Saw a mention about it, looked up and found this. Their catalogue iirc is pretty overarching on both platforms and titles, and while I'd imagine Microsoft would absorb the titles similar to how Capcom did with Clover Studios, I'd also expect them to remove the titles on platforms they're not keen on releasing, like GOG and Sony's consoles. As per the article, Microsoft and the studio are still on the agreements phase, so risk might not be too high immediately. But worth keeping an eye for, I'd say.

no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
26 comments in c/games@lemmy.world view that post
[–] 33 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I didn't like the way that Phil Spencer was running the company: trying to maximize profits by funding microtransaction titles and features up the wazoo.

I really really really don't like the way Asha Sharma is running the company: trying to maximize profits by cutting off all the less profitable titles and consolidating all their titles under one roof.

These chucklefucks go to school for like four to eight years to learn business and then go into a field like videogames/software and they learn zero fucking lessons from companies who made all the same mistakes in the past. EA did this shit and eventually went so far down the drain that they sold the company off to a foreign prince.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 month ago

    These people don't learn from their mistakes because in their minds, they didn't make any. They just see this as the natural course of business as they ruin one company after the next.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago

    I read a good article a while back about how Microsoft needs to choose whether there are console maker or a game publisher. As a company, you can't succeed at both because fundamentally those two approaches are at odds with each other. Consoles need exclusives. But game publishers need maximum exposure, which comes from NOT being exclusive.

    FWIW, I don't think Sharma understands this.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 month ago

    This industry is so fucked.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 month ago

    A shame. I liked Enslaved, loved DmC, and really liked Hellblade. They made quite a big thing at the time they were making Hellblade about wanting to be 'double A' publishers - making highly polished indie games on a sensible budget, basically. And then they sold out to Microsoft, which has screwed them over - all those publishers needing to make a non-stop stream of big budget megahits or they'll be hung out to dry.

    Consolations to all affected. It has been an absolute bloodbath in games development recently.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    With this and Halo Studios being shuttered and handing over Halo to Activision, every developer should know to avoid Microsoft at all costs

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago* (2 children)

    I don't understand why any company would sell out to Microsoft. MS's modus operandi since its inception has been to stifle competition by buying everything up and gutting it. It's a death sentence.

    Is it for a big personal pay out and the team can all go elsewhere with a fat check once the axe drops?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    That's what I assume - like if your studio is going under anyway and MS is the only one to make an offer, you might be able to keep the place running for another year of so, give everyone a buffer and maybe finish whatever you were working on. I would figure it's not a long-term strategy though, more just slowing the collapse.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 1 month ago (13 children)

    Lesson 1: You can do a strange game if you want, it will be acclaimed if done without obvious bugs. But you won't get much money from that. Especially when you're under the corporate boot and should give away most of the income anyway.

    Lesson 2: You can't skip lesson 1, make ANOTHER strange game and expect to stay in business.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 month ago (10 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    Because the 1997 games market is EXACTLY THE SAME as the 2026 market.

    Duh.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    Myst had classical "adventure" gameplay. Slightly different UI and rather crazy plot, but under the hood it was just an adventure game with puzzles. Hellblade 1-2 was a walking simulator without even a cool plot. The only "killer feature" was the face animation of the main personage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 14 points 1 month ago*

    Hellblade 1-2 was a walking simulator without even a cool plot.

    I haven't played 2 yet, but gonna have to defend 1 here... I thought the plot, while not mind-blowingly good, was both engaging and good. In fact I'd say it carried the game more than the gameplay.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    I thought it was interesting enough of a premise that I played the first game. The audio design was top notch, especially the voices in her head of course. But the plot went absolutely nowhere, and it doesn't have anything to say about psychosis or the causes and consequences of it. And the combat is bad. The game is mostly walking through linear levels with occasional graphical stuttering, occasional pressing of square to fight, and very basic puzzles. There was no world where I would have played the second game unless it reviewed differently.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    What does it say about the game, that you need to recommend supplemental material so one can get this supposed message?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    You know people can disagree with you without being intentionally obtuse, right?

    At the bare minimum people can actually be obtuse, and that would not be their choice, unlike yours to be condescending and unlikeable, thereby also making people less likely to agree with you regardless of how right you think you are.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

    You gonna also comment on how mind-numbingly pedestrian the combat was? The uninspired puzzles? Or did you just watch the game on YouTube?

    Like, I'm glad the game changed your life, but we're here to discuss video games and you're surprised someone called a glorified walking simulator boring?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Except the problem was that’s exactly what they were told to do and told they were supported to do by Microsoft. Spencer told them to go make another expensive weird game because he thought the broadening would enhance Gamepass etc. he was wrong, and was replaced, but it still wasn’t ’their fault’.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Time to bust out the trump card. Heavenly Sword 2.

  • source