Recent content by Shifty Geezer

No. It's had far higher over the decades, even outselling Intel some years, I believe.

Not game related. I image that'd reduce their spending on studios. They bought 2 studios in 2019. 6 in 2021. 3 in 2022. 1 in 2023. Looks like their panic buying is over to me.

Due to the peculiar nature of that industry, studio can be created just for a film and then disbanded. there also aren't established teams of the same people working on different content, but people migrate from project to projects. That's half how it is at gaming, but there's an established...

No-one's done a full count. Wiki lists 9 closures/conslidations for Sony and 15 for MS, not including these 4. However, the point wasn't Sony "doesn't close studios" but "Sony wouldn't close an award winning studio a year after praising its last game." If you want to counter that, you need an...

What's the minimum speed that's going to be needed and what's the cost of that cart versus a cheap medium and fast SSD storage? If this thing is supposed to run contemporary games, I'd have thought you'd need XBSS level SSD performance at a minimum, which would make for expensive carts if played...

You run the risk of list-wars with this. I'm not sure that's a constructive debate. If people actually want to compare the different publishers, we'd need proper data and arguments. In the case of Studio Liverpool, Sony owned them from 2001 to 2012, and they made racing (Wipeout and F1 games)...

If so, why wasn't it phrased that way? Or rather, we were explicitly told who was going where: According to Phil's email, Tango and Alpha are dead, not moved about. Arkane Austin and Roundhouse will have some reshaping.

This is clearly subjective and there's no argument here except back and forth yeah but nah but yeah. Self moderate on this, please.

Let's not spread that topic to this thread as well. There are other places to talk about game publisher choices.

Keep discussion about the topic, not the posters.

That's exactly it. They keep saying different things, and doing different things, it's hard to resolve all the info into a clear strategy. The EG article speaks at length on this. It'll be interesting to hear if anyone can offer a positive interpretation that counters what we're seeing and can...

But those GP subscribers (and non subscribers) can get the game elsewhere. You mean as a sort of smoke-and-mirrors thing??

If the games will sell 10M each at $70, but those ten million instead have GP, you are making less money from them. Of course, if that means securing more subscribers, it might work. It's clearly a tougher calculation that the cost of hosting a dozen small titles that get the same subscribers...

One reason is the big-ticket IPs. Buying Bethesda meant securing Skyrim and Fallout to be XB exclusives. The other studios were immaterial to that. Depending on business strategy, and MS having virtual infinite cash to throw at things, that can be clear method to the apparent madness. However...

If it's F2P, why does it need to go on GP?