I want to be optimistic about Perfect Dark too but until I see some actual gameplay, the stink of the development drama behind-the-scenes is going to be prominent. As well, we only know if the reason for the dev issues are based on what some insiders have said; none of it has been confirmed. Not that The Initiative or Microsoft would come right out and confirm any of it, but even something as simple as an early build leak showing a different game design, contrasted with a newer gameplay showcase for where the game is actually at now, would be more than enough.
With the advent of CD being purchased by Embracer Group, that might also have some effect on the development of Perfect Dark. We don't know if that'll happen, but the chance has increased.
I think it's pretty obvious what happened. Those who left thought they would have more say and control but didn't. I remember some wanting the game to be episodic and fuck no, that's not going to fly. Instead of there being so many cooks in the kitchen despite already having the chef, they left and Microsoft went and got Crystal Dynamics to develop the game. Gallagher also has a pretty damn good track record so im far more confident now than I was a year ago. I can see a short gameplay trailer at The Game Awards and if not, I would say June 2023 would be a safe bet. As for Embracer, they and CD have already stated that nothing changes. After the first game releases, who knows.
This is a problem for me, because one of the studios having these issues isn't just some random no-name studio with a no-name IP. It's a studio they founded as far back as 2007, on what has been Xbox's marquee IP. The fact that all these years later, 343i still have these issues (if anything, they have gotten worst) and Halo has gone from leading the FPS market to basically being an also-ran, doesn't instill a lot of confidence in me over the future of that studio or Halo Infinite. It also works against the prognosis for other MS teams outside of a very small handful.
With the ABK teams they have to radically change toxic workplace culture which won't be easy, but another problem with this line of thinking IMO is that if you have so many studios that you can afford for some to be mid or badly managed, then that is depriving other publishers the chance to make those studios great, if they were purchased. It also shows that in reality with so many teams, you cannot realistically invest in all of them to elevate them all to a greater level, so then it becomes a question of if the purchases were just for resources and IP, etc. And if that's the best reasoning for buying those studios or publishers...
I agree with 343 but Halo Infinite's core combat/gameplay is excellent. The base/foundation is there. They just need to get better organized and structured in order to release quality content in a timely fashion. Halo isn't what it once was and if anything, won't be the face of Xbox for much longer anyway if it still is.
I disagree in regards to depriving other publishers the chance to make these studios great. If other publishers wanted ABK so badly, then they should have outbid Microsoft which granted, isn't easy but not impossible either if you really want them. Like the saying goes, where there's a will, there's a way. The toxic culture will burn itself out once Microsoft takes over so no worries about that.
The ABK purchase was for King first and foremost. Everything else is just an amazing bonus. Can't say how any of it will play out as it's going to be a while before it gets completed.
Well, Asobo would want to be acquired before anything, but I agree they would be a good natural fit for Microsoft considering the close work they've had with Flight Sim, plus Asobo do quite well in a style of 3rd-person, narrative-driven action-adventure game that MS still kind of lacks in terms of proven studios of that type.
The whole situation with CD being acquired is, frankly, one Microsoft put themselves in because they were more interested in getting a "catch-all" giant publisher, and they've done that with ABK. Theoretically speaking ABK covers a lot of bases for Microsoft, and while I see some people saying they should buy Ubisoft or WB as well, I still don't know WHY they would want to. Game tech? They have enough of that between the Zenimax and ABK acquisitions. IP? Again, well more than enough good ones between Zenimax & ABK. Mobile? ABK through King has that covered.
Some people say they should go after WB for Netherrealm but if a studio like Playground can go from doing open-world arcade racers to 3rd-person open-world action-adventure fantasy, surely there is another studio MS already has that can transition to do fighting games. Maybe The Coalition? I say work with the resources you already have and HAVE had for a long time versus spending more and more to cover gaps in your output. If there's one final round of studios out there I feel would fit Microsoft, Asobo are in that list, and maybe a Japanese developer like Platinum (who maybe could also do something in terms of fighting games). I think that's where MS's future gaming acquisitions should focus, IMHO.
Agree with Asobo part.
The reason why Microsoft should go after Ubisoft and/or WB is simple - it's to prevent other companies from getting them. I don't want to see companies like Apple, Amazon, NetEase, Tencent and Facebook to get them because I have no interest or confidence in any of them whatsoever. I wouldn't mind Sony acquiring either but they don't have the capital or the cash on hand to do so. And even if they pulled it off, the problem is that they wouldn't have the money to keep all the employees especially Ubisoft which is around 20,000. Thousands would lose their job where as with Microsoft, they don't prevent you from leaving if you so choose but they won't fire/layoff anyone.
The ABK situation wasn't like ZeniMax which took two years to complete. It was simply one of those "too good of a deal to pass up" and business wise, I would have went after them too. As a gamer, ABK does nothing for me outside of Diablo IV but if I was a Microsoft executive, I would on them instantly. As for Crystal, I wouldn't be surprised if within the next decade, Microsoft acquires Embracer which to me, seems like Lars is adding as much value as possible and will then ride off into the sunset after a massive buyout. Could be someone else that acquires them but you can see their direction.
Microsoft should 100% get NetherRealm for three reasons. First, they own the MK IP which means it would be included. Second, they can't afford Sony to acquire NetherRealm or WB as a whole because it basically kills the fighting genre on Xbox. Add in the real possibility of Sony paying for SF 6 to be fully exclusive and yeah, Microsoft must acquire NetherRealm 100% if they want to retain any kind of fighting fan genre base that's on Xbox. Third, unlike all the other studios, fighting games is what they do plus expanding them to two teams to where Microsoft has MK and KI with an eventual MK vs KI game would be massive.
What a lot of people don't realize is that for generations, Sony has at times paid for full/timed exclusivity for top tier major games in certain genres which if you get every JRPG for example on PS, you don't need an Xbox so if MK was to go to Sony and you're a fighting fan, you don't need an Xbox for this particular reason. These types of deals kills the genre on the competition's platforms. This is one of the many reasons why Microsoft is going after studios and publishers. There's more important reasons but this is definitely one of them.
I don't see Microsoft acquiring Platinum Games whatsoever nor should they. They failed to meet deadlines for Scalebound numerous times and rumors have always had it where Platinum took the money for Scalebound and put it towards their other projects including Nier Automata which was a licensed game from Square Enix who are notoriously cheap when it comes to studios they don't or didn't own. So I don't see this happening whatsoever and would be shocked if it did.
While Microsoft could use a Japanese development studio or publisher, I think they're more likely to just "be close" with Sega and just ensure that they get all their future games day one on Xbox and if possible, on Game Pass.
But MS already have Ori, don't they? So that would cover the 2D AA platformer, also nothing would stop them from making a 2D AA Banjo-Kazooie spinoff as a test before doing, say, a 3D AAA Banjo-Threeie.
I don't think they needed to necessarily buy ABK outright just to have a studio to do a 3D platformer; simply entering a developer agreement with ToysWithBob (the way The Initiative have done with Crystal Dynamics) would've been enough. However regardless of that, like you say they do have a studio now for that type of game.
The fact MS passed on WB earlier being due to WB not wanting to sell the IP alongside the studios, kind of shows the intent behind MS's acquisitions. They're at least somewhat significantly driven by securement of IP for ownership.
MS owns the Ori IP but im not 100% sure. It could be the publishing rights. Honestly, I forget which it is but doesn't matter, it's highly unlikely that Microsoft is going to work with Moon Studios again and wouldn't give the IP to someone else. What Microsoft wants is to get studios/publisher that solve a gap/weakness in which those studios/publishers have expertise in doing. I do think this gets somewhat solved after the ABK acquisition gets completed but to see anything come out of it, is at least a few years away. Microsoft bought ABK because it's one of those "once in a lifetime opportunities" that you simply don't pass up.
Yes, Microsoft wants IP ownership which is brilliant and exactly what they should be after if they're buying a development studio or publisher. Look at last generation and even Xbox 360. They were burned several times by not owning the IP. If you're the company funding and publishing the game, you should 100% own the IP because if you don't, high chance you inadvertantly get screwed over. As for WB, they passed due to not getting any IP's but also because they were going to acquire ZeniMax which was and is far more valuable than WB especially without the IP's. Too much risk in acquiring WB without IP's.
I want WB (and Ubisoft) because I love a lot of their games as they cater to me compared to say ABK but business wise, it has to either make sense/fit in like almost every acquisition or be like ABK to where you just can't pass on it because it would be stupid to do so.
XBO generation went south because MS hamstrung the Xbox division in several ways. However at the start they actually did very well when it came to games; they had more AAA exclusives than Sony including big games like TitanFall. And a lot of those did not require studio acquisitions in order to bring them about.
You can have too much of a good thing and it ends up becoming a hinderance, though. Lack of a lot of internal studios wasn't the reason MS lost ground with XBO; lack of good management WITH those studios and Xbox division as a whole are the actual reasons.
I agree but look at the problems with not owning IP/studios. Titanfall 2/Respawn with EA, multi-platform. Microsoft wanted Ryse 2 but didn't own the IP or Crytek. While I do believe that Microsoft is going to rectify that based on the Crytek leak a while back, it hurt them. Same for Alan Wake, Quantum Break, Sunset Overdrive and more.
Xbox One was hamstrung by Mattrick at launch and then for about 4 years, Myerson. The real reasons why Microsoft lost ground with Xbox One was a shitty reveal of TV TV TV, an overpriced weaker console that had Kinect which no one wanted. After that, they literally only had 5 studios for the majority of the generation. 343/Turn 10/Coalition/Mojang all do up to now one franchise and that's it. Rare was a disaster for the most part but have a hit with Sea of Thieves.
But when you look at their exclusives, they have just as many exclusives from companies they don't own as those they did. You're not going to do anything with 5 studios and you're sure as hell not going to be able to rebound within the same generation with the issues I mentioned above.
I disagree in regards to having "too much" because there could end being studios that just don't hit and need to be closed down or whatever the case may be which is why you want as many as possible, if/when this happens, it won't matter in the grand scheme of things. Last gen, Microsoft shutdown Lionhead and I think one or two studios but I can't remember their names off the top of my head and it made their first party go from shit to shittier.
Simply, Microsoft isn't fucking around anymore and are finally doing what they should have been doing 20 years ago. It's also the simple fact that before an Apple, Amazon, Tencent, etc. start goobling up stuff, they need to do it first and as an Xbox fan, I definitely want them to do so because if the others end up with studios/publishers that im a fan of, they pretty much are dead to me because none of those companies have any history or track record in consoles and Apple having some shit 30 years was horrible and makes them look even worse than if you're coming into gaming with nothing like Google did who saw that you can't just enter and not do anything for your eco-system. Microsoft is simply making the business moves necessary not just for what they want to do but for Xbox fans because no Xbox fan wants to ever see a repeat of the Xbox One generation or at least, I don't.
I guess, but they can still cover those bases in a future acquisition, such as Asobo, or by being creative with current IP and studios in ways that don't require more acquisitions. For example, The Coalition are already pretty great at third-person, over-the-shoulder shooters, who's to say they could work with some people over at Ninja Theory or Obsidian to make something more story-driven in that same template. They could even use the Gabriel Knight IP for such a game.
That's what I mean by being creative with the resources & talent you already have. Seriously, they don't need yet more giant publisher acquisitions (at least not anytime soon) IMO to bring that new content to their fanbase.
I understand what you're saying but at the same time, games don't get made overnight and if you have the opportunity to get more, why wouldn't you? It's a buyers and sellers market right now. If you're looking to sell, no better time than now to do so. Also, one reason that people probably don't know about is in regards to banks and whatnot where Microsoft's money sitting in a bank is not giving them anything because of the world situation. Better off spending that money in order to make more money in the future based on acquisitions instead of letting money sit in the bad with minimal to interest accrued and getting nothing out of it.
Also, for the last decade or so, everyone said that Microsoft has no games, they have no studios, they have nothing. Spencer and Nadella im sure took that shit to heart and they simply are not going to allow this to happen again. Plus, the acquisitions isn't just for now, it's for generations into the future. Who knows how studios will be in 5/10/15+ years from now. Again, the more the better because even those that fuck up or this or that, it won't matter because you have so much other content that can easily make up for it.
Where as with Xbox One, they fucked up and had nothing to make up for those fuck ups. And like I said above, games don't get made overnight. Look at 2022. Nothing thus far. FM is probably September but take away Bethesda for example, there's no Starfield, no Deathloop port and there's no Redfall to strengthen the lineup and excluding Deathloop, nothing to strengthen the exclusive games lineup.
Everyone bashed Microsoft for only having Gears Tactics at launch and while Sony has had their empty gaps as well, Microsoft wants to get to where they can release an exclusive every quarter if not every two months. Plus, their focus is subscription and in order for a subscription to be successful, you need a shit ton of varied content and more importantly, exclusive content.
Again, IMO a lot of this could be had without making more acquisitions, at least for the foreseeable future. If MS really wants a superhero game, they already have teams that can deliver them, and can license the rights for a superhero or two in doing that. Maybe that means no WB, but even in that case they can still potentially work something out with Dark Horse (through Embracer Group) or Image Comics. Spawn has some history on Xbox, he was in the Xbox version of Soul Calibur 2, why not have one of the internal studios see if they'd want to make an epic Spawn action/adventure game with some RPG mechanics built in?
I don't think amount of time between releases is necessarily indicative of bad management. Take-Two haven't released a new mainline GTA in almost 10 years, or a new mainline installment in one of their marquee IP since 2018. Are they mismanaged? AFAIK, the last releases from WB Montreal and Rocksteady were well-received critically and most likely commercially, so I don't think those are ground to definitively say they've been mismanaged, either.
Yes, they can be done but exclusively? Not so much. Spencer isn't into timed exclusives which I personally hate and see as a waste of money for short term gain if that. It's also the simple fact that like I said in regards to Xbox One, if you don't own the IP and whatnot, you're basically screwing yourself in the long term.
The difference with Take Two/Rockstar and Rocksteady/WB Montreal is that GTA Online makes no much money that they don't need a new GTA for a decade or so. Where's the money, return of investment, profits, etc. from WB Montreal and Rocksteady? They haven't done shit. Arkham Knight had it's few months and then basically died. WB Montreal released Origins which was a failure and haven't done anything since.
Two completely different situations and also two very different results.
I don't think simply having the license to make a game on a massive superhero IP ensures that the game will be high-quality, otherwise we wouldn't have had a history of horrible licensed superhero games going back to the NES, where only a small handful of said games were any good, and that's over the span of decades. It just means more money is likely to be pumped into the game but money doesn't automatically equal talent, IMO.
That said I agree the brand power and name of those characters does a lot for building attention to your offerings and I've said in the past it's something Microsoft might need to work on so on those grounds I can see where them acquiring WB studios and IP makes sense, Batman is like the 2nd most popular superhero behind Spiderman for example.
However I just feel less enthusiastic on them making such a move after having already acquired Zenimax & ABK; I personally want to see some actual results from these studios (and some of the ones they acquired pre-Zenimax), results reflective of those gaming being clearly under Microsoft's wings, before claiming I'm okay at a personal level with them buying another massive publisher like WB or Ubisoft. And since I'm looking at this from my POV as a gamer and customer, what such an acquisition does for MS's bottom line doesn't actually matter to me.
I agree with the first part but it doesn't hurt to have more. More is always better than less. It just is.
I understand wanting to see results but as stated above, games don't get done overnight and if Microsoft is committed to highly reducing crunch if not completely eliminating it, that means games will take longer to make and release which in turn, means that you need as many studios and whatnot as possible in order to have a steady stream of solid varied content releasing for your platform and eco-system. If you don't then there will be people that get turned off and leave the eco-system.
I look at acquisitions first and foremost for what it does for me personally because it's my time and money. The more Microsoft buys, the less I have to buy which is already a massive positive. The more games and content I get for less money is even better.
I look at it like this. Microsoft wants to give their fanbase more for less money where as Sony wants to give it's fanbase less for more money. I own a PS5 and love Sony's exclusives for the most part but in all honesty, they leave a lot to be desired. One is simply giving me much more value for my money and time while also saving me a lot of money which in turn allows me to re-invest it into their eco-system so they basically have me and the more studios/publishers they buy, the more greater the chance they keep me.
GotG isn't the best example considering it came to GP primarily to gin up excitement after really bad sales. Also MS paid pretty cheap for it on GP, due to the bad sales, so it's arguable that if GotG sold very well it would've costed too much for GP hence MS would not have paid to put it on the service.
GOTG is said to have sold 4m copies which isn't bad considering it's SE and Avengers was a flop. But true, not the best example I could use.
I get your general idea, I just think there are other ways this can be done currently by MS which don't involve rushing into more massive gaming acquisitions.
The only rush was ABK because it's one of those "holy shit, they're available" that you can't pass up. ZeniMax took two years. The studios they acquired took at least several months to complete. There's other ways, sure but is it beneficial to Microsoft? Is it beneficial to me as an Xbox gamer this generation? Going the Sony route for example where they pay for FF16 for a year is not something I want Microsoft to do. I want their timed exclusivity to be dead honestly because there's no long term gain whatsoever from it. Do I want third party multi-platform games day one on Game Pass? Absolutely. Why wouldn't I? And again, it's all about not repeating Xbox One where they release an exclusive but own the IP and the entire thing goes to someone else or you get any long term benefit from it.
Always better to bring studios/games/publishers/whatever in hours because you then control it's destiny as opposed to depending on someone/something else hoping it goes their (Microsoft) way.
So I mean, right here you're saying The Initiative is a failure, which in some ways they seem to be IMO, and that was a studio they built from the ground-up in 2018. So if they can't get that right, if that studio has to turn to a 3P developer for co-development purposes (let's just assume that is why and it was due to internal issues; even though there's been another idea floated around there isn't much to support it), how does that instill confidence in a scenario where MS acquires CD, who already have their own work culture and style?
Because in that instance CD would fall under the watch of XGS/Matt Booty and it's really that side of things where most of the organizational and management issues with Xbox teams seem to be coming from. The Initiative, Playground games (potentially, if the Fable stuff is anything to go by), 343i, Rare (with Everwild) etc. The Zenimax side doesn't really have these issues because Pete Hines is running that, and while ABK has a mountain of their own problems they'll fall under someone else yet still. So the only way CD would potentially avoid a similar fate is if they went under Zenimax, how realistic would that have turned out to be the case?
The problem with The Initiative was there there were too many people with egos who thought Perfect Dark should be their way. Gallagher siad fuck no, they left and instead of taking years to hire/staff the studio, Gallagher/Microsoft went to a studio and people he knows and trusts which in turn allows Microsoft to trust them or at least the opportunity to prove themselves. The proble was the peopl at The Initiative thinking who they were, wanting control, Gallagher refusing ideas repeatedly like the episodic (smh) rumor and saying, fuck it, enough is enough.
Imagine if those people were still there. Nothing at all would be getting done. Instead, Gallagher saw problems and said fuck this shit, im going to try to bring in people I know and have worked with in which he obviously has chemistry with and knows their work habits and whatnot. After all, it was Gallagher that rebooted TR for CD in 2013. Makes perfect sense to me because of who the studio head is and the studio that's now working on the game.
It instill confidence because I have far more confidence in a veteran like Gallagher who was at CD and knows everyone as opposed to him fighting with those who were there and wanted the game their way despite being told no repeatedly.
Even if you take 343/Rare/Playground (Fable)/Undead Labs/The Initiative as negatives, you still have Mojang/Obsidian/InXile/Turn 10/Playground (Forza Horizon team is not the same team working on Fable, there's two studios, two separate teams), Compulsion/The Coalition/Global Publishing/Ninja Theory/Double Fine as positives which by my count is 10 to 5 which means twice as many studios aren't having issues compared to the five that are.
Reason why I wouldn't see CD as having a bad fate is two fold. First, getting away from SE already makes them better by far and second, Gallagher would basically be the studio head which he was years ago so I wouldn't see any issues here at all. If Gallagher wasn't here or was to leave, then okay but since that's not what it is now, I wouldn't have any worries with CD under Microsoft with Gallagher as the studio head.
.
)
