The Business Side of Video (Space) Games EXCLUSIVELY ON IDLE THUMBS

[Bjorn]

Sure, WhatsApp's valuation looks kind of insane, but then I don't know dick about the international messaging business, particularly when you start talking about 10s of millions of users in India, Africa and Asia (assuming their numbers are even close to legit).  I don't know what the value is for a Facebook in buying instant access to millions of (many of them young) users in markets where they have more competitors or a smaller footprint.  And Minecraft's value is in part based on the absolute ubiquity of its presence on everything.  Will MS maintain that, or go "exclusive" in some way? 

 

FWIW, I'm looking at this as a complete outsider.  I've never even played Minecraft, so I don't have any particular attachment to it.  I do think it will be fascinating to try and watch Microsoft interact with and continue to foster the community and creativity that we associate with Minecraft, and keep their legal departments at bay.  We're only a year or so removed from the Microsoft that charged indies thousands of dollars to patch their games, the one who didn't even know what their PR message for the Xbox One was when it was introduced, who still doesn't know what the One is, and is abandoning features they previously insisted were the defining elements of it.  They've never made a dent in the mobile/tablet market, and I don't see Minecraft being the killer app that changes that.  I also just don't think they have a strong history of successful gaming acquisitions or nurturing and developing their in-house gaming resources.  Internally, the last 6ish years have been this merry-go-round of studio closings, openings, acquisitions and restructuring with how many games to show for it?  Maybe this signals a new path forward for them, but I just don't see where the last few years give any reason not to be a bit cynical about it. 

[tegan]

I wonder if this means there will still be a PS4 version.

 

 

also Lego sets

[Bjorn]

Well, there are some of the questions answered about platforms and exclusivity.  Plan is to continue development across all platforms.

http://www.joystiq.com/2014/09/15/xbox-chief-minecraft-will-continue-on-playstation-mobile/

[Denial]

One interesting question there is whether Microsoft will hire people to join Mojang to do the inevitable Windows Phone version, or outsource it as Mojang has previously.

[neonrev]

Well, there are some of the questions answered about platforms and exclusivity.  Plan is to continue development across all platforms.

http://www.joystiq.com/2014/09/15/xbox-chief-minecraft-will-continue-on-playstation-mobile/

Well, I'm guessing that's the plan for as long as there is a bunch of media attention on the deal. They've also said: 

 

Of course, Microsoft can’t make decisions for other companies or predict the choices that they might make in the future.

Which sounds to me like "We'll keep selling the game on those platforms and develop slowly for it, but the first time we get a chance to blame dropping a 'not us' platform on the platform holder, we will." I can't imagine the Vita version, the Raspberry Pi edition, the android or the Amzon Fire edition are going to be justifiable to microsoft books-wise. I personally don't like the insane MINECRAFT ON EVERY BOX sprawl it's taken over time, so I don't mind if the Vita version gets smothered quietly in the night.

[tegan]

A bug was discovered today in Mario & Luigi: Dream Team that lets users make Miiverse posts with any image saved to the 3DS and not just the current screenshot. Naturally, Miiverse is now full of porn. Whoops!

 

You may remember that Nintendo shut down Swapnote entirely when someone posted a dick, so who knows what this will mean.

 

 

 

 

[Twig]

I wish I could fast-forward a year because I'm really interested in seeing how this actually turns out. I'm still excited at the prospect of change while being pessimistic that Microsoft is the right entity to enact that change. Hnnngh.

[Twig]

A bug was discovered today in Mario & Luigi: Dream Team that lets users make Miiverse posts with any image saved to the 3DS and not just the current screenshot. Naturally, Miiverse is now full of porn. Whoops!

 

 

 

Haha oh wow.

 

I thought Miiverse originally had a "every post has to be approved" mandate? Was that later revoked, or was that people just overreacting to something a PR unit at one point said somewhat inaccurately?

[tegan]

Miiverse is heavily moderated and probably has crazy word filters*, but there's no post approval to my knowledge.

 

 

*Nintendo loves those word filters. It wasn't until Gen VI that you could trade certain Pokémon online -like Froslass and Cofagrigus- without nicknaming them.

[Bjorn]

So on valuation, I just saw someone point out that in the last few years, Disney acquired both LucasFilms and Marvel for about $4 billion each, meaning Microsoft values Mojang being worth about two-thirds what either Marvel or Star Wars is worth. 

[SecretAsianMan]

So on valuation, I just saw someone point out that in the last few years, Disney acquired both LucasFilms and Marvel for about $4 billion each, meaning Microsoft values Mojang being worth about two-thirds what either Marvel or Star Wars is worth. 

 

I saw this tweeted by IGN

 

[Denial]

Mojang's revenues in 2013 were about $330 million, and it's got a terrific margin - its profit was $129 million. Lucasfilm's merchandising revenue, as a point of comparison, in 2012 was a little over $200 million - although that was in a year where nothing much happened in the franchise creatively (insert "just like every since Return of the Jedi" joke here). At the time of the acquisition, Disney's CFO estimated that the adjusted Box Office revenues for the prequels would be $1.5bn in the present day (i.e. if they had entered a world with 3D glasses and 2012 cinemagoing levels in the BRIC nations). However, the cost of making those films is pretty huge as well. Mojang, relatively speaking, is cheap money, if not big money, and relatively low-risk. It's hard to blow $500 million on a 50-person studio.

 

In the longer term, I suspect Microsoft is gambling that Minecraft/Minecraft-shared-on-the-Azure-cloud will end up as the equivalent of Angry Birds/Farmville on the mobiles of the future... so, huge scaling across every device, maybe with extra goodies for Windows 8/WinPhone versions...

[feelthedarkness]

the comparisons are funny, but there is no perspective there! 

 

As far as I know Twitch isn't making any money, so it's going to be a minute before amazon starts recouping that, and Instagram doesn't even have a system to make money. Oculus might, but it's going to take a lot. If MS does nothing, MC will recoup in ~6 years.

 

The one thing they have in common is that they are plays for user bases, and MS just got multiple generations of the youngest. 

 

Also, it was a purchase made almost entirely in cash that is parked overseas to avoid taxation, which MS couldn't exactly bring back into the country, and can't be used within the U.S.

[syntheticgerbil]

It's also Microsoft money, I would imagine there's an aspect of not caring how much they spend as well. I don't know the exact numbers, but my friend who works at Twisted Pixel said when Microsoft bought them out, they all got very significant raises, no part of the company was reorganized or restructed, they so far have not butt in to their projects, and very generous healthcare benefits were given. I imagine a lot of this is just there's a significant amount of cash to burn. LIKE ON WINDOWS 8! HAHAHAHARRHAHRAR

 

(I use Windows 8.1 and like it a lot though.)

[steinersteiner]

This Polygon article is sort of confusing, but the comments section is good deep dive on why Microsoft would spend $2.5 B on Mojang, from a finance/accounting perspective.

 

http://www.polygon.com/2014/9/15/6153497/microsoft-minecraft-2-billion-deal

[SuperBiasedMan]

So Kickstarter have changed their terms now to obligate creators to finish their work. The specific rules are more nuanced than just "finish it", but here's an article on gamasutra about it.

 

And here's the change

 

The new terms say that a creator "has only remedied the situation and met their obligations to backers if":

- they post an update that explains what work has been done, how funds were used, and what prevents them from finishing the project as planned;

- they work diligently and in good faith to bring the project to the best possible conclusion in a timeframe that’s communicated to backers;

- they’re able to demonstrate that they’ve used funds appropriately and made every reasonable effort to complete the project as promised;

- they’ve been honest, and have made no material misrepresentations in their communication to backers; and

- they offer to return any remaining funds to backers who have not received their reward (in proportion to the amounts pledged), or else explain how those funds will be used to complete the project in some alternate form.

 

This isn't as bad as it could have been, since it's trying to offer ways by which the creators can placate their backers without having to scramble together some release, but I'm still not happy about it.

 

People are supposed to use kickstarter for the freedom of funding passion projects without big burdens of fitting certain criteria. The freedom of the platform is the huge attraction and this move is mostly because people are worried about the freedom and lack of accountability. And I suspect there's a disproportionate concern that the site is being outright abused to just garner bags of cash and run.

 

It also plays into the sense of entitlement that backers have, treating KS like a preorder system for games that don't even have playable demos. The original foundation and intent of the site was "let's donate money to a creator/s who has/have a cool idea so they can try it." You'll also notice that the money raised is referred to as a pledge. Pledges are not investments, but the way the system has skewed they're treated as such and expected to be returned on.

 

But mostly, this is just disappointing because it means KS has sided more with consumers and their demands than it has with the creators it could be fostering and helping. Couldn't they have offered a system of helping with budgets, gathering information from previous campaigns to help new ones? Things that are positive and could grow the site rather than trying to police people.

 

After all, the creators have to put so much more of themselves into any project, even a failed one, than the backers do. It seems unfair to stack the system against them.

[monkehhh]

I got my first ad in Instagram the other day, it has begun! Well, it was an image in my timeline from the Instagram account that explained I'd be seeing ads in the future and I could hide them as they came up (pretty much like Twitter sponsored tweets I guess).

 

and Instagram doesn't even have a system to make money

[Justin Leego]

This Polygon article is sort of confusing, but the comments section is good deep dive on why Microsoft would spend $2.5 B on Mojang, from a finance/accounting perspective.

 

http://www.polygon.com/2014/9/15/6153497/microsoft-minecraft-2-billion-deal

 

Oh, thanks for this, it was a good read.

[Merus]

I feel like Kickstarter projects should be prevented from offering the completed project to backers without a contingency plan. I think Kickstarters should be allowed to fail, but that's because I can't imagine how you'd handle it otherwise.

 

Knowing that there's a hole in my imagination, I wonder if maybe artists who aren't sure they can deliver on a big project should use something like Patreon to get that experience.

[tegan]

I feel like Kickstarter should probably could probably stand to be more selective about what projects they allow to go live instead of just okaying everything and policing them later.

 

Though I guess that could lead to them closing down legitimate, viable projects. There's really no good way to do this, I guess.

[Henroid]

I feel like Kickstarter should probably could probably stand to be more selective about what projects they allow to go live instead of just okaying everything and policing them later.

 

Though I guess that could lead to them closing down legitimate, viable projects. There's really no good way to do this, I guess.

Are you saying potato salad isn't worthy?

[Bjorn]

The new rules and clarifications look great to me.  It looks like they've taken the things that good Kickstarters already do, and mandated that everyone do some of those things (regular communication, honest communication, transparency about how funds are being spent).  And it sets clearer expectations of what people should expect in the case that a project fails.

[tegan]

Are you saying potato salad isn't worthy?

Potato Salad makes me angry because people were mushc more willing to throw money at a joke than any of the actual valid causes that people start Kickstarters, IndieGogos etc. for.

[Twig]

Potato Salad makes me angry because people were mushc more willing to throw money at a joke than any of the actual valid causes that people start Kickstarters, IndieGogos etc. for.

That's about how I feel, too.

 

I have similar feelings about how much money was thrown at the Dota 2 TI4 prize pool (even though I contributed myself)! I love Dota 2, but man, if even a fraction of that money went to various crowdfunding things, games-related or otherwise!, that's a lot of funded projects. Of course, the big difference here is Dota 2 isn't a joke project. But still.

 

At the end of the day, though, I can't hold it against people for deciding how to spend their own money, as much as I'd like to. ):<

[syntheticgerbil]

It also plays into the sense of entitlement that backers have, treating KS like a preorder system for games that don't even have playable demos. The original foundation and intent of the site was "let's donate money to a creator/s who has/have a cool idea so they can try it." You'll also notice that the money raised is referred to as a pledge. Pledges are not investments, but the way the system has skewed they're treated as such and expected to be returned on.

This is what bothers me. I don't feel like this addition to the terms of service is necessary. If the creator doesn't deliver, tough luck in my opinion, it's a risk because in the end it's a donation.

 

It's not a preorder system at all. People don't even have to offer the game for free as a reward, they could potentially just ask for money to complete the game and you just buy it later.

 

Although that bullshit Penny Arcade Kickstarter would definitely not be allowed under these new terms. God that still pisses me off, maybe even more than potato salad. I suppose if they had posted play by play updates of them removing ads from their site they would be eligible though.