• @Xantharian_ocelot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    975 months ago

    By shutting down a studio instead of selling it off or even letting it buy itself out, Microsoft ensures that no studio it has ever owned can become viable competition. Who cares about a diverse industry when you can keep all the IPs developed under your umbrella and shelve them for decades, instead of letting the studios that made them go on to work on their creative visions?

    Article also mentions that it breaks the employees of those studios up so there is less chance of a competitor that makes another successful IP

    • @lilja@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      595 months ago

      Ironically if the developers band together and start another studio they would probably have Microsoft knocking on their door with an acquisition offer in a few years.

      • @Risk@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        235 months ago

        The trouble is the upfront capital though, but at the same time another publisher would surely bite at the thought of getting a talented studio’s staff in one go?

          • @SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            0
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            There’s absolutely noncompetes baked into that sale. Noncompetes might not be legal, or applicable, torards employees anymore, but they sure as shit are still legal and binding as a condition for a business’s sale.

        • Pup Biru
          link
          fedilink
          24 months ago

          hello welcome to my new venture capital firm: we specialise in funding game studios where 90% of the staff got fired in an acquisition turned shutdown