The Next 'Elder Scrolls' Game Will Be A PC, Xbox Exclusive

from the womp-womp dept

Almost exactly a year ago, Microsoft acquired Zenimax Media, a parent company for several video game publishers, including Bethesda. When that occurred, some sizable percentage of the gaming community asked the immediate and obvious question: does this mean games from Bethesda and others would be Microsoft exclusives? Xbox chief Phil Spencer was the first to weigh in on the question by giving a total non-answer.

“I don’t want to be flip about that,” he added. “This deal was not done to take games away from another player base like that. Nowhere in the documentation that we put together was: ‘How do we keep other players from playing these games?’ We want more people to be able to play games, not fewer people to be able to go play games. But I’ll also say in the model—I’m just answering directly the question that you had—when I think about where people are going to be playing and the number of devices that we had, and we have xCloud and PC and Game Pass and our console base, I don’t have to go ship those games on any other platform other than the platforms that we support in order to kind of make the deal work for us. Whatever that means.”

Whatever that means, indeed. On the one hand, yes, Microsoft had clearly thought about delivering new games to Microsoft-centric platforms... but none of this was done to keep other players from playing these games. To anyone paying attention, that sounded like exclusives wouldn't be a thing. Todd Howard of Bethesda made many of the same noises.

But then came Xbox CFO Tim Stuart, who's messaging was a bit less vague but a lot more concerning.

Speaking at the Jeffries Interactive Entertainment Virtual Conference last Friday (as transcribed by Seeking Alpha), Stuart said directly that "in the long run... we don't have intentions of just pulling all of Bethesda content out of Sony or Nintendo or otherwise. But what we want is we want that content, in the long run, to be either first or better or best or pick your differentiated experience, on our platforms."

"That's not a point about being exclusive," Stuart continued. "That's not a point about... adjusting timing or content or road map. But if you think about something like Game Pass, if it shows up best in Game Pass, that's what we want to see, and we want to drive our Game Pass subscriber base through that Bethesda pipeline."

Still vague, but less so. So, no Bethesda exclusives, but perhaps timed exclusives, timed releases, or content differences on Microsoft platforms. Maybe. Kinda? It's all very confusing.

Except no it isn't and it turns out everyone was simply lying. Because Elder Scrolls VI, a Bethesda title, was just announced as a PC and Xbox exclusive after all. And it's Phil Spencer who is back to drop that bad news.

This week, Microsoft put probably the final nail in that conversational coffin, with Xbox chief Phil Spencer confirming in an interview with British GQ magazine that the upcoming Elder Scrolls VI will be available only on Xbox consoles and the PC.

In a quote that doesn't seem likely to soothe many PlayStation owners, Spencer said the exclusivity is "not about punishing any other platform, like I fundamentally believe all of the platforms can continue to grow." Instead, Spencer was focused on "be[ing] able to bring the full complete package of what we have" with the company's games, meaning integration with Xbox Live, Game Pass, Xbox Cloud Gaming, etc. "And that would be true when I think about Elder Scrolls VI," he added. "That would be true when I think about any of our franchises."

Now that clears multiple things up. First and foremost, that Microsoft and/or Bethesda simply lied to the public after the acquisition. And, secondly, that in fact at least some Bethesda titles will in fact be Microsoft exclusives! It's hard to know for sure, but all those previous statements sure read like cowardice to me. And I will damned well say that Tim Stuart should be very pissed off at how this all makes him specifically look. "We're not looking to pull Bethesda games out of Sony or Nintendo" some how morphed into the exact opposite.

And so it goes. We have a major gaming hardware manufacturer now buying up a game studio that released its most famous titles on the Sony PlayStation in a way that sure looks like it is purposefully trying to pull those PlayStation owners over into buying Microsoft hardware. I sure hope this was all worth it to those that made money from the acquisition at Bethesda, because this isn't going to be good for that studio's reputation with its most dedicated fans.

Filed Under: elder scrolls, exclusives, video games, xbox
Companies: bethesda, microsoft

Microsoft: Bethesda Games Will Be 'First, Best' On Xbox, PC

from the fragmentation dept

Several weeks back, we discussed how Microsoft and its newly acquired property, Bethesda Softworks, were making seemingly conflicting statements on what the purchase of the studio meant for beloved franchises like Fallout and Elder Scrolls, among others. Concerns popped up immediately after the acquisition, with people wondering whether the next Fallout game would be siloed to the Xbox and/or PC, as opposed to showing up on other consoles, such as Sony's PlayStation. Xbox's Phil Spencer kicked the concern into overdrive by noting that he thought Microsoft could recoup its purchase price of Bethesda even if the studio's games weren't sold for the PlayStation. Todd Howard of Bethesda, however, said the studio is committed to making its games available across platforms, while also acknowledging such details with Microsoft hadn't been ironed out.

And so the public was left wondering. Well, now Microsoft has once again commented publicly, this time stating that it doesn't plan to restrict Bethesda games from other consoles, but would instead look to make those games "first and best" on the Xbox and PC.

Speaking at the Jeffries Interactive Entertainment Virtual Conference last Friday (as transcribed by Seeking Alpha), Stuart said directly that "in the long run... we don't have intentions of just pulling all of Bethesda content out of Sony or Nintendo or otherwise. But what we want is we want that content, in the long run, to be either first or better or best or pick your differentiated experience, on our platforms."

"That's not a point about being exclusive," Stuart continued. "That's not a point about... adjusting timing or content or road map. But if you think about something like Game Pass, if it shows up best in Game Pass, that's what we want to see, and we want to drive our Game Pass subscriber base through that Bethesda pipeline."

This, frankly, clarifies nothing. Stating that perhaps games will be "first" on Microsoft's platforms and then stating that it has nothing to do with timing of the release on other platforms is contradictory. If it's "first" on one platform, it must therefore be at least "second" on others. Likewise, stating you want a game to be "best" on Microsoft platforms and then stating it has nothing to do with content is, again, contradictory. If not the content, what could possibly make a game better on one platform than the other.

It's unclear why Microsoft is remaining so opaque about all of this, but it sure sounds like some version of either EPIC's timed exclusives or Sony's exclusive content for games. Both are controversial in their own rights, and likely not great for the gaming ecosystem as a whole, but at least both companies play it straight with their customers.

In this case, we all just have to wait and see how high a fence Microsoft does or does not want to put around these beloved game franchises.

Filed Under: compatibility, elder scrolls, fallout, pcs, platforms, ps5, video games, xbox
Companies: bethesda, microsoft

Bethesda, Microsoft Make Conflicting Statements About Game Exclusivity After Studio Purchase

from the please-don't dept

Several weeks ago, Microsoft bought Zenimax Media, the parent organization of Bethesda Softworks for over $7 billion. Bethesda is a celebrated studio best known for its Fallout and Elder Scrolls titles. Both series have long histories of being published across a wide range of gaming platforms, including the PC, PlayStation, and Xbox markets. Almost immediately after the deal, however, many gamers openly worried that Microsoft would warehouse the properties to either the PC or Xbox markets exclusively.

The worry didn't cease when Kotaku interviewed Xbox chief Phil Spencer about the implications of the deal and Spencer's remarks were decidedly noncommittal.

“Is it possible to recoup a $7.5 billion investment if you don’t sell Elder Scrolls VI on the PlayStation?” I asked.

“Yes,” Spencer quickly replied.

Then he paused.

“I don’t want to be flip about that,” he added. “This deal was not done to take games away from another player base like that. Nowhere in the documentation that we put together was: ‘How do we keep other players from playing these games?’ We want more people to be able to play games, not fewer people to be able to go play games. But I’ll also say in the model—I’m just answering directly the question that you had—when I think about where people are going to be playing and the number of devices that we had, and we have xCloud and PC and Game Pass and our console base, I don’t have to go ship those games on any other platform other than the platforms that we support in order to kind of make the deal work for us. Whatever that means.”

Whatever that means. Well, what it means is that there has been enough conversation of how Bethesda franchises will be distributed and sold that Spencer felt confident saying that those games didn't need to be multi-platform in order for the deal to still be profitable. Couching this all in the fact that the specific language of the acquisition didn't mention exclusivity is all fine and good, but Spencer had this answer ready to go. That likely means that there has been at least some discussion about taking those games exclusive to the Xbox, or Microsoft's forthcoming game-streaming services. Coupled with a growing trend in exclusivity both in the console and PC gaming spaces, this wasn't exactly encouraging for those that think exclusivity deals are a terrible idea and terrible for the industry.

Todd Howard, one of the creative leads at Bethesda, was at least a bit more forceful in his remarks to Ars Technica when asked if this was about to become a thing.

"I would agree that is hard to imagine" The Elder Scrolls VI restricted to Microsoft platforms, Howard said in response to a direct question on the matter.

Elsewhere in the interview, Howard admits that the parties haven't fully discussed the details of multiplatform publishing as part of the purchase deal, which won't be finalized until next year. "We haven't gone through all of that, to be honest," he said.  Howard also stressed Bethesda's autonomy to "[run] our games and [push] everything the way that we have," even as a Microsoft subsidiary. "We felt very strongly about their view of access; games for everybody that we can bring to anybody regardless of where they are, what devices they're playing on. We're very, very passionate about that, and at the end of the day we're convinced we'll make better products and get them to more people easily by being part of Xbox as opposed to being just a third party."

But that's still not really a firm answer. Bethesda's vision can be whatever it wants, but its part of Microsoft now. If you're into reading industry tea leaves, it doesn't look like there are any serious plans by Microsoft for locking up these beloved franchises. But sans a commitment by the company to not do so, there is still much worry that access to them may go away for many.

Why anyone would think that would push more people to buy an Xbox in significant numbers is an mystery.

Filed Under: acquisitions, competition, consoles, elder scrolls, exclusivity, fallout, playstation, studios, video games, xbox
Companies: bethesda, microsoft, zenimax media

North Korean Propaganda: Now With More Elder Scrolls!

from the oblivion-or-oblivious? dept

Well, it's been a couple of days, so I guess it's time to update you on the latest version of North Korean propaganda that tries to impress our sense of humor. You should recall that the reclusive nation released a bizarre video about the coming destruction of New York City, complete with video game footage from Modern Warfare 3. That was followed up by their brothers-in-dumb, the Iranian government, who thought the best way to show off their new flying machine was to photoshop its image over a mountain, rather then show it actually...you know...flying.

Well, North Korea is back at it, with another odd video, with all the effeminate flame animations you've come to expect and text that I sure as hell can't read. With that said, I'm sure the text says something about how the North Koreans have developed the latest in orc technology and elven code systems, being as how they decided to use the soundtrack for The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion to set the mood.

I'd like to take this moment to offer a small bit of advice to my friends in Pyonyang. If you put a video out on YouTube to tell the rest of the world how crazy awesome powerful you are, so much so that you're going to smash America, part of that video should be to demonstrate that you can come up with an inspirational tune. I mean, if you can't even put together something like Call Me Maybe, it's kind of difficult to take your plans for our destruction seriously.

In the meantime, hey Bethesda? You guys want to DMCA this or are you laughing as hard as I am?

Filed Under: elder scrolls, north korea, propaganda

Mojang's Trademark Application Rejected: Too Many 'Scrolls' For The USPTO

from the uspto-uses-papyrus dept

We have been covering the trademark dispute over 'Scrolls' and the pending lawsuit against Mojang's use of the mark. We have now learned that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has rejected Mojang's 'Scrolls' application for trademark status in the US.

The letter of rejection states that Mojang's application for 'Scrolls' infringes on two registered marks in the US. The first is for Bethesda's 'The Elder Scrolls'. The Second is for 'Scrolls', a registered trademark by a t-shirt company in California.

The t-shirt mark I can understand. Mojang's application listed t-shirts and clothing as areas where it is looking to use the mark. It seems pretty easy to understand why the USPTO would reject the application based on that criteria.

However, the logic behind the rejection based on Bethesda's trademark still makes little sense. According to the USPTO:

Regarding the THE ELDER SCROLLS marks, the applicant has merely deleted the term ELDER from the registered mark. The mere deletion of wording from a registered mark may not be sufficient to overcome a likelihood of confusion. The applicant's mark does not create a distinct commercial impression because it contains the same common wording as the registrant's mark, and there is no other wording to distinguish it from registrant's mark.

What really confuses me here is that the USPTO considers Mojang's mark to be Bethesda's mark with a few words cut out. This leads me to believe that the USPTO is willing to accept the idea that a trademark is not just limited to the full trademarked phrase but also to the individual parts. So not only does Bethesda own the trademark for 'The Elder Scrolls' when used in a game, but also to the words 'Elder' and 'Scrolls'. I hope that doesn't apply to the word 'The'. I really hope that this is not the USPTO's intention. If this ruling is left to stand, applying for a trademark could become an even more complicated process than it currently is. Not only do applicants need to look for exact matches to proposed trademarks, now they will have to make sure that individual words are not part of other trademarks. I don't think that is how trademark law is meant to function.

However, this rejection seems to leave room for Mojang to alter the title of its game by adding a subtitle or another word to the title as long as it creates a 'distinct commercial impression', however that is determined. Mojang has six months from the issue date of the letter to amend its application or appeal the ruling. It will be interesting to see what move Mojang will make in response to this letter.

Filed Under: elder scrolls, scrolls, trademark
Companies: bethesda, mojang

Notch Comes Up With New Plan To Settle Trademark Dispute: Quake 3 Battle

from the ah,-if-only-all-legal-disputes-were-handled-this-way dept

We noted recently the ridiculous trademark lawsuit filed by game company Bethesda against Markus Persson's company Mojang. Of course, Persson is better known as Notch, and Mojang is better known for creating Minecraft. Mojang is working on a new game called Scrolls and Bethesda is suing because it holds the trademark on Elder Scrolls, for its series of games. As we noted in the original post, the really amazing thing about Notch was how reasonable he had been throughout the whole thing, even talking up how much he liked Bethesda, and hoping this was just some lawyers over reacting.

Well, now he's decided to offer an "alternative settlement" technique. Rather than, say, trying arbitration or mediation, Notch is offering to settle this over a Quake 3 match. Seriously:

Remember that scene in Game of Thrones where Tyrion chose a trial by battle in the Eyrie? Well, let’s do that instead!

I challenge Bethesda to a game of Quake 3. Three of our best warriors against three of your best warriors. We select one level, you select the other, we randomize the order. 20 minute matches, highest total frag count per team across both levels wins.

If we win, you drop the lawsuit.

If you win, we will change the name of Scrolls to something you’re fine with.

Now wouldn't that be fun?

Filed Under: elder scrolls, markus persson, minecraft, notch, quake, scrolls, trademark
Companies: bethesda, mojang