By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Ryuu96 on 01 June 2023

I'm so fucking confused now, everyone saying that it wasn't possible, Microsoft saying it might be.

I don't know what is going to happen or what is possible.



Around the Network
Machiavellian on 01 June 2023
smroadkill15 said:
Machiavellian said:

Its way more complicated that that.  Just because a group of people are excited about what they are doing does not mean the product will be a success.  Instead what makes a product a success is strong leadership in understanding how to execute whatever their vision is for a product.  A strong direction and understanding of what is required for a successful product is way better than people being excited about what they are doing.  I have been on many projects where people were excited about what they were doing but miss big time on what would make the project a success.  Also having to many cooks in the room can make a product appear incohesive which is also an issue.  

I know it is. What I'm saying is, they need to make sure the team is on board when deciding on what project to make and then go from there. 

I still disagree with this as well.  Its not whether the team is on board, its whether the team has a clear vision of what they need to do.  You will always get to much opinions on what the team needs to do but there needs to be a clear leader who knows exactly what should be done and knows how to execute that plan.  I have been in way to many meetings where everyone has an opinion and if you let everyone opinions run wild you never get anything done.  There needs to be that leader who can take everyone opinion, make a decision some times even tough decisions that will not make everyone happy and then execute it.  This is where I see the problem in this report the most is that the leadership did not know how to execute what they wanted and thus the whole project is rudderless and will fail.



EpicRandy on 01 June 2023
Shaunodon said:

Where does this 'damned if they do, damned if they don't' angle come from?

It'd be one thing if they felt like they had no choice but to release the game out of pressure. But they didn't just stop there. They also made it the centre of their first developer showcase for the year; made it the only AAA exclusive for the first half of the year, the first since Halo Infinite; and even chose it as the first game they'd price at $70. How can you put this much backing behind a project without knowing the disastrous state it's in, and expect to not be blamed when you're the parent company?

I'm all for them taking a hands-off approach when it comes to letting the developers and studios have full creative freedom, but to not have accurate and up-to-date information on those projects and what you're planning to put out to market, just makes them look negligent.

Phil can try his hardest to clean up this PR disaster, but his job will continue to be impossible if he doesn't make sure he's getting the right information when he needs it, rather than after the damage is done.

@bold: But that's the job of the publisher, if MS starts to distrust Bethesda so much that it overrules them then MS just need to merge Bethesda publishing into Xbox.



G2ThaUNiT on 01 June 2023
EpicRandy said:
Shaunodon said:

Where does this 'damned if they do, damned if they don't' angle come from?

It'd be one thing if they felt like they had no choice but to release the game out of pressure. But they didn't just stop there. They also made it the centre of their first developer showcase for the year; made it the only AAA exclusive for the first half of the year, the first since Halo Infinite; and even chose it as the first game they'd price at $70. How can you put this much backing behind a project without knowing the disastrous state it's in, and expect to not be blamed when you're the parent company?

I'm all for them taking a hands-off approach when it comes to letting the developers and studios have full creative freedom, but to not have accurate and up-to-date information on those projects and what you're planning to put out to market, just makes them look negligent.

Phil can try his hardest to clean up this PR disaster, but his job will continue to be impossible if he doesn't make sure he's getting the right information when he needs it, rather than after the damage is done.

but to not have accurate and up-to-date information on those projects and what you're planning to put out to market, just makes them look negligent.

But that's the job of the publisher, if MS starts to distrust Bethesda so much that it overrules them then MS just need to merge Bethesda publishing into Xbox.

I mean, I've personally always felt that Bethesda Softworks the publisher should be done away with and merged into XGSP, but that's just me lol



Angelus on 01 June 2023
Machiavellian said:
Angelus said:

Schreier literally reported the devs there were HOPING that MS would come in and make changes, so we can't say that people would be leaving left and right if MS had done exactly what various people on the team were apparently WANTING. And I'm really not down with the idea of letting a studio fail so they can then be more accepting of oversight. That's just a downright horrible leadership philosophy. 

If they were hoping that does not mean they actually communicated this need.  This is the problem I see a lot.  People hoping for something to happen but keeping their mouth shut and expecting things to just change.  Also another issue is that we are only getting tidbits of information and usually one sided.  This always leads to opinions made on incomplete information.  We have really no clue all the details which is the issue.  Basing an opinion on just one report not knowing the full scope leads to jumping to a lot of conclusions.  The only real thing we know is that Redfall was a project with a lot of problems where communication broke down in a number of areas.  Blame is the first thing everyone wants to jump to do but I have seen working under such conditions that its way more complicated.

I wasn't interested in blame at all. I just want MS to actually pay attention to their studios, and take action, when necessary, to ensure that they're charting the best possible path forward...even if it means making some unpleasant choices from time to time. I want them to be pro-active, instead of reactive after the fact. And I'm utterly baffled by the fact that some people apparently think that's somehow unreasonable. 



Around the Network
Ryuu96 on 01 June 2023

So basically Microsoft has to.

  1. Find a way around CMA's block against them in acquiring any % of Activision-Blizzard-King.
  2. Find a way around CMA's fines for ignoring their order of $5b-$10bn.

I believe #2 can be done via the regular courts and Microsoft can fight either the fine itself or the amount.

But if CAT sides with CMA then I really don't see how Microsoft fights it. CAT would surely then side with CMA on #1 and #2.

And even if they pull Activision out of UK, CMA still has a worldwide acquisition restriction on them, and CMA can still fine Microsoft itself, Lol.

Unprecedented times, it's probably why this whole thing is so confusing.



EpicRandy on 01 June 2023
gtotheunit91 said:
EpicRandy said:

but to not have accurate and up-to-date information on those projects and what you're planning to put out to market, just makes them look negligent.

But that's the job of the publisher, if MS starts to distrust Bethesda so much that it overrules them then MS just need to merge Bethesda publishing into Xbox.

I mean, I've personally always felt that Bethesda Softworks the publisher should be done away with and merged into XGSP, but that's just me lol

I think so too, but I don't know if there were specific clauses in the acquisition deals that made Bethesda continue to directly oversee all their prior studios with limited intervention.



Ryuu96 on 01 June 2023
EpicRandy said:
gtotheunit91 said:

I mean, I've personally always felt that Bethesda Softworks the publisher should be done away with and merged into XGSP, but that's just me lol

I think so too, but I don't know if there were specific clauses in the acquisition deals that made Bethesda continue to directly oversee all their prior studios with limited intervention.

Good point and honestly wouldn't be surprising if it's literally written into the contract.

Microsoft created a whole "limited integration" for Linkedin, Mojang and Zenimax so the contract itself may have some independence stipulations.

It would also protect Zenimax employees because the moment Zenimax merges into Xbox, they'll be massive layoffs.

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 01 June 2023

EpicRandy on 01 June 2023
Ryuu96 said:

So basically Microsoft has to.

  1. Find a way around CMA's block against them in acquiring any % of Activision-Blizzard-King.
  2. Find a way around CMA's fines for ignoring their order of $5b-$10bn.

I believe #2 can be done via the regular courts and Microsoft can fight either the fine itself or the amount.

But if CAT sides with CMA then I really don't see how Microsoft fights it. CAT would surely then side with CMA on #1 and #2.

And even if they pull Activision out of UK, CMA still has a worldwide acquisition restriction on them, and CMA can still fine Microsoft itself, Lol.

Unprecedented times, it's probably why this whole thing is so confusing.

I think there was a prior case where CMA fines were ultimately overruled but I have limited time to seek it out right now.

If they actually do #2 then maybe it is possible that MS kill XCloud for the UK and argue when challenging the fines that CMA issues are non-standing anymore.



Machiavellian on 01 June 2023
EpicRandy said:
Shaunodon said:

Where does this 'damned if they do, damned if they don't' angle come from?

It'd be one thing if they felt like they had no choice but to release the game out of pressure. But they didn't just stop there. They also made it the centre of their first developer showcase for the year; made it the only AAA exclusive for the first half of the year, the first since Halo Infinite; and even chose it as the first game they'd price at $70. How can you put this much backing behind a project without knowing the disastrous state it's in, and expect to not be blamed when you're the parent company?

I'm all for them taking a hands-off approach when it comes to letting the developers and studios have full creative freedom, but to not have accurate and up-to-date information on those projects and what you're planning to put out to market, just makes them look negligent.

Phil can try his hardest to clean up this PR disaster, but his job will continue to be impossible if he doesn't make sure he's getting the right information when he needs it, rather than after the damage is done.

@bold: But that's the job of the publisher, if MS starts to distrust Bethesda so much that it overrules them then MS just need to merge Bethesda publishing into Xbox.

Pretty much this.  Its a fine line when Bethesda as the publisher of this game was not giving enough warning signs that this game was not up to snuff to release because at the end of the day, MS has to trust that Bethesda to know where their projects are at without having to nurse them like a child.  This probably undermined Bethesda more than anything else which as I stated now puts MS in a position where communication between the 2 companies are probably going to change so something like this does not happen again.  Remember the statement from Phil where he stated a user test of the game put it around the 80s.  Who did that test, was it Bethesda and if so, was it doctored.  There is definitely missing information we do not have concerning the whole issue.