Microsoft's Xbox Expands, Buying ZeniMax Media and Fallout Maker Bethesda For $7.5 Billion (cnet.com) 99
Microsoft's Xbox team significantly expanded its list of game development studios on Monday, announcing the purchase of ZeniMax Media for $7.5 billion in cash. From a report: The entertainment company owns several industry-leading game developers, including Bethesda Softworks, the maker of the post-apocalyptic Fallout games and the fantasy series the Elder Scrolls. It also owns id Software, known for its Doom, Rage and Wolfenstein shooting game franchises. The move grows the number of in-house Xbox game development studios to 23, up from 15 earlier, and giving it control of some of the game industry's most popular franchises. Microsoft also plans to run Bethesda as its own division, with leadership and structure intact. "As a proven game developer and publisher, Bethesda has seen success across every category of games, and together, we will further our ambition to empower the more than three billion gamers worldwide," Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said in a statement.
So much for Fallout (Score:2)
It will still exist, it will even still exist for PC, but it will require the latest DX and the storylines will also go downhill.
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't they already saying that about Fallout?
It is almost like when we get past 25 years old, Entertainment seems to just get worse.
Oh I pine for the stuff that came out when I was 15-25 years old, that was the pure golden age of entertainment. Unlike the new stuff that is just derivative dribble with a fancy coat of paint, that is too easy to play. and the really old stuff that has crappy graphics and sound, and overly complex game play.
Re: (Score:1)
Look at Halo. It stuck around forever but it also got fucked around forever.
In the end it produced some fun games but some were also tedious.
I predict the same for Fallout.
Re: (Score:3)
I am probably older than you and believe me, most games have always been mediocre. We just don't remember them as much. And I think games have largely gotten better. I mean, look at Fallout; every version (pre-76 I guess based on what I hear) was better than the last. And I've been playing since 1.
Re: (Score:2)
it was all downhill after NV. of course that was a different dev team, so not sure it counts.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh.
> every version (pre-76 I guess based on what I hear) was better than the last
Fallout 1 & 2 were awesome.
Fallout 3 lost some of the feel but brought a more polished experienced, and was probably a net benefit.
FO:NV was very, very, very good. Nearly as good as FO 1 & 2 in writing, storyline, etc, and much better in other ways. Perhaps this was the peak of the series.
Fallout 4 was pretty weak; not in the same league as any of the previous games IMO. Maybe for some people the base constructio
Re: (Score:2)
I love me some FO 1 and 2 but FO3 was just a transformationally better experience.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that Fallout 3 was basically on rails. The addition of "karma" took a big chunk out of what made Fallout 1 and 2 great - you could trick and steal your way through the world unless you get caught, in which case there are consequences.
Having consequences for merely opening a cupboard ephemerally "owned" by an NPC that may already be dead in an empty shit shack is stupid.
Re:So much for Fallout (Score:5, Insightful)
I disagree. Fallout 3 is open. You can leave the vault at the start and walk in any direction and have fun. The main quest is not the point of Fallout 3; the main quest can be ignored if you want. New Vegas however felt more like being on the rails in some places - you can't walk any direction or you'll be dead very quickly, the difficulty forces you to basically follow the freeway to Primm, Nipton, Novac, Boulder City, then eventually New Vegas, taking the looong way around to avoid cazadores, deathclaws, etc. You can't really avoid the main quest in New Vegas as it parallels the safe route out of the starting area.
Also Fallout 3 shows you stuff, New Vegas uses exposition. Face it, game writers in general are terrible at wriing. These aren't English majors. At best you have something resembling a polished fan-fic. But Fallout 3 doesn't try to do a lot of exposition, the plot is shallow because the point of Fallout 3 is to explore.The main plot is simple because it's less than 10% of the game anyway. New Vegas though does too much writing, too much plot, and it fails. Obisidian falls into the trap that too many Game Masters fall into: writing a complex plot that the players ignore or subvert, then decides to keep forcing them back onto the plot that they have no interest in following. I've played New Vegas several times, and I still don't understand lots of it without just accepting that some plot points are just forcibly contrived, or that Mr House is brain damaged, or the NCR is brain damage, or that Caesar is brain dam.. oh wait, he really is.
Re: (Score:2)
NV was open world, with only one usable path. F3 was open world, with only one practical path to the end. If you were a wanderer, F3 was more open. If you wanted the end, NV was more open.
F3 wasn't open in DC. You were forced to one of two paths, underground, or along the water. F4 was the first where you could walk the perimeter of the usable map and spiral your way to the middle (avoiding only a couple of hot spots). In NV and 3, large portions were essentially lo
Re: (Score:2)
F3 is open in that you can ignore the main quest and go most places. Many people go to Rivet city early and end up talking to Doctor Li, bypassing the need to even visit GNR for example. Yes, you need to go underground to get into the city areas, but crossing the river is easy to do. Visit Canterbury Commons early at low level even, even though I typically never bump into it until very late. Moira's quest for example, takes you to some distant areas early on, such as Minefield or Robco. There are some a
Re: (Score:2)
I can't even imagine trying to solve the game before 50 hours or so of walking around and exploring...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There have always been mediocre content produced across all media but the disaster that struck films and games as opposed to music is high budgets spent almost exclusively on the wrong things
Re: (Score:2)
I like Fallout 1 best. It was buggy as hell, and too short. But it had all the right elements, even the game manual was great. Fallout 2 was ok, but sort of failed in that it was waaay too long, and Reno with the mobsters and drugs and adult film industry just felt like it was in the wrong game. And Horrigan was a lousy bad guy with a contrived end-game fight. It was fun though, don't get me wrong.
Re: (Score:3)
I will second this for sure.
FO1 (and 2) was awesome, especially for the time. It also was awful in it's way - I'm pretty sure I spent as much time on loading screens or crashes than I did playing...but it was still awesome, new, interesting, and helped define the RPG genre.
FO3 and NV made a lot of improvements in their way. Pinnacle of the series was VN.
FO4 was a case of "add something so it's new" and they tried to make it into a SIMS game...meh. I wasted hours scrapping and building things but it was
Re: (Score:2)
Also, I played F4 without building any settlements beyond adding some turrets and beds to meet quest goals or not lose them as settlements. So they are almost completely optional, so they only add, not detract. Simplifying gameplay to make it more FPS-like to bring in more players was a good choice for sales and keeping the franchise alive. NV was shit. It's the only Fallout to make less money than its predecessor, other than the BOS and tactics you pretended didn't exist.
Re: (Score:2)
NV is hailed as better than 3, but many disagree, but the NV lovers are louder, so we pretend they are right, because it doesn't matter to anyone except NV lovers.
Re: (Score:1)
I disagree, I think I'm older than you.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh I pine for the stuff that came out when I was 15-25 years old, that was the pure golden age of entertainment.
Every generation since the '50s has said the same, probably before that too, but I don't have first-hand stories from those times. Grease is a movie about '70s nostalgia of the '50s. That '70's show was about nostalgia for the '70s, and I remember Wizardry and Larn fondly, both released in the '80s(81/86 respectively), when I was the "golden age". Now I have to go see if Might and Magic 4 is freeware/abandonware. Ultima II, the original XCom: UFO Defense was an isometric turn based RPG that was 3 years
Re: (Score:2)
As Peter Graham said in 1957, "The golden age of science fiction is twelve."
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
And my friends laughed at me for keeping my old 80386 DX-33. Who's laughing now?
Just play Outer Worlds (Score:5, Interesting)
There's a new STALKER game coming, so maybe that'll scratch the itch.
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard good things about Wasteland 3 as well.
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard good things about Wasteland 3 as well.
I like both. They are different though.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
DLC for The Outer Worlds was just released last week actually.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
DLC for The Outer Worlds was just released last week actually.
Hah, I missed that. Thanks!
Re: (Score:2)
Need a post-apocalyptic RPG? Maybe one from the creator of the original Fallout? Wasteland 3 is superb.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think Microsoft could do more damage to Fallout than Bethesda already did with Fallout 76. In fact, now that the company has been sold, they can stop making the game into a vehicle for microtransactions and go back to making single player campaigns. On the PlayStation side, some of the better no-bullshit high-budget games came from Sony-owned studios, since their primary goal is to have good exclusives that draw people onto their platform.
Re: (Score:3)
Yea, but they said they were still running it as a separate studio with the same leadership team. Translation: Make the same games, just don't release them on the PS5.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft will keep forcing the microtransactions though.
Re: (Score:2)
It will still exist, it will even still exist for PC, but it will require the latest DX and the storylines will also go downhill.
I think the end of Fallout has happened a while ago. Bethesta being swept up by the most incompetent large software maker is just a symptom of that.
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is that it will be Xbox and PC exclusive, I don't think Microsoft would pay this much just so that it could play fair. And Fallout 76 is probably the last one. They jumped the shark, quality has been going downhill as they chase the current crop of games that have graphics over gameplay. They've been highly intent on monetizing everything (probably orders from Zenimax rather than home grown at Bethesda), from the early horse armor debacle to the kerfuffle, to mandatory game updates that include
Re: (Score:2)
I treat fallout 76 as a single player game with really crappy NPC AI. I even have a nemesis. The very first PC that I encountered had the immersion breaking name of "TheMuffinMan2176". I've turned him into a quest line for myself. Everywhere I go, I'm asking "Have you seen The Muffin Man?" (no love for the guy who said - just look on the map). When I find him, I kill him. Over and over again.
Good to have a purpose in a game like this.
Re: (Score:3)
Wonderful. (Score:2)
I wonder when they're slated to close, like Lionhead Studios?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The only one I remember is Black & White.
Re: Wonderful. (Score:2)
I remember being hyped for that game. It was so, so buggy, I never even finished it. I have a distinct memory of my cow God avatar being constipated (bug) and making non-stop farting noises. Too bad.
Re: (Score:2)
They only had two game series BW and Fable
direct X all the way... (Score:2)
wonderful
now these studios will concentrate on xbox and direct X rather than publishing for the largest market which is mobile
pity but honestly china will solve that problem...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Modern phones are too thin to use AAA, but maybe they can use AAAA.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you imagine a modern smartphone using AAAA batteries? How long would it run even with four of them?
Re: (Score:2)
I would gladly pay a full $60 for a $20 phone game, because that would mean a $20 phone existed.
Re: (Score:2)
I've never wanted to play Fallout or Elder Scrolls on a 5 inch screen.
I wouldn't mind being able to play them without Windows though. Any chance of that is dead now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Mobile? BWHAHAHAHAHA
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? Did you miss the whole Microsoft Game Pass Ultimate includes streaming to your phone on Android and now iOS many Xbox and PC games?
Re: (Score:2)
the largest market which is mobile
A virtual gamepad on a flat sheet of glass just isn't cutting it for anything but point-and-click games or comparatively shallow 1- or 2-button games. So let me know what phone case with a slide-out or fold-out controller is any good.
Boost for Xbox 1st Party (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Why should normal gamers and geeks care about that? Shouldn't we care about how many total games are available for our preferred platforms, rather than how many are first-party games?
Re: (Score:2)
Why should normal gamers and geeks care about that? Shouldn't we care about how many total games are available for our preferred platforms, rather than how many are first-party games?
tl;dr: There's some potential for marginal gains in graphics quality.
Generally I agree with you, but, from my (limited) understanding, these first party studios often will push the hardware in ways that cross platform games have a harder time doing. By hyperfocusing on their hardware, they're able to tune the game better. While this helps the graphics world (and somewhat the physics potentially), it does very little to improve the overall games, the stories, and anything else that I personally want in gam
At least... (Score:2)
At least I hope this means they lose the pressure on making phone games and the like, and also lose the focus on making interfaces that have no respect for PC controls.
What they're good at is making worlds that are big enough to feel like you're really exploring, and dynamic enough to see the changes as you do so, better than the slightly board game token feeling of Ubisoft games.
Yeah - it's still a thin experience, with plenty of bugs, but there is some real care there - and also a malleability in that sam
Re: (Score:2)
Bigger is Better (Score:3)
Now, if only Disney would buy Microsoft...
Re:Bigger is Better (Score:4, Funny)
Can only help Fallout (Score:2)
Fallout has been struggling quite a bit in recent iterations, I am hopeful that Microsoft could return Fallout to it's story roots and produce some good games in the series...
Heck, maybe they could even improve Fallout76!
Re: (Score:3)
Microsoft wont return it to the New Vegas era. Microsoft will turn it into a generic 1st person shooter.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it's gone downhills. Do you have any idea how hard it is to keep things fresh and new when you make 76 versions of the same damn game?
Re: (Score:3)
I don't understand the butthurt over Fallout 4. I'm not a purist, in that I didn't play anything prior to Fallout 3, so that my come into play. 3 was good. New Vegas was good. 4 felt on-par with those. (We can all agree that 76 was a steaming pile of excrement.)
I'm sure my feelings about going from 4 to 76 is probably on par with how the people that have been with it since the beginning felt when they went from the 2-d turn-based to Fallout 3.
Re: (Score:2)
4 isn't on par with those and they try very hard to hide it. Your dialog options for example, ever notice it doesn't actually list what your character is going to actually say?
Here is one encounter which shows the example. 4 options to say the same thing. There is no choice in the vast majority of your conversations.
https://i.imgur.com/zLiI3Ri.jp... [imgur.com]
In other instances you'll have 2 or even 3 dialog options that are the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in the camp that just doesn't get the hate aimed at FO4. I played a bit of the original Fallout as a kid and liked that, yes. And I played 3 and liked that. 4 was an entirely decent game with a lot of voluntary endgame in building up the settlements and getting to a point where you felt that these people were going to be okay.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How do you improve Fallout76? By releasing Fallout77?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's an MMO. Everyone should know by now that an MMO based on source content is never as good as the original. To be an MMO there are certain game play elements that need to be there, because they need the players to continue playing long after the normal game duration is over. Ie, keep players subscribing, or keep them buying expansions, or keep them buying micro-transactions, and thus you get a game that never ends. Usually this transition is terrible, but sometimes it works out.
So it will stick aroun
Re: (Score:1)
I don't play so I don't know exactly, but have watched a lot of video about the game and it seems like there are a lot of general complaints that if addressed, would maybe make the game a lot more enjoyable... like far more intelligent NPCs that added to the story, or maybe fixing the glitched long term storage system (maybe that's already fixed).
Basically, surely there is some way to make a Fallout multiplayer RPG fun, and they could just transform 76 into that to reward the VERY loyal people that bought a
Re: (Score:2)
There are many ways to do this, but there's really just an MMO persisted world style that makes money. That means central server, controlled by the company, game updates come when the company decides, not when you're ready to play. Ever show up in an old MMO that's been around for many years; you will find that all effort is in place to appease the end-game players, content for newcomers is a rarity. Usually they just have some way of accelating the level ups for newcomers, skip them past the existing co
Re: (Score:2)
Considering MS owns Obsidian and now owns Bethesda there might be a chance for that.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, just like they did for Halo.... oh wait...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
As I've said in another response, I've not played it but... it seems like maybe there is a fun single player game in there if a bunch of NOC and story elements were added? That seems like a lot less work than a whole new Fallout game as you could at least use the large graphic assets and story assets and basic gameplay it already has...
Re: (Score:2)
I played for a few hours shortly after it came out. My biggest issue (other than it wasn't playable because it would crash every 10 minutes) was the lack of NPCs. (I assume that's what you meant by NOC?) It just made the story feel less "real". I gave up when there was a spot in the game where low level players and high level players had to be in the same spot for the same part of a quest, the high-level people would bring their high level "monsters" with them making it impossible for me to get where I
Nothing good can come from this (Score:1)
Elder scrolls and fallout series needs an independent software vendor to guide them. Told bad for Sony and Nintendo and gamers everywhere.
Time to clean house (Score:1)
No Playstation Ports in the Future? (Score:2)
Re: No Playstation Ports in the Future? (Score:2)
The next Fallout isn't going to be available for any existing console. You can just upgrade to the nex XBox during the next cycle.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm only half-joking, but gamepass ultimate and an android device for xCloud is sort-of an option.
Good! (Score:2)
Maybe Microsoft will get Bethesda to actually create games that people want instead of new games that noone is interested in. Fans of the Elders Scrolls series keep waiting for ES6, but Bethesda keeps making mediocre games that aren't interesting as well as trying to keep the Skyrim cash cow alive for as long as possible.
Skyrim was a great game....9 years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
It will be very unlikely that I'll buy ES6 unless Microsoft keeps it multi-platform (that is, not just Windows or Xbox).
I don't mind exclusive titles or franchises, but do I mind when franchises that weren't previously exclusive become exclusive.
Re: Good! (Score:2)
With Sony's shite online content policies, ESV was essentially an XBox/PC exclusive already. Sony and Nintendo got durped versions of the game.
Re: (Score:2)
TES3 was windows/xbox only. TES4 was windows/xbox exclusive for a year.
In terms of "modern" Elder Scrolls, only one of them (Skyrim) was on a platform other than windows/xbox at release.
Spend some money on Quake, damn it (Score:1)
Remember what happened with GitHub? (Score:1)
When Microsoft took over GitHub, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said that GitHub will "retain its developer-first ethos, operate independently and remain an open platform." Furthermore, the staff at GitHub reportedly stated at the time, "We won't take down any of your content unless we really have to. Microsoft's open-source code-sharing platform's latest report places freedom of expression above all else."
However, Microsoft still forced removal of usage of such unpopular terms as "master" and "slave" from Gi