In his most recent podcast, Major Nelson, a well known XBox PR outlet, has said that Epic Games cost Microsoft a BILLION dollars. Apparently, Epic Games was single-handedly responsible for the decision to include a 512 MB RAM chip in the 360, rather than a (supposedly) proposed 256 MB chip. This was brought up in relation to the recent debate over Microsoft charging for the Gears of War Map Pack. You might remember, Epic Games felt that the map pack should have been provided for free, and Microsoft wanted to charge for it.
If Microsoft is allowing a single developer to chart the course of their console development, they need to take a long, hard look at their development process. Now, if Epic said, "Hey Microsoft, we really need 512 MB of RAM in this console so that we can make some seriously great games that will help sell your XBox 360," and Microsoft said, "Hey, sounds good to us," then what's the problem here? Microsoft benefits by more console sales and associated hardware, Epic gets to make Gears (which rocks) and reap the rewards from that.
In the end, only Microsoft decides what will be included in their consoles. If they made the decision, then they have to live with the financial consequences of it. The only reason we're hearing this now is because Epic had the balls to stand up and say that the Gears map pack should be free. For Microsoft, even through a surrogate, to basically blame Epic for Live Arcade's pricing scheme is ludicrous. If they want to charge for the content, they should stand up and say so. They're a business, and they need to be profitable. I can respect that. However, I can't respect the way this has been handled at all.
New report from Skillsearch found that 22% of those surveyed had been laid off within the past 12 months.
It's a step forward for Stop Killing Games.
The Callisto Protocol director thinks the solution involves the right people, the right timing, and perhaps a little bit of AI
I don't agree with that. I WISH I could agree with that. But buying habits and customer opinions prove otherwise
We've seen developers in the AAA space try new things and ideas. More often than not, the customers aren't willing to give things a chance, or not enough people buy into the project for it to grow.
Creativity works better in the indie space because the budgets, pressures, and expectations aren't the same.
it's a nice idea and it worked during the PS2/PS3-era when AAA didn't cost hundreds of millions of dollars. smaller budgets and shorter development time left room for more creativity and more risk. a game didn't need to sell 4 million+ copies to break even. things are different now.
This is the guy who bragged about crunching his staff and having them work through the night. Crunch culture has lost more talent and done more damage to the industry than any other factor. Screw him.
Of Gears of War and they can do whatever they want we the content for the game.
microsoft builds its console around one game
I like the way major said it in his podcast, "They like spending someone else money and not their own." Microsoft funded Gears, microsoft spent 1 Billion because of EPIC which Epic will never be able to bring into the table. So, now they want to tell microsoft what they should do with the game? Right... Epic you have the chance to all the charity you want with UT. Since you are using your own money to develop it, you can not only give us free downloadable content, but also give us the game for $29.99. 50% off. yeee! VIVA Epic.... ohh wait... thats their own money... they wouldn't do that.
Epic is the developer and Gears of War is a second party game meaning that Microsoft Game Studios is the Publisher.
http://www.microsoft.com/ga...
built around movies an games so that it reached out to movie watchers and gamers which is a bigger market than just games and won the format and console war. That would be crazy im just sayin
edit: yeah but if it reached out to the movie market then combined the movie and the game market would make a bigger market to sell to