Nik Wood writes on why he thinks that the internet has had a negative effect on gaming.
Companies, particularly public companies like Microsoft, need to grow.
i mean its pretty simple, they spent close to 30 billion in acquiring activision, they thought they'd make it bk no problem, and that didnt happen.
its just shit that because of MS's miscalculation alot of people lost their jobs.
This is exactly what many people said would happen including the CMA and FTC. Lies lies and more lies and they allowed a $69 billion buy out to happen.
MS has educated financial advisers, they knew there was little chance to recoup the 70billion just to break even on the Activision deal let alone whatever other nonsense is going on in MS.
This whole thing was to corner the market for leverage.
gold,
You can't be serious, right?
Do you think that MS thought they would make 80bill in a year & Half? They haven't even released titles under MS yet, lol.
But in fact, that A/B revenue is already paying off, look at the last earnings call. That $80 billion is long-term money, my guy, no sane person/company would think they would make that back in any short-term situation, it's a long-term investment.
Let's play silly then. If MS's reason for laying off staff and closing studios was due(which it really was not) to the A/B deal, tell me what Sony's reason was for past studio closures, the recent 900-person layoffs, closing Sony London, shutting down Dreams, and closing Japan Studio? Zipper? Psygnosis? cuts at all their internal studios.
Keep in mind, you are claiming MS's reason is because of the A/B deal; please explain Sony's reason.
this is not a sony vs MS debate. dont make it something it isnt.
and of course not, but im pretty sure they thought they'd make more money after the deal. they didnt, and closed off some studios.
its pretty insane to think there is any other reason for the closure of studios in this case.
(It really was) due to the Activision Blizzard deal and the loss of physical sales due to gamepass. You keep bringing up Sony in all your posts about this, stop deflecting and trying to change the topic, this is about MS and what they are doing.
once in a while you see someone too invested in their make-believe console war that everything happened has to be connected to said war…
a bit of banter between fans is normal, this crusade you’re doing now isn’t.
Wow idiotic. You bring up very old closures not that there haven't been recent ones from Playstations, but, seriously stop deflecting. This has NOTHING to do with Playstation.
Does Playstation got $3 trillion behind them and daddies wallet? No they don't so stop making a fool of yourself.
Xbox has never been profitable really and they just keep losing money so between their worst hardware sales, terrible 3rd party sales and now terrible 1st party sales.
Gamepass numbers that are no longer being announced shows their numbers after 3 years of missed targets has flatlined. Plus their recent gains up to 34 million were ONLY because they folded Gold members in too. Absolutely take your idiotic rhetoric out of here. Keep on topic without deflecting.
How dare you mention Sony! Everyone here knows when Sony closes a studio and lay off workers it was the right thing to do. Even when they bought Gaikai and fired almost everyone it was the right thing to do.
Gamers can be such hypocrites sometimes.
The earnings call only showcased how dire the situation is... Even with ABK and Bethesda, they still couldn't make enough to keep investors happy, gamepass subs are stagnant, and hardware sales are tanking.
Drake,
"this is not a sony vs MS debate. dont make it something it isnt."
You are correct that it's not an MS Vs Sony Topic, but when exaggeration and imagination mix from a one-sided social group, similar examples are needed to ground radical thoughts; in this instance, the example was that shutting down 3,4,5, even 6 studios during a restructure/ buyout/acquisition is not some anomaly(it can suck) that has to be dissected or spell doom and gloom.
"But I'm pretty sure they thought they'd make more money after the deal. They didn't, and they closed off some studios."
But they did make more money, a lot, actually; the last earnings call showed a huge growth in profit, almost all due to A/B revenue.
"its pretty insane to think there is any other reason for the closure of studios in this case."
The fact that they did make money, kinda throws this out the window, and besides, you don't wake up and say, hey let's close a studio, you look at the output, you look at the dev as a whole, the long term and short term, you weigh it against all other studios and goals, you keep key members, ect..then you close if they are the weakest links...which by MS analysis they were.
Again, I will make a small Sony comparison, just so some of you can understand and see past the bias; Insomniac, ND, and Bungie have made some of the best games ever created, yet Sony saw fit to cut jobs in every of these studios, even tho Insomniac & ND are the biggest producers of PS games, leagues ahead better than Tango and Arkane, yet, they saw cuts, mind you, while being the TOP produces of PS first party. They were told to cut costs, and more jobs may be on the line, and Bungie is being threatened by a hostile Sony takeover. Put that in perspective, as I know that layoffs and dev closures are different, but if the best of the best is getting cut off, it is less than surprising, that lesser studios are closing.
@Cheva,
My response fits well with your comments as well. You even went on to prove that the dev closures are not just due to A/B acquisition. Then you point out Sony has less money than MS, inferring that MS should keep devs open that they see as lesser earners, while Sony having less money makes it okay to close them. lol...it doesn't work that way.
im not reading all of that. u have ur opinion, i have mine.
thats rly it.
but this aint sony vs ms.
You're trying to compare a 100 billion company to a company that has 3 TRILLION worth. SIE has to live or die on their own. And in turn, PlayStation has helped the main company again and again. Sony has to balance out what is working and not working in the company.
While Xbox has Daddy Warbucks footing the bill to keep the platform afloat. They have been bleeding money from Nvidia hardware in the OG Xbox, the RROD fiasco, the attempted 2013 DRM nonsense and the lies about being the most powerful console in the world and the losses of paying out millions to prop up a service hoping it catches on with enough subscribers to justify its existence.
They're not comparable if Xbox isn't allowed to live or die by its actions. It's subsidized. Revenue isn't profit. And if they were profiting on their own, they wouldn't be closing developers. If they were profiting, they wouldn't need Daddy Warbucks spending 80 to 100 billion buying up 3rd party publishers to sustain a loss leading platform.
They stopped announcing game sales, stopped announcing hardware sales, stopped announcing game pass subscribers, they are putting games on their competitors platforms but you're telling us that they are doing great even after killing jobs and closing developers at Xbox.
Stop drinking the Kool aid. You're drunk.
Again at which point did Playstation have a $3 trillion company shift the market with a giant purchase?
"But they did make more money, a lot, actually; the last earnings call showed a huge growth in profit, almost all due to A/B revenue."
Lol. No they didn't. Increased revenue was ONLY due to adding Activision Blizzard revenue in. Growth was only 1 percent. It's idiots like you that have no idea what they're talking about is why Xbox isn't better than it is. You guys just make excuses continually.
If Xbox got so much profit then why did they stop announcing hardware numbers? Why did they stop announcing Gamepass numbers? Oh right because they're NOT profitable. Their sales in every category has dropped off the face of the planet. It's why Spencer will be closing more studios and canceling upcoming projects too.
How can they be profitable when they're not selling enough hardware, software or subs. You need take a seat on this one my friend unless you can prove you angles
Sony didnt shut down the studios you mentioned after they made last of us or ratchet and clank or destiny. Cutting jobs is not equal to closing studios. Sony cuts are a candle in the sun of Microsoft’s closures.
I am pretty sure MS knew this would happen and this was part of their plan. I mean if anyone with half a brain can see this happening I am pretty sure a multi billion company like MS knew this would happen
The whole strategy in buying Beth and Acti/Blizzard is for
1. Buy established games they can have under xbox because they have done a horrible job in building their portfolio internally for the past 15 years
2. Following from 1, try and boost xbox competitivenss against a dominat PS which MS after 3 tries still can't crack
3. Follolwing from 2, try and weaken Playstation dominance by taking out these massive multiplats from the PS
4. Following from 3, try and profit off from the PS domiance with selected games they will still have on the PS to make money like COD
5. Obviously get the IP's by buying them instead of creating them which again as I mentioned in number 1 they have been woeful in doing
None of these had anyting to do with keeping all the devs they accuried. MS has always been very shitty to Devs under them. Look at what happned to Bungie for example.
I believe MS in court truely mean it when they said they had to do something because PS was just too dominant. This was their last roll of the dice.
And from the looks of things. It has not panned out as MS had hoped. PS5 is still as dominant as ever and xbox is still behind. Worse still their MP's they got is not irreplaceable as they thought. Starfield? lol!. There have not been any major shift in momentum in this console war in their favor so now its time to start cutting their loses and it starts with the most expensive cost for any company. People.
for a comparison, sony laid of a bigger % of it's staff this year than ms, it's what companies sadly do nowadays. If you think with GP and Bethesda + acti aquisition they were looking for quick cash, you couldn't be more wrong. It hasn't even been a year, "they thought they'd make it bk no problem, and that didnt happen." shows you have 0 understanding of how a business operates.
@ Michiel1989
Exactly this!
I'm reading these comments, and it's mesmerizing how off-base most of them are.
I posted a few comments above, and their rebuttals have nothing to do with the points that I presented; when they start doing that, I just ignore them because, at that point, they're debating all over the place.
meanwhile everything turned woke an inevitably went downward, i'd say it serves them well if they promote such kind of approach, mwuahahahahahhh!
They are going to use AI for a large portion of the game development process. Upper management need bonuses and the shareholders need more money. So, people will lose their jobs.
Maybe they were already using AI to make business decisions, which would explain why they closed Hi-Fi Rush's studio, then said they need more games like Hi-Fi Rush not long after that announcement.
They shouldn't have bought any studios. Some is okay...but they went on a shopping spree...stupid
The better question is why did Microsoft buy publishers for a service they were subsidizing they knew couldn't support.
And why are so many websites trying to make people feel sorry for Microsoft instead of truly criticizing the fact they are closing studios and killing jobs that would have been fine if Microsoft themselves hadn't gotten involved.
Quit feeling sorry for Microsoft and start feeling sorry for the industry and the all the gamers who are actually losing out.
THIS IS MICROSOFTS FAULT.
The first thing that happens after any major acquisition or merger is a consolidation of the whole new portfolio, which includes cutting any excess, bloat or portfolios that don't fit the larger MO of the big boy. So far, it's been par for the course with Microsoft and that's why gamers have been so against this acquisition. Tango Gameworks is the beginning. You think Microsoft wants to pay to keep small timers like Ninja Theory in business?
There is absolutely zero evidence to suggest that Microsoft will improve any of these studios, but plenty to suggest that they will get rid of what they don't need and hold onto the IP. The real agenda of the acquisition was always to acquire The Elder Scrolls, Diablo, Fallout, Call of Duty, Candy Crush etc. that will create millions in passive revenue stream for Microsoft regardless of where the games release. Microsoft simply wants their cut.
Because of Games Pass Microsoft has no interest in investing in new IP which is risky and requires creative talent they can neither nurture nor manage. Game Pass has also not grown in the way Microsoft expected it to, even post acquisitions. Therefore the logical thing to do, without serious money makers to release, is to cut as much cost as possible.
Backward compatibility works for many games on newer consoles, but titles such as The Simpsons: Hit and Run have been left out.
From base building to swinging willies, here are the best survival games around, which include a couple of less than obvious picks.
"Games are released with terrible bugs that are eventually sorted out by updates, that require… an internet connection."
^^^
Only valid point in the whole article, the relatively few other arguments he gives just make him sound whiny.
I personally play very little online with the exception of a little BF or COD here and there. I used to do the mmo thing too for awhile until I wised up and got sick of the amount of time and money you have to sink into them.
But my point is, even though I'm not much of an online gamer myself I've never felt that online gaming was (in any significant way) harming the industry, let alone any the games that I like. Not sure how this guy gets that impression...
Now, I'm mainly a single-player (or on-the-couch multiplayer) gamer, so keep that in mind...
Online gaming is the future. Sure, some things need to change. Some things need to grow and evolve. But think about Demon's/Dark Souls. Those games could be played completely solo, but you would still feel the influence of other players. Star Wars Old Republic is an MMO, yes, but it can also be played - more or less - solo and you can experience a halfway decent story. I anticipate Guild Wars 2 will also be much the same way.
The problem is World of Warcraft. Because it's such a success, everyone imitates it, but WoW is a 7-year-old game. It's ancient. The online game model needs to evolve beyond WoW instead of copying it.
Online gaming changes the reasons why we play a video game. It is for competitive reasons followed by the emerging cooperative mode. In either case online is social based. It creates an environment of immediate gratification using one's primitive emotions of dominance over another. I, for one, play online but prefer single player or co-op campaign mode that follows a storyline. It can cause impatience, which is a huge detriment to the single player mode.
Online will cause the destruction of ownership and the destruction of the meaning of a name. Games get chopped up, rehashed, and repackaged. My biggest hope for online this generation was that the consoles could do it better than the PC. Consoles were always a representation of stability over technology until they all went online.
I don't appreciate being mislead into thinking the games I purchased digitally are mine. No matter which way they slice it the terms and conditions say otherwise. Since when does the terms "buy", "own", or "ownership" NOT mean what the dictionary defines them as? Yet that is what is stated in PS3/360 terms. They are basically telling you that they have the right to mislead you by having a buy button. I could go on and on about the issues with online based gaming but I won't. I'd be here for quite awhile.
MP games will sell more because you can't borrow friends' copies to play against them. You have to buy new ones. And most people can't wait for a price drop or buy it used because the community might die out, so they sell lots of copies right from launch.
@Nitrowolf
"Good and Evil didn't have Online.
If you have an issue with online play then at least use a game that is actually online play."
"games back in the 80's -90's weren't full of 3D models and all worked on a 2D plane."
Good and Evil was a rare example of the need for online patches in an offline gaming world. Yet I can't name much else. So, I ask, is having online the solution to bugged games or is it the problem? In my experience, there are more bugged video games on release now that they have in the past
The PS1and PS2 were on a 3D plane and had no online systems in place. I can't name a video game on these systems (aside from G&E) that had noticeable bugs like we do today.
Note: Read some of my other posts here and you'll see I have many issues with online gaming.