13 ms·

I think for gaming this is pretty negative that everything is consolidated under large developers. I also don't think that the atmosphere under Microsoft will b

I think for gaming this is pretty negative that everything is consolidated under large developers. I also don't think that the atmosphere under Microsoft will be better than under Activision. I hope PC gaming can detach from Microsoft as soon as possible to be honest.

wongarsu 5y ago
> I hope PC gaming can detach from Microsoft as soon as possible to be honest In what way is PC gaming attached to Microsoft? Microsoft Game Studios doesn't have a lot of market share in PC games besides Minecraft, and the industry is very diverse. Most games happen to run on Windows, but apart from DirectX they have resisted every attempt from Microsoft to use that in any way. If PC gaming is attached to anyone it's Valve, but even that is slowly changing.
- ekianjo 5y ago
  > If PC gaming is attached to anyone it's Valve PC Gaming runs on Windows, not on Valve's OS (while valve is intending to change that progressively).
  - smileybarry 5y ago
    Which doesn't mean much as long as Windows runs on anything x86 and costs OEMs (relative) peanuts. It's not like you have to pay royalties to Microsoft if you sell a PC game (but you do have to pay MS/Sony if it's a Xbox/PS game).
- nathanaldensr 5y ago
  It's not either-or, it's both. Both Microsoft and Valve play pivotal roles in PC gaming.
- houseofzeus 5y ago
  > Microsoft Game Studios doesn't have a lot of market share in PC games besides Minecraft Wow, that sucks. They should acquire someone with a bigger catalogue!
  - wongarsu 5y ago
    They really should, but is Activision-Blizzard that company? Of the 7 Activision releases in 2020 to now 4 are Call of Duty, a game that's much more popular on consoles than on PC. Blizzard is the PC side of the company, but they are mostly games that are slowly dying due to mismanagement. The IP is very valuable, but current PC sales alone wouldn't make Microsoft dominant by a long shot.
    - sascha_sl 5y ago
      They also acquired ZeniMax, which includes Arkane, id Software, Bethesda Games Studios and MachineGames. And Obsidian Entertainment. And inXile.
- robertlagrant 5y ago
  Microsoft are using their platform positions to sell games on Xbox and PC in one, which others can't compete with (because Xbox is a closed market), and their deep pockets to fund Xbox Pass mean it is a little combative rather than genuinely competitive.
- WHA8m 5y ago
  > Microsoft Game Studios doesn't have a lot of market share in PC games besides Minecraft You could see it coming that this is controversial. 1. Microsofts share in publishing video games isn't exactly what you'd call small. They acquired Zenimax Media [1] last year, which is kind of big. That said, Microsoft can't be seen as a dominator in the publishing market. 2. But the argument wasn't necessarily about who owns the most studios. Microsoft absolutely dominates in the platform market on PC. Games are developed for Windows. Period. Everything else is either niche or an extra. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZeniMax_Media https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZeniMax_Media
  - wongarsu 5y ago
    I think my think my argument is mostly based on the precise wording. Make it slightly broader and it would no longer hold. 1) Microsoft holds a very respectable share of the video game market (especially if you ignore mobile). But their share of the PC game market specifically is much smaller. 2) Microsoft is the dominant platform of PC gaming without question. But that doesn't make the market attached to them. Being without alternative or having high switching costs is what makes you attached, not merely using it. Most games are inherently multi-platform, either because they are built in an engine that is or because they are also sold on other platforms (mostly consoles). Not having Linux, Mac or SteamOS builds is usually a business decision, not a technical one. You could argue that they are attached to Microsoft because that's where the consumers are, and that's true in a sense. But that limits what kind of benefit Microsoft can get out of the attachment and what kind of damage they can do - at most as much as it takes to get enough consumers to switch (dual boot, some SteamOS device, etc). In a world where games sell platforms the attachment isn't very strong
stephbu 5y ago
I agree with your view point - however it’s hard to see any other outcome for the AAA franchises. Player expectations of a modern title are increasing - as are the time, human, and fiscal capital required to ship a modern title - years of engineering, hundreds of people, hundreds of millions of dollars. The risks are huge - missing your date, or game experience can sink a company - consider what Cyberpunk almost did to Projekt CD RED - to ship they cut to the bone very late in the day. The economics of the AAA business is optimizing towards managing and distributing that risk thru supply-chain and scale. I don’t see a better way on this current trajectory.
- yoyohello13 5y ago
  Do players really prefer the current AAA space right now though? There are many indie games out there made by a small team (or even one person) that are very popular and successful (e.g. Stardew Valley, Outer Wilds). For me personally, I haven't really enjoyed a AAA game in years. I tend to stick to indie or more niche experiences. I think AAA studios might do well if they split up their massive teams to create many, more focused games instead of one big blockbuster that primarily serve as a vehicle for microtransactions.
  - mariusmg 5y ago
    >Do players really prefer the current AAA space right now though? God of War, a 4 years old PS4 title, was just released on PC and sold very well. That should tell you everything you need to know...
    - bmhin 5y ago
      I don't know what the 5th highest reviewed title of all time that was made available on a popular platform selling well tells me about the state of AAA as a whole to be honest. One data point, for a game considered a masterpiece of the last generation (so the decade), doesn't say a whole lot. The Avengers was a large AAA game from the world's most popular media franchise and it recently tanked. "That should tell you everything you need to know..."
tonmoy 5y ago
I would think women employees would be harassed less under Microsoft
- Wurdan 5y ago
  One thing we can say fairly certainly is Bobby Kotick's days are numbered. Everything I've read about the guy indicates to me that he won't do well in the Microsoft corporate culture.
- sascha_sl 5y ago
  It seems very likely, based on comments Phil Spencer made just 3 months ago, when the acquisition was likely already on the table. https://www.engadget.com/xbox-phil-spencer-activision-blizzard-203557204.html https://www.engadget.com/xbox-phil-spencer-activision-blizza...
- schmorptron 5y ago
  Hopefully, that'd probably the best outcome in this whole thing.
vanilla_nut 5y ago
It’s annoying that MS will probably pull the same crap they did when they purchased Bethesda a couple of years ago: we won’t see releases of most Activision/Blizzard games on Sony consoles going forward. This exclusivity game has to stop. I understand MS’s motivations — they want people to buy their console, after all. But it’s awful that you can make an educated console decision, and then two years later have a good chunk of games stolen from you because of a merger. I concur that I’d really like to see Linux take the PC gaming space over. Personally I feel that we should focus on indie games and low-level platform compatibilty — if enough users switch to Linux, AAA studios will have to follow. Except the MS-owned studios who have a standing order to ignore Linux, of course…
- pjmlp 5y ago
  AAA studios already target Linux via Android and Stadia, guess why they don't bother with GNU/Linux.
- rileyphone 5y ago
  I'm really excited for the Steam deck sometime this year, especially given GPU prices are what they are. Interestingly, Valve's work on Proton/Wine has created a situation where smaller developers are almost less likely to target Linux first class, as the game can just run on the compatability layer and save the dev the work of obscure Linux issues that effect 1% of players.
- Ilikeruby 5y ago
  The issue is a bit more than that. To make gamers and normal users switch to linux we need to make more GUI apps for linux and increase the accessability of linux GUI / DE. Just watch the LTT videos about gaming on Linux. Linux is a Cluster** of an OS to troubleshoot and configure. I'm a dev myself I love my Arch and everything but this OS is NOT meant for normal people. Its 2022, people don't want to fiddle around with a terminal. Until Linux and its users don't fix the core problem of linux and thats usability, I don't see people switching to it. Maybe steam changes this.. but we will see..
  - hajile 5y ago
contravariant 5y ago
I don't really share your impression that everything is consolidated under large developers. Most of the games I've bought over the last few years have all been from relatively small studios (as far as I know anyway, it can be hard to tell).
mattbrewsbytes 5y ago
Games are software. Changing the upper management/ownership isn't going to change deliverables. If anything, it could delay releases even further out with new overlords. Certainly they can clean house of the former companies HR department as well as any senior leaders that did nothing with previous issues. It will take a long time before anything material comes from this from a games perspective. I would assume legal agreements are in place for cash-cow games like Call Of Duty on other platforms so that should alleviate any anti-competitive investigation.

wongarsu 5y ago

> I hope PC gaming can detach from Microsoft as soon as possible to be honest In what way is PC gaming attached to Microsoft? Microsoft Game Studios doesn't have a lot of market share in PC games besides Minecraft, and the industry is very diverse. Most games happen to run on Windows, but apart from DirectX they have resisted every attempt from Microsoft to use that in any way. If PC gaming is attached to anyone it's Valve, but even that is slowly changing.

ekianjo 5y ago
> If PC gaming is attached to anyone it's Valve PC Gaming runs on Windows, not on Valve's OS (while valve is intending to change that progressively).
- smileybarry 5y ago
  Which doesn't mean much as long as Windows runs on anything x86 and costs OEMs (relative) peanuts. It's not like you have to pay royalties to Microsoft if you sell a PC game (but you do have to pay MS/Sony if it's a Xbox/PS game).
nathanaldensr 5y ago
It's not either-or, it's both. Both Microsoft and Valve play pivotal roles in PC gaming.
houseofzeus 5y ago
> Microsoft Game Studios doesn't have a lot of market share in PC games besides Minecraft Wow, that sucks. They should acquire someone with a bigger catalogue!
- wongarsu 5y ago
  They really should, but is Activision-Blizzard that company? Of the 7 Activision releases in 2020 to now 4 are Call of Duty, a game that's much more popular on consoles than on PC. Blizzard is the PC side of the company, but they are mostly games that are slowly dying due to mismanagement. The IP is very valuable, but current PC sales alone wouldn't make Microsoft dominant by a long shot.
  - sascha_sl 5y ago
    They also acquired ZeniMax, which includes Arkane, id Software, Bethesda Games Studios and MachineGames. And Obsidian Entertainment. And inXile.
robertlagrant 5y ago
Microsoft are using their platform positions to sell games on Xbox and PC in one, which others can't compete with (because Xbox is a closed market), and their deep pockets to fund Xbox Pass mean it is a little combative rather than genuinely competitive.
WHA8m 5y ago
> Microsoft Game Studios doesn't have a lot of market share in PC games besides Minecraft You could see it coming that this is controversial. 1. Microsofts share in publishing video games isn't exactly what you'd call small. They acquired Zenimax Media [1] last year, which is kind of big. That said, Microsoft can't be seen as a dominator in the publishing market. 2. But the argument wasn't necessarily about who owns the most studios. Microsoft absolutely dominates in the platform market on PC. Games are developed for Windows. Period. Everything else is either niche or an extra. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZeniMax_Media https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZeniMax_Media
- wongarsu 5y ago
  I think my think my argument is mostly based on the precise wording. Make it slightly broader and it would no longer hold. 1) Microsoft holds a very respectable share of the video game market (especially if you ignore mobile). But their share of the PC game market specifically is much smaller. 2) Microsoft is the dominant platform of PC gaming without question. But that doesn't make the market attached to them. Being without alternative or having high switching costs is what makes you attached, not merely using it. Most games are inherently multi-platform, either because they are built in an engine that is or because they are also sold on other platforms (mostly consoles). Not having Linux, Mac or SteamOS builds is usually a business decision, not a technical one. You could argue that they are attached to Microsoft because that's where the consumers are, and that's true in a sense. But that limits what kind of benefit Microsoft can get out of the attachment and what kind of damage they can do - at most as much as it takes to get enough consumers to switch (dual boot, some SteamOS device, etc). In a world where games sell platforms the attachment isn't very strong

stephbu 5y ago

I agree with your view point - however it’s hard to see any other outcome for the AAA franchises. Player expectations of a modern title are increasing - as are the time, human, and fiscal capital required to ship a modern title - years of engineering, hundreds of people, hundreds of millions of dollars. The risks are huge - missing your date, or game experience can sink a company - consider what Cyberpunk almost did to Projekt CD RED - to ship they cut to the bone very late in the day. The economics of the AAA business is optimizing towards managing and distributing that risk thru supply-chain and scale. I don’t see a better way on this current trajectory.

yoyohello13 5y ago
Do players really prefer the current AAA space right now though? There are many indie games out there made by a small team (or even one person) that are very popular and successful (e.g. Stardew Valley, Outer Wilds). For me personally, I haven't really enjoyed a AAA game in years. I tend to stick to indie or more niche experiences. I think AAA studios might do well if they split up their massive teams to create many, more focused games instead of one big blockbuster that primarily serve as a vehicle for microtransactions.
- mariusmg 5y ago
  >Do players really prefer the current AAA space right now though? God of War, a 4 years old PS4 title, was just released on PC and sold very well. That should tell you everything you need to know...
  - bmhin 5y ago
    I don't know what the 5th highest reviewed title of all time that was made available on a popular platform selling well tells me about the state of AAA as a whole to be honest. One data point, for a game considered a masterpiece of the last generation (so the decade), doesn't say a whole lot. The Avengers was a large AAA game from the world's most popular media franchise and it recently tanked. "That should tell you everything you need to know..."

tonmoy 5y ago

I would think women employees would be harassed less under Microsoft

Wurdan 5y ago
One thing we can say fairly certainly is Bobby Kotick's days are numbered. Everything I've read about the guy indicates to me that he won't do well in the Microsoft corporate culture.
sascha_sl 5y ago
It seems very likely, based on comments Phil Spencer made just 3 months ago, when the acquisition was likely already on the table. https://www.engadget.com/xbox-phil-spencer-activision-blizzard-203557204.html https://www.engadget.com/xbox-phil-spencer-activision-blizza...
schmorptron 5y ago
Hopefully, that'd probably the best outcome in this whole thing.

vanilla_nut 5y ago

It’s annoying that MS will probably pull the same crap they did when they purchased Bethesda a couple of years ago: we won’t see releases of most Activision/Blizzard games on Sony consoles going forward. This exclusivity game has to stop. I understand MS’s motivations — they want people to buy their console, after all. But it’s awful that you can make an educated console decision, and then two years later have a good chunk of games stolen from you because of a merger. I concur that I’d really like to see Linux take the PC gaming space over. Personally I feel that we should focus on indie games and low-level platform compatibilty — if enough users switch to Linux, AAA studios will have to follow. Except the MS-owned studios who have a standing order to ignore Linux, of course…

pjmlp 5y ago
AAA studios already target Linux via Android and Stadia, guess why they don't bother with GNU/Linux.
rileyphone 5y ago
I'm really excited for the Steam deck sometime this year, especially given GPU prices are what they are. Interestingly, Valve's work on Proton/Wine has created a situation where smaller developers are almost less likely to target Linux first class, as the game can just run on the compatability layer and save the dev the work of obscure Linux issues that effect 1% of players.
Ilikeruby 5y ago
The issue is a bit more than that. To make gamers and normal users switch to linux we need to make more GUI apps for linux and increase the accessability of linux GUI / DE. Just watch the LTT videos about gaming on Linux. Linux is a Cluster** of an OS to troubleshoot and configure. I'm a dev myself I love my Arch and everything but this OS is NOT meant for normal people. Its 2022, people don't want to fiddle around with a terminal. Until Linux and its users don't fix the core problem of linux and thats usability, I don't see people switching to it. Maybe steam changes this.. but we will see..
- hajile 5y ago

contravariant 5y ago

I don't really share your impression that everything is consolidated under large developers. Most of the games I've bought over the last few years have all been from relatively small studios (as far as I know anyway, it can be hard to tell).

mattbrewsbytes 5y ago

Games are software. Changing the upper management/ownership isn't going to change deliverables. If anything, it could delay releases even further out with new overlords. Certainly they can clean house of the former companies HR department as well as any senior leaders that did nothing with previous issues. It will take a long time before anything material comes from this from a games perspective. I would assume legal agreements are in place for cash-cow games like Call Of Duty on other platforms so that should alleviate any anti-competitive investigation.