or triple what an Ati 5970 level tech can do would be about right to get that kinda dramatic 'this is something very new' impression.

KingKiff5054d ago

Very well said and bubbles up for you.

Spydiggity5054d ago (Edited 5054d ago )

When you consider the cost of hardware as it is right now, and the hardware that is in current gen consoles, you could build a next gen system that is at least 10x the power for under 700 dollars. and that's if i'm building a single unit, at home, buying individual parts (not bulk).

they build the same thing in mass, with optimized specs, they could probably crank out insane 500 dollar systems.

and they'd do it too, if the developers were willing to invest the time and expense into catering to the NEW tech rather than the current tech. but, thanks to marketing, shareholding, and people's willingness to pay, there is no need to encourage progress. when sony said the other companies would be the first to make a move, all they are really saying is "we're willing to milk it for as long as the other guys are." they all think that way. so they are all waiting for developers to say, "we're ready to move on and we'll goto pc if we have to" instead of them telling developers "it's time for you to step up your game, start crankin out the good stuff."

i guess my point is that there is a lax attitude in the industry right now. sony, ms, and nintendo don't wanna push developers, and developers don't wanna be pushed...everyone just wants the profits. so it's up to the gamers (all of us) to demand better with our spending. once we do that, the next generation will be here, and i'll be happy as hell.

snp5054d ago (Edited 5054d ago )

Oh, i realise the graphics hardware is 'technically' a mile ahead Spydiggity, i'm thinking more the 'perception' that hardware difference creates.

I guess i'm not quite as sure that it's there yet for that night/day difference - esp to sell things to the masses (i personally love tech to, so any jump is nice).

For 'me' - owning consoles and a pretty up spec PC - the gap is nine times out of ten enough to prefer buying the PC version on graphics, but i'm not convinced things are 'quite' there for something that's 'smack in the face obvious' for the masses.

You mentioned Crysis, for instance. That is is a 2007 game, yes, but it's actually only just now that the graphics cards are starting to catch up with it on the PC. At 1920x1200 with fully features enabled, for instance, it'll net you ~46fps on a 5970 Ati (Ati's absolute, and very expensive, top of the line card). That figure would come up to something near 50fps average at a straight 1080p res.

It is very very impressive, but i think it's probably still one gen out from where it needs to be. Get Crysis at full 1080p, without any dips bellow 60fps, and ideally even at something closer to 100fps and i'd say you've got where next gen (which will see us from 2013/14 through near to 2020 hypothetically) needs to be (where PC's will be at the very top end next year, or possibly early year after).

And of course, if things end up going the 3d route - which even if stereoscopic doesn't take, auto-stereoscopic not long after these consoles release likely will - then you'll actually need close to that 'double power' just to maintain 60fps at 1080p.

ECM0NEY5054d ago

If they started coming out with a new console every 2 years for around $500 to $600 I couldnt be happier. I would wait in line for 12 hours to buy the newest console. We should already be on the next xbox. I know im not alone in my thinking. When it comes to passions of mine money is no object.

Chris_TC5053d ago

"Double or triple" what a 5970 can do? A 5970 costs $700. You think in three years the consoles will have a graphics card with "double or triple" the power? That would be one expensive console.

And of course it's not needed. A normal 5970 would be a plentiful upgrade because it exceeds current-gen console hardware by a ridiculous margin (which should be no surprise if you compare the prices).

snp5053d ago (Edited 5053d ago )

"Double or triple" what a 5970 can do? A 5970 costs $700. You think in three years the consoles will have a graphics card with "double or triple" the power? That would be one expensive console.
------

Consoles have matched or close to matched the top end of the equivalent PC in graphics when they've gone into production the last couple of generations. It's only a year or two later they've fallen behind to any major degree.

I see no reason this will be the generation that changes...

-----
And of course it's not needed. A normal 5970 would be a plentiful upgrade because it exceeds current-gen console hardware by a ridiculous margin (which should be no surprise if you compare the prices).
-----

Each to their own.

Yes, there's a price gap, but that price gap is for manifold reasons - not the least of which is due to PC component being created, and sold at every step, for profit (and at the very top end in fairly small quantities). Console components conversely are created at a mass level by deals between various component makers to significantly bring down costs - eliminate many middle men. Which are then further subsidised, usually, at release for a good part of their early life by the console manufacturers (again unlike PC parts).

Although it should be added, if you have a look at that $700 graphics card this time next year you'll find it'd be lucky to cost half that - it's not because their costs have suddenly fallen by hundreds of dollars, either.

You're welcome to disagree, but i don't think a 2012/2013 console will have mid 2010 PC level graphics. I think it'll be fairly competitive for a brief period (maybe slightly behind) the top or very near to top PC graphics at roughly the time of it's release (might be half a generation behind very top end). If it isn't, it's going to struggle to maintain interest for six years or whatever it's life expectancy is hoped to be (particularly if PC's make the transition to media station type setups).

As to the differentiation... the further out you get, the harder it is to sell on graphics alone (monochrome to 256 colours is bigger than 256 to 16.7 million colours, even though mathematically it's obviously not). Maybe i'm desensitised somewhat owning a PC, but i just don't see upping the fillrate a few times over, pegging a higher res and more consistent frame rate, and having a few times as many polygons is going to cut it. Not in a world where the majority of masses, just as a fact, are choosing the novelty of the Wii over the graphical improvements of either HD system (and i noticed Nintendo is hedging their bets with a new novelty with the 3ds - no doubt thinking 'just' upping the graphics alone a bit, or even a fair bit, wouldn't create or maintain interest).

I think if they are going to play 'graphics' as a/the major transition to encourage everyone to go and buy another new system to last another 3/4/5/6 years, they're better off waiting as long as possible and distinguishing next generation from this generation as much as possible. Again, you're welcome to disagree. Hell, there's a guy two up that wants ten console revisions a decade (though for the life of me i don't know why you wouldn't just buy a PC if you're that way inclined).

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 5053d ago
DTClown5054d ago

The PS3, as it stands now, could very easy take a Nintendo style business move with the PS4 and not use new tech, but instead, re-use the current tech with some minor upgrades.

1) Using a cell chip in the PS4 would be extremely smart due to the fact that developers are now finally comfortable with it. If Sony upgrades to a dual cell processor...way more power for not a big price increase.

2) Same with BluRay...upgrade the optical disc storage by using a newer 300gb (or more) BluRay disc tech.

These two moves coupled with the slimmer form factor, and lower production costs associated with it, would allow Sony to come to market at launch with a $300.00 (or cheaper) PS4 that packs plenty of punch for the next generation of gaming. Add to it a gig of ram, large hard drive, the newest HDMI port...and you're done. Cheap to manufacture PS4 with plenty of power. Backwards compatibility with the PS3 would be a breeze due to the similar hardware and architecture. Developers could get a head start on games for launch since they are very familiar with the specs...for the most part.

Add to this scenario the two tier PSN model, base for free, tricked out w/ cross game chat ect... for pay. This is a win - win - win scenario. Everybody's happy...unless you're Microsoft or Nintendo of course! This could very easy be a system we first hear about at E3 2011...if not sooner!

Imagine developers having 14-20 spu's to work with instead of the current 6!!! Holy crap BatMan!

starchild5053d ago

I bet we'll see a new Xbox and a new Nintendo console by 2012 at the latest. Sony, if they are smart, will release their next console no later than 6 months to a year after their competitors.

Arnon5053d ago (Edited 5053d ago )

>Xbox 360 sells close to 45 million consoles.
>People state there wont be another Xbox to make more profit. $1 billion on RROD = $7 billion.
>Implying Sony hasn't lost more on the PS3 than the entire first 5 years of profit on the PS2's lifespan.

http://media.giantbomb.com/...

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 5053d ago
Serjikal_Strike5054d ago

360 and wii are nearing the end so yeah...i can see that happening

November 9 20045054d ago

end of what?everyone will release close to each other.

Serjikal_Strike5054d ago

the only thing that might keep the 360 alive for the next couple of years will be Kinect...if it doesnt FAIL!

truth betold

starchild5053d ago

BS! The 360 is just as capable as the PS3 overall. The 360 is better at some things and the PS3 is better at others, but they are both very similar in overall capabilities.

The PS3 is just as outdated as the 360. The only advantage the PS3 has is it's Blu-ray drive and that really only allows you to have more content on a disc. Most PS3 games are no longer than most 360 games, though, so the advantage is not being taken advantage of (probably because game budgets don't really allow for larger games in most cases). The downside to the Blu-ray drive is that it has slower read and seek times. That is why multiplatform games often have faster load times on the 360 than on the PS3.

snp5054d ago (Edited 5054d ago )

I'd expect the Ps4 to come out last - after all the Ps3 was released a full year and a half later than the 360 in Europe/Oceania etc - but don't think the gap would be quite as big this time round.

Mind you, whatever gap there is between the tech's may well result in a more noticeable differentiation in tech this time round. The PS3's delay and excess cost was largely put into Bluray subsidising i suspect. With Bluray a settled tech - and i presume all next gen will use it - any differentiation (largish release date differences) and cost hikes would be purely about controls and graphics, most likely.

5054d ago
CountDracula5054d ago (Edited 5054d ago )

Fuck Ubisoft and their generic estimate. Any moron could have guessed that.

Why not predict that it's gonna rain in the next 2-3 years too while you're at it UBISOFT!

5054d ago
Show all comments (37)
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...

andy855h 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

isarai9h ago(Edited 9h 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.

Christopher8h 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?

Christopher7h 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.

Tacoboto5h 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)
70°

Game Developers Have Begun Confirming Nintendo Switch 2 Support

Game developers have already started to confirm that they will support the Nintendo Switch 2 with their future titles.

Read Full Story >>
twistedvoxel.com