Bethesda Acquisition by Microsoft Factored Into Stadia Studios Shutdown

GigaBowser

The bear of bad news
The real reason they went under is because I started a thread about it the day before on Neogaf and obviously someone at Google was listening.

 
Last edited:

Chukhopops

Member
Ghostwire and Deathloop both launched on PC and PS5 at the same time (y)

Speculation but MS could have blocked the launch for Stadia as it’s a competitive cloud platform for all we know.
Deathloop was announced as a PS5 console exclusive five months before Stadia even launched, how does the timeline even make sense?

You’re saying there was somehow plans for a Stadia version that Sony was ok with and MS blocked?
 

sainraja

Member
So if MS hadn’t purchased Bethesda, Google would have? And their games like Deathloop and Starfield would all be Stadia and cloud exclusive? Yuck.
It doesn't necessarily mean Google would have acquired them. They may have tried to establish marketing deals, other exclusivity deals or simply counted on their content being available on the platform.

Deathloop was announced as a PS5 console exclusive five months before Stadia even launched, how does the timeline even make sense?

You’re saying there was somehow plans for a Stadia version that Sony was ok with and MS blocked?
MS were honoring the contract signed before they acquired Bethesda when it comes Deathloop. When it comes to the cloud, well, MS is investing heavily into it due to Game Pass so its a likely scenario that they might try to block it and he did say he was speculating....not that there were any established plans. The question you are asking has already been answered in how he started his statement.
 
Last edited:
I am so confused by Google.

They literally didn’t try. Gaffers think Stadia failed from the merits, but Google was extremely passive in its efforts, its baffling.
 

Infamy v1

Member
Besides, you guys had one contract from REVillage and that was enough to confirm Sony blocks every single game from GP. No proof was ever asked.

Nobody said Sony blocks all games from GP, that's blatant insecurity projection and a bad attempt at a strawman. Also, there were more things listed under RE8 on those documents right below that were redacted; the only reason RE8 was publicly mentioned was because it was already public due to the Epic case (which Sony fought hard to not be shown in public but failed). You want to talk about things not being "far-fetched" yet ignore the likely possibility that there can be other games besides RE8 being blocked? That's why you strawman it and say "all" games. Transparent as glass.

MS is killing the competition. That's their MO. What else is new?

The best thing about the OP are the rats who don't understand what they're reading and take a false victory lap only to get visibly upset and shaken that no media is reporting this and no big gaming forums are talking about it. I already see a usual suspect on Twitter claiming MS paid the media and influencers to keep hush about this and that's why nobody is talking about it 😂 and not the real reason, that the article was written in February 2021 and there are no actual quotes or proof in the article. Not to mention that nobody with working brain cells took Stadia seriously with their multitude after multitude of terrible business moves, but hey, desperate times call for desperate measures. 😉

They had clauses to block Stadia in their contracts with publishers I'm sure.

They had some of their own games on Stadia but were paying to block... other publishers from releasing games on Stadia? Please, enlighten us with some of these games you speak of. Not surprising that you literally think this, though. 😂😂😂
 

Chukhopops

Member
It doesn't necessarily mean Google would have acquired them. They may have tried to establish marketing deals, other exclusivity deals or simply counted on their content being available on the platform.


MS were honoring the contract signed before they acquired Bethesda when it comes Deathloop. When it comes to the cloud, well, MS is investing heavily into it due to Game Pass so its a likely scenario that they might try to block it and he did say he was speculating....not that there were any established plans. The question you are asking has already been answered in how he started his statement.
I understand it’s speculation but it still needs to make sense as a theory. Nothing indicates there ever was a Stadia version of the games Sony moneyhatted since it never was announced, even prior to the MS purchase.

It’s possible that Google was interested in buying Bethesda at some point and MS outbid them or was simply faster - but I personally doubt Google was willing to gamble 7.5 bn on Stadia.
 

Infamy v1

Member
It wasn't their games. Stuff like Rage 2 was there since 2019, Doom and Doom Eternal were announced in 2020. The contracts were already done.

Why isn't Deathloop and Ghostwire Tokyo on Stadia, pray tell? 🤭 damn MS always killing their competitors!

The rest is your usual psychotic rants I won't bother this time. Peace 😘

You "won't bother" as per usual because you got exposed and have no retort so you run with your tail between your legs to troll the next thread. Peace 😘🤢🤮
 

Infamy v1

Member
Jim rubbing his hands for the next meeting eith ftc

Like moths to a flame:

The best thing about the OP are the rats who don't understand what they're reading and take a false victory lap only to get visibly upset and shaken that no media is reporting this and no big gaming forums are talking about it. I already see a usual suspect on Twitter claiming MS paid the media and influencers to keep hush about this and that's why nobody is talking about it 😂 and not the real reason, that the article was written in February 2021 and there are no actual quotes or proof in the article. Not to mention that nobody with working brain cells took Stadia seriously with their multitude after multitude of terrible business moves, but hey, desperate times call for desperate measures. 😉

😂
 

GhostOfTsu

Member
FTC gonna have to work double overtime to convince people that Stadia was ever close to being competition.

"When you talk about Nintendo and Sony, we have a ton of respect for them, but we see Amazon and Google as the main competitors going forward," he said.

"That's not to disrespect Nintendo and Sony, but the traditional gaming companies are somewhat out of position. I guess they could try to recreate Azure, but we've invested tens of billions of dollars in cloud over the years."

"I don't want to be in a fight over format wars with those guys while Amazon and Google are focusing on how to get gaming to seven billion people around the world," he added. "Ultimately, that's the goal."
Stadia = Google
 
Last edited:
I am so confused by Google.

They literally didn’t try. Gaffers think Stadia failed from the merits, but Google was extremely passive in its efforts, its baffling.
There's no audience for it, how many times will this have to be proven? You can literally start playing on xCloud right now for $1 in most of the world, yet hardly anyone is doing it.

Turns out that the people who actually want to play console type games buy their hardware. People that don't have enough interest to buy the hardware don't even want to play these games.

Maybe if 5g with no data caps was cheap and available to most people those that right now play trash games on mobile would want to play trashy games over the cloud. That's about it.
 
Last edited:

GhostOfTsu

Member
Not in this context, but you're welcome to believe that to further a specific narrative. He's specifically talking about a cloud infrastructure, not Stadia, which was only out a few weeks at the time of that interview.
You can't be serious. Customers can't subscribe directly to Azure or AWS to play games.

Google Cloud = Stadia
Azure = xCloud
AWS = Luna

So yes he was talking about Google reaching 7 billion gamers through Stadia.
 

adamsapple

Banned
You can't be serious. Customers can't subscribe directly to Azure or AWS to play games.

Google Cloud = Stadia
Azure = xCloud
AWS = Luna

So yes he was talking about Google reaching 7 billion gamers through Stadia.


He's literally talking about competing in cloud infrastructure.

Speaking with newly-launched tech publication Protocol, Spencer said the company's Japanese counterparts lack the means to compete with its high-end cloud infrastructure.

Regardless, Stadia is dead now and mostly in part to their own actions like turning down known developers. Bethesda's acquisition happened less than 1 year after Stadia launched, it wouldn't have been a factor in the reception Stadia got.
 

Silver Wattle

Gold Member
Google is used to gaming revenue being low effort (play store), they didn't want to put actual effort in.

Good riddance.
 
Last edited:

GhostOfTsu

Member
He's literally talking about competing in cloud infrastructure.
Ok so he was talking about Google Cloud only (NOT Stadia) but how can customers play games on Google Cloud without Stadia? 🤔

The article also mentions GP subscribers, Sony and Nintendo. All customer-facing stuff. It's not about the backend cloud infrastructure only.

He said it again in 2022 after the Acti deal anyway so it wasn't the only source.


Maybe one day your posts will make sense 😅
 

adamsapple

Banned
Stadia closure = negative implications now? I thought people were celebrating

Most people are, but then you have folks like our friend GhostOfTsu GhostOfTsu who doesn't leave any opportunity to turn any news into anti MS/Phil, such as this thread :messenger_grinning_sweat:

Imagine taking an interview done a few weeks after Stadia launched, where its name isn't used by Spencer as some kind of indication that it was considered primary competition. Let alone the last few years where Stadia barely put up a viable footprint to even be considered competition to any of the primary gaming platforms in the first place. It has had the same level of impact as an Ouya all things considered.

PS:

You can't be serious. Customers can't subscribe directly to Azure or AWS to play games.
AWS = Luna

Luna didn't launch until 10 months after that article. Unless Phil has incredible clairvoyance, he is not talking about Amazon Luna 10 months before it was a thing, just like he doesn't mention Stadia even once. in the article where he's talking about cloud infrastructure and name dropping Azure:

But Microsoft's Spencer says he doesn't consider Sony and Nintendo his main competition anymore, largely because neither of those Japanese companies owns its own top-end global cloud infrastructure akin to Microsoft's Azure platform.
 

Three

Member
He's literally talking about competing in cloud infrastructure.



Regardless, Stadia is dead now and mostly in part to their own actions like turning down known developers. Bethesda's acquisition happened less than 1 year after Stadia launched, it wouldn't have been a factor in the reception Stadia got.
"As Microsoft continues its shift into game streaming and digital-only, Xbox boss Phil Spencer says PlayStation and Nintendo are no longer the platform's main contenders."

The deflection you're doing is absolutely mind boggling.
 

adamsapple

Banned
"As Microsoft continues its shift into game streaming and digital-only, Xbox boss Phil Spencer says PlayStation and Nintendo are no longer the platform's main contenders."

The deflection you're doing is absolutely mind boggling.

Is it more or less mind boggling than the deflection of trying to put Stadia closing down on Microsoft ? 🤔

Oh, funny story on that. The Kotaku article that the OP's article is quoting says this:

The next he was shutting it all down and blaming the move in part on Microsoft’s acquisition of Bethesda, Kotaku reported at the time.

The hyperlinked piece there with the "reported at that time" has absolutely no mention of Bethesda at all.




If You Say So Reaction GIF by Identity
 
Last edited:
🤣 Bethesda wasn’t going to save that shit show. You had to buy games at full price that you couldn’t ever download and play. Fuck that shit with a studded dildo. Whoever thought that was a great idea should be fired and forbidden to come up with any ideas ever again. In fact, it was such a bad idea that we should give that person and all another people that agreed to it shovels to bury their careers.
 
Last edited:
Look at the absolute stupidity Trup1aya posted on this topic on Reset:

Meanwhile, Geoforce Now recently reached 20 million registered users w/o acquiring a single developer.

If Google looked at the MS acquisitions and decided they would have to would spend that much money in order to complete, that would further signal that Google didn’t bother to try to understand the market they sought to compete in.

Before you type BS, learn that Geforce Now can be signed up to for FREE; you don't need to pay for an account.

Secondly, if they were able to reach 20 million users without buying a developer, why does Microsoft need to buy two massive publishers to maybe reach 50 million GamePass subs?

Oh, is it because you have to pay for GamePass? Like how you had to PAY for Stadia? Would that suggest, then, that for paid services you maybe HAVE to buy developers and/or publishers? And if that is the case, Google's claim of MS's aggressive buy of publishers like Zenimax/Bethesda basically pushing them out of the market, has some validity?

But I get it, dude. We know how you play this game, so you'll never look at the flaws of your own arguments.
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
The case has not been made that Microsoft killed Stadia. Google launched a shitty product and the market didn't like it from the start.

This. If anything, Stadia's failure should point out how nascent the cloud gaming space is. There isn't a single case yet that has proven the market is viable on its own standing (as a game distribution platform - Geforce Now is a separate thing). Typically regulators avoid meddling in markets that are just forming, out of fear they could kill the emerging market outright.
 
Last edited:

drganon

Member
Look at the absolute stupidity Trup1aya posted on this topic on Reset:



Before you type BS, learn that Geforce Now can be signed up to for FREE; you don't need to pay for an account.

Secondly, if they were able to reach 20 million users without buying a developer, why does Microsoft need to buy two massive publishers to maybe reach 50 million GamePass subs?

Oh, is it because you have to pay for GamePass? Like how you had to PAY for Stadia? Would that suggest, then, that for paid services you maybe HAVE to buy developers and/or publishers? And if that is the case, Google's claim of MS's aggressive buy of publishers like Zenimax/Bethesda basically pushing them out of the market, has some validity?

But I get it, dude. We know how you play this game, so you'll never look at the flaws of your own arguments.
Be careful thicc. Reading too much on resetera can be harmful to one's mental facilities.
 

Three

Member
Is it more or less mind boggling than the deflection of trying to put Stadia closing down on Microsoft ? 🤔

Oh, funny story on that. The Kotaku article that the OP's article is quoting says this:



The hyperlinked piece there with the "reported at that time" has absolutely no mention of Bethesda at all.

[/URL][/URL][/URL][/URL]



If You Say So Reaction GIF by Identity
I don't even know what you're talking about now but I suspect it again has no relevance to what was being discussed and is another deflection to a different point.

You said
FTC gonna have to work double overtime to convince people that Stadia was ever close to being competition.

Then ghost provided an article that directly quoted Phil Spencer saying he considered Amazon's and Google's game streaming and digital content store/delivery as the competition and not Nintendo and Sony.

"As Microsoft continues its shift into game streaming and digital-only, Xbox boss Phil Spencer says PlayStation and Nintendo are no longer the platform's main contenders. "When you talk about Nintendo and Sony, we have a ton of respect for them, but we see Amazon and Google as the main competitors going forward," he said. "That's not to disrespect Nintendo and Sony, but the traditional gaming companies are somewhat out of position. I guess they could try to recreate Azure, but we've invested tens of billions of dollars in cloud over the years." "I don't want to be in a fight over format wars with those guys while Amazon and Google are focusing on how to get gaming to seven billion people around the world," he added. "Ultimately, that's the goal."


But now you're working doubly overtime to suggest he wasn't referring to Google's Stadia or Amazon's Luna (for obvious reasons) . Even when it's pretty clear and it's mentioned in the artcle.
 
Last edited:

GhostOfTsu

Member
Most people are, but then you have folks like our friend GhostOfTsu GhostOfTsu who doesn't leave any opportunity to turn any news into anti MS/Phil, such as this thread :messenger_grinning_sweat:

Imagine taking an interview done a few weeks after Stadia launched, where its name isn't used by Spencer as some kind of indication that it was considered primary competition. Let alone the last few years where Stadia barely put up a viable footprint to even be considered competition to any of the primary gaming platforms in the first place. It has had the same level of impact as an Ouya all things considered.

PS:



Luna didn't launch until 10 months after that article. Unless Phil has incredible clairvoyance, he is not talking about Amazon Luna 10 months before it was a thing, just like he doesn't mention Stadia even once. in the article where he's talking about cloud infrastructure and name dropping Azure:
I'm not even sure what you're arguing about. Phil made several mentions of Google and called them his main competition for cloud gaming. It was talked about at length here and everywhere.

Now you want to pretend he wasn't talking about cloud gaming. They were actually competing for the cloud servers in the backend when you play Fortnite or whatever?

Yeah I'm sure they bought Activision because they wanted them to use Azure for their servers instead of Google Cloud.

Sure Jan GIF
 
If stadia thought that Skyrim in space was going to save them from their terrible idea and terrible marketshare they didn't learn anything from this project.
 

adamsapple

Banned
I'm not even sure what you're arguing about. Phil made several mentions of Google and called them his main competition for cloud gaming. It was talked about at length here and everywhere.
Now you want to pretend he wasn't talking about cloud gaming. They were actually competing for the cloud servers in the backend when you play Fortnite or whatever?
Yeah I'm sure they bought Activision because they wanted them to use Azure for their servers instead of Google Cloud.

He was talking about a cloud infrastructure where only Google and Amazon can rival MS's Azure. Once again, at the point of that interview, Stadia was barely a thing and Luna wasn't out, neither of those platforms were a factor in his quote, it was talking about the backbone structure to run a cloud based service.

But you're really going down the hill that Stadia closing is primarily MS's fault, without any corroborating evidence, or even an actual quote from anyone saying as such, huh ?


But now you're working doubly overtime to suggest he wasn't referring to Google's Stadia or Amazon's Luna (for obvious reasons) . Even when it's pretty clear and it's mentioned in the artcle.

Which part of any of the articles implies that Stadia was enough of a competition for FTC to have hypothetically taken notice exactly, since we're talking about original quotes ?

Please highlight the specific portion you think shows that.


Sony paid Google to shut down Stadia to stop MS from buying Activision. It all makes sense now.

It's all Phil Spencer's fault you see, why ? Because.
 

johnjohn

Member
Is it more or less mind boggling than the deflection of trying to put Stadia closing down on Microsoft ? 🤔

Oh, funny story on that. The Kotaku article that the OP's article is quoting says this:



The hyperlinked piece there with the "reported at that time" has absolutely no mention of Bethesda at all.




If You Say So Reaction GIF by Identity
Some people are just desperate and hoping this somehow stops the Activision acquisition. Even though realistically MS had nothing to do with Stadia's failure.
 
Top Bottom