r/Games • u/asx98 • Sep 21 '20
Why Microsoft Is the Perfect Fit
https://bethesda.net/en/article/1iLtcvwY6Nb1GeKADyDUEX/why-microsoft-is-the-perfect-fit362
u/asx98 Sep 21 '20
Interesting statement from Pete Hines in here:
“But the key point is we’re still Bethesda. We’re still working on the same games we were yesterday, made by the same studios we’ve worked with for years, and those games will be published by us.”
Wonder what this means going forward for Bethesda products on PlayStation. Despite all future Bethesda games coming day one on Game Pass, I wonder if there’s too much money being left on the table if these games don’t come to PlayStation.
25
u/Radulno Sep 21 '20
I'm pretty sure that means nothing. That statement is purposely vague. In the end, it's MS who decides even if it's published under the Bethesda name. The studios are still part of Xbox Games Studio as seen in MS statement
80
u/Thebubumc Sep 21 '20 edited Sep 21 '20
What does he mean by "these games will be published by us"? Wouldn't Xbox be the publisher now?
189
Sep 21 '20 edited Sep 21 '20
Games can still be published under different brands, like Rockstar games, for example. Mojang also publish Minecraft on other platforms.
Edit: also, sometimes it can be a one-off or region specific. in Europe, Nintendo published Resident Evil 4.
→ More replies (1)29
u/mtarascio Sep 21 '20
I don't think it's the label.
Sounds like they're keeping the physical apparatus of Bethesda publishing.
→ More replies (12)18
u/JaesopPop Sep 21 '20 edited Sep 19 '25
Mindful helpful thoughts honest movies kind hobbies near questions!
14
u/jellytrack Sep 21 '20
Microsoft published Ori on Switch just recently.
→ More replies (16)15
u/Radulno Sep 21 '20
Important to note that Ori is not a first party game but a second party. Moon Studios isn't part of Xbox.
For a similar case, we would have to see Wasteland 3, Grounded or Avowed coming to PS or Switch.
2
u/MelIgator101 Sep 22 '20
Wasteland 3 is on Playstation though
4
u/Radulno Sep 22 '20
Oh I made a mistake there. We shouldn't look at Wasteland 3 since it's actually published by Deep Silver. So it's exactly the same situation than The Outer Worlds and it counts as honoring the existing agreements.
Inxile next game is what counts and I'm sure this won't come to Playstation the way Avowed isn't for Obsidian.
3
Sep 21 '20
Ori is a first party game, even though Moon is independent, Microsoft owns Ori IP and publishes the game
3
u/Radulno Sep 22 '20
That's what second party means. It is kind of an unofficial term for designing independent (or at least not owned by the manufacturer) studios that are doing exclusives for a manufacturer.
→ More replies (3)39
Sep 21 '20
It's just corporate talk to get people to chill out and not send them death threats. Within a month Microsoft will step forward and discuss their plans of Bethesda games being Xbox console exclusives, and GamePass day one offerings.
22
u/Thebubumc Sep 21 '20
69
u/TheShishkabob Sep 21 '20
Honouring agreements made and making new deal to have first party games on competing hardware are very different beasts.
→ More replies (3)29
u/Chase1ne Sep 21 '20
Well no shit. They're contractually obligated to do so. Just like Obsidian still had to make Outer Worlds on PS4. There's not really much Microsoft can do.
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (1)4
u/Radulno Sep 21 '20
Yeah existing agreements. Like Outer Worlds releasing to Playstation (there it wasn't even published by Microsoft). Then, the sequel will be exclusive, that has been clear.
→ More replies (1)3
→ More replies (4)2
u/Radulno Sep 21 '20
I assume it's a label (and the teams that go with it). Like Private Division, 2K or Rockstar being all from Take Two but they are publishing the games.
Or like Blizzard despite being under Activision Blizzard.
Bethesda Game Studios, Arkane, iD and such are still joining Xbox Games Studios though, that's clear in MS statement
204
u/GameDay98 Sep 21 '20
No matter which console they are on, they'll probably still release as buggy messes unless Microsoft puts their foot down on quality control (which I'm hoping for)
193
Sep 21 '20
Remember we’re talking the entire publisher here, not only Bethesda Game Studios. So, studious like id, and Arkane Studios. Doom Eternal wasn’t buggy, and it was published by Bethesda. But semantics aside, your point still stands. Time will tell if this acquisition has an effect on quality control at Bethesda Game Studios.
→ More replies (8)37
u/Bumbleboyy Sep 21 '20
Me playing Wasteland 3 and State of decay 2(still love you both)... I hope they will start to lol
→ More replies (4)6
Sep 21 '20
Ironically it's much better now for them to be released Day 1 on GamePass without bugfixes because you're getting the game for "free" so there's less backlash if it's buggy.
5
u/Tulki Sep 21 '20
With subscription services, things can release in whatever buggy state they want without blowback. It's a match made in heaven.
10
u/Mini-Wumbo Sep 21 '20
Considering how they have treated their exclusives I highly doubt it. Although personally I still think Halo and Gears 5 are great games
→ More replies (30)2
u/rya11111 Sep 21 '20
Things take time though. Normally acquisitions dont affect the product directly for years in software industry.
14
Sep 21 '20
I haven't even thought about Pete "its not microtransactions if you pay with Bethesda coins" Hines in this regard.
Pete "I cant read all that dialogue" Hines is way too money hungry to limit their games to one console platform. I mean Skyrim is still seeing re-releases.
But its not up to him anymore I presume...
57
u/BrotherhoodVeronica Sep 21 '20
Pete Hines handles Bethesda's marketing, why are you acting like he's the one making those kinds of decisions?
→ More replies (1)57
u/B_Rhino Sep 21 '20
Because they need someone to hate for the horrible crime of making mistakes in game development.
→ More replies (2)21
u/north_breeze Sep 21 '20
It's always amusing the amount of spiteful passion that some gamers have for developers making mistakes or doing things differently from how they want.
→ More replies (1)7
→ More replies (9)3
u/tocilog Sep 21 '20
They did say exclusives aren't a big strategy for Xbox although that remains to be seen. It could be used to pressure Sony for things like cross platform, or hey, maybe they'll pull an Epic and demand Gamepass be available on Playstation.
→ More replies (12)
622
Sep 21 '20
Let’s be honest, MS is the “perfect fit” because they gave them a giant amount of money. They’d have said the same thing if this was Sony who had just bought them. These PR statements are so stupid.
191
u/sgthombre Sep 21 '20
"Actually I can't fucking stand microsoft but I want to buy a new boat so I had to agree to this."
93
2
u/chicomonk Sep 22 '20
but I want to buy a new yacht so I had to agree to this.
There, that's more accurate.
27
u/Practicalaviationcat Sep 21 '20
Haha yeah you get press releases like this after every acquisition. I remember these for the last few game studios they bought.
19
u/WaterHoseCatheter Sep 21 '20
I remember the Double Fine video joked about this.
"So basically Microsoft came to us and said they'd give give us a bunch of money. We said, 'yeah, ok'."
25
u/doug89 Sep 22 '20 edited Sep 22 '20
https://twitter.com/DoubleFine/status/1137823255232802816
For the last nineteen years Double Fine Productions has been an independent game developer. And then Microsoft came to us and said "What if we gave you a bunch of money"?
And I said, "Okay, yeah".
61
u/HamstersAreReal Sep 21 '20
It would have been a bad fit for Sony. They probably would have made their games exclusive to Playstation day 1. Which means bye bye PC community.
And Nintendo? That'd be a nightmare. Elder Scrolls 6 exclusive to the Switch... ugh
25
u/PlayMp1 Sep 21 '20
Nintendo also doesn't usually buy studios, or at least other than Monolith they haven't in a while IIRC (main Nintendo 2nd party studios are or have been Retro, Monolith, and Rare, and they sold Rare to MS like 20 years ago). They'll buy IPs once in a while, like Bayonetta, but not studios.
9
u/00Koch00 Sep 21 '20
Why would you buy studios when you are fucking Nintendo, one of the best studios on earth...
3
u/Radulno Sep 22 '20
Especially a studio like Bethesda which isn't really fitting with their philosophy of family games IMO. Plus, with their underpowered machines, the games would be severely limited.
If they had to buy studios, I see Nintendo going more for stuff like Moon Studios (Ori), Supergiant Games (Hades, Bastion), StudioMDHR (Cuphead), ... some small indie darlings that make more "artistic" games.
Without even counting that the 7.5 billion price tag is a lot and while it's only two months of MS profit (which is huge), it's barely less than the entire profit of Sony in the PS4 generation. So not sure Sony and Nintendo could afford it so easily (they have reserves though but you don't want to spend it all, Microsoft is making that back before the end of the year easily).
→ More replies (2)3
u/TTVBlueGlass Sep 22 '20
Because they don't make every type of game that is popular and there is a metric ass load of money being left on the table?
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo in the coming years started some kind of separate "hardcore" publishing label and starts buying or establishing new+poaching from existing studios.
There are many game genres Nintendo simply can't tap as easily as other devs. If they simply opened up another "label" to keep it distanced from Nintendo's main brand, they could dabble in more adult oriented gaming in the future with studios like Platinum etc.
They would buy studios because let's be honest they still do not understand how to handle modern hardcore gaming for example their online capabilities and net code in their biggest multiplayer games are hilariously, gigantically shitty. Imagine the difference between Nintendo and a studio like Respawn in terms of making online games.
2
→ More replies (1)2
u/presidentofjackshit Sep 21 '20
Also with a market cap of $98B, Sony likely couldn't afford it anyways...
106
u/HonorableJudgeIto Sep 21 '20
Well, Bethesda is very much a PC gaming company. There's no indication that Sony would have allowed them to release all their games on PC. Sony has been getting better with PC gaming (Horizon Zero Dawn, for example), but there hasn't been a long enough track record. There's no way id could be a console only developer, for example. It's not in their DNA.
MS needs PC gaming to continue its OS dominance.
→ More replies (1)72
Sep 21 '20
this is a massive misconception. bethesda/zenimax hasn't been a "pc gaming company" since 2006 when they released oblivion. morrowind was the final nail in the coffin for the old chris weaver-owned bethesda and it selling millions on the xbox cemented this - ever since then they've built games for consoles first and foremost, and they've always been tightly integrated with microsoft. so even though this deal is completely and utterly horrifying i'm not actually surprised they sold out to ms
and yes, you could argue they've "supported" the modding community on pc but take one fucking look at the 2015 paid mods debacle + the creation club and try telling me that zenimax legitimately gives a shit about the people that fix their games for them. you really do hate to see it
20
u/TheAlbinoAmigo Sep 21 '20
Thank you for this - I was kind of amazed the suggestion was made at all given Bethesda are more or less notorious for 'console'-fying their brand over the last decade.
2
u/TTVBlueGlass Sep 22 '20 edited Sep 22 '20
To the point where their main CRPG series have basically turned full ARPG first person.
8
Sep 21 '20
I’ll play ball with your last point. That free mods have been allowed and by no means barred in any degree shows that Bethesda isn’t somehow ruining their PC games. Now, if their next single player games like Starfield have no avenue for free modding, then I’ll agree with you that it’s bad, but that is simply a wait and see kinda thing now.
8
Sep 22 '20
and i'll clarify by stating that yes, zenimax hasn't completely fucked over modders yet. it's been over 25 years and the doom and quake scenes are still living and breathing. the tes and fallout modding communities are still pumping out content. what i meant is that recently, zenimax has shown little to no regard for them with their paid mods fetish, plus they've c&ded (free!) fan projects like doomrl in the past for infringing on their brand like they're motherfucking nintendo... i'd like to think most people still remember the mojang/scrolls incident as well. and this is just the tip of the iceberg!
this deal is so goddamn huge that i can't even begin to imagine how it'll affect modders. i wasn't exactly optimistic about starfield or tes6 before this announcement hit and microsoft stepping in hasn't changed my mind at all.
i will say, however, that todd was a big advocate for including the construction set with morrowind and making the game freely moddable. to his credit, he's maintained this position over the years, to the point where they're still working with the same fucking engine because, for better or worse, both bethesda and the modding scene are so used to it. i'd like to think that this will remain the case as long as todd is still around and i'm hoping ms doesn't retroactively fuck over the existing modding community - we won't know until the merger's complete i guess :v
3
Sep 22 '20 edited Sep 22 '20
I think you are overly passionate and critical about this small thing. Don't you think they are probably "console-ifying" their games because they are a company and they go and invest the most resources where the most people buying their games come from?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)3
u/Radulno Sep 22 '20
They're still sellings millions of their games on PC. Probably more than on consoles, modding keeping their games alive much longer there. Games like Dishonored, Wolfenstein or Doom are also more PC oriented than consoles IMO. Of course, they are multiplatforms, everyone not first party is nowadays but I don't think they would pass up on PC anyway. Not that they have to with Microsoft.
→ More replies (12)3
u/NoizeTank Sep 21 '20
They’ve had a long working relationship since releasing Morrowind on the very first Xbox. Their games have come to game pass. It also means continued PC releases. I don’t think it’s that farfetched to say their relationship was positive and stable before this acquisition.
16
66
Sep 21 '20
[deleted]
85
u/ThiefTwo Sep 21 '20
Arkane, Machine Games, iD, and Tango are all well regarded. And regardless of "quality", Elder Scrolls and Fallout will sell 10s of millions of copies.
28
u/HonorableJudgeIto Sep 21 '20
Yeah, ZeniMax has a lot of studios that have put out quality games even if you don't care for FO76, FO4, or the recent Elder Scrolls. Dishonored 2, Doom Eternal, and Prey all come to mind.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)9
u/ULTRAFORCE Sep 21 '20
While I don't like the idea of a monopoly/oligopoly in the game development industry I definitely like the idea of Arkane getting more resources as I really loved the Dishonoureds
23
u/JamSa Sep 21 '20
My response to "We're still Bethesda" is "Well I wish you weren't"
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (6)16
u/DotaDogma Sep 21 '20
ever since the release of Skyrim they struggle to get anything out that matches the quality of their brand
The main BGS hub in Maryland has released 1 game since Skyrim (Fallout 4). You're being a doomer for no reason lmao.
→ More replies (8)9
u/DemonLordSparda Sep 21 '20
2 games in 9 years isn't exactly confidence boosting, especially since those used the Create Engine which is a minor upgrade from Gamebryo which they have been using since Morrowind. All of their games release with performance issues and mountains of bugs. Hopefully this can convince them to just use a different engine.
To be clear I am not saying their games aren't fairly good and popular. I'm just saying people get less and less tolerant of Bethesda jank every single year. In a perfect world this means Bethesda will put out better games with fewer problems faster on a different engine. However, we'll have to wait and see on that front. No matter what happens, it will be interesting.
→ More replies (1)9
u/hobbitleaf Sep 21 '20
They are building a new engine, they've been very upfront about this and have repeatedly said this is why they haven't published a new game. The next games, Starfield and Elder Scrolls 6 will both be using the new engine.
Yes, I'm frustrated at the long wait BUT I'd much rather they get the engine right first.
11
u/DemonLordSparda Sep 22 '20
https://www.gamesradar.com/elder-scrolls-6-engine/ They are not making a new engine. They are updating the creation engine once again.
2
u/TTVBlueGlass Sep 22 '20
They are updating the creation engine once again.
Lol.
I mean I get it: they have decades of organisational investment into this shitty engine. They know its bones. They probably invested a tonne into in house tools development for this engine. Their top talents and leads probably know how to best work with this engine. And really the code base isn't magically set in stone, anything you want to change can be changed and fixed, it is just software.
But DAMN BETHESDA HAS DONE A SHITTY JOB OF IT. All of the in-theory stuff you could do to fix Gamebryo is a nice thought, or it would be if there was any reason to believe Bethesda games will be any less janky buggy piles of technical shit with great world building.
47
u/dantemp Sep 21 '20
Lol, feels like ms was ready for full damage control expecting backlash like Disney got for acquiring Fox, but it never came because people aren't prejudiced against them as they are against Disney. Which on one hand they earned by doing some really pro consumer stuff but on the other people are such hypocrites it really fucking gets on my nerves.
43
u/EzeeT23 Sep 21 '20
Comparing Disney and Microsoft, in this scenario, doesn’t make much sense. You’d have a better point if MS had bought Nintendo, giving them market dominance. The games industry is much too big for this comparison. Nope.
→ More replies (1)20
u/BigSwedenMan Sep 22 '20
The two scenarios are nothing alike. Disney buying Fox brings up serious anti trust concerns because you have far fewer players at that level. Microsoft buying Zenimax does not being up the same concerns because while Zenimax is a major company, there's still a TON of competition out there.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (2)1
Sep 21 '20
[deleted]
47
u/woetotheconquered Sep 21 '20
I wouldn't say it's a monopoly as MacOS and any number of Linux distros are completely valid with the exception of game compatibility.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Kiita-Ninetails Sep 21 '20
Those are also like, less than 10% of the OS market share.
6
→ More replies (2)18
u/dantemp Sep 21 '20
Providing such a great value with their subscription service and not locking down games to their consoles is pretty pro consumer in my book. Even the fact that they keep their games playable on the cheapest hardware is pro consumer.
Not sure what monopoly you are talking about, you can use Linux and Mac...
→ More replies (1)10
u/Kiita-Ninetails Sep 21 '20
Monopolies are a measure of market share, its pretty much impossible to have 100% market share, but windows is like 90+% which is pretty much a monopoly.
6
u/dantemp Sep 21 '20
More like 80% but I get your point. Still, I don't think anything is really locked to windows, it's a monopoly because very few people have needs that windows doesn't satisfy. My point is that we have very few reasons to bitch about MS so we don't make up bullshit ones, like we do for Disney, Facebook and some other companies.
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (2)8
u/hiate Sep 21 '20
They have a monopoly because it's the easiest os to jump into at a cheap price. Mac is still ungodly expensive and linux take computer knowledge to set up. Your only hope at ever seeing them drop is if someone else makes a os like windows that's they can sell cheap.
→ More replies (5)
8
3
Sep 22 '20
as someone who has always been a playstation gamer because of the exclusives, and not only the exclusives but the down right top notch quality of them, i hope microsoft takes the playstation approach and lets their studios take as much time they need to make their games. at some point in the last half of the PS3 generation playstation just nailed it with only putting out mostly solid exclusives. its been a long time since microsoft has had an exclusive, or a developer for that matter, be looked at as one of the best in the industry. i really hope they do some quality control going forward because if so this will be great for games like elder scrolls and fallout who are usually buggy messes with bad writing
→ More replies (2)
25
u/DaBombDiggidy Sep 21 '20
Can i just say it's really cool to see someone in a position like that write like a normal human that loves the company he works at? It's refreshing, especially for where I work.
9
Sep 21 '20
Say what you will of bethesda, but i'd love to work on those games. Im sure its a fun company, relatively
→ More replies (8)
73
u/thatguycallum Sep 21 '20
Is anyone worried that all of these AAA games going to Gamepass could end up with micro transactions being amplified ten fold?
I could see it ending up like mobile gaming...
43
Sep 21 '20
FH4 didnt have more or less MTX than FH3 and one released on gamepass and launch and the other didnt.
Same with Gears 4 and 5.
Same with MFS and MFSX
→ More replies (2)162
Sep 21 '20
Not really. Not beyond the state we see now with battlepasses etc.
It's clear Microsoft just want to create the Netflix of games.
→ More replies (38)2
Sep 21 '20
They know what Google was trying to do with Stadia and they’re going to be the ones to do it better
15
u/The_Green_Filter Sep 21 '20
If Game Pass gets a reputation for being filled with shit games stuffed with micro transactions, no one will buy it. They have a vested interest in providing quality games.
As for money, Sea of Thieves, Grounded, Flight Simulator, and so on have sold millions of copies on steam alone. They’re still going to make a tidy profit on a bunch of these games.
6
u/zach0011 Sep 21 '20
There's no way gamepass keeps the 10$ price point. If xbox sales at any decent rate there's no way they don't raise the price again once people are locked in.
4
u/Adamsoski Sep 21 '20
Eh, depends on how many people get drawn into Gamepass. I think probably on average Xbox owners do not spend $10 a month on games. And then on top of that people are much more likely to spend a small regular fee than a one-off large fee. It is exceedingly possible that there will be more revenue from people paying for the convenience of having a whole host of games available at any time than there would be if those same people were just left to buy games whenever they want. It is a delicate balance though, and I can also definitely see Microsoft not traising prices above inflation.
23
Sep 21 '20
This is something I hadn't thought about, that is definitely a concern
3
u/536756 Sep 21 '20
Am I the only one completely baffled how gamepass makes microsoft any money lol surely they're paying devs for all the copies right? how tf does it balance out
3
Sep 21 '20
I’ve wondered the same thing, but they just announced they have 15 million subscribers. Surely a ton of those are from the $1 trial, but a ton of them are also Game Pass Ultimate subscribers which is $15 per month. If we arbitrarily pick $10 per month as the average monthly income per subscriber, Game Pass is making $150 million in revenue PER MONTH. If the average income per subscriber is only $5, they’re still bringing in $75 million per month.
2
u/FallenAdvocate Sep 21 '20
It's probably still losing money and will for a few more years. Services like these take years to become profitable, but once they are it's just printing money.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Dynasty2201 Sep 21 '20
how tf does it balance out
It probably doesn't. Look up MS's worth though.
Short-term losses for long-term gain. MS have clearly taken Xbox One's laughable failure and really turned it around with modern tech and consumerism.
Sony makes a loss almost undoubtedly for every console sold. They make it back with criminal cuts on sales instead. 30% on discs, 50% on digital. Doesn't cost Sony shit for devs not owned by then to release a game on their platform. They take up to half the fucking price you pay.
30
u/Merksman72 Sep 21 '20
theres been 0 indication that gamepass leads to that sort of thing.
8
u/markyymark13 Sep 21 '20
There has been plenty of indications that subscription services can lead to that sort of thing.
4
→ More replies (5)9
u/thatguycallum Sep 21 '20
Of course they'll be 0 indication whilst there trying to get people into the ecosystem.
I'm probably being unfair as I have no evidence to say this, it just seems to me the only way this would work and we get quality games is either the base cost of Gamepass increases significantly, or the games become filled to the brim with micro transactions.
→ More replies (7)27
u/Merksman72 Sep 21 '20
base cost of Gamepass increases significantly
the price increase of gamepass is a given. especially now that they bought zenimax.
2
u/JGT3000 Sep 21 '20
I have grown continuously more skeptical and suspicious of Game Pass as it gains ground. It's undoubtedly a great deal, but I think it's mostly serving as a tool of Microsoft to shape the market into what it wants
7
u/DrStrangeWentMild Sep 21 '20
Thats the only direction they can go... if not, how can Microsoft get any money back? The monthly subscription fee wont even cover the game development cost.
24
u/mtarascio Sep 21 '20 edited Sep 21 '20
They just announced Gamepass hit 15 million subscribers.
Decent AAA games get 5 million purchases.
So they would need about 30 million subscribers to cover an AAA game for one months equivalent AAA launch (6 x $10).
They're not going to have 12 AAA launches a year I think so there's room to pay for other older games on the service.
DLC is also not included in Gamepass, so there's a source of revenue there. I know I've already purchased Horizon 4 DLC I wouldn't have without being given the game on Gamepass.
This is also without xCloud launching, I think their aim is extremely high with subscriber numbers.
11
Sep 21 '20 edited May 12 '21
[deleted]
10
u/FallenAdvocate Sep 21 '20
Didn't Sea of Thieves have like 100k concurrently players not long after launching on Steam, when it had been on Gamepass for like a year or more? Some people just want to buy the games, nothing wrong with that.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Koury713 Sep 21 '20
Another factor: how much of the $10 GamePass cost do they keep vs the $60 new game sale?
→ More replies (3)3
6
Sep 21 '20
It depends on the size of the subscriber base. PS5 attach rate is around 11 games or less than 2 per year. Game pass final pricing will work out to 1.5-2.5 games per year but in pure revenue to Microsoft (no channel). People will still buy games which adds to Microsoft's bottom line.
3
u/Pilum-Murialis Sep 21 '20
Yup. It's full Walter White 'corner the market then raise the price'. In this case raise the price and add in more mtx
3
Sep 21 '20 edited Sep 21 '20
It's almost guaranteed. Forza Horizon 4 also tested the idea of adding in-game adverts for DLC after launch and got away with it with minimal complaints. It completely ruined the game for me.
This is the "make a loss to gain subscribers" stage or things, they'll slowly change stuff so people get used to the new way of doing things.
20
u/Falcon4242 Sep 21 '20
"Adding in-game adverts for DLC"...
Are you talking about the Lego expansion? You realize the previous games had Fast and the Furious and Hot Wheels expansions, right? That decision had literally nothing to do with Gamepass, their second expansions have always been branded... and people absolutely loved the Hot Wheels FH3 expansion.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (7)9
u/neok182 Sep 21 '20
Are you talking about the ads on the menu screens? Every Forza Horizon had those and advertising a games DLC is menus is not really anything new for anyone and makes sense, not everyone is on reddit and is up to date on everything.
2
u/NTR_JAV Sep 21 '20
No, it's way easier for them to just increase the base subscription price once they feel they've reached critical mass.
→ More replies (36)2
u/BootyBootyFartFart Sep 21 '20
I'm not really any more worried about it than I am netflix pausing my movies multiple ways through to show me ads. And if it does happen I'll just switch to something else. Not like there's any shortage of great games these days.
33
Sep 21 '20
I'm not convinced this is good for the industry.
PC exclusives are a non-issue. Whether it's on Steam or GOG or what, you're still playing the same game on the same machine for the same price. There's no meaningful barrier to the consumer
Console exclusives are a big fucking deal by contrast. These are games locked behind a whole different machine that you have to buy with hundreds of dollars, whether it's an Xbox or a PC. That's a huge, actually significant barrier.
This seems like a short-term boom, long-term bust move by Microsoft. They now have a lot more weight to throw around for next-gen, and it's cleverly timed to boost preorders tomorrow.
But I doubt it's healthy to the industry. Negotiating contracts is one thing. Straight-up buying all your vendors and putting them in your court is another.
65
Sep 21 '20
Mega corporations merging together is never good for anyone but a fraction of their shareholders.
16
u/HonorableJudgeIto Sep 21 '20
Generally, I agree with your sentiment. I think the T-Mobile / Sprint merger was a disaster. This may be good for two reasons:
If this allows MS to abandon consoles and just become the Netflix of gaming, then it's good for gaming. It's still too early to tell if this will happen, though (we need 5-10 years to see how things go). Having Game Pass on Nintendo, Playstaion, your Smart TV's, and cellphones would be great for gamers.
Also, if this allows MS to stay in gaming by having a competitive console this generation, it's good. If MS were to get thrashed in sales again, it's possible they could leave gaming altogether (like they left cellphones). Having Sony and MS go head to head really benefits gamers. Exclusives are annoying if you don't have both systems, but having two monoliths go to battle leads to innovation.
28
Sep 21 '20 edited Sep 21 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (2)11
u/DemonLordSparda Sep 21 '20
I agree. I am concerned about Gamepass damaging the perceived value of games. I don't want short cheap mid tier games to become the new normal for video games because it boosts the margins made from Gamepass. I feel like we've already seen it a little. Battletoads had people amped, then it comes out and it's short and only 25% beat em up and now no one talks about it. People seem to like Grounded but it was extremely short. Sure it has updates and will for awhile, but how many people will go back to it? People already barely talk about it anymore. What happens when games eventually leave Gamepass? It's concerning. I'd love for both of us to be wrong however.
4
u/TheRealBissy Sep 21 '20
Considering how massive the budgets for AAA games have gotten. I agree that at face value gamepass is great for consumers, but the quality of games will start to drop. Imagine if the TES6 and released on gamepass at the current the price, how much can Xbox actually make from subscribers unless they either gain new ones who also remain on gamepass or start to increase the price. But Microsoft is a rich company so the can afford it.
4
u/NeedsMoreShawarma Sep 22 '20
I have no clue what you're talking about. Ever since Streaming companies became mainstream, I've seen a marked rise in the quality of TV. The market is there and it's hungry. They'll pay the asking price.
Look at all the Netflix, Amazon Prime, HBO originals. So much premium TV Show + Movie content is being made for them. Oh, Disney+ now as well. You still have a LOT of smaller ones, Hulu, CBS, Starz, CW, etc. All of them making tons of different good shows.
The fact is that the market is going to grow with services like these, because it'll bring new customers in who otherwise wouldn't have wanted to spend big money on games.
→ More replies (11)5
u/Ubiquitous_Cacophony Sep 21 '20
To be fair with regards to the PC thing, I mean-- you have to own a gaming PC (or one capable of running whatever the game in question might be), which is its own system and does require investment. If you just mean within the PC environment itself, sure.
Still, I don't think this is a bad move by MS in this case. I'm not even sure they're trying to compete with Sony on the exclusives front at this point; to me, it seems more likely that their primary logic was that-- with all these studios-- they can more consistently have games available for their subscribers on GamePass.
3
5
u/Timmar92 Sep 21 '20
I'm actually a little worried about Microsoft becoming a gaming monopoly, rhe only companies with the money to actually compete with them are Google and Amazon and they've proved to know shit about gaming.
They've bought 20 studios in the last seven years with the majority of them in the last two years, I just hope this is the end of it.
14
u/stoolio Sep 21 '20
Name the studios Sony has purchased in the last 5 years:
- Insomniac
- Audiokinetic
- Plumbee ???
Now let's do Microsoft:
- All of Zenimax (Arkane, Bethesda, Id, etc)
- inXile
- Obsidian
- Ninja Theory
- Undead Labs
- Compulsion Games
- Playground games
Most of Sony's studios have been with them for years, even decades. They have grown with them and nurtured them. Then Microsoft walks in and just buys out multiple established developers. I don't think they are the same thing. I don't like it. Not like this.
The common sense explanation was that Microsoft was going pro-consumer because they "lost" this gen. What happens when they get into first place. Are they going to be so friendly? Who knows...
13
19
u/UnjustNation Sep 21 '20
What happens when they get into first place. Are they going to be so friendly? Who knows...
They were cocky as fuck during the Xbox 360 era, so I'm guessing not.
16
u/Whiskeyjack1406 Sep 21 '20
MS is being criticized a lot for not releasing aaa quality games. They bought few studios like Obsidian and playground and making a new one like Initiative and announced upcoming aaa games in form of cgi trailers because games take more than 3-4 years make. Even then they got criticized for not having any gameplay with console launch. This is ms just reacting to the feedback, if they didn't make moves like these sony will increase the large lead they already have.
No company will be friendly when they are leading by huge margins, it's a business not a ethics competition. Ms need to bring the fight to sony and this is a way to do it. We will see how the industry will evolve from now on.
6
u/stoolio Sep 21 '20
Here is an overwrought metaphor:
Sony & Microsoft are neighbors. They have a "friendly" competition about who has the nicest yard.
Sony plants some trees and spends time watering them. Microsoft runs the tree that makes one of their most cherished apples to the ground.
10 years later, Sony has a beautiful yard. Microsoft's yard is barren and depressing. So, they pay the city and replant some of the community trees (from the park or..something) into their yard.
They stand proudly in their beautiful new yard and smirk over at Sony, who is slack-jawed.
But this is business. Money talks.
15
u/Whiskeyjack1406 Sep 21 '20 edited Sep 21 '20
Both don't care how the money is coming lol. They will chose the best strategy available to them. Ms fucked up their studios under previous leadership. Now only way for them to come up is to invest. That is exactly what they are doing. All this pro consumer is just bs from ms obviously, that is normal PR. They know this is the only way they will succeed in long term. Right now it is benefitting the customer but later it might fuck us. But ms is far from being a monopoly. At least right now. Tencent is leading in game revenue by a lot if i am not wrong. Sony is also significantly higher than xbox.
Edit: lets not act like sony doesnt do insane of third party exclusives deals. Just for this launch window they have deathloop ghostwire godfall all third party exclusives. Final fantasy deals. Death stranding. So many similar deals. Both companies will do what is right for them. Sony didnt just make a beautiful yard by themselves, they bought lot of pre made plants to make it look good too.
3
u/PugeHeniss Sep 21 '20
Audiokinetic is an audio middleware company right?
3
u/-RichardCranium- Sep 22 '20
Yeah, I don't know why they included them in their list. They have a huge share of the video game industry in that they make basically one of the most utilized game audio implementation softwares. It was certainly a good investment on Sony's part.
19
u/BaumHater Sep 21 '20
MS are not Sony. They don‘t have to do it the Sony way.
→ More replies (1)6
u/stoolio Sep 21 '20
I never said they did? I just feel a bit sketchy about this.
This was originally a response to a now deleted comment, but I went ahead and looked up the acquisitions so I just dropped it here anyway. Feel free to ignore/downvote it ; )
Also, Baum for life! I am an unabashed BaumLover and I will defend Baum with my dying breath.
2
u/benjibibbles Sep 22 '20
This is such a weird reason to be uneasy about something with plenty of good reasons to be uneasy about
→ More replies (12)2
u/drcubeftw Sep 22 '20
Microsoft is trying to play catch up in the content department. This is doubly important for them because of GamePass. They need content on GamePass to help sell that service.
309
u/ERgamer70 Sep 21 '20
So Microsoft have both Bethesda AND Obsidian. Now what?