Top
180°

Why Microsoft Buying Mojang Is Bad For The Gaming Industry

iDigitalTimes - "Current rumors suggest Microsoft is hoping to acquire Mojang -- the independent studio founded after Minecraft creator Markus "Notch" Persson realized he couldn't continue developing his hit sandbox by himself -- and there's a clear argument to be made for why this is bad for the games industry. Or at least for those whose regular monetary contributions have allowed it to continue for the last 30 or so years."

Read Full Story >>
idigitaltimes.com
The story is too old to be commented.
llxKonanxll1134d ago

I think instead of putting the money into this dev group, MS should've put it into creating 3-4 new studios. And everyone could enjoy Mojang's next game.

super_lazy1134d ago (Edited 1134d ago )

I couldn't agree more. It doesn't make much sense to blow so much cash on a property that's likely well past its peak in the public eye. Minecraft is likely to be relevant for several more years, and remain a casual hobby for many of its players, but Microsoft would have been better off building up some brand new IP.

XBLSkull1134d ago

Its bad for the industry because Sony didn't do it. Welcome to N4G, enjoy your stay.

nicksetzer11134d ago

While I wholly disagree with the purchase, to say "Bad For The Gaming Industry" is just pure fanaticism. Was it also bad when Sony bought naughty dog? Bend? Evolution? Sucker punch? Etc.

I absolutely think MS should not waste their money, but that is because I would prefer them to use the money across larger spans, not on one VERY SMALL dev team. I definitely do not find this any different than any other 3rd party studio aquisition, ever.

1134d ago
4Sh0w1134d ago (Edited 1134d ago )

"I think instead of putting the money into this dev group, MS should've put it into creating 3-4 new studios. And everyone could enjoy Mojang's next game."

-Well you can say the same about any other studio acquisition by sony in the past.

-I get the feeling that if in 1 year micro created 5 studio's from the ground up and bought out 1 you guys would still complain.

-Ultimately its business, I don't care if a good game is 1st party or 3rd party as long as micro makes it available on the xbox platform then they have done their job. The fact that future games from that same dev may or may not be exclusive is fine as long as micro continues to find new exclusive IP's for its platform, again they are doing their job, in fact owning tons of studio's limits your budget for buying future exclusives because you are always paying studio's you own even when they go years between hit games= that same money could at least contribute to another exclusive from a talented studio, so I think many people are in love with the idea of creating and owning new studio's but that doesn't always pay off either. How many "1st party" studio's actually deliver new high quality IP's year after year? lol, only a handful but you still pay ALL of them that you own regardless of whether or not they produce great games like Naughty Dawg, Bungie (did for 360) and Turn10 have over the years. In the case of 3rd party exclusives you are basically *renting talent for 1 game, but it gives both parties the freedom to move on to the next deal, exclusive or not. Yes creating new studio's is a good thing but its not the only way things should be done.

feraldrgn1134d ago (Edited 1134d ago )

@nicksetzer1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
SP: Indie working exclusively for Playstation since creation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
Sony Bend (formerly Eidetic, Inc.) created 1 game for Apple on the Newton & then became exclusive to Playstation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
Evolution: They created a racing "demo" for PC before becoming exclusive to Playstation.

I'll give you Naughty Dog though, as although they were an indie, their past goes too far back for confirmation.

wsoutlaw871134d ago (Edited 1134d ago )

minecraft already sold to everyone that wants it. What does ms have to gain from this? A tiny studio? When games like these take off and explode, people eventually move on. If they do a sequel or something it wont match the first ones sales. Why buy the studio and not just minecraft? What are the assets of this studio? Are they expecting a different game they make to be just as big, because thats unlikely. Its just a strange buy to me. How on earth could MS make the billions it would take to justify this purchase. Is being the "exclusive minecraft console" really worth anything since its already on every other platform possible.

Magnes1134d ago

@xblskull whatever pal if it was a game you liked and it went PS exclusive you would be upset as well nice try. I bet if you had more than one bubble you would claim you have PS4 and XB1 which you don't have a ps4 or more than one bubble.
Disclaimer I have minecraft on my xb1, got it for free.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1134d ago
Quicktim31134d ago

they announced 4 new first party studios not to long ago, so im not seeing your point.

llxKonanxll1134d ago

Doesn't hurt to have too many first party studios. Dumping roughly 2 BILLION dollars into this single indie dev is lunatic. It's money better spent elsewhere.

Quicktim31134d ago (Edited 1134d ago )

@llxKonanxll i would agree with you. but i doubt microsoft is just buying it for "minecraft the game" but more so for the brand. minecraft can become a franchise. i think in the long run if they play their cards right they can get that money back.

and by dumping money into unproven first party studios that has a lot more risk, games like minecraft are once in a generation.

and i think its a good move for them especially to help push their products. minecraft on a microsoft VR system, minecraft on xbox, minecraft on windows phone.

sure they should keep it on other plateforms. but they certainly can advertise it so minecraft becomes associated with the xbox and microsoft brand.

SoapShoes1134d ago

The point is it's wasting 2 billion. It will turn out to be another Rare where the main team leaves and you have a shell of their former selves that make bad games.

llxKonanxll1134d ago

@Quicktim3

Thanks for proving my point. Microsoft doesn't like taking risks. Remember Phil Spencer saying they tried to make a game that could compete with Uncharted.. he said they couldn't, thus they purchased time exclusivity for Tomb Raider. Hell, he should've dumped the 2 billion to buy the Tomb Raider IP. I wouldn't support that, but that would be more logical than buying mojang, Minecraft is a popular game, but that doesn't mean the next game will be. Microsoft(Xbox) loves to purchase their success, not create it.

Docknoss1134d ago (Edited 1134d ago )

Actually it was 7 new first party studios. LXP, State of the Art, [fun]ction,NP, Good Science, Platform Next and now Mojang. Sounds like risks are being taken to me and it I do know Xbox will have alot of new Exclusives in the next couple years. Those exclusives will sell consoles and MS will gain in sales by a significant margin.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1134d ago
AngelicIceDiamond1134d ago

I agree.

The acquisison doesn't make much since in my opinion as well.

What are MS planning to use Majong's assets for? Mobile games?

It might be a pointless buy out in my opinion.

darthv721134d ago

well, to us (on the outside) there are plenty of really strange acquisitions but that is up to the companies and the shareholders to decide.

We may never know the real intention unless they want us to know. We can speculate but its better to just keep going about our day.

BX811134d ago

Or they could have the dev group soley tied to ms and take those profits and make 3-4 more studios.

gangsta_red1134d ago

MS has created 3-4 more studios, SOTA (State of the Art),[FUN]ction Studios, Good Science, NP, and Platform Next.

Why does everyone automatically assume that because MS supposedly wants Mojang that they are not spending money elsewhere?

Everyone should have enjoyed No Man's Sky but that isn't the case now is it. It's called business and trying to make your brand look more appealing to the consumer.

And the name Minecraft has huge weight and if a Minecraft 2 ever came out it would sell more than a new, similar IP. I mean look how many clones there are now, Castlecraft made millions just on the popularity of Minecraft alone.

And who knows maybe Mojang are working on something else so big that MS had to have it for themselves. Maybe it's a game that's a direct answer to No Man's Sky and the whole universe type of exploring.

And 2 billion spent elsewhere? Where else would it be better spent? Opening up more studios that may or may not make a return? Creating a new IP that may or may not be a hit? Or spending it on a proven and very talented group developers?

RyujiDanma1134d ago

but but but mircosoft has all the money in the world

NeoGamer2321134d ago

Its not like you can just wave a magic wand and up pops 3-4 AAA studios developing games that consumers want ASAP...

I like how people think that MS should "just start a new studio" and automatically assume it would be a AAA developer.

There is a news flash here...

First, it is the people that make the game studio not the creation of the studio itself. And those people are very hard to find and retain.

Second, a new studio would be working from zero IP so they would have to prove they are a AAA studio.

By buying an existing studio they are getting both talent and a AAA IP instantly.

gameon19851134d ago

Seriously, Whats wrong with you Sony fans? Do you not do research, or only click on Xbox news when you think you can bash Microsoft. Microsoft Just open 5 brand new studios (all working on new ips),and most of you people argument against them buying Mojang is they need to open new studios. I mean seriously Why would you make that statement When they just open new studios. and you getting getting bubbles up with well said shows the ignorance of Sony fan boys.

strangeaeon1134d ago

It's pointless to fight it anymore, we aren't allowed to like MS or the Xbox One on the internet. Been this way since the first Xbox.

Eddie201011134d ago

Doesn't seem very smart for Microsoft to spend 2 billion for a company that has one game to it's name, even though it is a very popular and lucrative game, the game probably doesn't have 2 billion dollars worth of milking left in it. They may never see a return for that 2 billion expenditure.

They would do better to create a couple of studios under the Microsoft name. Studios that would help define them as game creators, not buyers of game creations. It would show they are truly active in the gaming experience and creation. The studios they own have almost all been developers who were known and established before Microsoft entered the console gaming market, not studios they created.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 1134d ago
EvilWay1134d ago

If they want to buy studios atleast buy Crytek, Square Enix, and Capcom

hello121134d ago (Edited 1134d ago )

Actually it was the Minecraft creator who approached Microsoft according to reports, not the other way around. Minecraft was a huge game on 360, one of most played games on x box live.

A news report from Bloomberg confirms what i just said. Microsoft is only in talks now can't change the fact the game is available for PS4 now.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2014...

SoapShoes1134d ago

I doubt that seeing as they wouldn't have put it on PlayStation if he wanted to be with Microsoft. There was even an article saying if the deal went through the founder would leave Mojang.

darthv721134d ago

You dont think its possible for a developer/company to approach a bigger company with a deal?

it happens all the time. Whether or not that larger company is interested is another story. think Media Molecule. They came to Ms with LBP but MS wasnt interested in the idea of user created content. So MM went to sony and sony said yes and then rest is history.

that is just one example of a smaller fish looking for a bigger fish instead of the other way around.

Dlacy13g1134d ago

lol... bad for the industry. Oh I love the drama some of these opinion pieces throw out there.

cfc781134d ago

For once Microsoft just don't do it.

Show all comments (64)
The story is too old to be commented.