200°

Why gamers would benefit if Sony and Microsoft dropped used games

Digitally Downloaded writes: "But the simple reality is that the second hand games market is a problem, and Sony and Microsoft would be wise to stamp it out. Long term, it would ultimately benefit us as gamers, too."

Read Full Story >>
digitallydownloaded.net
NYC_Gamer4109d ago (Edited 4109d ago )

How does blocking used software benefit customers?the person bought the physical copy and should be able to sell/trade in the product as wants..It also means that we could no longer borrow games from our friends&family members.I'm okay with not being able to trade/buy/sell digital software but it's a whole different story when it comes to hard copy...

MattS4109d ago

You'll get more and better quality games as publishers don't have to compete with their own games.

jimbobwahey4109d ago

Ahahahahahaha. Get a load of this guy and how naive he is!

If you honestly think publishers would make better quality games if there was no used market you're completely and utterly delusional.

Do you know what would really happen? We'd actually see worse games. If they knew customers could not sell their games on after buying them, and there was no threat from the used market, publishers would start putting less and less effort into games. More bugs and glitches from less strict QA, even more of a heavy focus on DLC (because they know people can't sell their games) and lower quality all round.

As we've seen from this console generation, publishers will do absolutely anything that they can to screw over their customers. To see some idiot actually try to defend the disappearance of the used game market is utterly depressing, because I had faith that people weren't that foolish.

Kamikaze1354109d ago

That's true. Gamestop has been around for quite some time and their primary income comes from used games. Imagine taking that piece of the pie away from Gamestop? I'm sure publishers would get a lot more money coming in. More money = more games.

DragonKnight4109d ago

The problem isn't used games. Even without specialty stores, the used market exists online through eBay, craigslist, kijiji, etc... People will always look for the better deal, it's up to the publishers to provide actual value for the dollar because people are willing to spend more money as long as they are getting their money's worth. All of us could write up lists of $60 games that should not have been $60 for what they offered, and that's on the publishers, not the users.

Then you have these publishers making deals with stores like Best Buy, Gamestop, or Wal-Mart trying to get people to pre-order games when the stores like Gamestop are the biggest problem for publisher bottom lines.

Removing the used game market will not bring forth higher quality games. What will in fact happen is developers will know that there's nothing for the consumer to do if they don't like a game they bought but to throw it out, so they can easily phone in the development. This will be responded to by a fundamental shift in buying practices by the general user base, and developers and publishers will lose a lot of money.

Guaranteed there wouldn't be any price drops either. What would be the point? It would be a basic violation of consumer rights to be rid of the used game market.

da_2pacalypse4109d ago

that's a hunk of bologna!

I wish publishers would realize that I can afford half of the games I get day1 because I'm able to take advantage of trade promotions and pay off my preorder with a traded in game.

If they take out used game sales, I would buy a larger portion of my games later down the line... and I know I'm not the only one!

theBAWSE4109d ago (Edited 4109d ago )

Anyone who thinks used games are a problem is crazy just as it is paying to play a game 'you have bought at full price which is online capable for a machine you have already bought connected to a broadband you already pay monthly for' ONLINE!!!

....simple answer as with the example I have just given why companies hate used games?.......GREED

yeahokchief4109d ago

Dunno why he has so many disagrees.

Get rid of the greedy middle man parasite Gamestop.

You should be able to give your copy or sell it to someone else, but it should be illegal for there to be COMPANIES to profit off OTHER PEOPLE'S WORK.

They are screwing customers and creators of the games. They are a problem.

1. Publishers make more money to put more of that money into the games

2. New IPs are less of a risk because more people will be actually buying the games instead of waiting to find out what everyone else says about them and then buying a used copy

3. Less content has to be packaged separately into DLC since profits off the actual game are 100%. Not to say that there still won't be pricey dlc, but at least they dont need to use it so much as a tactic to get money for their work.

I could go on, but why bother. Get rid of Gamestop next gen!!

jmac534109d ago

I agree with dragonknight. I would buy a lot less games and really have to research which games are worth my money. Microsoft and Sony will sees their attach rates plummet if they implement this tech. Both companies really need to wait until consoles are digital download only which will probably be the generation after and this used game problem will work itself out. It would be a mistake to force it on us now.

nukeitall4108d ago

Blocking used physical games sales is taking away your rights, reducing competition and making publishers richer.

I don't see that as positive at all. In fact, it very much mirrors business software where you buy a volume license, get a lock in, can't resell it, and have to pay exorbitant prices for it.

3-4-54108d ago

no. They will just pocket more money.

jmc88884108d ago (Edited 4108d ago )

No it doesn't. Quality isn't determined by amount of revenue.

Good games that are well made are better games.

Taking away used game sales will not effect this one bit.

Money doesn't equal this. Same thing in hollywood. Bigger budgets doesn't mean more sales or a better movie. Or else Waterworld would have been the best movie of the 90's.

There's also no guarantee the budgets would go up any faster than they are already if used game sales were removed.

Why can't people think anymore? Teaching for tests apparently. Except every correct answer is 'none of the above'.

Whether a game is good or not is determined by those that make the game, not where it sits on the shelf opened or wrapped.

That just effects how much money is returned to the shareholder on wall street as they decide whether or not to sell the stock and open a short position.

rainslacker4108d ago

You know the irony, the better games aren't the ones getting turned in right away(within a week according to the article) for the 2nd hand market, at least not in sufficient quantity to make that big a difference on bottom line sales. They command a high trade in price even from GameStop because people want to keep them and play them.

This article made a lot of assumptions, namely in the prices go down because of the used games market. That is completely untrue. Games go down in price because sales aren't as predicted, and retailers and publishers want to push out what product is already sent out in order to possibly sell more. Also newer titles on sale tend to sell better than older titles on sale.

Also, if the only option for games is the new market, you can expect them to stay higher longer, which according to your article is what you want.

I'm all for publishers and developers making their due, but I am more for consumer rights and advocacy. In the end, the consumers should come first, and it's up to publishers to find that happy medium where the consumer is willing to support them. The first step in doing that is making games that people want to play and keep longer. The 2nd hand market has nothing to do with game quality, it never has, and it never will.

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 4108d ago
aceitman4109d ago

If any of them do this I won't buy either of the consoles

delboy4109d ago

But they will do this, and you will buy it,stop lying yourself.
I remember reading same story's on the net for dlc, online passes, and drm pc games.
The truth is that there are millions of people that have no problems with any of these things mentioned.

4109d ago Replies(3)
showtimefolks4109d ago

i am against this but you would be naive to think publishers won't find another way or making some of that money from used game market back

used games sales is a huge issue first of all accept that 100%, and don't give me this crap about well i buy games so i should be able to trade. Issue isn't you its the people will will pay gamestop 54.99 for a used copy than extra 5 for a game that was just released to its developer/publisher.

i don't believe this gen anyone will block used games sales but you better believe there will be more online and offline passes too. Kingdom of Amular had a Single player pass in a way where if you buy the game used you won't be able to get the single player missions unless you pay $9.99

expect online passes to go to $14.99
expect many AAA games to have single player content blocked codes.

gamers only see their side and compare gaming to used car or music industry when its not the same. buy most of the games new even if you are buying a year after release.

and by year 2020 when new consoles are in the market expect a 100% digital only

see both sides of the coin before you decide who is right or wrong

QD said heavy rain was sold about 2 million but than there was an extra million or so who bought the game used to play. so wouldn't sony be happier if game actually sold 3 million? would QD get a bigger budget for their next game?

jmc88884108d ago

People forget though that already in Germany there are gov't officials sniffing around Steam and forcing them to allow used game sales or trades.

So while 'gamestop' might be screwed, the overall practice of selling games is not going to go away just because of digital games.

Eventually it might even allow for trading games, though I expect a period where digital only game systems might not have this feature that first generation.

Though at 34, I haven't traded a game to a friend in decades. Was a big thing with NES/SNES, so I expect kids and to some extent through college for it to be a big issue. But for anyone reading this, it probably won't be, because by the time it happens, you all should be out of college.

soultecc4109d ago

whoever disagreed with you are complete braindead morons

badz1494109d ago

but I do occasionally too bought them used when I found a good deal here and there. so...it's a nice way to save money sometimes.

but blocking used games also means blocking me from sharing games with friends, right? so...HELL NO! if they are still gonna do it, let Microsoft do it and Sony...you just stay out of it for now, damn it!

Veneno4109d ago

Exactly. It would be complete retardedness iF BOTH companies blocked games. The one that doesnt wins the console race as soon as it starts.

Dont ever listen to any idiot journalist that supports this shit. They get free review games.

Flavor4109d ago

THQ produced triple-A single player games like Darksiders. They are now bankrupt.

Oh_Yeah4108d ago (Edited 4108d ago )

If blocking used games means lower prices, I'd gladly accept it if the price was cut in half to say 30$ for a new AAA game. After all you can't sell it, lend it, trade it, etc.. So I think 30$ sounds about right.

matchu_peechu4108d ago

The fact that they are eliminating used games is good! They are eliminating competition WITH THEMSELVES. Although consumers don't like this idea since they have to pay more out of their pockets, they will get a better return on their investment since buying new games will bring in more profit for producers, which will in turn lead to better quality games in the future (we'd hope)

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 4108d ago
4lc4pon34109d ago

i dont even care if they block used games. ill buy both consoles anyways. 65.00 for a game is not that expensive unless your jobless or just poor. Plus gamestop is trash good riddance

jimbobwahey4109d ago

Since you seem quite happy to bend over for anyone and throw your cash around like a clueless buffoon (or is it your parents money?), would you mind giving me $50?

No big deal right? I mean you're not poor are you, so you might as well hand it over.

4lc4pon34109d ago

i dont have parents and its my money. I dont have some low budget job. It has nothing to do with bending over.

If you want $50.00 maybe you should get a job or a real job

Soldierone4109d ago

65 isn't, but 130 is. 260 is. The problem isn't people not buying games at all, its people not being able to buy more than one game a month.

"AAA" releases have lineups of games with 3 or 4 games A MONTH, you can't buy them all....

suicidalblues4109d ago

I just bought heavenly sword for 7 bucks used. Care to explain to me how banning used games would've benefited me? I guess I could've bought it new from Amazon for around a hundred bucks, I mean I'm not jobless....

DragonKnight4109d ago

I have a job and I still want your money. Clearly your responsibilities are at an absolute minimum which would explain your foolish attitude towards a price hike for games. Some people have things like families and grown up expenses to take care of. We can't all evade the tax man Mr. Capone. How's your syphilis doing?

CyberCam4109d ago (Edited 4109d ago )

LOL! Good one DK... Maybe one day he'll grow up and have a family with responsibilities!

I make 6 figures a year and I still struggle with the cost of gaming purchases, after shelling out money for cost of living, supporting a family's needs, plus paying for one child's in University and another going in 5 years time.

I've seriously cut down on my gaming habit to the point where I seem to only game on PC's using Steam (for the thrifty gamer). Paying 1/4 of the price of a AAA game, with a little patience, which goes a long way on the pocket book.

Plus, instead of me purchasing only one copy I can purchase 4, for my LAN at the cost of 1 console copy.

Games seem to be better on the PC because of the modding community. They fix things that developers seem to give up on, a perfect example is Far Cry 3, the PC & console version are vastly different because of the modding community.

squarecircle4108d ago

You're comment was; ignorant, demeaning, selfish, careless and oblivious. Congratulations.

Enjoy your job while it lasts in this decaying economy.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4108d ago
deadfrag4109d ago (Edited 4109d ago )

Capitalism sucks ass!People must have the choise in there hands; from the moment i buy a game that product is mine to resell or do what the fuck i would want to do;i pay for it!Not everyone is rich and $60 or £39,99 or 69.99€ for a game its very expensive in my view!

Megaton4109d ago

What is the president of EA writing for digitallydownload.net?

Funky Town_TX4109d ago

Some people just don't get it. All games should not be $60 when they release. I only buy AAA games with lots of replay value for $60. Some dev/pub should be ashamed for charging $60 for a game. If we take game stop out of the equation then the pub makes more money and the games should go down in price, and we should get better games.

Soldierone4109d ago

Games should be 40-50. 50 for the games we know will sell, and sell well, and 40 dollars for the games that want any sales around those big titles.

C-Thunder4109d ago

Yeah, if you remove the cost of retail, they could lower prices. Of course, they could just leave the prices the same. Look at dlc, how often do those prices drop? Never or rarely and when they do its usually for a limited time. Why would anyone think that would change now? I find it funny people rag on places like GameStop for trying to make money while giving people a deal (maybe not the best but still something) but are fine with Microsoft and whatever unnamed publishers that are supporting this move monopolizing your options and hoping they'll be generous and lower prices.

Soldierone4109d ago

"If they remove retail"

Then why are games still 60 dollars on PSN and Xbox Live, heck even the publisher's own stores (Origin) sell the games at full price with taxes now. These same stores will keep selling the game for full price (with the exception of oddball sales) years down the road when that same game is maybe 20 bucks at retail....

You can't blame retail, its the publishers that wanted the price point and wont change it. They wanted it because "it was too much to create a game" Yet we get rehashed games every year using the same engines and sometimes the same assets.

CyberCam4109d ago (Edited 4109d ago )

The argument of games being too expensive to develop is a bit misleading... usually about 60% of the cost goes to advertising. I just can't understand that COD keeps costing 100 mil to make when all it is, is a new coat of paint on the old wall. You can't tell me that they paid their devs 50 mil for 2 years of work.

He's some basic math;

Let's say that have 100 devs at say $100,000/yr (give or take some make more, some make less)

That's around $10,000,000 give or take a few $100,000.

For 2 years that around $20-$30 million, and they already have the all equipment (dev kits etc.) paid for.

Where's does the other $70-$50 million go?

Funky Town_TX4109d ago

I don't mind downloaded games from PSN or Xbox Live, but I don't want to pay $60 for a DL game that I can't trade in or share with a friend when I'm done playing it. Give me a new DL game for $40 and I just may DL more games.

Show all comments (80)
180°

Xbox, do you even have a plan anymore?

TSA asks what is the future for Xbox.

Read Full Story >>
thesixthaxis.com
Chocoburger7h ago

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

anast6h ago

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

Cacabunga6h ago(Edited 6h 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_za5h ago(Edited 5h 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_za3h ago

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

SonyStyled1h ago

The Parent company of Xbox spent billions on publishers, not Xbox

andy856h ago

To ruin great studios it's looking like

Skuletor6h 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.

neutralgamer19926h 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 (24)
360°

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
Christopher10h ago(Edited 10h ago)

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

crazyCoconuts8h 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_za7h ago(Edited 7h 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.

Christopher6h 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.

Lightning775h 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.

XiNatsuDragnel10h ago

I'm not surprised Microsoft guys are crock nuff said

isarai10h ago(Edited 10h 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.

Zeref10h 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.

jwillj2k48h ago(Edited 8h ago)

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

Mr_cheese6h ago

Excuses, Excuses, excuses.

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

XiNatsuDragnel6h ago

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

romulus236h 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 6h ago
Tacoboto6h 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?

isarai5h ago(Edited 5h 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.

Einhander197210h 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.

Christopher10h 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.

Einhander19729h 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.

Christopher9h 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.

Einhander19729h ago(Edited 9h 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"

Christopher9h ago(Edited 9h 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.

Einhander19729h ago

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

Christopher8h 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.

Einhander19728h ago(Edited 7h 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.

TiredGamer7h 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.

XiNatsuDragnel6h ago

Again terrible excuses in the 1st place

Christopher7h 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.

Tacoboto6h ago

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

Einhander19726h ago(Edited 6h 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 6h ago
MrDead8h 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)
340°

Microsoft Is Finally Ending Its Focus On Big Budget Gaming Nonsense

Back when the Xbox 360 launched, Microsoft pushed the big budget game as a differentiator. Following all the recent layoffs, it’s clear this strategy has run its course.

Einhander197211h ago(Edited 11h ago)

The Microsoft shill take on the Microsoft causing the death of big budget gaming...

The whole driving force for growth in gaming both technologically, creatively and financially was all nonsense, and it was definitely not because Microsoft ran the industry into the ground with obviously bad decisions and creating an unprofitable business model that massively disrupted consumer spending habits. /s

RpgSama10h ago

First, F**** Forbes and their shill take, I hope the money cleared by now.

Second, Which big budget games I might ask? Microsoft has been in a rut for like a decade now, with no big publisher and developers puechases they would have not released anything in the last 5 years but the new Halo and Forza.

Eonjay7h ago

Fortunately for us, since we know this message is basically coming from Microsoft, we can read into their motives. Why are they trying to turn people against big budget games and who would it help.... hmmm.

neutralgamer19926h ago

GP is like any content service it needs new content. AAA games take 100 plus million (low end estimates since most AAA games take double that) and it 4-5 years to develop. That’s why there were 2 god of war games instead of 3 because Cory felt like it would take too long

I am not defending MS. That’s just the reality when you put all your eggs in one basket (gamepass) and now they need content. Sadly that’s what we all said would happen and is happening. GP will be a service for AA games with 1-2 AAA games on yearly basis. And I am all for AA games because to me that’s where developers can take chances on smaller budgets but MS has mismanaged this whole situation from the beginning. Their messaging needs to be clear and it’s not

They own so many studios and IP’s they just need to get everyone on schedule so that there are games releasing every few months on GP. But I don’t even think Phil knows what he wants. It seems his goals change constantly

Game pass is not a sustainable and take two ceo was right when he said that it doesn’t make any business sense to release huge AAA games day one on GP. Just like call of duty shouldn’t be on GP because why give up on 15-20 million sales

Einhander19724h ago

"And I am all for AA games because to me that’s where developers can take chances on smaller budgets"

How'd that work out for Tango?

Do you think less AAA games will increase game pass revenue or decrease it when it has less value? What if they also have to increase the costs?

S2Killinit6h ago(Edited 6h ago)

Right on.

Hahaha MS has ended “focus” on games? Lol when? 3 generations ago maybe?

notachance36m ago

Man I don’t know what the writer is smoking, anyone with a braincell can see what will happen is the exact opposite, they’re gonna double down on big name IPs and turn them into GaaS and milk them to the extreme with multiple studios focusing on specific IPs instead of creating their own games.

It was so clear with the way they keep 343 despite multiple failures and shutting down Tango even after winning awards, MS is a service provider and not a product creator, they will buy the product from others and turn it into a service.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 36m ago
Hofstaderman11h ago

Ah Forbes. One of the prominent MS mouthpieces....

Luc2011h ago

Microsoft is finally... ahhh I've never heard this one before!

Petebloodyonion11h ago

LOL, this article is a big pile of dog crap...
Spencer has been constantly telling ppl that NO they would not go the route of having games like TLOU, Uncharted, etc because Playstation exists and prefers to focus on a diverse portfolio.

How many years have we seen Xbox as no game and we don't want small games like ORI, Pentiment, Grounded, etc.?

That's the real tragedy and why lots of gamers are mad at MS right now
because they have been championing smaller titles and yet fired the ppl delivering exactly what they were proning about.

So no the only nonsense is that MS seems now to be going BACK to AAA popular titles..sorry, I meant refocusing effort on core established IP where broken GAAS might be rewarded versus praised and rewarded work.

Einhander197210h ago(Edited 10h ago)

https://media1.tenor.com/m/...

You read an article cheerleading the end of big budget games and all the other articles about problems and this is what you have to say? That's what you think "the real tragedy" is?

I thought that xbox fans might finally "get it", but no, it seems they don't even understand what is happening and what is at stake.

Petebloodyonion8h ago

Please tell me what's happening and what is at stake

Since it's not big companies closing small studios, killing innovation while refocusing assets on big ongoing projects and core IP?

Let's See MS Close Tango Studio mentions that they are too thin on key project
Sony Close London Studio and make massive cuts in Firespite will reallocate resources to core project
EA will focus on Core project
Square will focus on big established IP
.....
.....

crazyCoconuts11h ago

Hurray! No more big gam.... wait... what??

Show all comments (43)