Remove ads

Microsoft close to buying Obsidian

Choo Choo

Choo Choo

THE GRIEF TRAIN HAS NO BRAKES
Location
Sweden -> California
Pronouns
She/her
Sources: Microsoft Is Close To Buying Obsidian (kotaku)

Article:
Microsoft is finalizing a deal to acquire the independent development studio Obsidian Entertainment, according to three people briefed on the negotiations. We don't know if ink is on paper yet, and plenty of major acquisition deals have fallen apart in the final hours, but those close to the companies believe it is all but done.

One person with knowledge of the deal told Kotaku they'd heard it was "90%" finished. Said a second person: "It's a matter of when, not if."


Well, it was only a matter of time before somebody either bought Obsidian, or they went out of business. They could do worse than Microsoft, though; hopefully this gives Obsidian the stability and money they need without having their creativity hampered too far.
 
Zap Rowsdower said:
RIP Obsidian. Remember Rare?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Gah, the company that made two semi inspired Mario derivitaves back in people's childhoods and skated for two decades?

Literally the first time I heard of them was when Microsoft tried to sell a game in their name, and all their most popular titles were children's games from the late 90s.
 
Tealg said:
Gah, the company that made two semi inspired Mario derivitaves back in people's childhoods and skated for two decades?

Literally the first time I heard of them was when Microsoft tried to sell a game in their name, and all their most popular titles were children's games from the late 90s.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Studio with several major IPs, who invented modern console first person shooters and were undisputed masters of the then-major 3D platformer genre. Soon as Microsoft bought them, they were put on shovelware rather than either of those genres, all of their big IP were left to rot, and when Microsoft finally used one of their big IPs a decade later, it ridiculed the player for liking the original genre and promptly shifted into a different one. Last seen making Kinect stuff AFIK.
 
Rare was sad, but in terms of track record, its not even close to something like EA, devourer of studios, hoarder of IPs. I'm willing to consider this part of Microsoft's ongoing move to get more studios under its umbrella.
 
Last edited:
From what I was told Rare's contract with Microsoft apparently gave them more creative control than they had under Nintendo. Then again, Prince's contract with Warner Bros was supposed to give him 'complete creative control' and his time with the company infamously came to a disastrous end (it's part of why he had to change his name to a symbol).
 
Does this mean I have to buy everything Obsidian I might like right now on Steam or have to risk seeing it pulled and put on the Shitstore as 'Exclsuive'?
 
This does lead more credance to avellone's rants against obsidian. He did say that obsidian was desperately shopping itself out to be bought and it's primary problem was that the executives were incompetent and the corporate part of the company was a mess
 
This is a big risk for MS.

Obsidian management hasn't been great. Last few dev cycles they've come out late and very over budget for their last few games.
Money and time management hasn't been great, and the workplace as a reputation for being lax. That's good in many ways, but its a risk for MS and might not be a success.
The dev teams from this company also responded poorly to pressure from management and publishers before.

Microsoft will need to get a very skilled manager to handle this team, which I'm not sure they will be able to do.
 
FishInTheAirCon said:
Haven't heard this one before. Do you mean lax as in lazy or lax in comparison to the always crunch time culture of the rest of the vidya dev world?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

From what I know, they've a reputation for not rushing projects, which in many ways is good.

Push it out on the devs own time, with less stress, can lead to a better product.

But it also can causes a company to hemorrhage money long term, and there's no guarantee the product will be viewed as objectively good by the majority of your audience.
And even if it is, no guarantee it will sell.
 
sapphirenebula said:
From what I know, they've a reputation for not rushing projects, which in many ways is good.

Push it out on the devs own time, with less stress, can lead to a better product.

But it also can causes a company to hemorrhage money long term, and there's no guarantee the product will be viewed as objectively good by the majority of your audience.
And even if it is, no guarantee it will sell.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I honestly have never heard this perception of obsidian. Indeed their games, when they flop, inevitably feel rushed.
 
I was going to be super upset about this, but then I remembered I play all their stuff on PC anyway...
 
sapphirenebula said:
But it also can causes a company to hemorrhage money long term
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Counterpoint- Microsoft has so much money they don't even know what to do with it. They're just sort of sitting on it awkwardly.

That's not to say that it's a good idea to just throw it away, but the idea that they're going to be hurt by the 'inefficient' practice of 'taking their time and making quality products' because it's more expensive than industry standards is a little weird.
 
stratigo said:
I honestly have never heard this perception of obsidian. Indeed their games, when they flop, inevitably feel rushed.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Vindictus said:
Counterpoint- Microsoft has so much money they don't even know what to do with it. They're just sort of sitting on it awkwardly.

That's not to say that it's a good idea to just throw it away, but the idea that they're going to be hurt by the 'inefficient' practice of 'taking their time and making quality products' because it's more expensive than industry standards is a little weird.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Taking longer to make a good game is always good for the consumer.

From the perspective of a person that plays games, of course I want a game to be good and polished.


From the perspective of a company though, there runs into issues of diminishing returns.
Pillars of Eternity 2 and games like Tyranny were relatively good, although niche games.
Issue is it didn't make much money on these games relative to the time and money spent on them.
For an extreme example, if someone budgets and spends $800 million on game development, and the game sells 5 million copies and makes around $500 million in revenue, its still a massive loss for the company that made it, and will likely result in it closing as well as losing investors, publishers, chances for future projects, and any franchises it owns might just outright die.
Time loss is another factor. Spending $1 and making $1 profit over 10 years is still a massive loss, and also risks losing audience interest.

The reason Obsidian is in the position to be bought out in the first place is due to situations like this, with budgeting and management issues.

It's also another reason why Rare got absorbed, and both Rare and Microsoft had a lot of trouble adapting to each other.

The original devs of Rare had a company culture of creative freedom, though with very long harsh working hours and poor pay.

But people could often make what they wanted if the company heads liked the project.
Rare (company) - Wikipedia

MS acquisition raised pay scales and work benefits for many people, but had more direction to specific projects, with less care for pet projects.

Of course maybe MS really is worse then the news articles make it seem. They do have a lot of power, and an individual disrespecting or insulting MS is likely to give an individual difficulty with future partnerships and other things in the tech field, especially if that individual doesn't consistently produce exceptional things. There's a delicate social balance to it too. Though MS themselves cannot go wild too. They've also got to protect their reputation since they need to work with other big and small players in the tech field, as well as have a good rep for consumers.

Vindictus said:
Counterpoint- Microsoft has so much money they don't even know what to do with it. They're just sort of sitting on it awkwardly.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

MS has a ton of worth, but most of that isn't liquid. A lot of its tied up in projects, and if those projects fail, and fail hard enough, its very possible the company could go under.
Granted not totally likely considering the company's reputation and structure, but they cannot literally burn money.
 
Last edited:
sapphirenebula said:
Taking longer to make a good game is always good for the consumer.

From the perspective of a person that plays games, of course I want a game to be good and polished.


From the perspective of a company though, there runs into issues of diminishing returns.
Pillars of Eternity 2 and games like Tyranny were relatively good, although niche games.
Issue is it didn't make much money on these games relative to the time and money spent on them.
For an extreme example, if someone budgets and spends $800 million on game development, and the game sells 5 million copies and makes around $500 million in revenue, its still a massive loss for the company that made it, and will likely result in it closing as well as losing investors, publishers, chances for future projects, and any franchises it owns might just outright die.

The reason Obsidian is in the position to be bought out in the first place is due to situations like this, with budgeting and management issues.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Was PoE 2 a net loss?
 
sapphirenebula said:
Taking longer to make a good game is always good for the consumer.

From the perspective of a person that plays games, of course I want a game to be good and polished.


From the perspective of a company though, there runs into issues of diminishing returns.
Pillars of Eternity 2 and games like Tyranny were relatively good, although niche games.
Issue is it didn't make much money on these games relative to the time and money spent on them.
For an extreme example, if someone budgets and spends $800 million on game development, and the game sells 5 million copies and makes around $500 million in revenue, its still a massive loss for the company that made it, and will likely result in it closing as well as losing investors, publishers, chances for future projects, and any franchises it owns might just outright die.

The reason Obsidian is in the position to be bought out in the first place is due to situations like this, with budgeting and management issues.

It's also another reason why Rare got absorbed, and both Rare and Microsoft had a lot of trouble adapting to each other.

The original devs of Rare had a company culture of creative freedom, though with very long harsh working hours and poor pay.

But people could often make what they wanted if the company heads liked the project.
Rare (company) - Wikipedia

MS acquisition raised pay scales and work benefits for many people, but had more direction to specific projects, with less care for pet projects.

Of course maybe MS really is worse then the news articles make it seem. They do have a lot of power, and an individual disrespecting or insulting MS is likely to give an individual difficulty with future partnerships and other things in the tech field, especially if that individual doesn't consistently produce exceptional things. There's a delicate social balance to it too. Though MS themselves cannot go wild too. They've also got to protect their reputation since they need to work with other big and small players in the tech field, as well as have a good rep for consumers.



MS has a ton of worth, but most of that isn't liquid. A lot of its tied up in projects, and if those projects fail, and fail hard enough, its very possible the company could go under.
Granted not totally likely considering the company's reputation and structure, but they cannot literally burn money.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

From what I understand, Obsidian has been trying to be bought for quite some time now, so the reason they're being bought is that being bought is the end goal
 
Apparently PoE2 sold poorly and Chris Avellone reckons if MS likely buys out Obsidian MS should clear out the management:

 
Hykal94 said:
PoE2 did badly?!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Avellone expressed satisfaction at it appearing to do badly (he conveniently dropped his accusations about the situation at Obsidian in time for release, and seemed to think the second contributed to the first), so apparently.
 
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top