Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Media Games

Netflix Is Building Its Own Game Studio (engadget.com) 78

Posted by BeauHD from the in-house dept.
Netflix is forming an in-house game studio in Helsinki, Finland to create "world-class" original games without ads or in-app purchases. Engadget reports: While it's too soon for details of the games themselves, Zynga and EA alumnus Marko Lastikka will serve as director. Helsinki is a good fit as the home to some of the "best game talent" on the planet, according to Netflix. This includes The Walking Dead mobile developer Next Games (which Netflix bought in March). Netflix has purchased multiple developers, including Boss Fight and Oxenfree creator Night School Studio, but hasn't built a developer from scratch until now.

You won't see the first fruits of this internal studio for "years," Netflix says. Still, this and recent acquisitions show how the company's gaming strategy is evolving. Where Netflix initially depended on outsiders' games, including slightly tweaked versions of existing titles, it's increasingly focused on truly unique projects you won't find elsewhere. In theory, more people will subscribe to Netflix with the game library in mind.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Netflix Is Building Its Own Game Studio More

Netflix Is Building Its Own Game Studio

Comments Filter:

  • Good ol' Netflix (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2022 @05:11AM (#62917317)
    Wasting money delivering stuff that people don't want and never asked for.

    • Wasting money delivering stuff that people don't want and never asked for.

      Oh, because gamers just love ads, and parents just love finding charges on credit cards from in-app purchases they never expected?

      Yeah, speaking of don't want and never asked for...

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Well, while it is a good idea to not do this crap, you cannot expect that this will be enough to make good games. Just hiring some people with experience in the industry and pumping in money has failed a lot more often than it has worked.

        • Well, while it is a good idea to not do this crap, you cannot expect that this will be enough to make good games. Just hiring some people with experience in the industry and pumping in money has failed a lot more often than it has worked.

          Speaking of crap, do you often shit on the author before they even finish chapter 1?

          I know that hate is quite fashionable, but putting a self-imposed "deadline" of years tends to keep this venture a hell of a lot more realistic than others who would be promising the moon to greedy shareholders by Christmas.

          A lot of new businesses fail. In fact, more often than not. And yet, humans keep trying. And quite frankly, I expect game developers to go where the money is. Money talks, plain and simple. The value

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by quall ( 1441799 )

            If the author has a poor track record, then yes. Do you always give them the benefit of doubt? Or can you reasonably assume that they'll produce garbage again if that's mostly what they've been producing?

            • If the author has a poor track record, then yes. Do you always give them the benefit of doubt? Or can you reasonably assume that they'll produce garbage again if that's mostly what they've been producing?

              When has movie/TV show making, ever been used as an indication of game making capability? Not sure why you're reaching quite hard here to shit on them already before even getting started.

              Doesn't matter. You won't be proven right or wrong until "years" from now. If Netflix was that bad, they'd be out of business. No doubt they've produced some good things and bad shit. So has everyone else.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by narcc ( 412956 )

              What poor track record?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by gweihir ( 88907 )

            Well, while it is a good idea to not do this crap, you cannot expect that this will be enough to make good games. Just hiring some people with experience in the industry and pumping in money has failed a lot more often than it has worked.

            Speaking of crap, do you often shit on the author before they even finish chapter 1?

            That depends. If their plan sucks, yes. Do you have a problem with that?

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by narcc ( 412956 )

              You're right. No one should ever make games. It's doomed to fail from the start.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by gweihir ( 88907 )

                Well, that is just immature. Did you escape from Kindergarden?

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by narcc ( 412956 )

                  It's your position, not mine. Don't complain that someone pointed out how stupid it was. Learn from it and move on.

    • Netflix is just desperate to do something, anything to stay afloat right now.

      • Netflix isn't worried about staying afloat, they'll do fine even if they lose a bunch of subscribers.

        What they want is to stabilize their subscriber base, games can do that as people would lose access to them if they let their subscription to Netflix laps.

        Netflix is trying to squish the boom or bust cycle that disrupts everything they do. (It's a side effect of binge watching and subscribing only when they have a massively interesting series on.)

    • Who didn't ask for games? Netflix is an entertainment company. Games are a form of entertainment worth $300 billion annually. So yeah people are asking for it. Most people couldn't give a shit about the studio behind a game and judge the results based on merits.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by NFN_NLN ( 633283 )

        > Netflix is an entertainment company. Games are a form of entertainment worth $300 billion annually.

        Netflix is an entertainment company. Porn is a form of entertainment worth $100 billion annually. So yeah people are asking for it. Most people couldn't give a shit about the studio behind a porn and judge the results based on the titties.

        https://www.defendyoungminds.c... [defendyoungminds.com]

        • The titty has been completely devalued. Between Franken-tits and the vast ready availability, nobody judges porn on that basis any more. I feel sorry for women in general. Until the last 20 years, that was currency in their back pocket. Now it's gone, and they're not considered a prize anymore, but are simply the minimum barrier to entry.

    • I don't understand. Isn't that what people want, and exactly what they asked for?

      • Well obviously Amazon has proven that people just want higher prices. People pay for Amazon prime to get “free shipping” and in a “but wait, there is more deal” they also get to pay for TV Shows, Movies and games!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by CAIMLAS ( 41445 )

      Just what I wanted - woke gaming with weak contrived lead characters, weak plot development, and unbelievable abilities - with a dose of white male shaming.

  • I wonder if they know people don't want to watch advertisements when playing games either.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by splutty ( 43475 )

      to create "world-class" original games without ads or in-app purchases.

      Yes?

      • So naturally, they got a director fresh from Zynga and EA. He'll be an expert in delivering "games without ads or in-app purchases"!

    • Advertisements have been part of games for 20 years now. The reality is most people simply ignore them.

  • I'll believe it when I (don't) see it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by narcc ( 412956 )

      Because Netflix has a history of showing ads? LOL!

      • They (netflix) are about to release an ad supported tier in November. So yes.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by narcc ( 412956 )

          So zero history then.

          To the point, there is no reason to believe that Netflix will include ads after explicitly saying that they will not. They built their business without ads, after all.

  • I never tried Stadia, but I have tried playing Xbox games over the cloud on my PC with really, really good internet, and it's just not that great. It's not exactly terrible, but it's certainly not the same experience as actually installing and running a game on your PC or console.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DrXym ( 126579 )
      Cloud gaming can be decent but it depends on the price model and what the platform does with the concept.

      Stadia had an awful model - pay full price for a paltry selection of ports to their platform. Stadia Pro was also terrible, charging a sub for games given out for free on Epic. Unsurprisingly the platform has been a failure. Google should have launched with a free to play MMO or a Fortnite style game with premium tiers to skip the queue, unlock areas or get other perks.

    • cloud gaming suffers from compression artifacts to the point where I'd rather just not play.

  • So Netflix does understand people don't want to have ads in games but somehow the idea that they also don't want ads in their shows eludes them?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by bws111 ( 1216812 )

      Since when does Netflix have ads in their shows?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by skam240 ( 789197 )

      It's funny how Netflix is all commercials all of a sudden to some people. Never mind that their new ad supported format doesnt change your ad free subscription at all.

      • Where have I heard that before? Right, cable TV. "You pay for cable, so it comes without ads". The older ones here might remember that one.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by bws111 ( 1216812 )

          Except that claim was never made.

          50s-60s - cable was just retransmission of OTA broadcasts, including ads
          70s - Subscription services like HBO appeared. No ads then, no ads now
          80s - 'Superstations' carried by cable - complete with ads. Also 'basic cable' channels appeared, like MTV, complete with ads.

          There have been a few channels (like AMC) which started out ad-free and then moved to ad supported, but the 'you pay for cable so there are no ads' claim was never made by anyone. What do you think the cable

        • Even if that claim was true, which somebody else covered above, how many decades do you have to go back to find it, and how is that relevant today?

          And let's grant that it becomes true... this isn't a cable plan with backout penalties. You can drop Netflix in a moment's notice, problem free. Where's your risk?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by bws111 ( 1216812 )

          Also, comparing Netflix to cable is dumb for another reason. Cable is broadcast - everyone gets the same thing at the same time. So they aren't really able to have a 'paid' and an 'ad supported' version of the same thing. Even if they used two different channels to support that, there are still things like timing issues (a version with ads is going to run longer, so what does the version without ads do with that extra time). So the cable channel has to decide which will make more revenue - subscription

      • Two ways is could possibly change it. One, prices without ads will go up, forcing people into the ad tier. Two, shows will be narratively structured around ads and become more formulaic.

        • If only there were a button somewhere that you could press that would quietly disconnect you without followup or harassment... an "I'm out" button, if you will.

          If such an option were available to you, would that mitigate your concerns?

          • Personally, I don't care about Netflix anymore. Too much crap and its hard to find the few shows that are actually good. I'd pick it up one or two months out of the year if other people on the account weren't watching it constantly. The question I was responding to asked how Netflix getting ads affect current service tiers. I was just giving a couple possibilities.

            • Well, that's a valid complaint. I struggle to find decent new things using their interface - I have to google "best (thing) on netflix 2022" to find something.

              I mostly keep it around because my retired mother uses it...

              • That's pretty much what I do now. Or I just look for good shows and occasionally I get directed toward Netflix. I've developed an aversion to Netflix lately, (ala Clockwork Orange). Even when I see something gets good reviews, often, I still can't bring myself to watch.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by skam240 ( 789197 )

          One, prices without ads will go up, forcing people into the ad tier.

          It's inevitable that Netflix will raise prices at some point. I think it's also inevitable that people attribute the next price increase to exactly what you're saying.

  • Zynga and EA? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DrMrLordX ( 559371 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2022 @06:21AM (#62917419)

    Ew. That should tell you everything you need to know.

  • Surely in their own mind they will create world best games

  • Ripstone in the UK on the "Queen's Gambit" chess game, yes?

  • Believe it when I see it. Netflix is seeing the writing on the wall for them....

    • It seems like flailing but if they have interesting content on it, then it'll be more of a value add then, say, the streaming and gaming services companies like Verizon and T Mobile have been offering for 'free' with some of their plans.

  • Honestly (Score:4, Interesting)

    by DarkOx ( 621550 ) on Tuesday September 27, 2022 @07:52AM (#62917591) Journal

    Both game rentals and streaming games are good ideas but the implementation is everything.

    In the first case - rentals for games make sense. The AAA titles are expensive and in many cases replay ability is actually pretty low, at least outside the strategy space. The sandbox type games tried to address that with DLC but my observation with that is its quickly morphed into a mixture of content that was slated for the original release but was not ready on time, where the ability to do it as DLC later was an excuse to release an unfinished product or its rather uninspired we did some DLC because we said we would stuff consisting of more grindy - collection quests or home-run-derby like challenges.

    Therefor for a lot players the right way to game is - the way we mostly consume movies, play it thru and move on to the next one. Additionally with so many games tied to server side resources you never really own it anyway and it can get crippled/rug pulled at any time. Might as well rent it because the publishers have already decided that is the only 'real' option.

    Streaming makes a lot of sense too. Network connectivity to the edge is getting better rapidly. The ability to deliver a 8K image (enough for VR) at 60hz and low enough input latency will be a reality for a large number of customers soon. The GPU power and memory bandwidth to make ever richer worlds on the other hand is a going to be a moving target for a long time. Not having to keep up with all that capex for home rigs probably means better experience at lower cost for anyone who isnt in the upper quantile of hours spent gaming.

    All that said its going to be a question of experience. If Netflix does what they did c.2012 and deliver a wide array of first rate content at a reasonable fixed price, it would be amazing. If we get a ad laden heap of BBB stuff, and nickle and dime loot box, free to play - pay to win, crap it will suck. They question is really is the market big enough the over-subscribe model works or does each activity need to reflect its costs and deliver some contribution margin. I suspect we are not there yet. Ywo things are true about that as well 1) Netflix's current success (if rapidly waning) is STILL (maybe only) a product of the early mindshare they got being first to market. Clearly they want to repeat that performance to power their next decade. 2) Netflix is hemorrhaging cash in its existing content gambits already and this isnt an environment where investors are as freely handing out blank checks. I guess we find out how repeatable it is

  • Oxenfree - installed it yesterday. I know my phone is on the smaller side, but is it just me, or does this game feel like it was intended for a 50" screen?!

  • Which will be advertised with "now you can identify as Orc!!"

  • I'm sure this will go as well as Amazon's stunningly successful (/s) foray into MMOs, right?

  • Nowhere else to put it... so... Netflix pisses me off in one serious way. They have devalued the standup comic one hour special.

    It used to be that getting a special meant you had reached a certain place in your career and your ability. Having an HBO special mattered. Having a comedy central one... less so, but still somewhat curated. Netflix? Barely means you can register a pulse. In particular they are doing a terrible disservice to female performers - there are great female comedians, but you wouldn't kno

    • Not really as off-topic as you think. They've devalued comedy specials, action movies, and whatever else. Now they're setting their sights on games. What boggles my mind is how they can spend 'years' worth of capital developing a game and then include it in a streaming video subscription service.

      I guess Microsoft kind of does that with Game Pass, but they still make money with DLC. Plus the whole service is devoted to games.

  • If they want a curvy female protagonist, best to go with a non-binary, non-white, one.

    We already had Far Cry 5, so an acceptable target for bloody violence could be creatures that are totally non-sentient, like if a non-Terran entity took dirt, sand, and rocks, and made bipedal killing machines out of that.

    A reboot of Myst, making it just different enough (get Brad Dourif back though), could make for a great series, one with obvious possibilities for turning into Netflix videos.

    Roger Zelazny's Amber Chronic

  • Seems like every unrelated business who starts a game studio (Amazon, state of Massachusetts, etc) ends badly.

Slashdot Top Deals

Fast, cheap, good: pick two.

Close