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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Kotaku- Microsoft is close to buying Obsidian Entertainment

Pemalite said:
This is kinda' the entire industries fault.
People complained about the lack of games, so obviously Microsoft is going to go shopping to rectify said criticisms.

Uh... Weird take. I mean, I don't think it's strange or wrong MS is buying them, or potentially others could consider buying them,
but it isn't "entire industries fault" MS didn't develop more games itself previously, that was MS policy they didn't need Obsidian to change.



Around the Network
pitzy272 said:
I’ve never played one of their games, and likely never will, but they’re a talented developer from what I hear.

Is Sony just gonna sit back and let MS buy up all these studios without firing back with their own purchases?

But then Sony would be doing what people are hating on Microsoft for doing(If though Sony has done this in the past too). So then people would have to criticize sony for it otherwise they'll look bad if they don't. 

 

Both Sony and Microsft are businesses, if they want to buy up studios to help their end game, that shouldn't be a negative on either imo. Just nature of the game. 



NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick

flashfire926 said:
COKTOE said:

How about Polyphony Digital Einstein? If you can pull yourself away from formulating a unified field theory, tell me all about the history of Polyphony Digital. Tell me about their history of game development before they were acquired by Sony.

Well, upon closer inspection looks like polyphony stemmed out of Sony Japan. I'll take the L on that one. I'll remove Polyphony from my initial post. 

Though that's one of several. 

There are other examples. Media Molecule. They made one PS exclusive, LBP on the PS3, and were then bought by Sony. Their purchase, and others you listed, are much closer to being, as you said, "grown from the ground up" than the Obsidian purchase. Literally all of the acquisitions you referenced had closer ties to the company that bought them out than Obsidian would have to MS.

I could have been more diplomatic. It's been a chronic failing in the last few weeks. Wherever this goes from here, I'm sorry for being a dick.



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."

Chazore said:
EspadaGrim said:

IMO it has more to do with the the rising cost of developing games, big independent studios nowadays are being bought up by Outside Investors/Parent Company's. It's getting hard to survive out there and next gen being around the corner won't help those studios either.

Not every game costs a few hundred mil to make, and even then a lot of those AAA games end up spending a lot more on merch and marketing than the game itself.

 

Also, I'd rather not every single IP known to man be snatched up and locked behind each of the big 3 either, let alone PC IP's. 

On the bright side though... Microsoft tends to release their games on the PC as well.

...Even though it's often locked behind that god awful Windows store and not on Steam.

mutantsushi said:
Pemalite said:
This is kinda' the entire industries fault.
People complained about the lack of games, so obviously Microsoft is going to go shopping to rectify said criticisms.

Uh... Weird take. I mean, I don't think it's strange or wrong MS is buying them, or potentially others could consider buying them,
but it isn't "entire industries fault" MS didn't develop more games itself previously, that was MS policy they didn't need Obsidian to change.

Not really a weird take. 
Microsoft has spent all generation long turning around criticisms of the Xbox, higher price, lack of power, size and aesthetics of the console, kinect, always online... List goes on.

All console generation long, people have been complaining about the lack of games on the Xbox One... Last E3 Microsoft announced they had acquired/built 5 new game studios.
This is just another step in that same plan.

I would hate to see Obsidian go... But I would honestly rather Microsoft have them, than EA, Ubisoft or Activision.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:

On the bright side though... Microsoft tends to release their games on the PC as well.

...Even though it's often locked behind that god awful Windows store and not on Steam.

I honestly see that being close to death, since that store doesn't allow for mod support, let alone being able to modify the game. Doesn't help that the playerbase on their is rather small and is mostly gated behind that wall. It still lacks a ton of features that Steam has to boot.



Around the Network
Chazore said:
EspadaGrim said:

IMO it has more to do with the the rising cost of developing games, big independent studios nowadays are being bought up by Outside Investors/Parent Company's. It's getting hard to survive out there and next gen being around the corner won't help those studios either.

Not every game costs a few hundred mil to make, and even then a lot of those AAA games end up spending a lot more on merch and marketing than the game itself.

 

Also, I'd rather not every single IP known to man be snatched up and locked behind each of the big 3 either, let alone PC IP's. 

Yeah not every game cost that much to make but even Hellblade that cost around 10 million to make was still a big risk for Ninja Theory, they also had many of their game pitches turned down by publishers and had to do freelance work in order to keep the lights on. Obsidian needed to use crowdfunding to make their games and were at the brink of being Bankrupt.



EspadaGrim said:

Yeah not every game cost that much to make but even Hellblade that cost around 10 million to make was still a big risk for Ninja Theory, they also had many of their game pitches turned down by publishers and had to do freelance work in order to keep the lights on. Obsidian needed to use crowdfunding to make their games and were at the brink of being Bankrupt.

That was their decision and budget to go with. There is no objective marker for what a game should/should not cost, otherwise, if it was a fabled 10m marker, we'd see very few games these days.

Well, when you look at EA with the likes of "where's your 1b dollar ip?" and other pubs dabbling far too much into MP only with MT's loaded into them, you can start to see why they turned down their game.

I don't think Crowdfunding is a bad thing, especially when it's helped so many indie devs. We are now living in a world where it's not just the pubs devs have to lean their shoulders on, but also gamers as well, and I believe that to being a good thing, rather than just being solely limited to the biggest of publishers out there.



Chazore said:

That was their decision and budget to go with. There is no objective marker for what a game should/should not cost, otherwise, if it was a fabled 10m marker, we'd see very few games these days.

Well, when you look at EA with the likes of "where's your 1b dollar ip?" and other pubs dabbling far too much into MP only with MT's loaded into them, you can start to see why they turned down their game.

I don't think Crowdfunding is a bad thing, especially when it's helped so many indie devs. We are now living in a world where it's not just the pubs devs have to lean their shoulders on, but also gamers as well, and I believe that to being a good thing, rather than just being solely limited to the biggest of publishers out there.

There were more projects of theirs turned down by publishers I wasn't just referencing Razor, Ninja Theory only ever got royalties from 2 of their projects in their entire history DMC and Hellblade. Working with publishers isn't always guaranteed to be successful for Independent company's even Obsidian were screwed over in pay with Fallout:NV and South Park: SoT (although they were to blame by singing on the conditions on their bonus for Fallout).

Crowdfunding isn't a bad thing but it is never guaranteed to be success because not all projects will raise their goal, but a big studio like Obsidian having to resort to it just shows what type of situation they were in and they even confirmed that they were nearly out of cash when they did it.



EspadaGrim said:

There were more projects of theirs turned down by publishers I wasn't just referencing Razor, Ninja Theory only ever got royalties from 2 of their projects in their entire history DMC and Hellblade. Working with publishers isn't always guaranteed to be successful for Independent company's even Obsidian were screwed over in pay with Fallout:NV and South Park: SoT (although they were to blame by singing on the conditions on their bonus for Fallout).

Crowdfunding isn't a bad thing but it is never guaranteed to be success because not all projects will raise their goal, but a big studio like Obsidian having to resort to it just shows what type of situation they were in and they even confirmed that they were nearly out of cash when they did it.

Yes, especially when those publishers hold strict "we get a 90 meta or you lose any bonuses" policy, which doesn't exactly hold out hope for said devs they are supposed to be helping out.

Tbh, I see croundfunding the exact same way I see publishing, you don't know if it's always going to be good, or if the studio will even have a leg to stand on afterwards. In the case of CF, it's the people and the law that will rip the devs apart, should they scre up. With publisher it'll be them who wring the necks of devs who do them bad, but also the people as well.

Them being out of cash has been dealt to them by some bad cards, not simply because they are asking for hundreds of millions to compete some Star Citizen style project. They also haven't always hit a constant set of home runs either, as that would have given them a steady flow of cash to live on. 



EspadaGrim said:
Pemalite said:
This is kinda' the entire industries fault.
People complained about the lack of games, so obviously Microsoft is going to go shopping to rectify said criticisms.

IMO it has more to do with the the rising cost of developing games, big independent studios nowadays are being bought up by Outside Investors/Parent Company's. It's getting hard to survive out there and next gen being around the corner won't help those studios either.

My take on it is, Independents will in the main exist in just a few forms, one is small scale teams doing a combination of making their own ip and contract work in the mobile space another is specialists; by that I mean more independents looking at where the demand is heading in relation to outsourced game related production and becoming more specialised in that direction, an example  might be rather than trying to sell a game proposal to a publisher who most likely want the ip in return for funding, we might see more emphasis on obtaining a contract for remasters/ remakes as a cheaper way to keep afloat and a better way to showcase your talent to the world and it might be a pathway  into becoming the next type of independent the second party studio, these will still be around in some form but even though they are more secure than 3rd party independents they still live with the same realities that affect 3rd parties, that is unless your studio owns one or preferably more successful IP's you will be forever chasing your tail , there are some exemptions like Insomniac but even with all the successful games they created they have had to heavily  rely on Sony and to a lesser extent MS, one of the reasons they spent money on  Fuse rather than do  another second party game at that time was the fact having your own hit game lessens that reliance .  The moral to this story owning, successful ip matters, it might not stop you eventually being swallowed up, but it can help you determine in exactly whose mouth you end up in.