the same way that companies all put out the idea that you can't talk about your salary to others.
...? what are you talking about?the same way that companies all put out the idea that you can't talk about your salary to others.
ah, ok. yeah for sure, that was about crunch inside double fine tho, not really related to acquisitions and other stuff. the captioned moment is tim schafer talking about how amnesia fortnite is the same as before, they just needed to put stuff into paper since they are part of a bigger company now.the caption. "How have we all been trained that this stuff isn't ok to talk about?"
The problem with GP is that it makes sense if MS had more of a share of the console market. One could point out the uphill they've had since X360 where they can be much more competitive than Sony but still won't get a bigger share of the market than them. I think "first console" loyalty is a big thing for a lot of people as seen on this forum where every other post is either port-begging or concern trolling.We tried telling y'all this was unsustainable and that MS was subsidizing the losses of GamePass with the profits of other divisions. Eventually the bill would come due. It has come due and as usual it's not the people in charge who made the utterly incompetent decisions who will pay the price.
All I can say is thank heavens MS was so utterly incompetent they were unable to capitalize on their mass subsidization to capture more of the market before the walls started crumbling down on their heads.
Here's a sampling of some of the posts I personally have made over the last 6 years talking about this subject and warning of the sustainability concerns for this model and the incentives it creates. Going back and looking at these and seeing the replies is really something
Source
Source
Someone earlier in this thread mentioned that in the replies Jez is saying to blame Nadella and not Phil Spencer. I don't have twitter so I can't confirm that.I read that tweet as the criticism is being misdirected. Point it towards the decision makers overseeing the studios, Matt Booty and Phil Spencer.
Exactly. They should have resigned if they were that much opposed to those studios closures. But they didn't.
2019 was the last one though, right?ah, ok. yeah for sure, that was about crunch inside double fine tho, not really related to acquisitions and other stuff. the captioned moment is tim schafer talking about how amnesia fortnite is the same as before, they just needed to put stuff into paper since they are part of a bigger company now.
Saw this brought up as how Matt Booty shows up in the Psychonauts 2 documentary on the topic of moonlighting that devs do with side projects:
View: https://twitter.com/EMBYRDEV/status/1789920968275574807
View: https://twitter.com/ponettplus/status/1789146095433425004
dunno. there were years that it happened and we only found out way after they did, could be the case here since they are focusing on several new projects (at least 3 IIRC). since there was no mass exodus of DF talent after the acquisition, i imagine things have been pretty similar in there.
I'm just talking about how protective he is of Phil, Matt and Sarah in general. They are C-Suite of Xbox, and those 3 are equally responsible for all of these bad decisions.
I mean if Phil really actually genuinely cared about developers, gamers and games wouldn't he resign in protest?
He's likely not that far off retirement anyway - 10 years max - and he is worth hundreds of millions of dollars. It is absolutely no skin off his nose if he stopped working tomorrow. He will be living in the lap of luxury for his remaining days regardless (unlike the developers that lost their jobs). He could take an early retirement while also actually doing some good.
So why doesn't he resign and publicly state how opposed to MS shutting down these studios and that they are doing the wrong thing?
Does he not actually care?
Watching that interview I had a strong impression they're pulling the classic tech company move of throwing female executives under the bus when shit hits the sand.I don't follow Jez closely enough to gauge that, but given his job I'm sure there is some corporate quarterbacking.
All I'm saying is that Sarah Bond was assuredly at the table when these things were being discussed, with the opportunity to voice her perspective, but at the end of the workday it's not her line of business to manage and she can't make decisions for it. Focusing on making Matt Booty and Phil Spencer think twice about how they treat their studios is going to have a better chance of the ire being well spent. I hope they've been tuned in.
It's crazy to me that they put Bond on that Bloomberg interview without Booty or Spencer being hung out to dry beforehand.
Saw this brought up as how Matt Booty shows up in the Psychonauts 2 documentary on the topic of moonlighting that devs do with side projects:
View: https://twitter.com/EMBYRDEV/status/1789920968275574807
View: https://twitter.com/ponettplus/status/1789146095433425004
and still not a single word from phil so far.Watching that interview I had a strong impression they're pulling the classic tech company move of throwing female executives under the bus when shit hits the sand.
For sure she has her share of responsibility, but it shouldn't be just her face in front of bad news.
Saw this brought up as how Matt Booty shows up in the Psychonauts 2 documentary on the topic of moonlighting that devs do with side projects:
View: https://twitter.com/EMBYRDEV/status/1789920968275574807
View: https://twitter.com/ponettplus/status/1789146095433425004
I mean, there's a difference between hobby creation and moonlighting work that you are being paid for. Not saying I agree with their policy but it's not an example of being hypocritical.
Saw this brought up as how Matt Booty shows up in the Psychonauts 2 documentary on the topic of moonlighting that devs do with side projects:
View: https://twitter.com/EMBYRDEV/status/1789920968275574807
View: https://twitter.com/ponettplus/status/1789146095433425004
I'm not sure if I'm understanding this correctly. If an employee creates a game in his/her own time with his/her personal computer, the idea is potentially owned by Double-Fine/Microsoft? Or is it only if it's "officially" submitted to the studio as a potential game idea?
I'd love to read more about this if you have an something handy. So his projects are just for him and his family or something like that?I mean, there's a difference between hobby creation and moonlighting work that you are being paid for. Not saying I agree with their policy but it's not an example of being hypocritical.
Nadella and Hood never asked for these studios to be closed. They asked for Microsoft Gaming to make financial sense. Then the command chain under them, starting with Phil Spencer, Matt Booty, Tim Stuart, Sarah Bond, whoever is the Zenimax CEO, etc decided on which measures they'd take to reach certain financial goals, and the studio closure was their solution.
Right. Nadella is too big to give a shit about micromanaging specific studios. His order was "make the business work the way it's supposed to" and it's all of the Microsoft Gaming execs' responsibility to execute on that. They picked the studios to kill, not the people above them. This shit isn't hard to understand yet people are acting like Nadella and Hood pulled a Littlefinger on people.
This whole wack-a-mole of who to blame really shows the weird levels of fondness people have for these higher ups. People defending the higher ups saying it's not them it was someone else they are on our side is frankly scary. You would think some of the people tweeting/posting/etc were family of these people.
They are all to blame in various ways in which we won't ever be privy to and trying to figure out the percentages of everyone and everything doesn't matter to all the people out of a job.
I think Phil cares. I don't think many of these higher ups wake up trying to hurt the company they are working for. Best of intentions doesn't mean a lot when you are in that position. Even if he had the best of intentions with every decision he's part of the higher ups responsible for a currently in tatters Xbox brand that has needed to close studios due to those decisions.
All the arguing about which rich person at or near the top to blame is so bizzare.
He's talked about it in various interviews that he will just do some hobbyist programming in Unity at home in his free time making little games and experiments. Not with any intent to sell something or publish it.I'd love to read more about this if you have an something handy. So his projects are just for him and his family or something like that?
Wow, that's insane! This is the first time I've heard of this and it's almost hard to believe! How is it legal that stuff done off-hours with personal property belongs to the company?
Talking about that video? That was some low key mob bullshit. "If you want to run a startup quit and do it"Microsoft has enough lawyers and money to the point where legality isn't really a concern for them. They're effectively bullying their own employees to either fall in line or never go public with their off-hours work just by having Booty bringing it up in a meeting.
god this dude is so terrible at his job. I'll never believe Xbox is serious about supporting creatives as long as he's in the position he's in.
Take a look at Matt Booty's LinkedIn and how he describes his time at Midway. He is probably good at the job Microsoft hired him to do. (Stuff like "narrow the company's product line" and "rationalize overhead spending".)
This was always included in the contracts I signed (UK). I just ignored it as they can't enforce it and if you keep it secret how are they going to know. It's a nonsense thing to have in a contract.Wow, that's insane! This is the first time I've heard of this and it's almost hard to believe! How is it legal that stuff done off-hours with personal property belongs to the company?
This is my take. People are less concerned with understanding why Xbox made a move that shot themselves in the foot with the hardcore and more interested in self righteous dunking and moral grandstanding. Every company is laying off right now, it's not anything especially evil about Microsoft doing it. And that's not important to understanding what happened here. Nobody is running a large company and on feelings, it's about money. You don't become a large company on doing what feels right. It's a waste of time looking for someone to rake over the coals or to personify capitalism at Microsoft. What's actually interesting is what they are going to do next and if it will have any impact on their market share and PR image. Shit is bad now because it just happened, but I bet with time passing the doom will recede. I'm not saying let Microsoft off the hook for stupid decisions but, burning your Xbox onesie because Tango closed might be a Little extreme. Coming in to say this is why all Xbox execs are shit, and they want to destroy the industry on purpose is lame too but opinions are free to type into the Internet.I'll never understand people's obsession with pointing fingers at specific people and saying they are responsible, or defending these corporate individuals. It doesn't really matter: stuff like this is always the end result of a string of bad decisions on different levels, and I reckon it's better to say there's something dysfunctional about Microsoft's/Xbox's path (or their misplaced bets) that they should get to the bottom of, instead of caring if Spencer/Bond/whoever the fuck is behind the closure or not.
I get irrationally angry about the usage of these corporate terms. I wish these people were forced to write "took away the livelihoods of 30% of our people" instead. Maybe then they wouldn't act so proud.Don't forget about "reduced staffing by 30%". He's really proud of all the people he fired.
In the end everyone lost their jobs.Don't forget about "reduced staffing by 30%". He's really proud of all the people he fired.
Microsoft has enough lawyers and money to the point where legality isn't really a concern for them. They're effectively bullying their own employees to either fall in line or never go public with their off-hours work just by having Booty bringing it up in a meeting.
Watching that interview I had a strong impression they're pulling the classic tech company move of throwing female executives under the bus when shit hits the sand.
For sure she has her share of responsibility, but it shouldn't be just her face in front of bad news.
But we already know why Xbox closed Tango. They weren't actively working on a game. Their past performance with HFR didn't matter. And that's the crux of it. You can make a fantastic game, a new IP no less, and still not have the chance to continue.This is my take. People are less concerned with understanding why Xbox made a move that shot themselves in the foot with the hardcore and more interested in self righteous dunking and moral grandstanding. Every company is laying off right now, it's not anything especially evil about Microsoft doing it. And that's not important to understanding what happened here. Nobody is running a large company and on feelings, it's about money. You don't become a large company on doing what feels right. It's a waste of time looking for someone to rake over the coals or to personify capitalism at Microsoft. What's actually interesting is what they are going to do next and if it will have any impact on their market share and PR image. Shit is bad now because it just happened, but I bet with time passing the doom will recede. I'm not saying let Microsoft off the hook for stupid decisions but, burning your Xbox onesie because Tango closed might be a Little extreme. Coming in to say this is why all Xbox execs are shit, and they want to destroy the industry on purpose is lame too but opinions are free to type into the Internet.
Lmao. For real.