Gaming

19940 readers

147 users here now

Sub for any gaming related content!

Rules:

1: No spam or advertising. This basically means no linking to your own content on blogs, YouTube, Twitch, etc.
2: No bigotry or gatekeeping. This should be obvious, but neither of those things will be tolerated. This goes for linked content too; if the site has some heavy "anti-woke" energy, you probably shouldn't be posting it here.
3: No untagged game spoilers. If the game was recently released or not released at all yet, use the Spoiler tag (the little ⚠️ button) in the body text, and avoid typing spoilers in the title. It should also be avoided to openly talk about major story spoilers, even in old games.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

202

Phil Spencer blames capitalism for games industry woes: 'I don't get [the] luxury of not having to run a profitable growing business' (www.pcgamer.com)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

119 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 22 points 7 months ago (3 children)

You can grow without being hostile and negative. Start your own studios, make innovative games, compete with quality not acquisitions.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

the best and the only answer. git gud. 💪

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but can you roll a platform of the distribution, breadth, depth and persistence over good and bad cycles of the scale of Xbox or PlayStation while being a private company? A few have tried.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No, but do you have to? You can still be a profitable company without aiming for world domination.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

No, there are plenty of independent private game developers (Stardew Valley, Baldur's gate etc come to mind) I was just taking Phil Spencer's perspective, which I imagine is a platform level one.