Sure you want to write for the XBox???

#1 You can trust Microsoft about as much as any company with a lot of $$$, power, and for whom "the little guy" doesn't figure in...

I put my faith into things like GarageGames and Open Source development ... oh, and myself...

-Josh Ritter
Prairie Games

#2 I know its fashionable to trash MS and all, but whats the point of keeping a studio if its sport titles could not muscle out their competitors after all? MS tried to take a chunk of sports games and failed. Means that the company is basically a dead weight. Is it sad news to developers involved? Of course it is, but at least the lay off is not meant to simply boost company stock, but is instead dictated by common business sense.

and MMO's... well, it would be wise if some couple dozens of others went the same path. I dont know for sure, but I guess there are hundreds of generic MMO's in works out there. What i DO know for sure that there is not corresponding number of players interested and capable of playing them. Most of the MMOs are the Dot Coms of gaming industry. The bubble is starting to burst and MS is withdrawing to analyze situation from a distance.

#3 Those employees agreed to be employed... now that they're laid off, maybe they'll go indie, maybe they'll find work elsewhere, maybe they'll get disgusted and work a help desk... it's their problem...

I know damned well the peril of working for a big studio... frankly, I would probably start farming before I took a job at one.

-Josh

#4 Whoa. Microsoft closed XSN.... It looked like that was gonna be their next xbox live for sport games.

#5 I hate big M as much as the next guy, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with Nauris on this one. If I were in charge over there I would probably do the exact same thing.

It's not like they hired a bunch of people to work on a game, worked them to death with false promises, then fired them the day it was released. These studios apparantly were not able to hold their own against the competition, sounds to me like prime candidates for the chopping block.

#6 @David, Microsoft is removing their staff at the XSN sports division (except for those who make Links and Amped) because they don't need them anymore. The whole group was created so that the Xbox would have sports games that you can play on Live and now with EA finally waking up and supporting Live, this stop-gap solution is no longer required.

There was in fact never a hint that they would do follow-up titles and they were very blatent about this just before E3 when they announced that EA would support Live and that Microsoft wouldn't be creating new editions of their sports games this year.

Yes it certainly sucks that these developers were laid off, but this is a very common occurance in today's economy and game development industry. I don't see the need to get upset or get my underwear in a knot.

I still do not see what this has anything do with whether or not I would want to develop a game for the Xbox though. I do not directly work for nor am I funded by Microsoft and as such I am not affected with how they choose to run their company. If they came up to me and asked me to port my game to Xbox, I would jump at the chance because the nature of business is to get ahead and I know that irregardless that at the end of the day I would end up benefiting regardless of what happens.

Logan

Edit: Sorry for repeating some things that my peers have already said, I got pulled into a meeting in the midst of writing this.

#7 Indies on the Xbox, indies on the Xbox, indies on the Xbox...

#8 I wouldn't feel too bad for anyone who got laid off from microsoft, IRRC the severance package is quite generous. Also at microsoft you always have the option of applying for other jobs within microsoft. The guys who got laid off likely chose that option as opposed to trying to interview for some dev job working on MS Office :)

#9 Unfortunately I also agree with Nauris. NFL Fever came out of nowhere at X-box launch and showed alot of promise. Unfortunately after that it fell behind both ESPN football and Madden. MS has been losing money on their sports games. I'm sure these are talented people that will find work quickly.

#10 From a purely cold-blooded business standpoint, Nauris is correct. If they aren't pulling their weight, they ought to be dropped.

However, there have been instances where a shop has gotten off to a slow start and maybe didn't make the sort of impression they were initially shooting for. If we want to look at the movie industry, Evil Dead was one of those flicks that didn't make a great first impression, yet Sam Raimi kept making sequels to it, ultimately creating a volume of pop culture icons in Army of Darkness, and earning the sort of clout needed to create two iconic (if campy) TV series and direct the popularly acclaimed Spider-Man movies.

We could also look at the TV industry and the example set by Grant Tinker at NBC during the 80's. His whole philosophy was simple: hire good people and let them do their jobs. This was quite a bit different from his predecessor, Fred Silverman, who believed in dictating and micro-managing every show on the network. Under Tinker, NBC grew and got back more entertainment muscle than it had started with when he took over. Some of television's most successful shows, such as The Cosby Show and Hill Street Blues came about because of that exceedingly simple philosophy. Actors such as Michael Gross, Michael J. Fox, Courtney Cox, Phylisha Rashad, and others would not have had the sort of careers they've enjoyed without Grant Tinker's philosophy in place at NBC at that time.

Which brings us back to M$ shutting down XSN. From a "bottom line" perspective, if the unit was bleeding cash, it might make sense to shut them down, particularly if they didn't have anything impressive on the horizon. If it was anybody but M$, it would be considered another business as usual decision, unpopular perhaps, but otherwise nothing to write home about. Since XSN was part of Microsoft, taking the "bottom line" view becomes a bit harder given the tremendous cash flow that company has. We already know they're taking a hit on the actual Xbox units, and they're expecting the games to make up for the loss. Yet the volume of games being sold for Xbox should theoretically cover any losses incurred by the XSN studio, which in turn would give them time to improve their product, if somebody were so inclined.

Could Microsoft's cash flow not be as strong as has been observed? Could it be that XSN was just a hopeless case with no potential for actual improvment? The truth, I suspect is not the black "M$ is evil" argument, nor is it the white "M$ is trying to cut costs" argument. It's probably something gray and fuzzy between those two extremes.

#11 The thing to remember about sports games is that unless you are selling extremely well then you're loosing money. The licensing fees for sports games are insanely high and eat up a lot of your profits, EA by publishing to every available platform makes up for the small margin with volume, MS can't do that. The sports games have always been a money losing endeavor for Microsoft, but the Xbox and Xbox-Live both needed sports games on the lineup when they launched. Now that they've got EA making the games there's no reason to keep throwing money way to fatten up the NFL/NBA's coffers. Instead they can put that money towards developing new games on original properties that will make a profit.

As for canceling other projects, as Nauris said, its usually just good common sense. Mythica was way overbudget, no where near complete and facing a launch following at least four other fantasy MMPORPGs with huge pre-existing fanbases. Thats a recipie for disaster and MS was smart to see it when they did.

#12 Amped 2 is cool, I would love to see Lore on X box Live =)

#13 I've got to agree with the others who say this is a good move for Microsoft, even if it sucks for the individual developers (I've been laid off myself, I know what it feels like).

Why continue funding a line of sports games when they are getting beat in that area by not one but two competitors (EA and ESPN)?

Microsoft isn't a charity. They don't owe anyone jobs.

In any case, they are still funding at least one MMORPG (disclaimer -- my girlfriend is working on this game):

http://www.vanguardsoh.com/

#14 Small world. Guy I know is working on Vanguard too, I think they got the right stuff, we'll see how it does.

#15 Part 1.

Thanks for all the feedback guys. I'm afraid I disagree with most of you philosophically about this stupid idea we let slip into our business ideology that it is ok to hire people, let them work for you for a couple years, and then dump them as soon as a faster buck shows up on the horizon somewhere else.

The idea that it is somehow ok to treat people like toys, (if you are incorporated) never set right with me. The idea that a business is somehow a separate thing, that it is above us, that it should have rights and priveleges above those of ordinary human beings is wrong, in my opinion.

A business is not good and services, a business is people. And greedy business individuals have sold us on the idea of the corporation being separate and having "rights". We have let "businesses" adopt a philosophy that money is more important than integrity, honesty, and doing it right. That if a "business" cheats it is ok as long as they don't get caught and they don't kill too many people.

We let ourselves get into this mess. We allow ourselves to think that it is ok to send a person convicted of murder to death, but we levy a trivial fine when a big global corporation kills a half dozen with its pollution, or disfigures hundreds of third world children for a generation? (Not singling any company out here - I think you can all find lots of examples of companies that fit the bill.)

We allow corporations to conduct research on their products, but if the research turns out to be negative we allow them to suppress it? So your new drug causes birth defects? Oh well, we won't publish that in the AMA Journals. Oh yes, and fire the research worker and on the way out remind them they can be sued if they reveal anything about what they found? This is criminal and we let businesses do it every single day in this country.

How does this fit in with Microsoft? Microsoft hired 1200 people to work for them. They spent close to a bilion dollars to buy into a market they wanted to be in. Then when they got there, they fire the people who helped them get there. Did they offer to retrain them? to relocate them to other teams? to put them on other programs? Just the ones they thought were superior at best.

They took away their jobs, their medical and dental benefits, and their pride in their work. They put them on unemployment and for some in a bad economy they may have put them on welfare. They needlessly stressed their lives, their marriages, and their children. They did it all for more profit.

The people who are running Microsoft don't care where it grows, just so long as it grows. They just want more money and more influence. They raise their employees in a cloud of fear and paranoia and call "competitiveness". They school their employees that it is "us" against "them". Then they casually throw away those who don't put in enough overtime, those who don't
"fit" in, those who don't adhere to the company line.

The games that the sports groups were making were not failing in the market - they were successful - just not successful enough. And Microsoft's marketing groups knew that Mythica would be facing stiff competition before they gave the game the "green light" for funding. They were not behind in development, at least any more than any other software project that involves an element of developmental research could be. Microsoft tracks project progress very carefully and they never said there was any scheduling issues or missed milesotnes. Furthermore, it was an inhouse project. They had vast resources to bring the project back on track if they wanted to. The game had a loyal fan base, they had good press coverage, and they could have been a profitable venture. Just not profitable enough for Microsoft which demands that its products dominate a market - not just participate.

#16 Part 2.

Maybe we should start holding our businesses to a higher standard. Maybe we should say, "We are no longer going to let you uproot people, move them half-way across the country with the promise of a brighter future, then two years later dump them to make a fast buck."

I am sick to DEATH of the crappy American "businss ethic" which says, "Anything for a buck."

Anyway, that's my business philosophical opinion.

Thanks to all for the opinions. For now, I'll keep mine and keep trying to change yours. @George Best of luck to your girlfriend on her MMOG. Hope I get to play it.

#17 David I don't want to start an argument. It is very naive to think you are guarateed a job anywhere. I'm sure being in the game developing industry, those people understood the risks. I'm not saying it's fair but MS has stockholders and other parts of the business that they need to take care of. They can't just shell out money on projects that don't return on there investment. Would you keep on a staff of 50 people when you only could make money with a staff of 30? Look at it as a company in itself not as Microsoft the big corp. Each unit has to pay for itself.

#18 LOL. You won't start an argument. For me this is a philosophical disagreement - you can change my mind.

Point 1. It is not naive to think you have been guaranteed a job. In my opinion its Human Contract Law 101 (not Business Law 101). You offered me a job. In many cases you asked me to move cross country, pull my kids out of school and relocate them, sell my home, and abandon many of my previous relationships. You offered me a job, a salary, hours to work, medical, dental, life insurance, major medical, disability, and the chance to work with similar enthusiastic minds as incentive. In return you asked me to work hard, and help you make a profitable product. I accepted and I did those things - those games were profitable.

Now, you say this business is not making a big enough profit -- not that it isn't profitable - it is just not making a BIG enough profit. So I am going to lay you off. That is a violation of my "Human Law Contract". Sure, it isn't legally binding. Business Law as it is now written, exempts the white collar worker from this kind of clear "contract" violation. (And many of us think blue collar workers are somehow beneath us in the social order for organizing unions - lol)

Point 2. As for MS having stockholders. So what? This operation was making money. We need to break the mindset that a profit isn't a profit unless it is more money than last month. We no longer judge a business on the basis of being profitable. We judge it on the basis of being more profitable quarter to quarter than its rivals. Stupid and self destructive. It only encourages unrealistic expectations in the minds of investors and drives people who would like to be honest into illegal activities to maintain an essentially unworkable system.

Point 3. Would I keep a staff of 50 people on in my company when I only had work for 30? No. But I wouldn't hire 20 extra full-time employees then fire them. I would hire contractors to start and when I found a full time need for extra people I would bring them in. And when I found the market softening I would shift my people to other work until it picked back up. And if that division began to actually lose money then I would transfer those from it that wanted to move to other areas to make it profitable again, If that didn't work and I actually began to lose money, I would offer to retrain those remaining if they needed it, AND I would offer those who I had to lay off first shot at any new jobs that arose in my company if things turned around. I don't think MS did ANY of those things.

Point 4. Making each unit "pay for itself". That's an excuse. It's a "business decision" whose results don't justify their costs. It simply breeds internal dissention and distrust. It demeans the workers involved by pitting them against each other on one level while telling them they have to pull together as a team on another. It is short sighted, devisive, and geared only to making money at any cost.

If the business is profitable then shift people internally. It is better for company morale and its better for worker productivity. It results in less employee theft, less vandalism, and better physical and emotional health for the workers. It results in fewer sick days, and longer happier and healthier lives.

No business should have the right to ruin a person's financial existence in order to make a BIGGER profit for itself. Human beings are humiliated when they lose their jobs. People die when their medical benefits are lost. Increased business profits should not be allowed to mean more than people dying.

Nope still not convinced.

#19 Having a job is not a right. There are no guarantees with employment. The communists tried that, it doesn't work.

#20 Although I am a huge "Bob Roberts" fan and about as liberal as they come...

Anyone who takes a job should know, they may be let go, at any time... An employee also has the right to quit, and move on, at any time... What is the option here... some kind of marriage between company and employee? THX 1138? What?

The only way out of this is to work for yourself... and even then, there aren't any promises.

-Josh