Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft To Close Xbox Sports Game Studio

Posted by simoniker on from the skipping-lots-of-years dept.

AbyssLeaper writes "Microsoft is closing its Xbox sports game studio in Redmond and laying off 76 employees. In a Seattle Times article, Robbie Bach, Microsoft's Xbox chief, cites the difficulty of competing in the game development space and the expansion of 3rd party support - this move wasn't surprising based on their focus on making the Xbox profitable. MSNBC/Seattle Post-Intelligencer speculates that it might also be due to an increased partnership with EA Sports." We previously reported on many XSN Sports titles skipping 2004.

36 comments

  1. No One Cares... by johnkoer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Based on the lack of reaction to this article, no one really seems to care that XSN titles are not coming out. EA sports dominates the console sports market right now, but NFL2K5 gives madden a run for its money. The Xbox sports titles always felt like second rate games to me.

    --
    Johnkoerner.com
    1. Re:No One Cares... by shufler · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Right now?"

      EA has dominated the console sports market since 1991. (NHL Hockey is the earliest EA game I am aware of).

    2. Re:No One Cares... by Osty · · Score: 1

      NHL Hockey is the earliest EA game I am aware of

      I assume you mean "earliest EA sports game", since EA has been around for a long time, and was making games long before they made sports games. However, you're wrong on the sports game account, too. I believe Dr J and Larry Bird Go One on One was EA's first real sports game.

    3. Re:No One Cares... by shufler · · Score: 1

      Regardless, your correction only shows that EA has dominated even longer than I originally stated.

  2. XSN by SightlessMind · · Score: 3, Funny

    I had honestly never heard of XSN before reading this article. Perhaps that's part of the problem?

  3. I think it's sad by Sp00nMan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Microsoft only tried making sports games good with XSN for one year.. It really had some potential. Heck, I think Top Spin is one of the best tennis games to come out in a long time. If only they didn't have so many bugs with the XSN release, this might not have happened.

    1. Re:I think it's sad by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think that's possibly the worst thing about this announcement. Their yearly titles may not have been the best (though their first year or two weren't bad, 2003 wasn't a good year for them), but the other titles (Top Spin, Links, etc) were very good. Hopefully they'll consider keeping some of those titles to compete in the less-dominated markets, but looking at the layoffs and so forth, it seems unlikely.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    2. Re:I think it's sad by Reapy · · Score: 1

      I loved amped. Amped 2 added some great stuff, but they took away the great feel of just boarding down the mountain that amped had. I was hoping for an amped 3 that had the features of amped 2 and the boarding physics of the original. Sigh.

    3. Re:I think it's sad by iocat · · Score: 1

      Neither Amped nor Links (both produced in Utah) were affected. I'd post the link to the article, but since it was already posted and you didn't read the article, I doubt it would help you!

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

  4. Why more sports games? by Matt+Perry · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Does anyone here play and buy sports games? I'm wondering what the appeal is in creating yet another football or basketball game. Do the newer ones deviate from the rules to create a new type of game, or is it just better graphics and sound? Or are game studios working on games based on other sports? It seems to me that one could only create so many football games before covering the same ground, yet there seems to be a new "Madden" game every year.

    Not being a sports game player I'm wondering how the game developers are keeping sports games new and different.

    --
    Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    1. Re:Why more sports games? by johnkoer · · Score: 3, Informative

      I play and buy sports games, however I usually buy one year behind the curve. This allows me to play the games I want for a fraction of the cost ($10-$15 versus $50). The reason to buy the updated sports games is the updated content and additional features of the game. Once every few years there will be a major update to the gameplay or graphics engine, however there are always additional features that make the game more fun. Most of the EA games now contain some sort of Franchise mode which allows you to run a team for multiple years and control all sorts of aspects of your team. Some games allow you to even run the financials of the team and control everything from parking costs, to stadium equipment, to the cost of a beer at the game. The basics of the games don't change that often, its the new little extras that really make a game spectacular. The updates between versions is not worth $50 to me, but for $10-$15, I will give it a shot.

      --
      Johnkoerner.com
    2. Re:Why more sports games? by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 4, Informative

      Does anyone here play and buy sports games? I'm wondering what the appeal is in creating yet another football or basketball game.

      I do, occasionally, but not in the "pick up the new one as soon as it comes out every year" way that seems to be the foundation of the genre. Therefore, I can't help you understand this mentality, because I don't understand it myself.

      Do the newer ones deviate from the rules to create a new type of game, or is it just better graphics and sound?

      It depends on the title, as well as the year. Sometimes the updates are fairly minor, other times they do a fairly good job of revamping the interface and adding some new features that actually make it worthwhile. More often than not, though, the biggest reason people will cite for buying more than one game in the same sport on the same console is to get the roster and stat updates, as well as any rule changes the league may have implemented. I know a handful of people that can tell you what's new in Madden 2005, but, in the end, it all sounds pretty minor to me (but again, I'm not an overwhelming fan of these games).

      Or are game studios working on games based on other sports? It seems to me that one could only create so many football games before covering the same ground, yet there seems to be a new "Madden" game every year.

      There are games for other sports, and, of course, every sports game studio will probably try to put out a game for anything that seems remotely popular, even if it's just a passing fad. The only games that seem to get yearly updates, though, are the longer-standing titles: football, basketball, soccer, baseball, hockey (with pro and college versions for some). There are the tennis, golf, snowboarding, skateboarding, etc games that get updated more or less often, but in some cases they only rarely get multiple titles (from the same developer) on the same console (snowboarding and skateboarding may be the exceptions here, but those titles haven't been as long running in their current inception as the others). Racing titles seem to go both ways, depending on the nature of the individual title (i.e. new NASCAR games every year, but GT games occur far less often).

      Not being a sports game player I'm wondering how the game developers are keeping sports games new and different.

      Most of them really aren't, although they've also branched out into more titles in some areas, such as the "street" versions of basketball and football. This doesn't really impact the core titles. Madden 2005 is Madden 2004 + XBox Live support + new rosters/stats/whatever + a handful of new features that probably won't be noticed by all but the most rabid fans. Casual sports game players are probably best served by checking the reviews and picking up the best title for the particular season + console they're shopping for at that particular time, though if they're looking to save some money, looking at the previous year's titles may be even better (though this year Sega's NFL title is $20, so why not?). Most won't be missing out on much if they only buy 1 title for a particular sport per console generation, as most of the major updates come with the new consoles (updated graphics + sound, maybe changes in the interface, etc), and the time between console generations allows for a large number of small changes from one year to the next, which will be much more noticable after 3-5 years of such changes.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    3. Re:Why more sports games? by kryptoknight · · Score: 1

      The Sega football and hockey sport games are released at the $20 price this year. This is one of the main reason I picked up ESPN NFL 2k5 over Madden 2k5. Both are excellent football games but at the price point, I choose "say it" "say it" SEGA!

    4. Re:Why more sports games? by Reapy · · Score: 1

      I usually will try one of the major titles every couple of years. A new one I havent seen that I'm loving is fight night 2004. They added in a really really great control scheme for the game that really makes you feel like you are boxing. The game pacing is great. It lacks the large varieity of features that the sports games that have been intereated every year do, but in 3 or so years it ought to be one phenominal boxing game.

      EA games tend to keep the core gameplay feeling the same, and add features and options to the games are developed. So really, buying every 4 years or so and you are garonteed to have better graphics and a much more feature rich game. Buying year to year should only be for the people who play only that game all the time.

    5. Re:Why more sports games? by DLWormwood · · Score: 1
      I'm wondering what the appeal is in creating yet another football or basketball game.

      One reason: Stats.

      Most of the "annual" release sports titles are games that have seasons, like football and baseball. Hardcore sports fans want to be able to play as the exact same team as the team that plays on TV. With the support of the Internet in recent years, the games can be patched to provide updates to cover mid-season trading.

      Warning: stereotypical dumb jock joke follows

      The market for these kinds games are usually dominated by types too dumb to realize that the statistical content is acually a very small part of the overall product. If they were smart, like us geeks, they'd insist on cheaper product treating the new stats as an expansion set, rather than repurchasing the same game year-over-year.

      But then again, many geeks play pay-per-month MMORPGs, which I think is exploiting the same kind of stupidity, but that's just me. The truly smart sports fans (jock/geek dual-class) are those who play games like Fantasy Baseball and what not...

      --
      Those who complain about affect & effect on /. should be disemvoweled
  5. sports games by Silicon+Mike · · Score: -1, Troll

    Yeah, people actually do play sports games... It's the only way /.'ers get any exercise.

  6. Amped not cut!!!11 by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Thank god. MS is the only party out there making a real snowboarding game. Please don't cut Amped MS. For Me.

    1. Re:Amped not cut!!!11 by bigman2003 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes- the article says that Links (best golf game available) and Amped (good game too) are not getting canned.

      Also- the other two XSN games that are worth a shit: Top Spin (made by PAM) and Rallisport Challenge (Made by DICE) won't be affected.

      I've never played their hockey, basketball, or football games- but those are the ones getting cut. I'm not sure about their quality, but I heard they were pretty bad.

      In general, I am not a huge fan of EA games- the only one that I really like is NBA Street 2. The rest just seem a little too 'canned'. Good solid games, but nothing thrilling. So I hope that this announcement causes Sega to really step up and support the Xbox even more. They support it very well now, but maybe in the next generation it will be their primary platform.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    2. Re:Amped not cut!!!11 by DeadScreenSky · · Score: 1

      Whew. I was worried there too. Amped 2 is just an awesome game - nothing else like it out there. A shame more people don't play it online.

      Amped2's heavy use of analog controls and the need to be stylish in your tricks really push it above and beyond the Tony Hawk series and its clones - it really is the next evolutionary stage in 'extreme' (ugh) sports games. Maybe Amped 3 will finally open more people's eyes...

      --
      There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. -- Francis Bacon
    3. Re:Amped not cut!!!11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      watch Your caps, Bitch.

  7. Microsoft's intentions by Metroid72 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I think that "true" gamers should be worried about this move.
    A real game company will try to have its own studios pumping out great games for their consumers.
    Microsoft is in to get into your bedroom as a multi-function entertainment machine (to push their media and software empire), they're not in to make great games.

    It makes business sense to leverage partnerships to improve your weak spots because ultimately any company is in for the money, but I think that if Microsoft gets the 3rd party support to be an "Entertainment" powerhouse, it won't be long until you will have to accept an EULA by pushing the action button.

    1. Re:Microsoft's intentions by RaboKrabekian · · Score: 1

      I think that "true" gamers should be worried about this move.

      That's a bunch of crap. Are any true gamers going to buy NFL Fever 2006 over Madden or NFL2kx? Not likely. Microsoft isn't cancelling all of their games, just the major sports ones. Their basketball, football, baseball, and hockey games got trounced by EA and Sega's. The one good sports game they had is Amped, and they're not cancelling that.

      These games might have been somewhat of a loss leader at some point - just get more titles out there - but now they're just dead weight. Take the talent and move it to other games. It's a good move.

      --
      "Moderate drinking can help prevent amputated limbs" -- Abigail Zuger, NYTimes, 12/31/02
    2. Re:Microsoft's intentions by Guppy06 · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Microsoft is in to get into your bedroom as a multi-function entertainment machine"

      Microsoft bought out Realdoll?

  8. Important proposal to DESTROY MICROSOFT by SimianOverlord · · Score: -1, Troll

    I, being a rabid linucks zealot, want to destroy Microsoft utterly. But I could not think of the means to do so. Now **_I know I'm going to lose karma for this_** but I've thought of a simple yet effective way of bankrupting the company - completely legally. The OpenSourceTM way.

    WHY I WANT TO DESTROY MICROSOFT
    Microsoft is bad. Not just bad, it is evil. Pure unadulterated evil. It is a monopoly. That is bad because you have to use it. I don't have to use it at work only home, but that is because McDonalds use SCOsource on their cashier tills, which is even worse. I can easily present evidence conclusively proving every one of these points. Just point your browser at Slashdot, which is an OpenSource model based research website dedicated to exposing the numerous ways in which Microsoft has done harm, and Apple are brilliant. Every poster, under the many eyes hypothesis, combines to form the worlds largest Microsoft watching network. Don't mess with Open SourceTM.

    HOW TO DESTROY MICROSOFT
    It is so simple, I can't believe no other zealot has seen it. In fact it came to me in the ten minutes I had to spare to surf the web, inbetween getting my Auntie's printer set up on obsolete hardware. I read the following fact: For every X-box sold, Microsoft loses $100!

    Game over Microsoft. Thanks for playing. Linucks was the end of level boss, and you didn't have the right weapon or figure out the weak points to get past its GPL shield (there are none.) None.

    Now if everyone who read this message buys an X-Box but no games or anything Microsoft will be bankrupt in a day. I heard they had a $50 billion surplus. So if 0.5 billion people bought a X-Box, they'd have no money. Then I think they'd be dead, because they wouldn't be able to predate on other companies like they always do to steal the innovation. So go buy a X-box. Beautiful, pouting Rob Malda estimates that 10 billion people visit Slashdot every day (refreshing the page only once), so if only 50% of you do this, we're set.

    Do it for Linucks. It's David v Goliath and this time we are Goliath with 10 billion eyes, and this is REAL, not in some made up book.


    --
    Meine Schwester ist sehr, sehr reizvoll - Nietzsche
    1. Re:Important proposal to DESTROY MICROSOFT by hambonewilkins · · Score: 1
      I assume you're being sarcastic or being a troll but in either case in case people take you seriously:

      Simple economics will tell you that it is obviously worse for Microsoft if no one buys their systems because a $150 loss is worse than a $100 loss (less now) and they can't claim as many sales.

      Just FYI, as I see this argument quite a bit.

      --

      God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
    2. Re:Important proposal to DESTROY MICROSOFT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah... If Microsoft was unable to sell another Xbox, they'd lose money, but they would already have accounted for this.

      If a ton of people started buying the console so that it exceeded the current supply, then Microsoft would have to have more produced (presumably at a loss) in order to meet the demand.

      Then again, most likely Microsoft would halt or slow down Xbox production way before such an extreme could happen.

  9. What about Top Spin? by kryptoknight · · Score: 1
    The sports game studio being cut produced titles such as "NFL Fever," "NHL Rivals" and the "Inside Drive" baseball game.

    ...

    A separate studio in Utah that produces the "Links" golf game and "Amped" snowboard game is unaffected by the cuts, she said.

    I'm glad Amped and Links aren't affected by the division closure. I think the Utah studio that developed these two games also made Top Spin, so hopefully it's not affected either. While NFL Fever, Inside drive, and the hockey game sucked, Amped, Top Spin, and Links are some of the funnest games on the xbox and xbox live!
  10. Bungie? by White+Roses · · Score: 1
    One begins to wonder if the same sort of thing might begin to happen to other in-house Xbox games studios, like Bungie (makers of Halo and a metric ass-load of cool Mac-only games before that). Still, Halo was the (only?) must-have game for Xbox when it launched. I am sure Bungie has some cred in the halls of power at MS for that.

    If, say, id starts making way cooler FPS games for Xbox . . .

    --
    Do not touch -Willie
    1. Re:Bungie? by kryptoknight · · Score: 1

      No this only applies to the Microsoft Gaming Division that made the 3 sports title: NFL Fever, NBA Drive, and NHL Rivals. So only the sports games where both the publisher and developer states Microsoft Game Studios. While halo might be published by Microsoft, the developer is Bungie. In other words, I believe that Bungie exists outside of Microsoft Game division.

    2. Re:Bungie? by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      This was almost certainly done to keep EA happy and making their sports games for XBL. I don't know how Microsoft enticed them into that deal originally, but granting them a virtual monopoly over XBL sports games would go along way towards counterbalanced whatever EA's objections where.

      If, say, id starts making way cooler FPS games . . .

      Than Bungie? Not likely :P

    3. Re:Bungie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude! FASA just got shut down as well.

    4. Re:Bungie? by White+Roses · · Score: 1
      Than Bungie? Not likely :P

      True. Since I don't own an Xbox, I don't really know how cool Halo 2 is, but I've played Halo, and it does, as all Bungie FPS, blow the doors off and expand the genre. Liked Oni a lot as well.

      --
      Do not touch -Willie
  11. Bungie, FASA, Rare are safe... by ribond · · Score: 1
    Bungie is still a separate, distinct studio entity @ ms.

    http://pc.ign.com/articles/081/081081p1.html?fromi nt=1/

    Ed Fries: This is really a new thing. We're going to try and keep the Bungie guys together, and keep it branded, and really keep it as a studio within my [Microsoft Games] group. It's really more the direction I want to go, with a collection of studios, rather than one big group.

    They're safe. The reality here isn't quite as bad as it sounds. Yes, they've tanked the studio but did anyone care about those games? I know I gave away my copy of NFL Fever 200? and never missed it. They really weren't capturing a market -- nobody was waiting with baited breath for the latest Fever release like they do for Madden, EA titles, etc..

    I don't think that the FASA guys or RARE (both MS-owned now) are up nights wondering if they might be in the same boat... they know what they bring to the table.

    ...And the employees aren't getting tossed out the door either -- there are ~30,000 MS employees in the same region (pacific northwest) and these ~200 people can get absorbed by turnover/open positions inside the company.
  12. It's Just Payment to EA by blueZhift · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I can't say that the demise of Microsoft's inhouse sports division is a great surprise. The benching of the titles after EA agreed to support Xbox Live was the first sign that the price of EA support was going to be high. This just closes the deal. Don't be too surprised if Sony cans 989 too. EA is so far ahead in the game now, that competing head to head with them just doesn't make sense. Sega's now ESPN branded titles have been pretty good and the low price is great too. But unless Sega sees really good sales, I wouldn't expect those titles to last much longer either. Usually low game prices mean either the game has already sold millions or the game has hardly moved and it's time to clear stock. So a $20 NFL 2K5 is either good news, or not... Unlike the XSN titles, the 2K series have been of quality that many believe is on par with EA's titles, but have made hardly a dent in EA Sports' market share.

    Sports is a critical sector to fill for any console. Some attribute the success of the Genesis to the EA sports titles that were superior to their SNES counterparts. Also many attribute the failure of the Dreamcast to EA's boycott of the console. I'm sure these lessons weren't lost on Microsoft as they did the Xbox Live deal with EA. Oh well, at least Amped will be coming back.

    --
    To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
  13. ESPN 2k5 Madden * by oldosadmin · · Score: 1

    Madden is just annoying to me. ESPN has some cool features, such as Sportcenter in franchise mode and the halftime shows with Berman. The crib is an interesting idea as well. I'm begging SEGA not to murder ESPN 2k* football games... for $20, I'd buy a new one every year.

    --
    Jay | http://oldos.org
  14. Wahoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The less sports games the better. They haven't improved much in the past decade and they never will.

    EB doesnt even take them in as trade ins cause every year is the same