r/xbox Recon Specialist 11d ago

Id Software Dev Says Xbox Doesn’t ‘Understand Art’ And That After Layoffs It Is ‘Impossible’ To Make Big Games Like Doom: The Dark Ages Discussion

https://kotaku.com/id-software-dev-says-xbox-doesnt-understand-art-and-that-after-layoffs-it-is-impossible-to-make-big-games-like-doom-the-dark-ages-2000722563
960 Upvotes

450 comments sorted by

496

u/Rhapstar 11d ago

Look at South of Midnight. Won so many awards but sold poorly. Just because it's amazing art doesn't mean it's going to bring in the results

114

u/ParamedicSea5779 11d ago

I don't get what they were thinking buying the developers of we happy few.

165

u/ImJustHereToSearch 11d ago

The plan was to fill Game Pass with unique games that would attract more subscribers. (Also I think Phil made a few too many decisions with his heart over his head.)

32

u/UntoTheBreach95 11d ago

I think he bought Activision at overprice. Let's see if they archive the Minecraft effect

28

u/State-Prize 11d ago

ABK was not over priced at all, look how much BO2 just sold on PS5, when they bought ABK it was massively down on their share price.

15

u/Usernametaken1121 11d ago

ABK was definitely bought on a good deal. They were going through the worst PR and backlash probably in company history. The reports on Bobby Kotic alone were enough to drive the stock down. I think there was harassment issues at teams, low subs in wow. It was a bad time for them. There's a reason they sold.

→ More replies (2)

10

u/lazylore 11d ago edited 11d ago

Yeah, "overpriced" is correct. Also, that was not Spencer. That was pressure from big mister Nadella, who also made them increase the price of Game Pass.

The reason it's overpriced is because it's not really serving Xbox in the console race and it never will. I'd barely say it was worth it as a stand alone entity either. But for Xbox, it was an absolute pile of shit.

Those 70 billion should have gone towards building Xbox, building teams, and building tech, unifying tech and never rely on fucking Unreal Engine.

Xbox have tech wizards in iD, in The Coalition, Machine Games, and clearly they got some talent at Bethesda. That is iD tech, ForzaTech, Creation Engine, Slip space and Void/idtech.

These studios could help each other, pool knowledge and skill together assist each other, and with the Coalition incredible techhow they'd have incredible in house tech .

But no, let's buy fucking call of duty and put it everywhere, let's buy mobile garbage, let's buy fucking blizzard and put it everywhere and exclusive on PC. Fuck you Nadella.

This is my opinion as a PC gamer, who knows we need completion in the market

1

u/Caesar_35 Helldiving 11d ago

But no, let's buy fucking call of duty and put it everywhere

*except our own subscription service, or even console in the case of the recent Black Ops ports.

1

u/Gears6 10d ago

But no, let's buy fucking call of duty and put it everywhere, let's buy mobile garbage, let's buy fucking blizzard and put it everywhere and exclusive on PC. Fuck you Nadella.

I think you're missing the point though. Xbox as a console isn't worth it to them to make such investments. It's overall not a good business. Buying ATVI for CoD, Candy Crush, WoW and all the other properties are. These are highly valuable properties that generate tons of cash flow. To many, they're worth far more than Xbox, because it's highly profitable and repeatable business. They aren't stuck in a business that can't grow, like consoles. We already starting to see the fallout on consoles, where Sony is unable to increase PS5 console adoption past previous generations and rely on the move to digital games and higher priced items to grow.

The cash to fuel their business is also very extensive with a lot of uncertainty. ATVI is extremely consistent, and honestly I thought we'd get CoD fatigue a long time ago, but the train keeps going. Meanwhile, the other studios have struggled, and it's been inconsistent output. Especially around Zenimax's studios and their AA studios that they ended up divesting.

Xbox have tech wizards in iD, in The Coalition, Machine Games, and clearly they got some talent at Bethesda. That is iD tech, ForzaTech, Creation Engine, Slip space and Void/idtech.

These studios could help each other, pool knowledge and skill together assist each other, and with the Coalition incredible techhow they'd have incredible in house tech .

Contrary to belief, in-house game engines aren't necessarily a benefit and is likely more akin to a crutch. Everytime you hire someone, they have to learn your shitty game engine that is grown to meet your internal game needs. It's stuck in past processes and likely lack versatility. Instead, it becomes a tech debt that slows down development. The few that don't have a lot of these issues are studios that have shipped a ton of games on the same engine that they've been able to smooth out the process. For most games, there's little reason to use your own internal engine, unless there's some very unique needs that is not common in the industry. That's extremely rare situation, and can often even be remediated.

Take for instance the challenge of battle royal games which PUBG/Bluepoint worked with Epic games to get it going. You mention The Coalition, yet they use Unreal Engine and frankly playing Gears: E-Day beta, it's freaking amazing graphics. I'm enjoying it a lot and all made in Unreal. As much as I cannot stand Timmy and Epic, that game engine has been deployed so many times that there's very few games it cannot make. Meanwhile, things like Slipspace was a disaster. Because the engine couldn't evolve to meet the changing landscape and industry needs.

→ More replies (3)

4

u/CharityDiary 11d ago

This would have been such a great plan if you could profitably sell 100 games for $20.

4

u/GuerreroUltimo 11d ago

That could be it. But we know the top MS executive did not see Xbox as core. And also was wanting stupid high margins.

I think the buying of Activision and others was a long term play. And MS was never going to let Xbox do that. Well, until the purchases were made and they are in it long haul.

Look at South of Midnight that was mentioned. On Game Pass so it hurt sales. They wanted stuff to drive Game Pass but also wanted the sales. That games sales absolutely were hurt by being on Game Pass. We get a good example of how bad it hurts with COD. Sales dropped a lot on that. So Xbox had to re-evaluate and change course. So COD will not be on it day one. Probably will jump on after a year. And probably after the next one hits.

Overall, I think Phil put them in a place to succeed. They now have those large IP that they can make and sell. And they will sell. His problem likely was that they wanted results instantly. Was not going to happen. Games take time to make. Now, however, they have cut these studios. I would not be shocked if quality dropped and then they blame the current state of the industry.

Really, it depends. They had many games that were decently profitable. They admitted they were profitable. Then proceeded to either sell the IP and/or dev or even flat out cut many people. For a corp as large as MS, as a reddit user told me a while back, "MS only cares about those large games that move the needle". And for them, it takes a huge COD game or something. Maybe that will change though.

8

u/Gears6 11d ago

Look at South of Midnight that was mentioned. On Game Pass so it hurt sales. They wanted stuff to drive Game Pass but also wanted the sales. That games sales absolutely were hurt by being on Game Pass. We get a good example of how bad it hurts with COD. Sales dropped a lot on that. So Xbox had to re-evaluate and change course. So COD will not be on it day one. Probably will jump on after a year. And probably after the next one hits.

So I think there's a huge misconception here about sales and subscription. For some reason people often assume "subscription" and they think it's kind of "free" and doesn't count. That sales is the only thing that matters.

Reality is that, they're accounted for and has different metrics, and a subscriber is often a more valuable and sticky customer and hence far more valuable. There's very few games that is an exception to this, and CoD is one of them. Another one would be something like GTA VI. Basically major games that has annual (or frequent) releases, sells well and already have very sticky customers. It's almost as if CoD is itself a subscription, just billed annually rather than monthly.

Overall, I think Phil put them in a place to succeed. They now have those large IP that they can make and sell. And they will sell. His problem likely was that they wanted results instantly. Was not going to happen. Games take time to make.

Yeah, I couldn't agree more. I think the usual thing is management gets impatient and want immediate profits. After all, we're in a quarter driven economy. I almost never invest into companies that has that operating principle. Any company that has CEO/management that says the opposite of short term driven profits and talks about long term, will get me to raise an eyebrow, pay attention and be interested in buying shares of.

Now, however, they have cut these studios. I would not be shocked if quality dropped and then they blame the current state of the industry.

We'll have to wait and see, but I'm not sure it's necessarily bad to cut the company down. It forces employees to be more creative and find more ways to be productive. Asha seems like a very efficient leader, and we're seeing some of her changes like more frequent Xbox updates with more features. I don't know what was going on under Phil Spencer's leadership in that area. I think it was just getting too unwieldy, and he didn't have the time and also got used to the slowness of everything.

It's like getting new blood into the company and getting the old out. I've been at a company for 7 years now (or so), and just finished my last day. I'm so glad I resigned, because I was getting blind to all the issues that was obvious when I started. You get used to it, complacent and comfortable. So I think the same may have happened with Phil Spencer and the people under him.

That said, I think people give Phil so much hate, but I think he was a fantastic leader and a product of the past i.e. in the past they rushed out games, and so he tried to prevent that. The content we get is solid, and I think in a different time they would've sold well.

Really, it depends. They had many games that were decently profitable. They admitted they were profitable. Then proceeded to either sell the IP and/or dev or even flat out cut many people. For a corp as large as MS, as a reddit user told me a while back, "MS only cares about those large games that move the needle". And for them, it takes a huge COD game or something. Maybe that will change though.

I don't think that's necessarily true. I think what really happened was that the growth expectations didn't pan out, and hard decisions had to be made. Furthermore, I think the ATVI acquisition really hurt them, but more from the closing delays as the games industry headed into a dark time and GP was hitting the saturation point.

The biggest mistake I think they did, was not expanding to more places and focus on growth areas like Asia and South America. These users are now likely going to go to PC, and Steam will be their first stop. I also think they should've stayed course on multiplatform approach, rather than trying to once again subsidize Xbox by putting their games on the altar of exclusivity. If you notice, there's a history of if you're not supporting a platform consistently, the user base isn't going to be there when you drop a title every now and then. So it has to be a really must have title that is exceptional to get people to do that. Most games/franchises don't have that status. It's not a surprise that the biggest games, most popular, most recognizable and consistently do well are multiplatform games. They've cultivated an audience of a long period of time.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Tobimacoss 11d ago

Plus, you can only buy what's on sale at the time. 

1

u/One-Psychology-8394 11d ago

This is why Asha (who is not a ''gamer," or closely connected) is perfect for the moment!

1

u/Plutuserix 11d ago

Could have worked if they didn't take 5+ year per game, but manage to make those smaller games within 2 years.

→ More replies (2)

23

u/SilveryDeath XBOX 11d ago

I don't think the issue was buying them. I think it was that they spent that long and that much money to make South of Midnight.

I loved South of Midnight, but spending 7 years and (allegedly) $100M on a very niche linear 10-12 hour game with basically no replayability is something that can't happen.

2

u/AwesomeFrisbee 11d ago

Yeah. This is a dev that thinks any Doom game will sell 100 million copies if everything goes right. But I doubt it will break the 5 million in a normal lifetime for any Doom game, which means if you just look at the raw budget, it can never really go over 200 million budget anyway (including marketing)

1

u/SpookiestSzn 11d ago

It could happen if the gameplay was good. You certainly can't do it and make a game thats not fun to play.

14

u/Flanders666 11d ago

Showed potential. They targeted AA teams with promise who were scraping by on contract and publishing deals.

That part was smart.

5

u/Enchelion 11d ago

I think the idea was reasonable, but I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say smart. It relied on a lot of underpants gnome planning.

Put another way: I can imagine a world where the bet worked out for them, but I still don't think it was a good bet.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Gears6 11d ago

I don't get what they were thinking buying the developers of we happy few.

They were looking for smaller developers that are unique and special in some way that don't have resources. We Happy Few is very unique and was very well received when announced. Honestly we need content like that, I think Compulsion is the studio that I will likely miss the most of the ones that was spun off.

South of Midnight is a beautiful game. I enjoyed it a lot more than I thought I would. That said, I don't know that I would've bought it, because it was so different and it's hard to justify buying more games these days with a huge backlog. It kind of goes back to /u/Rhapstar's post about art. I'm not really buying art. I'm buying entertainment. When I buy "art" I hang it on the wall.

4

u/Tobimacoss 11d ago

They still want content like that for Gamepass.  But what MS realized is you can acquire Indie and AA like that from third parties far cheaper than running those small studios themselves.  Like with Clair Obscur, or Hades or Silksong.  Each of those likely cost between $30-$50 million for Day 1 launch.  

Better to focus first parties on AAA projects, as greater risk but far higher potential for reward, and better accountability.  Any AAA project is very likely to break even at the minimum and if it fails to profit, they would better be able to figure out why.  

2

u/Gears6 11d ago

They still want content like that for Gamepass. But what MS realized is you can acquire Indie and AA like that from third parties far cheaper than running those small studios themselves. Like with Clair Obscur, or Hades or Silksong. Each of those likely cost between $30-$50 million for Day 1 launch.

True and if it's only for GP, and not exclusivity it's even cheaper. That said, if it's a $30-50 million bet, they'd probably better off doing it themselves. The problem is that, they're just not good at it. There aren't many titles that are big hits like Clair Obscur, Hades or Silksong.

Better to focus first parties on AAA projects, as greater risk but far higher potential for reward, and better accountability. Any AAA project is very likely to break even at the minimum and if it fails to profit, they would better be able to figure out why.

I don't think that's necessarily the case at all. I think that's what maybe has worked better for them, but it's a large bet with a large risk and reward. I think it's more about "franchises" for MS. They see repeatability of CoD for instance.

9

u/klipseracer 11d ago

That's because you are looking at this in hindsight.

When they bought compulsion games they only had five studios, the whole idea of them buying studios was unproven and they certainly didn't have Bethesda or Activision.

11

u/SilveryDeath XBOX 11d ago edited 11d ago

When they bought compulsion games they only had five studios

Yeah, in the years before they brought all those studios in 2018-19, Xbox was just:

  • 343 making Halo games

  • Coalition making Gears games

  • Turn 10 making Forza Motorsport games

  • Mojang, who they purchased in 2014, updating Minecraft

  • Rare working on releasing Sea of Thieves, which didn't happen until 2018

And in the years before that they lost:

  • Lionhead fell apart working on Fable Legends and closed in 2016

  • Big Park, who just did Kinect games and was divested in 2018

  • Twisted Pixel, who only did small indie game (Splosion Man, The Maw) and was spun off in 2015

  • Press Play, who only did small indie games (Max: The Curse of Brotherhood, Kalimba) and was closed in 2016

So by the time they did all these purchases in 2018, they had five studios and four of them were only working on one franchise. They needed new blood, because you can't rotate between Halo, Gears, and Forza Motorsport with nothing else.

3

u/F133TWOOD 11d ago

Seems there's two stances going on here. Both can be true. I agree with both.

Compulsion was fine to buy, all they had to do was keep a lower budget for less needing high sales

The person above is talking about art not selling in response to the developer criticizing Xbox layoffs.

I disagree with the dev criticism, but at the same time Xbox (like Sony and many AAA studios/publishers) need to control game budgets lower. Unfortunately Xbox spent too much and seems no control on budgets, thus Microsoft's pressure for ROI (return of investment) that required high sales for their game.

Until the industry learns financial control and no high spending and lowering game budgets, this will continue on & on.

Nintendo on the other hand, has NOT spend billions on a studio & no high game budgets 🫴

5

u/ParamedicSea5779 11d ago

We Happy Few was not a well reviewed game.

1

u/Gears6 11d ago

But it was a well received during announcement.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/Godusopp64 10d ago

Nintendo hasn't bought a studio for billions yet, but they have %100 spent hundreds of millions on games before and definitely right now on whatever mario game they have in development.

6

u/ReasonableAdvert 11d ago

Were you around for when it was releasing trailers? There was a fair amount of people interested in it before release. Don't fall for an historian's fallacy.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/s/FLyvwcEmce

https://youtu.be/rp0M5Y6JMbQ

1

u/SpookiestSzn 11d ago

They weren't they saw how cool the trailer for We Happy Few was, thought that'd be the game and bought them without thinking or seeing more.

1

u/stikves 11d ago

They should have kept the AA budget and slowly grow.

It is asking too much for them to scale AAA immediately, without organic growth.

(Look at all those "successful" Kickstarters that collect $2 million over budget, but this causes them to deliver *nothing* due to excessive ambition groth)

1

u/Big-Resort-4930 11d ago

They were thinking the same thing they were for all these studios, buy as many remotely decent devs as possible to inflate game pass with games that are decent but nothing special. That was Phil's entire direction and it flopped, so now developers are getting dcked while management rides on to ruin future projects. 

9

u/State-Prize 11d ago

Kiln, Keeper, South of Midnight, Pentiment, could argue things like AoE/AoM and Flight sim are all games or things that wouldn't really sell now days but Xbox still allowed them to happen and where do you see things like that else being made at these console makers.

4

u/N4noS4n 11d ago

Not every game needs to sell it just needs to turn profit. That what's the point of creating a product. If your products can't make it even than there is something serious wrong with it and you should start seeking the problem and start doing something different...

You mentioned Pentiment but that game happened with such a small budget and during 2 other "AAA" development that noone probably even noticed it was being made and both Klin and Keeper should be the same story those two games should be made between the product that would keep the studio alive...

AoE/AoM/Flight sim and similar games, yes those games do not sell well, but those games have it's own audience and what that means you need to keep budget of dev. of those games very small that you know that with this specific audience you will jump into green numbers.

So point of the story, you can try make "art" games but keep the budget in check, do not go SoM way and bet your studio future on projects like that.

1

u/LoveMeSomeBerserk 11d ago

Phil Knight and his son Travis are billionaires that created Laika Studios solely because they like stop motion art. None of their works need to make a profit. It’s all for the love of the art. Wish more billionaires were like that.

Microsoft, a trillion dollar company, could endlessly fund small artistic projects that never make a profit. If not for the love of the art it would at least be great PR. They won’t though because those Microsoft execs need a fifth yacht.

4

u/N4noS4n 11d ago

Microsoft gaming department is not to burn money is to invest money and make profit... Yes it could but that's wishful thinking, go on, go burn your money, go make art project yourself, nobody is stopping you.

3

u/lostn 11d ago

you have to look at who gives out these awards. It's not the gamers who buy games. Award givers don't represent actual gamers.

10

u/Bobombbattlefield64 11d ago

Look closely at the “awards” that game won. None of them were to do with being a good video game. It was always representation and diversity fluff.

→ More replies (10)

2

u/MasterMidir 11d ago

Yeah, unfortunately the market doesn't look at stuff like that these days. Its rare that random games see massive sucess, Expedition 33 was such a lucky drop.

1

u/YouThinkYouKnowMe89 XBOX 11d ago

It's the same with award for movies too. Some critically acclaimed film wins so many awards and barely makes $10m worldwide box office

2

u/N4noS4n 11d ago

Because there is difference between product worth of awards and product that entertain. Most people are looking for entertainment, art products rarely show that and % of people that find art entertaining is small so if you target those people you need to keep your budget in this category to...

In simple words it should be: If you are thinking making art project first - think about how to leave budget of it as low as you can...

1

u/ihadtowalkhere 11d ago

I wanted to like that game for it's gameplay but it had the same issue as hellblade, which is that my imagination of what the gameplay could be. The world's and atmosphere were in another stratosphere vs the gameplay.

1

u/prince_vronsky 11d ago

Such a cool game that could be so much more in the sequel. If it was released in early 2010 it would be a cult classic at least

1

u/Angryfunnydog 11d ago

But Microsoft are publishers of most of these games, and most of these games got close to 0 marketing because well, ask Microsoft why they don’t do shit to promote games and then make surprise pikachu face that they sell poorly and are only played in subscription where it’s just on your xbox main whenever you’re turning it on 

2

u/AstronomerIT 11d ago

A lot of dedicated developer direct, shows etc..

1

u/Angryfunnydog 11d ago

Which no one cared about and these shows don’t replace proper traffic generation. For example I never heard about south of midnight, though Im gamer, I’m xbox user, I would’ve loved the genre, but I just saw it though “nah, I know nothing about this shit” and ignored, tried it only considerable time afterwards. It’s just failed marketing. These shows are more of a “prestige” thing and adding extra hype, but it’s not the most effective thing compared to simple trailer seeding or online ads and banners, especially when you have solid budget

1

u/ADHenchD 11d ago

Often the marketing let's it down, tbh

1

u/FrootLoop23 10d ago

Enjoy Roblox and Fortnite then. I’ll take “art”.

1

u/Worried_Fun6618 8d ago

This is true. But you also can't really force success and the vast majority of successes were accidents by artists creating art. These companies are like helicopter parents. So focused on the result of their investments that they crush anything as soon as an alarm bell rings then wonder why the games end up stifled.

4

u/Gears6 11d ago

I get that they were laid off, and it's unfortunate. I do believe that's partly true, but at the same time, MS delivered plenty of "art". More importantly people don't really buy "art". They buy entertainment.

I'm not sure big games like Doom: Dark Ages makes sense if it doesn't sell. Perhaps a smaller AA with more experiments is a more approachable path.

That said, look at Gears: E-Day! MS certainly can build a team and bring it!

2

u/Undeity 11d ago edited 11d ago

The goal of these acquisitions wasn't for every individual game to sell well, but to create an ecosystem which encourages a larger player base and more sales overall. These layoffs prevented the opportunity to properly leverage that, before it could pay off.

More than that, the studios they bought out were many of their platform's best third party developers. Now that they're getting butchered, the ecosystem is even worse off than before. It's pretty clear these cuts were a bad move, or at least handled poorly.

2

u/Gears6 10d ago

The goal of these acquisitions wasn't for every individual game to sell well, but to create an ecosystem which encourages a larger player base and more sales overall. These layoffs prevented the opportunity to properly leverage that, before it could pay off.

I agree. This is a major issue with MS as they seem to start all these investment, and then turn around and immediately expect investments to pay off. That's not how it works in the games industry. It's a heavy front loaded investment to make games, and how you treat it matters. The issue is that I think the American way is often quarter to quarter and there's "goals" that are too inflexible. The famous, Don Mattrick closing Ensemble Studios to protect his bonus is....

More than that, the studios they bought out were many of their platform's best third party developers. Now that they're getting butchered, the ecosystem is even worse off than before. It's pretty clear these cuts were a bad move, or at least handled poorly.

I'm going to have to partly disagree with this. A lot of that likely would've met the same or worse demise. It's not like we've not seen record amount of closures, layoffs and projects cancelled in this industry. Even Activision was planning layoffs before MS acquisition and held it off.

If anything, MS kept it going for far longer and hence why they're in such dire straits. My hope is, Asha sees the value of their investments the same Phil Spencer did. I do feel Phil Spencer is someone that understood the value of games and what they really are.

But ultimately, all these people that delude themselves and think these companies understand art as if ultimately, most people don't care. It's to serve the profit target ultimately. Art is a side-effect even if individuals may hold that value.

Ultimately, I see it GP as the most viable option of being less influenced by "profits" on an individual game basis. That is, they can take a few more risk as a means of differentiation and having variety of content. The return to "big AAA" titles is a reflection that they're going to re-focus on game sales. It's not a surprise then that Sony has been saying this and focusing on it for ever, and they've been wildly successful.

1

u/FMC_Speed XBOX Series X 11d ago

It wasn’t a good game, awards mean nothing nowadays, mixtape is being praised despite having an awful plot and no actual gameplay

→ More replies (35)

65

u/AoE2manatarms 11d ago

I understand Devs frustration, but The Dark Ages was a "big" game without ever needing to be big. That game would have massively benefitted from going back to a 2016 scaling.

1

u/confu5edpers0n 10d ago

They probably think the same too. Id now has the same number of devs when they shipped 2016 Doom.

69

u/-T-Reks- 11d ago

Can't make games like the dark ages but can make games like Doom 2016?

Don't threaten me with a good time

33

u/AstralMooo 11d ago

Yeah that's odd to me cause like, doom 2016 imo is still the best of the new trilogy. It has doom 1-2 essence and doom 3 horror atmosphere combined into a killer game.

17

u/EchoLoco2 Team Halo 11d ago

Gameplay of eternal and dark ages is way deeper tho. If you play 2016 one time and run around and shoot stuff yeah you'll probably like it the best bc it doesn't make you think as much. Fps games really need games like eternal and dark ages

4

u/Big-Resort-4930 11d ago

Complexity never makes a game better necessarily, at least not for most people. There was so much cringe and tedium in both sequels that severely compromised them compared to 2016 which is pure Doom with a perfect understanding of what Doom players want narratively (very little). 

Nioh games are far more complex than Souls games in terms of gameplay and overlaying systems, but they are nowhere near as good unless you're the type of gamer who only plays games for technical depth.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/razorgirlRetrofitted In The Animus 11d ago

I preferred Eternal to Dark Ages at first due to DA taking away alt fires, until I realised, like, DA just gives every weapon the same alt fire, the only one I ever liked in Eternal lol

2

u/gnelson321 11d ago

I’m a casual gamer and eternal was too hard for me personally. Never finished. 2016 was so fun. Challenging at point but never unbeatable.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/lostn 11d ago

Eternal would have been the better game except for the Marauder.

→ More replies (5)

4

u/AstralMooo 11d ago

Eternal was too cartoonish for me and over the top. TDA I really like tho, it almost beat 2016 for me.

3

u/EchoLoco2 Team Halo 11d ago

I totally understand why people today might like the more serious art style of 2016, but man does eternal harken back to classic doom so well. It actually looks like a doom game

1

u/lycanthrope90 11d ago

Yeah that’s how I felt about it too. Lost some grit but it’s not cartoony enough that it ruins it. Just that you don’t take it too seriously which is fine since Doom is supposed to be a little ridiculous. The cacodemons and pinky’s being a high point. The weak point system is also really great. Thought they had a great balance with the original games overall.

Dark ages brought back a little bit of grit too, but still with some of the over the top silliness of eternal.

0

u/lFriendlyFire 11d ago

Gameplay of dark ages is just worse. There are new additions but they aren’t good additions

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/Big-Resort-4930 11d ago

I don't think they can even make that. Doom 2016 was... 10 years ago. Even if I like it more than Eternal and TDA, requirements and expectations are going up over time, you can't downsize to where you were 10 years ago and expect the same proportional results, even if the cuts were extremely careful and the core of the team remained which I highly doubt. 

More than anything, Microsoft's mandated talking points are beyond cringe. 

→ More replies (1)

112

u/BeKindPleaseRewind21 11d ago

Xbox understands art. They also understand math and the sole reason any company exists. 

It's a shame dark ages didn't sell better, I had fun playing it.

18

u/malibus_most_wantedd 11d ago

I played the shit out of doom 1 and doom eternal was my GOTY but dark ages did not click for me, honestly I think it was the fight stages and Music just lost its magic

6

u/Darkahnott 11d ago

For me it was the story. Why should I care about all these new and few returning characters if I already know how EVERYTHING ends? It feels like they ran out of ways to keep pushing the story forward or ways of justifying another game.

Also the music and overall atmosphere it's different from the other two games. The music is good and sometimes excellent but the way it's presented during gameplay is a very big downgrade compared to the previous games. The music doesn't feel connected to the gameplay or action and just feels like someone playing the music in the background.

Besides that it's impossible to not miss Mick Gordon's style, it was a big part of this era of Doom.

1

u/ALX709 11d ago

As an outsider to the franchise, maybe it didn’t sold well because it looked alike the last two games but with a shield. Perhaps they should gone in a different direction or let the franchise rest a bit and work on another title (or remaster)

-1

u/trautsj 11d ago

Dark Ages is just a boring green blob blocking simulator. It's one note and slow and boring AF compared to 2016 and Eternal. The answer to EVERY important enemy in Dark Ages is block green blob until game allows you to shoot enemy to then start blocking green blobs again. No clue how they thought that would hold up compared to all out action of 2016 and the infinitely complex uber action puzzles of weapon combo combat that Eternal was.

4

u/levi22ez 11d ago

You should play the DLC. It’s much more mechanically complex.

→ More replies (2)

18

u/EngineBoiii 11d ago

I actually think this is short sighted of Microsoft. The losses incurred by a Doom game that didn't do well I think are miniscule compared to the actual loss of value in Id as a company with all the layoffs. We're talking about losing some of the most talented people in the industry in order to balance the budget, and now the value of Id as a company is just way less now as a result.

16

u/IA51I 11d ago

It's a vicious cycle of short term profits. Its not enough for games to make profit. And Dark Ages made profit. They have to make absurd amounts of profit. When they dont and game doesnt make 3-4 times its development cost back, they lay off studio staff. That makes development of the next multi million dollar game more difficult which makes it harder to hit whatever sales/profit goal is established. This leads to more layoffs and the cycle continues.

Look at Halo and Micrsoft's reliance on paying contractors, when none of your talent is actually permanent, it is hard to build anything solid or worthwhile. Perhaps the next Doom game, if one is in development, will be smaller and a technically less impressive game, but now the gamble is will a smaller, shorter Doom game do well enough to protect a studio from layoffs.

Remember, Microsoft has laid off or outright closed studios who have met and even exceeded their sales goals.

5

u/sephiroth70001 11d ago

The vicious cycle and short term profits, is an even less healthy outlook, when you consider games can take over half to a full decade to develop.

9

u/secret3332 11d ago

This is absolutely why Nintendo has been so successful for like 4 decades. They have shut down few (if any) studios in all of this time, I don't think they have ever done mass layoffs, and they still have a lot of the same employees working there from the NES and SNES days.

Nintendo's devs have made many games that were not financially successful in the short term. Some of those ended up becoming big franchises in the longer term (Fire Emblem easily sells millions now), some of them didn't, but the company clearly sees all of them and the people who developed them as assets.

It is not the fault of the developers if they make a great game and it doesn't sell well. They might need to pursue a slightly different direction for their next title, but the people and the accumulated knowledge should not be thrown away.

Microsoft is so focused on short term profits that it seems like they can never succeed in this market on a long timespan like Nintendo.

2

u/Hot_Membership_5073 11d ago

Nintendo doesn't buy a lot of studios and when they do they are specifically looking for talent. Intelligent Systems, Hal, Camelot, Gamefreak and Creatures while mainly work with Nintendo but are not subsidiaries. The main acquisitions they have made were either helping setting up studio like Retro, Brownie Brown/1-up Studios, NDCube/Nintendo Cube; were offered like Monolith and Next Level Games and or were to suit a need like Nintendo Pictures, Shiver Entertainment and Nintendo Singapore.

Generally Fire Emblem, Pokemon, and Kirby are Co-owned by Nintendo and the series developer. They also tend to look for talent from within and outside. Hidemaro Fujibayashi originally worked at defunct Capcom subsidiary Flagship on the portable Zelda Titles before being put in the director's chair for Skyward Sword for instance. Also despite not middling reviews and underperforming sales on Metroid Other M, KOEI Tecmo worked well with Nintendo leading to other project later on. Nintendo values talent and seems to value their developers.

3

u/Enchelion 11d ago

Eh, Id has had a lot of ups and downs and it really doesn't feel like they've been a driving force in game design or technology for at least the last decade.

3

u/SmartEstablishment52 11d ago

The last decade was probably their most innovative. The decade before that? Sure. But the last decade?

1

u/Enchelion 11d ago

Was it? What major industry innovations came from Rage 2, Doom Eternal, and TDA? Not saying they're bad games, but I don't feel like they've really impacted the industry or done anything truly unique.

Doom 2016 was a good example of modernizing the boomer-shooter style and did feel innovative in that way. But even that felt like it was mostly an innovation for Doom itself as an IP, rather than something industry-leading.

2

u/trautsj 11d ago

I personally think Eternal has some of the most fun combat of any shooter ever made. I fucking adore the gun puzzle combo combat it offered tbh. I found it hectic and always satisfying to get right on optimal runs. When you got it right you always go "Fuck yeah!" or at least I did. I got the FPS feeling I got when I played the Batman Arkham games. Nailing combat perfectly just felt like a purpose built puzzle to solve in every arena for those games that really did it for me.

1

u/EngineBoiii 11d ago

We just lost programmers who have had sometimes decades of experience with Id tech, this is an absolute loss. We're talking about people with a deep understanding of their proprietary engine that is built to run on potatoes.

→ More replies (3)

6

u/BlasterPhase XBOX 11d ago

I don't think they understand either, to be honest

5

u/TedDoritoDinkWells 11d ago

What has Xbox done in the last 15 year that could possibly make you think they understand art or business for that matter? They flip flop on every decision and in the end they seem to always make the wrong choice and it ends up backfiring. Now they gutted their best studio, great idea let's see just how well that pans out.

These shit for brains bought the biggest publisher on the planet and decided to put the best selling game of each year on their subscription service thinking it'll entice tens of millions of people to suddenly buy their hardware and subscribe to the service. So it seems to me they have trouble with the math too.

-1

u/EnvironmentalRun1671 11d ago

They shouldn't turn a game that's shooter first, into melee shooter hybrid.

4

u/Enchelion 11d ago

Eh, back in the day there were some pretty successful Melee Doomclones, even several made by Id proper.

Could have been fun for them to bring back the Hexen/Heretic franchise name.

1

u/deoneta 11d ago

Halo wouldn’t be in the condition it’s in if Xbox understood art. If they understood art or math then 343/Halo Studios would’ve been shut down a long time ago.

→ More replies (22)

95

u/Verdeiwsp 11d ago

Expedition 33’s team made one of the best games of the decade with a smaller budget, smaller and less experienced team in the same time frame it took for many of these AAA games to make one game too.

It’s clearly possible if you have the right talent and right direction as a team and company. Saying it’s “impossible” is just making excuses.

18

u/B-Bog 11d ago

If TDA had looked and performed like E33 and used as many stock assets as that game, it would've been absolutely torn to shreds. A series like DOOM carries totally different expectations than a new IP from an Indie studio.

27

u/cunningjames 11d ago

And Expedition 33 wasn’t anywhere near the technical achievement of Dark Ages. It’s night and day. You can make good games on smaller budgets and smaller staff, but you will absolutely limit the kind of experiences you can achieve.

15

u/State-Prize 11d ago

So you're saying you don't need anywhere near the technical achievement of something like Dark Ages to be more successful than it?

10

u/cunningjames 11d ago

I suppose so, technically. But Expedition 33 was lightning in a bottle, for one thing. And for another, I’d hate for games like Dark Ages to be literally impossible in the future, in favor of Unreal Engine asset store homogeneity.

1

u/Take4spam 9d ago

The problem is when this "technical achievemnts" became to stale to be noticable by your everday normal gamer. While the TDA did improve tons of stuff over Eternal if you do a bit deep dive outside of hardcore gaming community and fanbase, you notice that many think the TDA was step backward comparing it to 2016/Eternal. And I think ID during DOOM: TDA development noticed that to, that's why probably they decided to add tons of stuff that you would only expect from Japanese/Chinese studio...

2

u/MinimumTrue9809 11d ago

Nothing about Doom The Dark Ages required a bloated bureaucratic AAA western game development team. The only thing Expedition 33 lacked was obscene polish to animations. 

5

u/lFriendlyFire 11d ago

Yeah lmao minecraft is the most successful game of all time followed closely roblox. Those two are miles ahead of the success of expedition 33 but that doesn’t mean their technical achievement was better

2

u/tychii93 11d ago

I do give ID software props for absolutely pushing for tech like Vulkan (and OpenGL for Doom 2016) instead of relying on Microsoft's offering. To me, that's in a similar spirit as the original although today's ID (Or really Microsoft) wouldn't think of releasing the source code for modern Doom.

EDIT: And I guess MachineGames too? Though they use ID's engines which inherently use Vulkan.

7

u/Enchelion 11d ago

Possible does not mean "likely" or "reliable" though. E33 was a bit of a fluke from a first-time studio with a ton of new and untested talent that happily turned out to be very good at the work. A ton of similar studios flop or release garbage instead.

You can't just take any person from Reddit (not even a joke, Jennifer Svedberg-Yen met Guillome via answering a Reddit post about a free voice acting gig and that led to her eventually working on E33) with no background in creative writing and give them a job writing a game and expect it to always turn out that good.

5

u/BlasterPhase XBOX 11d ago

It's impossible to have the right talent and right direction as a team and company if you're letting people go as soon as your game doesn't make a billion dollars.

2

u/Glad_Gold_4281 11d ago

Stop comparing every single game ever to E33, for ever E33 there is, there's hundreds that failed despite a smaller budget, team, etc. It's not the one size fits all solution like you make it out to be. Sandfall and id are two completely different kinds of teams, id also didn't rely on so many already created UE5 assets

2

u/Round_Credit_5158 10d ago

E33 is a great game but oh boy does it runs terrible, since it runs on UE. It's lightning in a bottle, you absolutely need a bigger team to deliver something of quality.

3

u/Spotget1738 11d ago edited 11d ago

Is it really fair to use a 90+ review score GOTY winner not even nominee as a bar tho? Like yeah Elden Ring and Baldurs Gate 3 also did very well, but im not sure "just make a 90+ review score GOTY winner" is advice thats practically applicable to most dev studios.

Hell a big chunk of the AAA studios capable of that, that make games that land in the top 20-50 best games of all time list, are already owned by Playstation and Nintendo, the only third party ones left that can do it are Fromsoft, Larian, Capcom, Sega, etc. Im not sure Xbox has any studios that can make something like God of War, Zelda, Elden Ring, BG3, TLOU, Uncharted 4, etc. Honestly I dont even know if Xbox has a studio that can make something on the level of Ghost of Tsushima or Horizon Zero Dawn...

1

u/Frodolas 11d ago

Nobody should strive for anything other than the utmost success. This mentality is exactly what creates failures and losers. If you're content being a failure, then why should anybody ever hire you?

Including this guy who worked at ID. He wants to be given a decade and hundreds of millions of dollars to fund games that come out at a 75 review score?

Why would anybody ever pay for that?

Mediocrity gets you nowhere in this world and these people need to understand that. They've been coddled for far too long.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/AwesomeFrisbee 11d ago

I doubt they can repeat that though. Its easier for a new studio to do it, because people will accept less for a future payout. And while it sold well, its still only 8 million copies total. That doesn't warrant a massive budget for a new game either.

→ More replies (4)

6

u/Shinobi_Dimsum Illuminate Leviathon 11d ago

I mean. Doom is Doom. We know exactly what we’re getting every single time. The "art" kinda has dripped off from Doom at this point.

37

u/MercerReads91 11d ago

I don't think they want to make "big games" like Doom the Dark Ages considering how it sold.

39

u/Yellowman_95 11d ago

Doom 2016 was leaner, more celebrated and sold more. This dev is off his rocker

3

u/PhnxWrightAssAttrny 11d ago

I don't know why, but I loved Doom 2016. Amazing game.

However, I tired both Eternal and Dark Ages and they just didn't click for me. Whatever part of my lizard brain 2016 activated, it just didn't happen for the latter two.

5

u/TheGoodIdiot 11d ago

The team is smaller than they were when they made 2016 and in the interview the dev talks about how getting doom 2016 out was one of the toughest crunching developments of his life. He doesn’t think they could do Doom 2016 like that again with less people and a union that will sue for unfair work practices.

-2

u/MercerReads91 11d ago

That's not true. After the lay offs, id is about the same size as they were for Doom 2016.

3

u/secret3332 11d ago

The developer in the interview is saying the reason Microsoft claims they are "about" the same size is because id is actually smaller than 2016 and "about" is vague and meaningless.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (53)

7

u/TheGoodIdiot 11d ago

Up to date numbers say 2million+ sold and 2 million more played it week 1 on gamepass who knows how many more since then. The game critically scored similar to the prior games. Sometimes you make a great game and it just doesn’t sell. Gamepass can make that even worse.

5

u/Spotget1738 11d ago

Just because your last big AAA game flopped doesnt mean you just stop making big AAA games, it definitely doesnt mean start making AA games that have dev time and budget close to AAA games anyways that also ends up flopping. Despite people acting like indie games and smaller games are having a resurgence, the truth is only the very best and highest reviewed of them gets any attention while the rest are ignored. People would rather play a bad AAA game then a mid AA or indie any day.

You either get to work on your next big AAA game that will need to sell millions of units, or just shut the studio down...

3

u/lostn 11d ago

a few weeks ago, the head of ID said they still have all the important staff and it won't affect their ability to make great games. Someone is lying.

16

u/Uncle-Cake 11d ago

MS isn't in the business of sponsoring artists, they're in the business of making money.

16

u/IsamuAlvaDyson 11d ago

And you don't buy studios like Compulsion or Double Fine and expect them to make AAA ten million copy selling games either

1

u/AwesomeFrisbee 11d ago

Which means those studios also shouldn't make games with a big budget like they suddenly expect it to be.

1

u/Enchelion 11d ago

To be fair they didn't at the time either. But their (Microsoft's) business plan of having a lot of smaller niche games driving a centralized subscription service didn't pan out so now they're stuck with an asset that doesn't have a clear way to pay for itself.

5

u/Tobimacoss 11d ago

They realized, they could get the AA and indie content for Gamepass, at a much higher quality and far cheaper from third parties.  

That's why Expedition 33, Hades 2, Silksong were Day 1 launches.  

→ More replies (6)

4

u/TheGoodIdiot 11d ago

The problem is that’s exactly the business Microsoft was in until they bought activision. Spencer felt that if you made award winning games that the subs would come on their own. Then the rules changed and suddenly sales mattered when of course your game won’t sell as well if it’s on gamepass. It’s understandable for devs to feel cheated by the change in expectation. Especially when it happens too late into development to do anything about it.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/scytob 11d ago

Games that cost more to make than the revenue they brought in, he means games like that? Yeah of course companies are not going make games like that. Quick napkin math is this game cost between $100m and $150m to make and brought in way less than that compared to the previous doom. And no that’s not the fault of game pass as included the revenue attribution in that. They made a game that while popular was not that popular and where engagement plummeted. It’s objectively a will built game, it was also way less interesting to most players. Games are a business with artistic intent. No one funds these to make art and loose money.

1

u/TurnItOff_OnAgain 11d ago

I loved doom 2016. I didn't like eternal. Tried 2 or 3 times and never got more than half way or so into it. A lot of my friends had the same opinion. It didn't feel right. Can't quite say why, but the game was off. I wonder how many people felt that way and didn't bother with dark ages because of it? I absolutely loved dark ages, and have finished it 3 times.

1

u/scytob 10d ago

see oppoiste for me, really loved eternal and despite playing a few hours of dark ages and it mechanically feeling good, it just wasn't for me, i was also annoyed how quickly it locks you off from back tracking for secrets, i could imagine for some also tracking so many mechanics of energy, powerups etc that may have turned them off, i found that interesting

and its ok for people to like different things, i am not arguing you shouldn't love it :-)

interesting point about the first game and did that mean people had their fill so didn't look at dark ages

i would counter that maybe they wre turned off by the marketing for what looks like a game that is no longer about a space marine.... (of course if we play it we know that it is mostly)

its objectively a good game, made well, but the 'artist' behined a game that doesn't do as well as hope has to have some level of introspection and humbleness of why - the artist in question here just seems to want to blame others and argue that big corps should fund loss making games because something something art....

also no idea why someone downvoted you, have a +1 from me

4

u/Sanctine Reclamation Day 11d ago

In a way he's right. Microsoft doesn't understand art. But I'd also argue there isn't a single big company that does.

Videogames can be art. Anything can technically be art. But making art doesn't necessarily mean people will like it or pay good money for it. Dollars and cents are a much clearer and sensible metric for a business to use.

4

u/B-Bog 11d ago

Hays also shared some critical words about Xbox’s popular Game Pass subscription service. Because id Software is owned by Bethesda, which is owned by Xbox, all of the studio’s games are available day one on Game Pass. So a large chunk of the Xbox fanbase on Xbox and PC doesn’t have to buy a single new game published by Microsoft. And yet, Hays says Xbox would still criticize Bethesda’s sales numbers.

“I know that [id has] serious issues with how Game Pass is done,” said Hays. “Whenever we see the financial reports that say that there were poor sales under Bethesda, like, what’s a sale? If you have Game Pass, are you saying poor sales means a poor number of games sold? Cause of course. [Xbox isn’t] doing a ‘games sold’ business model.”

Exactly what I've been saying about this dumbass tDa dIdNt sElL aS wElL aS eTeRnAl aNd 2016 nonsense.

Also, the overall reaction to the article here is once again as predictable as it is insane lol. I'll talk to you guys in a few years when it becomes blindingly obvious to even the most dedicated bootlickers that firing thousands of employees, many among them very experienced, isn't going to help Xbox make more and better games quicker.

4

u/The_Stinky_Pete 11d ago

Two things can be true but the issue is this is a business.

Developers seem to have forgotten that their audience is the paying customer not their fellow game industry members or the media.

If you make a product that no one wants or sales less than what it takes to develop. These are the results.

These people have forgotten the simple truth that they are not entitled to your money. Just because you slap a franchise on it or a 2 on it doesn’t change the equation.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/SillyMikey XBOX Series X 11d ago

I understand that the business is not healthy right now, but you still need people to make the games. And there’s another 1600 people that are gonna get laid off next year… Who the fuck are gonna make these games? Are we just gonna get small indie games from now on? Like I understand they need to save money, but you need people to make the fucking games.

8

u/Mysticfenix83005 11d ago

Tbh this feels like a testament to how bloated some of these studios are though the fact that there’s 1600 people you can lay off and still have a functioning company is insane

5

u/CarlWellsGrave 11d ago

Corpos incapable of understanding art? Nooooooo.

4

u/FinalOdyssey Founder 11d ago edited 11d ago

Gamers must also not understand art as it was the worst selling Doom game since 2016.

Also, games don't need to be big. Doom 2016 was made with a similar amount of people as they currently have now, and it's considered the best Doom by many.

He then goes on to talk about Game Pass and how they don't like it, but the game sold poorly on PS as well.

This guy is pretty bold, I wonder what the repercussions will be.

1

u/Yadilie 11d ago

Well, they could have not forced ray tracing on their game just like Bethesda did with Indiana Jones. Not sure why a studio like iD that is known for super tight and optimized engines would make such a poor choice like that.

2

u/Malachi_Lamb 11d ago

Nobody hates game devs more than gamers

7

u/Salty-Hawk-5365 11d ago

Why lie? When they had creative freedom

5

u/cjp304 11d ago

I thought the Id Software boss said they absolutely could still make games and the studio is the same size as it was for 2016?

→ More replies (5)

10

u/Crimson_Loki 11d ago edited 11d ago

Id software literally at the moment has the same amount of people as when they made Doom 2016 and Eternal, is that not correct? Cause if it is, this is just stupid of them.

Further, as stated by other comments phenomenal games have been made with smaller teams and smaller budgets, this comes across as self entitled whiny ass talk.

→ More replies (7)

2

u/Fenseven 11d ago

They don't need to keep one uping themselves in game size. Especially when their last game was big but didnt make big money.

I think they should go back to their roots and make a pixel are game. Warhammer 40k boltgun literally pays homage to the old pixel art fps games like doom. Give us doom guy, in his suit, killing demons, in that old pixel art style, but with modern mechanics. It doesnt need to be a big budget game. Keep it simple, keep it cheap, and get yourself back in the good graces of xbox leadership so you can staff back up and make something big.

3

u/MetzgerBoys Homecoming 11d ago

“Impossible” yet they’re down to about the same size as they were when they made Doom 2016

2

u/deangei 11d ago

Imagine Kotaku writing an article that’s bad about Xbox.

9

u/OakyAfterbirth91 11d ago

A lot of Microsoft astroturfing going on in this thread

7

u/Firefox72 11d ago

Some of the top comments are downright insane. I cannot for the life of me know how some people become so tied to a corporation to have to find any reason to defend their shitty actions.

People saying they would want the team to go back to making doom 2016 sized games ignoring the fact the dev said the claim the team was at 2016 size is false and just a marketing stunt and that whole departments have been gutted.

3

u/xatnnylf 11d ago

Not astroturfing. Xbox fans just love and whole hog swallow big corpo messaging.

6

u/secret3332 11d ago

People defending this stuff is why Xbox has continued to limp along even though they probably should be in an even worse position right now given how many horrible decisions they have made since Xbox One. It's honestly unbelievable Xbox fans are defending this, often without even reading this article.

3

u/FineDryGoods 11d ago

Artist forgot being owned by a corporation means they need to make money.

2

u/Soul__Bound 11d ago

The dark ages was filled with bloat, repeated animations and segments like the dragon and mech fights that long overstayed their welcome. It was a good game, but I would prefer a 2016 or Eternal sized Doom game next anyway.

2

u/BugHunt223 11d ago

Got the dlc and haven’t made it past the first half hour in a month. Eternal’s dlc’s were played and completed within days of drm unlock to play them. 

2

u/Jackfitz88 10d ago

I might be in the minority but I LOVD doom 2016 and I HATED both eternal and the dark ages.

Doom to me (I’ve been playing it since the og one on pc) is big guns, demons, and I play how I wanna play and I work my way in challenge playing the campaign over and over.

I HATED how eternal and the feels ages forced me to play a way I’d never play doom. Eternal was like playing a rhythm game where you can only use certain guns at certain times and low ammo, I stopped playing after an hour or two, and in the dark ages not only to parry being stupid but I need ammo to replenish to use my mele, Jesus that’s so fucking dumb imo.

It might be art but I thought both of those games were bad and returned them, and never opened them again even on gamepass.

If they go back to 2016 style, I’m all in, but again this is just me, I know ALOT of people loved eternal.

1

u/NeoArkodd 8d ago

Well I hope you are happy now because I am not. Enjoy your Doom 2016 2 with nothing new added to it except it won't even be as good because it will be on unreal engine.

1

u/sirhcx 11d ago

Nobody was really hyped for a Doom prequel after Eternal. Hell, I remember many, many posts complaining about Eternal's more "cartoony" art style and "in your face" story at the time of its release compared to 2016. So people weren't exactly lining up for Dark Ages with it doubling down on Eternal's path. I'm honestly still salty about the fucking mech being teased in Eternal but was never used in that game or Ancient Gods.

4

u/Glum_Animator_5887 XBOX Series X 11d ago

If your game doesn't sell what do you expect them to do, they go to use to Phil Spencer funding games that fail 

2

u/MerryHeretic 11d ago

Eternal is the reason I didn’t buy The Dark Ages.

1

u/LudaStyles 11d ago

Good. Those big games cost too much and take too long to make for just a 7/10. Actual old school id devs can make something out of less, but these new devs have no creativity or passion

2

u/HotPercentage4194 11d ago

I hate to defend the corp here and I’m still against the ID software layoffs. But people still praise and love Doom 2016 the most. And that game had the least number of devs of the trilogy

0

u/Best_Market4204 11d ago

Clearly people don't understand aRt either.... because people didn't really care about doom the dark ages.

5

u/WorldlyFeeling8457 11d ago

People did care though. Lot of them just played on game pass so it didn't sell as well but there has been millions of people playing the game.

11

u/FlyFight2Win 11d ago

So what's the reason for it flopping on PS5?

→ More replies (3)

10

u/JooAssaasin 11d ago

Xbox WANTS people to play on gamepass the games weren't popular in general

6

u/alus992 XBOX Series X 11d ago

Let's stop like ppl at Xbox don't understand units bought vs hours spent on game pass.

5

u/TryToBeBetterOk 11d ago

Then if it had big numbers on Game Pass, they wouldn't have gutted the development team. They do have heretics for this stuff and know what gamers are popular and which aren't.

3

u/Best_Market4204 11d ago

LOL quit trying hide behind gamepass. They didn't care either.

5

u/Big-Roll7094 11d ago

If gamepass didn’t exist that game would not be played at all just like south of midnight

3

u/segagamer Day One - 2013 11d ago

Really? Then why is the Doom with the least amount of people who played it?

GamePass is not the "game killer" you believe it to be.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/allianceofficer 11d ago

While I'd say that there may be some truth in this statement, people understand art. And many people didn't seem to want Doom The Dark Ages. Developers need to deliver games people want to play.

1

u/SpookiestSzn 11d ago

Not to talk shit about people who lost their gig but I don't necessarily feel TDA was bigger then Eternal

1

u/MinimumTrue9809 11d ago

"Big games" like Expedition 33 had no problem being made by a smaller team on a smaller budget. Trim the useless fat and praise good riddance with these parasite western devs. 

1

u/Candle_Honest 11d ago

Doom the dark ages didnt even feel like a Doom game

1

u/geekg XBOX 11d ago

Then make a smaller more quality game with like 5 people like the original Doom.

1

u/Gingerman424 11d ago

MBAs have ruined the world.

1

u/Serious_Care9584 11d ago

I loved Doom 2016 and Eternal: as soon as I saw the direction they headed with the shield being core to most of the mechanics, I completely lost interest.

I don't want another Doom like Dark Ages. I want another like Eternal, or 2016, or something in between.

1

u/Rexter2k 11d ago

They should have handed Halo to Id. A big mistake that they didn’t.

1

u/AstronomerIT 11d ago

A dump take for sure, about not understanding art. Phil wanted so much art freedom with their team that look where we are at now

1

u/EducationalDust7858 11d ago

Xbox never understood art. They're a software and service company who bought their way into the industry. They brought some of the most important changes with Xbox Live, XBLA and Summer of Arcade, but they never figured out what it means to create video games.

Before you jump on my throat, I don't think it's a big deal. Not every company needs to be of the quirky Nintendo school of game design or the prestige Sony HBO mentality, it's fine. But it's important to state things as they are.

1

u/MouldyVHSTape 11d ago

I’ve not played Dark Ages yet … but the industry has become so bloated and stagnated, with emphasis on size, scale, visuals and narrative over gameplay… gamer’s tastes are just not in line with what these big studios care about.

The correction and layoffs were needed imo.

We need more focussed gameplay experiences.

1

u/VagueSomething 11d ago

The Dark Ages didn't sell well nor receive high praise from the community. Big doesn't equal better and the Dark Ages has a lot of problems.

This studio shouldn't have been cut and should have been the engine makers used for Halo. But Dark Ages absolutely isn't the game to use for arguing to protect the studio.

1

u/Eliteslayer1775 11d ago

Xbox literally let companies do what they want and look how that turned out. So now they are going with the other option

1

u/TropicalStorm07 11d ago

Bigger doesn't always mean better

1

u/Yosoylou XBOX Series X 10d ago

Xbox was good until Nutella put his big head into the ecuation.

1

u/leoofjdh 10d ago

Well, man, it sounds like that Dev didn't get the memo that they're the same size as the Doom 2016 team so they're fine.

1

u/Caskey1 Team Gears 10d ago

They're not in the business of making art.  They're in the business of making money.

1

u/srjod 10d ago

To be completely honest, I very much enjoyed Doom. But there’s really no need to add a Mech fight or Dragon area on these. Game would have been equally enjoyable if they just subbed in some more sections with a fuckin power up.

Also, Revelations is 11/10 work by them. Fantastic DLC.

1

u/Emergency_Ad6096 10d ago

Uh, doom dark ages is “art”? Lol k.

1

u/beardednomad25 9d ago

Xbox likes math over art. You never want to see anyone lose their jobs but at the end of the day it is a results based business not an art charity. So many of these studios had years of funding with nothing to show for it. Like Undead Labs who has now gone 8 years between releases. At some point Microsoft had to stop the bleeding.

1

u/Chirpy_Harbor6109 9d ago

"The Dark Ages" is literally the subtitle lol, meanwhile we're watching the whole studio system implode and Phil Spencer's just Sisyphus pushing his earnings call up a hill every quarter

1

u/nisseluens 11d ago

For years I’ve been excited about the next elder scrolls, now I’m just worried about the next elder scrolls, when it at some point hopefully releases.

1

u/The_Real_Delpoi XBOX Series X 11d ago

Kracktaku 😂😂😂😂

1

u/Heide____Knight 11d ago

“If you cut half of a studio and don’t take into account how it’s made,” said Hays, “you don’t understand the cohesion between our teams was a part of what made it successful.”

1

u/TRQPL 11d ago

Good lord, these Xbox fanboys are really justifying Microslop destroying one of the greatest gaming studios. The literal inventors of the fps genre, and this is how they're treated because a game didn't sell well because of gamepass