Talk:Xbox Game Studios

A potential aspect re Zenimax
MS preps a "Vault" subsidiary ahead of Zenimax acquisition completion. Whether that means that this will be where the studios will be under at XGS or not, its not clear yet, but I'm leaving this here once that happens. --M asem (t) 14:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It says that Vault "will be merged with and into ZeniMax" (emphasis added), suggesting that Vault (probably a shell corporation) will be disestablished upon the merger (á la reverse merger), while ZeniMax is preserved as-is unless it is renamed. This is most likely just legal shenanigans, so we will need to see how it plays out first. Some media outlets are framing this very poorly as Vault becoming a proper division within Microsoft/XGS that will replace ZeniMax, even though this is far (very far) from clear as of right now. IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 14:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Right, I'm not planning to add yet, as its not clear how it will come out, I'm just leaving this in case we need that tracking at some point. --M asem (t) 14:48, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Separate Publishing Labels
Seeing as how there have been a few back and forth edits, I wanted to clarify the reasoning for adding a publishing label to the chart. It makes sense to make a clear distinction as to which games are going to under the Bethesda umbrella and which are under the Xbox Games Studios umbrella. Not only does it improve readability, it also will be good future-proofing as Xbox continues to expand. This same thing was once done under the Embracer Group page. That has since been moved to a new page where the publishing label continues to be made apparent. There are 23 studios here, with rumors swirling that more will be added this chart is going to become unwieldy without proper labels on who is publishing what studios games. Tgr williams (talk) 21:12, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Microsoft Gaming issue
ABK does not report to XGS. ABK reports to the Microsoft Gaming division, which XGS also reports to. It's unclear but likely that ZeniMax also reports to Microsoft Gaming, meaning listing those two companies under XGS is a WP:V failure. -- ferret (talk) 16:37, 13 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Perhaps the page should be moved to Microsoft Gaming? XGS is already listed under the Studio section anyway. Or Maybe wait until Microsoft makes an official MSG logo? KAISEAN W. (talk) 17:02, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * No, Microsoft Gaming content would need to be split to a separate page. This page is about Xbox Gaming Studios and its long line of predecessors. -- ferret (talk) 17:18, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * A great idea. Perhaps we can making a proposal on splitting Xbox Game Studios into Microsoft Gaming. One-Winged Devil (talk) 17:41, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Then maybe Move the Subsidiaries & Divisions section to the Microsoft Gaming page, Yeah?? And then leave only the XGS divisions under the section for XGS. Sound Good?? KAISEAN W. (talk) 17:42, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The "Microsoft Gaming" topic itself would likely fail notability standards due to the fact that most of the focus has been on XGS and its history. Even when Zenimax was acquired, the coverage was all based around XGS, not Microsoft Gaming, same with the ActBlizz acquisition. If we can be sure MS Gaming is a notable topic, then a split is warranted, but unfortunately, that's not going to be easy to prove notable. M asem (t) 17:46, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Microsoft Gaming is too vague and hazy an entity. Not having a logo is one issue, but generally it doesn't seem like a very concretely defined division. While not the neatest, I think mentioning "Microsoft Gaming" as parent to XGS, ABK, Bethesda can be kept but just redirect here (basically status quo). Perhaps just clean up the introduction? Liornz (talk) 19:18, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Hold on. What if all mentions of "Microsoft Gaming" redirect to the "Xbox" (brand) wiki? Xbox is the consumer facing brand name, but internally/structurally it is Microsoft's Gaming division. Phil Spencer's last position was called 'Head of Xbox' anyway (which is now 'CEO of Microsoft Gaming'). This solution would require a significant renovation of the Xbox brand wiki to now contain all these acquisitions, subsidiaries/studios, and IPs owned. This leaves XGS as a separate page, as one mentioned here, to preserve its history and predecessor lineage, and solving the hierarchy issue. Liornz (talk) 19:46, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * No, Microsoft Gaming does not represent "Xbox" alone. Xbox Operations itself is a separate division. -- ferret (talk) 20:31, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Xbox is a devision within Microsoft Gaming, it's not its own thing outside of there. I'm not sure if that's what you are saying, but just here to clarify. The wording in the opening of this article is a bit weird as such; XGS, ZeniMax and ABK don't "make up the Microsoft Gaming division". They are only a part of that. Xbox's hardware devision, its software and services and some other smaller subsidiariers are also part of that. The sentence continues to insinuate that these exist besides Microsoft Gaming, but they are part of it.--YannickFran (talk) 22:11, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Xbox Operations is under Dave McCarthy, who reports to Phil Spencer as part of Microsoft Gaming division. Xbox Game Studios is under Matt Booty, also reporting to Phil Spencer as part of the Microsoft Gaming division. They are two separate entities within Microsoft Gaming. -- ferret (talk) 22:23, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes. That's what I said, but that's not what the introduction of the article is saying right now. It says these exist "alongside" Microsoft Gaming, and not within, and that only the third party studios make up Microsoft Gaming. YannickFran (talk) 22:28, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * No, the lead says that XGS, "alongside" ZeniMax and ABK, make up Microsoft Gaming. Not that they are along MG, but that they together make up MG. -- ferret (talk) 22:30, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, as it definetly avoids congestion on the XGS page, and serves as a pool for Xbox-related stuff as a whole. BiggieSMLZ (talk) 11:51, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I think the Microsoft Gaming page should be based off/similar in writing to PlayStation’s parent company (Sony Interactive Entertainment, which houses the PlayStation brand and PlayStation Studios umbrella). Microsoft Gamings divisions include the Xbox brand and the three publishing arms (XGS, Bethesda, ATVI BLI). No official logo yet but just re use the Microsoft logo. Pats6XChamps (talk) 04:16, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, in fact, there's now even more incentive to make a separate page, because there have been some significant promotions, for Matt Booty, Sarah Bond, etc. So we would have to follow through. I also agree with @Pats6XChamps, so it's a start. JWthaMajestic (talk) 07:44, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * As I note in a section below, we can put a section at Microsoft engineering groups for Microsoft Gaming, but the division itself is not sufficiently notable for its own page. M asem (t) 12:50, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * ZeniMax and ABK are on the same level within the structure of Microsoft Gaming. However, since Microsoft *does* consider ZeniMax part of Xbox Game Studios (as per its own website) its reasonable to assume ABK will take the same spot. In the corporate structure, XGS, ABK and ZeniMax exist alongside each other, but that isn't the structure that is being communicated to the outside world. Note also how the website groups all of ZeniMax as "Bethesda Softworks" instead of ZeniMax, despite Bethesda Softworks falling under the ZeniMax umbrella, and not the other way around. That goes to say that there is a difference between "Xbox Game Studios" as a corporate entity and "Xbox Game Studios" as the collective name for all first party studios within Microsoft. The later is what Microsoft communicates to the outside world.
 * Note that its recent events are also "Xbox + Bethesda". Not Xbox Game Studios + Bethesda, they don't specifically pit Xbox Game Studios as something that exists besides Bethesda.--YannickFran (talk) 22:11, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The Xbox website is simply out of date. Microsoft has explicitly released announcements in the last six months saying that a new division, Microsoft Gaming, had been formed, and that Xbox Gaming Studios, ZeniMax, and ABK would report to it. Additionally, this article is about the company, not any branding. -- ferret (talk) 22:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * ...the website isn't out of date. As of today, sure, but the structure on this website is very much how it has always been and still is. When ZeniMax was acquired, it existed alongside XGS, that didn't change with the transition to Microsoft Gaming, as a matter of fact, nothing really changed there, it was just a new corporate name over Xbox Game Studios, ZeniMax and all other subsidiaries that already existed. Nothing was restructured, other than Spencers official title within Microsoft. YannickFran (talk) 22:27, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I've created a separate page for Microsoft Gaming because, as the discussion progresses, it becomes evident that Xbox Game Studios and Microsoft Gaming are distinct components within Microsoft's gaming division. This separation is important to accurately represent the organizational structure and focus of Microsoft's gaming initiatives. I welcome all to improve Microsoft Gaming Page. Ryan York (talk) 03:03, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Nice! I already had a draft that was there before this, so I will be improving that instead. Thanks. JWthaMajestic (talk) 19:17, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

When do and when don't we list something as a studio
Right now, we list 3 studios under Blizzard (it's Irvine headquarters, and Albany and Boston). But this seems rather arbitrary. Why would Cork, Austin, Seoul, Shanghai, Sydney and Taipei not be listed? Why do we list 3 of the 11 studios within King? YannickFran (talk) 22:36, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Irvine shouldn't be listed as an individual entity. We're not listing offices, we're listing subsidiaries. Albany and Boston are actual separate corporate entities. -- ferret (talk) 22:40, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

New re org
https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/26/23933049/microsoft-reorg-xbox-marketing-ai-leadership-changes https://www.eurogamer.net/xbox-re-organises-studios-brings-bethesda-under-matt-bootys-control

If I am reading this right... M asem (t) 19:00, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Spencer leads Microsoft Gaming
 * Booty now leads the gaming software division under this, which includes ''only XGS and Zenimax
 * Activision Blizzard is directly under Spencer
 * also Xbox stuff is directly under Spencer.


 * Related to this, I just discovered that we can include anything related to Microsoft Gaming at Microsoft engineering groups, if we need to go into more detail. --M asem (t) 00:12, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Another secondary source for this: https://www.pcgamer.com/after-3-years-of-hands-off-management-microsoft-is-making-bethesda-and-zenimax-report-directly-to-an-xbox-bigwig/ -- ferret (talk) 15:55, 29 October 2023 (UTC)


 * They're all under Xbox game studios you guys just don't understand. Who you report to doesn't matter that's just company structure. Just look on the Xbox website it tells you right there Bethesda is a part of Xbox game studios 24.188.230.3 (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Demonware other locations
Demonware also has locations in Vancouver, Canada and Shanghai, China alongside its Dublin, Leinster Ireland location. 66.61.198.60 (talk) 05:46, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Other Locations
I'm not sure how in-depth we are going for other locations looking to Blizzard. Are we including satellite studios? Former separate? Because Zenimax Online, for instance, has like 9 offices. DeoGame (talk) 21:33, 13 November 2023 (UTC)


 * We are only including studios that are considered a separate corporate entity under the parent's structure. Satellite offices are generally not a separate entity. M asem (t) 21:52, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Actually, studios in other jurisdiction are usually separate entities or are part of some intermediate holding when in larger corporate structures. This is just not documented all too well. For example, Blizzard's Cork office most likely falls under Blizzard Entertainment Ireland Limited. Still, I agree that this page can be significantly cut down, perhaps starting with studios that literally are not part of XGS. There should not be a table of non-XGS studios just because Microsoft Gaming currently has no article. ZeniMax has its own, as does ActiBlizz, so why does XGS's table need to be artifically inflated? IceWelder  &#91; &#9993; &#93; 22:10, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

What's the debate?
Just go on the Xbox website and you'll see that Bethesda is a part of Xbox Gme Studios. In a couple months, Activision Blizzard will be too. So just add them all on the same page 24.188.230.3 (talk) 01:48, 23 November 2023 (UTC)


 * A website doesn't confirm anything about a corporate structure. We have created Microsoft Games which is the parent org that contains all three of them. M asem (t) 02:56, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * This is stupid. Xbox game studios should all be on one page but you idiots are trying to make it seem like there is some division between the studios. They all are under the same damn company. Just list all the studios in one area to make it easier to navigate. Why the fuck would i want to search other pages when it could all be on one page. 24.188.230.3 (talk) 23:10, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * We're not trying to make it seem like anything. There IS a division between them, and you can find all the studios at said division's article, Microsoft Gaming. -- ferret (talk) 23:14, 26 November 2023 (UTC)