| Machiavellian said:
What mandate have any of you heard from anyone that these decisions were made from above Phil position. The only person above Phil at this point in time is Satya. Phil does not report to anyone, but Satya and you have not heard, seen or witness anything from Satya on any decisions on MS gaming. This is why I am pretty much certain everything and I mean everything is from Phil. |
The decision for how much funds Xbox is getting is decided by MS, not by Xbox. MS does not give Xbox carte blanche to take as much money as they want. And yes Satya is involved in the gaming division as much as any other MS division, he even set himself to receive a bonus from game pass performance a few years back (the target was missed though).
You say that it must be Phil because, and I'm paraphrasing, he was always 2 faced with you, but what you suggest (Ms did provide everything needed Phil just decided to close studios and fire resources) is not being two-faced, it's pure insanity, nobody would do so if they had the funds to keep everything.
MS reducing Xbox funds is just a more logical and simplest explanation.
| Machiavellian said:
I am never under the illusion the public appearance of a CEO level person is the same appearance they are internally when doing their job. While people want to believe that Phil would not make these decisions without some external force making him do so, there isn't any. People want to blame Satya but even during all the emails and correspondence during the ABK acquisition, you never heard a peep from him. All emails and decisions were made by Phil. |
That's simply not true, as also mentioned by Ryuu, Satya even provided testimony during the FTC trial.
| Machiavellian said:
Bethesda is just second to get the treatment but let's not forget that ABK was first. What pretty much make me believe everything is from Phil is because of all the emails during the ABK acquisition. None of them showed that any decision made were lorded down from anyone else but him. If anything from the moment he got into his position, he has maneuvered MS to exactly where they are today and that include from the purchase of BGS, ABK and him being promoted to head of MS gaming, to MS gaming now being one of the bigger players in MS revenue stream. |
Yes MS acted on Phil recommendation, but that does not mean they'll always do so. And let me remind you the whole industry saw crazy investment from all actors in this timeframe. That's simply because investors thought Video Game was set to grow immensely due to COVID-19 and be able to retain newfound consumers. In early 2022 you got studios being created left and right, Sony also bought a bunch.
Now the industry is not viewed with the same prospect by investor and they reduced their investment/demand higher ROI.
Xbox lives by MS funding, wins by MS funding, but they can also lose by MS funding and if ever they die it will be by MS funding.
| Machiavellian said:
There is this belief that Phil is a nice guy but I have worked with many nice guys who lead departments and divisions to CEO of a company and none of them were shy about making decisions that were unpopular just because it's going to piss some people off. Until I see otherwise, there is nothing so far I see that is not totally coming from Phil with no external pressure than him moving towards his own strategy of what he feels MS gaming is going to be for the future of the company. |
Phil's Being a nice guy has been echoed by Many of his acquaintances and both past and current colleagues. I have no doubt he can take hard/unpopular decisions but I don't believe he decides such on a whim without it being a necessity. Until I see otherwise, the sole necessity to do so that is logical is getting to work with reduced funding.
Last edited by EpicRandy - on 11 May 2024
