Edinburgh Interactive Festival chairman Chris Deering has warned the games industry that it must look for new revenue sources as development costs rise and software sales fall.
In a speech opening this year's EIF, Deering said, "Traditional revenue sources will not be sufficient to fund games development. If you look at the very narrow definition of the gaming market, people are saying the software business will be down 20 per cent by 2011 versus this year.
"Something is going to have to be there to make up the difference and take us beyond that threshold," Deering continued. He observed that major games can now cost more than USD 10 million to develop - and up to USD 100 million in the case of titles such as Grand Theft Auto IV.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
"They want you to believe the devs under them are super stoked to work generative AI into their processes," continued Gaider, "but I assure you what they took as excitement was really a veiled wail of despair not unlike the time that team was informed of their new 'really cool' live service mandate.".
I think anyone with some common sense knew this, im glad i don't support their games anymore, what a sh!t company.
I said this yesterday. AI isn't what we want when it comes to crafting artistry. Alas, these soulless corporate morons don't care about their work, only about cutting corners as much as possible.
Has the rapid growth of Xbox made the ship too heavy? Following the closures of Tango Gameworks, Arkane Austin, and Roundhouse, we explore what the future of Xbox could look like.
This ship was never meant to sail, this ship was made from the get go to sink as fast as possible. It almost feels that they want to lower the standards of quality in the industry so that they can fit in
I disagree, Xbox from the get go innovated and changed the industry. They did a lot of firsts and standardized a lot of others. It wasn’t till the beginning of the Xbox1 era that things started to go south.
Yep, although I’d argue it started going to shit when they tried to hock Kinect on their audience instead of continuing to invest in their studios and IPs. 2001-2010 Xbox was peak gaming, though.
@Stevonidas
I agree they never should have focused on it after the 360 era. But you do have to remember they were faked out by the huge volumes of Kinects sold. To quote info on Wikipedia, “Project Natal, It was first released on November 4, 2010, and would go on to sell eight million units in its first 60 days of availability.” So if your Xbox and see these huge sales on a peripheral where are you going to put some money? Criticism in hindsight is worthless…..if only we could all see our future. In other wards they had no way of knowing. Plus they had engagement numbers and a lot of signs pointed to people wanting it.
Their biggest mistake wasn’t the Kinect, but unlike Sony after the PS3 debacle. They didn’t double on down on exclusive good games. The other huge mistake was letting Call of Duty go to Sony.
Xbox has no soul and Phil has no confidence, and it's impossible to say either do when they killed Tango and Arkane Austin.
Everything they've said since has only made them look worse to a point that they're actually less competent than Embracer.
Whe you release something like the series S and expect it not to hurt your business model, and developers have to have parity with games. Then you know Microsoft don't care. Series s is the final nail that broke developers,
why Square decided to go multiplat with FF13...
It doesnt surprise me too see 3rd party games like Bioshock go multiplat , Its 3rd party ! They dont HAVE to stay exclusive.With costs rising and stuff they have to go multiplat.
Maybe with in game ads they can make some extra revenue but dont know if its really significant.
Looks like 1st party games are going to be the deciding factor , 360 still doing good with their 3rd party and timed eclusive strategy but it might not last forever.Pretty sure next gen (720 and ps4) will be more than the end for 3rd party exclusives.
3/10 games only seems quite low to me , but its only his guesses and estimates, I bet its more in reality.Even if gta4 cost 100 million to develop Im sure within the first month alone they had already recovered the costs.
most games are quite poor and and don't deserve to make money.
$100 million for gta4?!?!?!?
the game was poor, why did it cost so much?
i think they spent $10 million on the game and spent the rest on booze, drugs and hookers
i have played shareware games on pc that have kept me interested for longer than gta4
Well seeing as 70% of games blow, it sounds about right.
Does ninjabreadman really deserve money?
I remember seeing that this 3 out of 10 ratio is much the same in the movie business too. The 2 or big hits like Dark Knight and Ironman that a studio gets per year pays for themselves and generate enough profit to fund the other 7 movies of which 3 or 4 break even give or take while 3 others lose money.
The problem in the game industry is not that games fail to make money, it is that the publishers fund every game like it is a blockbuster; the market needs high spend games that generate money like MGS4 and Halo but games like Army of two should not be funded similarly. I wonder if with lower budgets on some games like AO2 and Kane&Lynch if the devs would have made better games by focusing on story and characterisation rather than the conformist graphics and blood demographics.
Madden and the sort are essential to gaming because the profit they generate is needed to fund the boom blox of this world.
The 360 is totally screwed!