'

Microsoft isn't finished acquiring game studios

It won't end with Bethesda

Microsoft isn't finished with its game studio acquisitions

Microsoft isn't finished acquiring game studios

Microsoft is making big waves within the video game industry, having recently announced their acquisition of ZeniMax Media, the company Bethesda Softworks.  

Now, Microsoft has 23 first-party studios, with id Software, Bethesda Game Studios and Arkane being amongst the company's latest additions. Is that enough for Microsoft? No, more acquisitions are expected in the future, as Microsoft's CEO, Satya Nadella, has made it clear that the company will consider more acquisitions as they continue to invest in the Xbox brand and into Xbox Game Pass. 

As Nadella states, "You can't wake up one day and say, 'Let me build a game studio,'". Creating new game studios is a challenging task, a fact that makes acquisition an ideal growth vector for Microsoft. Nadella also stated that "The idea of having content is so we can reach larger communities." signifying Microsoft's hopes that these acquisitions will give the Xbox brand the content that it needs to become more successful within the next console generation. 

With their acquisition of ZeniMax Media, Micorosft'sleadership has confirmed that they plan to make no sweeping changes to ZeniMax and Bethesda after their acquisition. Game development will continue as scheduled, and the prior commitments of their developers will be honoured. That means that Deathloop and Ghostwire: Tokyo will still be released as Sony timed exclusives, even though these games are now being developed by Microsoft subsidiaries. 

Microsoft isn't finished with its game studio acquisitions  

Microsoft has made a long-term commitment to the gaming industry and has invested billions to ensure that they will be able to deliver the content that the market demands. Only time will tell whether or not these investments will be worth it for Microsoft, as it will be a while before many of these developers create Xbox exclusive titles. 

You can join the discussion on Microsoft's potentially acquiring more studios on the OC3D Forums

«Prev 1 Next»

Most Recent Comments

23-09-2020, 10:23:48

Avet
It is a good plan. They can share the same engine and recources for all games.Quote

23-09-2020, 11:59:14

NeverBackDown
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avet View Post
It is a good plan. They can share the same engine and recources for all games.
That's a bad plan. Using one engine for everything isn't efficient as it requires so much work to get working for everything it eventually does barely anything. All breadth no depth.Quote

23-09-2020, 15:44:47

Avet
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverBackDown View Post
That's a bad plan. Using one engine for everything isn't efficient as it requires so much work to get working for everything it eventually does barely anything. All breadth no depth.
Epic would disagree. Unreal runs everything. I see no reason why Microsoft wouldn't expand id Tech 7 into something similar. It is a bloody good engine.Quote

23-09-2020, 20:00:29

NeverBackDown
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avet View Post
Epic would disagree. Unreal runs everything. I see no reason why Microsoft wouldn't expand id Tech 7 into something similar. It is a bloody good engine.

Epic can disagree it does not change the truth. Being well rounded doesn't mean it's the best in everything.
UE doesn't run everything. You're also assuming idTech7 can already do everything Unreal can. I doubt it could. In that sense it's not bloody good.

Unreal does many things well and games are built around the engine for the convenience. For example it's extremely good at large open world's, but it's World Composition still has many limitations. It still requires tons and tons of work to get the systems working like you want. Blueprints are very useful but are not a one size fits all design (impossible to be). Many of the systems are even 3rd party solutions such as the physics engine being used from Nvidias PhysX. Which has basically become standard in the industry. I believe SPS mentioned this a long while ago.

UE is a unique case. I'm not surprised you brought it up. However it also the benefit of over a decade of development from multiple studios who's code has been contributed into the source engine. It's open source after all. It would take a very long time for idTech7 to reach that level between fewer studios working on it. Though with the backing of MS they definitely have the money to do it. If anyone could it would probably be them. This is the only point I agree on.

If you want the best engine, you make one for your specific application. There's no denying this.
In a more efficient case, build one for a few genres at the expense of having everything be designed specifically for one game. That's basically what UE4 did. Fps, open world, action games, are generally very popular with this engine. However it could change in the future with UE5.Quote

24-09-2020, 01:13:12

Greenback
I'd agree with NBD, going through the history of the Frostbite engine, it would be a long time before an engine is capable of being a base for every type of game, and forcing a developer to use something that's not ready can have a big impact.Quote
Reply
x

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.