3 ms·

Not the OP, but Scott Miller said "most if not all" coders at ID were laid off. https://www.gamesindustry.biz/xbox-layoffs-july-2026 https://www.gamesindustry.

Not the OP, but Scott Miller said "most if not all" coders at ID were laid off. https://www.gamesindustry.biz/xbox-layoffs-july-2026 https://www.gamesindustry.biz/xbox-layoffs-july-2026 I hope the industry will be in a better place in a few years. There is this recurring theme of big companies rolling up little developers and destroying their development culture.

eightysixfour 4mo ago
Yes, it was mentioned in the article. I just don't count a tweet from an "insider" as particularly strong evidence anymore.
- CuriouslyC 4mo ago
  Miller has a history with id, and has probably gotten numerous reports directly from boots on the ground in the company.
  - starkparker 4mo ago
    Sounds like Digital Foundry's also looking into it, without much detail or confirmation: https://bsky.app/profile/dark1x.bsky.social/post/3mpyvnrbwds2t https://bsky.app/profile/dark1x.bsky.social/post/3mpyvnrbwds...
bix6 4mo ago
> There is this recurring theme of big companies rolling up little developers and destroying their development culture Why are the little devs selling to the big companies in the first place then? If you’re crushing it as an Indie studio why wouldn’t you stay that way knowing how big tech acts?
- pjc50 4mo ago
  The directors like money. And are probably beholden to their investors.
- all2 4mo ago
  Money. Someone made a lot of money selling IP and the skills of the team.
- munificent 4mo ago
  Because big companies can spend way more on marketing than you. If a big company decides to make a game very similar to yours, they can make theirs win by throwing more money into marketing than you can. Do you want them to spend that marketing budget on your competition or on you?
- mayoff 3mo ago
  Here’s what Tim Schafer said about selling Double Fine to Microsoft at the time: > "I think it's perfect for us, because we can just focus on doing our inspired weird games, and not worry about how we're going to get our next deal. We aren't chasing down our next funding and thinking about how many more months of funding we have all the time." https://gameinformer.com/2019/06/23/tim-schafer-on-microsoft-acquisition-and-the-future-of-double-fine https://gameinformer.com/2019/06/23/tim-schafer-on-microsoft...
  - account42 3mo ago
    That's founder speech for "I'm getting a big paycheck out of this deal lol".
- SepiaSapient 3mo ago
  "Little devs" in this context is still a company that probably has investors, investors that can push for the acquisition. Even if a small dev studio is self funded or has normal debt that they can realistically pay off, the money on the table for the owner is hard to resist. If the owner has qualms, the whole pitch of "we'll give you artistic independence and the funds to make what you want" will seal the deal. The only people that can tell Microsoft to gargle their gonads are already rich as fuck or have a will of steel and principles uncommon with entrepreneurs.
thewebguyd 4mo ago
The industry could have been in a better place already if the DOJ hadn't allowed Microsoft to buy up all these studios. I have near zero hope we'll see any meaningful antitrust action in the future either without a complete overhaul of the incentives in politics. Xbox div's annual revenue is $23 billion. Its big enough to be its own company and sit upper-mid pack of the F500 on its own. It'd be the number 3 or 4th top gaming company globally, beating out Nintendo even. No reason for Microsoft to not have been broken up by now, let alone have been allowed to buy all the studios they did. Don't forget they also mislead the FTC to convince them to allow the Activision/Blizzard acquisition to go forward, and then once allowed laid off 1900 employees, mostly admin/HR & support, forcing it to integrate into Microsoft gaming and operate less independently.
- epolanski 4mo ago
  When UK blocked the merger this very board flamed anti business old Europe.
  - superxpro12 3mo ago
    One does wonder how many bots were involved in the flaming
    - teamonkey 3mo ago
      I’d love to blame collective internet myopia on bots, just as I’d love to blame leaded gas for the mental state of geriatric politicians, but in my heart I don’t buy it.
- rightbyte 3mo ago
  I like the concept "Goomba fallacy", but it is a bit confusing since Goombas are exactly the same, where as board users are at least me and not me. Edit: Keeping to SMB1 for simplicity.
- toast0 3mo ago
  > The industry could have been in a better place already if the DOJ hadn't allowed Microsoft to buy up all these studios. Yes, but it's not the DOJ's job to tell Microsoft when they're lighting their money on fire. There's no unfair competition from this kind of thing. It wasn't any different when leather companies or old media would buy up studios and run themselves out of business. Microsoft buying out studios could be anti-competitive, but Microsoft would have to not be Microsoft.

eightysixfour 4mo ago

Yes, it was mentioned in the article. I just don't count a tweet from an "insider" as particularly strong evidence anymore.

CuriouslyC 4mo ago
Miller has a history with id, and has probably gotten numerous reports directly from boots on the ground in the company.
- starkparker 4mo ago
  Sounds like Digital Foundry's also looking into it, without much detail or confirmation: https://bsky.app/profile/dark1x.bsky.social/post/3mpyvnrbwds2t https://bsky.app/profile/dark1x.bsky.social/post/3mpyvnrbwds...

bix6 4mo ago

> There is this recurring theme of big companies rolling up little developers and destroying their development culture Why are the little devs selling to the big companies in the first place then? If you’re crushing it as an Indie studio why wouldn’t you stay that way knowing how big tech acts?

pjc50 4mo ago
The directors like money. And are probably beholden to their investors.
all2 4mo ago
Money. Someone made a lot of money selling IP and the skills of the team.
munificent 4mo ago
Because big companies can spend way more on marketing than you. If a big company decides to make a game very similar to yours, they can make theirs win by throwing more money into marketing than you can. Do you want them to spend that marketing budget on your competition or on you?
mayoff 3mo ago
Here’s what Tim Schafer said about selling Double Fine to Microsoft at the time: > "I think it's perfect for us, because we can just focus on doing our inspired weird games, and not worry about how we're going to get our next deal. We aren't chasing down our next funding and thinking about how many more months of funding we have all the time." https://gameinformer.com/2019/06/23/tim-schafer-on-microsoft-acquisition-and-the-future-of-double-fine https://gameinformer.com/2019/06/23/tim-schafer-on-microsoft...
- account42 3mo ago
  That's founder speech for "I'm getting a big paycheck out of this deal lol".
SepiaSapient 3mo ago
"Little devs" in this context is still a company that probably has investors, investors that can push for the acquisition. Even if a small dev studio is self funded or has normal debt that they can realistically pay off, the money on the table for the owner is hard to resist. If the owner has qualms, the whole pitch of "we'll give you artistic independence and the funds to make what you want" will seal the deal. The only people that can tell Microsoft to gargle their gonads are already rich as fuck or have a will of steel and principles uncommon with entrepreneurs.

thewebguyd 4mo ago

The industry could have been in a better place already if the DOJ hadn't allowed Microsoft to buy up all these studios. I have near zero hope we'll see any meaningful antitrust action in the future either without a complete overhaul of the incentives in politics. Xbox div's annual revenue is $23 billion. Its big enough to be its own company and sit upper-mid pack of the F500 on its own. It'd be the number 3 or 4th top gaming company globally, beating out Nintendo even. No reason for Microsoft to not have been broken up by now, let alone have been allowed to buy all the studios they did. Don't forget they also mislead the FTC to convince them to allow the Activision/Blizzard acquisition to go forward, and then once allowed laid off 1900 employees, mostly admin/HR & support, forcing it to integrate into Microsoft gaming and operate less independently.

epolanski 4mo ago
When UK blocked the merger this very board flamed anti business old Europe.
- superxpro12 3mo ago
  One does wonder how many bots were involved in the flaming
  - teamonkey 3mo ago
    I’d love to blame collective internet myopia on bots, just as I’d love to blame leaded gas for the mental state of geriatric politicians, but in my heart I don’t buy it.
rightbyte 3mo ago
I like the concept "Goomba fallacy", but it is a bit confusing since Goombas are exactly the same, where as board users are at least me and not me. Edit: Keeping to SMB1 for simplicity.
toast0 3mo ago
> The industry could have been in a better place already if the DOJ hadn't allowed Microsoft to buy up all these studios. Yes, but it's not the DOJ's job to tell Microsoft when they're lighting their money on fire. There's no unfair competition from this kind of thing. It wasn't any different when leather companies or old media would buy up studios and run themselves out of business. Microsoft buying out studios could be anti-competitive, but Microsoft would have to not be Microsoft.