Slashdot Mirror


Sweeping Changes At Microsoft Studios Kill Lionhead Studios and Fable (betanews.com)

Mark Wilson writes: Microsoft has announced sweeping changes at Microsoft Studios, affecting development teams in the UK and Denmark. In sad news for gamers, development of Fable Legends has been brought to an end. The Fable series is one that has suffered numerous setbacks and delays over the years, but this is the biggest blow yet. More than this, the team behind Fable — Lionhead Studios — is at risk of closure, and Microsoft is in talks with employees about this. General Manager of Microsoft Studios Europe, Hanno Lemke, also announced that Press Play Studios in Denmark will close, leading to the end of development on Project Knoxville.

91 comments

  1. Fable 2 PC by mwn3d · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe they could keep it alive if they'd make the Fable 2 PC port that we have wanted for years

    1. Re:Fable 2 PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many people want this, and are they willing to pay retail?

      If the game isn't popular enough for the studio to make enough money to justify its costs, the studio should be shut down.

    2. Re:Fable 2 PC by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      Choosing to release on console rather than PC may affect popularity. Fable always struck me as a game that was less good because of the need to accept console limitations.

    3. Re:Fable 2 PC by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      i was a big fanof the fable series. in fact it was one point i had in my decision of the new consoles. I eventually went PS4 so this is just one more reason i feel i made the better choice.

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    4. Re:Fable 2 PC by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are you suggesting there is more money to be made developing for the PC?

      All it takes is a single best selling PC game that takes advantage of hardware not available on the current gen consoles to convince developers that a pot of gold lies over yonder. Let's call it the Deadpool Effect. Now that Fox brought out an R-rated comic book movie that made a pot of gold, every wannabe studio will make R-rated comic book movies. Most will be terrible, a few will shine.

    5. Re:Fable 2 PC by vilanye · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It sucks that Dredd wasn't the R-rated comic book movie to start that trend.

    6. Re:Fable 2 PC by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      Never saw Dredd. Watchmen would have been a good candidate too.

    7. Re:Fable 2 PC by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Have to agree. If they had ported the Fable 2 PC port, or made a Fable Linux port, they might have had a chance.

      I'd say half of my game purchases this century have been Lionhead games.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    8. Re:Fable 2 PC by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting there is more money to be made developing for the PC? Are you smoking crack?

      Well, it seems developing for the console wasn't enough to keep them alive, so.... all we can say for certainty about this studio is that the console market is not enough to keep them afloat.

      Had they ported to PC, there is a non-zero chance that it may have been a PC-hit, enough to keep them afloat. We have evidence that there was a zero chance of staying afloat purely on console sales.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    9. Re:Fable 2 PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Have you seen Steam numbers and actual academic studies of how much more pirates buy actual stuff in comparison to non-pirates?
      In the PC space, what matters is not the initial revenue but the long-term relationship, as in the establishment of a core fanbase that will always be there to support you financially. Such a thing has saved plenty of devs, and such a philosophy is almost nonexistent in the console industry considering how fucking anti-consumer it has become.
      So yes, he is not only suggesting a game that is demanded and given a fair polish will be well supported by the PC userbase, he is completely correct in the statement.
      Look at Dragon's Dogma for instance.

    10. Re:Fable 2 PC by mikael · · Score: 1

      Always though that Dredd would have made a great TV series if they picked the best stories from the 2000AD comic magazine.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    11. Re:Fable 2 PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FABLE 2.

      Windows 10 required.

    12. Re:Fable 2 PC by interval1066 · · Score: 1

      I thought Fable was a popular game but apparently I was wrong...

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    13. Re:Fable 2 PC by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      All about money. Where the PC kills consoles is in long term sales, where the PC game price is actually lower than the console licensing fee, let alone paying for the game, hence crippling discounting on consoles. There are games I have bought on discount from steam that I have yet to play, months after purchasing them. I picked up Elite Dangerous and am not going to play it until I get around to picking up a steam controller because I want to experience that way from the start, bought on discount, no rush, plenty of other discounted gains to choose from.

      So basically the start out at near the same price, PC vs console and then the very first discount on PC is no console licensing fee inclusion, can't start that way otherwise Sony and M$ get too pissed off. Then the rest of the discount for no manual or hard copy manufacture and distribution chain and then the reality of far more competition on PC games sets in and better to make some money than no money. Steam really kills it with a huge library of old games and pretty much the last decade of games is still really playable, a huge amount of competition for gamer time and money.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  2. Nothing of Value was Lost by bigdady92 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes they did good stuff back in the day. Lately nothing out of that whole huge back catalogue. Good on MS for shutting down a stagnant failing studio.

    --
    Wheel of Time: Book by Book and Sumview (summary review) Bigdady92 style: http://bigdady92.blogspot.com/
    1. Re:Nothing of Value was Lost by Kobun · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed. Lionhead was full of disappointment for me. Black & White, which has performance degradation bugs that make the game unplayable on a 10-years-later modern PC. Fable 3, with game-ending bugs (shooting range, anyone?) that were never fixed. The Fable 2 PC port that never came. Either Black & White, with their suicidally stupid AI.

      I would feel differently if the games were such that I could go back and play them today with fond nostalgia, but their never-addressed quality issues make the whole endeavor too much of an unfun hassle.

    2. Re:Nothing of Value was Lost by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2

      I'd have rather seen them make some effort at getting things turned around rather than putting it on a chopping block, but maybe it was beyond that point. I've been there, as part of a failing studio that went under. It's not fun at all, but competent devs should be able to get new jobs without trouble - experienced specialists are always in demand. So, you can say that I've got a bit of professional empathy for those guys.

      There comes a point, however, when it's foolish to throw good money after bad, and it seems like that may be the case with Lionhead. I've been disappointed with them for many years now. The Fable franchise, while decent, has *never* lived up to what it really could have been, and this is from somewhat who absolutely loves all things RPG. For whatever reason, there was something at that studio that's been holding back the potential of those games. I've been in studios like that, and unfortunately, it's often not a problem with the general work force, but people in leadership positions that insists on meddling with game design and making bad decisions, sometimes obviously, but sometimes in fairly subtle ways. But it's pretty difficult to spot those things from the outside.

      To give you one example: I was on a team with a project manager that had never worked in the game industry before, but he insisted on a number of really stupid design decisions, viewing them as "cost-saving measures", as they would tend to simplify development. His brilliant idea? All the enemies in the game would use the same basic attack code, and we'd just swap out art assets and tweak numbers to make them unique-looking. Naturally, the publisher realized the game played like shit, and we ended up having to completely redesign and rewrite that portion of the game. I was doing AI, so the re-designed forced a massive rewrite of my code, of course. As a result, the game ultimately ended up behind schedule and presumably over-budget, largely thanks to a bone-headed design decision from a non-game-designer put in charge of the game. The company was rife with stupid interference from above like this.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  3. Do they now have budget to revive ACES? by Lisandro · · Score: 1

    Flight Simulator is sorely missed guys.

  4. I hope Peter Molyneux never works again by slashmydots · · Score: 0

    Thankfully this might help finally stop that blowhard douchebag, Peter Molyneux, the guy responsible for all 3 versions of Fable being awful.

    1. Re:I hope Peter Molyneux never works again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I hear he's working on an even bigger, more pointless cube! (he calls it "sphere")

    2. Re:I hope Peter Molyneux never works again by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 4, Informative

      1. You do realize Peter Molyneux left Lionhead 4 years ago exactly to the day, right?

      * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      On 7 March 2012, Molyneux announced that he would be leaving Lionhead and Microsoft â" after the completion of Fable: The Journey â" to begin work at a company founded by former Lionhead Studios CTO Tim Rance called 22Cans.

      2. And your god-genre-games are where again?

      Sure, Molyneux, overpromises, and doesn't understand "scope" but he did give us the god-genre and gems such as with Populous, Syndicate, Dungeon Keeper, Magic Carpet.

      There is no need to bag on a great game designer.

    3. Re:I hope Peter Molyneux never works again by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      Syndicate was a great game.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    4. Re: I hope Peter Molyneux never works again by Threni · · Score: 3, Interesting

      He wrote populous 30 years ago then did the same game ever since. I couldn't stand the boring game but it was popular at the time. Really, his interviews, especially in the last year or so, have been a lot more fun than the games ever were. After the last one or two I wondered if he should be on suicide watch.

    5. Re:I hope Peter Molyneux never works again by Kobun · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Sure, Molyneux, overpromises, and doesn't understand "scope" but he did give us the god-genre and gems such as with Populous, Syndicate, Dungeon Keeper, Magic Carpet.

      I feel like this undersells how great the team at Bullfrog was. For me, Molyneux always felt similar to John Romero - started off as part of a great team, but was significantly less impressive when put in the primary lead position.

    6. Re: I hope Peter Molyneux never works again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll say this: Populous was best played multiplayer. The strategy angle playing against another human being was amazing - not just for it's day - it's STILL amazing. :)

    7. Re:I hope Peter Molyneux never works again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Powermonger was fun to play for a while. Black&White was overrated.

    8. Re:I hope Peter Molyneux never works again by idontgno · · Score: 1

      Populous II really could have been improved with Peter Molyneux's head on a stake somewhere on the map.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    9. Re:I hope Peter Molyneux never works again by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      That's a very good point ! Games in the 90's were not made in a vacuum. Definitely need to credit the rest of the team (programmers, designers, artists, sound, etc.)

      Interesting that Molyneux is like Romero -- big on ideas but struggle to self-manage studios.

    10. Re:I hope Peter Molyneux never works again by Tom · · Score: 1

      he did give us the god-genre and gems such as with Populous, Syndicate, Dungeon Keeper, Magic Carpet.

      Most of which promised more than they delivered. I remember how I excited was about Dungeon Keeper, then how sceptical I became after they changed course during development and turned it into a competitive DM vs. DM thing, and how utterly disappointed I was that I was right. DK was fun the first few levels when you were actually defending your dungeon against heroes, after that it was just a run-of-the-mill Aufbauspiel.

      Likewise Syndicate didn't have compelling endgame. Black & White had the same, fun idea at first then it became more and more boring.

      Molyneux is an idea man. I know the type, I tend into this direction as well, I've got trouble with completing and polishing things to perfection because I already have the next idea.

      He brought us great ideas, but largely mediocre games.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  5. Disclosure: I'm not really a gamer by idontgno · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but somehow, I never pictured Lionshead getting shut down, even by our benevolent overlord Microsoft Studios. It was too iconic. It's a fixture. Hell, if it inherited just a tiny part of Peter Molyneux's ego, it should have been immortal.

    I suppose the idea of Yet Another MMORPG getting shut down isn't a shocker, though. If you want to kill a good game idea dead, attempt to implement it as an MMO. And, to be completely sure, develop it at Microsoft Studios, the great elephant graveyard of gaming. It's the gaming equivalent of lifting off and nuking it from space.

    Oh, yeah, original summary doesn't have a linky. Linky.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    1. Re:Disclosure: I'm not really a gamer by Carewolf · · Score: 2

      but somehow, I never pictured Lionshead getting shut down, even by our benevolent overlord Microsoft Studios. It was too iconic. It's a fixture. Hell, if it inherited just a tiny part of Peter Molyneux's ego, it should have been immortal.

      It is only fitting, all the greatest studios have been killed by the company that bought them. Just to meantion the two biggest: Origin and Microprose. It was worse for Lucas Arts who was allowed to rot first after the take over before being put out of its missery.

    2. Re:Disclosure: I'm not really a gamer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's what Microsoft does to games, Lionshead isn't the first, won't be the last.

    3. Re: Disclosure: I'm not really a gamer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are only 3 monkey island games. MI. MI2. MI3.

      While we are here, there are only 4 Star Wars movies: Episodes 4, 5, 6 and 7.

    4. Re:Disclosure: I'm not really a gamer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The finger of death. From 3000 to 6000 miles away, they will wish their management structure onto another company, micro-managing who does what and what priorities the development team should have each month.

    5. Re: Disclosure: I'm not really a gamer by guises · · Score: 1

      What? There's a fourth Star Wars movie? Isn't it just three, plus a remake?

  6. Bring Back Links by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never found a good replacement, and I refuse to give EA money.

  7. nobody gets fired for choosing Microsoft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or choosing to sell out to them.

    1. Re: nobody gets fired for choosing Microsoft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So true it is depressing. Perhaps Atlassian can slay the beast but that day is long off and microsoft fight dirty.

  8. Re:Do they now have budget to revive ACES? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Flight Simulator is sorely missed guys.

    Even if they had the budget, it wouldn't help. The team is scattered to the four winds and all the needed infrastructure to make a full-fledged version of Flight Simulator is gone.

    You can thank Don Mattrick and Phil Spencer (head of MGS at the time) for that.

  9. Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by rahvin112 · · Score: 0

    Microsoft buys game companies and a few years later shuts them down. You can almost guarantee that any game company that MS purchases will be run into the ground in about 3 years. See once all the higher ups have fulfilled their obligations to stay for a certain amount of time they flee Microsoft and start another game company using all the funds they extracted from MS. Shortly after it's a bloodbath and everyone that's any good jumps ship.

    Microsoft, it's where good game companies go to die.

    1. Re:Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by halivar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You have to admit; they're track record is still a helluva lot better than EA, which has pretty much crushed all my favorite franchises, ever: Maxis, Origin, Westwood, et. al.

    2. Re:Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by Zephyn · · Score: 2

      Microsoft, it's where good game companies go to die.

      I'd say EA gives them a good run for the money on that score.

    3. Re:Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The reason is that somehow over time most game companies turn into bad, stagnant game companies. While they're independent they have got little choice but to muddle on, usually producing worse and more derivative games as time goes on until they're just teetering on the edge. However, when a studio is part of a bigger organisation, it is easier to shut it down when it goes stagnant, shifting developers over to different studios. Once you've got a surplus of developers and a lack of good ideas, you buy another studio.

    4. Re:Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only game companies. Microsoft has a reputation for destroying the companies that it acquires.

    5. Re:Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by vilanye · · Score: 1

      Too be fair, they should never have funded Vanguard and let it rot too long.

      I wasn't surprised when SOE picked them up.

      Vanguard was a guaranteed failure the second that drug addict thought it up and talked MS into funding it.

      That really upset me because MS had an MMO with promise that they killed off for Vanguard. I must be getting old because I can't remember the name of it.

    6. Re:Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by vilanye · · Score: 1

      I couldn't believe they shut down Ensemble. That game studio was great and made a ton of money.

    7. Re:Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by Tharkkun · · Score: 1

      You have to admit; they're track record is still a helluva lot better than EA, which has pretty much crushed all my favorite franchises, ever: Maxis, Origin, Westwood, et. al.

      EA definitely takes the cake on bad management of companies.

    8. Re:Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by secretsquirel · · Score: 0

      RIP Westwood, never forget!

    9. Re:Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by mikael · · Score: 1

      That's the same with most companies. The smaller the startup, the smaller and more achievable their goals. There's less code base to support, so they can concentrate on just writing new software. But then they get have to get their first product out. They make enough sales to employ more developers. Customers now want support, so they have to implement customer support engineers, technical writers, documentation, test engineers. The test harness system needs to be maintained. The more code that is added, the more code that needs to be made interoperable without breaking any builds. Testing takes longer. It might take 30 minutes to run through all automated test to make sure no check-in has broken anything.

      Development teams will split into next-generation core technology development and infrastructure support. Eventually, the need for investment in equipment, conferences and development tools, that will be so much they will need to be bought out by a big company. In exchange for money, they have to restructure their staff to be compatible with the host. That will blow out the more creative engineers who liked to learn new skills and hack stuff together. Many corporations would just buy companies out and promote their staff to "ambassadors" or "sales" and "customer relations".

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    10. Re: Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by Oyjord · · Score: 1

      Asheron's Call?

    11. Re: Microsoft: Where game companies go to die by vilanye · · Score: 1

      No, they killed it before it even got to beta. You started the game out as a powerful god or something like that, instead of starting out beating on rats with a rusty sword.

      It might have ended up a bad game, but by the PR and screenshots it looked promising.

  10. notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by nimbius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    seems like this is a once a month occurrence...and it typically goes something like this:
    1. Microsoft gets slaughtered to the tune of hundreds of millions on a new offering...for example, surface losing 600 million in 2014.
    2. Microsoft pretends that didnt happen, releases a new surface.
    3. eight months pass, the new surface incurs another hundred million in loss.
    4. Microsoft pretends losses are due to economic factors and not representative of anything more than a downturn in consumer demand.
    5. Microsoft spends, say, the year of 2014, firing twenty thousand employees while muttering "this is okay, this is normal" in a soothing monotone to any onlooking press.
    6. People point out the microsoft store is failing, the phone offering is also suffering huge losses, and the only thing using the microsoft cloud is the colocational datacenter racks that hold it up.

    7. ....microsoft releases a new windows...proclaims its the greatest ever....it begins failing...
    8. Microsoft announces it will now strap Xbox indelably to the haggared burro known as Windows 10...they will form a new perfect union...like beer belch flavoured doritos or stale cigar flavoured icecream.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      and the only thing using the microsoft cloud is the colocational datacenter racks that hold it up.

      Of everything you wrote, this is the only point I'd differ on. The Azure cloud stuff has actually been pretty successful, to the point where they can barely meet demand. (Personally I don't see why, because AWS seems to be a better platform in nearly every way.)

      So Azure has actually been a money-maker so far, but other than that everything you said was spot-on.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    2. Re:notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >AWS seems to be a better platform in nearly every way
      by who's perspective? developer? nope. devops? nope. accounting? yeah

    3. Re:notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah Azure and o365 are selling by the virtual cloud based truckload.

      They've already got AzureAD and it's shaping up to be a complete replacement for windows server in SMB environments. A soon as they get their head out of their ass and put it together in an easy point and drool package (Basically they need to gut onedrive and make it actually do what business users need to do and make AzureAD able to replace winserver wholesale, then bundle it with a remote management tool that's not a huge pain in the dick to setup) they'll have business computing pretty much locked up.

    4. Re:notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      Ten years ago the company I work for wouldn't even entertain the idea of supporting and using Apple products and though I see more and more of them every day it appears even less likely today that we would move away from Microsoft anytime soon.

    5. Re:notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ten years ago the company I work for wouldn't even entertain the idea of supporting and using Apple products and though I see more and more of them every day it appears even less likely today that we would move away from Microsoft anytime soon.

      I think the MS "lock in" effect is fairly common because a lot of companies have mission-critical applications that only run under Windows, or they have applications that have Linux or Apple equivalents, but that would be painful or expensive to move over to.

      For example, I'm sure Linux has some capable employee management applications, but transitioning from a Windows application to a Linux analogue might be difficult and time-consuming (and possibly expensive as well). It's a kind of "native lock in" that's hard to break away from. It's not that alternatives aren't available, but moving to them is usually seen as more trouble than it's worth (and that notion is probably justified, too).

      As more of these kinds of applications move to the web, however, (HR, employee management, process control) I think we'll see more companies adopt Linux, because a web page works the same under any OS as long as it's written properly.

      I'd bet you could sit most average users down and have them use Linux Mint or Ubuntu with hardly a hiccup as long as they were shown what to click on to open whatever it is they need to use to get their job done. If it's a web app then it's basically click-and-go, no need to retrain anyone. It's desktop apps that are the sticking point, but I suspect that may not be the case for much longer.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    6. Re:notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think most people use them most likely using their cloud service to either run Windows Server in full or part or developers that prefer to only write Windows server apps.

    7. Re:notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      A little more than that when you add up Windows, Office, Active Directory, Exchange, Sharepoint, Skype, and a boat load of other MS products it suddenly becomes one stop for support. Now you are no longer looking at business critical applications that interact with software from various vendors the buck stops at MS and they support it.

    8. Re:notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by Tharkkun · · Score: 1

      It's more along the lines of Apple doesn't excel at making hardware in servers or environments for enterprise, mission critical applications. Windows and Linux platforms do. Apple is more aimed at the small. app store type stuff while they nickel and dime to profit and overpriced hardware.

    9. Re:notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      Linux may have alternatives to just about everything MS but the problem is it's a lot of third parties and no one vendor to point your finger at and say we payed for it now fix it.

    10. Re:notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As more of these kinds of applications move to the web, however, (HR, employee management, process control) I think we'll see more companies adopt Linux, because a web page works the same under any OS as long as it's written properly.

      Never, ever going to happen. It's been a decade and a half since the Internet took off and web apps are still "write once, suck anywhere" thanks to the limitations of HTML and the differences between allegedly standards-compliant browsers.

    11. Re:notice we didnt say 'meaningful' changes by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Never, ever going to happen. It's been a decade and a half since the Internet took off and web apps are still "write once, suck anywhere" thanks to the limitations of HTML and the differences between allegedly standards-compliant browsers.

      Bullshit. The vast, vast majority of web applications work perfectly well under any modern browser.

      Ever heard of Facebook? SalesForce.com? Twitter? Pinterest? Instagram? Wikipedia? Amazon? YouTube? Google? Linkedin? Ebay?

      They all work just fine with any browser that isn't 100 years old. Stop with the bullshit FUD.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  11. How much $$$$? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    How much money has Microsoft pissed away doing stuff like this?

    When you count up all the failures and the aborted projects and half-baked shit they've abandoned, it's incredible that this company is still above water.

    For example, how many tens of millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of man-hours of work did they lose just by crashing the Fable Legends project? It's mind boggling to me.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:How much $$$$? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you count up all the failures and the aborted projects and half-baked shit they've abandoned, it's incredible that this company is still above water.

      Don't know much about software engineering, do you? *snicker* If you read the literature, the failure rate for software projects is astonishingly high all across the industry. You just don't hear about it because they're much smaller companies than M$.

    2. Re:How much $$$$? by Tharkkun · · Score: 1

      How much money has Microsoft pissed away doing stuff like this?

      When you count up all the failures and the aborted projects and half-baked shit they've abandoned, it's incredible that this company is still above water.

      For example, how many tens of millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of man-hours of work did they lose just by crashing the Fable Legends project? It's mind boggling to me.

      Many, many, many games and ideas are scrapped before they become complete products. Obviously the game was not progressing like it should along with failures in the past so they shut it down. It takes about 5 years to bring a good MMO to market and they were still 1-2 years out.

    3. Re:How much $$$$? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Meh, their taxes are so high they just write it off or write it down - if it's already covered and they can not reduce their tax burden any further then they just defer it or push it to a "wholly owned subsidiary" that is in a different country and reduce their burden there. They have (and continue to make) gobs of cash and have a whole lot of assets.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    4. Re:How much $$$$? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Many, many, many games and ideas are scrapped before they become complete products. Obviously the game was not progressing like it should along with failures in the past so they shut it down. It takes about 5 years to bring a good MMO to market and they were still 1-2 years out.

      No, I understand that....but still, it seems like a huge waste. Either commit to something or don't. I know the "sunk cost"fallacy is a huge problem but nonetheless, game development isn't some new, untried process. Either they're not doing it right or they have no idea how to do it at all. It's not like this is magic or some unknown quantity. I understand there are a *lot* of variables in play as well as unforeseen circumstances, but it just seems as though the failure rate is unreasonably high for this kind of thing.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  12. Uhh by easyTree · · Score: 1

    On the plus side the staff can just move en-masse to a Starbucks of their choice and start up again as co-owners.

    1. Re:Uhh by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why would anyone want to co-own a Starbucks?

    2. Re:Uhh by easyTree · · Score: 1

      Own? I'm talking about running a games studio from a table =)

    3. Re:Uhh by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Some comic book stores have an area for playing board games. ;)

  13. Re:Do they now have budget to revive ACES? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even if they had the budget, it wouldn't help. The team is scattered to the four winds and all the needed infrastructure to make a full-fledged version of Flight Simulator is gone.

    You're tearing me apart...

  14. Re:fp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Word

  15. Re:Do they now have budget to revive ACES? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Much of the flight sim community has moved over to X-Plane 10 now. Like FSX it requires add-ons to shine, but it is based on a modern 64 bit engine (so no ram problems like FSX has), and is under active development with a large community around it.

    FSX still does some things better than XP10 does, but XP10 does other things better than FSX does.

  16. Microsoft should just take over the government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    within a few months the power will be restored to the people.

  17. Way too late by poisonborz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I never understood why anyone thought they were an iconic studio. The only game they ever delivered in the scale and originality they promised was Black & White. Fable, while good, was already showing cracks (compared to what Molyneux promised) and the only other original IP was The Movies, which - while also being an interesting concept - was a costly flop. That's all. Their last decade was basically spilling out Fable sequels in worsening quality, parallel of how Molyneux became more and more depressed and actually mad. After (and actually before) he left, there wasn't a strong, visionary lead there. Microsoft was actually merciful to keep them around this long.

  18. That is what they get for lying down with MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MS has a long history of fucking over game studios.

  19. Kinesthetic Killed It by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    Fable went to shit when they made the decision to tie it to Kinect. If there is any genre that should not need a Kinect bolt on, it is theasy RPG style that Fable falls into.

    I was actually come sidelong buying a XBONE just because of the Fable series, until I found out they were bolting Kinect onto this thing.

  20. R.I.P. by grimfate · · Score: 2

    So no The Movies 2? :(

  21. Microsoft's MOONLIGHT plugin! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    let's all REJOICE in the gift given to Linux users!

    oh, wait... it was shitcanned.. LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE FOR LINUX!

  22. With more than just Kinect controls... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...this story may not have happened at all if the last Fable game had allowed for controller play instead of just using the Kinect all the time.

    Most people still actually LIKE console controllers, and being disallowed from using them is actively harmful to the success of a game. This is even more true when many users also have trouble performing the motions necessary to make their character perform as they desire. It's hard to mess up a button press, but easy to mess up motion recognition. I actually blame Microsoft for this decision, because I can't actually imagine a sane gamer/game developer actually believing it a good idea to only rely on motion recognition for an RPG.

    Also, tying in with Fable Heroes may not have been the best choice.

  23. Re:fp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Second Word

  24. Good by sixsixtysix · · Score: 1

    Any company that has had any dealings with Mark Healey deserves to go tits up.

    --
    ...
  25. Re:Do they now have budget to revive ACES? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh hai mark!

  26. How is this surprising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lionhead used to be a PC game maker, but now Microsoft only lets them make games for a console that I don't know anyone who owns. Really, how are gaming giants like the ones who made Black & White expected to remain profitable if they are only making software for no-name console brands?

  27. Lionhead is still around? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ever since the piece of s**t that was "Black and White", anything by Lionhead is on my auto-ignore list.

  28. RIP Fable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for nothing Mircosoft you bunch of money grubbing, greedy assholes.....