Jump to content
IGNORED

Microsoft has acquired Activision Blizzard. Woah. .


MidWalian
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Stanley said:

It doesn’t matter, if they only play COD and FIFA and literally nothing else, then if they want to play both going forward they’ll have to either buy an Xbox, a PC and/or subscribe to Game Pass. I don’t see an option there that isn’t a win for MS. And they can still buy the games physically on Xbox if they choose. 


Totally, IF CoD becomes exclusive and IF CoD stays popular. Either way Microsoft will still be making money, which was one of the points I was making - they’ve covered themselves with these acquisitions, as they now have lots of IP and lots of games to potentially release on lots of formats, if they choose to go down that route, for whatever reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Isaac said:

Crucially though it doesn't have a disc drive, which is a huge sticking point for a lot of people still.

 

But yeah, this 8% hardware growth (vs. the same quarter last year) is even more interesting when viewed through the fact that overall console hardware sales were down 38% in the USA in November (the typically biggest month of the year - black friday and Xmas), due to supply chain issues:

 

Yeah that changes things significantly, being slightly up when everyone else is down massively is a big difference from being slightly up when everyone is up more, you're basically hiding an increase of nearly 50% there, relative to what others are selling.

 

The figures I'd seen suggested current figures were 12 million vs 15 million, certainly nowhere near the 2:1 analysts are throwing around (which seems akin to the exact sort of 'expecting past performance to represent the future' we all mocked in the Wii era where they kept insisting it would flatline around 20 million sales and the PS3 would suddenly skyrocket to 120 million like its predecessor), and nothing like the last gen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, CrichStand said:


Totally, IF CoD becomes exclusive and IF CoD stays popular. Either way Microsoft will still be making money, which was one of the points I was making - they’ve covered themselves with these acquisitions, as they now have lots of IP and lots of games to potentially release on lots of formats, if they choose to go down that route, for whatever reason. 

The thing to consider here is Game Pass. It currently has 25 million subscribers, which will likely double in the next couple of years.

 

So the next instalment of COD would land day one on that service and be made available to a much bigger audience as a result. So I would imagine COD not just staying popular, but growing even more popular. 
 

Just look at Halo, a series many considered dead and buried after Halo 5 and Xbox One both under performing, now it’s as popular as ever, because of Game Pass. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Just look at Halo, a series many considered dead and buried after Halo 5 and Xbox One both under performing, now it’s popular than ever, because of Game Pass. 

I saw something about over 20 million players earlier. Not bad for a dead franchise.

 

edit:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RubberJohnny said:

I don't think anyone has ever considered Microsoft would ever stop making Halo, I think you're both really reaching here.

No of course they wouldn’t - but without Game Pass there’s no way it would be doing as well as it is, and the multiplayer being free to play of course ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Graham S said:

Plenty of deals on CoD, Crash and Spyro content in the Xbox store this week for some reason. 

 

Ah, Activision always have the same deals on these big sale events. They still haven't put the Infinite Warfare season pass up, which is annoying as I only want it for the Zombies maps and I ain't paying 40 quid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the studios now at their disposal it is not an exaggeration to say that MS should be releasing a triple A game at least every quarter going forward, so the value proposition of Gamepass will only increase over the next few years.

 

I said it way earlier in this thread but it bears repeating, we are all naturally to a greater or lesser extent viewing this deal through the lens of the past, as that is what we know.  You don’t however spend $70 billion to keep things the same as they are.  Big changes are coming and it is going to be interesting to see how it all pans out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

could somebody take all the crap, which has nothing to do with the topic, and is now just game pass baaaaad,  out of this thread and stick it in the Console WarZZZZZZZZZZZ thread where it belongs! please and thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, mikeyl said:

lets lol at Microsoft overpaying by 17% not that it means anything to them

 

https://apple.news/AKA_vhntXS5-IHp3Lr5tduQ

 

some analyst lad also doomongering about monopolies. It'll go through. Capitalism always wins.


seeing as the whole market tanks of course means pretty much all share prices are heading down the toilet so the 17% number doesn’t mean a whole lot. 
 

i think it’ll go through once MS assures the government they’ll still throw their competitors some scraps every once in a while.  Long term though, it’s more games heading to gamepass and fewer elsewhere. 
 

I’m looking forward to more “free” games for me.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kryptonian said:


That headline doesn’t seem to match the content of the article.


basically modern media, clickbaity headline, dig up an ‘analyst’ to support it, become facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/01/2022 at 19:24, TehStu said:

In fact, smaller studios probably need it to do well on one platform before making a port, I guess.

 

The current land grab by companies with money is resulting in a bit of a funding bonanza for smaller studios as these companies are throwing money around to secure content, including fully funding development of some titles, so the lucky indie developers are doing well out it, much like in film and TV with the various companies desperate for hit content throwing money at the compelling content problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 27/01/2022 at 15:15, bear said:

Surely the sheer amount of money Microsoft are throwing at increasing their first lineup is a sign they aren't interested in mediocrity?

 

I dunno, I look at Netflix's industry-leading annual original content spend and what they actually produce and say I'd rather they spent HBO money and do some actual QC and downsizing on their output. I'd imagine over time that 'Netflix' quality will be good enough to keep most people happy enough to keep subscribed compared to pushing harder and aiming for HBO quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there's a fair few outdated ones on there too, just looking at the Take Two portion for instance, Visual Concepts doesn't exist anymore, it got renamed to 2K in 2005, and yet 2K is also on there. This is incorrect, apparently.

 

I also don't think they have that many Rockstar studios anymore, a fair few were porting houses or did the handheld games and got shuttered/merged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, according to that chart, Ubisoft own a sixth of all the dev teams in the world! That’s double what Microsoft own! Look how tiny Sony’s slice is, Ubisoft are going to destroy them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kevvy Metal said:

Poor Nintendo

 

They are D00MED!11!

 

Slightly more seriously, that does knock on the head anyone thinking there would be any complications in regards to a monopoly regs really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure it goes by numbers of studios, though. This is more of a (poorly laid out) diagram showing how Unilever and Pepsico own everything, for anyone who recalls that chart. I don't think I recognize a single logo under Embracer Group. Is that all mobile guff?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rex Grossman said:

Why are Activision and Blizzard on there twice? It's down as "Activision Blizzard", "Activision" and "Blizzard".

 

Technically Activision Blizzard is the overarching company that incorporates Activision and Blizzard. Before Microsoft bought them they operated independently, which is probably why Blizzard are neck deep in the shit with regards to actually releasing games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.