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

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft

Microsoft's Sleazy Tactics in the Video Game Industry? 57

Posted by Cliff from the if-it-work-for-the-PC-market... dept.
Dyrandia asks: "I'm currently working on a Legal and Ethics course for my software engineering degree and have decided to write about microsoft's tactics of buying up video games and companies in order to keep games limited to their own platforms (pc and xbox). I am currently using the following games as examples: Oddworld: Munch's Oddysee; Halo (Microsoft bought the developers, however rumour has it that Halo will actually make it to PC next year); and Shenmue 2 (they even bought the rights to it so that it couldn't be released for the Dreamcast in the US, even though it was released in Japan and Europe). Does anyone know of URLs for sites that would have more information and possibly other games Microsoft has used similar tactics on?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft's Sleazy Tactics in the Video Game Industry? More

Microsoft's Sleazy Tactics in the Video Game Industry?

Comments Filter:

  • Just Microsoft? (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by dimator ( 71399 )
    Sorry, Microsoft is just playing the game in this case:
    Nintendo buys Retro Studios [nintendoweb.com]
    Sony buys (into) Square [rpgamer.com]
    Sony buys (into) Rare [the-lowdown.net]

    Buying a development house to gain exclusives does not seem to be ground-breaking news.

  • Why take this as 'bad tactics'? (Score:3, Flamebait)

    by OnyxRaven ( 9906 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @03:35PM (#3498709) Homepage
    It is possible that there is a reason these companies were bought by microsoft. In the case of Bungie, it was to help fund the last phase of development for Halo, and to push the development of their next two games (Project Phoenix and something like Halo 2). Microsoft offered more people to work on the projects, more resources to produce a quality game and all within less time (It was crucial to the Xbox launch that Halo be shipped with it. It is the killer game for the Xbox still).

    Halo will be coming out for the PC and Mac, but it may not be for a while... personel are still focused on the next game release, and not porting the game to PC/Mac.

    Bungie will keep its name, as one of the many subsidiary companies of a larger company throughout the gaming industry.

    Its all about project funding.
    • Halo will be coming out for the PC and Mac, but it may not be for a while... personel are still focused on the next game release, and not porting the game to PC/Mac.

      I think Microsoft has another priority. Halo is XBox's Killer Game right now. As long as Halo continues to drive XBox console sales, they have no incentive to release it on other platforms, even if the ports are already done. Why buy a $299 console to play a game that's available for PC?

      • Why buy a $299 console to play a game that's available for PC?

        Microsoft could release Windows LH [google.com] operating system for the PC, charge $300 per seat, and encourage developers to take advantage of Windows LH's new gaming features.

        Better yet, Microsoft could release a VMware-like product that virtualizes your CPU and GeForce 4, creating "Windows XB" with a built-in Xbox "emulator."

        • I seem to remember Dvorak theorizing that last autumn. Doesn't the XBox use a very x86-like CPU, anyway? If that's the case, then I'd suspect that, once the price of the PS2 drops to $150 or so, they'll match that on the consoles, but sell a $99 emulator for XP.

          • I haven't seen the price for a PS2 budge since it came out, and they're still selling at a brisk pace at my local EB and Babbages. I think a price drop to 150 ain't gonna happen until you're waiting in line for your new PS3. Hell, I'd be willing to wager they dont drop below 250 before they hit teh "redesign" stage that every console goes through when it's replacement comes out.

    • I guess that's one way to spin it.

  • Is this really sleazy, though? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by realgone ( 147744 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @03:36PM (#3498717)
    I mean, pretty much every console out there lives and dies by their "exclusive" content.

    • PS2: everything Squaresoft
    • Nintendo: Mario, Zelda
    • X-Box: Halo
    It's not so much a Microsoft thing as it is an industry thing. I've fallen into their trap myself. I bought a PlayStation primarily to run Final Fantasy. I bought a N64 primarily to run Zelda. (X-Box? I'll wait for Halo on the PC, thanks. No mouse, no WASD, no service.)

    As fun as it is to punch MSFT in the nose every once in a while, don't blame 'em for this one... =)

    • dont knock the halo control scheme until you have tried it. I like it a lot - it lends itself well to the game.

    • PS2: everything Squaresoft

      Not necessarily. Squaresoft and Nintendo have made up [freshangles.com]. Specifically, Final Fantasy Tactics is coming to Game Boy Advance.

    • halo (Score:1)

      by eshaft ( 82430 )
      look, i hate M$'s tactics and feel that it's leveraging it's monopoly to buy into a new market, but the more i play halo, the more i like the whole feel of the controllers and the gameplay. well, sometimes. sometimes that block of f**king buttons on top pisses me off, it's impossible to hit the one you're looking for unless you have tiny fingers and thumbs with absolute accuracy.

      what my point here? i forget. f*** M$.

  • Sleazy tactics... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by dtfarmer ( 548183 )
    Now, I dislike microsoft quite a bit, but having been a gamer most of my life, this kind of thing goes on all the time in the industry. The only problem with the strategy here is that Sony has deep enough pockets to go head to head with Microsoft doing the same thing. In the end, though, MS has already lost the Japanese market, and Sony has such a larger user base worldwide that despite the difficulty programming the PS2 - developers will support the platform that has 25 million users better than the the one that has 2 or 3 million (especially when the XBox is still underselling PS2 by a factor, they can't catch up if they can't outsell) - I'm used to this idea, I'm a mac user.
    • Sony's no where near as rich as Microsoft. If they wanted to, Gates'n'Company coudl probably outright buy the biggest developers for Sony. Sony, however, probably couldn't do the same considering it doesnt have 40 billion in the bank. btw, wish I was a mac user.
  • Just games?

    Has Microsoft, to some extent, limited competition in the entire software industry by buying rights so programs cannot be released to other platforms?

    Well, I can tell now:
    -1 Troll, -1 Offtopic, -1 redundant, -1 overrated.
    Perhaps there is an M$ conspiracy surrounding /. :-)

  • a better topic (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AdamBa ( 64128 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @03:47PM (#3498802) Homepage
    You could instead look at why people's view of Microsoft is so warped that a standard tactic like this pushes people's "legal and ethics" hot buttons.

    - adam

    • Right you are. Why are so many people here afraid of business, its the government they should worry about.

      These kinds of deals happen all the time in almost every industry, and their is absolutely nothing wrong with them legaly or ethically.
    • How true. You don't think being an official predatory monopoly (or the well-known history of leverage tactics that led to that status) has anything to do with it, do you?
    • well, let me see... bill gates making a stubborn fool of himself at a trial... outright lying and deception found by a judge in a US court of law... well, i guess that given Enron as an example, at least M$ isn't losing all their shareholders' money for them. but why do they have $40 billion in cash and liquid assets when they don't pay dividends (more than any other company on earth by far)? you're right, i should trust bill gates as far as i could throw his money-lined ass.

  • Age of Empires (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by n-baxley ( 103975 )
    I've become seriously hooked on Age of Empires II. Does anyone know an alternative that can let me break out of the MS control, even if it's something on Windows?

  • Don't Forget SubLogic! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by zulux ( 112259 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @03:58PM (#3498875) Homepage Journal
    SubLogic made Flight Simulator for Microsoft to brand - it also made Flight Simulator for other computers, even the TRS-80 CoCo has a version. After Microsoft bought SubLogic outright - the only playform they produce for belongs to Microsoft.

  • MS is buying up companies so their games will only be available on XBox? Well, they're not doing a very good job of it, because so fart there isn't a single decent XBox-only title, or even reports of one (although that may change at E3). All the console makers do this, so why get on MS except to say that they do it poorly?
  • I was heart broken when I read that MS was assimilating Bungie. More so when I found they at one point halted all development of the PC/Mac version of it. I've heard about the PC version comming sometime next year, and it's belivable, but what I want to know is if there will be a Mac version or is that going to be a no show.
  • and Shenmue 2 (they even bought the rights to it so that it couldn't be released for the Dreamcast in the US, even though it was released in Japan and Europe).

    As I understand it, they will be paying for heavy advertising of Shenmue II in America, and as part of the deal (for obvious reasons) Sega is not releasing it for the Dreamcast. This was a simple business deal between Sega and Microsoft, and while it may piss off Dreamcast fans, there is nothing the least bit sleazy about it.
  • You want sleze in the video game industry, you go to the master: Nintendo. Go find a book called 'Game Over.' Read it. Boggle in amazement at the realization that Microsoft is a lightweight in the world of sleaze.

    • Re:This isn't sleazy. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Kris_J ( 10111 )
      Just because everyone does it doesn't mean it's not illegal or unethical.
      • It's got nothing to do with 'everybody does it.' It's just that there are companies that did it FAR BETTER, and MORE, than Microsoft EVER DID. In the computing world, IBM. In the video game world, Nintendo. Oh, and Sony, for that matter. It amazes me that people allow their hatred of MS to blind themselves to other truths.
        • True, but IBM, Nintendo and Sony don't generally make crap products and then tell you it's gold. The three companies you mention built their reputations more on providing quality products at (usually) reasonable prices. Sure, there was always a latest and greatest that you could buy next year, but it was more, "Only if you really want it," rather than, "Guess what, the only way to fix your current problems is to give us more money." They made the newer versions have better features so you did want them, which is not the way MS does business.

          The first Gameboy was pretty lame, but it didn't cause any Navy ships to go dead in the water. The early Walkmans were expensive, but didn't crash every third song. IBM . . . well, I guess I don't have a great example for IBM, but they are the only typewriter company still in business today. And why? Because the products aren't crap.

          How dare you call me blind when you can make such a comparison with a straight face.

  • flight simulator (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I once read a story several years ago, possibly 1993. It was in PC World or something to that effect. It was about a guy who wrote a flight simulator. As the story wentm, a company approached him about publishing it, and he said cool. They offered him either $10,000, or 10% of the proceeds. Believing in his product, he took the 10%. Little did he know, the software company was a front for Microsoft. They were buying up flight simulators so that Microsoft Simulator would enter the market with little competition. His product never made it to the shelves, and since he sold the rights for 10%, he couldn't take it elsewhere.

    It was a while ago, I'd really like to find that article again. I might have messed up some of the figures and facts, but that was the basic gist of it.
  • As another datapoint for the paper...

    MS also frequently makes acceptance of 3rd party games contingent on the inclusion of a few XBox-only features. Sony (and presumably Nintendo) frequently do this as well. All three are guilty of the tactic the original poster describes, although MS may be pursuing it a bit more strongly than most.

  • Microsoft bought out Digital Anvil in Dec. 2000

    http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2000nov/gam20001 205003170.htm [geek.com]

    More often than buying up the companies, they just make deals with them where they are the only platform that that the game can be developed for.

Slashdot Top Deals

FORTRAN is not a flower but a weed -- it is hardy, occasionally blooms, and grows in every computer. -- A.J. Perlis

Close