In the internet age, it’s easier than ever for games to be kept up to date: new content, balance fixes for the multiplayer component and, arguably the most important, bug fixes. But how much of an obligation do developers have once their game is released?
Microsoft announced its financial results for Q3 of fiscal year 2026, including an update on its gaming Xbox business and more.
Not looking good. Hopefully Asha Sharma is able to turn Phil’s disaster around.
To me it's still quite remarkable how they can cash-in 5.3bn in revenue in a single quarter, since their hardware is basically dead.
The stock mark is what makes Microsoft remarkable, They have convinced every institutional and retail investor to just keep piling money into them. Like many big tech giants they are just a big growing pyramid scheme. As long as people keep dropping money into ETF's that cover the market Microsoft will always be liquid. At the same time it is completely stifling innovation and competition. People need to start being more discreet in how they invest their money as it's killing the system.
Riiiiight because people will just flock back to them for one or two games per year.
15+ years of bad performance is what they call irreparable in business. It is time for them to sell off the assets and get out of entertainment.
These declines are on the back of extra revenue received from releasing games like Forza horizon 5 on PlayStation. So I’m being sarcastic here when I said they should go back to exclusives. Killing off a revenue stream from Ps5 sales will only make things worse
Thanks to the slip-up of an artist working on the title, we now have more evidence that a new Injustice game is in the works.
Spiders: "We're going to cut straight to the chase so you're not left wondering: After a long period without clear answers, we have received confirmation that Spiders is being liquidated.
What does it mean? This means the company as a whole no longer exists. We'll cease our functions immediately. The planned DLC will release via Nacon, and then-- well, that's it.
We're sorry that it's come to this and would like to thank each and every one of you for your support over the years.
If you have any questions or run into issues with your games, please contact Nacon directly as we'll no longer be able to reply."
It depends on the game/type of game. Single player only games should be put out finished and complete, with a possibility for a patch if there are serious enough bugs.
Any game with a multiplayer component. Not just to keep things fresh but because there are vast amounts of statistical data that can only be gotten after release. Which then should be used to balance online gameplay to make it more fun for the people playing it.
For games that are online only this is even more important, not only should they be balanced post release they should have additional content created and added to them. Free and in DLC form to keep the game sustainable.
It's situational.
If this is a single player only game, then there should be NO need for dlc. If something is meant to be part of the single player game, then it SHOULD be on the game disc or original download if its a psn or xlba game. That adding stuff to single player is nonsense in my opinion. Put the game out when it's DONE and not before plain and simple.
Now on the Multiplayer part, yes to some extent developers should be obligated to that. Because if they want people to play their product for weeks, months, and years at a time, it's their job to give people a REASON to stick with their product.
I don't see the need for much of the DLC released these days, but I do think devs have an obligation to release it. It's become an industry norm, and to not release DLC might have a negative impact on the company.
Personally, though, I hardly see the need for most DLC and rarely ever buy it.
I dont really see much need for DLC but patch support yes
developers aren't obligated to do anything and game reviewers should start evaluating games based on what they are, not what they should be.