470°

Report Claims Xbox Is Planning More Cuts Following Studio Closures

"The sudden closure of several video-game studios at Microsoft Corp.’s Xbox division was the result of a widespread cost-cutting initiative that still isn’t finished.

This week, Xbox began offering voluntary severance agreements to producers, quality assurance testers and other staff at ZeniMax, which it purchased in 2020 for $7.5 billion, according to people familiar with the company’s plans. Others across the Xbox organization have been told that more cuts are on the way.

Speaking about the closures more broadly, Booty said that the company’s studios had been spread too thin — like “peanut butter on bread” — and that leaders across the division had felt understaffed. They decided to close these studios to free up resources elsewhere, he said.

Game Pass has not seen the massive growth that Xbox boss Phil Spencer may have been hoping for."

Read Full Story >>
purexbox.com
just_looken27d ago

Sense it seems very few remember that human's were around before 2020 the next studio to close will be bethesda based no doubt on the history of.

Fallout 76
Elder scrolls online
elder scrolls blades mobile
fallout mobile
The vr versions of old games

Then you got starfield pissing out cash nothing to cover it.

I doubt tod's team or any sub team is making m$ cash they are no doubt on the chopping block for job cuts

If you can remember before 2020 even fallout 76 was made with over 4 studios.

purple10127d ago (Edited 27d ago )

pretty sure starfield coming to playstation 2024, nx gamer deep diving on the creation engine update in a recent blog, he seems to think, there is a lot of stuff developed to use on starfield for its Playstation release,

who will buy it though, ?? I think M$ has lost all good will now, after the Activision debacle, and now all these studios closing, people dont want to support them even if the game is half decent

Abear2127d ago

Bethesda is the only studio to release anything noteworthy on Xbox. Take Bethesda out and they have nothing this Gen. Hifi Rush and Starfield are probably their two biggest hits.

Cacabunga26d ago

They are counting on bethesda and activision on consoles and PC.
I really hope there would be a massive boycott movement against just the next release. I’m sure they will reconsider.

They see employees as trash, i will never give them a dime.

Eonjay26d ago

Someone said that cost $350 million to make Starfield. The use cost of making games has gotten crazy. With MS putting everything on GP it makes it harder to recoup costs. This is why I assumed that everything is coming to PC and PlayStation. I think they will have a whole slew of titles ready for the Switch 2 launch.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 26d ago
-Foxtrot27d ago

"Speaking about the closures more broadly, Booty said that the company’s studios had been spread too thin — like “peanut butter on bread” — and that leaders across the division had felt understaffed. They decided to close these studios to free up resources elsewhere, he said"

So what you're saying is...you bought all these studios and you guys can't run them.

Jesus.

Inverno27d ago

Spread thin after firing over 2000 employees a few months prior. So basically they created the problem and their solution was to just fire more people. Absolute geniuses over at Xbox, of course can we even believe this to be the reason for the closures?

FinalFantasyFanatic26d ago

I was just thinking this, they just fired all those people and now stated they are spreading their staff thinly, this just reeks of incompetence.

just_looken27d ago ShowReplies(2)
Profchaos27d ago

Leaders can't run them hire more management create new roles don't shutter entire studios cause you can't figure out how to run them.

Unless the reality is this whole consolidation thing was really an excuse for IP harvesting

anast27d ago

He's lying. They are doing it for the shareholders.

27d ago
kayoss26d ago (Edited 26d ago )

The crazy part is that if Xbox goes under, all these great studios will also go under. They've bought up all these studios and instead of letting the studio manage themselves, they fire 2000 across and now they're complaining that they're understaff. Sounds like xbox bit off more than chew. Just like all the promises that they've made but cant keep.

JEECE26d ago (Edited 26d ago )

Well, what do you mean by "if Xbox goes under"? Because MS itself isn't going under. So if they decided Xbox was no longer worth it, it's not like they would just eat all those losses. Sure, for individual developers where there are substantial costs in terms of the people working at the studio and minimal money to be made selling related IP (i.e. Arkane Austin probably costs a lot in resources but MS couldn't have made much selling the studio because Redfall is worthless and they probably want to keep the Prey IP), they may just close them, but if they were getting out of gaming completely, they could sell the IP and related studios elsewhere. Like we may mock Bethesda Games Studios on here, but their biggest IP (Elder Scrolls and Fallout) are very valuable. Similarly, I know Halo has seen much better days, but you are kidding yourself if you don't think that IP is worth a lot.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 26d ago
Eonjay27d ago

Reports are suggesting that Game Pass will be getting a price hike soon and that Call of Duty may not be added to the day one offering. I honestly have a hard time believing this but it does beg the question why exactly did GP fail? I think the answer is that it just didn't get the growth that it anticipated. Jim was right but I wish he wasn't because at the end of the day, its gamers, devs and other front-line workers who have to absorb the blow for Spencer and team's miscalculations.

27d ago
NotoriousWhiz27d ago

And out of the ashes something even better than Xbox will be born.

Eonjay27d ago

Honestly as long as is not a situation where the industry has to contract in order focus wealth on a few people who are already trillionaires..

Barlos27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

It's already here and it was born before Xbox was even a thing. It's called PlayStation.

Tacoboto27d ago

I think 2022 killed the Series X.

2021 was a good year for Xbox though and maybe the best in a long long time, hardware and software and as a publisher. Halo Infinite launched to popularity, Forza Horizon 5 blew everyone away, Psychonauts 2 was so well received, Flight Simulator on console, Deathloop even on PS5 & PC.

But they followed that up with next to nothing. Then 2023 with Redfall, a disappointing Forza, Starfield, and 2024 leads with closures and layoffs. And some tweets reminding us Hellblade is days away.

The only disappointment with the PS5 is not enough Sony games. Xbox followed up no games with disappointing ones.

Einhander197226d ago

PlayStations history has been built around third and second party publishing. The vast majority of games that people recognize as PlayStation games were made like this.

Insomniac only because a PlayStation Owned studio a few years ago in response to Microsoft buying up studios, every game they made prior to that for PlayStation was as a third party making a games published by Sony.

PlayStation has had an incredible year using that business model.

We got Granblue Fantasy: Relink, Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, Helldiver 2, Rise of the Ronin, Stellar Blade, and Silent Hill is right around the corner.

Eonjay26d ago

I think Xbox S. Brand was already dying for some time. Your 2022 point is interesting but also remember that is a year after the lock down which hD created false demand.

Einhander197227d ago

"I honestly have a hard time believing this but it does beg the question why exactly did GP fail? I think the answer is that it just didn't get the growth that it anticipated."

What?!?

Game Pass failed because from day one it was maintained by subsidization. Game Pass was never profitable, I mean, sure you can say that was because it didn't get the growth they predicted, but their predictions of it having "billions" of subscribers were completely ridiculous, to the point where saying that it didn't have fast enough growth is as completely out of touch with reality as their predictions.

Eonjay26d ago

To clarify, what I am saying is that there is a scenario where GP would have worked and thats where they had a lot more subscribers. You see MS isn't dumb and they charted out how many subs they would need to make the system work. That's why Spencer testified that they would need 80 million subs by 2027 (which is crazy now in retrospect). Now we also understand why Satya Nadella's bonus a few years back was based on that unrealistically high Growth in GP subs. From the beginning they knew that the only way to make it work was with a large base of subs. This is because as you said simply subsidizing won't work forever.

Einhander197226d ago

"To clarify, what I am saying is that there is a scenario where GP would have worked and thats where they had a lot more subscribers."

Yea... but again they expected/wanted an obviously unobtainable number of subscribers. Do you think that taking the risk was a good idea if it was based on getting billions (even 80m) of users?

"You see MS isn't dumb"

Are you sure? Have you been reading the news?

"That's why Spencer testified that they would need 80 million subs by 2027"

This was a refined estimate for the courts, and probably more truthful maybe... but go back and look at the first few years of game pass Microsoft actually said they were going to reach billions of people. Yes that was marketing, but still what they presented to the public to sell the idea.

I actually don't want to argue with you, normally I find your comments agreeable, but this one just came off a little off base to me.

Tacoboto26d ago

"Game Pass failed because from day one it was maintained by subsidization"

I do agree with Eonjay here - *if* Microsoft got the subs they want, Game Pass could have worked. Microsoft assumed people would buy into a subscription service like they already do for TV and Movies and Music.

But that didn't work out, at all, with the catastrophic consequences that we're seeing today.

"Microsoft actually said they were going to reach billions of people"

Reach != Subscriber count. That's your own conflation. Reaching just means "being available in" and usable in, billions of people with the awareness and ability to access the service. There exists no quote saying they estimate "billions" of subscribers.

Eonjay26d ago (Edited 26d ago )

No worries. I consider it more of a conversation than an argument. I learn alot from people who don't agree with me. Bring it on lol!
And yeah I forgot about the whole 'reach billions' PR from MS. I think theybare a victim of their own BS. I think at these companies you do have people push back on pipe dreams from the management.
I mean clearly it wasn't a good idea lol.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 26d ago
FinalFantasyFanatic26d ago

Maybe they need to put less games on there or just simply charge more from the beginning, I think they guttered their bottom line, they didn't make as much as they could have from selling games.

kayoss26d ago (Edited 26d ago )

GP fail because these studios poured in $100 of millions to makes these games only for it to given out free in GP. Even if Microsoft pay them to put in on GP, they are not making some of the profits they can potentially make. Especially not for AAA games. For studios making lower quality games, this may work but not for AAA. Look at Sony, their AAA games are award winners. Look at god of war ragnarok, they sold 5 million copies to date and needed to sell 3 million copies to break even. Thats a tough market to be in when your AAA game is not guarantee to break even let alone trying to make a sizeable profit.

JEECE26d ago

Ragnarok sold 15 million as of last November.
https://blog.playstation.co...

kayoss25d ago

Sorry, i missed the 1 when typing 15. But the point i was making is that not all AAA games are guarantee to be a success.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 25d ago
Scissorman27d ago

For all the armchair executives who were calling for Sony to release its big-budget AAA games on PS+, the same exact thing would have happened at PlayStation. Game Pass has killed Xbox. Congrats.

shinoff218327d ago

There's not many of of us clamoring for Sony to do this because most of us understand it would kill Playstation. I'm sure there's a few but I've not seen alot of it myself.

porkChop27d ago

"the same exact thing would have happened at PlayStation"

But the same thing *has* been happening at PS. They've closed, what, 3 or 4 studios so far this gen? Laid off plenty of staff, restructured studios, etc.

BehindTheRows27d ago (Edited 27d ago )

PlayStation isn’t struggling. Xbox is. That’s the difference.

Sony also didn’t buy out multiple publishers with LOTS of studios and leave them in a state of uncertainty.

So, he’s absolutely right that Sony not following Game Pass in its entirety was smart as this very thing could have happened. Name a team, like Tango, who wasn’t struggling (like Tango) that Sony closed. Every closure was because of a studio who wasn’t pulling their weight.

rlow127d ago

You’re right about that. People on here will turn a blind eye and downvote because it’s Sony. Jim Ryan flew to the London studio and spent the day with them. The very next day they were all fired.

Calling out MS and not Sony. No matter how the studios came to be. Won’t make a damn difference to those who lost their jobs. In the end it’s all the same.

FinalFantasyFanatic26d ago (Edited 26d ago )

This is why I have always advocated that Sony should not follow Microsoft's footsteps and adopt their model, Xbox couldn't afford to do it, Playstation certainly can't either.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 26d ago
27d ago
Show all comments (105)
80°

Why Microsoft Putting Black Ops 6 On Game Pass Is The Ultimate Test

By putting Black Ops 6 on Game Pass, Microsoft plans to gauge its growth, pricing, and monetization changes, at the cost of less game sales.

rlow12h ago

If they have follow up games that are bangers, then this strategy will work. But if it’s Call of Duty followed another dead period then it won’t last.

Garethvk1h ago

When the game does not hit 1 Billion in revenue in under two weeks they will wonder why and the next thing you know; Season Updates will no longer be free.

Noskypeno42m ago

Yup, the CEO needs a new yacht and private jet

purple10121m ago

subscribers go up, execs celebrate win, get bonus, price goes up, subscribers go down,

execs dont care, got their bonus,

160°

Why is Steam Blocked in Vietnam? Government Shares Reason

Finally, the Vietnamese government has officially responded to Steam being blocked in the country.

Read Full Story >>
spieltimes.com
blacktiger1d 19h ago

AMAZING! Thank You Gabe, stand for freedom of speech!!!!

PRIMORDUS1d 19h ago

VPN to buy games, fuck that if it's allowed or not, or just use a VPN and torrent what you can.

seanpitt231d 7h ago

I just cannot believe we haven't had a game from them this generation nearly 4 years in.. crazy!

Knightofelemia1d 12h ago

If the game is crap then yes there will always be negative feedback it comes with the territory. It's called word of mouth or welcome to the internet. Where the truth about a game comes out really fast whether the game is good or crap. If you can't handle the criticism because of a game then why publish the game. Why should people who never criticized or even played the game be punished? Vietnam has some really screwed up laws block Steam because they don't answer us rule. And going on a witch hunt with Steam please. Where's the proof, where's the evidence of this witch hunt. Somebody is butt hurt and has a Vietnamese Karen leading the witch hunt.

250°

Take-Two CEO Doesn’t Think AI Will Reduce Employment or Dev Costs; “Stupidest Thing” He’s Heard

Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick doesn't think AI will reduce employment or lower development costs, and calls it "stupidest thing" he's ever heard.

lodossrage3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

They already have AI trained to do coding.......

How he thinks it's stupid is beyond me, Especially since we see it happening in real time.

CS72d ago

Company A has 300 employees and lays of 200 to replace them with AI to release the same quality game.

Company B has 300 employees and keeps all 300 but instead uses AI to release a game with dramatically larger scale, scope, complexity, short dev cycle etc.

Company B would release a dramatically better product by using humans + AI and consumers would buy the better game.

I actually agree with this concept.

Huey_My_D_Long2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

This is key facet. Its how the AI is used. It's actually is impressive as is and really would make an amazing addition to alot of people in their jobs, not just tech. It also has the potential for businesses to use to lay off large amounts of people, as much as they could to save money on labor. I hope too many companies don't go with the latter. But since usually companies are worried about bottom line over people...we will see some try and hopefully fail. But yeah, if its to help workers like in your company B scenario I'm totally down...Just scared Company A may be too enticing to some ceos and businesses.

Darkegg2d ago

Value of AI and value of humans will both be increased with human-AI complex. Each, by themselves, will not be independently better than the other. Whether AI will ever be independent from humans is the fear question of humans, ironically because of our doing. At this stage, most of the doing is because of humans, not because of AI. AI is doing exactly that by our design, until we have failed ourselves with an AI development that went awry. The biggest take is that humans have only ourselves to blame when things become wrong, and we have to decide what is the ultimate goal with AI we want to accomplish. It would take a person with high morals and high ethics to make right of AI. I would not want businessman to decide what AI should do or what capabilities it can have. AI should be in the hands of people with high moral fiber, or those operating on love, kindness, and compassion.

BlackOni2d ago

AI is SUPPOSED to be used as a tool, not a replacement. It's designed to do two important things artists can take advantage of immediately.

- Make the ideation/reference imaging process much quicker and easier (basically using it as a google search)
- Make mundane and time consuming tasks faster and easier so more time is spent on creation.

Unfortunately, what many have done is used it as a way to replace rather than supplement.

Einhander19722d ago (Edited 2d ago )

CS7

In the ideal world yes.

In the real world where companies have shown little desire to innovate and spent every effort to maximize profits the end result will be the same quality games (if were lucky) made by less people and more AI.

Company Real World: Fires 200 people and makes the same game cheaper using AI and the executives get record bonuses.

Edit:

Lets look at history, specifically auto manufacturing.

In the 70's and 80's the auto unions tried to oppose automation of jobs (robots) stating that they would take peoples jobs. And the people in charge who wanted to make more money said the exact same types of things that are being said about AI. But we can look at history and see that countless types of jobs were in fact replaced by automation, that was of course even compounded upon by computers.

The net effect was that the rich got richer less jobs were needed so wages were forced down by competition for the jobs that were left.

hombreacabado2d ago

that concept works in the initial beginning phase of AI but once AI learns and surpasses the knowledge and coding expertise of even the best human employee than this CEO will no longer need competent humans in that line of work.

Extermin8or3_1d 23h ago

@Hue_My£D_Long

Yes but that is a choice then by massively increased productivity and this greater income and wealth and stagnating with similar levels of productivity and output and not creating much wealth. Usually the option that creates wealth prevails because a rising tide raises all ships.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1d 23h ago
Number1TailzFan2d ago

You can already make your own SFX with text prompts now as well, of course it will lower development cost and time

1Victor2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

WARNING WARNING ‼️ SARCASM AHEAD
Sure Strauss and robots didn’t take jobs from car factories.
Edit:Sad thing is he believes it and unfortunately he won’t be replaced for a long time by AI

senorfartcushion2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

He doesn't, he's just lying. These people lay people off so they can get bonuses. If AI takes jobs, their bonus goes bigger and the workforce goes smaller.

porkChop2d ago

Because he sees AI as a tool to aid development. He wants to use AI to help make bigger and better games in the same timeframe. Other CEOs want to replace devs with AI to cut costs and make lifeless games faster for a quick buck. Strauss has the right idea, this is how AI should be used. To extend and expand the capabilities of devs.

neutralgamer19922d ago

There will be few companies who will go overboard and try to replace their employees with AI tech. The ones that will make the most money will be the ones that utilize ai, along with their employee talent, to make the best product possible

AI could handle some of the most time consuming processes. To expediate the development, so in return, costing the publisher's last money end time.

Extermin8or3_1d 23h ago

Not reliably they haven't. Coding done by ai is generally abysmal for all but the most generic tasks.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1d 23h ago
jambola3d ago

Ceo says stupid thing
Part 5837384

Zeref3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

I think maybe sometimes we give people in these positions too much credit when it comes to intelligence.

DarXyde2d ago

I think you mean candor, not intelligence.

If you take him to mean what he's saying at face value, sure.

I don't. And I think he's clearly lying.

romulus233d ago

As long as it doesn't effect his inflated executive salary or his ridiculous bonuses I'm sure he's fine with it.

RNTody2d ago

Hahaha yeah trust the CEO suit over the actual developers making the games. Good one.

Show all comments (37)