650°

Ori Dev Criticizes Microsoft For Creating "Artificial Barriers"

Thomas Mahler, the founder of moon studios, has criticized Microsoft for not acting on their vision and creating "artificial barriers."

Sonyslave31546d ago (Edited 1546d ago )

Lol the nerve on this guy Ms is way to nice with their games i mean for god sake you can play ori on everything except playstation.

He should be telling Sony and Nintendo this smh

GhostofHorizon1546d ago

'He also criticizes the exclusive culture in the industry, pointing out PlayStation and Nintendo as being “scared of change” and that they still believe in “walled gardens”'

It's right in there if you bothered to actually read it. From the sounds of it, he's against exclusives in general but has personal experience with Microsoft which is why he brings them up specifically.

-Foxtrot1546d ago

Thing is, while true, Sony/Nintendo aren't the ones downplaying exclusives and trying to come off as this "come on everyone, lets hold hands, we shouldn't have any barriers in gaming" company during onslaughts of interviews only to then contradict themselves later. Phil talks so much it ends up biting him on the ass later.

For example

July 2020

https://www.nme.com/news/ga...

September 2020 - 2 months later

https://www.eurogamer.net/a...

Sonic-and-Crash1546d ago (Edited 1546d ago )

for all those Multiplatfomists-no barriers supporters ..i want to ask

Is Microsoft pays any money to Sony from Windows sales??? ...then why the fk Sony to give their exclusive products to MS or any other platform holder???....

people (developers or not) who cry for all games to become multiplatform are detached from reality or have other more suspicious purposes

LucasRuinedChildhood1546d ago (Edited 1546d ago )

If he anyone wants to look at the full thread for more context (he makes his first comment about this on this page): https://www.resetera.com/th...

4Sh0w1546d ago

-Yeah he's actually criticizing all 3 but specifically Microsoft because thats who he worked with, but I honestly its sounds like something from a 13yr rant rather than someone who understands business:

“Make their games and port them to ALL platforms, not leave anyone behind. The 13 year old kid whose parents were able to only afford to buy one system for their child now won’t grow up playing Halo because Microsoft believes that it makes the most financial sense to leave PlayStation players out. How does that benefit anyone but Microsoft?”

-So he doesn't believe in platforms? Platforms and exclusives are a neccessary tool to generate profits that the devs themselves are concerned with because unlike manufacturers they are ONLY concerned with making 1 game at a time to make a profit.

-If he's so concerned about the 13yr old who's parents can only afford 1 console, then why not fund & dev his games for anyone to playe for FREE....surely there are parents who cant afford to buy their kids games tooso why stop at the console... why is it all on the console manufacturers, why isnt he making free games?

-That all said, actually Microsoft has done alot to make games more affordable an accessible so I dont get his criticism at all.

KillBill1545d ago

Incorrect... he calls out Microsoft because he mistakenly imagines the conversations Phil has made on exclusivity in the past suggests they are open to put games on other platforms. When what they have always stressed is they are open to put games on their supported eco-systems. This allows options for their games to reach much larger base and does not include the option to pay Nintendo and PlayStation to put all their games on their platforms.

His suggestion is that Xbox become a 3rd party developer for other systems. Which is simply ridiculous. He does not call out all platforms and then emphasize his experience with MS. He calls out MS and offhandedly mentions Sony and Nintendo in afterthought.

1545d ago
Suave_Langosta1545d ago

@sonic nah man, people just want to be able to play games. Exclusives mean nothing to anybody besides die hards. Microsoft, Sony, tendo, or whoever should pay whoever publishes a game for access to the game. It’s not a hard concept, why bottleneck games anymore?

You claim people are detached from reality… but it’s like not a “reality” it’s a simple effect from how the industry was ran for decades. So it’s more of a artificial barrier than a reality. There’s no “suspicious” behavior. Video games are entertainment at the end of the day, some people can’t afford every system, it’s not always some tribalistic vendetta. You sound like you are out of touch of reality if anything.

Like for example if Sony pictures only released their spiderman movies to play on Sony tvs/PlayStations/Blu-rays, would that make any sense? No. We live in a new era, holding onto imaginary company laden battle lines is a bad look.

Let PlayStation play halo, let Xbox play Pokémon, let switch play uncharted. Saying no just shows how hard you grasp at the tailfeathers of yesteryear.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1545d ago
SinisterMister1546d ago

Agreed. Xbox has Game Pass on PC too, opening up a whole world of IPs for PC gamers. Can PlayStation offer the same?

13sentinel1546d ago

They are putting first party games on PC. So yes.

CobraKai1546d ago

Lol. Sentinel and Christopher 👏👏👏

IRetrouk1545d ago

Ps now has been available on pc since 2014 too

AuraAbjure1545d ago

@Christopher Oh killer, I wanna play Uncharted 4 next year on PC!

Hofstaderman1545d ago

Ugh whenever I think of Todd Howard I think of Fallout 76. Microsoft can keep that dirty ray tracing liar

Class_Viceroy1545d ago

Yes, they have been releasing exclusives on PC now….not to mention PS Now has a PC App and it has many older PS exclusives on the service that you can play.

While not perfect, they are showing effort into this now

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1545d ago
dbcoops1546d ago

Yep, they were very "nice" when they bought Zenimax and took long established multi-platform IP away from a player base that had been playing those series of games for decades. He's telling exactly who he needs to be telling.

Ursozord1546d ago

Like when Sony "helped" Capcom and Stret Fighter 5 was born BUT NOT FOR OTHER CONSOLES LIKE MY SWITCH

Sure. Only 1 evil in the world

Atticus_finch1546d ago (Edited 1546d ago )

@Ursozord
Yea because buying a publisher and locking down their catalog is the as paying for the development of a game that wouldn't have been created otherwise.
"Their the same"
Lol

4Sh0w1546d ago

I have no sympathy for the crying about Microsoft buying studios, because if the shoe were on the other foot everybody knows sony fans would praise the move. Sonys 1st party talent mainly comes from buying up once independent studios, very few studios under either Sony or Microsoft were built from the ground up with talent put together by them. So sure many try to move the goal posts to act like sony is so different when it comes to acquisitions but at the end of the day they both are just doing what they can to increase their gaming portfolio & strengthen their brand...and hell Microsoft doesn't even tie you to a console at all, all 1st party is on pc, letting you play anywhere but ps, they are honestly much more consumer friendly than Sony.

darkrider1545d ago

Exactly. This after that salesperson told that exclusives don't matter...

dbcoops1545d ago

@4Sh0w

I'm sure you don't have any sympathy. "crying"? LOL, that's hypocrisy at its finest. Name any major studio, in fact name any studio at all that Sony purchased that pulled long running multi-platform IP off of xbox and took it away from the xbox fanbase. I'll wait. No ones moving any goal posts except for maybe you, the reality is the situations are very different and you're trying to find an excuse to make Sony look like MS when it comes to acquisitions and that couldn't be further from the truth. But maybe it would be an easier pill to swallow for everyone if Spencer didn't go around claiming to not place barriers on people to gaming and then take beloved franchise away from people because for MS its easier to throw money around than it is to foster or create talented studios of their own. Yeah taking away peoples beloved franchises from where they prefer to play them is definitely the most consumer friendly thing anyone could do. You cant be serious with this s---. smdh

mkis0071545d ago (Edited 1545d ago )

4show.

Sony buys the devs, MS buys the IP's . They are very different when it comes to acquisitions. Try to find me one IP other than Sunset Overdrive that Sony acquired as a result of buying a dev. They have actually had relationships with their dev's. What has MS ever created with Double Fine or Ninja Theory? They bought the IP's plain and simple. Sony already owned all the IP's from every dev before they acquired them. You can't buy loyalty. Just look at people jumping back into Insomniac after Sony bought them.

What it comes down to is consolidation, if Sony were to get a big publisher will you be all for it? What if they split them down the middle half the current 3rd party games are not available on the other platform?

AuraAbjure1545d ago (Edited 1545d ago )

Microsoft didn't "take them away" like a brutal divorce sometimes forces a child to be taken away by just one parent. Zenimax was happy to forgoe other consoles for the $$$$.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1545d ago
gamer78041546d ago

Really his beef is with all of the platform holders. He wants everything to be third party accessible

CaptainHenry9161546d ago

This comment right here is when you're loyal to Microsoft and lobe kissing their A$$

TheRealHeisenberg1546d ago

As if you are not here on N4G to brown nose for Sony. 🤡

CaptainHenry9161546d ago

Umm, I'm a PC gamer you clown LMAO

lelo2play1545d ago

In a perfect world there would be no exclusives... unfortunately we don't live in a perfect world.
If the Ori dev wanted their game on every platform, they shouldn't make a deal with Microsoft... or Sony... or Nintendo.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1545d ago
1546d ago Replies(1)
LordoftheCritics1546d ago (Edited 1546d ago )

It's called exclusives. Every platform is creating ''Artificial Barriers''

The dude opened his mouth and now everyone knows who to be worried about.

Christopher1546d ago

He knows that. But, Microsoft is at the same time saying they want to get rid of those barriers. His literal complaint is the difference between what they say and what they do.

SinisterMister1546d ago

But what about the point he's trying to make? He's basically saying that exclusives shouldn't be a thing, which is, well, something I don't agree with.

Christopher1546d ago (Edited 1546d ago )

***He's basically saying that exclusives shouldn't be a thing, which is, well, something I don't agree with.***

That's not his point. His point is clearly quoted about how Microsoft talks about removing artificial barriers while doing the exact same thing as Sony/Nintendo.

Regardless of how you feel about exclusives, good or bad, Microsoft is the one saying something completely different than what they are doing regarding exclusives.

And I agree, exclusives should be a thing, to an extent. It creates a healthy, competitive environment for the industry. But it 100% needs to be watched to ensure that anti-competition elements don't creep in to give any single company dominant control of the market via IP purchases.

You're essentially complaining about the opinion of the developer and not saying "Microsoft should stop saying they don't believe in exclusives when they clearly do." If you're going to go after the developer, you should also go after Microsoft for their own words.

4Sh0w1546d ago (Edited 1546d ago )

Chris I disagree he is totally saying exclusives shouldn't be a thing...at least *starting with Microsoft when he says this:

“Make their games and port them to ALL platforms, not leave anyone behind."

You say:
"That's not his point. His point is clearly quoted about how Microsoft talks about removing artificial barriers while doing the exact same thing as Sony/Nintendo."

-Gotta disagree with you here, sounds like you guys are purposely taking the comments made about being able to play on many different devices out of context. Microsoft has removed artificial barriers by putting all their 1st party games on pc, thus no longer making console needed to play but I dont think anybody in their right mind thought that "removing artificial barriers" ever meant removing *ALL* artificial barriers, nor did Microsoft say that as a factual matter. Gamepass also reduces barriers giving gamers access to more games cheaper, cloud, etc to some limited extent. Frankly this dev is surely talking big about somebody elses wallet....ironically only after his game has done well on xbox & pc= that barrier he's really talking about is just more $$$ in his pocket from ps. Its a cheap shot in fact to all 3, because he gets to play the nice guy while making more money, meanwhile who cares about the platform owners investment. If hes such a no barriers guy then dont take the funding or ask sony to fund it for all platforms & see how that goes??? This is a clear case of how some will take a good thing, deed/genorosity and then say well they could do more here, more there, etc. Microsoft is not doing exactly like Sony/Nintendo, until they both make all their 1st party games available on pc day one thats a HUMONGOUS DIFFERENCE...and if we want it to go further with NO BARRIERS then sure that means ALL GAMES playable everywhere but I think we can all agree this would breed complacency and quality of games would suffer in the longrun because theres less incentive, less competition without competing brands.

Christopher1545d ago

***Gotta disagree with you here, sounds like you guys are purposely taking the comments made about being able to play on many different devices out of context.***

Direct quote from his post:

"Microsoft is in this weird ‘between a Rock and a hard place’ position where they’re saying that this is the vision they want to see happening in the future, no artificial walls, no boundaries, but then they’re not necessarily acting accordingly”

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1545d ago
Hofstaderman1545d ago

Well said. There has to be exclusives that are optimized for a particular platform to show off its capabilities. Not our fault a certain company doesn't place an emphasis on this and ends up coming third every generation. If they just commit to this they wouldn't have to hide actual sales figures, promote the crap out of a service that's going to hobble them eventually or claim to promote cross platform play. But hey if some people like to believe the same lie Gen after Gen....

SinisterMister1546d ago

I get the point that the Moon Studios founder is trying to make but I really think that it's all about money in the end. No business in the world runs on Good Samaritan points. I personally like the "exclusive culture." Makes console wars more exciting. And no, don't give me that "gaming is for all" bs. You pick sides in this mf or you play PUBG on your phone.

Teflon021546d ago

Agree 100% but I think this is about how contradictory MS is being as opposed to being exclusive. What's likely going on is, they probably wanted to port ori to Playstation after switch and MS probably wasn't okay with that as the switch porting really seemed to be MS trying to bully Sony which didn't work. Ultimately when they couldn't do it anymore, they stopped porting. Just sounds like they don't want to work exclusively with MS anymore is all tbh. As a dev, it would make sense to want to be multiplat even if I don't think Ori would get the attention it gets now as a multiplat. The trade off is limited audience but alot more exposure because of exclusivity. Sounds like a fair trade to me

1545d ago
1545d ago
leahcim1546d ago

Ori saga playstation port confirmed.

One can dream. :)

Sonyslave31546d ago

Not going to happen Ms owned the ip

ColtPSSX1546d ago Show
Show all comments (85)
40°

Former Highguard level designer suggests "sweaty" competitive 3v3 play "turned a lot of players off"

A level designer laid off from Highguard developer Wildlight believes the free-to-play shooter's difficulties stem from having "leaned too far into the competitive scene".

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
isarai_lee21h ago

Ummm no 🤨

Seriously wtf is with devs just ignoring what players are saying?

50°

Hogwarts Legacy 2 Planned for No Earlier Than 2027, With More Major WB Games Releasing the Same Year

Hogwarts Legacy 2 will arrive no earlier than 2027, as Warner Bros plans major franchise returns between 2027 and 2028.

Retro198619h ago

Thats ok ! Take Your time and make it gooood.
Playing the first one these days, and got a long way to go before finishing. Awesome game! Gonna 100% it.

repsahj2h ago

I got mine just 5$ for switch 1 version and 5$ for switch 2 upgrade! Very beautiful game.

scorpio_20494m ago

Man I hope they emphasize the school aspect and minimize the open world Ubisoft-ness of the first game. Open world is fine but it felt like every other game when I left the school.

120°

The Idea of Microsoft Sunsetting Xbox Is Absolute Nonsense, but It Exposes a Massive Problem

A few days ago, an interview with Seamus Blackley, designer of the original Xbox, sent shockwaves among the community.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
Christopher2d ago

***This whole conspiracy theory (because that’s what this is) is basically entirely based on the idea that everyone involved is lying to us. ***

C'mon now. It's an opinion. Just like your opinion here. And it's from an industry professional who does have more knowledge than we do on how these things work and access to people inside the industry.

I'm not saying he's right, but you spend all this time arguing his stance and why his words are illogical, but then you go and make this sort of statement? Hypocritical.

SimulationDaily2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

It's from someone who has not worked at Microsoft or anywhere close to Microsoft or even in the gaming industry for over 20 years, and has worked at Microsoft for less than 4 years in total. He doesn't know a single one of the people involed and his experience of the topic is so diluted that he has no more authority than any rando on Reddit.

And almost none of the articles citing this silliness do the bare minimum due diligence to mention that essential context.

When you present a ludicrous hot take from someone who is nowhere near a position to know a thing about what Microsoft is doing today, if you think that readers aren't entitled to be made aware of that, we'll have to agree to disagree.

The truth is that a lot of the media outlets in this industry have chucked the bare minimum of professional reporting ethics into the recycle bin in the name of making a quick buck, and this is a pretty obvious example. This has been going on for years, it sucks, and it's only getting worse.

Misleading information for clicks may not offend you, and that's fine, but as someone who has dedicated the past 25 years of his life to informing people, it certainly offends me, and I see no reason not to express that position. Firmly.

Christopher2d ago

***Misleading information for clicks may not offend you, and that's fine***

You really need to stop with the logical fallacies. There's nothing there that says my opinion on the original matter other than calling out your hypocrisy of doing the same thing you complain they're doing. Not even a part of the conversation.

Also, he didn't do it for clicks, journalists turned it into clicks.

SimulationDaily1d 22h ago (Edited 1d 21h ago )

@Christopher: his opinion is not the problem, besides the fact that it's nonsensical and based on nothing.
The problem is that it has been presented as a take from someone with authority by professionally bankrupt media that fills up the fact that they have nothing relevant to say with fluff for clicks, regardless of the fact that such a presentation ends up misinforming people.

ABizzel11d 3h ago

Regardless of everyone’s opinion, one thing that’s never good is to be in the comments arguing with people on their opinion, about your opinion, especially in a place where you have no monetization.

1Victor1d 1h ago

@simulation
The way I see it you’re flipping the crumpet and assuming that because he hasn’t been a part of Microsoft for so long he don’t have contacts inside or he is exaggerating what we all can see in Xbox history of lies, deception and half truths since the 360 era.
Its very disingenuous of you to come and complain about his opinion when the patterns has been clear for way over a decade.
Microsoft is a corporation here if they don’t dominate they terminate the product you sound old enough to to remember Zune and windows phones you if not ask bing what happened to them.

ApocalypseShadow1d ago

'Xbox Is Being Sunsetted' — Seamus Blackley, One of the Creators of Xbox, Thinks Recent Shakeup Spells the End for Microsoft's Gaming Business

It clearly says that Blackley THINKS...has an, OPINION, on the matter.

I think his opinion hurt you enough that you had to create an N4G article to try and discredit his OPNION. The fact that someone that hasn't been in the industry for years, carries more weight than someone that only has one comment on his video, yours. And, has less than 2 thousand subscribers. What makes your opinion better than his? He's someone that actually worked at Microsoft. What's your background besides MS Flight Simulator and FFXIV videos?

Here's the deal, Microsoft spent upwards of 100 Billion or more to try to beat Sony. They tried to buy industry pillars like Nintendo and Sega who said no. They pretty much created a service to devalue games to try and control the market and failed. They never won a generation. Most powerful system in the world or not. They couldn't do it by undercutting Sony with their Achilles heal of Series S. Nothing the 3 Trillion company could do but end up releasing their games on Nintendo and Sony's platforms. Their competitor's systems. The amount of coping in your defense of the current Microsoft heads is just hilarious. It is true that not having a gaming background means nothing if you can turn a business around. But there's nothing to turn. Outside hardened Xbox fans, there's no reason that any gamer needs an Xbox when the games are releasing on competitor's platforms. Nadella isn't stupid to try and go back to exclusives that Xbox fans don't buy enough of to keep the developers they bought afloat. Heads have to roll. Just like the Sega days of heading into a new direction.

Read the writing on the wall. Xbox as you know it is dying and dead. No game sales numbers. No console sales numbers. Nothing. Nothing will change their transition to third party other than an outright ban of Japanese game consoles. But the backlash would be so severe, that any new Xbox would be boycotted everywhere. If any new system is released, it would be in name only or the fans that are left. A PC with Microsoft's name on it like the Ally and the Quest headset. but nothing more than that. A platform that has never been profitable. A game service that has never been profitable. That was once almost canned by Nadella before.

Land that MS Flight Simulator plane and leave the clouds. It's over for them. She's there only to help their transition. No system they sell will bring them back when they never were leaders to begin with in the industry. I came out of N4G retirement just to say this. Your opinion carries no weight and is unsupported by the facts of where Microsoft's position is currently.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1d ago
lodossrage2d ago (Edited 2d ago )

@SimulationDaily

He may not be in the xbox loop anymore. But he'd surely have a better idea than any of us random people commenting would.

And how to WE know he doesn't know any single person involved? It's not like we can see the man's contact list or know his life personally. And all he did was give his opinion. He never said it was fact. An opinion is not misleading info. If he tried to pass off his opinion as FACT, then you'd have something. But that didn't happen.

We can't be mad about someone coming to the man for an interview answering a question he was asked

SimulationDaily1d 21h ago (Edited 1d 21h ago )

He's not in *any* loop, and he has not been for 2 decades.
How do we know? His responses tell us that. Unless you're unable to read between the lines, you can easily see that he's spitballing without any direct knowledge. The fact that he completely ignores the presence of Matt Booty tells us that he didn't even really read the news, let alone have any real knowledge about it.

Who in the world told you that an opinion can't be misleading information? Of course it can be, when it's wrongly presented as the view of someone with authority on a topic, without being contextualized, which is exactly what happened here.

If you don't know a thing about a situation and someone asks to interview you on it, you can say no.

lodossrage1d 21h ago

His response doesn't tell us who he does/ doesn't know regardless of how long he was away from Microsoft. Again, we don't know this man's personal life or professional contacts to speak on such.

And who in the world told me an opinion can't be misleading info, living my life all these years tells me that. If you're presenting an opinion that should tell you it's not fact. No rational thinking person will sit here and misconstrue the two.

And again, he was asked a question. He never presented himself as an authority, he openly admits he hasn't been there in forever. What more context does he need when he already told us he hasn't been there in so long? Nor has he acted like is opinion is fact.

Now can he say "no" or "no comment" when asked a question? Sure he can, but he doesn't HAVE to. He can offer up his opinion the same way we all do here.

And how can you say he's doing this for clicks? He's the interviewee, not the interviewer or site owner. You have to realize with the video you made you can be accused of the same thing you wrongly pointed the finger at him for.

And for the record, since I know how this site is, I'll say this now. No, this isn't an attack on you. I actually like having convos like this that aren't troll based.

SimulationDaily1d 21h ago (Edited 1d 21h ago )

His response is incredibly vague and drifts into the factually incorrect, for example, when he says "It would have been shocking if they had somebody in there in a meaningful role who was passionate about games, passionate about the creator-driven business of games."
Matt Booty is the second-in-command, which is definitely a "meaningful role," and he's very obviously passionate about games and the creator-driver business of games. As a matter of fact, much more (and with much more relevance) than Blackley himself, who dropped the industry and went to do something else 25 years ago.

No one said HE did it for clicks, although all these "former X" usually do this kind of stuff to appear somewhat relevant when they have not been relevant for a long, long time.

The site that interviewed him and the sites/influencers who presented his opinion with no context as authoritative did it for clicks, because they had no access to any the people even remotely involved, and scraped the bottom of the barrel for something to fill the quota and generate some clicks, and they absolutely misled a ton of people into believing that what he says has some merit.

The "massive problem" isn't that he has an opinion. Opinions like his are a dime a dozen. Is that today's gaming press will fill the air with white noise with zero merit, disingenuously painting it as relevant, regardless of whether their readers are misled into believing something that does not exist.

blacktiger1d 3h ago

First of all I did not watch the video but as far as conspiracy theory goes. Here is my take.

The whole idea for everyone to lie to us is about not owning and be happy. But here is the thing why is it so important for everyone to not own and be happy. What does the elite gain whether we own or not. I understand we not owning cars rather rent is what they want.

But why mess around with video games? I tell you why.
Because they don't want to sell "GPU"
GPU is the main problem. GPU is everything! From 3d printing your house to Mining Bitcoin. Not to mention it's the future that can cripple future government.

Profchaos21h ago(Edited 21h ago)

Blackley is the father of Xbox if anyone wants to see it's success it's Blackley

Yet he doesn't think it's long for this world simple as that

I'm more inclined to believe we've been lied to because Xbox has a history of lies and half truths

Stopac17h ago

@SimulationDaily its not a good look for the author of an article to go to the comment section to argue commentors.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 17h ago
2d ago
Vits1d 14h ago

Look, I understand the indignation about how the media is talking about this interview. I completely agree on that front. That said, personally, I don’t think Blackley is wrong. Not because he’s a former Xbox executive, but because what he described is something we see time and time again in the corporate world.

If you’ve ever worked in this kind of environment, the sequence of a head leaving, obvious substitute leaving, and then a much younger, completely unrelated executive stepping in feels like déjà vu. Every time we see this pattern, it’s usually because the company is looking for a “shake-up” in a business unit, which often just means restructuring. And restructuring usually means layoffs and shutting things down.

That said, I don’t think Xbox as a brand is going to vanish. What I think is more likely is that the division will be significantly reduced and absorbed into another part of the company.

SimulationDaily1d 14h ago (Edited 1d 13h ago )

Glad you understand my view on the press. It's good that at least someone here does.
That being said, placing Matt Booty as Sharma's vice conflicts with that view. Hiring a young CEO with a background of success and supporting them with a veteran vice president is a completely different scenario then one you describe.
The sole idea that Microsoft would be willing to throw away circa 8% of its revenue because of AI is pretty ridiculous.
And if you listen to the reports, you'll know that Sarah Bond was far from the obvious substitute for Phil Spencer.

Vits1d 13h ago

It’s actually the opposite. If they weren’t planning to completely bulldoze the place, then Sharma would be completely alone with an entirely new leadership team, at their mission would be to turn that ship into something else, but keeping the unit itself. The fact that she got Booty as a second hand, instead of a completely new second hand, tells me that they need someone with "experience" to smooth things over while she bulldozes everything.

And honestly, people would be surprised by how often companies choose to “lose” revenue when they realize they can save the same amount or more by simply exiting or reshaping a business line. And that is before AI, that just promise to do anything and it's currently Microsoft focus.

But time will tell. Let’s revisit this in a couple of years and we will see what actually happened. Unfortunately, and I truly mean that, because I don’t want to be right about this, I’ve seen this pattern play out too many times not to believe I’ll end up being right in the end.

SimulationDaily1d 11h ago (Edited 1d 11h ago )

Absolutely, let's reconvene in a couple of years. I have absolutely zero doubt about being right. Xbox will still be there, likely bigger than it is now.

"Bulldozing" doesn't fit today's Microsoft's MO at all, nor that of 99% of companies. Companies may choose to lose revenue, but that happens on dead weight businesses, which gaming is not.

And even when they do, they don't park a very successful young executive with a spotless career like Asha Sharma on a business they want to drop. Not only is it massively counterproductive for the company, but she'd likely quit, because she has the resume to get a job anywhere that would give her a business she can lead to success, as she has done with literally everything she has touched in the past decade.

Would I rather see a gamer at the top? Sure, but there's zero doubt that Asha Sharma is an extremely capable exec. Her resume proves it, and you don't waste extremely capable executives doing the palliative care doctor thing.

gold_drake1d 13h ago (Edited 1d 13h ago )

i mean, the leadership was changed out rather swiftly, with someone who has no odea of the business the former had atleast some know-how.

i think they are slowly trying to find something else they can make money off of, and xbox might just be the thing thats costing them more than they think its worth.

that's business. unfortunately

SimulationDaily1d 11h ago

Leadership was changed to someone who has plenty of ideas (and plenty of success under her belt) about *business*, supported by someone who has one of the most extensive careers in the gaming industry.

You don't waste a very successful young executive (who Asha Sharma is; her career is spotless) to babysit a business you want to spin down. This is how business works.

ocelot0713h ago(Edited 13h ago)

Question - it's obvious the way the Xbox division hasn't performed well for Microsoft for a long time. The hardware sales has been abysmal compared to their only 2 competitors Sony PlayStation and Nintendo Switch.

I agree with you. You don't put someone like her into a position to babysit a business you want to spin down.

But is sunsetting Xbox hardware really spinning down the business? What if she transforms Microsoft Gaming into the number one game developers/publisher's? Bigger than EA and Ubisoft. Microsoft gaming make plenty games each year for every available console, PC, Handheld PC as well as mobile users via cloud.

GotGame8181d 3h ago

Yeah, not worried about it! Microsoft said it's going with PC Architecture next gen! Hopefully Steam ready! Also, hopping it is upgradable, like Sega and Nintendo were 3 decades ago.

No need for a Pro version. Upgrade memory, exchange/add a board. Buying a mid Gen console upgrade last Gen, you could instantly tell the difference. The majority of current gen games optimized for PRO are great, but they certainly don't make me want to Rush out and buy one. I am happy with my PS5.

It brings me to ask, why so many 5 Pro/Vs Switch 2 comparisons? Seems kinda strange.

Show all comments (29)