You seem to be one of the few with this opinion in this thread. I am curious. COD is the huge IP that can't be beat because in part of Activision ability to release a new game each year. You admit that Halo was slow to be as good as it should be at launch. If we accept the idea that the same should happen for COD if the same methods are used, I suppose that Xbox plan would be to stop making a game each year, a little like Ubisoft did for Assasin's creed games. Do you consider Halo infinite good for a Halo game, or good even compared to their concurrents like COD, Fortnite etc? If the answer is the latter how do you see the Halo IP be used when they now have one that is stronger? Do you think that for example the next Halo wil risk a fate like what happened to Titanfall 2? Being released at a bad time?Honestly Halo is really good. It was slow in development because they had engine issues. And they fully failed on creating a GAAS pipeline at launch. But that seems to have hobbled even the best devs, including Naughty Dog.
As for Call of Duty, I'll just wait and see. If it goes south we'll all see it.
It is their playbook. Same story with Rare, when they released the games already started on the GameCube they got them to do fucking avatar and Kinect bullshit rather than anything with their ip. Microsoft are a cancer to this industryThis has got to be fake, right?
Why buy them if you dont want them to continue the IP you paid billions for?
it could work depending on production cycle. Usually in games you bring in contractors the last 2 years of production. Most things have been set up by your in house team, you are hiring contractors to finish and pump out work.If this is how I think it is, what this really means is they will hire contract workers over Full Time Employees (FTE) when they need to ramp up production. The contract workers will still go to the office and be part of the "team" but will be replaced when their contracts are up. There will still be a set number of FTEs, mostly being their senior developers and such. I am not defending this, because I actually think this approach can add a lot of technical debt, but with the way the cycle of game development can go, it makes sense. You don't need a full sized team working all the time. By having a good portion of the team as contractors, it makes it easier to scale up and down your workforce.
Where I work at, we have a similar approach (one of the main things we build are large-scale, enterprise ecommerce solutions). We have a good combination of FTEs and contract workers. When a large project comes is, we will hire mostly contractors to help work on the project, with our senior FTE developers, architects, and project managers leading the project. When the project is up, if there is not another project in the waiting, the contractors are lowered in size.
I personally would never want to be a contractor again, but many people like it. They do get paid more, but they usually do not have full blown benefits. We could not afford to keep all of them as fulltime employees. This approach works for us due to how we are dependent on sales coming in for projects, but it can cause issues like I mentioned before with tech debt.
One thing that does not make sense for this though, is the cycle of COD games that there has been. It really seems like a developer could roll off of one COD game and continue work on another, minimizing the amount of downtime between development at a single studio. However, maybe due to the number of developers, it is still too many for that approach so some FTE developers need to be transitioned into contract roles? Or maybe MS' goal is to lower the overall number of COD games in the future?
Of course this is all speculation, and only MS truly knows the strategy behind this. At the end of the day is about capitalism and making money. It really sucks for those who lost their jobs.
To all my anti-consolidation homies from the ABK acquisition thread.....
(if true)
Give me a damn breakIf they can get CoD multiplayer to the level of polish they got Halo to currently... all in
after how many years ? ( oh and its still not better than Halo. but at least Halo decent ) . it took it couple of years since release date just to get in a better decent position if not more than 2 years even.Halo infinite is a better product than any of the last few CODs so not sure what the concern is
which is the only aoe rts game I haven't played. I play campaign and skirmish single player and they couldn't even put in a pause button, like all other age games and total war. Also looks bland compared to aoe2 and 3.On the other hand, the "Microsoft touch" also resurrected Age of Empires.
I mean Age as a franchise. It was dead for quite a long time (killed off by Don Mattrick). Then they resurrected it with Age 2 HD and employing the fans to elevate what was once a mod into a full thing. And then they put more money into it.which is the only aoe rts game I haven't played. I play campaign and skirmish single player and they couldn't even put in a pause button, like all other age games and total war. Also looks bland compared to aoe2 and 3.
As for cod, Can't be worse then current mtx/shit/woke vanguard / mw3.
Yet they designed gamepass like one, giving AAA million dollar games out at a cheap monthly price.Microsofts not a charity.
Yet they designed gamepass like one, giving AAA million dollar games out at a cheap monthly price.
It might possibly be true, it might already have been true before the aquisition- but i guarantee the guy who 'leaked' it has absolutely no idea if it is true or not.I doubt this is true.
Usually in games you bring in contractors the last 2 years of production. Most things have been set up by your in house team, you are hiring contractors to finish and pump out work.
Im calling fake to but if it is genuine its impossible to make a fully fledge game with contractors, most contractors have max 150 people, even if you hired a bunch to make a game one would have to take the lead which is thus the developer, think this retard is talking about warzone because its literally impossibleThis has got to be fake, right?
Why buy them if you dont want them to continue the IP you paid billions for?
I barely play first person shooters. It's really not my genre. But I thought the game controlled extremely well, had solid enemy AI, and the grappling hook was a great boost for traversal or grabbing items. The feel of the actual gameplay is among the best FPS games I've ever played, and this is why it got good reviews. I did want more biome variety though.You seem to be one of the few with this opinion in this thread. I am curious. COD is the huge IP that can't be beat because in part of Activision ability to release a new game each year. You admit that Halo was slow to be as good as it should be at launch. If we accept the idea that the same should happen for COD if the same methods are used, I suppose that Xbox plan would be to stop making a game each year, a little like Ubisoft did for Assasin's creed games. Do you consider Halo infinite good for a Halo game, or good even compared to their concurrents like COD, Fortnite etc? If the answer is the latter how do you see the Halo IP be used when they now have one that is stronger? Do you think that for example the next Halo wil risk a fate like what happened to Titanfall 2? Being released at a bad time?
Yep. The corporate answer is to hire contractors because it looks good for numbers quarterly. In the end it cost more. The time spent on training then losing that talent and knowledge is a drain is just stupid. Contracting out QA is stupid, it doesn't get you a quality product. Some qa can be outsourced but In house QA working directly with devs is always better. If all this is true Microsoft is ushering in Bargain bin gaming for the masses.You would think that, at some point, studios would just be "contractor studios" of trained staff available to just bounce around development offices as needed. (And some established studios actually do that, like Virtuos and Certain Affinity and places like that, albeit usually for an area of expertise or for an extended contract, not just "Here's some guys for your final lap.") Then again, those employees would be permanent at the "contractor studio", carrying with it all the office and healthcare costs of having the people in house.
smug bastard... right smug bastard! but still lolTo all my anti-consolidation homies from the ABK acquisition thread.....
(if true)
smug bastard... right smug bastard! but still lol
To all my anti-consolidation homies from the ABK acquisition thread.....
(if true)
Its called sucking you in....Yet they designed gamepass like one, giving AAA million dollar games out at a cheap monthly price.
COD is a yearly release. are we gonna wait 2 years to fix the one going to be released on 2024 ? lol
Anyone who knows the history of Microsoft could have saw thus coming. ABK is about to get Nokia'd. Cheers to everyone in the acquisition thread, especially the pro-merger posters who have all mysteriously gone silent. Guess they all got laid off?To all my anti-consolidation homies from the ABK acquisition thread.....
(if true)
Thanks for the answer. For me the leak is one of those "it makes sense" that people say because if true it give them reputation but if wrong there is no loss. A little like the person that said that stupid statement about Jim rayan before 2023 Sony conference. But here more than one person said it and "it makes sense" than Microsoft who love temp workers to use them for Activision. I think that if the same happen to Bethesda we will be fixed.I barely play first person shooters. It's really not my genre. But I thought the game controlled extremely well, had solid enemy AI, and the grappling hook was a great boost for traversal or grabbing items. The feel of the actual gameplay is among the best FPS games I've ever played, and this is why it got good reviews. I did want more biome variety though.
I don't accept anything about this leaker. I don't know if any of this is true, or if the contractor work is truly the cause of any demise of Halo. I just said as far as Call of Duty, I'm just going to wait and see since this sounds like BS frankly, or exaggerated BS.
As for MS strategy for Halo, I don't know what the plan is. Make games and put them out. Maybe they're shooting for early into next gen. I don't think MS sees it as a problem to have multiple shooters.
I just know Halo supposedly switched to Unreal 5. I think that will most likely fix the main issue with their delays. Having a unique engine probably does pose extra challenge for temp workers, and most would probably be more familiar with unreal. I'm not losing any sleep over Call of Duty. They will figure it out I'm sure.Thanks for the answer. For me the leak is one of those "it makes sense" that people say because if true it give them reputation but if wrong there is no loss. A little like the person that said that stupid statement about Jim rayan before 2023 Sony conference. But here more than one person said it and "it makes sense" than Microsoft who love temp workers to use them for Activision. I think that if the same happen to Bethesda we will be fixed.
Why aren't the Avengers assembling yet?Fuck I don't think I'll be able to stop myself from getting that perm ban
I don't care that much about Call of Duty too. As for Halo, the loss is already huge. It can't get worse so hopefully it will get better now that they reorganized 343i.I just know Halo supposedly switched to Unreal 5. I think that will most likely fix the main issue with their delays. Having a unique engine probably does pose extra challenge for temp workers, and most would probably be more familiar with unreal. I'm not losing any sleep over Call of Duty. They will figure it out I'm sure.
Because your expensive McKinsey MBA consultant is telling you that you can save $millions on labor! Just ignore that you will tank $multi billion franchise.Considering the news lately, I can't outright dismiss it, but this story doesn't sound right. Why completely overhaul the thing that you probably spent the most of that 69 billion for?