My top 4 games by playtime in the last few years were Rimworld, Oxygen Not Included, Dwarf Fortress and WoW Classic. Honorable mentions go to Spelunky and Stellaris. It's to everyone's great regret that a single one of these titles was purchased by one of the shitty publishers you mentioned, fortunately it's the one that's on its last legs.
There seems to be an overall issue now where the quality of the good produced and the benefit to the consumer is divorced from the value extracted by the producer.
For instance, you can make a mobile game company that aggressively monetizes re-hashed bubble-poppers or match three games. With that, you focus not on innovation of pleasing the customer but on making the most money per customer so that you can feed it back into your marketing. The most exploitative game wins.
This is a more profitable strategy than simply trying to make a fun game that people want to play.
With most consumer markets, we find similar stories of customer exploitation being a better play than simply making a great product. This is not as much the case in B2B.
How do we reign back in the markets? It doesn't seem like consumer choice is working out very well.
Maybe marketing is at the core of all of this malignment.
For these big conglomerates, the trendy thing is to have your own games store. Complete with exclusivity deals, privacy concerns, and plenty more.
That's not to say that every game on a store has these issues. However, I think the lesson from mobile app stores is: don't discount the impact that a storefront can have on what's allowed to succeed. Stores can exert their control with more than just removals.
Indies can't escape this. Even if they wanted to sell their game independently, not being on one of the big stores hurts visibility. Not all of them get the luxury to be able to expect their users to follow them to their own site/store/etc.
Right now, Steam is still the leader and obvious home for a lot of these otherwise-independent developers. Again, if the big conglomerates get what they want, this won't always be the case.
But granted, the indie game market (and mid-sized publishers like Paradox) are super important right now to fight against the AAA / massive budget game devs and publishers.
Mind you, ID has been a bit of an underdog for a long while; their games are / were good, but did not become crazy big like their EA / Activision counterparts; the 2009 Wolfenstein sold poorly ("only" 100K units in the first month); The New Order, its sequel, did a lot better (400K sold in about a month and a half), and Doom 2016 was a hit.
Small team makes innovative and interesting game. Gets bought, makes a good sequel, then milks IP forever.
It's up to you to move on.
Instead, I prefer realistic-looking graphics, with moving trees and clouds. I've more often than not spent too much money on new AAA just to look at the graphics and barely play. Unfortunately, games with AAA-graphics with a good story and great original gameplay (no sequels!) seem to get rarer, and the disappearance of independent top-notch game studios could be a reason for that.
I've loved a lot of Devolver's stuff. The Red String Club, Hotline Miami I/II, Katana ZERO .. all super incredible games with gameplay and story that's just as fun as the any of the big AAA shops.
Brilliantly put.
All fantastic games better than most major studio titles.
I had a similar experience with Cosmoteer. And the darn thing is not even released yet! :)
Plenty of games out there, no reason to keep buying the same 3d-action RPG formula from the AAA-studios unless that's a thing you like.
It's a garbage money grab.
The idea that there is a huge nostalgia fueled demand for the original experience doesn't absolve a multi-billion dollar developer from a complete lack of support or quality of life improvements to the game.
There is just too much overlap with the fact that they can literally re-release a game with practically zero development costs.
I worked there for 6-7 years and the CEO fought off vivendis acquisition. Which was not the first.
He has even gone so far as to decentralise the Canadian studios so that if the company was somehow acquired the aquirer could not close down studios without heavy fines from the Canadian government.
Tangentially, open-source game engine Godot keeps getting better and better, and it's just a matter of time before a significant game is made using its tools: https://godotengine.org/
It is also the tier1 engine sponsored by Google and Microsoft for their 3D offerings, Godot needs to grow a bit more to reach that level of relevance for game studios, AR/VR companies and Hollywood now looking at Unity.
IMO Bethesda decided to sell to MS because their recent games cannot generate enough popularity. They can only hoped for skyrim and are struggling with their old engine.
Truly mystifying why they'd want to create an MMO. It's as if they hadn't been following the news. The success of WoW is incredibly hard to repeat, and most studios who try fail, no matter how much money they throw at it.
The MMO space has been, WoW aside, a money bonfire for one and a half decade at this point.
In May 2016, 5 years after Skyrim was released, it was valued at $2.5 billion, now it's being bought 4 years later for $7.5 billion.
I appreciate some Bethesda fans have a weird agenda, but you are wrong. Also, Starfield has been written in an overhauled engine, so again, wrong[1]. Although to be honest, it's probably the same engine with updates and they're just saying that to try and stop the small minority of rabid fans that keep on harping about their imagined deficiencies of the creation engine with every new Bethesda game. That's then always a massive hit.
[1]https://bethesda.net/en/article/4IwKWIj174Cb2QNTTtBAEb/todd-... - paragraph 9 "[The new console cycle has] led to our largest engine overhaul since Oblivion, with all new technologies powering our first new IP in 25 years, Starfield"
I wouldn't be so sure. Sure, they are not GTA or CoD, but Prey, Dishonored or Doom have all sold rather good.
The hardware-is-sold-at-a-loss argument that people like to use to defend closed console stores isn't as convincing when the console makers also own the biggest money making game studios as well.
Go Epic, go!
Kind of ironic how bad an argument that is when discussing anti-trust. It's a form of dumping to distort the market. It prevents new competitors becoming viable purely by selling hardware.
I would love the game industry to fully embrace Linux. If cloud gaming gains more traction, the industry might just do that. Why develop games to run on custom-built blades in a data center when generic blades exist?
We may get to a point where there are practically no "medium-large" developers and only "massive" ones like Microsoft, but I'm confident we'll still get great games from outside the massive groups.
They had only $4.3 billion cash on hand as of 2018 (surely more by now thanks to the success and maturation of the Switch.) But Microsoft just dropped a little less than double that on ZeniMax.
I wish Nintendo were in such a rock-solid place where I'd feel confident about them existing forever like Disney but I don't think that's ever been the case.
Edit- The people downvoting me have apparently already forgotten about the Wii U. Imagine if they had two such systems in a row, without the DS/3DS line as a profitable fallback. Such are the possibilities of the future.
When Nintendo's doing well, they're doing great, and everyone seems to forget the bad times. The GameCube era wasn't much better, but at least the GameCube and GBA were profitable/break even from their launches, as opposed to the Wii U and especially 3DS post-Ambassador price cut.
Would be interested in a discussion or any kind of rebuttal from others who are actually familiar with Nintendo's financial history.
To be clear: Nintendo as a company operated a loss from 2012-2015. An incompetent CEO could easily exacerbate that into a death spiral. Don't take Nintendo for granted, is all I'm saying.
I feel Apple Arcade sucks. I recently subscribed, cause I thought maybe my daughter would enjoy it. But most of the games are still too hard for her. So then I tried to play some games on Arcade for myself, but can't say I enjoyed it. Played a few games for 15 - 30 minutes then got bored. There just seems to be very few -if any- really quality games on Apple Arcade, at least from my point of view.
A few days ago I ordered the Retroid Pocket 2 [0], I hope this device will help me get my gaming fix.
If the Retroid Pocket 2 provides me and my daughter with a fun experience, then later I'll order a 2nd one for my daughter. I believe old NES/SNES games are probably easier to play for a 3.5 year old child compared to most of Apple Arcade's offerings. My daughter can already handle a simple gamepad, so as long as the game doesn't use too many buttons (4 directions + A/B/X/Y), a game should be playable for her.
---
[0]: https://www.goretroid.com/products/retroid-pocket-2-handheld...
> Valve will quietly exit software development altogether, and pivot to building custom vanity knives using their hardware manufacturing experience.
At least indoe games still have a chance. (among us for example)
Miss Ukraine 1996 married Bobby Kotick's dad, Charles Kotick (for 2 years, before he passed away).
And, you know, all the other independent developers. Of which there are a legion.
> Great! I think Microsoft has been a good parent company for gaming IPs, and they don’t have a grudge against me, so maybe I will be able to re engage with some of my old titles.
https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1308069857913720832...
I didn't buy DOOM because I didn't support Zenimax's cynical lawsuit/cash grab. Maybe now I'll get DOOM after the Microsoft acquisition closes.
Wow, that's now a decade ago.
Well I was just thinking the other day that Microsoft really doesn't have any first party studio that are really as good as Sony's first party. IMO they didn't release a game 'this' gen that makes picking up a xbox one worth it. This could change that with fallout and doom. Also this allows them to bring the ID tech engine under their stewardship....
I just hope that they don't trash the franchises in an attempt to bolster game pass.
If you just want another single player Fallout game, this game is a steal and has no monetization problem. What I can't do is build up a camp using a lot of different trinkets from the store, but luckily I don't care about that.
I've played Forza Horizon 4 for a while and you can buy cars in that game, but you earn enough points that they all become pretty cheap after only a few hours in the game.
"WHEN THE HELL WILL YOU TELL ME ABOUT STARFIELD?" and the rest of that paragraph actually fills me with a pretty high degree of confidence that this will go well. That, and Nadella-era Microsoft's surprisingly good track record in recent acquisitions.
It doesn't have to be id tech, but can they make Todd Howard use some other engine than whatever Gamebryo monstrosity Bethesda Softworks been using for 20 years?
What we could see now is these games coming to Game Pass early, or even getting Xbox exclusive content. Theres a low chance they dont drop on other platforms (Skyrim on your Windows phone?) but still a big chip for MSFT to have on hand.
I'm surprised that isnt more commented on here. Everyone is focused on creative IP. Owning id Tech 6 is or should be a play against Epic, Unity, Crytek etc. 1-4 were open source, and ZeniMax clamped down 5-6. I can see Microsoft marketing id Tech's long open source history, and transforming it into an Amazon Lumberyard competitor.
Xbox 360 -> Xbox One S -> Xbox One X
But, looking at the different showcases. Definitely getting a PS5 this time. I don't do many multi-player games and actually enjoy story based single player games. Looking forward to play God of War, Unchartered, Spider Man, etc.
Maybe this will give Microsoft the boost they need to make some fun next gen games.
Can you play Halo on the PlayStation? No, for the same reason you can’t play Uncharted on the Xbox.
Microsoft will happily support Windows gaming, for obvious reasons. But the PlayStation for a franchise like Fallout or Elder Scrolls?
I will believe it when I see it. It makes little strategic sense to offer those titles on Sony hardware when Microsoft have their own console.
That said, I don't know if this is necessarily a good thing either. Strictly as a video game publisher, Microsoft has been doing pretty well for themselves over the last five years. They've definitely stood out as one of the more consumer-friendly publishers, but the market is full of notoriously bad publishers (Bethesda included) so being one of the better ones isn't very praiseworthy.
Microsoft also has their own jaded publishing history which includes some pretty bad moves at the end of the 360 generation and beginning of the Xbox One generation. The Kinect was a very high-profile failure. The original Xbox One was met with a strong backlash for lacking support for physical media. They played a significant role in the integration of "microtransactions" into full priced video games. Although they have done many great things over the last few years, I'm still weary of them as a publisher.
I think the jury is still out on whether this is a net positive for the video game market, but it will definitely make the upcoming console generation very interesting.
I mean Minecraft started off like that. Terraria is following behind it. Among Us, a $4 game on Steam released in 2018, suddenly became a meme and huge out of nowhere. Fall Guys, made by a small studio that mainly did web, Flash, Facebook and mobile games for most of their existence, came out of left field and created the top game of last month, which (if played right) is an instant brand because of their simple yet infinitely customizable cute characters.
There is still real competition because the big publishers cannot stop the small developers.
>Like our original partnership, this one is about more than one system or one screen. We share a deep belief in the fundamental power of games, in their ability to connect, empower, and bring joy. And a belief we should bring that to everyone - regardless of who you are, where you live, or what you play on. Regardless of the screen size, the controller, or your ability to even use one.
https://bethesda.net/en/article/4IwKWIj174Cb2QNTTtBAEb/todd-...
https://www.roadtovr.com/oculus-guarantee-promise-facebook-l...
Would a platform agnostic game only available on the Xbox online store count as "exclusive to xbox?" What if it required an Xbox Live/GamePass subscription for significant features - but not everything? Or they introduced super-skewed pricing ($100 for ES6 w/ no sales vs. included with GamePass)?
My concern isn't that this won't be true (at the very least, they release everything for Xbox on PC anyway), it's that the platform will evolve so much that console lock-in won't matter, so the promise will elide the real concern.
Microsoft has decided that all their exclusives will also come to PC anyway. So Windows, Xbox consoles and Xcloud (streaming service) are a given.
This doesn't promise in any way that games will come to PlayStation.
> Quality differentiated content is the engine behind the growth and value of Xbox Game Pass—from Minecraft to Flight Simulator.
"Differentiated content" sounds to me like exclusives.
As a Playstation gamer, anything Todd Howard related can stay on Xbox for all I care. What I will potentially miss are games like Wolfenstein and Doom.
Specifically:
> Regardless of the screen size, the controller, or your ability to even use one.
"your ability to even use one" is clearly a reference to Xbox Adaptive Controller
In other news, the only 3D API that matters now for gaming is DirectX. Which was kinda always the case, except now OpenGL and VK fanboys can't go "but... idTech!"
The biggest problem that Microsoft has with the Xbox is lack of AAA exclusives. If the next Elder Scrolls game is going to be released for Xbox and PS5 - what's the point of this exercise?
eh, I read this as games will still come out on PC and probably the odd token Nintendo switch release here and there.
I doubt there will be PS5 releases of Bethedsa games.
released a bunch of very successful games as xbox exclusives.
7 years later Bungie left microsoft as its own company again. (not sure how that happened.
My guess is Microsoft got to keep what it really wanted, the Halo brand.
Gigaconglomerates Tencent, Activision Blizzard Ubisoft (ABU), Microsoft and Apple gatekeep the entire gaming industry.
Rebel guerilla groups of small publishers and indie developers rise up to take control of their encampments.
And let's not forget 2K, 505 Games, Chucklefish, Bandai Namco, Capcom, Deep Silver, Devolver Digital, EA, Epic Games, Focus Home, Gearbox, Koei Tecmo, Paradox, Sega, Stardock, Square Enix, Take-Two, Team17, THQ Nordic, Valve, Warner Bros, and hundreds of other publishers that I can't even begin to list here.
2040 is definitely too soon for the dystopian future you're talking about. Maybe 2042.
Once we have cheap, ubiquitous VR, all we're missing is Kouriers, skateboards with those cool wheels and a cult based on a dead language.
Excellent game that is actually on GamePass right now. Microsoft has actually been really great to smaller/indie games with GamePass.
Pros: 1. Solid Writing: I found the story to be interesting and engaging. There's great ambient world building via notes you find and the main story is fairly interesting with lots of branching paths. 2. Flexible playstyles: they really committed themselves to allowing you to play how you want to. There are the standard melee and ranged playstyles, but stealth and speed are also completely viable for the entire game as well. 3. Combat: Combat is actually pretty good. They replaced VATS with a time dilation mechanic that is basically bullet time/slowmo. I played a ranged character so it felt cool to slow down time and get headshots, etc. Maybe it feels less good with melee characters, I don't know.
Cons: 1. Limited loot: This was a big dissapointment. There were only 2-3 weapons per category, plus a few special weapons thrown in. I felt like I basically had 2 guns for the entire game, which was a bit of a let down. It was disappointing to get the same generic gun again and again from enemies, especially compared to the huge variety of guns in NV. 2. Less exciting progression: They changed the perk system to be much simpler and there are many fewer perks to choose from. Around the mid game I basically had selected all the good perks and felt like there was no point in selecting new ones. You also get perks from leveling up skills but I found that those weren't well balanced and frequently the first tier of perk unlocks were way better than the later tiers, which didn't incentivize much specialization. 3. Setting: This one definitely comes down to personal preference but I was not a big fan of the aesthetic. They swapped 1950s nuclear age with 1920s art deco. Some of the environments and costumes look cool, but generally I found it to be less compelling and exciting than Fallout. This is arguably an unfair comparison because they had a big body of existing Fallout lore to build on for NV but IMO it's a much weaker universe - I can't see it being as interesting even after they make a few games in this setting.
The maps and environments looked good but were pretty generic in terms of layout and variety.
I don't regret buying it (on sale), but I haven't picked up the DLC, and probably won't.. I had my fill with the base game.
(1) Microsoft is trying to expand their gaming division, but struggle with first-party games. This acquisition is an acknowledgement that MSFT needs Bethesda creatives.
(2) Microsoft's big strategy right now is to build their Xbox ecosystem - they're pushing GamePass, Xcloud, etc. heavily, and trying to become Netflix for games.
I'd guess they're basically buying Bethesda's key franchises to drive GamePass subs. They'll build them quick, lock you in with a $10/month sub, and let Bethesda slowly merge with the mothership.
Short term, I'm excited because I want these new games! Long term, I fully expect Bethesda to get hollowed out.
It's probably the gym membership model. Developers get money for actual time played. The market of users that just play from time to time and don't really care about the 10$s is probably substantial.
I fall into this category. I only really get an urge to play every few months. And unless there is some specific game I'm interested in, I just pick something from the Gamepass catalogue, which is already pretty substantial. (it has/had great games like RDR2, GTAV, Witcher 3, Subnautica, No Mans Sky, ...)
While cancelling the subscription and then re-subscribing when needed is actually pretty smooth (re-subscribing takes just 2 button presses), I don't care enough to do it.
And all the "idle" revenue probably allows Microsoft to play decent rates to publishers, so they actually incentivized enough to put their games on the service.
Say that the system has a current-gen lifespan of 5 years and users run their subscription throughout the duration of the service, that's $600 per user assuming no price increases. I don't game nearly as much as I used to, so that would cost me way more than I've spent the last several years on games.
The shitty thing about a model like this is that I can't just power the system on after 6 months and just play without turning the subscription back on.
2 - Netflix is around the same price - a big enough market smooths it out.
3 - The press release defines their market as 3B people. I wouldn't be surprised at all if their internal business cases target 1B+ people.
The thing that is missing are the huge AAA games, but I honestly can't see most of those coming to Game Pass. They may come but like 1-2 years after initial release.
Minus like the Forza and Halo series, most of the MS owned studios developing games are fairly shorter in length. Don't take that the wrong way though, even though they are shorter some are real gems. Just don't expect to play every game on there for 20+ hours or anything.
Plus, GamePass locks you in like consoles once did. That stickiness in recurring revenue is hugely valuable in itself, and because it has a network effect (this was basically the reason for the ongoing console wars).
Combine that with cloud gaming, and the lock-in and UX just gets better.
Their main barrier is good content. Thus the splashy buy.
Well done Microsoft and Bethesda.
TikTok is a fad, like Instagram and other social networks.
You should look at the rumoured purchase price that Microsoft was willing to pay for TikTok.
> Now all restaurants are Taco Bell. Taco Bell was the only restaurant to survive the franchise wars.
Out of all the dystopian sci-fi movies, who would have thought Demolition Man would have it right?
Or was it Pizza Hut?[1]
The modding will no longer be able to truly edit the engine itself through some reverse engineering and be forced to utilize the APl/scripting framework. Third-party tools will be locked out. Obviously this has happened already on the console platform. There's still the PC platform but that could be locked down further as well.
Think about the time and fostered talent that it took to make some of the communities amazing tools. For example script extenders for elder scrolls series. As mods are now centralized in official 'the store' the community grow around which will never allow mods like the script extender for developers to make advanced innovative mods. Even if other modding communities like the Nexus allow for that It's going to continue to fragment the community and the talent which is foster within the community. Then you throw paid mods into the picture... Thus begins the death of the open source pillar in modding.
Vladimir Lenin, 1915.
I've historically preferred PS exclusives (Uncharted, Spiderman, God of War, Horizon Zero Dawn), and the cross platform stuff, was a little worse than Xbox in the PS3 days, and a little better in the PS4 days (at least prior to XoX). Speaking as a biased PS4 owner, I'm happy with current layout of PS exclusives and cross platform stuff. Each new announcement like this sucks. I like DOOM and Dishonored. I liked being able to get them on PS4 and expected to get them on PS5. I don't think this will make me get an Xbox, but it sucks I'll likely be missing out on these games. I suppose what Microsoft hopes is that people like me get a PS5 and a cheaper Xbox Series S with Gamepass.
I love that the Nintendo Switch exists. It's completely different, and doesn't really compete with Playstation/Xbox. As a gamer, it makes sense to purchase a Nintendo Switch and one of either the Playstation/Xbox. I wish Xbox/Playstation differentiated somehow. I suppose Microsoft tried to do that with Kinect, but failed/gave up.
With that context laid out that I am a big-time PS user, looking at the XBOX game pass subscription model where you get the console for free is REALLY tempting.
In every market I've looked at, there is a deal that works out to about $30 a month for two years. They give you the console, instant access to hundreds of really good games, day one access to all microsoft first-party games included in the price, many new release games from other publishers (for example EA ACCESS titles). Free monthly titles on PC.
AND all of that is actually CHEAPER than buying the console with the two years of subscription.
Plus the XBOX is going to have a number of new features related to second-screen-game-streaming that are also really exciting.
I'm really torn here right now. I might move away from playstation for this next generation - the XBOX is looking like it is going to be a big deal this time round.
OTOH - I really want to play the Miles Morales spider-man ... so there are arguments on both sides. To say nothing of the third option involving an Nvidia RTX3080...
I honestly don't know what I'm going to do yet.
That always drove me nuts. Controller design hasn't changed that much since the mid 2000's.. there's zero reason for breaking backwards compatibility other than to sell you more hardware.
i know i'm more likely to subscribe to gamepass (and keep it running for years) vs. the 1/2 games i buy a year.
I feel like actual AAA gaming has never been more accessible than it is now.
I've only ever owned iPhone smartphones, but unless Apple changes their approach to game streaming services like xCloud or Stadia, I won't continue to be a customer.
Aren't consumers just going to buy what they want anyway? Plus the Sony world just has so many more games worth playing
That's the model Microsoft are going for with Game Pass, just pay us a fixed monthly fee and play any of the hundreds of games we have available on Android/PC/XBox.
With gamepass being on pc, xbox and cloud they could potentially capture a substantial part of that market and even expand it due to the low barrier of entry of xcloud or their rent to own scheme. They have 15 million subscribers now which is about 2 billion in revenue depending on the composition of their subscribers. They grew 50% in just 6 months. The potential for gamepass is therefore vast compared to traditional boxed products. If they capture 50% of the current market, thats 20 billion. That would be similar to netflix in size.
Microsoft's endgame is to increase the subscribers to its GamePass subscription so akin to Netflix's insatiable appetite for video content, Microsoft's will be for video games. But since IP development for games is expensive, time-consuming and hard to break into, it's arguably easier to acquire game studios entirely.
The impact is so wide-ranging: what becomes of Google Stadia and Nvidia GeForce Now? Same goes for Sony and Nintendo. The most interesting one could be Apple, who clearly does not want game streaming to be the norm.
Local processing power is also not standing still in time, the capability a given price purchases is increasing year upon year. Do you imagine a future where people have limitless bandwidth, with low latency, and only use incapable thin clients?
So while the inevitable trajectory of AAA gaming is consolidation, we are still seeing more and more indie developers break out and succeed at a larger scale, and there's no reason why that phenomenon shouldn't continue (or even grow).
Does anyone have better data?
Pre-MS Rare was my personal golden age of gaming. I don't really play anymore, but man do I think fondly on those days.
> Kinect Sports Rivals
Great game
> Sea of Thieves
Another great title
Also those games while not considered 'bad' weren't exactly considered system sellers.
Perfect Dark Zero in 2005 was probably the last title in either of those veins, which was a launch title for the 360 (soon to be 2 consoles ago!)
Sea of Thieves is certainly a feather in their cap, it's just a bit disappointing that we haven't been able to see Rare take a modern crack at the things they were so known for, if that's even possible now.
Also, if MS just wants development studios and IPs, I imagine a lot of the publishing arm of the company will be redundant. I wonder what MS intends to do about the publishing staff.
ESO is by ZeniMax Online Studios and FO76 is by a separate studio inside Bethesda Game Studios. Nothing to do with the team that works on mainline TES and FO games.
> Speaking to bit-tech for a forthcoming Custom PC feature about the future of OpenGL in PC gaming, Carmack said 'I actually think that Direct3D is a rather better API today.' He also added that 'Microsoft had the courage to continue making significant incompatible changes to improve the API, while OpenGL has been held back by compatibility concerns. Direct3D handles multi-threading better, and newer versions manage state better.'
A few paragraphs below
> 'It is really just inertia that keeps us on OpenGL at this point,' Carmack told us. He also explained that the developer has no plans to move over to Direct3D, despite its advantages.
https://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/pc/carmack-directx-bett...
And for a more up to date remarks
> "Lets fix OpenGL" http://cs.cornell.edu/~asampson/media/papers/opengl-snapl201... some interesting thoughts, but the shading language is the least broken part of OpenGL.
> For everyone saying "Vulkan!", the conclusion is that there is an opportunity for an API between Vulkan and the game engines. I agree.
https://twitter.com/id_aa_carmack/status/851397231320150017?...
So I can definitely feel the irony.
Later on he changed his mind regarding OpenGL vs DirectX, but there are legions of wannabe game developers that worshiped his opinions regarding OpenGL.
See my sibling post regarding his change of opinion.
I think Microsoft’s gaming vision aligns well with Bethesda’s and they probably have a better vision compared to Zenimax board of directors.
We're going to have the US as one large corporation now? No competition?
Day one post acquisition? For sure!
A month later? Of course.
6 months later? Yes, ok.
1 year later? Maybe?
3 years later? Never!
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKn9yiLVlMM [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethesda_Softworks
- https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/370520/Microsoft_buys_Ze...
-https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/1308028640488292352
1: https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/1308029942018510848
This YouTube video predicting that’s what they were doing springs to mind: https://youtu.be/qJt_i2_vsSw
This, not so much. Fallout 3 was the last great Bethesda title. Well and New Vegas but that was Obsidian.
Completely lost interest in them with Fallout 76.
Edit: Oh wait, there's also Dishonored since Arkane is owned by ZeniMax. But that was never available on non-windows OSes so it's not much of a loss.
Don't forget inXile. Still waiting on that Linux version of Wasteland 3.
2020, I'm done.
Bethesda/Zenimax has arguably the longest lineup of critically acclaimed franchises in the video game world. Additionally, almost every franchise still feels fresh and has pulling power, unlike ones like Halo and Assassins creed which have slowly lost their thunder.
Additionally, Bethesda had no idea what they were doing with their 2 biggest properties - Fallout and Elder scrolls. Hopefully with the MSFT acquisition, both will get some direction.
For those that work at Obsidian and MSFT owned game studios, is the Work-life-balance still terrible like most video-game studios or is it more in line with the 'family frendly' pace at proper MSFT ? Am I too naive to think that this might be a good thing for the employees and their sanity.
I don't know that this is a characteristic of all Microsoft studios. Departments in Microsoft can almost be like little companies all of their own. It _did_ leave a positive impression on me though and I can see myself working at Microsoft again in the future.
I left on good terms to see what it was like to work at startups.
Let me introduce you to a little company called Nintendo.
I knew I should have added 'cross-platform'. You're correct Nitendo certainly counts. Naughty dog would probably want to contend my claim too.
So it's a lock-in move and again something that should have been stopped by anti-trust, but of course, it's non existent these days.
the new Doom was ok, but the new Fallout was TERRIBLE, as with many other recent Bethesda ventures...
EA has taught the industry that mega corps are where IP goes to die a long, slow, cash-cow squeezing death. I'm actually more disappointed in ZeniMax/Bethesda. In my mind, there is absolutely no possibility that Bethesda will ever produce another game on the level of FO3/NV now because corps do what corps do which is A/B test and second guess every decision until the product is a flavorless lump.
And as a fan of the acquired franchises, I'm confident about their future. MS has a good track record of handling game franchises.
Any other Hacker Newers live close to there too?
What this acquisition means is that the gap between potential Xbox exclusives/Day 1 releases and what Sony has is much smaller. Realistically there is a very low chance that any of the IP from this purchase becomes Xbox-exclusive, but even an early launch on Xbox shifts momentum massively.
[1] https://pausebutton.substack.com/p/level-69-the-next-generat...
Still buying a PS5, not an Xbox Series X. I can (hopefully?) play all Microsoft exclusives on PC.
They even promote so called "Xbox Play Anywhere", and tried to make it normal for the new XBOX so that you can buy a single game and play it on PC and XBOX. However the gaming studios haven't yet to my knowledge approved it fully so they want to sell you the game twice.
After all the PC gaming benefits Microsoft too.
With Fallout and The Elder Scrolls’ history as PC only titles in their early iterations I would suspect this bridge building will continue
Morrowind was a masterpiece of a game. Oblivion was amazing. Skyrim was quite special and carried the genre forward but left behind important bits from morrowind. The job of making the spiritual successor to oblivion and morrowind is now officially open to anyone because Bethesda will never do it.
Microsoft is buying Bethesda
Bethesda is owned by a company called ZeniMax Media
It's actually Bethesda Softworks
Bethesda is a place in Maryland
I find it troubling that good news for the former group seems to trump bad news for the latter.
Last week Microsoft was thanking Trump from giving them a chance to acquire TikTok. It did not go well.
(I know, I know...)
Next week: "Now you can play Skyrim on your Android phones via xCloud!"
Microsoft is serious about great content for its Xbox/Windows 10 platform.
The press note still caused some fear in me. Years ago (FASA?) such a move meant closure, since MS was not really in the gaming industry business content wise.
Outer Worlds, Fallout, and so on just differ by visuals and story, the general jist is all samey samey. No innovation. No just single series but across the estate. Nothings been as good as Fallout 3 & Skyrim, just repetitions and echoes of greatness.
Is this a good purchase for MS? Maybe, if it's for tech, IP, and bringing talent on board. Hopefully they'll add some originality in game play elements, not just reskinning.
Now of course with this announcement Obsidian and Bethesda are sister studios.
The irony is beyond my mortal understanding, but NV certainly flagships the IP today, behind maybe 2.
Both different developers.
