By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Microsoft have a philia of spending money

elazz on 27 January 2014

If you're a company making 15-20 billion dollars profit each year even with all that spending than I don't see why not. However when Microsoft enters a bad state/situation they will innovate and improve more however I don't see them getting in such situation soon. We'll see in a decade or so



Stories unfolded with my home made rap songs. Feel free to listen here with lyrics: https://youtu.be/vyT9PbK5_T0

Around the Network
DirtyP2002 on 27 January 2014
KylieDog said:
vivster said:
Is there really a difference between buying a game and owning a studio?


Owning a studio makes a new game for a userbase, buying a game stops a userbase from getting a game.


so you would cheer for MS if they bought all of Epic instead?



Imagine not having GamePass on your console...

gergroy on 27 January 2014
KylieDog said:
vivster said:
Is there really a difference between buying a game and owning a studio?


Owning a studio makes a new game for a userbase, buying a game stops a userbase from getting a game.


That is some weird logic.  Either way it stops a userbase from getting game.  If anything, buying a studio is worse because it prevents a userbase from getting any game made from that studio.  



BeElite on 27 January 2014

who gives fuck how they do it as long as they do.

I wish Ninty went and got a few ips and made new games.

Sony does similar they just buy the developer not just the ip.



S.T.A.G.E. on 27 January 2014
vivster said:
Is there really a difference between buying a game and owning a studio?


Yep. When you own a studio more of your creative resources as well as money get put into it. Take Uncharted for instance, it wouldn't have been the way it was hadn't Sony directed Naughty Dog to change the genre and focus on what is big right now. Problem with Microsoft is that they are not that creative of a company internally like Nintendo and Sony, so they get a lot of shit for buying companies. This was a smart decision though.



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 27 January 2014
KylieDog said:
vivster said:
Is there really a difference between buying a game and owning a studio?


Owning a studio makes a new game for a userbase, buying a game stops a userbase from getting a game.


Epic more than likely wouldn't have made another Gears if Microsoft didn't buy it from them. Epic wanted to make a new IP so badly for the PC so I can't blame them for getting it off their hands.



Vasto on 27 January 2014

But I thought people said Xbox One was a media device. LMAO



vivster on 27 January 2014
S.T.A.G.E. said:
vivster said:
Is there really a difference between buying a game and owning a studio?


Yep. When you own a studio more of your creative resources as well as money get put into it. Take Uncharted for instance, it wouldn't have been the way it was hadn't Sony directed Naughty Dog to change the genre and focus on what is big right now. Problem with Microsoft is that they are not that creative of a company internally like Nintendo and Sony, so they get a lot of shit for buying companies. This was a smart decision though.

Now you're just assuming things. Do you have a source of how much of Sony's creative energy really is in Naughty Dog's games? I would think ND has pretty much free hands in everything they do.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Imaginedvl on 27 January 2014
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Microsoft cannot create their own games. They have to buy them. Thats the only way they can fight back against Sony. It's also the reason I am now buying the Xbox One before the PS4. I'll play the PS4 a little later. Microsoft just solidified that Xbox One in my house first! Damn Microsoft! LOL! To me their two greatest franchises ever are the ones they purchased in Halo and Gears.

Not sure how to contact the real STAGE. Obviously, his account just got hacked...

OP: Yes and those are brilliant moves from MS. Look at what they did with Halo (Bungie created it), they bought it and now it is their best first party games. Nothing wrong with that if you ask me! :)



S.T.A.G.E. on 27 January 2014
vivster said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
vivster said:
Is there really a difference between buying a game and owning a studio?


Yep. When you own a studio more of your creative resources as well as money get put into it. Take Uncharted for instance, it wouldn't have been the way it was hadn't Sony directed Naughty Dog to change the genre and focus on what is big right now. Problem with Microsoft is that they are not that creative of a company internally like Nintendo and Sony, so they get a lot of shit for buying companies. This was a smart decision though.

Now you're just assuming things. Do you have a source of how much of Sony's creative energy really is in Naughty Dog's games? I would think ND has pretty much free hands in everything they do.

First of All Naughty Dog was making a fantasy game with the funds used for Uncharted in the beginning. Sony was the one who shifted Naughty Dogs direction to make the game the way it was. Look up Uncharteds development. ND doesn't have completely free hands, but they have a lot to play with while with Sony. They have a similar goal in mind which is basically one now. Same thing with Sucker Punch. Their games might not sell major amounts but Sony believes in their promise and can contribute more to their efforts  through leadership now that they own them. Sony uses Sony Santa Monica to watch over a lot of projects.