133 pointsby dijksterhuis3 hours ago29 comments
  • rockyj2 hours ago
    This is a total mess IMHO.

    - The make around 5 billion in revenue per quarter - The problem according to them is profit margin - around 150-160 million

    So first of all, they are big! Secondly they are not at a loss. They just have a "thin, non-growing margin". So to fix all this they are trimming down, so they can "return to growth" (which I think is ridiculous).

    Some points -

    - They are huge business even now - 5 billion per quarter revenue is no joke

    - They did not have to buy all those studios

    - They looked at Netflix, and wanted the sweet monthly subscription cash stream

    - Then they did not have to give away popular games day one on Game Pass

    - And finally, they did not have to raise Game Pass prices to improve the profit margins. Of course, consumers pulled out.

    - Once again, short term vision, crazy decisions, bad spending spree and a constant need to "make numbers go up" and who has to pay for all this?

    • zitterbewegung19 minutes ago
      Xbox around 2021 had around a 12% profit margin and the gaming industry as a whole was around 17-22% . In 2023 the target for the division was put to 30% . We see this new restructuring because the target was put this high. Microsoft really wanted Game Pass to be a steam competitor which is pretty much what everyone in the industry tries to do and fails. The push for Game Pass prices to be higher was to get the 30% margin and that didn't work out. They aren't operating at a loss they are operating at a goal and they failed the goal. From other child comments many studios they bought probably were below average. We can see this restructuring basically is that they failed the target, the old guard went out as the new guard came in.

      https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-10-23/microsoft...

    • hbn2 hours ago
      Game Pass was never a sustainable business model. People liked it because when a new game came out, they could buy a month of game pass for like $15, play through the game in a couple weeks, and cancel. It was a really good deal because Microsoft has spent the past decade+ trying to recover from their terrible fumble of the Xbox One launch, so they were subsidizing gamers to come back to their platform.

      With the money being spent on AAA titles these days, they are not going to make any money without increasing the price of Game Pass majorly. The big price bump they quickly backtracked on was an attempt to make Game Pass somewhere closer to being profitable.

      • tracker144 minutes ago
        They should have just done a 45-60 day delay on new releases and relied on their back catalog to support Game Pass users. Putting funding for bug fixes and updates/upgrades in the games people play. WoW had users paying for years and years... Game Pass could be the same thing, but just with more games and funding based on players that actually use the games. That was probably the bigger mistake.

        The studio buyouts are mixed... I think they may have over-spent on a lot of the acquisitions... but that's just my opinion.

        Beyond all of this, they probably need to do better market research on the level of wokeness their audience actually will tolerate on average. Being understanding to less than 1% of the public isn't the same as forcing the world views of that 1% on the masses. If you're making a game where the natural audience is young men, don't try to rope in a larger audience by making the game suffer. Same goes for general youth content for that matter. Too many brands have been subverted and the natural audience and the brand suffers as a result.

    • etempleton18 minutes ago
      Completely agree. Their problem is that corporate wants more money to funnel back into AI and it is really inconvenient that Xbox provides only a couple billion dollars per month whereas Office and Cloud provide many more billions. What a complete joke.
    • mjr00an hour ago
      > - The make around 5 billion in revenue per quarter - The problem according to them is profit margin - around 150-160 million

      > So first of all, they are big! Secondly they are not at a loss. They just have a "thin, non-growing margin". So to fix all this they are trimming down, so they can "return to growth" (which I think is ridiculous).

      How is that profit margin distributed though? King (Candy Crush etc) and Mojang (Minecraft) are specifically called out as money-makers, it's possible that they're carrying the majority of profits while everything else is a dud:

      > We have also learned that we are not the best home for every type of studio; in a typical year, we lost 64 cents for every dollar we invested.

      As an example, Double Fine (one of the studios being chopped) has released 2 games since 2021, Keeper (191 peak player count on steam) and Kiln (163 peak players); these would be flops even for a normal indie game, for a studio getting Microsoft salaries those are enormous flops.

      • tracker141 minutes ago
        On the margins, that's crazy thin for the size of the org... One bad quarter could turn from a few million in profits to hundreds of millions in losses. It's too close, and there's no way to build/store funds for any kind of storm at that level.

        Now, I think the vast majority of the pain is more than self-inflicted... I think actual business, marketing and focus need to start taking priority over idealistic political PoV. Let the games target their natural audiences and have the broadest appeal... at a certain point, trying to gain 1% of audience means alienating 25% or more.

    • righthand2 hours ago
      Well this is the new Xbox boss, Aska Sharma trying to course correct her own actions after pushing out Phil Spencer (and team). Phil had a deep understanding of the game world about profit margins and how the Xbox is essentially a stake in keeping Microsoft in the minds of consumers, a place in the home. Aska has a shallow understanding and sees only the financials and wanted to increase profits. Now she is burning it all down to try and “reset” and replace people with LLMs to increase profit margins. I imagine she will be pushed out herself end of year or next Spring (2027) once her naïve plan back fires.
      • tapoxian hour ago
        Are you conflating Asha Sharma with Satya Nadella? Asha just joined Xbox, she had no role in any prior decision making.
    • 2OEH8eoCRo0an hour ago
      Compulsively chasing only the highest margins has been toxic for the country as a whole.
      • tracker139 minutes ago
        Gaming has definitely not strictly been doing that... they've been pushing political agendas into games to the detriment of a broader audience appeal.

        The margins they're holding, while not negative are too thin to be maintainable and too risky long term. They're a bad quarter from losing billions.

        • nicebyte30 minutes ago
          2015 called
        • pebble18 minutes ago
          I think you got lost, this is not the Steam forums.
  • hbn2 hours ago
    It was pretty rich seeing armchair video game industry analysts act like the new CEO was gonna usher in a new age for Microsoft's gaming division because she got to announce the updated logo and some games that would have obviously been in development long before she became CEO.

    Microsoft is never going to figure out gaming. It's more art than engineering and they can barely manage the engineering with all the intervention from marketing and HR in their products.

    To me it's mostly unfortunate that this has left PlayStation with no direct competition because they've noticed and leaned into the not-giving-a-shit attitude after they had such a great console generation with the PS4. It's kinda crazy that we're already almost due for a new console generation and there's very little appetite for new consoles after this generation where it feels like it barely got started. And between graphics almost certainly at the point of diminishing returns, and hardware prices like they are right now, I can't imagine there's a market to sell something more capable than current gen consoles. The industry is in a very strange state.

    • tracker134 minutes ago
      To me, the graphics abilities have been there for a decade... what we need are better games and gameplay. More fun games without gotcha, pay to win, loot box efforts. Too much effort is going for dazzling graphics at the expense of overall gameplay. How many people are still playing CoD, WoW and so many other games from over a decade ago? How many refreshes of Final Fantasy have we seen?

      The graphics can only carry you so far. There's indy adventure games with SNES level graphics that have millions of daily users.

      • wincy2 minutes ago
        This is where Nintendo is at. It’s hilarious how much fun me and my kids are having playing games like Animal Crossing, Super Smash Bros, Mario Party, Pokemon Pokopia, and the surprise smash hit has been Tomodachi Life: Living the Dream. My kids make all the neighbors and have them get married and laugh about it and it’s just such a goofy concept. The graphics are good enough that you no longer notice there’s graphics, just the art.

        Switch 2 is a fantastic console with an astonishingly fun first party library, and Nintendo just over there doing their own thing like they’ve always done.

    • whizzter2 hours ago
      The pandemic and scalpers really destroyed peoples apetite for the "new thing" when this generation came out, and with that boost missing studios saw little point in going exclusive perpetuating the vicious cycle, it's just in the past few years that there's really been exclusives for this generation that didn't also support older consoles.

      And even then, already the PS4/XbOne generation added stratification making it more "PC-like" with the XbOne-X having heftier hardware (not to mention it being PC-like compared to PS1/PS2/PS3/Xbox360), that then continued with the Xbox-series-X and Xbox-series-S.

      Consoles aren't specialized hardware for "magic experiences" and everyone knows this, it's just another "device" that happens to be connected to a TV with a controller where people are gatekeeping software availability.

      • maples37an hour ago
        Microsoft also didn't do themselves any favor with that naming scheme. In the current generation (I think?), you have: - Xbox X - Xbox S - Xbox Series X - Xbox Series S

        Compared to: - PlayStation 5 - PlayStation 5 Pro

        or: - Nintendo Switch - Nintendo Switch OLED - Nintendo Switch Lite

        Anyone who's literate in English (and knows that OLED means "nicer screen") can immediately rank the PlayStations and Switches into "good, better, best". But with the Xbox, how is anyone supposed to know which one is which? Is the Series version better or worse? Is it a whole new generation, with whatever backwards-compatability implications that a new generation brings? I need a chart and I probably still won't be able to tell you if you ask me in a month.

        • bobbob192115 minutes ago
          This is absolutely correct, I game on Xbox pretty much every day or every other day, I have been with Xbox since 360 or whatever the first one was called. I am still constantly confused by the naming. There also was another revision to the top of the line Xbox series X and the Xbox series X digital edition. I can’t imagine someone looking at the naming scheme pre-release and saying yes, let’s go with that.
        • hbnan hour ago
          Slight correction. Last generation was the Xbox One (already a confusing name because some people thought that was referring to the original first Xbox)

          A few years into the generation they updated the Xbox One, putting it into a smaller form factor called the Xbox One S, and at the same time released a spec bump model called the Xbox One X. I don't believe any of these are still available for purchase.

          The new generation has the smaller/lower-powered Xbox Series S, and the higher-specced Xbox Series X. Leaving the overall generation with seemingly no name, other than "Xbox Series" I guess?

          But yes, the names are terrible because S and X both refer to consoles from last gen and current gen.

    • MisterTeaan hour ago
      > And between graphics almost certainly at the point of diminishing returns, and hardware prices like they are right now, I can't imagine there's a market to sell something more capable than current gen consoles.

      I haven't bought a console since the Xbox360 and Wii. But I have a friend who still games pretty heavily and is low income. He can not afford the latest PS5 and is still on a PS4. We were talking the other day and he said "I love consoles because they are simpler and cheaper than a PC but now I can't afford either. The graphics aren't getting much better so what am I paying for? What happened to $400-$500 consoles? Remember when consoles were 200-300?" Of course those last few prices were 90/00's but I agree, the cost of a new console is quite insane for not much gain.

      • biggestfan19 minutes ago
        > Of course those last few prices were 90/00's

        Two years ago, you could get an XBOX/Switch for 300, or a PS/Steam Deck for 400. Granted, the PS and XBOX were digital only. But now the cheapest XBOX is 500, the Switch 2 will soon also be 500, the PS5 starts at 600, and the Steam Deck is 789. Things have been going up slowly, but the last year has been absolutely killer.

      • WorldMaker24 minutes ago
        $200 in 1985 (NES launch price/date), adjusted for inflation is just shy of $600 in 2026. RAM and GPU prices are really hurting the consoles right now, but compared to inflation benchmarks up until about 2020 they were considerably below inflation.
    • llm_nerd25 minutes ago
      When she was announced it was broadly assumed that she was being brought in to kill the division.

      But then she did some minor, pandering actions and suddenly everyone was "oh boy! A new era of xbox!" Only it was all a ruse to ensure people didn't jump ship too quickly and make the bleeding too heavy. They want people to keep pumping money into a platform heading to the graveyard.

      • sometimes_all4 minutes ago
        > Only it was all a ruse to ensure people didn't jump ship too quickly and make the bleeding too heavy

        You go when we tell you to go! Not before!

  • athorax2 hours ago

      It is neither possible nor desirable to own every great independent studio. We have also learned that we are not the best home for every type of studio
    
    This is shockingly self-aware for microsoft
    • saghman hour ago
      Yes, but only because the bar is so low. "We can't commodotize innovation" is not an especially subtle insight, and pretty much everyone other than executives at companies like this understand it without having to spend billions to try it out.
    • markus_zhang8 minutes ago
      I have no idea why they didn’t realize that earlier, or if there is any insider dealing involved, from my cynical thoughts.
    • thomastjeffery2 hours ago
      ...more like

      > We can't afford it, and it's a bad investment anyway

      • joe_mamba2 hours ago
        >> We can't afford it

        But they've already spent the money. They spent about 70 billion on activision blizzard. That was and still is an outrageous amount of money that will take fever to break even let alone turn a profit.

        • appreciatorBus2 hours ago
          Just because they already spent the money yesterday, it does not follow that the best decision today is to just carry on as if was still the correct decision. Yes they cannot get that 70B back, but if they have to choose between:

          1. a long dragged out distraction over decades trying to make it work

          2. a painful but quick 40B write down and the ability to refocus the company on better projects tomorrow

          .. then they are, quite rightly imo, going to pick #2. In fact I would assume this going to be the next announcment.

        • thomastjeffery2 hours ago
          They can't afford to buy every other successful studio, which means that their anticompetitive moat has to be competitive. Otherwise, they could have made the whole thing profitable the usual Microsoft (monopolist) way.
        • iAMkenoughan hour ago
          They bought a content competitor, now they get to "reset" their vision for it. Mission successful.
  • speak_plainly2 hours ago
    At some point, the games industry decided it wanted to be interactive Hollywood, and the consequences are entirely predictable. Meanwhile, Nintendo just quietly shipped 3.8 million units of Tomodachi Life in two weeks, and 4 million of Pokopia in five. They're making actual games. Sony's obsession with prestige cinematic bloat, like Xbox, has also put them in a slow-motion death spiral that's going to become painfully obvious in a few years.
    • piltdownman2 hours ago
      To some extent - but you can't get away with Hollywood Accounting Practices in the same way.

      Also one must consider the likes of Hideo Kojima who can sell ~7 million copies of a new IP that is effectively a cinematic Walking Simulator as an Auteur acrimoniously splitting from the traditional studio system.

      Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 also shipped over 5.4 million copies as a AA, in what is also arguably an interactive cinematic on-rails RPG.

      • theragraan hour ago
        Nah, expedition has enough of a game in it. Parry mechanic is pretty addictive, and gameplay is kinda fun. Exploration, too, is strictly gaming aspect, not cinematic.

        God of war is plainly movie on rails compared to E33

      • 99990000099911 minutes ago
        A walking simulator that has you fighting between multiple dimensions and is one of the best looking games of its generation.
    • manytimesaway2 hours ago
      Things are not that black and white.

      Nintendo also shipped Metroid Prime 4, with massive delays and unsatisfied customers, following the same "interactive Hollywood" philosophy which disappointed Metroid fans.

      Same thing goes for Star Fox, a remake of a remake of a remake, with poor visual and dialogue choices.

      And meanwhile, the same silent push for digital-only, forced upgrades and the like...

      • saghman hour ago
        > Nintendo also shipped Metroid Prime 4, with massive delays and unsatisfied customers, following the same "interactive Hollywood" philosophy which disappointed Metroid fans.

        I'm not convinced that Metroid at least really is a great data point for "Nintendo is ruining things in-house". From Wikipedia[1]:

        > Nintendo announced Metroid Prime 4 with a teaser trailer during the Nintendo Direct presentation at E3 2017, and announced that Retro Studios, who developed the previous main Prime games, would not be involved.[15][16] In February 2018, Eurogamer reported that Prime 4 was being developed by Bandai Namco Studios in Japan and Singapore.

        > In January 2019, the Nintendo EPD manager Shinya Takahashi announced that development had restarted under Retro with Tanabe remaining as producer. Takahashi said the previous studio had not met Nintendo's standards and that the decision to restart was not taken lightly.[21] Shortly after, Nintendo reevaluated Prime 4 after noticing changing attitudes towards open-world games, but maintained the direction as the development was already taking longer than planned. The team ignored new developments in action and shooting games to prioritize the adventure elements.

        There's a perspective where this is almost the exact opposite of the problem being discussed about Microsoft. They chose to let it get developed externally, suffered delays, and by the time they moved it back in-house, the ecosystem had moved from under them. They probably could have chosen to rethink everything and delay it further, but they also arguably could have avoided having to make that call by keeping it in-house and letting the studio who made the previous entries work on it from the start and landing it in time that the original vision still fit what people wanted.

        [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metroid_Prime_4:_Beyond#Develo...

        • manytimesaway4 minutes ago
          My point wasn't about Nintendo ruining things in-house rather than them following the exact same trends than Sony & Microsoft, only a few years late.

          MP4 is what OP was talking about, an "interactive Hollywood" experience that betrays previous Metroids, adds discutable open-world design cues, and locks features behind $30 figures.

      • butlikean hour ago
        I'm curious about the Star Fox comment. Tell me if I got this wrong:

        A remake (1) of a remake (2) of a remake (3)

        (1) A remake (Switch 2 Starfox, a remake of StarFox 64)

        (2) StarFox 64 (A remake of Super Nintendo's StarFox)

        (3) ??? I don't know what the 3rd level of remake you mention is, but I'm curious!

        • manytimesaway7 minutes ago
          Star Fox (SNES), Star Fox 2 (SNES mini), Star Fox 64, Star Fox 64 3D, Star Fox Zero and Star Fox (Switch 2), while having minor gameplay differences, are all retellings of the same in-game story (the eponymous Lylat Wars).
        • WorldMaker22 minutes ago
          Between 1 and 2 was the 3DS remake which added levels and cleaned up the story some. The Switch Starfox includes those parts, too, from what I've heard.
      • speak_plainly2 hours ago
        [flagged]
  • dagmx2 hours ago
    This is incredibly sad for a lot of my friends who are finding themselves out of work despite delivering well received products.

    But at the same time I appreciate the candor of Asha saying that the corporate management are to blame and letting studios go back to being independent where possible.

    Phil Spencer really messed up. Everyone in the industry knew Microsoft were making bad calls trying to dig themselves a hole with gamepass and simultaneously digging a hole with their acquisition spree. I’m glad that Asha is laying this bare even though it sucks to be brought in as the hatchet person.

    This is an example of the glass cliff and I’m hoping she can help right the ship. I think they need to split to a wholly owned subsidiary rather than be in Microsoft proper, and I expect that to be announced at the Q1 investor meetings.

    Phil really dug their hole deep. Microsoft themselves encouraged it. It’s been a decade of sheer incompetence at the highest level so I’m hoping they can right this without taking out half the industry in their wake.

    • 2 hours ago
      undefined
    • righthand2 hours ago
      I disagree, it wasn’t Phil that dug a hole but Asha who pushed Phil out with no plan. Why is Asha finally revealing her plan years later if she was such a good fit? She came in trying to automate away peoples jobs with AI for the last year or so and that is obviously failing. It wasn’t Phil that invested the entire company’s well being on stochastic parrots.

      She has done everything but focus on delivering games (product).

      • scott_wan hour ago
        Just looking at Sharma’s history, she rejoined MS in 2024. Xbox was struggling long before that, so I don’t see how anyone can blame Sharma for the past 10 years…
        • WorldMakeran hour ago
          Xbox has been profitable almost continuously since a few years into the Xbox 360. It's fascinating how "profitable but low margins" equates to "struggling" to so many.
          • saghman hour ago
            Right? It seems intuitive that markets can eventually saturate, and that there's a floor for how low you can get costs, so growth can't be infinite. Maybe you could make an argument that you want to grow in scale with inflation so that your profit doesn't eventually become meaningless, but you don't need to "reset" your multi-billion dollar revenue business to achieve that; you can get that by just bumping prices in line with inflation every few years.
        • butlikean hour ago
          You can blame her for the last 10 years because she's CEO _now_. That's what you do. You blame the head of the organization for the organization's problems.
        • WhereIsTheTruth18 minutes ago
          Ratio of consoles sold Xbox vs PS5 was 1:3 before that, after that it fell in the 1:10 territories (december 2025)

          Using Phil as a scapegoat and Sharma as the savior is disingenuous.. and is honestly pretty consistent with how i view Microslop: opportunists, tasteless, and visionless executives, shareholders and fanboys

          The fall of Xbox started before the launch of thier current gen:

          - HW: they announced 2 SKUs, with polar opposite performance profiles

          - SW: their system sellers got delayed to couple years

          The reset needs to happen at the highest executive order, not at the lowest, workers implement whatever project was greenlit

          People chose PS5/Switch over Xbox (it now sells 3x less than Switch 1, wich is a previous gen console), people see through the lies of the media

      • nhinck2an hour ago
        a) Asha didnt push Phil out.

        b) She's been in the role for 4ish months, not years.

  • VikingCoder19 minutes ago
    "And we will streamline how we work across our tools, with a cleaner code base, shared services, and 50% reduced vendor spend."

    How will they achieve cleaner code, with fewer workers? Seems like a well-intentioned platitude.

    • Joel_Mckay5 minutes ago
      Or... studio publishers may be encouraged to use a proprietary platform specific engine. Trying to dethrone UE5 would be silly. =3
  • tangenter2 hours ago
    Game Pass has caused a lot of direct sales losses to game developers in favor of Microsoft trying to find a Netflix-like cash cow for itself. The numbers never added up, but it is not a surprise everyone nodded and went along with it. I wonder what the career repercussions would be for speaking up - but it doesn’t matter because they are getting fired anyway.

    Call of Duty alone lost $300 million: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2026/04/microsofts-game-pass-...

    I look forward to the source code leaks.

    • BadBadJellyBean2 hours ago
      I was always very skeptical of the $300 million figure. It sounded like the same math that the movie industry used for pirating. If I was subscribed to Game Pass I might have downloaded CoD to see what it's about. That doesn't mean I would have paid full price for it.
      • joshstrangean hour ago
        > Last year, Bloomberg reported that Microsoft estimated it had lost $300 million in direct sales of Call of Duty games due to the title’s inclusion in Game Pass, according to an anonymous employee.

        Yeah, that's a bullshit number. It's like when people provide piracy counts as lost direct sales, a lot of people will download something for free, those same people won't always pay full price if they can't download it for free.

        I downloaded a TON of games from Game Pass, played <1hr, and uninstalled. Without GP I would have just never bought the game.

  • kristjansson2 hours ago
    > We will deliver success through a flatter organization that is built around makers (individual contributors focused on building), player-coaches (leaders who remain deeply involved in the work while developing their teams), and directly responsible individuals (DRIs) who own key decisions and outcomes.

    xbox-specific issues aside, this proposes an interesting view of the future of work.

    • badprose20 minutes ago
      Isn't this basically the same structure they currently use i.e. individual contributors, managers, and producers?
  • 1970-01-013 hours ago
    They will just continue smash thru exactly what is killing them because they do not know how to reset. More micro transactions, Halo 14-39, games launching before they're ready, price increases, etc. All of that looks good on paper, so they will take no action against. The XBOX is hitting icebergs, and instead of slowing down, they will just call for more speed.
    • WorldMaker35 minutes ago
      Microsoft laid off most of its Halo talent in a previous lay off cycle, stripping 343 Industries of most of its staff and rebooting it as Halo Studios as a shell to mostly outsource development to other companies in the way that Call of Duty was built on the game development equivalent of sweat shops. They've already shown that they don't have the guts to make Halo 14-39, they seem to be only doing yet another remake of Halos 1-3 and maybe Reach, this time in Unreal and with "AI" to help "upscale" everything. Just four Halo games endlessly remade until people forget why they were ever originally popular.
  • ChocolateGod3 hours ago
    I think some of these game studios got so content with Microsoft constantly paying that they forgot to make games that would actually sell.

    South of Midnight took 7 years to make and cost $100 million to make... yet sold hardly any copies and I'm not even sure who they were trying to make it for.

    Meanwhile you have studios like Sandfall and Warhorse pumping out games on a fraction of the budget that ship millions (and imho, make better games).

    • c-hendricks2 hours ago
      Compulsion Games was also a strange acquisition / team to decide to put $100M + 7 years of trust into. They had two games by that point, neither with amazing reviews.
    • saghman hour ago
      > I think some of these game studios got so content with Microsoft constantly paying that they forgot to make games that would actually sell.

      I mean, if you're assuming that Microsoft had a fully hands-off approach to managing these companies after buying them, then sure. It's not clear to me that you can make a compelling claim about whether the issues were from the bottom or the top just by looking at the final outputs.

      • WorldMaker40 minutes ago
        Plus there's plenty of evidence that Microsoft hasn't been hands off across that time period. At the very least we've seen them cancel a Rare game and layoff a bunch of Rare staff because of it, The Initiative shut down for not meeting game development goals, 343 Industries stripped apart for low results versus expectations with Halo Infinite and the "new" Halo Studios is basically just a shell and an outsourcing venture in direct line with ActiVision's old Call of Duty tactics.
    • WorldMaker3 hours ago
      Millions of people played South of Midnight even if sales didn't reflect it. Xbox Game Pass has done a lot to make Xbox sales figures hard to compare.
      • ChocolateGod2 hours ago
        How many people would have played if it wasn't on Game Pass though? I doubt many.

        Expedition 33 was on game pass and still sold 8 million copies.

        • WorldMaker2 hours ago
          At least from what I saw the game had a huge amount of hype leading up to its launch and the thing that kept people from buying it was just playing enough of it on Game Pass. For some players it was too short and everything they wanted to accomplish was easily done with Game Pass shortly after its launch. For other players like me we bounced off of its tone while playing it. The stop motion animated intro felt like a bait and switch going into its game play, and I had a bunch of uncomfortable feelings about cultural appropriation from a Montreal studio trying to capture a "deep South bayou" aesthetic and failing at some of the subtleties, from what I saw.
  • bob10292 hours ago
    > We will reduce management layers to no more than 5, and where possible, 3.

    This reads like something from The Office.

    • righthand2 hours ago
      Michael begging Oscar to tell the shareholders how to save the company.
  • franze2 hours ago
    When I bought my XBox i spent half a day setting up an account and payments.

    Good old times. The last time I tried to buy something on Xbox it fails miserable with multiple cryptic error messages - mostly around my credit card.

    No problem though to biy the game on my mac via browser and then after a few more settings actually showed up on my xbox.

  • protimewaster2 hours ago
    Xbox has an interesting opportunity going forward, that I expect they'll fumble.

    Interest in physical media has actually been on the upswing, and, with Sony announcing their plans to abandon physical media, it feels like MS has a chance be the "good guys" like what Sony did to MS when MS threatened to ruin physical media prior to the Xbox One release.

    However, I'm expecting Microsoft to simply follow Sony's path, because I think they are already going down a path that favors digital-only, and I also think they just don't care to distinguish themselves. It seems like Xbox's claim to fame for the past few years is "It has game pass, and it can play a lot of the same games PlayStation can."

    • saghman hour ago
      > Interest in physical media has actually been on the upswing, and, with Sony announcing their plans to abandon physical media, it feels like MS has a chance be the "good guys" like what Sony did to MS when MS threatened to ruin physical media prior to the l One release.

      Not only that, but RAM/GPU/SSD prices going up so much recently (which is especially jarring for SSDs, which for like a decade had been getting more affordable; I bought a 120 GB SATA SSD in 2012 for around $100, and I was able to buy a 1 TB m.2 one for around the same price a few years ago) is starting to equalize pricing for PC gaming. In 2022, the initial Steam Deck launched for just $400, and it continued to be offered at that price for a few years, which made it cheaper than the Switch 2 launch price.

      I feel like if I were a console manufacturer, I would be trying to figure out a way to take advantage of that. Other than price (previously), the other obvious selling point of PC gaming is more control over your system, so there could be an opening to try to lure away wayward PC gamers with some changes that give them a bit more control on the console. I agree with you that I can't really imagine Microsoft doing this though.

    • jeppesteran hour ago
      Xbox is ahead of Sony on this path. Their studios often, if not most of the time, release physical games that require a full download to play.

      I doubt that they will go back to where Sony are now.

      • protimewasteran hour ago
        > I doubt that they will go back to where Sony are now.

        I agree. However, I do think they would get some positive attention (and some accompanying sales) if they were to backtrack and announce a console more like the 360.

        It feels doable if they care to do it. Physical media should still be viable for holding all the game data for a while longer. Blurays can manage up to 128 GB, and I think the average game install size is ~60GB right now, giving most games some room to grow.

        The biggest issue with a strategy like that is that they're, like you said, pushing digital-only hard already, and they're also trying to save money, so the idea of spending more money to make future consoles with disk drives, and to make disks, is unlikely to appeal to them.

        It is a shame, though, because it seems like the Xbox 360 will have been widely viewed as peak Xbox until the end of Xbox.

  • _joel24 minutes ago
    "role eliminations".. So people losing jobs then :/
  • theragraan hour ago
    It a pity. So many good studios gutted, for the only reason "margins too thin"
  • zzixpan hour ago
    Impacted non-studio dev here. It's a bloodbath like some of the leaks in the past few weeks have said. Many important platform/infra teams getting gutted, even in areas where there's supposedly a ton of future investment.
  • bearcobra2 hours ago
    On one hand, the idea of using Microsoft’s crazy amounts of money to try to build a subscription gaming business feels like it should have been more successful than it has been. On the other, I think gaming has some distinct qualities vs TV/Movies/Music or other types of software that makes the idea seem way less appealing. Curious to see what the new direction looks like
  • dcrazy2 hours ago
    Any details about the studio spin-outs? The rumors were that Double Fine etc. would be closed, but all we know now is that some of them are being sold to management and others are being sold to other investors. Nothing about any commensurate restructurings.
    • Centigonal2 hours ago
      It's in the press release.

      > Compulsion Games and Double Fine Productions will return to management and transition to independent studios with their IP, catalog, and runway for their next games. Ninja Theory and Undead Labs have entered terms to join new ownership with funding to complete and grow Senua and State of Decay 3. In France, Arkane’s management is beginning required consultation with its Works Council to review potential strategic options.

      • jentulman6 minutes ago
        I'm hopeful (but maybe not optimistic) that Arkane gets out of this with the ability to do what they're really good at again.
      • dcrazy2 hours ago
        Yeah, that is what I was referring to about the lack of detail on restructuring. I want to know if people are losing their jobs and/or titles are being cancelled as part of these sales.
        • WorldMaker2 hours ago
          Senua and State of Decay 3 are the only currently announced titles of the studios in question and it does say that those games will be completed by their studios under their new owner. It's still an interesting mystery who the new owner will be, though.
  • theragraan hour ago
    I wonder about the future of inExile and clockwork revolution
  • haunter2 hours ago
    >Today, in some parts of the company, work passes through as many as 14 layers of management.

    Not even national security institutions operate like this

  • joshstrangean hour ago
    I think the Xbox Series X will be my last Xbox after owning Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox One, and the Xbox Series X. I was all-in on their platform and I even paid for Game Pass for many years.

    But they kept increasing the cost of Game Pass with no new features, the platform has seemed stagnant, and honestly I can't tell you why my Series X is better than my Xbox One. Literally I don't see a difference. I'm sure there is one but as a user I really didn't feel like it was a big step up. I bought it because I had every other Xbox and it seemed like the next logical step.

    That coupled with most games feeling like lootboxes wrapped in just enough of a game to justify calling it one, at higher and higher price points, all while trying to get more money after they've taken your $70/$80 for the base game. Oh wait, you bought the poor-person $70 version? You really need to the Ultra Collectors Edition Gold Special Release Version for $120. Oh also, make sure you are buying the season pass...

    Meanwhile I buy games on my steam deck and/or from indie developers for a max of $30 and get way more gameplay/fun that the "AAA" games (which have largely sucked IMHO).

    I'm over here playing Mass Effect 1-3, Skyrim, Fallout 4, and other games OVER A DECADE AGO. They are the only games not completely ruined by lootboxes, always-online BS, or trying to sell you a shell of a game with extras you have to buy [0]. I was excited for Starfield (Skyrim in space!!) but it was a complete bust. After spending, quite literally, 1000's of hours in Skyrim (and buying and rebuying the Anniversary/Special/Collector's edition enough times to be embarrassing) I could not get excited about Starfield and stopped playing after a few hours. The new Halo was meh, I played through it and the open world was somewhat cool but I guess they wanted to do seasons of new content and I have zero interest in that. Give me a solid single player game, that's all I want. I cancelled Game Pass after realizing I was paying an absurd amount of money to play a single game (Deep Rock Galactic).

    I think I'll stick to my Steam Deck which I enjoy way more than my Series X.

    [0] Yes, Skyrim/Fallout had expansion content but it's tame compared to most games today.

  • 12_throw_awayan hour ago

      I want XBOX to be one of the few companies that entertains more than a billion people each day
    
    "more than a billion"? What are we doing here? Do you have any idea what your target market is? Surely someone in your organization can provide you with a good stretch goal ... >10% of all humans using an XBox daily is not that.

    Seriously, I cannot fathom why you would say this. Innumeracy? Narcissistic delusion? Stealth launch for a new industrial human cloning project?

    • babelfish3 minutes ago
      There are approx ~3 billion "gamers" worldwide, why shouldn't Xbox set a goal of 1/3 of them using their platform?
  • colechristensen11 minutes ago
    >we will help independent creators succeed by providing open development tools and audiences to realize their vision.

    Bravo!

    >Today, in some parts of the company, work passes through as many as 14 layers of management.

    LMAO – reset approved.

  • ChrisArchitect3 hours ago
    Related:

    Microsoft cuts 4,800 Jobs, Half from Xbox division

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48804401

  • clonedhuman3 hours ago
    Continuing the long trend of major tech companies making everything they touch worse.
  • scuff3dan hour ago
    "Management fucked up, and now you all get to pay for it. Have a nice day :)"
  • calvinmorrison2 hours ago
    "Today, in some parts of the company, work passes through as many as 14 layers of management. Our platform teams are 40% larger than they were at the start of this generation, even as our player base and playtime have declined. "
  • tevli2 hours ago
    [dead]
  • georgeburdell2 hours ago
    [flagged]