Jump to content

Microsoft Buys Activision Blizzard


Recommended Posts

Microsoft buying Activision Blizzard for nearly $70 billion.

That’s a massive move by Microsoft, much bigger than buying Bethesda last year.

I wonder if Sony is wondering how long Call of Duty will be playable on the Playstation.

Looks like GamePass is going to be stacked this time next year.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, downzy said:

Microsoft buying Activision Blizzard for nearly $70 billion.

That’s a massive move by Microsoft, much bigger than buying Bethesda last year.

I wonder if Sony is wondering how long Call of Duty will be playable on the Playstation.

Looks like GamePass is going to be stacked this time next year.  

Has this only just been announced? I first heard about it on the radio on the way home from work today. How the fuck did they keep that quiet? :lol: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of monopolization but in this case I think it might be for the best and maybe Microsoft can make Activision/Blizzard not so shit.

I wonder if Sony and Nintendo will ever do a merger? Microsoft's resources eclipses theirs and this won't be their last acquisition. 

If I were Sony/Nintendo I'd also buy Capcom, Konami, Sega and Bandai etc.

Edited by Oldest Goat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

I'm not a fan of monopolization but in this case I think it might be for the best and maybe Microsoft can make Activision/Blizzard not so shit.

I wonder if Sony and Nintendo will ever do a merger? Microsoft's resources eclipses theirs and this won't be their last acquisition. 

If I were Sony/Nintendo I'd also buy Capcom, Konami, Sega and Bandai etc.

Funny story. Microsoft tried to buy Nintendo back in the late 90’s before deciding to go it alone with the original XBox. Nintendo agreed to take the meeting and got the MS execs to fly to Japan. They got them in the meeting room and just laughed at them until they left. 😂

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess that leaves four large third-party companies left: Take-Two, Ubisoft, EA, and Square Enix. (Five if you count Sega). 

I would have thought Activision was too big for an acquisition but now I’m wondering if Sony buys Take-Two and makes everything Rockstar produces exclusive to playstation. Or even Google and their Strada platform.

Activision might be the first domino to drop. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, downzy said:

I guess that leaves four large third-party companies left: Take-Two, Ubisoft, EA, and Square Enix. (Five if you count Sega). 

I would have thought Activision was too big for an acquisition but now I’m wondering if Sony buys Take-Two and makes everything Rockstar produces exclusive to playstation. Or even Google and their Strada platform.

Activision might be the first domino to drop. 

I doubt Sony can afford Take-Two tbh or if they could MS wouldn't allow that.

In the hopefully not too near future we'll probably see a lot of content/IPs be centralized into "The Metaverse" which I have absolutely zero interest in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

I doubt Sony can afford Take-Two tbh or if they could MS wouldn't allow that.

In the hopefully not too near future we'll probably see a lot of content/IPs be centralized into "The Metaverse" which I have absolutely zero interest in.

Sony has a market cap roughly 7-8 times Take-Two’s. They could do it if there was interest by both parties.  I’m not sure there would be much Microsoft could do to stop it outside of a hostile takeover of Take-Two. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, downzy said:

Sony has a market cap roughly 7-8 times Take-Two’s. They could do it if there was interest by both parties.  I’m not sure there would be much Microsoft could do to stop it outside of a hostile takeover of Take-Two. 

If Sony tried that then wouldn't MS just offer more money?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

If Sony tried that then wouldn't MS just offer more money?

Maybe, though Microsoft might not need to buy Take-Two if it were to buy, say, EA or Ubisoft.

One interesting idea I read is that Microsoft will have such a large selection of games on GamePass is that it might force other third-party studios to include their games on GamePass.  Competition is such that there's less incentive to play anything that's not already on GamePass since the gaming platform offers a lot of options already.  I think Rockstar's GTA and RDR might be the few IPs that would hold their own in terms of not being included in GamePass.  But for a lot of other third-party studios, it might get to the point where they need to be on GamePass (or whatever Sony ends up offering) whether they're owned by Microsoft or not.  

 

 

  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/18/2022 at 12:31 PM, downzy said:

Microsoft buying Activision Blizzard for nearly $70 billion.

That’s a massive move by Microsoft, much bigger than buying Bethesda last year.

I wonder if Sony is wondering how long Call of Duty will be playable on the Playstation.

Looks like GamePass is going to be stacked this time next year.  

This almost kills owning a PS5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ixtlan said:

This almost kills owning a PS5.

Really curious about what MS will buy next and what Sony will buy, apparently they have $18B set aside currently for acquisitions.

I think Sony will buy Capcom and maybe Konami. SquareEnix if it can afford it.

I hope Microsoft buys EA because I'm sick of their bs. So many dormant IPs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ixtlan said:

This almost kills owning a PS5.

This is a stretch. The only franchise this really affects is Call of Duty. The other major titles i.e Warcraft (which has been on a never ending decline for a decade), Diablo, Overwatch, Hearthstone are either PC exclusive or played predominately on the PC. No one's playing Candy Crush on the PS5. Spyro and Crash Bandicot aren't that big a deal imo and the Tony Hawk games peaked during the PS2 era.

As for the big one, Call of Duty... well Sony could just pump money into another dev for their own triple AAA multi-player fps. It'd take work, time, money and marketing admittedly, but it is salvagable.

If I was Sony I'd do everything I could to stop Microsoft if it made a move for Take-Two for example. That would be a blow. They're the biggest interms of console gaming that's theoretically aquireable.

Nintendo are more likely to sell to Sony than Microsoft (because it's a Japanese company) and it's unlikely anyway. That said, it would be a huge advantage if either side got Nintendo. Imagine if Zelda, Pokemon and Mario looked like PS5/X-box series X games instead of lower end PS3 games running on hardware equivalent to 15 years ago.

Capcom, Square, Konami, UBISOFT, Atlus, CDPR aren't game changers on their own imo, Sony would need to buy 2 or 3 of them. I don't think it'll happen and Microsoft can't buy them all.

The best thing Sony could do now is focus on creating a better game streaming service with older console games included.

Personally I'm more disappointed Elder Scrolls VI which probably won't be out for years probably won't be on a PS5.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ixtlan said:

This almost kills owning a PS5.

I’m still planning on getting a PS5 in the next year or two, long before I buy another Xbox.  My One X seems to be holding its own and I skipped PS4, so PS5 will allow me to catch up on some old games.  And I’m hoping the PSVR 2 will be as awesome.  Microsoft still has nothing to offer in that space. 

6 hours ago, AtariLegend said:

Nintendo are more likely to sell to Sony than Microsoft (because it's a Japanese company) and it's unlikely anyway. That said, it would be a huge advantage if either side got Nintendo. Imagine if Zelda, Pokemon and Mario looked like PS5/X-box series X games instead of lower end PS3 games running on hardware equivalent to 15 years ago.

This has been my dream for the last ten years.  There’s zero need for Nintendo to remain a console maker. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, downzy said:

I’m still planning on getting a PS5 in the next year or two, long before I buy another Xbox.  My One X seems to be holding its own and I skipped PS4, so PS5 will allow me to catch up on some old games.  And I’m hoping the PSVR 2 will be as awesome.  Microsoft still has nothing to offer in that space. 

This has been my dream for the last ten years.  There’s zero need for Nintendo to remain a console maker. 

Why don’t you believe Nintendo should forsake producing consoles? The switch is widely successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/23/2022 at 4:32 PM, Ixtlan said:

Why don’t you believe Nintendo should forsake producing consoles? The switch is widely successful.

Because it’s not necessary for consumers.  Having to buy an additional console (that’s handicapped from a technical perspective) just to play Nintendo games is redundant at this point. I’d love to play Mario Odyssey and the last Zelda game, but to do so would cost me $700 after taxes. If Nintendo was strictly an publishing entity, I could get 4K versions of those games on Xbox or Playstation without the huge upfront costs. And if they were available on GamePass, the cost is negligible.  The Switch did offer a unique playing experience when it first came out, but with cloud gaming and phones that are getting closer to console like graphics, there really is no need to have a console like the Switch anymore.

I realize some people will pay $$$ for every console.  But I’m not one of them. Nor is it necessary. Sega gave up on the console game for the betterment of everyone.  Nintendo would serve the gaming community better if it didn’t make them buy a second or third console.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, downzy said:

Because it’s not necessary for consumers.  Having to buy an additional console (that’s handicapped from a technical perspective) just to play Nintendo games is redundant at this point. I’d love to play Mario Odyssey and the last Zelda game, but to do so would cost me $700 after taxes. If Nintendo was strictly an publishing entity, I could get 4K versions of those games on Xbox or Playstation without the huge upfront costs. And if they were available on GamePass, the cost is negligible.  The Switch did offer a unique playing experience when it first came out, but with cloud gaming and phones that are getting closer to console like graphics, there really is no need to have a console like the Switch anymore.

I realize some people will pay $$$ for every console.  But I’m not one of them. Nor is it necessary. Sega gave up on the console game for the betterment of everyone.  Nintendo would serve the gaming community better if it didn’t make them buy a second or third console.  

Great points. I purchased a switch just for Zelda and Mario Odyssey, which is borderline stupid. And I was extremely disappointed that Nintendo didn’t make new Mario Kart, Toad or Donkey Kong games. So lazy. I feel Microsoft may shift to being a content provider after this next cycle and leave consoles alone. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ixtlan said:

Great points. I purchased a switch just for Zelda and Mario Odyssey, which is borderline stupid. And I was extremely disappointed that Nintendo didn’t make new Mario Kart, Toad or Donkey Kong games. So lazy. I feel Microsoft may shift to being a content provider after this next cycle and leave consoles alone. 

That’s definitely where Microsoft and the industry as a whole is going.  It is making less and less sense to spend all that money on r&d, marketing, branding, production, distribution with respect to an in-home video game console.  Few buy at home blu-ray players anymore for the same reason.  Digital distribution is quickly removing the need for a physical console. It’s why Microsoft and others are making strides to open up their ecosystems and allow customers to play on any device. The Switch already makes less sense when most people’s phones and tablets are can produce similar or better graphics. It will make even less sense when 5G is fully rolled out and people can stream video games directly as though they were playing them natively on whatever device they’re using. The only hurdle will be the control scheme, something that many third-party companies are happy to help people overcome.  Microsoft has noted that their competition isn’t Sony or Nintendo, it’s Google, Apple, Facebook, Netflix, and Amazon.  Consoles will be irrelevant at some point. It’s why I see little need to update my Xbox One X since I’ll likely be able to play any new Series X games through a streaming service at some point. I won’t play another Nintendo game until I can play it on a non-Nintendo console.

The pandemic and scalpers/bots have made it clear that the console is a huge hurdle for companies like Microsoft.  Think of the millions of lost customers due to hardware shortages and scalpers/bots driving many who won’t pay the markups on eBay. You eliminate the console you eliminate the biggest bottleneck both the industry and the customers have right now.  If Nintendo is going to survive it will need to move into its own digital distribution channel that can actually compete with whatever Microsoft, Facebook, and Apple are doing.  A future where they ask everyone to spend $300-$400 on a console to play Mario when no other game company asks their customers to do the same is not a company that will stay in business for too long. People will claim that Nintendo has brand loyalty, that no matter what Nintendo does they’ll have a profitable business because of their unique games. Except none of that helped them when they shit the bed and released the Wii U. The Switch was kind of a marvel for its time, but I have a hard time believing they can last by relying on hardware innovations to remain relevant.  Unless they somehow absolutely crush VR, which, judging from their last effort, is not something I can see coming. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought a launch Switch a dew months after it came out in 2017, I've put in hundreds of hours each year (first few years docked and more recently handheld), and couldn't be happier. There's a huge market for people like me who don't care for Steam or emulators.

  • GNFNR 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/24/2022 at 3:15 AM, AtariLegend said:

This is a stretch. The only franchise this really affects is Call of Duty. The other major titles i.e Warcraft (which has been on a never ending decline for a decade), Diablo, Overwatch, Hearthstone are either PC exclusive or played predominately on the PC. No one's playing Candy Crush on the PS5. Spyro and Crash Bandicot aren't that big a deal imo and the Tony Hawk games peaked during the PS2 era.

As for the big one, Call of Duty... well Sony could just pump money into another dev for their own triple AAA multi-player fps. It'd take work, time, money and marketing admittedly, but it is salvagable.

If I was Sony I'd do everything I could to stop Microsoft if it made a move for Take-Two for example. That would be a blow. They're the biggest interms of console gaming that's theoretically aquireable.

Nintendo are more likely to sell to Sony than Microsoft (because it's a Japanese company) and it's unlikely anyway. That said, it would be a huge advantage if either side got Nintendo. Imagine if Zelda, Pokemon and Mario looked like PS5/X-box series X games instead of lower end PS3 games running on hardware equivalent to 15 years ago.

Capcom, Square, Konami, UBISOFT, Atlus, CDPR aren't game changers on their own imo, Sony would need to buy 2 or 3 of them. I don't think it'll happen and Microsoft can't buy them all.

The best thing Sony could do now is focus on creating a better game streaming service with older console games included.

Personally I'm more disappointed Elder Scrolls VI which probably won't be out for years probably won't be on a PS5.

Nintendo have stated they'd rather shut their doors permanently than put their games on other systems. Not gonna happen. Nor should it imo.

What Nintendo should do is double down on the Switch's versatile hybrid concept and make the Switch 2 the 'Nintendo Phone'. A more powerful Switch with more features that's a traditional console but is a bit smaller and doubles as a phone and can still connect to your TV. Would make playing online portably possible with 5G. Lots of reasons it'd be amazing, I'd buy it. They'd make so much fucking money lol. Even if they don't do that I'll get the Switch 2 but currently I'm wanting a Series X, if they're ever available ffs.

P.S. Fuck streaming. The day modern gaming completes it's inevitable devolution into a Streaming only Metaverse hellscape is the day I say fuck that and just play the classics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

Nintendo have stated they'd rather shut their doors permanently than put their games on other systems. Not gonna happen. Nor should it imo.

That would never happen. Nintendo is a publicly trade company. Outside of Japanese corporate law, there’s nothing to stop another company buying a controlling stake in the company and replacing management and board as a means to leverage its IP.  Moreover, Nintendo’s management and company would be sued out of existence should it shut the company down as management has a fiduciary duty to its shareholders to maximize the value of the company.  You can’t legally close the doors permanently out of spite or pride unless you own 50 percent plus one share of the company.  Again, this would never happen.

8 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

P.S. Fuck streaming. The day modern gaming completes it's inevitable devolution into a Streaming only Metaverse hellscape is the day I say fuck that and just play the classics.

 Why?  What difference does it make if the game you’re playing is rendered at home or in some server?  It’s not any different than watching a 4K movie from Netflix versus playing a UHD 4K disc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, downzy said:

That would never happen. Nintendo is a publicly trade company. Outside of Japanese corporate law, there’s nothing to stop another company buying a controlling stake in the company and replacing management and board as a means to leverage its IP.  Moreover, Nintendo’s management and company would be sued out of existence should it shut the company down as management has a fiduciary duty to its shareholders to maximize the value of the company.  You can’t legally close the doors permanently out of spite or pride unless you own 50 percent plus one share of the company.  Again, this would never happen.

 Why?  What difference does it make if the game you’re playing is rendered at home or in some server?  It’s not any different than watching a 4K movie from Netflix versus playing a UHD 4K disc. 

I'm just saying that's what they said, so unlikely.

I'm too discerning for playing streamed games. I like responsiveness, reliability, fidelity and comfort. There are shortcomings due to the infrastructure not being there yet - which will probably take even longer for NZ because of our distance - and when the technology is advanced enough the systems will probably be so invasive and soulless that it still won't appeal to me. The best thing about the metaverse will be all the memes. Beyond that I think it'll be a detriment to society. I hope it fails or hackers fuck it up. I'd rather go outside and do something else. I hate VR. I sound like a rambling angry old man lol.

You played Forza Horizon 5 yet? I'll definitely get that when I get XSX.

P.S. Admit you want a Nintendo Phone! Nintendone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

You played Forza Horizon 5 yet? I'll definitely get that when I get XSX.

No, been so busy with real life stuff that I haven’t turned my xbox on in almost two months. 

Some day.

3 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

P.S. Admit you want a Nintendo Phone! Nintendone!

Not a chance.  And I honestly don’t think turning a Switch into a phone would make much of a difference or much sense.  The Switch is too big to be used as a phone. Imagine trying to go about your life with a Switch on you at all times.  I guess the Switch 2.0 could be shrunk down to something the size of an iphone, but will people really want something smaller than what they already have?  Moreover, it doesn’t solve the second issue of operating system. What does Nintendo do there?  Write their own?  Do they allow third party apps?  And what incentive would app developers have to develop apps for a user base that is a fraction if what iOS or Android has?  In all likelihood Nintendo would have to adopt a modified version of Android, which creates new problems.  First it would render the Switch a pricey emulator. Second, Nintendo would then have to pay Google a cut of the profits, which I have a hard time seeing Nintendo doing.

For me I’m all things Apple because I like that all my devices work seamlessly together.  My wife and I schedule our lives with the help of shared calendar appointments, grocery lists, and financial mobile services.  There’s no way I’m making my life more complicated because Nintendo wants to get in the phone business. Only way that happens is if Apple bought Nintendo, which I would fully support. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...