Cube Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2022/01/18/welcoming-activision-blizzard-to-microsoft-gaming/ For $70 billion. Still needs to be finalised, but they're sure enough to officially announce it. The industry becomes more and more monopolised. That said, Microsoft can probably massively improve working conditions for the staff.
Happenstance Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 The games industry just seems to be getting worse and worse with this stuff now if you don't own every console. I understand companies buying smaller developers, especially when they already work closely with them but this is on a whole other level. 1
Mandalore Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 They must've really wanted Geometry Wars back. 3
killthenet Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 Absolutely mad, the harassment issues have seriously harmed the company so it's kind of surprising that Microsoft still pursued the deal so aggressively but I guess it'll signal a sea change that will eradicate the underlying issues in the company. In terms of franchises Microsoft own now, surely Call of Duty is too big to be exclusive to PC and Xbox - they would just be leaving money on the table not to continue to release it on PlayStation
Dufniall Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 29 minutes ago, Mandalore said: They must've really wanted Geometry Wars back. Or the Lost Vikings! But yeah, quite a bold move seeing how Activision/Blizzard was under fire the last couple of months/years. I wonder what Microsoft expects here, to be the good Samaritan and clean the decks over at A/B? It seems a heavy investment, $70 billion but after that they probably have to restructure the company as well. Also interesting that A/B has quite a few PC franchises. Diablo, StarCraft and Warcraft and Heroes of the Storm are all biggest or exclusive to PC. I also wonder if the delay of Overwatch 2 has anything to do with this. I'm not big on Call of Duty but if that goes exclusively to MS then that's a big loss for Sony. Like @killthenet says, almost too big. Same as having the Elder Scrolls 6 exclusive to MS.
Sheikah Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 This is kind of crazy, I can imagine this could work out pretty well in terms of reforming such a shitty company, though. Overwatch is one of my favourite games so you have to wonder what's going to happen with it. OW2 is already planned to be fully compatible with OW1 so it's not like there'll be much reason to restrict the sequel just to Xbox and PC. We'll we how it goes!
Cube Posted January 18, 2022 Author Posted January 18, 2022 The deal isn't expected to be finalised until next year, so I think all current projects will still be developed for PlayStation. It might possibly even be out by then.
Glen-i Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 (edited) If Microsoft puts its foot down on the utter disgusting behaviour the company is ripe with, then for once, I'm completely fine with a company getting bought out by a console maker. But then again, it's the gaming industry, so I'm not exactly getting my hopes in that regard. BTW, I only found out about this because the best Twitter account decided to make a reappearance for this news. Always on the mark! Edited January 18, 2022 by Glen-i 1 3
drahkon Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 (edited) Sad days. Seems like Microsoft is actually going for a monopoly. Really hope Sony doesn't follow suit and will keep going for smaller acquisitions (which I also don't like very much, but are necessary) and that Nintendo will continue to keep their audience and stay themselves, even if I've fallen away from them. One thing that would be great: Turn that company around. Throw out those pieces of shit and rebuild. Edited January 18, 2022 by drahkon
Julius Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 Well, I can't not talk about this. For some perspective, this is a move nearly six times as big as Take-Two's recent acquisition of Zynga (which as of this moment, until the Activision Blizzard deal is finalised, is the largest video game industry acquisition) and nearly nine times larger than the Bethesda acquisition in 2020. It comes in just below Disney's acquisition of 21st Century Fox in 2019 for $71.3 billion. Some things that go without saying are that, firstly, and maybe most importantly but is sure to be lost in the long run to the pettiness of console warring: this is awesome for those Activision Blizzard employees. It's yet to be finalised, but I can feel the relief from here, and fair play to Microsoft because I can't remember the last time we heard a whiff of discontent or controversy from their teams (*touch wood*), so hopefully they'll be in much safer hands as and when this deal gets across the line. Secondly: I'd much rather it be Microsoft than a Chinese company like Tencent or ByteDance, or heck even Embracer. Honestly, it's hard to feel any different to how I felt back in 2020 when they acquired Bethesda. The smaller acquisitions that they spent a few years making have quickly fallen by the wayside (I still think they did Obsidian dirty by having them announce their fantasy game only to acquire Bethesda), and this is yet another case where - while there is a working relationship between the two companies - it's not as closely knit as, say, Bluepoint and PlayStation were, or Next Level and Nintendo, where they've already got a relationship founded on already working together to produce a game. The term I used back when the Bethesda acquisition was announced was that this was an example of inorganic growth, and I'd more than stand by that with the Activision Blizzard acquisition. We all know big money acquisitions have been on the table the last few years with some of the deals we've seen in the gaming space, but like with Bethesda, this acquisition is almost aggressive. You aren't nurturing smaller teams and helping them realise their dreams with greater financial security as seemed to be the case a few years ago, you're buying a developer with an IP - Call of Duty - where the threat of pure console exclusivity could legitimately bring PlayStation to its knees so that Microsoft can have their way with them in the boardroom. Others have said it, but much more than was the case with Bethesda, there is too much money to be left on the table by having their games be exclusive, so which permutation of events do we see? Pure exclusivity and a massive middle finger to those who have already purchased a PS5, as well as the rest of the industry? Bending PlayStation over backwards to push Game Pass onto their platforms, with Call of Duty not being available anywhere but on Game Pass for PlayStation owners? Continuing to release Call of Duty on PlayStation until the end of the generation to make a hell of a lot of money before winning the next generation before it begins by then making it exclusive? None of these outcomes are positive for the industry. There is no-one to compete with Microsoft right now as a platform holder when it comes to these acquisitions. Sony straight up do not have the money lying around to make an acquisition of a company like Square Enix, let alone a company big enough to rival the purchase of Activision Blizzard, like EA. Nintendo meanwhile are twiddling their thumbs in the corner and, as always, have zero interest in what's going on with these acquisitions. It certainly raises other interesting questions: do we finally see PC games like World of Warcraft come to console and smartphones, because I mean imagine a game as popular as that running on xCloud on your phone? What does it mean for Overwatch 2? Will Toys for Bob be revived get a second chance now, meaning more Spyro, Crash, and Tony Hawk entries? If COD becomes exclusive and Xbox sales rocket, will they finally start reporting their sales again? Where the heck does that leave games they only published, like Sekiro? On an individual basis, I have been avoiding Activision Blizzard games like I have Ubisoft games, just with everything going on within their companies, and their games aren't going to move the needle for me. I'm genuinely happy that those working at Activision Blizzard might finally get a chance at some semblance of normalcy, security, and stability in their workplace. From a business perspective, this is a move that makes sense. I question just how much of the industry has to be bought up before we actually see the powers that be question if the industry is being monopolised, and this is an insanely aggressive move, but this was a one in a million chance to acquire one of the biggest publishers after a year of nothing but negative press. I'm more surprised that it was Activision Blizzard first rather than Ubisoft, or even EA. As I mentioned last time with the Bethesda deal, if not for monopolisation laws Microsoft would have aggressively acquired Sony ten times over without even flinching, and slipped Nintendo into their back pocket. I've said it before, and I'll double down and say it again, because I would say the same if this were PlayStation or if this were Nintendo: In the long term, this can only be a bad thing. I don't care if you're silly enough to align yourself with one platform holder over another, these billion dollar companies are destroying the ceiling for growth and creativity in a medium I can safely say that we all care deeply about. They are commodifying the few big companies that remain for the price of the many, in that this will be a price that the rest of the industry - in the long term - could pay for dearly. And that continues to be a worrying thought. 4 1
Dcubed Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 (edited) Jesus Christ, that is horrifying! This is the end of the traditional western video game industry as we know it. There’s no going back now. EA is next. Edited January 18, 2022 by Dcubed
Kav Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 I’ve seen a take that suggests Microsoft could have the mainline Call of Duty games go exclusive but have Warzone multiplatform, making money there from the microtransactions.
Dcubed Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 (edited) 5 hours ago, killthenet said: Absolutely mad, the harassment issues have seriously harmed the company so it's kind of surprising that Microsoft still pursued the deal so aggressively but I guess it'll signal a sea change that will eradicate the underlying issues in the company. In terms of franchises Microsoft own now, surely Call of Duty is too big to be exclusive to PC and Xbox - they would just be leaving money on the table not to continue to release it on PlayStation That's probably exactly what allowed the deal to actually happen. Bobby Kotick wanted his golden parachute. I have no doubt in my mind that there is no way that Actiblizz would have even considered a sale if this scandal wasn't made public. Edit: Edited January 18, 2022 by Dcubed
darksnowman Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 4 hours ago, Mandalore said: They must've really wanted Geometry Wars back. By hook or by crook! 3 hours ago, Dufniall said: Or the Lost Vikings! Classic. I skimmed the Activision and Blizzard output on Wikipedia and I think the only thing I have of theirs is GoldenEye on Wii...? So they're welcome to em! I'll drive them over to Xbox HQ myself! Unless... is Geometry Wars just smoke and mirror and this how they get N64 GoldenEye on Xbox?!? 1 hour ago, Kav said: I’ve seen a take that suggests Microsoft could have the mainline Call of Duty games go exclusive but have Warzone multiplatform, making money there from the microtransactions. Totally. I'm sure they'll still let Crash Bandicoot and T Hawk and stuff out and about too.
Dcubed Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 1 hour ago, darksnowman said: Totally. I'm sure they'll still let Crash Bandicoot and T Hawk and stuff out and about too. Ironically, Crash, Spyro and The Birdman actually have much more of a chance at life now that Microsoft own them. Very good chance that they'll actually rescue Toys for Bob and Vicarious Visions from their respective dungeons too.
Ashley Posted January 18, 2022 Posted January 18, 2022 I'll do a proper response when I'm not tired and on my phone but this is one of my favourite (joke) responses to the news story: 4
darksnowman Posted January 19, 2022 Posted January 19, 2022 13 hours ago, Dcubed said: Ironically, Crash, Spyro and The Birdman actually have much more of a chance at life now that Microsoft own them. Very good chance that they'll actually rescue Toys for Bob and Vicarious Visions from their respective dungeons too. I thought Toys for Bob and Vicarious Visions were doing okay nowadays with Crash, Spyro and Tony Hawk being back in vogue. Not sure what The Birdman is. I think Microsoft just needs to steer the ship and keep these studios ticking over. The irony I would say is that they are attempting to take ownership of some gaming icons that used to be associated with the PS1. It's the kind of thing people were breaking out in cold sweats over when Xbox first came on the scene. Other than that (and without looking deeply into it) it seems like they are mainly consolidating a lot of Xbox/ PC games under their umbrella. The stability will probably be a good thing. If Pandemonium! appears on the slate I just hope there will be a Switch version.
Glen-i Posted January 19, 2022 Posted January 19, 2022 (edited) 14 minutes ago, darksnowman said: I thought Toys for Bob and Vicarious Visions were doing okay nowadays with Crash, Spyro and Tony Hawk being back in vogue. Not sure what The Birdman is. It's Tony Hawk, quite a few people refer to him as such. (Skateboarding is probably the one sport I actually know terminology for...) Toys for Bob and Vicarious System were doing well, until Activision reassigned them to support teams for Call of Duty. Naturally, this bummed out a lot of people because those studios are talented and it's a big waste to just have them churn out CoD games. Hopefully Microsoft reassign them back to other projects. Edited January 19, 2022 by Glen-i
Julius Posted January 20, 2022 Posted January 20, 2022 2 hours ago, Ashley said: I knew PlayStation had marketing deals in place for Call of Duty, but reading around, seems like they were re-upped just before the start of this new generation back in 2020, so I guess this is what Phil is referring to. Which makes sense, but I guess that means at the very least Call of Duty should be on PlayStation until mid-gen, so until 2024 or so. I do wonder what PlayStation's internal thinking is going to be, because Call of Duty is going to leave an enormous multiplayer shooter gap -- is this a gap they are going to try to look to fill themselves, either by reviving an old IP of theirs like SOCOM or Killzone, or perhaps by moving their marketing deal over to Battlefield and hunkering down with EA? Then again, that isn't exactly a franchise in good graces right now (and hasn't been for a while), so maybe they'd want to acquire a particular third party IP which is being swept under the rug but is already something of a name; not a household name to the same extent as Call of Duty, of course, but maybe something like Medal of Honour?
Choze Posted January 22, 2022 Posted January 22, 2022 Interesting there is so much focus on exclusives (Not a big deal in the larger scheme of things) rather than how much control/power MS gain in the industry. This makes them by 'far' the biggest game publisher/developer. A size we havent had before and they can still buy more, never mind the guaranteed growth they now have. We have anti-competition and anti-trust experts asking: What exactly constitutes a no for MS?
darksnowman Posted January 23, 2022 Posted January 23, 2022 On 19/01/2022 at 10:17 AM, Glen-i said: It's Tony Hawk, quite a few people refer to him as such. (Skateboarding is probably the one sport I actually know terminology for...) Too. Hip.
Dcubed Posted January 23, 2022 Posted January 23, 2022 17 hours ago, Choze said: Interesting there is so much focus on exclusives (Not a big deal in the larger scheme of things) rather than how much control/power MS gain in the industry. This makes them by 'far' the biggest game publisher/developer. A size we havent had before and they can still buy more, never mind the guaranteed growth they now have. We have anti-competition and anti-trust experts asking: What exactly constitutes a no for MS? They are not the biggest; Embracer have almost 3x as many studios (111 to be exact!), while Tencent are very much comparable too. They are certainly the one with the biggest pockets though! And should really be subject to anti-trust; but given the state of the US? I very much doubt that anything will be done to stop this.
Recommended Posts