GP Editor Marcus Estrada attempts to analyze and break down why women earn less than men in game development and if there is any one simple answer.
Microsoft just posted the third quarter of its 2024 fiscal financial results. The software maker made $61.9 billion in revenue and a net income of $21.9 billion during Q3. Revenue is up 17 percent, and net income has increased by 20 percent.
Xbox content + services up 62% while hardware down 31%... seems about right with the way they tout you don't need the hardware to play. People can play on their phones or smart tv or other means. I don't hardly play on my consoles directly since getting devices like the logitech g-cloud and ps portal. Which is to also say I have been playing more digital than physical because of these devices.
Too expensive hardware when others offer the same or more for less? Good work, Green Team.
"Despite some early successes for Xbox games on rival platforms, Xbox hardware is down by a massive 31 percent this quarter."
"Without Activision Blizzard, Microsoft’s overall gaming revenue would have actually declined this quarter."
"Xbox content and services would have only been up a single percent without Activision Blizzard..."
"It looks like next quarter is going to be a similar story for gaming at Microsoft, too."
That is crazy... so A/B/K is carrying the whole Xbox gaming.
Oh and Microsoft will be fine. Windows, Office and Cloud are growing with each pc purchase.
As of right now, there are no monopolies in the games industry, and for the sake of the medium as a whole, they never should either.
And yet the biggest tech companies in America are essentially that. They buy up all the small comps only to kill them off and steal what they have, and if they can't buy em they bleed them to death.
They buy IPs not talent. That's why these buyouts never work and the IPs die. Right now it's too expensive to develop games - but I expect that to shift maybe as AI tools can make it easier. The best games have been indie games for awhile as big developers fuck their ips to death with "games as a service" -
GL compiles a list of some of the most mind-blowing video game narrative twists in recent memory, from The Last of Us to Outer Wilds
With articles like these cant you tag the games mentioned so that we can know ahead of time if there’s a spoiler to avoid?
Not clicking on your article otherwise.
it means:
story quality? WTF? like this website? no.
Bravo. THIS is the exact sort of "gender equality" journalism that we need right now.
Enough with the "I found an obscure and vague reference to a nipple in Pokemon X/Y's new trailer, therefore SEXIST PATRIARCHY OPPRESSION!"
Everyone should give this article a click and a thorough read.
Status Quo
I did Games Tech at Uni, we had 1 girl in our class of 50. Its a male orientated industry, women are welcome but because gamers are stereotypically male this has driven the current state of gender equality in the industry.
I genuinely dont think there is any sexism, its just that there are more men interested in a career in the gaming industry.
Normally when I see one of these articles I say to myself "Ugh, not another one of these whining white knights championing something in the name of women everywhere again," but this was a really well written article.
I doubt there is a concerted effort to pay women less than men. Most, if not all, jobs have a pre-determined salary before a person is hired. If you look in most employment ads, they will usually tell you the salary outright and that's regardless of gender. You won't find an ad that goes "Wanted: One programmer. If Male, position pays X. If Female, position pays Y."
The numbers obviously don't lie, but I'd like to see research into the idea that perhaps women are getting paid less because they get to pay less, while receiving more, in benefits such as health or life insurance. Look anywhere, and you'll see women always pay less insurance than men, and often get more than men. Perhaps there is a balancing act going on with the funds due to that. I don't really know.
All I know is, trying to claim that there is an actual attempt at paying women less smacks of conspiracy theorist behaviour. I'm not saying that this article is doing that, I'm just saying in general.