More stories in the News category
| Don’t miss anything and follow us on Google News! |
At present, there is no denying that the Xbox division suffers from a terrible crisis of identity and credibility. There are a lot of words that have been said with displeasure by the current management, from the fact that they learned a lot from the closure of Lionhead and that the same story would not repeat itself, to the fact that they need small games that will give them prestige after the closure of Tango Gameworks, the only studio that has showered Microsoft with awards over the last 10 years. It’s said soon.
No one can understand the reasons that led Phil Spencer and his team to close two recently purchased studios and restructure two others with corresponding layoffs. To be honest, the restructuring is actually a closure, but partial.
Playing at being everywhere carries risks
The fact is that Mike Ybarra, who was corporate vice president of Microsoft, came to express his opinion on the social network on the autonomy and authority of Xbox teams. This is why he is surprised by this decision which seems incomprehensible even to people who were there.
For Ybarra, the problem with Xbox is that Despite purchases and investments, they don’t make good games which encourage people to buy the console or the subscription. In fact, he also criticizes Microsoft’s current position, which is “in no man’s land” and does not decide whether to be a third-party publisher or a first-party publisher.
If you’re not making good games, then your hardware isn’t selling and your subscription is stagnating… the clarity of strategy or execution is broken somewhere and needs to be fixed, including ensuring leadership and capacity of the team to drive well. development and growth of the game. They have teams capable of creating great games 100%. The problem is that they don’t do it systematically.
I see two paths here: If their North Star is a Game Pass subscription, they should bring that exclusivity to their services and hardware and opt for games, hardware, and services in an exclusive “go big” plan. Introducing regular games with a rating above 90 will increase consumer affinity and satisfaction. That said, the risk and reward are high and you need a strong desire to win. If you’re not willing to do that, then you’re going in a different direction: you’re an all-device publisher and you need to own it 100% and be clear (that probably means leaving the hardware behind, I basically believe If you don’t have exclusive content, your material is doomed to failure because people won’t understand “why” you need it. Being the largest game publisher in the world is a great place to be, provided you can make great games. Otherwise, you will return to the starting point. You must choose your path and do your best to succeed, with clear communication to your players. If you play in the middle of these two paths, IMHO you will hurt your teams and experience constant turmoil and chaos.
It all begins and ends with a strong desire to win and play great games that exceed players’ expectations. This is what is fragile today and which must be resolved as quickly as possible.
Personally, I completely agree with Mike’s vision, Microsoft must guarantee its leadership, but for this it must decide once and for all what it wants to be, either an aggressive competitor with its exclusive games, or a completely third party. It all starts and ends with the quality of the games.
