MS Work for Hire Projects

[cheapchips]

Microsoft have stated that they'll fill gaps in their first party / Gamepass line up with work for hire projects. I'm not sure we've seen much of this strategy materialise yet? (Studios collaborating on internal projects it's own thing)

They've already announce Contraband from Avalanche Studio.

People Can Fly have announce they've entered in a $30-50m deal with MS to develop a game based on an MS IP. The most obvious IP is Gears, since PCF did Judgement.

I think these sort of deals can take a further bit of context from Matt Bootie's comment on MS adjusting to the new 'normal' in development cycles. We could argue what's best release cadence for a game series like Gears. It's probably not the 4-6 years that AAA titles take. The Coalition won't have a Gears title ready in time for the next console launch. If MS wanted that, this is a way to do it.

Edit: Asobo probably fall under this category of deal.

 

[BRiT]

Isn't there also one with IO Interactive, Project Dragon? I haven't kept close tabs on it so not sure if it's still around or what the structure of it was. If it was truly work for hire or a different sort of partnership.

 

[fehu]

If only MS had some internal studio to work on these projects...

 

[BRiT]

If only MS had some internal studio to work on these projects...

They are busy working on other titles. It seems Microsoft is being ambitious and want more titles in flight instead of less, so dont mind pulling in outside resources.

 

[cheapchips]

Isn't there also one with IO Interactive, Project Dragon? I haven't kept close tabs on it so not sure if it's still around or what the structure of it was. If it was truly work for hire or a different sort of partnership.

MS were supposed to be involved at some point. It's not clear if they still are.

Like IO's Bond game, it's a 2025 or later release.

This is the official blurb. I'd have thought IO would want to hold onto their own IP.

It has now been a decade since we first imagined creating a new “World of Assassination” for our HITMAN games. Seven years ago, we launched that world in its infancy and nurtured it to grow to comprise three full games, exciting new game modes, many additional locations, and extra targets. And more importantly, it has allowed us to build a bond with our community that has supported us ever since. We have gone from a strong vision, through a lot of unforeseen events, to the ever-expanding world with freedom of approach in its core that we have today.



Now we are sharing with all of you, that we are embarking on a new adventure! One that expands our creativity, our capabilities, and in some sense our identity. We are building a new world, a new IP – an online fantasy RPG. A world and a game built from the core to entertain players and expand for many years to come. It feels familiar, yet at the same time IOI is going on a journey unlike any we have been on before.



For many, this journey is also a deeply personal one that began long before we started making games for a living – and it started with the fantasy genre. From the “Fighting Fantasy” books compelling you to choose your path, alone, against wizards, lizards, and thief kings. To the togetherness, camaraderie, agony, and delight found around the tabletop. For some it meant taking the role of a game master: Part storyteller, part AI opponent, part guide, part villain. For everyone around that table it meant creativity, imagination, building a world together, and a shared goal in creating a great game experience.



This idea – that a diverse group of individuals with different skills and strengths can work together and become more than the sum of their parts – is what inspires us. It inspires the fantasy world we are building – and it inspires how we build it. IOI now spans multiple distinct studios, from Copenhagen and Malmö in the north to warm Barcelona in the south. All studios take part in making all our games, including this new endeavor. People from all over the world with diverse personalities and skillsets are coming together to forge a new beginning.



This is just the start of our journey into this new world we are making. We hope you sense the warmth, the danger, the togetherness, and the heart we put into it… And if you do, we would be honored if you join us.

 

[eastmen]

They are busy working on other titles. It seems Microsoft is being ambitious and want more titles in flight instead of less, so dont mind pulling in outside resources.

Of course MS want's at least 4 big titles a year right now. They simply don't have enough studios to keep that output . So they are going to fill it out with smaller companies and likely they might start pulling a sony and purchasing any really succesful ones to continue on the IPs.

The only question I have is what part of the IP is owned by MS on all these projects if any. I know they got burnt in the past on that

 

[cheapchips]

The only question I have is what part of the IP is owned by MS on all these projects if any. I know they got burnt in the past on that

That's a tricky one for both parties I think. New IPs are hard to build. Who wants to be left without it if either side doesn't wants to partner on the sequel?

I've certainly seen comments that one of the hardware vendors will only partner with you if they own the IP. Not sure which vendor that is though.

 

[fehu]

Sorry but it doesn't tick. They already have a gazillion of first party studios, plus they already lend some ip to other studios like asobo, if they don't pull out a game a month is mismanagement, not a lack of workforce.

 

[cheapchips]

Sorry but it doesn't tick. They already have a gazillion of first party studios, plus they already lend some ip to other studios like asobo, if they don't pull out a game a month is mismanagement, not a lack of workforce.

If you chuck every development team MS have on an imaginary gantt chart, plug in a 4-6 year timeline from their last games, you don't get anywhere near a title a month.

 

[fehu]

I'm pretty sure that any of them had at least an ongoing project even before being acquired

 

[cheapchips]

I'm pretty sure that any of them had at least an ongoing project even before being acquired

Start your imaginary gantt from their last releases and add a year or two for covid, 2023's release schedule ends up looking unsurprisingly like this year's schedule

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Sorry but it doesn't tick. They already have a gazillion of first party studios, plus they already lend some ip to other studios like asobo, if they don't pull out a game a month is mismanagement, not a lack of workforce.

You have to think in terms of what Microsoft's goals are.

Right now the 2 big focuses for the company is Subscription gaming and Cloud gaming. The first is a relatively small but significant niche right now, the second is in its infancy. Both need compelling reasons for people to sign up. That means both need a steady stream of big hitting titles to entice more people to sign up.

IF the ABK deal goes through that will help with content generation but will still likely leave some holes. You don't ever want to have a year go but with only a few big releases, like Game Pass in 2022.

So, contracting with 3rd parties to guarantee that their AAA or high AA budget game will 100% be available on Game Pass day and date with its launch provides more of a safety buffer. For example, if a planned 2027 release by one or two internal studios gets delayed then a contracted 3rd party release can still ensure that there's sufficient new big releases for that year.

The same considerations apply for cloud gaming.

Then you also potentially have gaps in genre coverage where your internal studios have expertise within certain genres and sub genres but you want to have a broader spectrum of genres represented. This is applicable to both subscription and non-subscription strategies.

And finally, MS, even with their internal studios is still behind Sony when it comes to exclusive titles for their console. Sony has been far more aggressive at signing exclusivity contracts with 3rd party developers and even funding (Sony then owns the IP) or partially funding (3rd party may or may not be allowed by Sony to keep the IP) then in order to secure exclusivity.

That means that MS not only needs to be able to match Sony's internal studio exclusive release cadence, they also need to attempt to match Sony's 3rd party exclusive contracted releases. In this sense, MIcrosoft would just be doing what Sony has been doing the past few years in order to play catch up WRT console exclusive releases.

Regards,
SB

 

[eastmen]

That's a tricky one for both parties I think. New IPs are hard to build. Who wants to be left without it if either side doesn't wants to partner on the sequel?

I've certainly seen comments that one of the hardware vendors will only partner with you if they own the IP. Not sure which vendor that is though.

I am not sure. I remember insomniac went with MS because they allowed them keep the ip. I know however in the past with stuff like Mass effect , well that is a huge franchise that is now multiplatform.

Sorry but it doesn't tick. They already have a gazillion of first party studios, plus they already lend some ip to other studios like asobo, if they don't pull out a game a month is mismanagement, not a lack of workforce.

They don't have enough. I believe currently MS has 23 studios. That isn't enough for 4 AAA games a year. MS is also makiing smaller game types like 33 immortals . Even with ABK it might not be enough for 4 AAA games a year

 

[Johnny Awesome]

I don't agree that it's not enough. 30 studios should be able to put out 20% of a game each (with 5 year dev cycles), thus 6 AAA titles per year. These studios' secondary dev teams should be able to put out 6 AA filler titles as well. If they can achieve that, then GP will be pretty irresistible for a lot of gamers.

If MS already owned ABK their 2023 Xbox release schedule would be:

Hi-Fi Rush
Age of Empires II
Minecraft Legends
Redfall
Diablo IV
Halo Infinite - Season 4
Sea of Thieves - Monkey Island
Overwatch 2
Starfield
Forza Motorsport
Call of Duty

That seems sufficient to me (especially if Redfall had turned out right)

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I don't agree that it's not enough. 30 studios should be able to put out 20% of a game each (with 5 year dev cycles), thus 6 AAA titles per year. These studios' secondary dev teams should be able to put out 6 AA filler titles as well. If they can achieve that, then GP will be pretty irresistible for a lot of gamers.

Agreed. I think the challenge for Microsoft are that a lot of the teams acquired were mid-project already. Ideally you want to deliver new content on regular basis but when you acquire studios, you inherit them at the stage they were at under the previous owners which probably isn't the release timetable you want.

That seems sufficient to me (especially if Redfall had turned out right)

Redfall will probably end one of two ways. Micorsoft will kill it before Christmas, or it will undergo a No Man's Sky type redemption. Redemption is a long term investment and nobody at the studio wanted to do this type of title in the first place. Microsoft also need to be conscious of cannibalising their own GAAS offerings.

Most GAAS fail, and the market can only sustain a small number. A great developed Redfall, requiring X years of development, might erode Sea of Thieves and/or Grounded. I don't know how these kind of decisions are made. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Johnny Awesome]

Yes. I think they will try to fix Redfall enough so that it's not a complete embarrassment, but then let it go quietly into the night. Something for GP users to poke around in for 6 hours and then abandon.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I don't agree that it's not enough. 30 studios should be able to put out 20% of a game each (with 5 year dev cycles), thus 6 AAA titles per year. These studios' secondary dev teams should be able to put out 6 AA filler titles as well. If they can achieve that, then GP will be pretty irresistible for a lot of gamers.

If MS already owned ABK their 2023 Xbox release schedule would be:

Hi-Fi Rush
Age of Empires II
Minecraft Legends
Redfall
Diablo IV
Halo Infinite - Season 4
Sea of Thieves - Monkey Island
Overwatch 2
Starfield
Forza Motorsport
Call of Duty

That seems sufficient to me (especially if Redfall had turned out right)

Not all of their studios that they picked up are AAA studios. Combine that with development times for AAA this generation likely expanding from 2-4 years for a typical AAA title, to 5+ years for a "good" or "ambitious" AAA title.

They are wanting a consistent yearly cadence of 4+ AAA titles a year for Game Pass from their internal studios with likely 8+ "big" or "ambitious" titles for GP as a goal, thus they require outside AAA development contracts. Ideally you'd want a "big hitter" at least once a month, so 12 titles, for a subscription service. But that might not be possible even with 3rd party contracted titles.

That's just one reason why COD is so attractive even if it's on multiple competing platforms. It consistently releases year in and year out. That would guarantee 1 "big" AAA title a year.

Regards,
SB

 

[cheapchips]

About 22 teams on quarterly AAA. Arguably some of the second teams are half teams or AA. You have to assume they hit a release date, quality bar and don't just outright scrap games (as per The Coalition's none Gears title)

Quarterly AAA

343 Industries
Arkane Studios Lyon
Arkane Studios Austin
Bethesda Game Studios
Compulsion Games
Double Fine Productions
id Software
Inxile Entertainment Clocktower
Inxile Entertainment Game 2
MachineGames
Ninja Theory Hellblade
Ninja Theory Game 2
Obsidian Entertainment
Playground Games FH
Playground Games Fable
Rare
Tango Gameworks team 1
Tango Gameworks team 2
The Coalition
The Initiative + Crystal Dynamics
Turn 10 Studios
Undead Labs

Not Quarterly AAA

Rare Sea of Thieves Team
Mojang Studios
Alpha Dog Games
Xbox Games Studios Publishing
ZeniMax Online
Bethesda Softworks
Roundhouse Studios
World's Edge
Double Fine Productions small stuff
Obsidian Entertainment Grounded Team+ small stuff

 

[eastmen]

I don't agree that it's not enough. 30 studios should be able to put out 20% of a game each (with 5 year dev cycles), thus 6 AAA titles per year. These studios' secondary dev teams should be able to put out 6 AA filler titles as well. If they can achieve that, then GP will be pretty irresistible for a lot of gamers.

If MS already owned ABK their 2023 Xbox release schedule would be:

Hi-Fi Rush
Age of Empires II
Minecraft Legends
Redfall
Diablo IV
Halo Infinite - Season 4
Sea of Thieves - Monkey Island
Overwatch 2
Starfield
Forza Motorsport
Call of Duty

That seems sufficient to me (especially if Redfall had turned out right)

Well AOE 2 is a remaster , Sea of Thieves is an expansion as is halo infinite . Overwatch 2 is a huge cluster right now. Redfall was also a huge cluster.

That leaves you with Hi-Fi Rush , Minecraft Legends, Diablo 4, Starfield, COD , Forza
Of those Minecraft legends , diablo 4 and cod would be multi platform.

We know starfield had a 8 year dev cycle. So that would take bethesda out of the running for another game for at least 5 years . Diablo 4 is the follow up to diablo 3 which was released 11 years ago.

So I am not sure why you think MS would have 5 year dev cycles on games when a third of the new games you mentioned had a 8+ year dev cycle. Do you think diablo 5 will be released in 5 years ? Why are you also including expansion packs. Those aren't new games , heck halo ininite season 4 is just a season of small content like most multiplayer games get and the same with monkey island.


And to sum it up , that is if they are able to close the ABK deal. MS needs more developers and they will get more developers

 

[Silent_Buddha]

And to sum it up , that is if they are able to close the ABK deal. MS needs more developers and they will get more developers

They need more games, but if the ABK deal doesn't go through then it signals to MS that they should instead be doing what Sony are doing. Throwing money at 3rd party developers to secure exclusivity. With a 70 billion USD warchest, if they wanted, that's a LOT of 3rd party games they could potentially secure exclusivity on.

Basically they could secure far more AAA exclusives by using that money to secure exclusivity than by buying ABK. And that would be far more of a "foreclosure" danger to Sony than if MS bought ABK.

Of course, they don't even have to go as far as making it exclusive, it could just be throwing money at developers to secure day and date release on GP for their AAA title. However, if you are going to do that, might as well also make it exclusive since you wouldn't be getting any ROI from those titles selling on PlayStation or Nintendo consoles unlike with the ABK deal and allowing titles to remain multiplatform.

Regards,
SB