Xbox chief Don Mattrick heading for top position at Zynga, sources say (update)

By on July 1, 2013, 12:49 PM
microsoft, xbox, zynga, social gaming, don mattrick, mark pincus

Update: It's official, Zynga has confirmed that Don Mattrick will become the company's new CEO.

Multiple sources close to the situation claim the president of Microsoft’s Interactive Entertainment Business Don Mattrick will soon be leaving the company to take a leading role at Zynga. We’re hearing that Mattrick could become the company’s new CEO where he would work closely alongside current Zynga chief Mark Pincus.

The executive is currently in charge of all things gaming and entertainment including the Xbox platform but the decision could be made public as soon as today.

The hire would be good news for Zynga as evident by the company’s stock which shot up nearly 11 percent once this story broke. The once dominant social gaming company has struggled since their initial public offering back in December 2011 as Pincus continues to try and redirect the company toward mobile.

The Facebook / web browser cash cow that brought Zynga to prominence has all but dried up, leading to a drop in stock value of 68 percent since the IPO. To further complicate matters, Zynga initiated a massive restructure early last month that saw 20 percent of the company’s workforce lose their jobs. Pincus noted at the time it was a proactive decision that had to be done to continue their mission of connecting the world through games.

Mattrick is a hot commodity as of late as his name has also recently been associated with a possible takeover of Electronic Arts, another company that has faced some tough times as of late. Where he ultimately ends up is still up in the air at this hour but sources seem to strongly indicate it will be Zynga.




User Comments: 12

Got something to say? Post a comment
1 person liked this | lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Mediocre company seeking for a mediocre executive? Surprise, surprise.

1 person liked this | RH00D RH00D said:

I actually feel bad for him. If he is leaving because of what happen with Xbox One then that's just stupid. The implementation of the Xbox One could have been better handled but it wasn't actually that bad. The sea gaming warriors just felt the need to crucify him without even ever giving it a chance.

This parody of the "Feedback Matters" blog post by him is pretty relevant and true in my opinion.

[link]

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

I actually feel bad for him. If he is leaving because of what happen with Xbox One then that's just stupid. The implementation of the Xbox One could have been better handled but it wasn't actually that bad. The sea gaming warriors just felt the need to crucify him without even ever giving it a chance.

This parody of the "Feedback Matters" blog post by him is pretty relevant and true in my opinion.

[link]

Oh nice, another misinformed gamer.

People seem to forget the problem is not that gaming was going digital and people weren't ready to embrace it. It has NOTHING to do with that. And the fact that people like you think that, just goes to show how poorly of a job MS has done commuting the supposed benefits.

This is, in a nutshell, the issue:

YOU were NOT in mind when the Xbox was designed. YOU do NOT OWN the PHYSICAL games you bought after spending whatever amount of gas driving to the store. You are only "ALLOWED" to give your game to only 1 person on your friends' list as long as they've been there for at least 30 days. YOUR games have an EXPIRATION DATE; will it be 5 years? A decade? It doesn't matter. My Steam copy of Deus Ex: Human Revolution will ALWAYS be playable on my PC even if Valve goes bankrupt, and that's not even a disc.

But, biggest issue of all is this: digital rules are being applied to disc-based games.

Did you also know that the PS4 supports digital downloads and that you can't (as of now) transfer them the same as the Xbox One before the 180? So why all the flak, then, you ask?

Because this policy, unlike the PS4, applies to DISC-BASED games too.

Expectation is different when you buy proprietary hardware that runs third-party software. Your thinking is the same as Desilets, the creator of Assassin's Creed:

"Some people still buy CDs and vinyl, but nobody's yelling at Apple because of iTunes."

He argues that games are going digital and that there's nothing we can do about. But that's NOT the problem. The problem is that an album doesn't cost you 60 or upwards, or stop you from listening to it if you're not online, nor will it only work on one brand of media player.

One last time: digital NOT an issue. Consumer ownership: issue.

As for Steam, well, it doesn't require internet connection or periodic check-ins. Your files are still yours. You can see them; you can keep them or you can delete them. They will never, ever, expire. And lastly, expectations are set because it is a digital-ONLY service from the get-go.

Under Xbox One, why should I only be "allowed" to lend a game to someone who HAS to be on my friends' list for 30 days? Didn't I just buy the game? Why can't I sell my property?

PS. If you do finally manage to give away your game to someone who's been on your friends' list for 30 days, that person CANNOT give that game away the same you did to him/her. It's one-time only.

Yeah, that doesn't sound too bad...

yukka, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Pipe down lol

2 people like this | m4a4 m4a4 said:

Lawfer, what a bunch of BS! You spin it to make it seem worse than it actually was. Your post is filled with bias and blind hate.

YOU were NOT in mind when the Xbox was designed
That is a blind hate statement. If there was nothing positive about the previous policies, then I might be able to see why that might be said rationally...

You would quite literally own the physical games as an install medium. And do you expect for there not to be systems in place to prevent a "one disk can install on all systems" scenario? Sure there are better ways of doing some of this stuff, but if you can go online to complain, you can probably sign in to play the game (prob would evolve like Steam has).

You are only "ALLOWED" to give your game to only 1 person on your friends' list as long as they've been there for at least 30 days.
That is a LOT more than what Steam lets you do with digital games, genius.

YOUR games have an EXPIRATION DATE; will it be 5 years? A decade? It doesn't matter. My Steam copy of Deus Ex: Human Revolution will ALWAYS be playable on my PC even if Valve goes bankrupt, and that's not even a disc.
It will have the same expiration as the system, sure. But the same goes for Steam. You quite literally CANNOT play a game without Steam running (without tampering with it). Stop lying about how it is different. If you can crack a Steam game, who says you couldn't crack an XB1 after the system would go down...

But, biggest issue of all is this: digital rules are being applied to disc-based games.
DRM for disc (instead of disc in tray) was the biggest problem they had. They do not want to seem biased towards digital, so they make neither of them seem better than the other. If they made digital downloads with no restrictions, then people would've felt better about the restrictions I think. Or maybe they should've just gone all digital and ditched discs altogether...

Because this policy, unlike the PS4, applies to DISC-BASED games too.
Nope. It only applied to the digital. They specifically said that you could trade disc games like you could've before. But because it was only an install medium, it was more complicated...

One last time: digital NOT an issue. Consumer ownership: issue.

As for Steam, well, it doesn't require internet connection or periodic check-ins. Your files are still yours. You can see them; you can keep them or you can delete them. They will never, ever, expire. And lastly, expectations are set because it is a digital-ONLY service from the get-go.

In it's infancy, Steam required you to be online 24/7 to play games, yet you ignore that as if the XB1 system wouldn't be considered in its infancy too. And as for consumer ownership, you only own 1 license on Steam. No trading. No sharing. No selling. Looks like you are being hypocritical here...

And as I said, you might have the files, but you still require Steam to use them without tampering (just like with how the XB1 would've been). If Steam expires, they technically expire if you don't do any tampering.

Under Xbox One, why should I only be "allowed" to lend a game to someone who HAS to be on my friends' list for 30 days? Didn't I just buy the game? Why can't I sell my property?
Again, Steam doesn't allow you to do any of this. And the friends list thing was so that you couldn't have your account accessed, a game bought, and send to someone that was quickly friended. Common sense buddy.

PS. If you do finally manage to give away your game to someone who's been on your friends' list for 30 days, that person CANNOT give that game away the same you did to him/her. It's one-time only.
AGAIN, it is more than Steam allows. And it makes it so that you don't give 1 copy to EVERYONE.

So yeah. Even with your liberal use of caps, you still aren't right about most of that stuff. Heck, most of what you said was out of ignorance. Read up on something before you join the bandwagon of hate next time...

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Lawfer, what a bunch of BS! You spin it to make it seem worse than it actually was. Your post is filled with bias and blind hate.

That's funny you say that. People around here often call me a Microsoft shill because I don't shit on Windows 8.

YOU were NOT in mind when the Xbox was designed
That is a blind hate statement. If there was nothing positive about the previous policies, then I might be able to see why that might be said rationally...

You would quite literally own the physical games as an install medium. And do you expect for there not to be systems in place to prevent a "one disk can install on all systems" scenario? Sure there are better ways of doing some of this stuff, but if you can go online to complain, you can probably sign in to play the game (prob would evolve like Steam has).

No you wouldn't. You buy the disc, and they force you to install it on the HDD. After that the disc becomes useless.

What's the difference then from me buying the game through the Xbox Live store and buying it from Gamestop? That after I install it I get to keep the disc? How is that convenient?

If you were to lend your disc to a friend for him/her to play, they'd have to sign into your profile to play the game. If, say, you still give your friend the disc, but you're NOT there to authenticate the disc, then system would ask the user to purchase the game and then install it. You cannot, effectively, lend disc-based games.

The fact you don't seem to know this is not at all surprising. For someone with a supposed "bias", I seem to know more about this than you.

You are only "ALLOWED" to give your game to only 1 person on your friends' list as long as they've been there for at least 30 days.
That is a LOT more than what Steam lets you do with digital games, genius.

Why do you insist on comparing this to Steam? Steam is NOT a console! For the love of god. It's a digital service. The Xbox treats physical game as digital games, due to mandatory installations. Your disc is fundamentally useless after that.

Steam is a digital-ONLY store, not a physical console. No one is complaining that they get a copy of Photoshop and are not allowed to make copies of it and give to their friends. It's obvious what the repercussions are to the creators of the product whose software is reproduced.

But consoles are different. Why? Because you bought a physical disc that can NOT be reproduced digitally. Why is this so hard to understand?

YOUR games have an EXPIRATION DATE; will it be 5 years? A decade? It doesn't matter. My Steam copy of Deus Ex: Human Revolution will ALWAYS be playable on my PC even if Valve goes bankrupt, and that's not even a disc.
It will have the same expiration as the system, sure. But the same goes for Steam. You quite literally CANNOT play a game without Steam running (without tampering with it). Stop lying about how it is different. If you can crack a Steam game, who says you couldn't crack an XB1 after the system would go down...

Are you serious? "Who says you couldn't crack an XB1 after the system would go down"? Is that what you hope you have to do when the inevitable happens?

Also, who said you can play a game without Steam running? Why would running Steam be a problem? Even better, why are you using "can't play without Steam" as an argument? No one is arguing otherwise. You think Steam=hardware? Steam is only a digital STORE.

The issue is that my Steam games do not required Steam to connect to the internet to authenticate, nor depend on Valve's existence after the purchase.

But, biggest issue of all is this: digital rules are being applied to disc-based games.
DRM for disc (instead of disc in tray) was the biggest problem they had. They do not want to seem biased towards digital, so they make neither of them seem better than the other. If they made digital downloads with no restrictions, then people would've felt better about the restrictions I think. Or maybe they should've just gone all digital and ditched discs altogether...

Lol Who complains that they have to insert the disc and leave it there while playing? Who does that?

No one.

Want to know why? Because if you didn't like that, you could always download the games directly thorough PSN or XBL. So this little paragraph makes no sense. They didn't "solve" anything because they already had a solution.

Because this policy, unlike the PS4, applies to DISC-BASED games too.
Nope. It only applied to the digital. They specifically said that you could trade disc games like you could've before. But because it was only an install medium, it was more complicated...

Why can't you get it through your head? Since installation was mandatory, disc-based games essentially became digital, hence the rules applied to them as well.

Do. You. Understand. English.

If you still had the disc after installation, you couldn't lend it to someone unless you were signed in or they bought the game after inserting the disc in their console under their ID.

One last time: digital NOT an issue. Consumer ownership: issue.

As for Steam, well, it doesn't require internet connection or periodic check-ins. Your files are still yours. You can see them; you can keep them or you can delete them. They will never, ever, expire. And lastly, expectations are set because it is a digital-ONLY service from the get-go.

In it's infancy, Steam required you to be online 24/7 to play games, yet you ignore that as if the XB1 system wouldn't be considered in its infancy too. And as for consumer ownership, you only own 1 license on Steam. No trading. No sharing. No selling. Looks like you are being hypocritical here...

And as I said, you might have the files, but you still require Steam to use them without tampering (just like with how the XB1 would've been). If Steam expires, they technically expire if you don't do any tampering.

Ok, so let me get this straight:

So, you are implying that since Steam had a rough start (namely the 24/7 check-in), just like XB1 would have had (also with the 24h check-in), you're saying that since Steam is now better (as in no check-in), then its safe to assume XB1 would have also become better (as in no check-in)?

You do understand that what you're essentially saying is: the Xbox One will surely improve enough to eventually support the current capabilities of it's predecessor....

Wow.

And, once again, why do you think the argument here is that people have to use Steam to play games? Why is that an argument? That's not the issue! The issue is that my games do not depend on Steam AUTHENTICATING online or on Valve's servers, unlike XB1.

Also, how am I being hypocritical? Steam games are digital-only. The issue people have is with disc-based games being subjected to digital rules due to mandatory installation (rendering the disc useless), periodic check-ins and lack of personal sales.

Also, forgetting that Steam is only a ******* store, and for some reason I can't even fathom, you apparently think people can't go to Wal-Mart or Best Buy and purchase physical PC games...

Under Xbox One, why should I only be "allowed" to lend a game to someone who HAS to be on my friends' list for 30 days? Didn't I just buy the game? Why can't I sell my property?
Again, Steam doesn't allow you to do any of this. And the friends list thing was so that you couldn't have your account accessed, a game bought, and send to someone that was quickly friended. Common sense buddy.

Why do you keep comparing a console to a store?! Steam is a digital-only store. People don't have an issue with digital content on XB1, but with DISC-based games being subjected to digital rules. Why can't you comprehend this?

PS. If you do finally manage to give away your game to someone who's been on your friends' list for 30 days, that person CANNOT give that game away the same you did to him/her. It's one-time only.
AGAIN, it is more than Steam allows. And it makes it so that you don't give 1 copy to EVERYONE.

Why would that be a benefit? If I buy The Last of Us, I can give it away to you. When you finish it, you can give away to your friend. You friend can give it away to his friend, and so on. Why is being limited to not only having to wait for your "friend" to be on you list for 30 days, but after you finally give him the game he can't give it away like in my previous scenario, a benefit?

Those are digital rules. And they are perfectly fine. But not for game you bought at the store.

So yeah. Even with your liberal use of caps, you still aren't right about most of that stuff. Heck, most of what you said was out of ignorance. Read up on something before you join the bandwagon of hate next time...

That's pretty funny considering you haven't disproved a SINGLE thing I said. Try again.

Dj23 said:

Lawfer - Chill your beans. Jeez.

Skidmarksdeluxe Skidmarksdeluxe said:

And I though this post was just a bit of information of some chap possibly heading to Zynga not a transcript of the Nazi Nuremburg rallies.

Tekkaraiden Tekkaraiden said:

It's a bit of a surprising move, I figured he'd be heading to EA.

m4a4 m4a4 said:

...

I stopped caring after reading that ignorant post. But I will say this:

-NO DIGITAL GAME for a digital games service can be TRADED, SOLD, or RESOLD (you said you had no problem with using Steam as a digital games platform, so I used them as an example). MS would've allow you to give a digital game once (which is more than anything to date) and a family group thing would allow sharing of digital games.

-Last gen didn't have day 1 digital downloads. So no, you couldn't just "buy online" if you didn't want a disc.

-Discs for the ps3 and this next gen are only for installing and an easy DRM (to limit 1 person per disc). Heck, you can't even buy a PC game and share the disc around anymore because of keycodes, so consider yourself lucky...

-You can't expect a launch to be perfect and have everything figured out. That is just BS.

-People wanted to trade physical games, so they had a way so that you could do that. But it came with a price of 24h check ins so you couldn't abuse it.

But anyway, I'm sure you know better and MS could do no good, blah blah blah...

avoidz avoidz said:

"If you don't like always-online, we always have another product: the Xbox 360."

xboxvsps said:

Lol @ avoidz :)

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.