What could've been an unbeatable addition to the Versus franchise ends up being a footnote in why publishers shouldn't leave a project hanging with a meager budget.
A few days ago, an interview with Seamus Blackley, designer of the original Xbox, sent shockwaves among the community.
***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.
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.
***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.
@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.
@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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
For nearly two decades, GOG has built its identity around DRM-free releases and classic games that actually work on modern PCs. With initiatives like the GOG Preservation Program and One-Click Mods, the platform is going far beyond simply selling old titles — it’s actively maintaining them, fixing them, and making sure they don’t quietly disappear as technology moves on.
Blizzard reveals plans to speed up Diablo releases with more frequent expansions and updates as the franchise moves toward a live-service future.
All I want is a physical disc release of remastered D2 that doesn't require online check-ins.
I've lost complete interest. Too much FOMO with seasons as it is, now it's expansions? No thanks.
what fomo? everything gets reset each season and you start new characters unless you're playing on the regular servers and then you're already maxxed anway and just need to participate in the new season stuff.
i played only during launch and i found the ones in that battlepass to be absolute dogwater, the only ones that looked somewhat cool were the paid ones in the store and i wont bother with either. The game itself was just so hollow, there were no cool builds cause every synergy was just "x or y skills does more dmg or has this extra effect" almost no experimentation needed, couldnt give a rats ass about armor if the core of the game is boring af.
It had two-person teams instead of the fan-favored 3, and they charged for Venom as DLC instead of including him in the base game, even though Venom was the most-missed omission from MvC3.
Marvel vs Capcom deserved better than Infinite.
MvC3’s mechanics were too shallow, but at least they tried with the roster (THE most attractive part of the franchise).
If they were smart, they’d go back and do a semi-reboot of MvC2 with a hand-drawn style, and just include Marvel characters.
Avengers vs X-men would be infinitely cooler than anything watered down with old Capcom characters. I don’t need Ryu to fight Iron Man…. We wanna have Hulk fight Iron Man more.
I thought the series went into hibernation. The property rights debacle was an understandable reason. It is a pain in the ass. Old games getting their soundtracks removed, games getting taken off of the store, etc. When they announced infinite I went berserk because I understood the trouble they went through to make that happen. They got hype to 100 and then took a giant dump on it. We didn’t deserve that, mvc didn’t deserve that.
I want a capcom versus game. They have enough characters to do it and the budget and properties aren’t an issue
Yeah..both Capcom and Disney ruined the series with this one.
MvC 3 deserved better
I like infinite but the roster is terrible. Capcom needs to remake mvsc2 asap